There Are More Than Two Human Sexes

In high school biology, we learn that humans are born with either XX or XY chromosomes, and that a person’s internal and external sex organs match those chromosomes.

It turns out, however, that BIOLOGICAL sex isn’t that straightforward.

Male, female, and common.

Intersex people exist yes.

Thanks for another example of poor design.

A shocking number of "intelligent" people refuse to even broach the subject because their ONTOLOGY only includes XX and XY ("end-of-story").

Variety and variation is not necessarily "poor design".

Yes, that is a good point.

Probably an example of no design.

Just development and physiological anomaly.

Does the same apply to the anomalies of the transsexual?

There is significant overlap between physiological anomaly and gender expression.

What I'm wondering is why the government (or anyone else) needs to know what I look like naked.

Doesn't this qualify for medical privacy provisions?

Why does anyone need to know this?

You ought to be using more accurately descriptive terms than chromosomes. Discuss germ line and somatic cells, and genotypes and phenotypes. These are your true distinctions. And then you ought to discuss what can randomly occur in cell mutations, and what mutations can be caused by introductions of substances to the system that can affect germ line and somatic cells that should not be introduced to the body either at all, or in excessive amounts. We have much more control over this stuff than merely random chance. If diet, alone, and prudent behavior, can have such effect on prevention of the most critical diseases [heart disease, cancer, diabetes, primarily], what else might be prevented [such as cellular mutation] by a prudent lifestyle? Some effects are not intergenerational, i.e., they are not genetically inherited, but some genetic effect can be had, or avoided.

Have you ever considered that perhaps "anti-reproductive" adaptations might be more of a "safety-mechanism" rather than a "bug-in-the-system"?

Sure. Have you considered the possibility of the fetus to develop a natural resistance to abortion? What? Who said the right to life does not extend that far, even overwhelming the erroneous idea of a woman's privacy violation by being pregnant?

Try helping some homeless people (who might also have a "right to life") before you start giving out medical advice.

Just yesterday morning, I was volunteering at a local food bank. You? I contribute 20% of my annual increase. You? Let's be careful to whom we hurl accusations, huh?

How very noble of you. Allow me to rephrase the criticism. 

Try helping some homeless people (who might also have a "right to life") to rise out of the abject poverty that leaves them in a position of needing your charity to survive before you start giving out medical advice.

A single bacteria can replicate on its own. There is only one bacteria sex. However, two mammals are needed to replicate. There are two mammal sexes.

We find that the DNA of most people match their ability to replicate with other humans. So what? Sex is defined as a method of replication, not as a measurement of DNA.

Again, how many humans do you need to replicate? That's right: TWO.

Of course, there are 7 billion versions of human DNA. However, there are only two human genders.

At the root, there are but two gametes, male and female. Yes, there is possible mutation, more correctly referred to as meiosis of gametes, which, in the human, offer a wide variation of daughter cells [not to be confused with sexual differentiation] in both sperm and ova [m/f gametes]. Specifically, since human chromosome pairs exist [typicaly] as 23-paired chromosomes, each gamete, or divided chromosome pair, can have 2^23 possible resulting daughter cell variations. Within those variations, it is possible for meiosis to occur, but if not, no mutations will be genetically transferred to a resulting pairing of sperm and ovum: a zygote. This also accounts for the fact that the intent of genetic pairing of m/f gametes is strictly a male or female zygote. Intent is not the same as actual outcome. Meiosis can result in a gamete mutation affecting the resulting zygote from either meiotic sperm or ovum, but this is, after all, mutation, and not genetic intent. 

Why is sex-based in gametes? 

An interesting fact is that females are born with their entire lifetime supply of gametes. At birth, the normal female ovary contains about 1-2 million/oocytes (eggs). Females are not capable of making new eggs, and in fact, there is a continuous decline in the total number of eggs each month.

All that we are, biologically, even chemically, is in our paired gametes. The only other contributor after conception is in our environment. 
QED

Well, no, that is the foundation of our bodies, but that is not all we are. Would you agree that a state of a person's mind is more indicative of a person's individuality than the superficiality of their "gametes"? Which aren't even the only thing which determines what is typically considered "sex", that is actually mostly the hormone exposure as well as a how chromosomes are replicated.

Yes, I wold agree with excepting the mind, But, as I said, biologically and chemically, all that we are is from the gametes. RThe mind is something else entirely, because the mind is not merely connections by synapses. Those are the bio-chemical pathways, but not the mind, itself.

Sex.

Has generally come to mean gratification, rather than identity, and methodology is variable.

Physiological anomaly occurs in all aspects of function, so can only to be expected to occur in reproductive systems.

Generally though, most people fall into two categories. Ovum producer or sperm producer.

The species necessity is fertilization of the ovum....Fulfilment of the fundamental process, and therefore the continuation of the species.

Non-reproductive gratification and it's methodologies, is a concurrent issue defined by all sorts of sociological and perhaps environmental factors.

Nonetheless non-reproductive gratification is also, seemingly a natural species requirement.

Though, reading too much into issues concerning "sex" is also the human condition, relative to both human physiological development and human social development.

So a man wants to marry a man and have a puppy and a new fitted kitchen, and every now and then satisfy their reproductive urges.....Will they be smote down by the wrath of an angry GOD......Nah.

It's only other people who might smote them down,....Why?...Because  people have a tendency to overly concern themselves with the sexual methodology of others.

Even biotypical people might not be able to procreate due to all kinds of factors.  While our sex organs are set up for making babies our minds have way more going on and are far more ingrained in sex then just making more humans. 

Ay, there's the rub.

The mind is nothing more than an emergent property of the neurological processes of your brain

I disagree. The mind, which I equate to the spirit, is an eternal form that preceded neurology, or, in fact, any physical and mortal property whatsoever.

@Theweakeredge

The mind, is the brain switched on and functioning.

The spirit, is a product of the mind, when the brain is switched on and functioning. 

I don't think there is any such thing as a "spirit"

Just another point on which we disagree. It's allowed. However, since I am convinced the spirit is the part of us that continues beyond death and ultimately is resurrected into a new, perfect, and eternal physical body to which the spirit [whereas, for now, death is just the last enemy] is permanently fused, never to separate again, I prefer my version of the hereafter.