Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

More women than expected are genetically men (2016)

novonordiskfonden.dk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 231 posts

Re: More women than expected are genetically men (2016)

#131

Post by pseudosavant »

cogman10 wrote: post #112
pseudosavant wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Societal gender norms have existed for probably as long as humans have, but we've only known about chromosomes for On the scale of human evolution, this is a very recent situation for society to figure out how to "decide".

It's really not new or recent. For as long as there's been gender norms there's been groups of people outside those norms. You can, for example, find examples of trans individuals in Utah in the 1800s. [1] Eunuchs are a pretty well-known concept since about the start of recorded history. Here's an example of a roman cult which practiced self-castration. [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._Morris_Young [2] https:…

I didn't mean to imply that these people didn't exist, just that the scientific understanding detailing aspects of their existence (chromosomes, gonadal dysgenesis, etc) is new.

Re: More women than expected are genetically men (2016)

#132

Post by AnEro »

readthenotes1 wrote: post #52
pseudosavant wrote: post #12

Very interesting. Relates to conversations I've had recently regarding trans people in sports. Turns out that conversation isn't simple, because gender is way more complex than the binary M/F options society has tried to act like it is. Between reasons like in this article, or being born intersex, etc, there are definitely people with female chromosomes who have competed in men's sports, or people with female sex org…

[flagged]

As someone that has transitioned, I went into it with this opinion but now on year 7 of hormones, It's more complicated. I honestly now align more with the Olympic rulings of time in the hormone ranges of what you're competing under. Where at 5 years I lost all my strength, my bone density has dropped to cis womans (dexa scans). For instance, now I work out 3 times a week, 50 pounds still feels like 'get my body totally involved' heavy, before transitioning not working out it was a non-issue kinda heavy. (transitioned at 23) So its more having the time and atrophy of those muscles gained during that time period, then all that is left is probably an advantage of having a higher rate of fast twitch muscle fibre which probably is with in variance ranges of normal genetic advantages. Which also isn't a nice message to deliver to collage athletes of you have to muscle detox for 3-5 years.

Re: More women than expected are genetically men (2016)

#133

Post by drewcoo »

pseudosavant wrote: post #77
sunshowers wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The important thing to recognize is that fairness is a pretty fuzzy concept and a lot of the boundary between fair and unfair is defined by particular societal norms (socially constructed, if you will). All elite athletes have biological advantages not afforded to ordinary humans like us. People like Michael Phelps and Alex Honnold are specific examples of course, but even after years of training most people cannot p…

Societal gender norms have existed for probably as long as humans have, but we've only known about chromosomes for On the scale of human evolution, this is a very recent situation for society to figure out how to "decide".

> Societal gender norms have existed for probably as long as humans have

Or gender norms have existed since gender was defined in the 70s-80s by feminist scholars. Before that was only sex, which biologists know to be not a binary but a bimodal distribution, itself.

Re: More women than expected are genetically men (2016)

#134

Post by drewcoo »

pseudosavant wrote: post #12

Very interesting. Relates to conversations I've had recently regarding trans people in sports. Turns out that conversation isn't simple, because gender is way more complex than the binary M/F options society has tried to act like it is. Between reasons like in this article, or being born intersex, etc, there are definitely people with female chromosomes who have competed in men's sports, or people with female sex org…

> binary M/F

does not exist for sex or gender.

https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/gender-has-a-history-and-...

Re: More women than expected are genetically men (2016)

#135

Post by drdeca »

khuey wrote: post #75
stanfordkid wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It means two people of different races can have a baby together, but two people of the same sex cannot.

So literally every human characteristic other than their sexual reproductive capability is not real?

Well, I said race is "less real" not that it is "not real". Here are other things that are more real than "race": "blood type", "whether one has Down syndrome", "the number of limbs one has".

These kinds of properties/classifications are, I claim, more "natural", as far as biology. These groupings into classes are more natural (based on biological properties) than groupings into "races".

Re: More women than expected are genetically men (2016)

#136

Post by dissent »

sunshowers wrote: post #40
pseudosavant wrote: post #12

Very interesting. Relates to conversations I've had recently regarding trans people in sports. Turns out that conversation isn't simple, because gender is way more complex than the binary M/F options society has tried to act like it is. Between reasons like in this article, or being born intersex, etc, there are definitely people with female chromosomes who have competed in men's sports, or people with female sex org…

The important thing to recognize is that fairness is a pretty fuzzy concept and a lot of the boundary between fair and unfair is defined by particular societal norms (socially constructed, if you will). All elite athletes have biological advantages not afforded to ordinary humans like us. People like Michael Phelps and Alex Honnold are specific examples of course, but even after years of training most people cannot p…

[flagged]

Re: More women than expected are genetically men (2016)

#137

Post by elp »

sunshowers wrote: post #83
gruez wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Now, which biological advantages are fair and which are not is determined by society. We have somehow decided that chromosomal advantages are unfair, even though people have exactly as much control over them as they do over the amount of lactic acid they produce or how their amygdala behaves. What's the implication here, that because the distinction is totally arbitrary, that we should do away with it? What does tha…

I deliberately did not include any normative information on my post. Also, I didn't say the distinction was totally arbitrary (because it's not — social constructs rarely are totally arbitrary). I said the boundaries are fuzzy. I think a regime where intersex cis women, as well as trans women who have been on testosterone suppression for a long period, would probably be most fair. I don't think categorical bans are f…

The para-Olympics thrive with dramatically smaller numbers than trans women can manage. A 3rd category would do just fine.

The muscular changes that happen during puberty are permanent. No amount of testosterone suppression will change that. In how many sports do any trans-women end up on the podium vs their numbers in that sport?

The boundaries are really not that fuzzy at all.

Re: More women than expected are genetically men (2016)

#138

Post by jodrellblank »

realo wrote: post #31
jodrellblank wrote: post #4

tl;dr: "One in 15,000 males is born and grows up as a girl. .. this group is up to 50% larger than previously assumed"

Well... that would be more than 20,000 USA-ians. Soon targeted for deportation? Or maybe some therapy ... you know ... to make them 'normal' again.

The article isn't talking about trans people, it's talking about Androgen insensitivity and similar genetic disorders. AFAICT from a quick read, they are no more curable than Downe's Syndrome is.

Re: More women than expected are genetically men (2016)

#139

Post by zzo38computer »

pseudosavant wrote: post #12

Very interesting. Relates to conversations I've had recently regarding trans people in sports. Turns out that conversation isn't simple, because gender is way more complex than the binary M/F options society has tried to act like it is. Between reasons like in this article, or being born intersex, etc, there are definitely people with female chromosomes who have competed in men's sports, or people with female sex org…

I think what will be fairer might depend on what sports they are; I think that they will have to be considered for each kind of sports, why they have sex/gender segregation, whether or not you should have a segregation at all (and if so, if it should be by something else instead), etc.

Re: More women than expected are genetically men (2016)

#140

Post by neallindsay »

Aurornis wrote: post #50
blueflow wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Can't know what is a disorder is or not when you don't know whats "normal" I hesitate to wade into this discussion, but in the case of the conditions listed in the article there are a number of additional symptoms and medical difficulties that go along with the genetic variants. It's not a simple matter of confusion about sex. As for "normal": The biological systems involved are not functioning normally because a g…

> …as intended.

Genes and biology in general do not have "intended" purposes.

Post reply on HN