DZ
DefZone.Net

Kien thuc cong nghe & giai tri

  1. Trang chủ
  2. Wiki

Request to Add a Clarifying Sentence to the Intersex Article

[edit]

Hello dear editors,

I would like to propose adding the following sentence to the first paragraph of the article:

"Intersex is not a third sex but a variation in sex characteristics, typically aligning to some degree with male or female."

I plan to support this statement with credible scientific sources, such as this article from PubMed Central, which is a well-respected database for biomedical literature. (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10265381/)

The reason for this addition is that there is a common misconception that intersex represents a "third sex" rather than a biological variation within the male-female framework. I believe this clarification is important for accuracy and public understanding.

If needed, I can also provide additional peer-reviewed sources from recognized experts in the field to further substantiate this statement. I appreciate your consideration and look forward to your feedback.

Thank you for your time and effort in maintaining the quality of this article. Donboss21 (talk) 09:49, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: Please reformulate with a properly formatted reference. Please indicate exactly where in the first paragraph you want this insertion. UtherSRG (talk) 11:50, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dear mod, thank you for your answer
The first paragraph says: Intersex people are people born with any of several sex characteristics, including chromosome patterns, gonads, or genitals that, according to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, "do not fit typical binary notions of male or female bodies". (My sentence goes here) Intersex though is not a third sex but a variation in sex characteristics, typically aligning to some degree with male or female.
After that I can provide the citation with the officially recognized medical article.
I already explained why I find it extrememly important to add this sentence.
Feel free to ask me anything.
Thank you. Donboss21 (talk) 17:59, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please include the properly formulated reference here. No updates will be made without the reference. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:47, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
this is my reference
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10265381/ Donboss21 (talk) 17:15, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:REFB and properly format it. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:17, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
excuse me I am new and I dont know how this works, please inform me if I made a mistake Donboss21 (talk) 17:19, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh excuse me
Rehman, R. (2023). “Intersex” does not violate the sex binary. The Linacre Quarterly, 90(2), 145–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/00243639231155313 Donboss21 (talk) 17:18, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect you will have a great deal of difficulty convincing people that an article published in "the official journal of the Catholic Medical Association" [1], attempting to show that "the Magisterium of the Catholic Church remains correct that sex is binary" is a reliable source regarding a question which is biological, and scientific, in its scope. At best, it is possibly a minority opinion - and whether it merits discussion in this article would be dependent on evidence that said article had been widely cited elsewhere. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:42, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, but its scientifically undeniable that intersex is not a third sex because there are only two gametes, sperm cells and egg cells and I have no idea why isn't this mentioned in the official Wikipedia article. No scientist has ever said that intersex is a third sex. About the source I can absolutely find 100 others that have nothing to do with religion whatsoever. From what you told me I realize that I need to find an official source that is widely accepted and scientifically proven. Again sorry Im new to this platform and it's kinda confusing at least for me. Should I provide a different source and turn it into an APA source? How can I privately contact you to help me with this issue. Donboss21 (talk) 17:52, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your personal opinion regarding what is or isn't 'scientifically undeniable' is of no relevance to Wikipedia content: see Wikipedia:Reliable sources. And I very much doubt that you will find the scientific sources you claim exist, since this article follows current scientific consensus (noting that there are some points of debate) - though it appears to me you may be confusing cultural attitudes towards gender, which may very well include 'third sex' categorisation of individuals, with the biological understanding of the topic of this article, which is less concerned with attempting to shoehorn individuals into categories, and more concerned with documenting what is a very complex issue. And no, I don't provide 'private assistance' regarding article content. This is a collaborative project, and discussions regarding content should take place in locations where all can participate. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:29, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
First of all I did not mention gender, I was specifically talking about sex.
Secondly, I have one single question, if the WHO (World Health Organization) does NOT consider intersex a "third sex" and science claims that mammals only have two sexes, why on earth isnt this article mentioning that, especially since many people think that intersex variations are a third sex? If the WHO is not a reliable source I dont know what is. Donboss21 (talk) 05:11, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The first paragraph says: Intersex people are people born with any of several sex characteristics, including chromosome patterns, gonads, or genitals that, according to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, "do not fit typical binary notions of male or female bodies". (My sentence goes here) Intersex though is not a third sex but a variation in sex characteristics, typically aligning to some degree with male or female.
After that I can provide the citation with the officially recognized medical article.
I already explained why I find it extrememly important to add this sentence.
Feel free to ask me anything. 2A02:CB80:4286:ADC6:6410:BF75:20B5:8ADD (talk) 11:37, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prevalence table

