Scientific Sexism

As a cis white male, I would like to address my comrades (of any persuasion) on the issue of gender. A basic explanation of how men and women come to be will be helpful for those among us today who, in these progressive times, are questioning their gender-identity. It will benefit all stakeholders in the matter which, in point of fact, is all of us. So please call in the lingerers outside in the corridor.

It must be stated categorically by way of preface to my presentation that I am not making value judgments or discriminating in any way. I am not questioning the authenticity or conviction of any of the greatly diverse throng present here today. We are all one big happy family, our mandatory employment contracts say so. Fair-trade coffee and vegan cakes are at the side, please help yourself.

I shall start by saying that people have made this issue political though it is not. Sex is just a matter of science. On conception, humans (mammals) have XX or XY chromosomes. There is a rare variant, XYY, which became the subject of attention some decades ago. It was suggested that XYY males had increased criminality and other traits. An XXY variant also occurs, called Klinefelter’s syndrome.

The purpose of the Y chromosome post-conception is to generate a pair of testes. This sets the stage for masculinization of the foetus, notably the reproductive apparatus but especially the brain. This latter process is often not emphasised and is highly significant.

The default state in mammals is to be female: that is, if nothing happens the embryo develops as female (in birds it is the opposite). The various parts of the male genitalia have analogues with female structures e.g. the clitoris and the hidden tissue behind it are an undeveloped penis.

The most complex changes occur in the brain. Sometime in early pregnancy, the testes formed in an XY embryo emit a series of androgen pulses to alter the male brain. Minute levels of dihydroxytestosterone, a sort of supercharged testosterone, flood the unmodified female brain to condition it. Consequently there are systemic differences between male and female brains: for example male thinking is more compartmentalised while females are much more adept at speech, having a larger amount of cortex devoted to it. Speech impediments occur almost exclusively in males.

Marijuana is one of several substances which can affect this masculization process, as can maternal stress. A whole cascade of hormonal events form the foetus (finger length etc.) but in the male, particular masculinization pulses determine binary values such as mating object: that is, whether the individual will be sexually attracted to males or females. There could be a switch for submissive or assertive, and many other features.

The hypothalamus modulates hormones in later life and some male homosexuals have a male-responding hypothalamus (stable) and some have a female-responding one (cyclic). The female brain has multiples more “white matter” (associated with connectivity) while male brains have much more “grey matter” (associated with processing). This again is the result of androgens conditioning the brain. The development of a foetus is so intricate that it’s a wonder things don’t go wrong more often.

One of the implications of the above is that there is no clear origin of female homosexuality. Obviously, there are variations in individual hormone balance. Females normally have small amounts of testosterone produced by the ovaries and adrenal cortex. It has been noted that many female politicians have masculine facial features. In the male, testosterone is converted to oestrogen by fat cells. Darwin observed that masculine traits become most pronounced at maturity. In late life women become more masculine and men become more feminine as hormone production fades. Evidently there are different degrees of masculinity and femininity.

Turner’s syndrome provides an enlightening example. Turner’s syndrome females either produce no testosterone or are insensitive to it. They get lost inside their own homes and dream of having babies which, paradoxically, they are often incapable of. In the absence of any testosterone influence at all, they become ultra-female.

This brief summary has many fine points omitted but all of the above has been verified during experimental hormone treatments, brain scans and so on. The basics are set out in Moir & Jessel, BrianSex: The Real Difference between Men and Women and Glenn Wilson, The Great Sex Divide: A Study of Male-Female Differences. The ‘Gender Politics Harms Children’ statement by the American College of Pediatricians is a more topical perspective.

Statistically in the population, the incidence of sexual dimorphism is very low. Male homosexuality is a special case. The suggestion has been made that male homosexuality is a form of, or evolutionary prototype for, a ‘worker caste,’ genetically sharing by inclusive fitness like a sterile caste in ant societies, but this is speculation. Neglecting male homosexuality, particular syndromes (XXY, XYY, Turner’s etc.) have incidence rates of the order of 1 in 100,000. All the abnormalities together probably do not exceed 1 in 10,000.

Stepping beyond a bare representation of the facts, one need not be coldly objective to arrive at the following sensible conclusions. That the number of sexual aberrations is numerically tiny, and most contemporary claims of “sex dysphoria” can be attributed to widespread identity confusion and mental illness. The physical and medical complications of intervention and the high suicide rate post-surgery suggest it being best all round that people settle for the sex they were born with, even in those rare cases where there is ambiguity. I leave aside the question why the media promotes this harmful ethos.

Looking further forward, the Establishment narrative is now such that it is easy to envisage a scenario in which QWERTY is official doctrine and moreover, employment according to diversity quotas is mandatory. This may already be the reality in some parts. Then the scheme could arise whereby workplace staff are divided into teams of twenty or so. Each team must have a volunteer, or one chosen by lottery, to identify as a black lesbian say, simply to meet the official quota. Nothing about him would change at all, he only has to “identify” and must (according to the concurrent equality dogma) be accepted as such. The boxes are ticked and nothing more need be done. Except that he may have to dress up and put on blackface now and then for visits by the Government Inspector.