By Professor Ryan Kerney, Guest Columnist
I was disappointed that the Young American Foundation’s recent complaint to the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights failed to identify anyone in the biology department as violating recent executive orders. Philadelphia attorney Madison Hahn authored an official complaint to the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) that identifies members of our campus community who are allegedly in violation of Title VI and Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, as well as multiple recent executive orders. Gettysburg College recently notified the individuals and departments named by YAF about this increased federal scrutiny. Apparently, no one in the sciences made it to the blacklist.
Ms. Hahn’s letter lists executive orders the College allegedly violates, including E.O. 14168, which seeks to “Restore Biological Truth to the Federal Government.” As a member of the biology and biochemistry and molecular biology departments, I am very interested in the concept of “biological truth,” its bastardization and attempts to restore it on any level.
The “biological truth” that E.O. 14168 attempts to restore relates to a binary definition of biological sex. That definition is the latest attempt to deny “gender identities” by constraining “gender” and “sex” to genetics.
Section 2 of E.O. 14168 defines biological sex as the “immutable biological classification as either male or female.” It further asserts: “‘Female’ means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell.” and “‘Male’ means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the small reproductive cell.” According to the exhaustive Oxford English Dictionary, this is a new approach to defining biological sexes. No existing entries are based on the potential to make a reproductive cell.
This definition requires some understanding of developmental biology (a topic I’ve studied for the past 25 years). The embryonic precursors to the sperm and egg are first apparent around three weeks post fertilization. These are bi-potential, meaning they can become sperm or eggs based on several developmental conditions, including genetics. Similarly, the genitalia and internal connections to the gonads remain bi-potential (essentially hermaphroditic) until approximately embryonic day 41. The egg and sperm cells in the definition don’t differentiate until seven weeks (eggs) or 9-14 years (sperm). The genetics of a sperm that fertilizes an egg usually determines the biological sex. That sperm can typically either have a single X chromosome or a single Y chromosome, while the egg will only have an X. As my fifth grader knows, “Y makes a guy.”
Just not always. The potency of the Y chromosome lies in the protein encoded by the SRY gene (“sex determining region of the Y”). This protein initiates a cascade of interactions starting on day 41, resulting in the expression of other regulatory genes (my favorite being SOX9) and elevated androgen levels (testosterone and related hormones). The potential to make sperm can be manipulated after conception by inserting SRY (or its target SOX9) into the genome and transitioning XX (female) mice to XX males. A similar result occurs if SRY is translocated to another chromosome in XX humans. If the SRY gene is present (XY), but its protein activators are not functional (e.g., MAP3K1), individuals will present a range of internal and external intersex anatomies.
Intersex fluidity does not end there. The androgens eventually produced in response to SRY need to land on their receptors to push development towards a male anatomy. Genetically male XY individuals deficient in functional androgen receptors will typically not make viable sperm. Individuals with complete androgen insensitivity (CAIS) will be XY genotypes. However, they will exhibit female primary and secondary sexual characteristics and are indistinguishable from other women except that they have vestigial internal testes near their bladders. These individuals make up between 1:20,000 and 1:99,000 of female live births.
CAIS is just one of a wide range of “intersexes” that are genetically encoded by conception. Wikipedia lists 40 others. Many result in infertility due to an inability to make the “large” or “small reproductive cells,” making these people an undefined limbo of sexual definition, based on the new executive order definition. Estimates vary based on definition, but the combined intersex population is up to 1.7% of births, with 0.1-0.2% needing gender affirming surgery, after which they are raised either male or female.
However, the E.O. 14168 definition of “Biological Sex” impinges on a larger population: infertile individuals who cannot make reproductive cells. “Azoospermia” is found in 1% of the male population (nearly 16 million men in the U.S.). It is a condition where sperm cells are not in the ejaculate. Reasons vary and include the inability to make sperm in the testes due to a range of genotypes. The list of transcriptional regulatory genes needed for female egg formation is also long and includes DAX-1, FIGLA, FOXL2, GATA4, LHX8, LHX9, NOBOX, NR5A1/SF1, SOHLH1, SOHLH2, SOX9, WNT4, and WT1. Aberrations in any of these can result in XX individuals failing to make oocytes (eggs). These individuals fail the reproductive-cell-potential definition of biological sex. However, most identify as belonging to the genders assigned to them at birth.
The diversity of our sexual differentiation pale in comparison to the broader biological world. Innocent students have been recently indoctrinated through scandalous topics that include prolific lesbian lizard sex, as well as sequentially hermaphroditic clownfish that flagrantly transition from male to female without regard for draconian state laws, or Executive Order 14168.
Interestingly, a version of sequential hermaphroditism can exist in men who have type-2 5-alpha reductase deficiency. They are often born anatomically female but transition to a male anatomy during puberty. These children usually wrestle with their eventual gender identity.
The reproductive-cell-potential definition of both biological sex and gender quickly implies that our modern world is also making us a lot less manly. Diet, obesity, estrogen mimics, and estrogen-promoting chemicals in our environment have all contributed to dramatic declines in the number of sperm cells per ejaculate. A meta-analysis of over 42 thousand men has revealed a 50-60% reduction in sperm counts between 1973 and 2011. This trend coincides with increased rates in testicular cancer. However, we are currently slashing federal funding for biomedical research, so the potential for finding cures or monitoring trends is threatened by current attempts to find “efficiency” in federal support for science.
“Biological truth” cannot cherry-pick mechanisms to fit an argument. Biologists live in the details and relish in the exceptions to preconceived “rules.” That is what makes biology fun! Clearly there are two distinct biological sexes in humans, but we can’t brush aside individuals that don’t fit a simple binary, including people who don’t identify with the gender assigned to them at birth. My skill sets as a biologist are useless in the more complex study of psychology or social science. I am glad that we have colleagues on campus who are qualified to tackle these thorny subjects, including the exceptionally complex study of gender identity.
Our country has seen these tactics before. During McCarthyism, there were similar attempts to intimidate artists and academics, and several chose instead to publicly resist or even join the ranks of the accused. These heroes of American history diluted the power of intimidation and reassured the persecuted through solidarity. As Phil Ochs once sang, “For if there’s one man on the blacklist, I’ll be right there by his side.”
