Vaccine
- Thread starter Multi Sport
- Start date
GoldenGate
GOLD
So now the Bible is the sports rulebook? I thought it was the dictionary?
GoldenGate
GOLD
Gays, trans and brown people are all coming for your children.
It’s not really that blurry. All three of those conditions are pretty rare. On the order of 0.1% of people.
It’s irrelevant anyway. None of the athletes in question have one of those conditions.
what-happened
GOLD
Let me help you, they are disorders but are still: man, woman, man.
XYY - can get XX pregnant
XXX - can get pregnant by XY and XXY, a bit hard by XXY
XXY - usually infertile, can get XX pregnant with treatment.
13K is the one you should be addressing. He's the one with the absolutist statements.
Are you proposing that "can get pregnant" is a proper definition of woman?
EvilGoalie 21
GOLD
I knew if this stuff about X's and Y's stewed long enough we'd come to a point of realization that defining any biological trait by genotype alone is never sufficient. Ultimately, there has to be some kind of phenotypic expression. That's what a trait is.
So, yes, all the guys posting here should try this out tonight. Hi Honey I'm home. Guess what I learned today? What makes you a woman is not that you are XX (with one of them being inactivated in each cell at that). It's that I can get you preggers. It's just Truth, Fact and Biology.
She may well have a different take on Truth, Fact and Biology. Her Truth and Facts may involve you having to tell the dog to slide it over on the couch that night, and getting a crash course in the Biology of pain and swelling.
met61
GOLD
...Truth is clear and simple...women cannot be men and men cannot be women.
...anything short of Truth, requires the song and dance you just performed above.
met61
GOLD
... actually, it is relevant to the left...they only need a kernel to fuel their agenda and construct their lies upon.
EvilGoalie 21
GOLD
Heh heh. What about Immaculate Conception, then? Is that Song and Dance or Chapter and Verse? I imagine Truth comes with a convenient dichotomous cleavage point.
A difficult question for serious Jesuit scientists is the sex-chromosome genotype of Jesus. Since her only biological parent was her mother, one must assume it was XX since there was no one to contribute a Y. That makes her a woman, right?
Unless, of course, Mary was one of those rare trisomy individuals.
Lot of words, but it erodes your own point.
If you're going with phenotypic expression, then you have to group people by birth gender. Those are the genes which were expressed.
Surgery doesn't count. Otherwise, you have to believe in unicorns whenever someone cuts one horn off of a goat.
Even phenotypes can be ambiguous. There have been a few cases recorded where the newborn was genotypically male (XY) but due to a congenital malformation there were none of the expected male organs visible. Parents had to decide whether to raise the child as a male with no external genitals, or allow surgery to convert the child to a sterile female, with appropriate hormone treatment during the time that puberty was expected.
EvilGoalie 21
GOLD
Right, if one wants to approach the issue from genetics, the genotype of Mary becomes a question. And the karyotype of Jesus-the only haploid human thing. But, even for the Jesuits, I think the real question is whether genetics is the right pond to be fishing for answers. After all, I think it is only doctrine, not the Biblical text per se, taking a hard line where devine conception and biological conception mean the same thing. The reference in Luke to Mary's relative Elizabeth conceiving a child in old age is also sort of interesting.
I’m fairly sure once once you have faith, you kinda have to accept ‘miracles’ or acts of God. I’d be surprised if your proposed concerns are really anything ‘serious Jesuit scientists’ are struggling to deal with.
Then again…
“For by grace are you saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.”
Calvinism is even more strict, with the belief that your salvation is determined before you are born. A lot of sins can hide under that cloak.
Abraham's wife Sarah had a child at 90. I don't know which is the bigger miracle - Sarah's pregnancy, or the couple's implied sexual activity at that age.
EvilGoalie 21
GOLD
I'll push a bit. The stuff about surgery, identity, transformation is not relevant to a discussion of the inter-relationship between genotype and phenotype. If it is, it's much more complex and distributed across the genome than we can track at the moment. We agree-XX is the typical genotype of a woman. Or we can say the absence of the Y. Or we can say the absence of expression of the SRY region of the Y. So, what is it about the expression of the XX genotype that defines a woman (or the other way around if you got SRY going on)? We had the ability to get pregnant. Fails easily as a definition. Some females are sterile. Post menopausal women are still female. So you go, OK, birth gender, by which I'm guessing you mean some read out of the differentiation of sexual characteristics during development. Which ones-spell it out. Your are just shifting the trait you want to hang your hat on. Try that definition with your wife instead. Might not get you much further. She might say "Oh, so now we have quantifiable elements in our definition". Let's talk about measuring manhood and where you fall on that distribution shall we.
Look, I don't give a rat's ass about the transgender swimmer thing or whatnot. The interesting part is genetics and fairness in sport. Here's a different tact. Take your birth gender XYs and (to use your terminology) take a look at which genes are expressed (in reality, which variants of the genes are inherited and the levels to which they are expressed at different times in different cells). Instead of quantifiable traits of "man" and "woman" take "talent" instead. Humans have very little genetic diversity to begin with. Sequence a million people-it's happening right now. Now, start building genetic correlates that are to some extent associated with the 95th percentile of a trait associated with talent. How might that relate to fairness in sport?
Sure, people are going to go "gaslighting". But that's only because I don't care about what you are aguing about and talking beyond the narrow blinders placed around the conversation.