1457
OnLy tWo eLemEnTs
(gregtech.eu)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2025
1457 points (97.6% liked)
Science Memes
17860 readers
680 users here now
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- !abiogenesis@mander.xyz
- !animal-behavior@mander.xyz
- !anthropology@mander.xyz
- !arachnology@mander.xyz
- !balconygardening@slrpnk.net
- !biodiversity@mander.xyz
- !biology@mander.xyz
- !biophysics@mander.xyz
- !botany@mander.xyz
- !ecology@mander.xyz
- !entomology@mander.xyz
- !fermentation@mander.xyz
- !herpetology@mander.xyz
- !houseplants@mander.xyz
- !medicine@mander.xyz
- !microscopy@mander.xyz
- !mycology@mander.xyz
- !nudibranchs@mander.xyz
- !nutrition@mander.xyz
- !palaeoecology@mander.xyz
- !palaeontology@mander.xyz
- !photosynthesis@mander.xyz
- !plantid@mander.xyz
- !plants@mander.xyz
- !reptiles and amphibians@mander.xyz
Physical Sciences
- !astronomy@mander.xyz
- !chemistry@mander.xyz
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !geography@mander.xyz
- !geospatial@mander.xyz
- !nuclear@mander.xyz
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !quantum-computing@mander.xyz
- !spectroscopy@mander.xyz
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and sports-science@mander.xyz
- !gardening@mander.xyz
- !self sufficiency@mander.xyz
- !soilscience@slrpnk.net
- !terrariums@mander.xyz
- !timelapse@mander.xyz
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
If I remember correctly, not even sex is binary in humans.
There are a decent number of combinations of the X and Y chromosomes, not just XX and XY. If I remember correctly there are about 6 more common combos
Not just cromossomes matter. Intersex can be purely environmental and not genetic.
Aren't those considered disorders, tho? Like XXX or XXY
yes the majority of humans just have one or the other and mutations and disorders can cause variations within the two. but those aren't a majority of humans.
people seem to think that he is putting some negative meaning behind it.
just because a mutation is a mutation doesn't mean it's bad. but it doesn't mean it's normal for humans either.
It also means there are more than two options for sex. Meaning it isn't binary.
You're probably thinking of variations within a sex, such as XXY. They still have bodies organized around producing one of two gamete sizes. Nobody produces a third size of gamete
But some produce neither.
Nobody has a body organized around producing no gametes
What does this even mean?
Who "organizes" bodies?
If a body can't and never could produce gametes, what makes it "organized" to do so anyway?
There is no "who", it's the process of evolution over billions of years. Our bodies aren't blank slates.
Kinda feels like you dodged the question. I think they were asking you to define what it means to "organize around producing a gamete", how folks that were never going to produce either fit into that definition, and how you construct sex as a binary despite that.
~~Edit: looks like powerstuggle is responding to other comments but not this one. I think it is safe to assume they are going for low hanging fruit and trolling rather than actually trying to explain themself.~~
Sorry, you're down in the list of comments in my inbox. They'd look for structures like these for diagnosis:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramesonephric_duct
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesonephric_duct
There aren't people born with bodies that just have "no concept" of how to produce a gamete, and that's what I mean our bodies aren't blank slates. Even if someone doesn't actually produce gametes, the rest of their body is still structured in a sexed way, because we're a sexually dimorphic species.
I see what you're saying. Something like "there are two sets of characteristics and most folks grab from the majority of one or the other. Therefore we can place everyone into one sex or the other."
I feel like when I first read your comments I took issue with how black and white your words seemed. I still kinda feel that.
Is there some structure that's presense or lack there of definitely defines sex for every person? If so I think its fair to call sex a binary.
I feel like I'd only be convinced if I could understand what makes the options only 0 or 1 yk? It doesn't seem to be chromosomes, which is what I was taught growing up. X/Y Chromosomes have more that two ways of existing in humans.
I'll read through those wiki articles a bit. To me it seems like your saying that there is some kind of structure that has no middle ground in humans. It always only goes one way or the other. No variation. It's hard for me to picture life doing that. If ya have any more info to point to I'd be down to look at it.
Edit: for example, would Ovotesticular Syndrome be a counter example to gender binary?
Powerstruggle just trolls trans supportive posts for hours on end, judging by post history.
You're trying to reason with a bigot.
