Is Science going to be a Key or an impending Doom of the Androgyne?

[Kendall]

I was sitting in my favorite thinking place, a steamy hot bathtub, thinking what interesting thing I can right now. For some reason my thoughts went to the human genome project and the recent brain theories / discoveries supporting the idea of brain differences in different gendered persons.

My thoughts at first were glad and hopes where that it would help recognize, help, and improve a persons life.

Then... a few thoughts about societies and human nature. To be exact, the human need to "cure" and "fix" percieved "problems" or "defects". Not that I am calling them that, but thats how I pictured someone against androgynes calling and stating such opinion.

What do you think? Is the future bright, or bleak?

[shawnael]

Honestly, I see it going both ways at once. There would definitely be a raise in awareness. Maybe there would be people out to help non-binary gendered persons to cope with their identity.

But there will be people out to change or prevent deviance from the binary. Like a real-life Gattaca.

[Sylvia H]

Or maybe just maybe it willl open the door to the foolishness of prejudging people by their appearance.
Or maybe just maybe we (collectively) can stop the morbid interest of peoples sexual orientation from being interjected into everything.
Maybe civilization can actually take a baby step in the right direction and actually advance?
A girl can only hope.



Sylvia H.

[Jessica]

Ken/Kendra,

To be perfectly honest, what I am going to say is absolutely unbelievable without a great deal of background information.

I think Ray Kurzweil is right. It's not just processing power that is doubling every 18 months (Moore's Law) which is an exponential growth in processor speed.

1.  I think our technological advances occur at an exponential growth rate.

2.  Our sciences are *finally* beginning to merge together and doing interdisciplinary research.

3.  We are beginning to understand the relations between chemistry and biology, physics and chemistry, engineering and biology and chemistry, and so on and so on.

If You have ever heard of the term Singularity, my views on it are that we are quickly approaching a point where technological growth ... specifically platform technologies, for instance, nanotechnology... and not the kind in cosmetics, sunscreens, or stain resistant pants; I am referring to nanotechnology as defined by Eric Drexler in Engines of Creation.  Bottom Up Molecular Manufacturing.  With upcoming revolutionary platform technologies such as MM, coupled with advances in Chemistry, Genetics, Biology, and Physics, that are likely to occur next 50 years, I don't think gender will matter anymore.  Kurzweil believes 50 years, Drexler believes ... well, if I recall correctly, he is advocating 30 before MM.  I tend to agree with Kurzweil, however, we are looking at this technology in a certain light, how it affects Androgyne's.  I think that within the next 75-90 years, two of the most likely scenerios are:

1. Catastrophic Failure.  99.9 - 100% of life won't survive it.
or
2. The Beginning of a Transhumanistic Era where we are beginning to guide our own evolutionary steps with our technology.  This would be the beginnings of 'The Singularity.'  At this stage, gender won't matter for all intents and purposes for anyone living in this era.

Color Me Crazy

Jessica

[Laurry]

I was thinking exactly the same thing as Shawnael when I answered the questions.  I believe that research will find further information regarding gender and sexual orientation.  This will lead to greater protection under the law and more freedoms for expression.

Sadly, there will also be a portion of society that will push to fix us and search for a cure.  How large, vocal or even accepted this group will be will probably be determined by the strength of the research.

Then I read Jessica's response.  I have few doubts that mankind has the capacity to reach this point and that eventually, gender may be unimportant.  I only wish I had to optimism to believe we our civilization will survive long enough to reach that point, but fear her option 1 will occur long before we get there.

Still...it sounds wonderfully facinating, doesn't it?

......Laurie

[Emerald]

Is Science going to be a Key or an impending Doom of the Androgyne?

Imaginary enemies of Androgynes and the scientific annihilation of the Androgyne gender identity?
Lord have mercy... The sci-fi writers are awake tonight!

Androgynes don't identify with either of the traditional genders and traditional gender roles - that does not mean Androgynes are anything close to being defective by anyone's standards. Far from it! Androgyne has been described as a gender of all human excellence. Androgynes' abilities often surpass that of Cisgender people because Androgynes endeavor to excel in areas traditionally reserved for one gender or the other. The reason most Androgynes don't know they are Androgyne is because they are extremely successful human beings. Androgynes possess the finest attributes of both genders without the vices or undesirable traits found in the gender extremes of masculine and feminine. Psychological Androgynes have been honored and respected throughout history for contributions where their physical sex would normally prohibit their participation. The world is a better place because the Androgyne gender identity exists!

Androgynes are generally innovative, multi-talented, open-minded, creative, slightly eccentric, wonderful and interesting people (yes, a healthy self-esteem is a common Androgyne trait). There is no Cisgender agenda against Androgynes, no prejudice toward those who have an Androgyne gender identity. There is no calling for a witch hunt to eliminate the Androgyne gender identity from the human race. Why on earth would anyone think there will be one? To start with, 999 out of 1000 people couldn't point out a person with an Androgyne gender identity if their life depended on it.

