******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
> On Oct 26, 2019, at 11:41 AM, Me <m...@magnoliabloomberg.com> wrote: > > Biology is such a terf hey? > > https://twitter.com/lecanardnoir/status/1129742277134508033 > <https://twitter.com/lecanardnoir/status/1129742277134508033> Ah yes: A random Twitter thread as authoritative source. Why didn’t I think of that? Actually, he sounds a lot like those “edgy anti-imperialists” explaining how criticizing US involvement in “regime change” in Syria doesn’t make them supporters of Assad. The fact that their premise is self-servingly wrong is irrelevant to them. Meanwhile, this seems better (as does the piece Daniel Lindvall posted): “Some sexual scientists have tried to chart the many different expressions of sex/gender identity, putting together formal models of what we know about variations in sexual identity (man, woman, something else), gendered identity (masculine, feminine, androgynous, something else; note: the term “gender identity” is often conflated with sexual identity, here I use gendered identity to refer to the degree a person is typically masculine and/or feminine for their society), sexual orientation (androphilic [finding male bodies erotic], gynephilic [finding female bodies erotic], bisexual, asexual, something else), mating orientation (monogamous, polyamorous, open, something else), and other important forms of sexual diversity. “Leading sexual scientist Sari van Anders (2015) recently made an excellent attempt at integrating several of these sex/gender diversities here. She distinguishes between sex (including male and female as dimensions), gender/sex (man and woman as dimensions), and gender (masculine and feminine as dimensions), emphasizing variation in the intensity of each sexual configuration. The esteemed Anne Fausto-Sterling (2012) has argued for using dynamical systems theory to understand varying influences on sex/gender diversity (see also Fausto-Sterling et al., 2012). She emphasizes the John Money's classic 5-sexes approach of Genetic Chromosomal Sex (XX, XY, 45X, 47XXY, XYY, etc.), Fetal Gonadal Sex (ovaries versus testicles and sex as subsequent gamete production), Fetal Hormonal Sex (in utero exposure to testosterone and subsequent organizational effects), Internal Reproductive Sex (uterus/cervix/fallopian tubes vs. vas deferens/prostate/epididymis), and External Genital Sex (vagina/clitoris vs. scrotum/penis). Sexological legend Milton Diamond also has a compelling model of sex/gender diversity he calls Biased-Interaction Theory (see Diamond, 2006). Sexual scientists have learned a lot about sex/gender identities, but really we’ve just begun to understand the causes underlying the myriad ways humans express their sexual selves. There is much work to be done.” https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/sexual-personalities/201605/sex-and-gender-are-dials-not-switches _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
