The Intersex Gambit

Description

Just as the complexities of quantum mechanics are sometimes used to validate mystical beliefs about reality, so too the complexities of sex determination are sometimes used to validate mystical beliefs about biological sex. We call this "The Intersex Gambit."

This video was inspired from a Twitter thread by UK researcher Andy Lewis ( @lecanardnoir). You can find his work at The Quackometer, where he exposes medical pseudoscience and quackery.

Sources

[1] Zyga, L. (2009). Quantum mysticism, gone but not forgotten. Phys.org

[2] Clark, J. (2019). The Copenhagen Interpretation. How Stuff Works.

[3] Fausto-Sterling, A. (2000). Sexing the body: Gender politics and the construction of sexuality.

[4] Sax, L. (2002). How common is intersex? A response to Anne Fausto-Sterling.

[5] Graham, C. (2019). Statistics and semantics: Is intersex as common as redheads? MRKHVoice.

[6] Lewis, A. (2019). The Flapdoodle Gambit: AJ Lewis @lecanardnoir Dec 20, 2019, https://twitter.com/lecanardnoir/status/1207979033251733505?s=20

[7] McLaughlin, H. (2018). What is sex? Lecture: Sociology of Gender, Oklahoma State University.

[8] McLaughlin, H. (2018). The relationship between sex and gender. Lecture: Sociology of Gender, Oklahoma State University.

[9] IHRA. (2013). Third sex, redux: Intersex as identity is a political statement.

[10] Witchel, S. (2017). Disorders of sex development. Best Practice and Research in Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 48, 90-102.

Transcript

Physicist Niels Bohr once argued that a quantum particle does not exist in one state or the other, but in all possible states at once. It's only when we observe the particle, said Bohr, that it collapses into a specific state. This is what's called superposition, where a particle exists in two states at once until it's observed. The principle of superposition led some people to conclude that quantum mechanics showed consciousness was at the heart of all reality. While quantum physicists never made such claims nor gave evidence for them, this didn't stop pseudoscientists from using quantum mechanics as a gambit to validate their own beliefs. We call this the "quantum flapdoodle," which refers to the misapplication of quantum physics to unrelated topics.

A similar flapdoodle exists in the realm of biological sex. Just as the complexities of quantum mechanics are sometimes used to validate mystical beliefs about reality, so too the complexities of sex determination are sometimes used to validate mystical beliefs about biological sex.

Gender theorists will often argue that there is a spectrum of sexes, with male and female at either ends of a continuum. To do this, gender theorists point to intersex conditions, or in simplest terms, variations from the typical paths of reproductive development. These variations are then used to argue that 1) sex is a spectrum, and that 2) we cannot reliably sort people into male or female categories. Are these claims true?

We all know that most of us have XX or XY chromosomes, and therefore, develop as females or males, respectively. But those who have intersex conditions often do not follow this typical path. For example, some males are born with two X chromosomes and one Y, as opposed to one X and one Y, and some females are born with only one X chromosome, as opposed to two. From this variation, gender theorists then conclude that sex category exists on a spectrum. This is like taking a complex concept from quantum mechanics such as superposition and concluding that consciousness is the ultimate reality of the universe. But, just as physicists do not claim that quantum mechanics is equivalent to a theory of consciousness, biologists do not claim that variation of chromosomes, gonads, or hormones is equivalent to new sexes.

This attempt to complicate arguments about biological sex by using intersex conditions is known as the "Intersex Flapdoodle Gambit," a term coined by UK researcher Andy Lewis, in which he writes, "The intersex gambit in gender theology is a flapdoodle gambit that tries to create an equivalence between the complexities of sex determination mechanisms and processes and there being a continuum of complex sexes. In all, the flapdoodle gambit is a bait and switch technique that relies on equivocation and conflation in the hope that you do not spot the switcheroo."

This conflation of sex determination mechanisms with a 'sex spectrum' does not work, since intersex conditions are simply anatomical variations within males and within females, not new sexes. Or, in the words of developmental biologist Dr. Emma Hilton, "DSDs are variations of anatomy, not variations of sex."

Thus, rather than being defined through variations of anatomy, sex is defined through the developmental pathway a person went down to support the production of either sperm or eggs. Male bodies develop towards the production of small gametes, whereas female bodies develop towards the production of large gametes. This definition includes all infants born with intersex conditions just as it includes every other human who has ever lived. For example, males born with two X chromosomes and one Y are still males, as their bodies developed towards the production of small gametes. And females born with only one X chromosome are still females, as their bodies developed towards the production of large gametes.

Conflating complex intersex conditions with new sexes does nothing for the 'sex spectrum' argument, but the conflation's power resides in its ability to convince you your scientific knowledge is 'behind the times.' And yet, ironically, the effectiveness of the 'sex spectrum' argument relies not on peer-reviewed science but on your own scientific ignorance. Just as mystics may convince you of their beliefs through taking advantage of your lack of knowledge in quantum mechanics, gender theorists may do the same with your knowledge of biological sex. So be cautious. If you do not know that sex is defined around the two gametes required for sexual reproduction, you are likely to buy into the gender theorists' argument that biological sex exists on a spectrum, and that we cannot reliably sort people into male and female categories. Like many things in life, it may sound good, and it may sound inclusive, but that does not make it true. The 'sex spectrum' argument is no different.

So, do not let the "Intersex Flapdoodle Gambit" confuse you. It is no different than other gambits designed to convince you of homeopathy, astrology, the flat-earth, or quantum consciousness. Like other pseudoscientists, gender theorists will attempt to persuade you with their scientific words, their knowledgeable dispositions, and their effective gambits, but do not be fooled. As the famous playwright William Shakespeare wrote, "All that glitters is not gold."

I'm Zach, author of The Gender Paradox, for the Paradox Institute.

END

© 2020 Zachary A. Elliott, All Rights Reserved.