Damn that post history do paint a pretty consistent picture. Seems there is only one thing for powerstruggle to talk about lol. Same talking point too with the "organized around producing certain gametes."
Thanks for pointing that out.
To be fair, I also call out lots of other misinformation, like people trying to say North Korea is great, actually. That just doesn't get as much activity. In this thread alone I probably doubled my number of comments, but only because so many people tried to argue with me. The user you're responding to also seems to believe that people they disagree with are trolls, which is not how that works.
Fair, I guess I only looked back two weeks or so. Would you respond to my above comment that talks about Ovotesticular syndrome and variation in müllerian duct development?
You're an anti trans troll. It's what you do. Trump's talking points lived out online.
The structures that unambiguously always define male or female are the structures that produce functional gametes. I interpreted "how folks that were never going to produce either fit into that definition" as asking "If we don't look at the gonads, what would we use to determine sex". Those ducts are a very good indicator, but are secondary structures around the gonads. If you wanted to determine sex without looking at gonads, those are one of the primary structures for doing so.
Ovotestes are interesting, but probably not what you're thinking. They're not just normal testes and ovaries as one might be lead to believe from the name. They're exceedingly rare, so have to be examined individually and general statements can't really be made. You'll probably find a (semi-)functional gonad from which their sex would be determined, with a sampling of non-functioning tissue from the other sex. You'll also likely find that the surrounding structures and rest of their body is unambiguously male or female, though again you'd have to look at a specific case.
To bring it around to near the start of this thread, even then, the body isn't organized around producing no gametes. It's organized around producing gametes and failing to do so.
After looking some case reports it looks like a lot of folks with ovesterticular disorder have both sets of genetalia and neither can produce gametes. These folks tend to choose a gender (usually the one they grew up as pre-puberty) and get hormone therapy and such to affirm it.
Since "sex is a binary" is a universal claim, it only takes one existential example to disprove it. I was pretty convinced by the case reports I read that the sex binary can't include every person.
I'd be convinced if ya presented a definition that could be used on everyone.
But at this point I think we are splitting hairs. It seems obvious to me that there is a range of ways sex can exist in humans. At this point a definition for the binary would have to be pretty complex and people close to the boundary would likely be very similar despite getting opposite labels. It'd be like saying there is a binary of black and white and the line is at R127,G127,B127. I mean sure, but we both know we are just drawing a line in a spectrum.
This is from Scientific American in 2017
Those are variations within a sex. Chromosomes/genes/etc aren't how sex is defined. The paper that I link to in my sibling comment (Why There Are Exactly Two Sexes) explains why trying to use that as the definition of sex is incoherent.
Even if I've failed to convince you, thanks for actually trying to understand, unlike most in this thread. The best link I can provide for further reading is probably this peer-reviewed article published by a biologist, Why There Are Exactly Two Sexes. Here's a few quotes:
As I've said elsewhere in the thread, nothing I've said here is actually a claim that I myself am making. I'm simply stating what the consensus is. Trying to find flaws in that definition is how science works, and it's healthy to poke at it.
That article seems to counter your above points about using secondary characteristics pretty directly.
As well:
The article counters the claim that everyone can be placed into the binary.
It seems that "sex is a binary" but we have to exclude folks that don't fit into it. Looks like the meme we're commenting on is still pretty applicable lol.
So now to me it looks like sex is a binary nested in the larger binary of unambiguous and ambiguous sex. Giving folks 3 places they could end up, one of those places (ambiguous sex) being a spectrum. But thats only if we are going to be super technical. I probably wouldn't correct someone for seeing that disjointed spectrum as a regular spectrum.
I do love a pedant though. I'm not even joking. For example: the comedian David Mitchell.
It's been fun taking the time to learn all of this. Thanks for all the links.
Posted another link elsewhere that explains the ambiguous terminology a bit:
https://projectnettie.wordpress.com/
I think the answer you're looking for is that ambiguous is being used in the sense of "not immediately obvious, requires further investigation", not "impossible to know in principle"
Either way, thanks for the conversation (and pedantry!)
My niece has Turner's syndrome. She had to learn to give herself hormone shots to grow and develop as others normally would during puberty, but due to very underdeveloped ovaries is incapable of producing gametes. How does she fit in?
Turner's syndrome is a chromosomal disorder that only affects females. Her body is organized around the production of the larger of two gamete sizes.