I just wrote a comment above but I believe OP is mixing XXY with what the comment was about, which is likely Swyer Syndrome: XY individuals with female anatomy and gonadal dysgenesis. While they have a Y chromosome, a defective sex-determining gene leads to a failure to sexually differentiate into male gonadal tissue and leads to subsequent loss of downstream sex hormone production.
If male and female are assigned purely based on physical anatomy, does it really matter?
No one in that person’s life would consider them male and doctors would treat them based on their sex characteristics - they may have testes but they wouldn’t be external.
I have never been karyotyped and I’m willing to bet most people haven’t either; your sex is assumed based on your outward appearance even when your genitals are not observable.
I really don’t think that having a Y chromosome makes you male when you literally have a vagina, you know? Especially when you could go your whole life without knowing.
Anatomically, they look female. They develop a uterus and vagina, but usually don’t develop other secondary sex characteristics (breasts, widened pelvis, etc). The karyotype will show typical male XY chromosomes. Usually I’ve seen them classified as intersex because of this.
The sex of the baby will almost certainly be recorded as female. Keep in mind that while the karyotype might indicate XY, babies generally aren’t karytotyped at birth, as that’s a pointless expense for the overwhelming majority of people. The parents, doctors, and children wouldn’t have any idea about their condition until:
Streak gonads are detected, which involves an MRI or ultrasound
Hormone levels are measured in a blood test
The child fails to undergo puberty as expected
Since only #3 is visible without a specific test, it’s usually the first indicator, and the other two tests are used as confirmations of the syndrome. That’s when supplemental hormone therapy and surgery are discussed as well.
If the SRY gene is broken, they’d still physically develop as female, though potentially with some abnormalities, rather than as male. Even leaving gender identity out of it, sex is still more complicated than ifexists Y; then male
I think if we’re going to use the construction plan metaphor, it would be more accurate to say that the builders didn’t get the message to alter the plans. Like if there was a house plan that was designed so it could be a duplex or a single family home by adding or removing one wall. Both options actually exist in the plans for the house at all times (yes, XX still has the genetic code for male anatomy), the SRY gene isn’t the plans to build male anatomy, that’s stored elsewhere, the SRY gene is more like a text to the builder saying “go with option B”. Except in this case the text failed to send, so the builder defaulted to option A.
So at the end of the day, the builder doesn’t put the wall in and builds a single family home, not a duplex. The owner may have wanted a duplex, but that isn’t what got built. So is it a duplex or not? I would lean towards saying no, but we’re not talking about houses, we’re talking about people, so it should probably just be their call
I think you’re trying to oversimplify things a bit. Sexual differentiation is an extremely complex process. To be frank, a biological perspective doesn’t really care about “what’s recorded on the government ID”. As you get more and more granular, those kinds of generalizations become less useful.
For a pure science take, such an individual might be described as:
A 14-year-old unmarried girl was referred with complaints of primary amenorrhea and nondevelopment of breast. Her build was normal. Examination of her secondary sexual characteristics revealed no breast development, absent axillary hairs, and sparse pubic hairs. External genitalia was of female type. Karyotype showed genotype of 46, XY. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed hypoplastic uterus with absent fallopian tubes and ovaries. A diagnosis of Swyer syndrome was made. (Swyer Syndrome Case Study)
But that doesn’t really fit on a driver’s license, so…
I’m gonna throw a common metaphor at you. See my previous post in here for a more thoughtful exposition on my gender experience.
Gender is kind of like shoes. If you have the right kind of shoe, well fitted, on the right feet, you don’t think about your shoes much at all. You know you have a certain type or brand of shoes on, but it’s not an essential element of your daily life. You’re not constantly aware of them. This parallels the common cisgender notion that the self isn’t gendered, that “there is a just a human in your head.” If your shoes are too small, on the wrong feet, or made wrong for your feet, it’s a whole problem all fucking day. It’s uncomfortable and disorienting. It’s distracting and persistent. Over time, it becomes painful, and you use increasing amounts of focus and energy dealing with your footwear incompatibility. This is what being gender incongruent is like. You spend huge amounts of time and energy trying to deal with a profound discomfort and incompatibility that nobody else understands or acknowledges because their shoes are fine.
Because so far I understood that for example the sex can be female, and so can the gender. But what sense does it make to have female gender? There is just a human in your head.
But then again… how important is this belief? And why are people claiming that there are more than two genders? Because of gender refers to sex, then what is going on there?
Their are neurological and therefore psychological differences between people of different genders. These are normally aligned with their physical sex and hormones. When there is a misalignment between gender and sex that’s what trans people are. It’s not belief, it’s brain structure.
