Instigator
Points: 4

There are two genders Male and Female

Finished

The voting period has ended

After 2 votes the winner is ...
bronskibeat
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Category
Science
Time for argument
Three days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Points: 14
Description
There are only two genders everyone else is defective https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOniPhuyXeY
Round 1
Published:
if you look at things scientifically not through religion or leftist dogma science shows there are only two genders either you are male , or female or defective "
Science Shows Sex Is Binary, Not a Spectrum
COMMENTARY

.


October 31, 2018

AP Photo/Toby Talbot, File
Last week, The New York Times ran an op-ed by Anne Fausto-Sterling, a professor of biology and gender studies at Brown University, arguing that biological sex is not binary. The piece joined a long succession of media coverage criticizing the Department of Health and Human Services’ recently leaked memo, which proposed legally defining sex as either male or female.
From a scientific perspective, there was nothing wrong with HHS’s definition. Biological sex refers to whether we are female or male, based on our anatomy and reproductive functions. The concept of sex is, by definition, binary.

Fausto-Sterling’s piece points to the existence of intersex people as evidence that this isn’t the case. Certainly, research has shown that as many as 1 percent of the population is intersex, a medical condition denoting that an individual possesses anatomy characteristic of both sexes, such as a combination of vulvar and testicular tissue. Statistically speaking, however, this means that the vast majority of us fall into one category of sex or the other.
It therefore becomes a question of whether a statistically rare occurrence in the general population should be considered typical. An analogy that is commonly used to illustrate this is the fact that most of us have 10 fingers. There exist individuals who possess fewer or more than 10 digits on their hands, but this hasn’t called for a re-conceptualization of how many fingers a human being has.
Fausto-Sterling mentions how, earlier this month, Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orbán, banned gender studies programs. He has been called “far-right” by some outlets for stating that the government “[does] not consider it acceptable ... to talk about socially constructed genders rather than biological sexes.” Deputy Prime Minister Zsolt Semjen additionally pointed out that gender studies “has no business in universities” due to being “an ideology, not a science.”

Indeed, gender—whether we subjectively feel male or female—is biological, not a social construct. An extremely large and consistent body of scientific research has shown that gender is the result of prenatal hormone exposure, even in the case of intersex individuals, as opposed to adults and society imposing gendered norms on unsuspecting children from the moment they leave the womb.
After describing “the process of gender socialization,” the piece goes on to say that “[f]etal hormones also affect brain development.” How would it be possible for hormones to affect the developing brain in utero, but not the expression of this brain development, which manifests as sex-typed differences in interests, personality, and behavior when the child is born?  
Science Shows Sex Is Binary, Not a Spectrum
COMMENTARY
Science Shows Sex Is Binary, Not a Spectrum
COMMENTARY

.


October 31, 2018

AP Photo/Toby Talbot, File
Last week, The New York Times ran an op-ed by Anne Fausto-Sterling, a professor of biology and gender studies at Brown University, arguing that biological sex is not binary. The piece joined a long succession of media coverage criticizing the Department of Health and Human Services’ recently leaked memo, which proposed legally defining sex as either male or female.
From a scientific perspective, there was nothing wrong with HHS’s definition. Biological sex refers to whether we are female or male, based on our anatomy and reproductive functions. The concept of sex is, by definition, binary.

Fausto-Sterling’s piece points to the existence of intersex people as evidence that this isn’t the case. Certainly, research has shown that as many as 1 percent of the population is intersex, a medical condition denoting that an individual possesses anatomy characteristic of both sexes, such as a combination of vulvar and testicular tissue. Statistically speaking, however, this means that the vast majority of us fall into one category of sex or the other.
It therefore becomes a question of whether a statistically rare occurrence in the general population should be considered typical. An analogy that is commonly used to illustrate this is the fact that most of us have 10 fingers. There exist individuals who possess fewer or more than 10 digits on their hands, but this hasn’t called for a re-conceptualization of how many fingers a human being has.
Fausto-Sterling mentions how, earlier this month, Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orbán, banned gender studies programs. He has been called “far-right” by some outlets for stating that the government “[does] not consider it acceptable ... to talk about socially constructed genders rather than biological sexes.” Deputy Prime Minister Zsolt Semjen additionally pointed out that gender studies “has no business in universities” due to being “an ideology, not a science.”

