Submitted by R. Martin Lobdell.
There seems to be confusion among people (including politicians and the media) about gender and sex. I also experienced this confusion among students during my 40 years teaching Psychology. Sex is the biological difference between what we call male and female, while gender is one’s sense of maleness, femaleness or both.
This distinction becomes even more intricate when considering genetic and hormonal influences on sex development. For instance, some individuals possess atypical chromosomal patterns such as XXY or XO, which further complicate the binary categorization of sex. In addition, the physical characteristics we associate with male and female can be affected by prenatal hormonal environments, leading to conditions where genetic males may appear female at birth, and genetic females may exhibit male genital traits.
Now it would be simpler if sex was neatly divided into two categories, male and female; but as with many things in biology, it is not that simple.
Traditionally male and female has been defined by chromosome, XX female and XY male. But there are many variations for example XXX, XO, XXY and XXYY. If we categorize by genital appearance, it gets even more complex. There are XY (males?) who are insensitive to prenatal hormones resulting in a female genital appearance at birth (however they lack some of the internal female organs). There are XX (females?) that are stimulated by their mothers’ hormones who develop a male genital appearance. Both the above are labeled at birth as girls and boys respectively. And there are rare true hermaphrodites who have both male and female genitals. All the above conditions fall in the category of intersexed people. Clearly all people do not fit neatly into two categories male and female.
When it comes to gender most people identify with their biologic sex. However, some feel they are the opposite of their biologic sex even though they are clearly XX or XY. The reason for this is unclear but many transgender people report they felt like they were trapped in the wrong body since early childhood.
Sincerely,
R. Martin Lobdell
Professor Emeritus
Pierce College
Will says
Thank you, Martin, for this clear explanation of how varied individual people can be, and why. No how much some people try, the world will never return to simpler times, as they were never simple except in their own mind.
Gary Turney says
Several years ago National Geographic devoted and entire issue to gender/sex and explained the latest discoveries on all the topics you mentioned. While I always considered one’s gender/identity none of my business, it opened my eyes to much of the biology behind the issues.
Ray Egan says
Well done, Marty. As a former colleague, I applaud not only your explanation but especially your willingness to try to inform those who will not see.
Ray Egan
Marty Lobdell says
I always admired your competency and relationship with Dennis and me.
Christine Curren says
Yes! Excellent ! Thank you ❤️
Marty Lobdell says
You are most welcome.
Dave Burgoyne says
Excellent work, mediator. My plea is that those who don’t agree need to spend some time with gay and trans folks, see how comfortable they are with their gender, how truly human they are, how compassionate they are, how non-threatening they are — and leave them alone. Despite the protestations of current political leaders, diversity is a biological fact and very human.
Dave says
I disagree with you. You suggest that I “spend some time with gay and trans folks.” It is up to me to choose with whom I’ll associate. I do not agree with their lifestyle and do not feel a need to learn about it.
I do not hate them; I just don’t agree with them and do choose to “leave them alone.” What I don’t like is when they try to impose their lifestyle on me in the form of parades, marches, asking for special treatment (use of tax dollars?), etc.
Marty Lobdell says
You are most welcome.
Carol Colleran says
Thank you. The scientific information is informative and interesting. There is much to learn and explore about this world…never ending!
John Arbeeny says
It appears that “confusion among people (including politicians and the media) about gender and sex” also occurred among the mental health profession as late as 2013.
The term “gender dysphoria” replaced the previous diagnostic label of “gender identity disorder (GID)” in 2013 with the release of the diagnostic manual DSM-5. The condition was renamed to remove the stigma associated with the term “disorder”.
So what we have here is not a change in diagnostics but rather linguistics in an attempt to modify societal behavior. GID/gender dysphoria is still a deviant behavior and its societal normalization, especially among vulnerable youth, is not the role of the the mental health community.
