I’m not, I am keeping you on topic, which is we can define what a woman is.Themis wrote: ↑Mon May 30, 2022 12:13 amYou are getting off topic again. Everyone already knows each species will have a set of genetic material unique to them. The point is that each species, including humans have a lot of genetic variability within a species. Why, even with identical twins, no two humans are 100% the same. This includes all things related to sex and gender. Think of it as more a spectrum than binary.Markk wrote: ↑Sat May 28, 2022 11:32 pmBy this logic then there is no such thing as human beings and a genetic model for them. Shall we just bypass the non-binary gender identification and just conclude that the definition of human beings are also subjective based on the persons feelings of what they are? Where does this stop, and again what is the absolute benchmark of what we are from a biological perspective.
Every species share the same genetic model, that is why cats don’t breed with birds, and humans can’t breed with dolphins. Our genetic models(DNA) is different and the code for each species.
Our genes as humans differ in that “traits” form characteristics of us based on different factors…genotypes and phenotypes offer to our traits as human beings. Colored eyes are a genotype carried by inherited genes, while phenotypes are based on things like environmental conditions like diet and temperature.
More later….
You inadvertently supported my point here when you wrote “no two humans are 100% the same.” “Humans” being the benchmark for all this, and the model being XX/XY Human beings, male/female. With a healthy “being” of this, human life can continue to exist.
There are variants within the model, some positive and some negative…and as we discussed some, a very few percentage wise, are disorders….but always within the Human model.
Thanks for the conversation