Indeed, gender—whether we subjectively feel male or female—is biological, not a social construct. An extremely large and consistent body of scientific research has shown that gender is the result of prenatal hormone exposure, even in the case of intersex individuals, as opposed to adults and society imposing gendered norms on unsuspecting children from the moment they leave the womb.
After describing “the process of gender socialization,” the piece goes on to say that “[f]etal hormones also affect brain development.” How would it be possible for hormones to affect the developing brain in utero, but not the expression of this brain development, which manifests as sex-typed differences in interests, personality, and behavior when the child is born?https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/10/31/science_shows_sex_is_binary_not_a_spectrum_138506.htmlhttps://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/10/31/science_shows_sex_is_binary_not_a_spectrum_138506.html
.


October 31, 2018

AP Photo/Toby Talbot, File
Last week, The New York Times ran an op-ed by Anne Fausto-Sterling, a professor of biology and gender studies at Brown University, arguing that biological sex is not binary. The piece joined a long succession of media coverage criticizing the Department of Health and Human Services’ recently leaked memo, which proposed legally defining sex as either male or female.
From a scientific perspective, there was nothing wrong with HHS’s definition. Biological sex refers to whether we are female or male, based on our anatomy and reproductive functions. The concept of sex is, by definition, binary.

Fausto-Sterling’s piece points to the existence of intersex people as evidence that this isn’t the case. Certainly, research has shown that as many as 1 percent of the population is intersex, a medical condition denoting that an individual possesses anatomy characteristic of both sexes, such as a combination of vulvar and testicular tissue. Statistically speaking, however, this means that the vast majority of us fall into one category of sex or the other.
It therefore becomes a question of whether a statistically rare occurrence in the general population should be considered typical. An analogy that is commonly used to illustrate this is the fact that most of us have 10 fingers. There exist individuals who possess fewer or more than 10 digits on their hands, but this hasn’t called for a re-conceptualization of how many fingers a human being has.
Fausto-Sterling mentions how, earlier this month, Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orbán, banned gender studies programs. He has been called “far-right” by some outlets for stating that the government “[does] not consider it acceptable ... to talk about socially constructed genders rather than biological sexes.” Deputy Prime Minister Zsolt Semjen additionally pointed out that gender studies “has no business in universities” due to being “an ideology, not a science.”

Indeed, gender—whether we subjectively feel male or female—is biological, not a social construct. An extremely large and consistent body of scientific research has shown that gender is the result of prenatal hormone exposure, even in the case of intersex individuals, as opposed to adults and society imposing gendered norms on unsuspecting children from the moment they leave the womb.
After describing “the process of gender socialization,” the piece goes on to say that “[f]etal hormones also affect brain development.” How would it be possible for hormones to affect the developing brain in utero, but not the expression of this brain development, which manifests as sex-typed differences in interests, personality, and behavior when the child is born?

Published:
Thank you for creating this debate.

Fausto-Sterling’s piece points to the existence of intersex people as evidence that this isn’t the case. Certainly, research has shown that as many as 1 percent of the population is intersex, a medical condition denoting that an individual possesses anatomy characteristic of both sexes, such as a combination of vulvar and testicular tissue. Statistically speaking, however, this means that the vast majority of us fall into one category of sex or the other.

It therefore becomes a question of whether a statistically rare occurrence in the general population should be considered typical. An analogy that is commonly used to illustrate this is the fact that most of us have 10 fingers. There exist individuals who possess fewer or more than 10 digits on their hands, but this hasn’t called for a re-conceptualization of how many fingers a human being has.
Intersex


If a particular physical, biological, or genetic characteristic is rare, does it mean it’s not valid? Just because an occurrence is not typical, does not mean it shouldn't be acknowledged. The fact that intersex exists at all shows that there is more than two possibilities for biological sex.

We, as a society, have made and continue to make accommodations for other atypical conditions like being blind or deaf. We don't ignore a minority simply because they are a minority.



Indeed, gender—whether we subjectively feel male or female—is biological, not a social construct. An extremely large and consistent body of scientific research has shown that gender is the result of prenatal hormone exposure, even in the case of intersex individuals, as opposed to adults and society imposing gendered norms on unsuspecting children from the moment they leave the womb.

After describing “the process of gender socialization,” the piece goes on to say that “[f]etal hormones also affect brain development.” How would it be possible for hormones to affect the developing brain in utero, but not the expression of this brain development, which manifests as sex-typed differences in interests, personality, and behavior when the child is born?
Is Gender A Social Construct?

