Ugh, I mean just...UGH!!!

[Ragin4U]

If these were conditions in other animals, we would not be redefining the genders. We would be referring to every condition... whether hormonal, sex organ development, or other... as an abnormality. These biologists you're referring to are doing us all a disservice. It isn't about "nice neat little packages"... it is being honest about the science. We deep dive on scientific subjects all of the time... and do not compromise regardless of the complexity. These biologists are the ones oversimplifying the subject. The term "continuum" is bogus in terms of gender. It is a feel good term to mask the physical and psychological complexities involved. Post modernism simply lacks the sack to call anyone "abnormal". It's misapplied dogoodary... and it will absolutely come back to bite us all in the back side.

100% BS.
Biologists absolutely define sex on a continuum or spectrum. Search around for some gender-bending examples. Start with banana slugs.
Turb-So what defines gender? Science usually views sex and gender as the same thing but society does not, sometimes. Is it chromosomal and hormonal like sex is determined in biology? Or is it genitalia? Because there are all sorts of mix and match going on there too. They are syndromes that are related to how we determine sex.
If you are looking for nice neat packages, this isn't the field.

[CajunT]

Sorry T... many scientists support man made climate change (as do I... some of us just differ on the size of the impact... the natural system's ability to adapt... and/or man's ability to balance the effects).

Science supports science... not scientists. Scientists are just humans that you hope are competent and honest in their pursuit of knowledge.

Actually we are in agreement here. I'm simply pointing out that the left loves to use scientific evidence as an end to debate. Thus science finds that man contributes to Climate Change, therefore all debate is over. But when science doesn't agree with them, the debate is not over and we must consider alternative studies even when it doesn't agree with factual scientific evidence.

[Ragin4U]

Actually we are in agreement here. I'm simply pointing out that the left loves to use scientific evidence as an end to debate. Thus science finds that man contributes to Climate Change, therefore all debate is over. But when science doesn't agree with them, the debate is not over and we must consider alternative studies even when it doesn't agree with factual scientific evidence.

There is ALWAYS debate in science. There is nothing a scientist loves more than proving another scientist wrong.

[Turbine]

100% BS.
Biologists absolutely define sex on a continuum or spectrum. Search around for some gender-bending examples. Start with banana slugs.
Turb-So what defines gender? Science usually views sex and gender as the same thing but society does not, sometimes. Is it chromosomal and hormonal like sex is determined in biology? Or is it genitalia? Because there are all sorts of mix and match going on there too. They are syndromes that are related to how we determine sex.
If you are looking for nice neat packages, this isn't the field.

Slug away, the topic is humans.

Any additional concurrent factor does not add a gender it changes the syndrome.

[ManAboutTown]

100% BS.
Biologists absolutely define sex on a continuum or spectrum. Search around for some gender-bending examples. Start with banana slugs.
Turb-So what defines gender? Science usually views sex and gender as the same thing but society does not, sometimes. Is it chromosomal and hormonal like sex is determined in biology? Or is it genitalia? Because there are all sorts of mix and match going on there too. They are syndromes that are related to how we determine sex.
If you are looking for nice neat packages, this isn't the field.

I like a nicely packaged box. Also not scared of a little bush, but prefer the landing strip if we're going with the hedges.

Ideally, im more modern day and hope she just waxes errythang.

[ManAboutTown]

There is ALWAYS debate in science. There is nothing a scientist loves more than proving another scientist wrong.

Truthfully, the very basis of why I love science.

[Ragin4U]

Slug away, the topic is humans.

Any additional concurrent factor does not add a gender it changes the syndrome.

If XX is female and XY is male, what is XXY, XYY, XXYY? Not a simple question or answer.

[Ragin4U]

I like a nicely packaged box. Also not scared of a little bush, but prefer the landing strip if we're going with the hedges.

Ideally, im more modern day and hope she just waxes errythang.

Truthfully, the very basis of why I love science.

Erthang.

I love the argument too. Its what makes science entertaining.

[ManAboutTown]

Erthang.

I love the argument too. Its what makes science entertaining.

Even though we don't like to admit it, imo, we learn more thoroughly through debate.

[Turbine]

If XX is female and XY is male, what is XXY, XYY, XXYY? Not a simple question or answer.

Asked and answered, it's a syndrome not a new gender.

[CajunRebel]

There are not more than two "genders". The abnormalities of hermaphrodites does not constitute another gender... and neither do hormone levels. The entire argument before us is whether or not it is healthy (psychologically) to agree with confused states of sexuality... in order to help those that are suffering from it. That jury is still out. It is the only argument in question.

Is it acceptable to agree with a Liberty University student that the Earth is under 10,000 years old... so that they feel "adjusted and accepted"? No, science does not compromise itself to make people feel better.

Completely agree.

[CajunRebel]

There is ALWAYS debate in science. There is nothing a scientist loves more than proving another scientist wrong.

There is nothing a good scientist loves more than being proved wrong.