Androgynes aren't readily noticeable, you can't tell just by looking if someone has a gender identity independent of the genders of men and women. Being an Androgyne is not about appearances (androgynous-looks, gender bending), or culturally disruptive behaviour (gender rebels), or stereotypical crossdressing, or the desire to become a member of the opposite sex. Androgynes require no medical interventions (Neutrois excluded) and are only rarely disturbed enough about their lack of identification with the two traditional genders to warrant the services of a gender therapist.

Androgynes have no gender role because Androgynes don't think of themselves as being a man or a woman in the core of their souls. And that one fact colours our perception of self and how we give of ourselves to others and to the world.

Please, I would like a mark on my forehead... an "A"... and make it emerald green, thank you.

-Emerald 

[Pica Pica]

wow that's positive. i just see myself as a happy accident.

[Kendall]

Here is the scenario I was thinking. Imagine that before or once a child is born, a DNA human genome test is taken to find out what "flaws" a person has. Disease, mental illness, potential tendencies, including (if they ever find a link in the genes or brain) transgender, transsexual, crossdressing, or in this case: ambigender, nullgender, bigender, trigender, or whatever one would pick depending on one's belief, knowledge, or reality of oneself.

"Excuse me madam our DNA analysis of your child is complete. Your child currently is susceptible to asthma, vision problems, mild depression, and possibly be between genders."

[Jessica]

Yes I believe that genetic modification could be a scenerio.

Here is the analysis that brought me to that conclusion.
1. Imagine if Your unborn 3 day old fetus had, based on a Genetic Analysis, Muscular Dystrophy.
2. Imagine the technology exists to correct it at the genetic level, ie, rewriting the fetus' DNA to correct it.

There will be a large push for legislature that allows parents to correct genetic defects which lead to disease.  I believe 'designer babies' will be frowned on, I don't know if that will be legal or not.  Designer babies would be doing genetic modifications to ensure the hair color is blonde, with blue eyes, and fair skin. Or, something along those lines.  I don't know if that will be legal or not, but, if it's not, there will very likely be an underground market for it.

Most of the world looks at genetic variation where the result is outside of social norms as a disease.

1. Intersexed Children are looked at as diseased and surgical corrections are performed.  The surgical correction at birth treatment is fading, but, the medical community looks at IS children as having a genetic disease.
2. Gender Dysphoria is classified as a phsycological disorder.  There is mounting evidence that it is probably genetically based, but, since it is a genetic sequence resulting in something outside the social norm, it would be classified as a disease.

Which means that, if the legislation that passes reads something like, "Allow genetic modifications within the first trimester to correct disease..."

Well, it would be allowed.
Not every parent would do it I don't think.
Most of the world would not be able to afford it.
But, in the U.S., without a shift in the way society and the medical community thinks. (in other words, based on society today presuming we had the technology to correct it.) yes, it would probably be allowed.

Do I agree with this?  No.

But the Majority of voters probably do.
1. We can fix diseases in our unborn children
2. Any fetus showing <Insert Genetic Variation which is outside of Social Norms> is due to genetic disease.
3. Correct that which is diseased.

Hopefully, by the time this technology is in full swing, things will change.

Jessica

[Keira]

Seeing as the US cannot even "fix" major normal diseases in children, I'm not sure they'd even try except in the well off, well insured, upper crust of US society (the top 10% in wealth). The others would be left to their "diseases" which is fine with me.

[Sandi]

Having read Ray Kurzweil's "The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology," I pretty much agree with Jessica. But not only is our technology growing at an exponential rate, but so is the exponent. Jessica is also likely pretty close on her scenarios.

It' easy to see that when we get to the point of interfacing the human mind to computer technology. With the resultant intelligences so high as to be beyond measure (in the 100s or 1000s). Human power to  control our own evolution will be unimaginable. That vast power will be able to do great advances in health and longevity.

BY THE END of this century, the typical European may attend a family reunion in which five generations are playing together. Great-great-great grandma, at 150 years old, will be as vital, with muscle tone as firm and supple, skin as elastic and glowing, as her 30-year-old great-great-granddaughter with whom she's playing tennis...

The younger members of her extended family will have never caught a cold. From birth they will have been immune to most of the shocks to which human flesh has long been heir, such as diabetes and Parkinson's disease. Her grandson, who recently suffered a car accident, will be sporting new versions of the arm and lung that got damaged in the wreck. He'll be playing a game of football as skilled and energetic as anyone else there.

But that vast intellectual power will also make it possible to do evil and control others, especially those who are either left without, or don't want the biotechnological advances. I can't even imagine what a state of war would be like, and I don't imagine that vastly increased intelligence will remove any such evil traits, only make the consequences worse.

I'm sure that by this time the whole of gender identity will be understood. Who knows what they will do with it, but I suppose that according to the persons desire, that they could leave a person as is, repair to born gender, or turn on genes to grow new proper physical organs and attributes if we want them. OTOH it may be up to the super intelligent government overburdened with science to remove our choices, although I sure hope not.

Most of you are young enough to be around for the longevity and good ahead as well as the bad. Unfortunately—or maybe fortunately—at 66 I will probably miss it. The question of key or impending doom isn't answered in my mind.