I think there is a case to be made that gender is mostly a social construct, but not entirely. First, let's take a deeper look into "Gender,"

"The word gender has been used since the 14th century as a grammatical term, referring to classes of noun designated as masculine, feminine, or neuter in some languages. The sense denoting biological sex has also been used since the 14th century, but this did not become common until the mid 20th century. Although the words gender and sex are often used interchangeably, they have slightly different connotations; sex tends to refer to biological differences, while gender more often refers to cultural and social differences and sometimes encompasses a broader range of identities than the binary of male and female". [1]

How a male or female is expected to behave, dress, speak, etc. will differ depending on culture/society. What is considered a masculine or feminine attribute in one culture may be considered the opposite or neutral in another. It's also important to point out that the concept of more than two genders is not a new one, it's existed in multiple cultures through-out history (Mesopotamia, Ancient Greece, India, etc.). [2]

Looking at the study in the link of the above quote, it just shows that parental influence alone won't determine what toys a child will naturally gravitate toward playing with. I would agree with that. I think gender identity is a complex mixture of societal, environmental, and genetic influences. I don't believe any one thing alone will determine how a person identifies, and there is scientific research to back that point of view. [3]  

For example, let's look at testosterone, what does it affect? The development of genitalia, deepening of the voice during puberty, muscle size and strength, deepening of the voice during puberty, facial hair, etc. Will it guarantee that a young boy will have interests stereotypically associated with males like sports, video games, wearing masculine clothing, etc.? Research shows it does not. [4]

Now, that might beg the question, just because someone is not interested in the things typically associated with their sex, does that mean that they need to identify differently? The answer is no. And on the other end of that, someone born as biologically "male" who enjoys stereotypically "male" things can still experience gender dysphoria, and/or feel that "male" is not the gender identity that suites them. It's in no way a black and white issue. 

The reason why we are discussing this is not because some group of liberals arbitrarily decided that they wanted change for the sake of being progressive, but because there are many people who fall under the transgender umbrella who have spoken up about their experiences with dysphoria, identifying as non-binary (not identifying as either male or female), transitioning, etc. The way people who fall under this umbrella have been treated has led to high suicide, and murder rates. That makes this an issue that needs to be addressed, and how we have historically addressed this issue as a society has not worked (trying to force them to fit the binary, or the sex they were born with.) [5]

Round 2
Published:
There are two genders and then there are birth defects end of story Intersex variation (IV) is a morphological and physiological anomaly where an individual is born with “congenital conditions in which development of chromosomal, gonadal, or anatomical sex is atypical”. In essence, the reproductive organs differ from those typically associated as being male or female.Sep 8, 2016
The Increasing Prevalence in Intersex Variation from ...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov › pmc › articles › PMC5017538 god or nature designs humans to be either male or female genetically for the purpose of reproduction , anyone who is born outside that with "feelings' or genetic defects , is simply defective on some level

there are men and women for biological reasons every thing is is simply a defect, i am not advocating doing anythng mean to them i hope they can find happyness but on a biological level they serve no purpose they are incapable of reproduction they are a dead end
An increasing number of children are born with intersex variation (IV; ambiguous genitalia/hermaphrodite, pseudohermaphroditism, etc.). Evidence shows that endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) in the environment can cause reproductive variation through dysregulation of normal reproductive tissue differentiation, growth, and maturation if the fetus is exposed to EDCs during critical developmental times in utero. Animal studies support fish and reptile embryos exhibited IV and sex reversal when exposed to EDCs. Occupational studies verified higher prevalence of offspring with IV in chemically exposed workers (male and female). Chemicals associated with endocrine-disrupting ability in humans include organochlorine pesticides, poly-chlorinated biphenyls, bisphenol A, phthalates, dioxins, and furans. Intersex individuals may have concurrent physical disorders requiring lifelong medical intervention and experience gender dysphoria. An urgent need exists to determine which chemicals possess the greatest risk for IV and the mechanisms by which these chemicals are capable of interfering with normal physiological development in children. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5017538/ an increase in intersex is caused by a polluted environment

Published:
Gender Vs. Sex

I think it’s important at this point to point out again that sex and gender are not interchangeable. Sex refers to biology, and gender refers to the social and cultural. This is not simply opinion, but accepted through-out the psychology community. [1] 

As human beings we are more comfortable with categorizing things into boxes through language. The words “Male” and “Female” were created by humans to create two distinct boxes for each sex they most commonly came across. After these categorizations were established, then came gender. And that is where social and cultural expectations of speech, behavior, dress, class, etc. began to be assigned to the different sexes. 

There’s no doubt what sex you are born with, that is fact. But what gender you identify with does not have to align with that expected of your sex or what’s expected of any sex. The two are separate things. 

Focusing solely on issues pertaining to intersex people seems inappropriate for this discussion as it is more to do with sex than gender, but I will address my opponent’s arguments, but I’m going to try to stay on topic as well. 

My opponent says in their argument:

god or nature designs humans to be either male or female genetically for the purpose of reproduction , anyone who is born outside that with "feelings' or genetic defects , is simply defective on some level

Many people who are intersex can still reproduce. Most people who identify as Transgender or Non-Binary can also still reproduce. 

