How many genders?

[PortaJohn]

1 minute ago, Le duke said:

That has never been my understanding.

All human individuals—whether they have an XX, an XY, or an atypical sex chromosome combination—begin development from the same starting point. During early development the gonads of the fetus remain undifferentiated; that is, all fetal genitalia are the same and are phenotypically female. After approximately 6 to 7 weeks of gestation, however, the expression of a gene on the Y chromosome induces changes that result in the development of the testes. Thus, this gene is singularly important in inducing testis development. The production of testosterone at about 9 weeks of gestation results in the development of the reproductive tract and the masculinization (the normal development of male sex characteristics) of the brain and genitalia. In contrast to the role of the fetal testis in differentiation of a male genital tract and external genitalia in utero, fetal ovarian secretions are not required for female sex differentiation. As these details point out, the basic differences between the sexes begin in the womb, and this chapter examines how sex differences develop and change across the lifetime. The committee examined both normal and abnormal routes of development that lead individuals to become males and females and the changes during childhood, reproductive adulthood, and the later stages of life.



https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK222286/#:~:text=During%20early%20development%20the%20gonads,the%20later%20stages%20of%20life.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'll have to do some digging but I believe a study done by John Hopkins put to rest this  old theory and it's actually all fetuses have both.  Just a little search produces this. 

; all embryos, regardless of their sex, initially develop structures that have the potential to become either male or female reproductive tracts, meaning they essentially have "both" male and female reproductive tracts in their early development stages before differentiation occurs based on genetic factors. 

 

Explanation:

• Undifferentiated Stage:

  Early in development, the gonads in an embryo are undifferentiated, meaning they can develop into either testes (male) or ovaries (female) depending on the presence of the Y chromosome. 

   
• Müllerian and Wolffian Ducts:

  Both male and female embryos possess two sets of ducts called the Müllerian ducts and Wolffian ducts, which are the precursors to the internal reproductive organs. 

   
• Male Development:

  In a male embryo, the presence of the Y chromosome triggers the development of the testes, which then produce testosterone causing the Wolffian ducts to develop into the male reproductive tract while the Müllerian ducts regress. 

   
• Female Development:

  In a female embryo, lacking the Y chromosome, the Müllerian ducts develop into the female reproductive tract while the Wolffian ducts naturally degenerate. 

   

 

Key points to remember:

• All embryos start with the potential for both male and female reproductive organs. 
   
• The presence of the Y chromosome determines the development of male genitalia. 
   
• In the absence of a Y chromosome, the embryo will develop female genitalia by default. 
   

 

 

 

 

[mspart]

57 minutes ago, Le duke said:

From the EO:

(d) “Female” means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell.
(e) “Male” means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the small reproductive cell.

All humans are female until ~6 weeks. This is common in many mammals. At roughly the 7th week, the SRY gene triggers the development of testes; until then, all humans are female. So, at the moment of conception, everyone is female.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do this individual have a uterus and ovaries?   What controls this?   The genes in the chromosomes?   And are those present at conception?  Of course they are.   So all babies from conception are male or female.    Science man.   You should try it.

mspart

[Caveira]

On 1/21/2025 at 1:00 PM, red viking said:

The problem is common people wasting there time on this. It deflects from important issues. Which side somebody is on doesn't matter one bit to me. 

They fixed his name.   

 

 

[ThreePointTakedown]

17 hours ago, Caveira said:

They fixed his name.   

 

 

Rep. Balint’s comments could also apply to whoever posted ‘They fixed his name’ as if anything other than you is broken. 
 

Just imagine it took you almost a year to post this response. How far did you have to go back through the archives to find this? How impotent you must feel to need to bring this back up again after so long. How much does this make you question your masculinity if you have any that you need to post this as some kind of flex. 

Pathetic! And not surprising! 

[Gene Mills Fan]

5 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Rep. Balint’s comments could also apply to whoever posted ‘They fixed his name’ as if anything other than you is broken. 
 

Just imagine it took you almost a year to post this response. How far did you have to go back through the archives to find this? How impotent you must feel to need to bring this back up again after so long. How much does this make you question your masculinity if you have any that you need to post this as some kind of flex. 

Pathetic! And not surprising! 

Dims of Tik Tok posted it yesterday. That's easy to see. Making your over analysis well over analysis.  But your BIAS took OVER!!! 

Edited December 9, 2025 by Gene Mills Fan

[mspart]

TPTPTPTPT, try getting the facts straight before you pontificate.  

mspart

[Caveira]

33 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Rep. Balint’s comments could also apply to whoever posted ‘They fixed his name’ as if anything other than you is broken. 
 

Just imagine it took you almost a year to post this response. How far did you have to go back through the archives to find this? How impotent you must feel to need to bring this back up again after so long. How much does this make you question your masculinity if you have any that you need to post this as some kind of flex. 

Pathetic! And not surprising! 

I went as far back as literally yesterday.   You doing well today?

[ThreePointTakedown]

55 minutes ago, Caveira said:

I went as far back as literally yesterday.   You doing well today?

Moron! You searched the archive for a thread that was nearly a year old. In order to post your celebration of hate!

You too Gene. You smooth brained mope!

Edited December 9, 2025 by ThreePointTakedown

[ThreePointTakedown]

1 hour ago, mspart said:

TPTPTPTPT, try getting the facts straight before you pontificate.  

mspart

Which facts? That this administration is so weak it needs to deadname a person that served with honor and distinction. Go out of their way to draw attention to this person to advertise their hate without reason. 

Edited December 9, 2025 by ThreePointTakedown

[Gene Mills Fan]

10 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Moron! You searched the archive for a thread that was nearly a year old. In order to post your celebration of hate!

You too Gene. You smooth brained mope!

There's probably a nuanced reason why you're such a dope! Just read the date in the picture.

Brainless!

Edited December 9, 2025 by Gene Mills Fan

[Caveira]

18 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Moron! You searched the archive for a thread that was nearly a year old. In order to post your celebration of hate!

You too Gene. You smooth brained mope!

Moron?    We can have a civil discussion without you insulting someone every post.  It literally was reposted by some acct on social media yesterday.   I did not look back in threads boss.   But I guess you know me better than I do 

Edited December 9, 2025 by Caveira

[ThreePointTakedown]

Just now, Caveira said:

Moron?    It literally was reposted by some acct on social media yesterday.   I did not look back in threads boss.   But I guess you know me better than I do 

Y’all are so dumb to continue to argue this. I’ll just let you look at the date from the next earliest post on this thread. 
You’re too dumb to even explain this to. Again not surprising. 

[wrestlingguy]

6 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Y’all are so dumb to continue to argue this. I’ll just let you look at the date from the next earliest post on this thread. 
You’re too dumb to even explain this to. Again not surprising. 

You are saying @Caveira should have started a new thread on the same discussion even though one already existed.

Edited December 9, 2025 by wrestlingguy
mispelled one

[ThreePointTakedown]

1 minute ago, wrestlingguy said:

You are saying @Caveira should have started a new thread on the same discussion even though one already existed.

I’m saying they are a hateful bigot. Posting stories to glorify other hateful bigots. And working really hard to do so. 

[mspart]

2 hours ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

 How far did you have to go back through the archives to find this? 

Pathetic! And not surprising! 

 

29 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Which facts? That this administration is so weak it needs to deadname a person that served with honor and distinction. Go out of their way to draw attention to this person to advertise their hate without reason. 

 

22 minutes ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

There's probably a nuanced reason why you're such a dope! Just read the date in the picture.

Brainless!

 

14 minutes ago, Caveira said:

Moron?    We can have a civil discussion without you insulting someone every post.  It literally was reposted by some acct on social media yesterday.   I did not look back in threads boss.   But I guess you know me better than I do 

Those facts. 

mspart

[Gene Mills Fan]

6 minutes ago, wrestlingguy said:

You are saying @Caveira should have started a new thread on the same discussion even though one already existed.

He's a waste of time that could be used productively. He can't be wrong he can only just continually demand more. He went on some psycho analysis of someone; and found his premise was wrong, so now has to divert to his ideology.

[Caveira]

8 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

I’m saying they are a hateful bigot. Posting stories to glorify other hateful bigots. And working really hard to do so. 

What is a woman?   Can you define one?

Edited December 9, 2025 by Caveira

[Gene Mills Fan]

14 minutes ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

He's a waste of time that could be used productively. He can't be wrong he can only just continually demand more. He went on some psycho analysis of someone; and found his premise was wrong, so now has to divert to his ideology.

He also continually claims people respond with bias without reading everything, which is exactly what he did!

[mspart]

To the topic of this thread, 2.  One cannot become the other.   One can pretend, but one cannot in reality become the other. 

mspart

[ThreePointTakedown]

On 12/9/2025 at 4:21 PM, mspart said:

 

 

 

Those facts. 

mspart

You joined this idiot brigade too? 
Also with nothing to contribute. 
 

Facts: Cav looked for a thread that hadn’t had a new post for 10 months. So they could post something to be purposefully hateful. That anyone is defending them means they are dumb, ignorant, or a bigot. 
Which one are you MS? 
 

Facts!

[Gene Mills Fan]

11 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

You joined this idiot brigade too? 
Also with nothing to contribute. 
 

Facts: Cav looked for a thread that hadn’t had a new post for 10 months. So they could post something to be purposefully hateful. That anyone is defending them means they are dumb, ignorant, or a bigot. 
Which one are you MS? 
 

Facts!

No  Dims of Tik Tok reposted a year old post, with a NEW take, and Cav saw it on DEC 8 2025!!!

[JimmySpeaks]

12 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

You joined this idiot brigade too? 
Also with nothing to contribute. 
 

Facts: Cav looked for a thread that hadn’t had a new post for 10 months. So they could post something to be purposefully hateful. That anyone is defending them means they are dumb, ignorant, or a bigot. 
Which one are you MS? 
 

Facts!

If you look at page one you’d realize that he recharged a number of older threads and not just the one you’re blabbering about.  And that was long before the post about Richard/Rachel came out.   You have ignorant covered for sure.  

[red viking]

On 12/9/2025 at 4:07 PM, mspart said:

To the topic of this thread, 2.  One cannot become the other.   One can pretend, but one cannot in reality become the other. 

mspart

Who cares if somebody wants to be called the other gender? I don't. 

[ThreePointTakedown]

On 12/9/2025 at 4:27 PM, Caveira said:

What is a woman?   Can you define one?

This is going to be fun. If you're unsure of anything, I'd be happy to break things down. 

 

Woman:

An adult human whose gender identity aligns with their personal schema on the female sex.

 

Adult: a person that is fully grown or developed.

Gender identity: a person's innate sense of their gender

Innate: Inborn, natural, one's own internally 

Align: give support to

Personal Schema: LINK long lasting and stable set of memories that summarize a person's beliefs, experiences and generalizations about the self in specific behavior domains(in this case gender)

Female: denoting the sex that can bear offspring, or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of ova. 

 

So, what someone thinks are characteristics of how a female, at varying stages of development, may present themselves in society. 

 

Are those characteristics the same across cultures? Nope. Do they change with time? Yup. Are they ever static? Nope. 

 

Can you give one trait that is necessary to being a woman? 

Necessary: required, can have no exception 

[JimmySpeaks]

2 minutes ago, red viking said:

Who cares if somebody wants to be called the other gender? I don't. 

And you’re ok with Richard going into the women’s bathroom with little girls. Got it.