“Clearly all people do not fit neatly into two categories male and female” yet clearly the vast majority of people do. Thus the “rule” is that XX and XY define biological sex for female and male in the vast majority of cases. The exception to the “rule” is that there are individuals (XXY,XYY, etc.) a very small minority, who vary from that rule. So it comes down to whether we want to “rule by exception” or “let the exception rule”.
If “…gender is one’s sense of maleness, femaleness…” then it is a personal perception rather than an established biological fact as would be skin, eye, hair color, biological sex or other immutable physical characteristic.That perception may change over time while biological reality does not.
Male and females may choose to express the biological sex in a variety of ways. However that personal choice doesn’t require others to accept, applaud or endorse their expression of perceived gender.
Dave says
Thank you.
Elizabeth Scott says
Mr. Arbeeny just curious, which bathroom should a person who is XY (male?) with androgen insensitive syndrome who looks like a female use?
John Arbeeny says
Male. How you “look” as “…one’s sense of maleness, femaleness…” does not change the fact of your biological sex. There are many single stall bathrooms that allow either male or female users for privacy. Use one of those.
Elizabeth Scott says
Not always the case and not really an answer.
John Arbeeny says
Not really a question.
Elizabeth Scott says
You didn’t understand the issue. An XY person with androgen insensitive syndrome might have what appears to be female genitals and in all appearances looks female and has been raised as a female and may only find out they’re not when they aren’t able to have children. Again what bathroom since that seems to be such an important issue. And what sports team?
www.StephenNeufeld.com says
In the first book of the Bible–Genesis–in the first chapter, it is clear that God created only two sexes, Genesis 1:27-28:
“27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.'”
Like gravity, there are myriad immutable characteristics of our Universe. We run into trouble when we deny these established principals, like stepping off a high cliff results in death. Opposing clear “laws” (male/female) of this Universe only results in big problems and delusions.
One may try to discredit the Bible as a basis for understanding human existence but, its veracity is resoundingly supported by archeology, human history, and more. Though our increasingly secular society would rather deny the existence of God and any absolutes, our country was founded (Declaration of Independence, Constitution & Bill of Rights, etc.) on the Truths of God’s Word, as was the majority of the “Western World”.
When we follow God’s Laws, we are in harmony with His intended designs and purposes. The world is a better place for it. When we ignore God’s Word, we do so at our own peril.
John Arbeeny says
Elizabeth Scott:
I understood not only your “question” but also the intent behind it. Nice try at trolling. In the future don’t rely on an occurrence of 0.002% (even less for full AIS) of the population as the basis for making your point how society must change to accommodate this and every other exception to the rule.
The vast majority of those claiming gender dysphoria, which is itself a tiny number (0.47%), are not due to genetic disorders but rather mental disorders (call it what it is). Sadly, this disorder occurs at a high rate among vulnerable developing youth who are in no position to make life changing decisions with or without the urging of adults around them.
Ann Fessler says
Marty, Your short treatise on the cromasomal variations is excellent. So many people think that being trans is sexual, whereas many males “feel” female, and many females “feel” male inside their persons. What they feel has nothing to do with their sexuality.
The chomasonal variations often have something to do with it, I’m betting. However, I’m not sure because I don’t have in depth knowledge of the chomosomal make-up if a lot of trans people. And I’m wondering if some trans people don’t have any mixed chromosomal underpinings. A man might have been born male with traditional male chromosomes, but he may feel female.
The problem that I have is the assumption that if I’m born male and feel in my persona that I am female, wanting to dress like a female etc., it doesn’t mean that ergo, I’m sexually attracted to males. I may be sexually attracted to females. Being trans, it seems to me, has much to do how an individual feels in their person.
Can you get a hold of the research having to do with what the exact chomasomes make up of each individual in a large group of trans individuals ? Can you get a hold of the research that has to to with gender anomalies in the animal kingdom?
I’d really love to see a complete, researched discussion of this topic. Then I’d love to see it widely published, so that trans people could be seen for who they are, rather than besmirshed and degraded as they are now.
I’m pushing you or someone to do the research that I want to see. However, I think I should instead be thanking you for what you’ve already elucidate.
Thank you, Marty.