ext_50097 ([identity profile] anarchist-nomad.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] anarchist_nomad 2012-09-28 10:51 am (UTC)

Most people represent, in terms of secondary sex characteristics, in a binary way, but that does not represent what happens "beneath the hood" as it were. There are XX and XY structures, which we translate as female and male, and those are predominant... however, there are many other chromosomal configurations that are not represented.

This is true... but, to first approximation, XX and XY does cover the species. From what I've read about genetic research on the topic, 99.9% of the population is one or the other. About one in a thousand is an exception.

Thus, I can understand why people automatically assume a binary here -- it is a valid approximation, even if it isn't absolutely true. For better or for worse, it is natural for people as individuals, and society as a whole, to approximate the dominant cases as the whole of the population. To use a less politically sensitive example, take the case of us left-handed folk. We make up about 10% of the population -- at one in ten, we are a hundred times more numerous than the population that is neither XX nor XY. Still, since 90% of the species is right-handed, society makes the approximation that all humans are right-handed. Effectively, then, as a left-handed person, we face implicit discrimination throughout all of our lives. Given the the world is designed for right-handed people, we just have to adapt to it as best we can.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
(will be screened if not on Access List)
(will be screened if not on Access List)
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting