[–] PassingShip ago
Just to be sure, does this comic imply that when chromosomal editing is a thing (It's coming on fast, read up on CRISPR) people who opt to have a y made an x will be women, beyond question?
[–] PassingShip ago
I don't personally know exactly. I assume there is some basis by which the immune system recognizes self and other, and that that can be bypassed or subverted. I assume that it will be a process, possibly over a few days, where our hypothetical human would go into isolation (clean room), has their immune system paused, spends a few days being rewritten (our understanding of nanotechnology is advancing quickly, this might be actual tiny robots), has their immune system rebooted, and reemerges to the world. Such treatments will likely show up first for lasers and congenital diseases, but eventually a live edit of any trait will be a cheap consumer commodity (See computers, cell phones, the human genome project vs 23andme, self driving cars) available to anyone who works for a living.
[–] varialus 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
In Latin there are three options. Male, female, and neither. Our word masculine come from their almost identical word that means male. Likewise our word feminine comes from their almost identical word meaning female. Our word neuter comes from the identically spelled Latin word meaning neither, or in other words, not either of two options. If somebody is truly ambiguous, perhaps having lots of chimera mixed male and female DNA or perhaps having clear chromosomal sex, but messed up hormones during gestation, we don't need to go creating custom sexes; if they're not clearly male, and they're not clearly female, then they're neither. Is that so hard? Masculine is not their archetype, feminine is not their archetype, neuter, that's their archetype. Everyone who is neither male nor female, is neuter.
[–] [deleted] 0 points 8 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago
Ah yes, I'm familiar with that word, but I wasn't sure of its origins, so I looked it up just now. It's also Latin meaning having attributes of both sexes, which is of course the same as its current meaning in English. So my original comment is mistaken, hermaphrodite is the correct word. In Latin neuter isn't really used for biological sex, but rather for grammar. But since their equivalent words for male and female are the same words that they use in grammar and biological sex, it makes sense by extension, what neuter would mean in relationship to biological sex. In any case, they didn't have gender, so it's much clearer regardless. If somebody dresses, acts, and looks like the opposite gender, it ain't so hard to just say that.
[–] solar_flare 0 points 7 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago
Yes, we know there are some people with chromosome disorders like intersex/hermaphrodite peoples, but that's not what vast majority of these Bruce Genders are. It's a real shame intersex people have to deal with these fakes, these special snowflakes appropriating their condition.
[–] brass_bell ago
daily stormer is blocked where I am at. Anyone have a imagehost version?