Because those videos represent popular conceptions of science, they do not represent careful thinking and insight that we find in science. The tone of the speaker is pedantic in a way that tells you he has no idea what he is talking about. That with the gratuitous infographics and colorful animations that are easy cues to pick up on, they all signal this is not a good source of information the way bone-dry science is.

The video in the hopper was labelled:

"SciShow - There Are More Than Two Human Genders"

when the actual title of the video is:

"There Are More Than Two Human Sexes"

What happens after things like this are pointed out is that people who don't understand things try to tell you that you are conflating sex and gender by pointing out sex and gender are being conflated.

The video never names these other sexes. You won't find them in any science paper or biology text.

If you want bone-dry science, go look up the directory of all the clinical trials in the US:
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/search/advanced?cond=&term=&cnt ry=&state=&city=&dist=

The clinical trials associated with any medicine that gets approved to treat a human disease gets put in there. It's really important we sex balance trials to see how sex affects things here, since we know sex is a key biological variable. What sexes can you query the database by? Note the answer in your copy book.

There is a big difference between the abnormalities that can occur on a chromosomal level like Klinefelter Syndrome (XXY), triple X syndrome, XYY, and XXYY karyotypes and the claims they are now making about how frogs change sexes so humans must, too. There is a lot of misinformation being floated around by people that are simply committing themselves to wishful thinking, who stamp it with the name of science.

The idea that 2% of the human population could be "intersex" is not backed up by any data. Someone made that claim here before. This is just bad science. I've gotten labeled for being transphobic because I think children should not be sterilized at the age of 8 before their gonads develop in the name of trans rights. The trans rights movement is lying on many levels in order to encourage trans surgeries. I think that is happening in part because there are some trans people that are projecting their own experience onto children who do not necessarily have identical experiences. That is dangerous. It's dangerous to believe that there are trans children because that implies sex change surgery is necessary on pre-pubescent children. I think all of this is happening because people who are empathizing with the trans community are not believing things that are not backed up by science because they want to either be good people or be seen as good people. To be seen as having empathy. I downvoted the videos because they do not take into consideration the medical differentiations about genetics that they should have. They lump things together that they shouldn't.

I don't think we should say science backs the idea that gender is fluid. Your gender goes not change. Your sex does not change. People want to be called another name or another title, fine. I'm polite to those people. I don't think science is magic and there are a lot of people that conflate the two. The chromosomes are not going to change. People are not the same as frogs or fish and their gonads are not going to change naturally.

However, if you want to cheer on a billionaire that wants to have his cake and eat it, too, then fuck that. Bloomberg is a total hypocrite. The entire left has given in to the idea that if you even marginally disagree with the assessments or claims made by the trans community regarding gender and sex, you must be hateful and evil. I contend that this is cultistic. But by exposing Bloomberg, it forces him to have to take a stance. He obviously doesn't have a great deal of regard or sympathy for the trans community so they shouldn't be duped into voting for him if they feel he doesn't represent their community. I hate hypocrisy in general and I'm sick of Bloomberg looking down on conservatives when he probably has a lot of the same viewpoints. Virtue signalling is not really an option when you are a billionaire that talks to everyone like they are human garbage behind closed doors. Fuck that.

"are believing things that are not backed up by science"

I wish there was an edit feature here for typos.

All of those chromosomal conditions you mention are still either male or female. What people are confused about is the precise rule to classify a genome as either male or female is really just if it has SRY or not and even that could be refined a little further. Just because it is difficult to write down the precise rule that covers all cases, doesn't mean that anyone has any disagreements on any actual cases.

And "gender" can change if it is being used to mean something like "personality". Good luck on trying to a sensible definition of 'gender' that is not incredibly vague

My spirit animal is a ferret but I self-identify as a vivarrid. Anyway all y'all are freaks.

gmol in all seriousness, with how hard you are trying to justify your bullshit view, I am 100% sure you are a deeply closeted faggot who really can't wait to get fucked by a hundred hard cocks in a row in a sweaty STD ridden basement.

