They pretty much just believed that there were 2 genders and showed evidence of the hypocrisy stemming from the left. I didn't really notice anything too hateful and violent in the sub, but I also have a job and don't patrol the internet all day looking for wrong think and ways to get offended.

That's a genetic mutation, transgender is a man made construct

> redefinition Fucking. Mong.

ooh that sounds interesting. Do you have any more details or source?

To add to your comment, even if you treat intersex disorders as other sexes, it is strongly bimodal (the vast majority of people fall under one of two categories). We typically treat other similar situations in biology as binary. For example, some people are born missing legs, but we are still considered as a bipedal species.

I appreciate that you assumed I was arguing in good faith and responded accordingly. In short, my view is that sex is the biological reality and that gender are the social constructs built around the physical and practical realities of sex and sexual characteristics. I don’t think that distinction is controversial, and I’ll assume most people here also make that distinction I also assume you and even most of the people downvoting me would concede that the science has shown that most of the behavioral traits that we associate with one gender or another are only marginally “hard-coded” into individuals. Gendered traits are reliably associated with a particular sex on a population level, but it’s impossible to extricate the origins of those behaviors from social causes on that scale. And even on that scale, the differences in gendered traits are still sleight because there’s so much variance within each sex. I think we’re on the same page that a conversation about expanding the gender identities associated with each sex to better resemble the broad swath of behavior within each sex would improve plenty of lives at little social cost. Someone else in this thread mentioned that sex is largely bimodal in humans and that’s true. However, the small minority of people who are biologically intersex have a valid claim to being of a different sex regardless of how few they may be. They are not simply “without sex” for not fitting within the modal parts of the distribution. My assertion is that, even if there is not a third “mode”, denying that they are even a category for the sake of simplifying the concept of biological sex to “the sexes” borders on denying that sex is still a distribution. The fact that people exist outside of the two modes of biological sex is important to consider in conversations about gender. When sex itself has exceptions to it’s two largest categories, gender ought to be thought of as having infinitely more exception considering that it’s attachment to sex is as loose as it is. I don’t think that’s controversial either. I think what is controversial are some of the extremes that some people take these conclusions to. That sexual categories are so fluid that, say, it’s worth getting rid of sexual categories in sports, where they are obviously relevant. Or that they are so fluid that differences in sexual aggression between the sexes are beyond reasonable consideration. Or that the sexual and gender identities of developing people can be so reliably understood to the degree that there is no risk inherent in permanent medical procedures based on that understanding I think what is also controversial are the extremes that ignoring these conclusions would take a person to. That anyone with sufficient difference in their sexual traits is such an aberration that their existence shouldn’t even be considered when making public policy. That only a person’s genitals should be considered in assessing their sexual traits, even if they have hormone levels, brain chemistry, and behavior that resembles the other sexual mode. And that anyone with different preferences in their gender expression must necessarily be treated as morally deficient - under the guise of referring to them as mentally ill Anyway, obviously there are ideologues and outright frauds on both sides of this issue. Remember that such people are generally far more outspoken by virtue of their certainty