There is just a human in your head.
Do you not feel attached to your birth gender at all? Or any other gender? Like if you woke up in a body of the opposite sex would you be okay with that?
Statements like this sometimes make me thing the person I am talking to is either very ignorant or a very confused agender person.
I just wrote a comment above but I believe OP is mixing XXY with what the comment was about, which is likely Swyer Syndrome: XY individuals with female anatomy and gonadal dysgenesis. While they have a Y chromosome, a defective sex-determining gene leads to a failure to sexually differentiate into male gonadal tissue and leads to subsequent loss of downstream sex hormone production.
deleted by creator
If male and female are assigned purely based on physical anatomy, does it really matter?
No one in that person’s life would consider them male and doctors would treat them based on their sex characteristics - they may have testes but they wouldn’t be external.
I have never been karyotyped and I’m willing to bet most people haven’t either; your sex is assumed based on your outward appearance even when your genitals are not observable.
I really don’t think that having a Y chromosome makes you male when you literally have a vagina, you know? Especially when you could go your whole life without knowing.
Anatomically, they look female. They develop a uterus and vagina, but usually don’t develop other secondary sex characteristics (breasts, widened pelvis, etc). The karyotype will show typical male XY chromosomes. Usually I’ve seen them classified as intersex because of this.
deleted by creator
I’m in the US.
The sex of the baby will almost certainly be recorded as female. Keep in mind that while the karyotype might indicate XY, babies generally aren’t karytotyped at birth, as that’s a pointless expense for the overwhelming majority of people. The parents, doctors, and children wouldn’t have any idea about their condition until:
Since only #3 is visible without a specific test, it’s usually the first indicator, and the other two tests are used as confirmations of the syndrome. That’s when supplemental hormone therapy and surgery are discussed as well.
If the SRY gene is broken, they’d still physically develop as female, though potentially with some abnormalities, rather than as male. Even leaving gender identity out of it, sex is still more complicated than
if exists Y; then maledeleted by creator
I think if we’re going to use the construction plan metaphor, it would be more accurate to say that the builders didn’t get the message to alter the plans. Like if there was a house plan that was designed so it could be a duplex or a single family home by adding or removing one wall. Both options actually exist in the plans for the house at all times (yes, XX still has the genetic code for male anatomy), the SRY gene isn’t the plans to build male anatomy, that’s stored elsewhere, the SRY gene is more like a text to the builder saying “go with option B”. Except in this case the text failed to send, so the builder defaulted to option A.
So at the end of the day, the builder doesn’t put the wall in and builds a single family home, not a duplex. The owner may have wanted a duplex, but that isn’t what got built. So is it a duplex or not? I would lean towards saying no, but we’re not talking about houses, we’re talking about people, so it should probably just be their call
deleted by creator
I think you’re trying to oversimplify things a bit. Sexual differentiation is an extremely complex process. To be frank, a biological perspective doesn’t really care about “what’s recorded on the government ID”. As you get more and more granular, those kinds of generalizations become less useful.
For a pure science take, such an individual might be described as:
But that doesn’t really fit on a driver’s license, so…
Gender isn’t sex. Their gender is what’s in their brain, not what’s in their pants. I thought this would be obvious by now but I guess not.
deleted by creator
I’m gonna throw a common metaphor at you. See my previous post in here for a more thoughtful exposition on my gender experience.
Gender is kind of like shoes. If you have the right kind of shoe, well fitted, on the right feet, you don’t think about your shoes much at all. You know you have a certain type or brand of shoes on, but it’s not an essential element of your daily life. You’re not constantly aware of them. This parallels the common cisgender notion that the self isn’t gendered, that “there is a just a human in your head.” If your shoes are too small, on the wrong feet, or made wrong for your feet, it’s a whole problem all fucking day. It’s uncomfortable and disorienting. It’s distracting and persistent. Over time, it becomes painful, and you use increasing amounts of focus and energy dealing with your footwear incompatibility. This is what being gender incongruent is like. You spend huge amounts of time and energy trying to deal with a profound discomfort and incompatibility that nobody else understands or acknowledges because their shoes are fine.
Their are neurological and therefore psychological differences between people of different genders. These are normally aligned with their physical sex and hormones. When there is a misalignment between gender and sex that’s what trans people are. It’s not belief, it’s brain structure.
Do you not feel attached to your birth gender at all? Or any other gender? Like if you woke up in a body of the opposite sex would you be okay with that?
Statements like this sometimes make me thing the person I am talking to is either very ignorant or a very confused agender person.
deleted by creator