New member

[strangerdanger]

HI

I'm new here. Just wanted to say HI to all. I'm shy and don't know what to say.

Are there any Christians here?

[Aseras]

Hi. Don't worry, most of us are really shy in the real world. It's a little more comfortable here with people who really understand.

I went to school to be a preacher or something. Some quest to try and figure myself out and get some anwers. Ended up getting my answers in the hospital. I was way more religous before I went to school. I believe in god still, but I've lost my faith in any organized religion. I studied them all.

[spacegirl]

Hello strangerdanger. They tried to make me a christian when I was growing up, so I got all the required reading and boring sermons. But no christian would ever call me a christian when I spoke my mind, because I came to different conclusions which they consider heretical, so I don't count myself as one of them. I don't rightly belong to any religion. But when I went to do some research on my dreams and intuitions, it turns out they have something in common with shamans even though I wasn't trying for that.

[JOS]

Hello Strangerdanger

Are there any Christians here?

Just wondered why this was important to you... do you define yourself as a Christian?

Does having a firm religious foundation help or hinder with understanding intersex issues?

I notice your location.... it suggests to me you might not feel in a great state of mind at the moment so I hope you find some of the answers you need :cool:

Jos

[Peter]

I am not a Christian, as I believe that G-d does not have a gender, and did not father any children through a miracle. I have been thinking about the Virgin Mary lately. The reason for this is that there are claims floating around that people can have both two internal ovaries and two external testicles. If true, it would definitely be a miracle in my book. There are billions of people who believe in the miracle of the Immaculate Conception. Miracles are often foundational to people's understanding of who they are. But personally, I try to allow a bigger role for reason in my life.

Peter

[spacegirl]

I had this link in the strange but true section of my bookmarks, where a seeming normal boy had one ovary in place of an undescended teste. It wouldn't be hard to imagine a seemingly normal girl with one teste in place of an ovary. And then, maybe onwards to a self-impregnated virgin birth?

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/338/3/166

But from my philosophical viewpoint as a heretic, I'd say that virgin births and all the miracles loved by the masses are irrelevant. The real miracle, the one that really counts, was the lessons of friendship of others with mercy and forgiveness and in turn mercifully not being blamed for arbitrary "sins" by a life-giver who really wasn't the miserable sob that a lot of authoritarian religions painted. But unfortunately that miracle has largely failed, because most of the people who call themselves christians are unfamiliar with those fine qualities.

[The Female Eunuch]

I had this link in the strange but true section of my bookmarks, where a seeming normal boy had one ovary in place of an undescended teste. It wouldn't be hard to imagine a seemingly normal girl with one teste in place of an ovary. And then, maybe onwards to a self-impregnated virgin birth?

I think I read somewhere that the estrogen produced by the ovary would stop the testicle working.

[Peter]

I had never really given any thought to the idea that the Virgin Mary might have been a self-impregnating hermaphrodite before you mentioned the possibility. Even if physically impossible, it has a certain poetic charm. I know that Plato mentioned the idea that the original people were both man and woman with four arms etc. who were later separated. The Hindus often saw a coupling of male and female, such as the pairing of Shiva and Shakti. I wonder if the history of Christianity might have been different, and more tolerant, if the Virgin Mary was seen as a self-impregnating hermaphrodite. It's certainly a more interesting idea then that an angel brought down heavenly sperm to impregnate the Virgin Mary. An improbable story of the ultimate sperm donor.

Peter

[spacegirl]

Hi Peter. I don't know enough about chimeras and hermaphrodites to say how impossible it would be. I was thinking maybe not absolutely physically impossible, maybe just incredibly once in thousands of years unlikely. The kind of unlikely where it would take a miracle to happen at all. But that would just be to rationalize it's poetic charm :) It would make us a little closer to divinity than all those mean spirited normal people.

I think I agree with you, of god not being of either sex. Something of both and a little of neither, maybe? Though in my dreams and visions, god is also beyond particular species, with many other lifeforms being in the image of god, not just humans.

[Aseras]

It has happened. It is impossibly hard to occur as it would have to occur in a ovoteste with a open fallopian duct or very large epidydimis. The ovoteste would also have to be a mixed type and not a segregated type AND it would have to be capable of spermatogenisis and ovulation at the same time. To self fertilize the follicle would have to erupt and in doing so be close enough to a seminefrous tubule to damage it, and not so close as to disrupt sperm production. Sperm production is regulated by estrogen. It would be very very hard for that to occur.

Generally ( and in my case as well ) the estrogen is far more powerful than the testosterone. While the testosterone level may be high enough to induce virilization, the estrogen level will also be high enough to supress sperm production.

Estradiol levels in women go to 500 pg/ml. Testosterone levels in men can be 700ng/dl or more. 700ng/dl is 7000 pg/ml. You need a LOT more testosterone. A little bit more estrogen is MUCH more powerful/potent.

[Dianne]

I agree, the whole idea is very far-fetched and hardly worth the speculation.

There is so much "chemistry" that has to go on to bring an egg to maturity, allow ovulation, implantation, and then carry a foetus to term that it would be virtually impossible. Then there is the "mechanics" of requiring a fully developed fallopian tube, a functional uterus, a path for fertilization. And while all that was going on, the person would also have to have a functional testicle.

When I was a teen I was told my oestrogen level was "half of normal female" (and cyclic) and testosterone "half of normal male" (it was a LONG time ago so I don't remember exact numbers) so it was most likely that I had one ovary and one testicle. Though my genitalia was apparently predominantly under-developed male, I did not produce viable sperm and was told I was (and would remain) infertile. With modern reproductive technology there is a slim chance that they may have been able to harvest a viable egg (with proper fertility medication) and maybe find a sperm that could be used for laboratory fertilization but I certainly did not have the anatomy to carry it - the mixture of testosterone and oestrogen pretty much ensures that neither reproductive tract will be "normal" or fully functional.

"Self-conception" is far more likely to occur from parthogenisys.

[Peggy]

Hi all,

Peter wrote,

I have been thinking about the Virgin Mary lately. The reason for this is that there are claims floating around that people can have both two internal ovaries and two external testicles.

I would think that a human having a dual set of gonads, one pair internal and one pair external, would be impossible or at least vanishingly unlikely. One ovary, on one side, and one testis on the other, is much more plausible and has actually been recorded in the medical literature.

However, if you are looking for a way a human could conceive without fertilization from another human, parthenogenesis (virgin conception) without fertilization actually is somewhat plausible and happens almost routinely in some birds and some reptiles. Unfertilized eggs of ordinary hen turkeys and chickens often hatch, (always into males due to birds' different method of sex determination from mammals). It is not entirely implausible that something similar could happen in humans on rare occasions.

Of course, if one believes in God and miracles, no explanation is needed. The same if one does not believe in God or miracles , since that implies that at least some of the biblical record must be inaccurate. There are, of course, more parsimonious explanations for a story of virgin birth.

I have sometimes thought that both of the paradoxes of God's nature; the virginity of His mother, and His being (to Trinitarians) the same God as his own father, were metaphors for the eternity of God, for whom there was no prior creator.

Friendly greetings to all,

Peggy

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
"When art critics get together they talk about Form and Structure and Meaning.
When artists get together they talk about where you can buy cheap turpentine." - Pablo Picasso

[Aseras]

parthenogenesis (virgin conception) without fertilization actually is somewhat plausible and happens almost routinely in some birds and some reptiles.

Right, but then the babies are essentially clones of the original ( where sex is determined by temperature or other conditions and not chromosomally). Hard to get a Male son of god out of a woman with a genetic fluke that way.

[spacegirl]

Right, but then the babies are essentially clones of the original ( where sex is determined by temperature or other conditions and not chromosomally). Hard to get a Male son of god out of a woman with a genetic fluke that way.

How does parthenogenesis work? Is it one egg cell developing as though it had been fertilized, or is it two egg cells combining into one fertilized egg? If it was two egg cells, I could see the offspring not being an exact clone, just awefully inbred from not having any genes the mother didn't already have.

I heard once about a feminist group trying to arrange for artificial parthenogenesis using two eggs from different mothers, to eliminate the need for men. I guess they haven't succeeded yet, it would have been on the news for sure.

[Dianne]

Parthenogenesis is the development of a single egg so it would, in fact, be a form of cloning. When it is done in higher mammals I believe the result is always a sterile female. I think their are DNA problems as well with the parthenogenesis offspring.

[Peggy]

Hi all,
Spacegirl wrote,

How does parthenogenesis work? Is it one egg cell developing as though it had been fertilized, or is it two egg cells combining into one fertilized egg? If it was two egg cells, I could see the offspring not being an exact clone, just awefully inbred from not having any genes the mother didn't already have.

In the sporadic cases that happen in birds and reptiles, it is a haploid egg cell duplicating its chromosomes to become diploid and then dividing as though it had been fertilized. The offspring are all male because they inherit both copies of the ZW mother's Z chromosome and have a ZZ sex chromosome sex, typical of male birds. Since they have a duplicated set of of all genes, they are as "inbred" as it is possible to get, even more so than if they had been the product of a self-fertilization.

I believe something similar happens in some species of lizard where there are no males and all reproduction is by parthenogenesis - these lizards are all triploid and appear to be hybrids of two related diploid species with more typical reproduction.

Friendly greetings to all,

Peggy

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
"When art critics get together they talk about Form and Structure and Meaning.
When artists get together they talk about where you can buy cheap turpentine." - Pablo Picasso

[spacegirl]

So if I'm understanding correctly, an egg which contains half of the mother's genes then duplicates the half it started out with. That sounds pretty close to being a clone, though not exactly the same. Maybe there's even room for a lot of minor variations from the mother.

