this post was submitted on 05 Jan 2026
1122 points (97.1% liked)

Science Memes

18142 readers
279 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

If, as you falsely claim, sex is determined by rather than defined by chromosomes, and that you can split it in a binary way based on a body being "organised around" gamete size, then by your own logic, you should find it very easy indeed to completely disentangle this pictogram showing which side is male and which is female, splitting neatly into large gametes on one size and small ones on that other, and with primary and then secondary characteristics following neatly underneath and no crossed lines. That's what your trump-dictated theory claims. Draw it, if it's that simple. I'll wait.

[–] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There isn't any "detangling" like you're thinking, because you misunderstand the chart. For example, multiple conditions can lead to infertility. That doesn't mean the conditions can't be distinguished from each other, that just means the chart is kind of confusing.

At any rate, these conditions have a clear sex. For example, "Klinefelter syndrome (KS), also known as 47,XXY, is a chromosome anomaly where a male has an extra X chromosome". The term mixed gonadal dysgenesis isn't very specific, but sex can still be determined in each case, e.g. Turner syndrome.

Are there any examples from the chart you think disprove the sex binary?

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)
  1. The chart describes various variations in sex chromosomes and other factors and how they result in different primary and secondary sexual characteristics
  2. The chart has many criss-crossing lines; it's very tangled.
  3. You claim that there are exactly two sexes and that it is simply "organised around" producing small gametes vs "organised around" producing small gametes
  4. Therefore you should be able to split this chart into your two binary separate sides, your "organised around" producing small gametes side and your "organised around" producing large gametes side, and definitely the primary and surely the secondary sexual characteristics too should be part of that "organisation"
  5. Whether or not you believe in my understanding of the chart, yours is surely deep and sound, and you can surely demonstrate your far superior understanding and the overwhelming explanatory clarity of your simple definition by untangling this chart into your binary male and female halves with all the criss-crossing lines (that everyone else in the thread keeps bringing up and you keep dismissing peicemeal) now neatly packaged into the two "organised around" binary sides, with all this (according to you) unnecessary tangling gone
  6. Of course I believe no such chart exists and that your "sex is binary, just use trump's size-of-gametes definition" is a bunch of oversimplified crap that's of no use in either science or life, but you believe in all that shit and peddle it anywhere you think someone trans might be having a good day, so you ought to be able to do it if you're right and sex really is as simply binary as you claim
  7. Feel free to admit that it's actually a bit more complicated than that. OH WAIT, NO, YOU CAN'T DO THAT, IT WOULD MEAN YOU'RE WASTING YOUR LIFE ARGUING A USELESS PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC DEFINITION JUST TO FUCK WITH TRANS PEOPLE BECAUSE FOR SOME INSANE LOGIC EVEN MORE SCREWY THAN YOUR DEBATING STYLE YOU THINK TRANS PEOPLE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH SHIT TO DEAL WITH.
[–] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My apologies, I didn't think I needed to spell it out this simply. I gave one example of how people with that condition are unambiguously sexed, and asked if you were confused on the others.

There's no getting around the fact that it's a bad chart, but somebody conveniently has already made better ones. I'll copy them here, in order that they appear in the colored line in the chart. Here's the first one that explains what each box means:

(Mixed gondal dysgenesis, as discussed above, this isn't a single condition, it's an umbrella term)

Note the sex listed on each chart. None of them are unambiguous. Before you start inevitably complaining about the chart, why did you trust the first chart? Simply because it agreed with you?

Stop and consider before you respond: do you have any substantial critiques of these charts? Or are you just going to find some irrelevant detail and obsess about that? That's called trolling, and you certainly wouldn't want to do that, right? You'll respond in good faith, yes?

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Love how you have me ten charts with plenty of overlap and claim that they're all separate but when you look even superficially, you find that they overlap a lot like the original chart!

You claim there are two binary sexes then give me TEN and the male and female ones overlap!

