Debate Topic : There are only two genders.

Onto my second, Now, My opponent has misconceptualized my case. As well as how I have defined sex and gender in my opening argument. I will use this time to clarify some of these doubts. "You say sex does not necessarily determine gender in your view. If this is the case, Then you either agree there are more than two genders or you limit it to "man" and "woman" arbitrarily, And misunderstand the definition between why "gender" and "sex" are not equivalent. " First of all I don't quite understand where you believe my definitions are misunderstood. You did explain to some degree how sex is defined a little later on in your argument but you made no distinction on your own part to clarify the issue of gender and sex. I would prefer if you elaborate in greater detail because accusational notions are brought forward. Second of all I made it clear that sex in itself does not determine gender simply because naturally the wiring of the brain is far more complicated than the chromosones that determine sex at birth. However where I drew the line was that the flexiblity of being gender fluid must be restricted to identifying as either male or female. Now I do open the floor to my opponent as to where the contention lies between my distinction between sex and gender. We are not only born with XX and XY. This is an undisputed fact. XXY, XYY, Et cetera people exist. If your only definition for 'sex' is 'one who possesses XX or XY chromosomes' then your definition of sex does not include all humans that exist. This is once again another misconception as to the stance of my case. I stated that all human beings have XX or XY chromosones. That much is still true. Those born with XXY or XYY in your example already have either XX or XY chromosones. The difference simply is that they have additional chromosones. However, This is well known to the world as 'Klinefelter Syndrome' and it is a genetic disorder that extends far beyond gender identification. The Case by Case Analysis Case One - The Biological One "Humans aren't designed to be anything. There is no designer. Even if there were, He either screwed up by making more than XX and XY or he intentionally made nature create more than these two categories. " Humans aren't designed to be anything? Well that's certainly taken a shot at both the theory of evolution than just the creationist argument. I'm sure then that if we had conciousness during the period in which our embryos were fertilized then I'm sure we would have had the ability to choose to be born with eighteen mechanical arms or as a bird with wings instead of arms. "There is no 'correct' or 'proper' human. " If you're saying this to make an exception for those born with XXY or XYY chromosones then I respectfully retort. As I said before people who are born with this condition suffer from a disorder. This disorder can affect anything from fertility to muscle mass to coordinational skills. This is unnatural as I shall show later on. "How about intersex people without the traits of females or males? What is your arbitrary way of classifying these people as one or the other? What about people who aren't interested in participating in the arbitrary 2-class system society has rigged? " Yes, Biologically speaking these people do not fall under the UN's classification of what defines a male or a female. However many of these people who fall under the category of 'intersex' are either raised male or female early on in life. Those who choose to identify as a different gender in the male-female spectrum do so when they grow up. Of a study shown in Australia for people born with additional chromosones that my opponent is so gleefully bringing up as an exception, Only 6% identify as neither male or female later on in life. The reason this number is so low is because there are medical treatments (such as building testosterone in those that identify as male) that are avaliable to people who fall under the biological definition of intersex. I must ask you to keep in mind that just because the definition of intersex is biological the implications of gender identity is still an entirely social construct. And this can be rectified by approaching people with this disability the proper way in order to help them identify themselves on the male-female spectrum. The 6% that identified as 'unsure' did so because they did not 'feel' that they fell under either male or female due to their biological condition. However being 'unsure' does not validate the concept of a third gender at all. Because there is no single theorectical explanation in the world that matches another theorectical explanation about what defines this 'third gender'. Perhaps my opponent would be so kind as to define this. It would make the debate far more clear. "It didn't work for slavery, It didn't work for homosexuality, And it doesn't work for limiting genders to a binary choice that not everyone fits in. " If you're going to bring in analogies you better make sure they link. The issue of slavery was entirely a social and political issue and had nothing to do with gender dysphoria. The issue of homosexuality was an issue with the creationist side of the argument that argued it was unnatural, But there was a scentific explanation justifying homosexuality. There is no clear scentific explanation for a third gender. There is no clarification on what exactly it is and people identify as that merely because they are 'unsure' as to their orientation. Like I said, This is correctable given the proper attitude. "Most humans classify themselves as how they were raised. That doesn't make it correct. " And why not exactly? Because we haven't given them the 'freedom' to decide on their own? Parents raise their kids to teach them the virtues of what is right and wrong and how society works. Yes it doesn't always mean that it's correct but you have offered virtually no explanation of why this is a bad thing. Like I said, The Australian study showed that only 6% of intersex people still didn't identify as either gender later on in life after they were raised. Are you going to tell the other 94% that they're wrong about their gender identifcation and they have simply been brainwashed by society? "So your argument here consists of an appeal to nature, An appeal to tradition, And an incorrect biological 'fact. " I must say you're very good at putting words into my mouth. Yes, I did say my argument on the premise of being naturally in tune with the laws of nature. But I did not make my argument based on traditional values whatsoever. I do invite my opponent to show me where exactly this argument was made because I can't seem to find it myself. And I already refuted your misconceptualization that I was bringing up incorrect biological facts. Now you know. Case Two - Gender dysphoria and Social Application "Your argument that "Gender dysphoria exists so there should only be two genders" is completely ridiculous. It still exists even in the society you are suggesting. " Where exactly are you showing the contention? Yes, It does exist. But suffering from gender dysphoria does not validate your claim that you are something other than what you should be just because you feel like it. You don't go around telling people who suffer from paranoid schizophrenia that the voices in their heads are actually talking to them and they have a right to be paranoid. Intesex people suffer from a disorder much like many other people who suffer from disorders. If you're telling me that we're making an exception for these guys because they should have the freedom to choose then we should tell everyone who has a implicating mental illness that they're right and there's no need to be treated. "There are no laws in place telling people they must acknowledge other people's identities. " Yes, But there are laws in place for many other aspects of society where gender does play a role. Such as using the bathroom or playing on a football team. If I am someone who chooses to identify as neither male nor female, I can't just demand to use the ladies washroom because I feel that the gender norm should not apply to me because I choose to identify as neither. My opponent makes these statements without linking in his argument to the bigger picture. Yes, I don't have to care if you choose to live in your own bubble and identify as a rabbit. But you don't have a right to shove that down my throat when it comes to various other aspects of society where the laws of gender distinction play a role in the legal system. Concluding remarks - ""Gender" is whatever we identify ourselves as. " "Society doesn't suddenly collapse if some small percentage of society suddenly choose to identify as rabbits. " I am going to answer all of these in one response because it runs along the same lines and I am running out of word space. Like I stated before my opponent did not highlight the bigger picture and has chosen to remain suprisingly ignorant as to the actual mitigations of gender identity on society. I have clearly shown that there is a link between gender identity and the laws of social order. I invite my opponent to show how this is not the case. "We don't have the medical knowledge and control over our environment necessary to change our bodies as we wish" Yes we do actually. I stated before that there are medical contigencies in place even for problems that intersex people face. I'm not sure where you're getting at with this. In this argument I have clearly illustrated the bigger picture and drawn the link between society and gender identity which my opponent has failed to do. I have also presented my own case analysis from a real world example to back up these sentiments so now I respectfully ask my opponent to put his money where his mouth is as many of his arguments strung from misconceptulization and blatent accusations. Source - . https://ihra. Org. Au/30313/intersex-stories-statistics-australia/