Like if the mother was a carrier for 1 recessive gene for some condition X, the egg would either have the recessive gene and duplicate it, giving the offspring condition X, or it would have the dominant healthy gene and duplicate that, making the offspring healthy.

[Aseras]

It depends on where the parthenogenesis occurs, what step in the egg line the division takes place. Usually in most vertebrates the haploid ( means the chromosome divide equally , so in humans 23 come from mother and 23 from father ) germ cells divide and are monoploid ( half a set, 23 chromosomes )and genes are randomly selected so that half the genes go to one cell and half to another and those require fertilization. If the egg did not divide then it would be a clone if it developed. If it did divide, and then for whatever reason the cells shared genetic material, then you would have some random gene multiplication and changes, but it would be inbreeding to a point outside of random mutations.

[strangerdanger]

Hello Strangerdanger



Just wondered why this was important to you... do you define yourself as a Christian?

Does having a firm religious foundation help or hinder with understanding intersex issues?

I notice your location.... it suggests to me you might not feel in a great state of mind at the moment so I hope you find some of the answers you need :cool:

Jos

Not christian, that label is stereotypical all the bible thumpers and give christianity a bad name for pushing out people in need of God. but I am believer in God and Jesus Christ.

"Does having a firm religious foundation help or hinder with understanding intersex issues?"

I do not understand what you're saying here. "firm religious foundation"?
By the way I understand intersex issues. Please don't act as I know nothing about intersexed.
And yes, earth to me, can be hell.

Please don't chew my head off if you read this. I just don't understand your meaning, nor your attitude.. it's hard to see your attitude because we are not face to face. get what i'm saying?

bye :cartman:

[spacegirl]

I hope you won't say goodbye so quickly, SD.

I thought Peter's question sounded maybe a little relevant because it seems like a lot of the intersexed people who speak openly about religion are mostly saying how the reality of being intersexed destroyed their faith in christianity. Leaving them outright atheists, or being (or acting like they wished they were) jewish. Though there's a few christians who if they speak on intersex make it sound like the power of god would make the intersexed fit into the "right" sex, even if the right sex isn't one's true sex.

So maybe I was a little curious about how well you fit the two things together, christianity and intersex.

[strangerdanger]

I hope you won't say goodbye so quickly, SD.

I thought Peter's question sounded maybe a little relevant because it seems like a lot of the intersexed people who speak openly about religion are mostly saying how the reality of being intersexed destroyed their faith in christianity. Leaving them outright atheists, or being (or acting like they wished they were) jewish. Though there's a few christians who if they speak on intersex make it sound like the power of god would make the intersexed fit into the "right" sex, even if the right sex isn't one's true sex.

So maybe I was a little curious about how well you fit the two things together, christianity and intersex.

HI

no way i'm not leaving. I just got here. Sorry message is late. Busy here. babysitting and trying to write is terrible.
well i'm 25 going on 26 soon. I wasn't aware that intersexed separated.You all, we need to stick together like glue.. well, not that close ;-)

I apologized if I were annoying and sounded mean in my previous message. that's a bad habit of mine, procrastinate (spelling?) which has nothing to do with what i'm saying lmao i have had two nights of no sleep ... i think the effects of this is getting to me. bleck.

OH btw I don't connect christianty and intersex. i just wanted to start a conversation, not an 'oh pity me' thing. I will make myself more clear next time we speak, er, type. my backspace don't work right..

[JOS]

Hello again

I'm fairly ignorant of religion and so your question intrigued me.

Some people have told me that having a firm belief in religion helps then through various problem times as does having a close-nit community supporting them.

but as an outsider to that, I don't see it.

most of the religious people I've had contact with seem to have already made their minds up about how the world works and 'know' what's right and wrong. I wondered if that would actually make it harder to come to terms with finding out that your genotypic and phenotypic make-up is unusual.... most religions don't seem (from the outside) to be all that .... urm... accepting... of 'different' ?

Sorry, I wrongly thought you were into Christianity because of your question (and location).... it seemed pretty significant and important to you???
so I was just trying to continue your line of thought, in connection with the theme of this site :D

Didn't mean to cause you more upset... sounds like you've got enough of that already.

Jos

[Kailana]

hiya strangerdanger and yes there are christians here.

I should say I am a poor christian but I try from time to time.

I am curious though, on your understanding of what it means to be Christian?
Sorry if this is a odd sounding question but well I simply believe that Christianity existed long before Jesus Christ came along. I tend to get alot of Christians flustered when i say things like this but, well I often think believing in God or even an unexplainable higher power that a person cant quite understand or explain is enough.

I would guess that I am more spiritual then I am religious if that helps any. Then again I also from time to time say I am a blasphemising pagan Christian,<--only because I do not agree with the stupidity of those who chose to believe they are more rightous then another becuase the written word of man says sometihing is a sin.

perhaps you can pm me, i would actually love to chat on this subject without totally irking someone when they see something they find offensive.

making things simple again: I believe faith matters most, and the blind religous doctrine many have ben indoctrinated with is nonsense.