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! You can't even tell the difference between two sexes and ten!

Of course you can't complete the task. It's impossible.

If you like, try again. Two sexes. One chart. No criss-crossing. No sneaky putting the same thing on both the male and female sides of the chart, because it's binary, isn't it? Simply split it by what size of gametes the body is "organised around" producing! Your very own (oh, no, sorry, trump's) definition!

[–] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Bruh. You realize that each one of those charts isn't a different sex, right?

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'll take that as "no you can't disentangle them"

[–] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They're disentangled already, but before clarifying how you're wrong, let's make sure you understand. Can you affirm you understand that those don't each represent a different sex?

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What the fuck are finding hard about "same thing at the top of several of them" that made you think they were disentangled? If I made maps where only one underground line was on each map it would in no way prove that the lines aren't tangled in real life! Are you completely stupid or is it an act for the purpose of trolling more?

Given that we disagree about the meaning of the word sex and your charts use your definition, why on earth would it be meaningful for you to slap the word male and female on ten diargams that appear unconnected in only the most stupid and superficial sense that they're in separate images, and why the fuck do you think I would fall for such a juvenile ruse?

If your (trump-following) "organised around producing" large gametes or small gametes theory that you've been telling everyone about for days and days on end holds water, have one chart, no duplicated nodes, split by gamete size, no tangles, the body is "organised" around the size of the gametes by your own definition, all the primary and secondary sexual characteristics well easily follow the "organisation" you claim is so definitive.

Or admit that your definition is useless.

[–] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I didn't slap anything on anything. Do you understand that those charts don't each represent a different sex?

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Did you understand that anyone who actually knows something about it also knows that sex is more complicated than you claim? Did you understand that you're being a complete arse to trans people? Wait, yes, you knew that one. That was the deliberate part.

[–] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Do you understand that those charts don’t each represent a different sex?

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I understand that you're unable to use your definition to untangle the real chart. It's OK, I knew that you wouldn't be able to, and I also knew that you wouldn't be able to admit that you can't, because I also know that you want to win more than you want to be right. You're quite happy to be wrong as long as you're winning.

One day you may realise that truth and people are more important than winning, but that day is definitely not going to be today, and definitely won't be written about using the powerstruggle account. Do you think that Charlie kirk realised that his loyalty to winning arguments was misplaced as he was dying, or do you think he died happy for a cause he believed in - the right to bear arms no matter the consequences?

[–] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Do you understand that those charts don’t each represent a different sex?

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I understand that using reason, logic, truth and sense to debate with you was a waste of time and that we continue to disagree about sex. You claim there are only two sexes yet you are unable to demonstrate that on the real chart and you are unable to see that your eleven charts would be tangled up if you drew them as one diagram with one node each for each set of chromosomes, but there I go, talking logic to a bigoted troll who wouldn't admit they were wrong under any circumstances whatsoever, because truth matters to them less than "winning".

Did you own the libs again, powerstruggle? Did all the little red downvotes on the rest of the conversation prove you were winning your little war against the libs?

[–] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Do you understand that those charts don’t each represent a different sex?

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't think you're very good at spotting when I'm being facetious and when I'm making a serious point. Let's try again.

Hahahahahahahaha powerstruggle can't even tell the difference been TEN and TWO!

Your diagrams overlap a lot and it's a lie to say that you have disentangled the real chart when you have ignored and omitted details that don't fit with your oversimplified untestable pseudoscience.

[–] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Do you understand that those charts don’t each represent a different sex?

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Your heart's not really in it any more, is it? You're not even trying to win the argument at all, you're just trying to get the last word.

[–] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Do you understand that those charts don’t each represent a different sex?

[–] oftenawake@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Do you understand that you're autistic and trans and in denial?

No, you don't. But we do.

[–] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Do you understand that those charts don’t each represent a different sex?

[–] oftenawake@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 days ago

Why would it matter either way?