For fuck's sake, drop ALL your fucking interest in transgender issues. They never related to you at all, and your morbid interest in this only speaks volumes of your own crippling insecurities.

Hope you find that perfect fit for your fucked up asshole

A homophobe says what?

These guys pontificate about "science" while leaning hard on assumptions they neither question nor prove. Most notably, why are the chromosomes given ultimate authority? No one ever says any more that you're a man if you have a penis, period. Now you're a man if you have a Y chromosome, period. THAT is assumed to be science, instead of the penis thing. WHY? Does the chromosome really know better than the person? It's never questioned, and its never proven, but its supposed to be "science".

bi potential gonads. SRY.
Googling those and looking at sexual development biology texts will get you started.

What I am saying isn't homophobic.

Me calling you a dick craving queer is just what you deserve for caring so much about an issue that you intellectualize in order to attempt to invalidate what isn't a scientific chromosomal issue and is a humanis rights issue, an aspect of the debate you and brawndo always try to ignore entirely.

You are blinding yourself to human psychology in order to try and make a right or wrong claim about issues you completely lack understanding in.

Your efforts are a demonstration of homophobia, and therefore I am just straight up telling you that your homophobia is so obvious that clearly you have strong, deep seated desires to fuck the same gender as you, because you are clearly male

Since you are attacking an entire group of people's right to gender expression, I am simply pointing out your own homophobia

I am glad you can recognize that you are homophobic, it is the first step to recovery. Get help

"I don't think we should say science backs the idea that gender is fluid."

Anyone who actually knows what the word "gender" means in the social sciences, and has always meant since the use of it outside of linguistics was introduced in the 1950s, would know how ridiculous this sentence is.

OZ,
You say that as if there is a consistent and consensus usage of the word 'gender'. It is quite a nebulous word. The usage varies from a synonym of 'sex', to sex-stereotypes, to personality to identity. Look up Kathleen Stock's essay titled "Can you change your gender", she explains very clearly how the answer to that question depends on which of the many definitions of gender one is using.

Maybe try reading this. It's not comprehensive and the writer is ESL so it's a bit clunky, but it's a decent overview and has three and a half pages of citations you could use as a jumping off point to actually learn about this stuff.

I don't need to read your silly link that I can't see in your post. Stock does speak English, she's quite concise, clear and qualified:

https://medium.com/@kathleenstock/can-you-change-your-gender-7 b0c469e0b4b

I know this stuff quite well. If you have any sort of cogent argument against what Stock writes, do share it, but try to defend your ignorance with a wall of citations to garbage papers.

"..but don't try..."

If the sexes are defined as that which creates a zygote, then we have Male, Female, and now, Genetic Engineer...

Thank you. I don't often get people telling me they hope I don't get the HIV. Thank you for caring.

Men can wear dresses all they like. If one thinks that wearing a dress actually makes a man into a woman, that is magical thinking. Magical thinking has a tendency to cause problems.

Who cares? When I meet someone, I don't ask to see their junk and a chromosome report to know how to treat them.

Because you can tell someone's sex quite accurately when you meet them without thinking about it. Depending on where you are in life, your attraction to them is constrained by your sexuality and their sex. That's why you don't need a karyotype when you meet someone.

Want to prevent a man from being in a space for women only? You've got to be able to say he is a man, regardless if he is wearing a dress or not, to do that. If you don't think women need spaces without men, you believe in magical thinking.

I don't want to separate men from women. I want to separate assholes from people they would victimize.

Great. What is the most, clear, obvious prominent common factor amongst people who commit violent crime? Try looking under crime categories like "homicide", "forcible rape' etc.

It definitely matters in prisons. I don't want a guy who identifies as a woman and still has a penis being placed in a woman's prison.

Gmol you have a problem

I am telling you get help

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ERWGnfGUUAEKln1?format=png&name=small< br />
here you go