Re: sex, not gender {actually, it IS Gender} (fwd)

okey! you got it. this is the issue I have always wondered. how does your
explanation differ from socio-biological way of saying that genes or
chromosomes define sexuality? Does a socio-biologist have a problem with
"ambiguous genitalia"?

merci,

Mine


Glen wrote:

 >
        Actually, recent medical science is beginning to see that there is
>at least 10% of the world's population that is "gender ambiguous" or have
>"ambiguous genitalia". So two categories are NOT enough. There are at
>least
>five (5) genders: male, female, he-she, she-male, and hermaphrodite. Each
>has there own unique set of genitalia. For those of you who want the
>least
>amount of categories, then we can say male, female, and transgendered.
>But
>there are NOT just TWO (2) categories. We need to also consider what a
>person is chromosomally. With that is mind, on its own, we have XX, XY,
>XXY,
>XYY, and mosaic. The last one, mosaic, is where some of their cells are
>XX
>and other cells are just X alone. The first five (5) DO NOT match up with
>that last 5 (five). Therefore, a considerably increased amount of
>research
>is needed before we can make ANY sweeping generalisations.

--
                                                 Your Friend in Peace,
                                                        Glen Nuttall
                                                            UPF
                                                   http://www.upf.org
                                                        upf@upf.org

"Courageous Knowledgeable People,
               United Compassionate World,
                              Committed Responsible Future"

"Out of Respect for Diversity
           comes Recognition of Fundamental Freedoms,
                      Individual Rights,
                                 and Personal Responsibilities"

"In the common interest of a Lasting World Peace
                      through a Unified Planetary Assembly"