by zz3 | 2025-11-04 18:39:54+00:00
Let me see if I understand your argument. I'm not sure about several aspects, and it sounds like you have multiple arguments.

[1] Sex is purely defined by gamete size. (Already incorrect, but if that makes the argument easier we can play pretend.) [2] Humans are a gonochoric species. (true) [3] In gonochoric species, unlike simultaneous or sequentially hermaphroditic species, gamete-size generally remains constant throughout the lifetime of the species (also true). [4] Therefore, humans generally maintain the same gamete size throughout an individual’s life (sure, not many people are switching their gamete size throughout their life).

We’re in agreement humans aren’t generally switching gamete sizes through an individual’s lifetime. That would honestly be ridiculous and no one is arguing this. However, while some of these ideas are true and are convenient for talking about various species, it’s not always correct when talking about individuals.

An example of this is using generalized words or labels on anything or anyone. “English-speaking” could mean someone who speaks only English, someone who speaks only a little English. What matters is context and relevance.

Human sexual phenotype can be described by three discrete categories if you want: male, female, intersex. This is what I mean by “spectrum,” I’m literally just mentioning it doesn’t fit the definition of binary (being able to be completely described with 0 or 1 without loss of data). Please see my previous explanation for further details on this. I literally did a proof-by-contradiction.

In individual humans, our genotypes do not always match our phenotypes. For example, XY + No SRY would be functionally identical to XX. XXY and XYY are both viable and happen, and a lot of people might not even realize they don’t have the chromosomes they think they do.

Obviously intersex is about the same proportion of the population as red heads, for context.

So intersex is a perfectly normal and natural human sex phenotype. There are literally human beings living with both gamete sizes for their entire lives, living hopefully happy, healthy lives. This has nothing to do with gonochoric or hermaphroditic species. We’re still a gonochoric species, even if intersex humans exist. Humans aren’t spontaneously changing gamete sizes throughout their lives, but some people literally just have both and have had both since birth. That’s just how it is.

So human sexual phenotypes don’t always match genotypes. They mostly do, probably over 80%, but we’re not honestly sure about the true rate of intersex mostly because it matters so little. As you saw in the textbook chapter I referenced, human sexual phenotype has many factors, but yeah, we can summarize it with three discrete categories: male, female, intersex. That’s again, just how it is. We can debate what to do with intersex, sure, but it honestly doesn’t matter very much.

Your sports argument seems a little strange, I’m honestly not sure I fully understand it:

[1] Gamete size is the only determining factor in human sexual phenotype [obviously incorrect, please see that book chapter] [2] As a society, we divide up sports by sex or gender [yeah, sure, we sometimes do that] [3] Gamete size is relevant in sports [very obviously incorrect, but what you probably mean is that gametes CORRELATE with testosterone, muscle mass differences etc, which is true, and we can measure those correlations] [4] People can’t change their gametes [no one is talking about this, ridiculously irrelevant] [5] Therefore people can’t change their sex?

Trans people exist. We have accepted that there is both biological sex and gender (social construct). Just like genotype and phenotype, they normally match, but sometimes they don’t. I honestly don’t understand why there’s any upset about this, there’s been evidence of this going back pretty far throughout history. We literally get the word hermaphrodite from the ancient Greeks.

So do you only care about transpeople because of sports? There are transmen in the Olympics, so I think they’re doing fine, and I literally linked several papers on transwomen in the Olympics, but I can link them again.

We’ve measured it. This is what science does.

More links: Sex differences and athletic performance. Where do trans individuals fit into sports and athletics based on current research? https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-livin...

SPORTS AND PERFORMANCE IN THE TRANSGENDER POPULATION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

https://www.scielo.br/j/rbme/a/CDkTksYcMPcKYTHGfcJLX4K/?lang...

Transgender Women in the Female Category of Sport: Perspectives on Testosterone Suppression and Performance Advantage

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01389-3

Honestly, if there is some advantage, they’ll measure it, try to understand it, and then change the rules. I’m sure it’s an ongoing discussion. I’m not sure I see your point with all this.