The rest of my opponent’s argument, correct me if I’m wrong, focuses on the idea that people who are not cisgender (someone who’s gender matches the sex they were born as) or are intersex are the result of defects of some kind. 

To touch quickly upon this argument, as it pertains to intersex people, I think to call it a defect across the board, you are creating victims where they don’t have to exist, as many of them can live very healthy and normal lives with the condition. Many of them can reproduce, and many of them don’t have any health/mental health problems through-out their life. Much of the negativity they face is not from the condition itself, but how society reacts to the condition. [2]

Back on track, identifying as a gender that is not the one you were assigned with at birth is not a defect or a disorder. In-fact, the American Psychiatric Association went as far as to remove “Gender Identity Disorder” from their The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders back in 2012.[3]

A disorder that does exist is gender dysphoria (when someone feels their body does not match their gender), and the only treatment that appears to work for dysphoria is to allow those suffering from it to transition or simply identify with how they feel. [4] 

We also know that, for example, that there are men who enjoyed wearing dresses and make-up, but don’t experience dysphoria, and may feel that neither “male” or “female” is an accurate descriptor for their gender identity.

Gender has always been a grey area because there were never really just two categories for it, but just two labels. It limited the language people could use for themselves, which probably made sense for many societies through-out history. Reproduction and people maintaining their roles in society was a means to survive for much of it, but it was also never the full picture as I pointed out in my previous post.


Round 3
Published:
God made adam and eve and since those times male and female have been definite and separate, we have adjusted the roles and tried to establish equity but to outright deny the reality that th sexes are different or that they simply dont exist will end with our socieites destruction https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8BRdwgPChQ
Published:
Definitions

For one to have a constructive discussion on whether or not gender is binary, one most first establish whether or not that believe gender and sex to be separate. If they do not, then they should provide clear evidence as to why they believe then to be synonymous. I have yet to be presented with any evidence that they are so. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem we were able to make much progress past this point in our discussion.

I have provided the definitions of gender and sex accepted widely by both the scientific and psychiatric communities, and they maintain that two are indeed not one and the same. Sex refers to biology, and gender refers to societal and cultural characteristics created by people.

What Decides Gender?

With these words defined, we then ask the question, will sex always dictate your gender? I argued that gender is likely influenced by a complex range of factors including environment, genetics, society, etc., and that it is not determined by any one factor alone including biology. Studies in both the science and psychiatric communities support that idea.

Is Gender Black and White?

With these range of factors considered, we can see through-out different cultures as well as through-out history, the diversity in which gender can be presented. For example, up until the early 1900s, it was normal for young boys to wear dresses alongside girls up until a certain age. I also established that the idea that there are more than two genders is not a new one, and has existed for centuries in multiples cultures.  

With all of this in mind, it shouldn’t be a stretch to see how gender is far more of a grey area than a black and white one. In our culture, despite the mainstreaming of LGBT identities, we still have a strong image of what attributes a male and female are expected to have. If a person decides that they don’t feel comfortable with either the female or male label alone, that they don’t share or connect with those same attributes that society has associated with either word, then they don’t need to label themselves as either. If nonbinary or genderqueer are more accurate labels to what they connect with or how they present, then they should use the most accurate label as a means of more nuanced communication and understanding.

I’d, again, like to thank my opponent for this debate.

