You seem to be missing my point that your definition for what's a mutation or an anomaly is arbitrary. In other words, to say something is a mutation or anomaly, I must be contrasting it with something else. What I contrast it with is completely arbitrary. I could easily contrast sex chromosomes with our ancestors who had no sex chromosomes. Do you understand?
Also, this talk about whether or not something is a mutation, an anomaly, etc. is pretty irrelevant, isn't it? Some tigers are white. That fact that it's an anomaly/mutation doesn't change the fact that there's another color.
Which is more than enough of a justification for me to say eyeballs are unnatural, abnormal, a mutation, etc., using the arbitrary precedent you've set. You need to come up with something less arbitrary.Evolutionary changes make up for the diversity in life of this planet.
It all happened thanks to mutations.
The eyes we have in our heads are thanks to a mutation that allowed a little advantage some ~400 million years ago.
You don't seem to understand how cold science is. There is no such thing as "what should happen" in the natural world. That's a human projection we put onto things.What should happen is that you get born with either XX or XY chromosomes, defying what you are.
Couple of years after birth, you'll reproduce so that the population of the human species can survive.
Anything beyond that is tightly knit inside human emotion and what not.
Science is just extremely cold for that matter.
I am pretty sure that if someone gets born with a different set of chromosomes than hey "should have", it has nothing to do with emotions. It happened.What should happen is that you get born with either XX or XY chromosomes, defying what you are.
Couple of years after birth, you'll reproduce so that the population of the human species can survive.
Anything beyond that is tightly knit inside human emotion and what not.
Science is just extremely cold for that matter.
Which is more than enough of a justification for me to say eyeballs are unnatural, abnormal, a mutation, etc., using the arbitrary precedent you've set. You need to come up with something less arbitrary.
You don't seem to understand how cold science is. There is no such thing as "what should happen" in the natural world. That's a human projection we put onto things.
I am pretty sure that if someone gets born with a different set of chromosomes than hey "should have", it has nothing to do with emotions. It happened.
So you feel the need to continue that cycle by only spreading the bits of science that suits your needs?Couple decades before that, it was the whites against the blacks and centuries before that, the romans against the saxons n what not.
It's a never ending circle but I'm merely saying it from a scientific/biological point of view, without human emotion.
Thus by your own logic, you basically validate that you aren't a normal person. You aren't reproducing and thus you basically are a scientific anomaly.What should happen is that you get born with either XX or XY chromosomes, defying what you are.
Couple of years after birth, you'll reproduce so that the population of the human species can survive.
Anything beyond that is tightly knit inside human emotion and what not.
Science is just extremely cold for that matter.
So you feel the need to continue that cycle by only spreading the bits of science that suits your needs?
Thus by your own logic, you basically valid that you aren't a normal person. You aren't reproducing and thus you basically are a scientific anomaly.
Science isn't as clean cut on this as you would like to make it sound. The medical and scientific fields accept that gender/sex is a far more complex issue than just "you are this and that."
You're just trying to put things into me mouth now.
They're just born with a different set of chromosomes.
It happens.
Exactly my point. It can happen. Since it can happen, it is a valid outcome, right?
You're just trying to put things into me mouth now.
in 100000 years, maybe humans can reproduce asexually, who fucking knows?
It happens.
Whatever people are born as, is normal to them. It's a bit like Autism - some people are going to say it is abnormal, and it should be cured. But to the actual people with autism and their families, it is who they are. It isn't fair to say to someone that part of what makes you who you are is wrong and should be changed. Like what if someone said some aspect of your personality was different to other people's and it was wrong and should be changed. Could you even change that aspect without having to become a different person? How would you feel being told that you, as a person, was wrong? What if you just got told that your nose was too big, and if you wanted to live in society you had to get it altered? But you liked your nose? Would you be happy changing your face, which is part of who you are, to satisfy other people? Would you rather be treated as a freak and keep your nose? These are the sorts of questions you should ask yourself before you label anything about someone else, that they were born with and cannot help, wrong.Never said you should purge those who have it.
I'm merely saying that biologically, you got male and female.
Anything else is an anomaly and shouldn't happen under normal circumstances.
Anything else (intersex, FtM, MtF and whatever) is what you personally identify as.
You know, I don't think whether it was or wasn't supposed to happen matters. The point is, it happened.That's also what I meant with me first post.
Biologically, you got XX and XY.
Anything else is biologically not supposed to happen.
I have never condemned anyone with XXY or XXYY chromosomes, no idea where people got that from...
Don't try to change this. You are using the very same arguments that were used against people like you and I am going to call you on this. Biology isn't as clean cut as people would like it to be.Yes, I'm a horrible person that should be flogged.
I will await it down the street.
Don't try to change this. You are using the very same arguments that were used against people like you and I am going to call you on this. Biology isn't as clean cut as people would like it to be.
From what I understood:
Biologically, there are 2 sexes, male and female
Based on that, it's safe to assume there are only 2 genders
I assume that identification is another level, and that's where genders appeared. Or I at least think that would make sense explained that way. I don't know.
Well you can't blame me. I don't really understand this whole thing.That's an extreme logical fallacy and hardcore assumption you have going on over there.
You've already gotten evidence posted against your arguments. Anything I add would only be repeats of what has already been posted. Thus I am more here to point out your contradictions by reminding you that you were once in our place.Neither is medical science.
Neither is the knowledge of the human anatomy.
Nothing in this world is as clean cut as people would like it to be.
It's not just about identification. Trans people don't "agree with" their body and prefer the other sex. And then there's some people that prefer something completely different. Imagine a trans person that wouldn't be happy even after a sex change.From what I understood:
Biologically, there are 2 sexes, male and female
Based on that, it's safe to assume there are only 2 genders
I assume that identification is another level, and that's where genders appeared. Or I at least think that would make sense explained that way. I don't know.
Absolutely nothing is "simple".Neither is medical science.
Neither is the knowledge of the human anatomy.
Nothing in this world is as clean cut as people would like it to be.