[Mattie]

Oh wow, I would love to live to be 150 and playing tennis no less!  But to get there they would certainly figure out what what controls gender.  And if the leading theory prevails as to the cause, then hormones could be brought back to the correct levels to the brain matches the body. 

[Tay]

I thought the leading theory was that hormone levels changed the brain structure which caused transsexuality?

Which would be irreversible through adjusting hormone levels after birth.

[Shana A]

I think it likely that science could find some biological reason for androgynes. As long as the fundamentalist faction doesn't take over the world <fingers crossed>, I think we're safe from being genetically altered or "cured" before birth.

zythyra

[Kendall]

Lastest news of possible explaination I have heard is the 54 different genes in men and women
http://www.pediatrics.medsch.ucla.edu/news03/vilain.htm

We talked about some of the theories in https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,12204.20.html

[no_id]

Lastest news of possible explaination I have heard is the 54 different genes in men and women
http://www.pediatrics.medsch.ucla.edu/news03/vilain.htm

Interesting about the Reuter's research is that it stems from Oct. 2003, and as I suspected while reading: it was hardly convincing. In order to have a better overview of the actual research details (including con), I suggest the following article: Reuters Report About the UCLA "Brain Sex" Study Baseless.

In my opinion, science revealing and explaining gender identity (and sexual orientation -- the researches conducted are similiar) through investigation and definitions of hormonic levels, environmental aspects (bred), and/or genetics is still sci-fi. The human gene pool is a complete chaos, and if these 'mindsets' could be attributed to it then that would indicate science had evolved, gaining the capablity to isolate and identify all human genes. Unlikely at this point, and in the back of my head I remember Hamer's Xq23 that has faded into oblivion after causing a complete tantrum. Overal I believe that science will deliver slight proof of possible biological factors, but likewise with studies on Homosexuality I doubt progress will improve to the extend that one singular research can answer all questions since all factors (environment, hormones and genetics) have to be considered and examined to all possible extends.

As for the horrorfying thoughts that if a bilogical reason were found, and if humanity would decide to alter/correct such 'mistakes', just keep in mind that we're still a long way from genetic modification: science really has no clue what will happen if you alter the tiniest element.   

Therefore, in conclusion: I'm going to light another cigarette and be happy that by the time scientists start wars over peer-viewing each other's reports concerning these matters I'll most likely be dead. 

(Great, my first post on this forum makes me appear like a complete geek *facepalm* )

[Jessica]

As for the horrorfying thoughts that if a bilogical reason were found, and if humanity would decide to alter/correct such 'mistakes', just keep in mind that we're still a long way from genetic modification: science really has no clue what will happen if you alter the tiniest element.   

Therefore, in conclusion: I'm going to light another cigarette and be happy that by the time scientists start wars over peer-viewing each other's reports concerning these matters I'll most likely be dead.

Science & Technology are moving much faster than that.
This will be a concern in less than 20 years.

http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/news/2005/12/68970

Excerpt

Designer babies have already been born. Well over 1,000 children have been screened as embryos by preimplantation genetic diagnosis, or PGD. In PGD, a cell taken from an embryo is analyzed to see if the chromosomes or genes are normal. Families use PGD to weed out genetic diseases and to make a baby who will be immunologically compatible with an existing sibling in need of a blood or bone-marrow donation. More controversially, it can be, and has been, used to select the sex of babies.

Note, this is an article from 2005.

Jessica

[no_id]

Designer babies have already been born. Well over 1,000 children have been screened as embryos by preimplantation genetic diagnosis, or PGD. In PGD, a cell taken from an embryo is analyzed to see if the chromosomes or genes are normal. Families use PGD to weed out genetic diseases and to make a baby who will be immunologically compatible with an existing sibling in need of a blood or bone-marrow donation. More controversially, it can be, and has been, used to select the sex of babies.

Note, this is an article from 2005.

Jessica

True, as the article says: improvements have been made over the last thirty-years. However, keep in mind that these 'designer babies' deal with known genetic markers. I'm referring to the identification of all genetic markers, specifically those who may be attributing to (or be the cause of) androgyne or homosexuality. That would be a seperate research. 

[Jessica]

I'm referring to the identification of all genetic markers, specifically those who may be attributing to (or be the cause of) androgyne or homosexuality.

Do you believe those markers won't be found in your lifetime?

[no_id]

I'm referring to the identification of all genetic markers, specifically those who may be attributing to (or be the cause of) androgyne or homosexuality.

Do you believe those markers won't be found in your lifetime?

Hm, that question is hard to answer since I'd have to take in acount my own life expenctancy, the rationality of possibly involved scientists and their involvement with ethical protocols (and protocols overal --- set boundaries), and of course there is to consider the 'luck' factor. I believe, at this point there isn't enough research conducted/promising that can present a reliable timeline.

Thus, I'm going to bail out of answering that so you won't get the possibility of searching me up in an elderly home fifty years from now and telling me "HA HA you were wrong!"..