Added:
--> @Ragnar
It has been removed.
#18
Added:
--> @bsh1, @Ramshutu
Reported the vote for voting on his own debate.
#17
Added:
--> @Nemiroff
What does the Q actually represent?
#16
Added:
--> @Nemiroff
I agree, it could be less confusing. The language largely starts within the LGBT communities, then works its way up the academic food chain, and moves out into the mainstream.
I think transgender is essentially being used to mean "non-cis", and that's where the connection lies. The language is still evolving, i'm sure it'll become a bit more succinct as time goes on. Or not. We'll see.
Contender
#15
Added:
--> @bronskibeat
Interesting.
However i dont see how one can make a logical connection between people who feel they are the wrong one of 2 physical genders, and people who feel they are on a spectrum of personality genders. Like gender nonconformists.
The term may be used as an umbrella by lay people vut the conditions and issues are completely unrelated!
#14
Added:
--> @Nemiroff
"Often shortened to trans. A term describing a person’s gender identity that does not necessarily match their assigned sex at birth. Transgender people may or may not decide to alter their bodies hormonally and/or surgically to match their gender identity. This word is also used as an umbrella term to describe groups of people who transcend conventional expectations of gender identity or expression—such groups include, but are not limited to, people who identify as transsexual, genderqueer, gender variant, gender diverse, and androgynous."https://pflag.org/glossary
"Trans, Trans*, or Transgender People: Most commonly used as an umbrella term for individuals whose gender identity and/or expression is different from the gender assigned to them at birth. Trans people include individuals who are transsexual, genderqueer, agender, androgyne, demigender, genderfluid"https://hr.cornell.edu/sites/default/files/trans%20terms.pdf
Contender
#13
Added:
--> @bronskibeat
Trans is just the "T" in LGTQ...
Queer has its own letter: "Q"
Trans stands exclusively for people feeling unease at their birth sex, seeking to become the other OF 2 GENDERS. To *TRANS*isition.
All 3rd gender issues are about as related to trans as a homosexuality. None of these issues are related in anyway besides joining up in an acronym.
Can you show any reference to trans including any of those other groups cause i think you are very mistaken.
#12
Added:
--> @Dynasty, @bronskibeat
Intersex is better described as a developmental abnormality rather than a birth defect.
The uncorrupted definition of gender is quite specific.
And dysphoria and trans are state's of mind rather than a states of gender.
So the proposition is basically correct.
#11
Added:
--> @bmdrocks21
I wish you had accepted the debate. Your "half-eaten gogurt tube" would have been a good argument.
#10
Added:
--> @Nemiroff
Transgender can be used as an umbrella term that encompasses nonbinary and gender queer folk. Also, nonbinary and genderqueer people can experience dysphoria. Not all, but many do. Dysphoria doesn't have to be about your sex. It can be for specific areas of the body like breasts, voice, and really whatever aspect of themselves a person doesn't feel is matching up with their preferred gender presentation. For example, you'll see some nonbinary/gender people may have their breasts removed as a result of dysphoria, but might not feel the need to make any other physical alterations like taking testosterone.
Contender
#9
Added:
Its funny that most of you are talking primarily about trans, who btw agree there are only 2 genders... their just the wrong one. Lol
The 3rd gender issue is seperate, has nothing to do with a dysphoria, and is simply people who dont fit gender norms, but are perfectly fine with their birth sex.
This confusion is on both sides, the ignorant attackers and the blind defenders :p
#8
Added:
--> @bronskibeat
Intersex is a birth defect.
#7
Added:
The op makes a debate about gender but talks almost exclusively about sex. Good luck.
#6
Added:
--> @PressF4Respect
yep
Instigator
#5
Added:
--> @billbatard
Did you seriously post an online article 3 times and call it your opening argument?
#4
#2
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
I will not consider arguments copy pasted without context or any attempt to use their own words; so I am not considering pros R1.
There are two main arguments here.
Firstly, that there are only two sexes, and everything else is a defect. Pro doesn’t offer any reason or justification as to why, even if we accept this, those defects shouldn’t be considered as different from male and female. Indeed, pros own wording here appears to concede the debate.
Pro effectively appears to acknowledge that there is a variety of different aspects to gender, but simply decides to simply assert that these should not be considered as states.
As pro does not offer any clear justification as to why the alternative aspects of gender should be ignored - he loses arguments.
The second argument is that gender and physical sex is different. Con does pretty well to tie in all the aspects of gender identity that currently go into to what we consider gender, and ties these together pretty well with sources. The distinction between gender and sex mitigates much of what pro is arguing related to there only being two sexes. Pros approach appears to be to simply hammer home the same argument that he already made, rather than directly assess the argument that con made.
In both cases, con presents a valid point that refutes pros key premise - and as such arguments go to con.
Sources: sources go to con here. Specifically related to how they built up the case showing the complexity of gender and differentiation purely from sex. The testosterone link, and the glass link on the removal of gender non conformance as a mental illness greatly boosted cons warrant. As pro dis not really present a link that clearly bolstered the resolution (only the argument he made that appeared to refute the resolution), sources here must go to con too.
#1
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
The debate started with a grammatical mistake, and it took awhile to correct it. Sex and Gender are different things...
Anyway, pro accidentally conceded the debate in the first sentence: "you are male , or female or defective" which is quite clearly three options. He ended with an implied threat that if more than two genders exist than God does not, and God not existing would destroy our society; which was all pretty senseless.
Con on the other hand offered sources to show that the gender norms are a weird and non-binary concept, with existence of more than two culturally recognized throughout history in places such as "Mesopotamia, Ancient Greece, India, etc" confirming on many levels that there are more than two.
Nine integrated sources gives con too much of a lead to be dismissed when compared to zero integrated sources. A good highlight from con was the one on suicide rates, which showcased why pro's ideas are outright dangerous.