• justdoit@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not to nitpick but to me the title of this post is implying that XXY individuals are born female. Generally they’re born male.

    What the comment is referring to is likely Swyer Syndrome, where the individual has an XY configuration but a dysfunctional gene in the sex-determining region of the Y chromosome. This means the embryo develops female anatomy and the resulting children tend to identify female, but they lack functional gonadal tissue. It’s estimated to occur at a rate of about 1 in a 100,000 females.

    By the by, treatment for these individuals usually involves removing the dysfunctional gonadal tissue as it often becomes cancerous (which often gets misunderstood as “gender reassignment surgery”) and supplemental hormone replacement therapy. They would be affected too by any bans on hormone administration to kids often connected with trans people. One of the reasons why blanket bans should be a no-go regardless of how you feel about any other trans issue.

    • SomeoneElse@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think we can safely say that is nitpicking, but it’s informative and correct so I’m all for it!

      From my biology lessons 20 years ago, I thought I was taught that it was the presence of a second X chromosome that made a person genetically female, but I could definitely be misremembering. Either way, XXY individuals are usually born male, and Dr Genetics Federation was likely talking about sawyer syndrome (or so google tells me). Thanks for the correction!

      • justdoit@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not in humans, no! While in some animals sex determination is purely about X dosage (Drosophila), in humans the Y chromosome is actually sex-determining. In females the second X chromosome actually gets inactivated as a means of gene dosage compensation.

            • Xylight (photon dev)@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              According to Wikipedia

              “Eureka” comes from the Ancient Greek word εὕρηκα heúrēka, meaning “I have found (it)”, which is the first person singular perfect indicative active of the verb εὑρίσκω heurískō “I find”. It is closely related to heuristic, which refers to experience-based techniques for problem-solving, learning, and discovery.

  • gamer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I was having a civil and boring discussion with someone on a (non-anonymous) forum once about a highly specific technical thing, and then some random person decides to write something along the lines of “I have nothing to add to this conversation, but I just want to point out that the guy you’re talking to is actually an employee of <well known company> :)”

    I don’t know if that guy felt any cringe after posting that, but I sure as hell felt it for him. Neither of us really knew how to respond to that, and it kind of just killed the discussion to avoid that awkwardness.

    Sometimes I still think about that guy. Is he still vicariously Pretty Woman’ing people? Did he accomplish some of his life goals? I hope so.

    • x3n0s@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It does if it’s as prestigious and well known as the International Genetics Federation.

      • Aux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It doesn’t. Administrative work requires different set of skills of knowledge from scientist work.

        • x3n0s@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Well, he has a doctorate and has been cited over 13,000 times. So for this particular institution, it absolutely does.

  • very smart Idiot@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Is he mixing up people with 3 gonosomes?

    Because these are not too rare. It’s one of the more frequent mutations.

    But even a person with XXY is a male. Since the male gonosome is considered as a mutation of an X chromosome. Somewhere in the evolution of mammals and other vertebrates (or most likely much earlier) something messed up and created the Y chromosome from an X chromosome. That’s why genetic diseases are usually more frequent in males, since one branch of the X chromosome does not have some backup. It’s simply missing.

    So whenever a person has one Y chromosome. It is considered male. The lack of a Y chromosome is considered a female.

    This can also be seen in people with genetic disorders, such as three gonosomes. XXX is a female XYY is a male XXY is also a male.

    And to everyone’s information: I am for Germany and we do not have two words for sex and gender.

    I don’t understand what you English speakers are up to.

    • justdoit@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I just wrote a comment above but I believe OP is mixing XXY with what the comment was about, which is likely Swyer Syndrome: XY individuals with female anatomy and gonadal dysgenesis. While they have a Y chromosome, a defective sex-determining gene leads to a failure to sexually differentiate into male gonadal tissue and leads to subsequent loss of downstream sex hormone production.

      • very smart Idiot@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        So I assume such people are identified as females at birth. But if their chromosomes indicate that they are male, what’s the gender then?

        I think it’s a male then, right? Because when a defect leads to malformations, it still is a malformation. One that people could probably live very well with.

        • SLaSZT@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If male and female are assigned purely based on physical anatomy, does it really matter?

          No one in that person’s life would consider them male and doctors would treat them based on their sex characteristics - they may have testes but they wouldn’t be external.

          I have never been karyotyped and I’m willing to bet most people haven’t either; your sex is assumed based on your outward appearance even when your genitals are not observable.

          I really don’t think that having a Y chromosome makes you male when you literally have a vagina, you know? Especially when you could go your whole life without knowing.

        • Revan343@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If the SRY gene is broken, they’d still physically develop as female, though potentially with some abnormalities, rather than as male. Even leaving gender identity out of it, sex is still more complicated than if exists Y; then male