[edit]

This seems to contain many items that would not be "traits that medical experts consider to be intersex" - especially after discussions in both the lead and the section on both different definitions and different circumscriptions of the term this seems poor. Even including those where there are different views without notes would be wrong, but I doubt that cryptorchidism and polyorchidism are considered intersex by more than a very few, if any, medical experts. Testicular dysgenesis syndrome double counts with hypospadias and cryptorchidism. Hyperandrogenism would also be double counting with the not-necessarily-canonical LOCAH - if it had any estimate of prevalence. Can we remove those conditions not reliably sourced as intersex? All the best: Rich Farmbrough 20:17, 11 May 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, please remove any that are not reliably sourced to medical references or are otherwise a problem (e.g. redundant). Crossroads -talk- 20:44, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Wannafucks" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Wannafucks has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 30 § Wannafucks until a consensus is reached. RaschenTechner (talk) 20:36, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 July 2025

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. WP:SNOW close. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 07:00, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Intersex → Intersex (human biology) – The current title Intersex lacks precision. Since there is a separate page for intersex conditions in non-human animals, this article should be clearly identified as covering intersex in humans. Renaming to Intersex (human biology) improves clarity and symmetry with Intersex (non-human biology), and follows conventions like WP:PRECISE and WP:NATURAL. Diana0134 (talk) 03:52, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - This isn't the way we do things. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:06, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Please see: Parallel discussion @ Talk:Intersex (biology)#Requested move 3 July 2025 --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:27, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. There is only one other Intersex article, Intersex (biology), which is already parenthetically disambiguated. There is no need to parenthetically disambiguate this one and to do so violates policy and practice. This article's scope goes far beyond the realm of biology, discussing human rights, athletics, religious perspectives, etc. Thus "human biology" is inappropriately limited if for some reason disambiguation were needed. Furthermore, (human) Intersex is the clear primary topic by usage (PT1) among the general public and my initial assessment supports the conclusion that it is also the primary topic by usage in scholarly sources. I looked at the first five pages for Google Scholar results for intersex and every single publication was specifically about humans, including several outside the realm of biology.[2][3][4] In terms of long-term significance (PT2), the term intersex was coined in 1917 by geneticist Richard Goldschmidt.[5] Though he conducted his research in moths, he wrote about the relevance of his work to human sexuality, sex development, and endocrinology as early as that first year.[6][7] The phenomenon obviously predates humans by millennia, and from the perspective of general taxonomy of knowledge, the human phenomenon is a subtopic of the broader phenomenon. But the usage of the term and the modern understanding of the concept is about as old in humans as it is in zoology broadly. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:17, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. as others have stated, the term is overwhelmingly used for intersex variations in humans. Intervex (talk) 07:36, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Edit request July 2025

[edit]

can we add to this that the origination is from the Greek Hermes and Aphrodite that had a child that had both male and female qualities/ sexual organs..the term Hermaphrodite is nothing to consider offensive when one actually knows the story— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1008:b18f:5c50:c8c:a157:4e2a:d825 (talk) 09:44, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Dahawk04 Talk 💬 18:15, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Talmud section. Intersex types being described as aylonit with a supporting source.

[edit]


The stated definition in the lead is "do not fit typical binary notions of male or female bodies". This intersex definition would include (debated in this articles intro) Klinefelder or Mild androgen insensitivity syndrome, and the Talmud describes these sari types accurately. Since congenital adrenal hyperplasia and Turner syndrome are listed as intersex then aylonit would be intersex. The section on Religion would need to have sari and aylonit types. The articles on Ayelonit and Saris (Judaism) have been classified in [Category:Intersex topics in religion and mythology].

Now, I am having trouble finding reliable religious scholarly sources. Here is one paper (Not Judging by Appearances: The Role of Genotype in Jewish Law on Intersex Condition) that discusses medically defined intersex cases and the attempts of Rabbi's to classify them. The discussion on aylonit are relevant to my topic (pages 12-) [8] but it does not have a connection between medical intersex defined types and sari. This other source ties Turner to aylonit but I'd challenge it as WP:RS [9].

My edit request would be, in the Religion section, a sentence describing Ayelonit as intersex, and specific conditions attached to it, using the WP:RS provided above which details Rabbis adjusting to new science that fits traditional decriptions of Ayelonit. Sari can describe the typical Mild androgen insensitivity syndrome, but I havn't found a WP:RS yet.

Maybe another editor knows of a source for sari This is a process of science challenging Talmud traditions. 172.221.168.214 (talk) 18:50, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. If you would like content to be added to the article, please provide the exact text of your proposed addition. Day Creature (talk) 14:33, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reliable source is provided above; did you review it?
So I'll need to write the exact sentences for insertion. Wikipedia editing does not keep the electric on. It's why I stopped logging in or editing (my account is from ~2009). AI can do this for free; humans must be paid, in age of AI, for any work a human accomplishes.
Intersex topics are personally very important now that I know my body was modified in infancy but my genetics/hormone function remain unchanged. If you are unwilling to write the edit then I'll get to it in a month to three. 172.221.168.214 (talk) 18:17, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

Semi-protected edit request on 21 September 2025

[edit]

The Wikipedia page removed “hormonal patterns” from the definition. This demonstrates a clear bias. This is something anti-trans and anti-LGBTQ+ groups have been targeting online.

Change the definition at the beginning and where quoted to reflect the accurate OHCHR definition as follows per their website (linked in the article). Here is the OHCHR definition verbatim copied from the OHCHR website which has been modified in the current Wikipedia page:

“Intersex people are born with sex characteristics (such as sexual anatomy, reproductive organs, hormonal patterns and/or chromosomal patterns) that do not fit typical binary notions of male or female bodies.” Lmgj136479 (talk) 03:02, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done But for the record, it wasn't "removed" from the blockquote. The blockquote was cited from an older PDF document OHCHR put out. Nubzor [T][C] 03:46, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal (discuss): addition of PCOS debate and its potential impact on interpretations of statistics

[edit]
−
Estimates range from 0.018% (one in 5,500 births) to 1.7%. The difference centers on whether conditions in which chromosomal sex matches a phenotypic sex which is clearly identifiable as male or female, such as [[late onset congenital adrenal hyperplasia]] (1.5 percentage points) and [[Klinefelter syndrome]], should be counted as intersex. Whether intersex or not, people may be assigned and raised as a girl or boy but then [[gender identity|identify]] with another gender later in life, while most continue to identify with their assigned sex.
+
Estimates often range from 0.018% (one in 5,500 births) to 1.7%. The difference centers on whether conditions in which chromosomal sex matches a phenotypic sex which is clearly identifiable as male or female, such as [[late onset congenital adrenal hyperplasia]] (1.5 percentage points) and [[Klinefelter syndrome]], should be counted as intersex. Whether intersex or not, people may be assigned and raised as a girl or boy but then [[gender identity|identify]] with another gender later in life, while most continue to identify with their assigned sex. Some estimates may be significantly higher than the 1.7% estimate, particularly when factoring in [[polycystic ovary syndrome]] (PCOS) statistics, which range from 4-20% in their own right. There is debate over whether or not PCOS is an intersex variation, and it is not officially medically recognized as one. However, proponents note that the medical establishment is committed to minimizing the prevalence of intersex people, both linguistically and physically, so this lack of medical recognition may not necessarily rule out the possibility of PCOS being an intersex variation. The hormonal differences associated with PCOS, as well as the noticeable differences in secondary sex characteristics that occur in some individuals with hyperandrogenic PCOS, are two major reasons that some include it under the intersex umbrella. Opponents are often uncomfortable with the idea of associating PCOS with intersexuality due to the stigma and marginalization that intersex communities experience. There are also many who feel that the inclusion of PCOS as an intersex variation would be a denial of [[womanhood]] towards women with PCOS. This stance is criticized for its lack of acknowledgment of [[transgender men]] and [[non-binary]] people with PCOS, as well as its implication that intersex women are not women. A major [[Intersex civil society organizations|intersex organization]], [[interACT]], includes PCOS in their list of intersex variations, and takes the stance that people with PCOS can be considered intersex. They also clarify, however, that they are not an authority on what can "count" as intersex. Despite their positive stance on PCOS inclusion, interACT generally sticks to the 1.7% estimate when stating the prevalence of intersexuality, possibly to avoid controversy and best represent the current common consensus on what constitutes an intersex variation.

KyloFC (talk) 09:04, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. As a side note, if you want to show differences in a talk page, you can use the {{textdiff}} template like this:

{{textdiff|Estimates range from 0.018% (one in 5,500 births) to 1.7%.[1][2][3]|Estimates often range from 0.018% (one in 5,500 births) to 1.7%.[1][2][3]}} →

−
Estimates range from 0.018% (one in 5,500 births) to 1.7%.
+
Estimates often range from 0.018% (one in 5,500 births) to 1.7%.

CamAnders (talk) 11:03, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks for the response! I was unaware that I had to do that first. Also was unaware of the textdiff template. KyloFC (talk) 11:16, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, on the note of establishing consensus, should I start a separate post for that, or just use this one? KyloFC (talk) 11:23, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ a b c d e f Cite error: The named reference sax was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ a b c d Cite error: The named reference Anne_Fausto-Sterling_2000 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ a b c d Cite error: The named reference Anne_Fausto-Sterling_2000b was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ "How Common is Intersex? An Explanation of the Stats". Intersex Campaign for Equality. 1 April 2015. Archived from the original on 11 February 2021. Retrieved 1 January 2021.
  5. ^ a b Alice Domurat Dreger (2001). Hermaphrodites and the Medical Invention of Sex. US: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-00189-3.
  6. ^ a b "New publication "Intersex: Stories and Statistics from Australia"". Organisation Intersex International Australia. 3 February 2016. Archived from the original on 29 August 2016. Retrieved 18 August 2016.
  7. ^ a b "Intersex population figures". Intersex Human Rights Australia. 28 September 2013. Archived from the original on 17 July 2018. Retrieved 1 January 2021.
  8. ^ "How Common is Intersex? An Explanation of the Stats". Intersex Campaign for Equality. 1 April 2015. Archived from the original on 11 February 2021. Retrieved 1 January 2021.
  9. ^ a b Sharpe, Sam (28 October 2022). "No one-size-fits all: Myths and Misconceptions about PCOS". interACT. Archived from the original on 2 October 2025. Retrieved 16 November 2025.
  10. ^ Wugalter, Katrina; Perovic, Mateja; Karkaby, Laurice; Einstein, Gillian (1 March 2023). "The double-edged sword of PCOS and gender: exploring gender-diverse experiences of polycystic ovary syndrome". PubMed Central. Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. Archived from the original on 13 June 2025. Retrieved 16 November 2025. Participants felt that the ways in which they experienced the world through their bodies had informed their sense of gender, particularly because their bodies tended to deviate from AFAB body expectations. Three participants mentioned considering PCOS as an intersex condition because they felt as though their sex characteristics made their body neither female nor male.
  11. ^ Brown, Sherronda J. (26 October 2022). "How PCOS can create gender euphoria for trans and nonbinary people". Prism Reports. Prism. Archived from the original on 3 September 2025. Retrieved 16 November 2025.
  12. ^ "Intersex Variations Glossary". interACT. Archived from the original on 5 October 2025. Retrieved 16 November 2025.
  13. ^ "How common is intersex?". interACT. Archived from the original on 5 October 2025. Retrieved 16 November 2025.