Comment by thenewwazoo

I have taught sex ed over the past ten years. The curriculum (which we are forbidden to alter) embraces ideas of many dimensions to sex, but I found that there is not one empirical scientist in their list of authors, reviewers, or source material. The definition of “evidence-based” is that a lesson. has been tested in a classroom. (In other words, kids learned it.)

Intersex is a concept that bears looking into. We’re taught that it is as much as 0.4% of population, which is arrived at through removing context multiple times. Nowadays it is used to argue that there is a spectrum, not a sex binary, but this was not its meaning empirically. (Same thing with “sex assigned at birth”). You’re getting down to some very rare “differences of sexual development” (example: Y chromosome not getting expressed) whereas intersex individuals empirically belong to one or the other genotype. And the majority do not identify as “non binary” and don’t want to be used as examples.

I’m sure I’ll be debated, one comment can’t carry all the proof, but read some sports medicine papers on sex differences, that area has the facts.

I am neurologist. There is a spectrum between but the result situation is either a disease, infertile, unsustainable long term or... made up for hype. If you can point a person that has distinct characteristics and not a mix/overlap, then I admin there is a third sex.

The only forms of matter are gases, liquids, and solids.

Anyone speaking about “plasmas” and “Bose-Eisenstein condensates” is just spewing woke horse shit they must have learned in a liberal indoctrination center(universities )

Sarcasm aside, a lot of people seem to act like no new information can be discovered by humanity beyond what was taught to them as a child in k-12