Who appeared first - males or females?

Pinball1970 said:
Prokaryotes came before and before that LUCA
Click to expand...
Пин, они же не имели пола? А когда появились мужские и женские особи? И кто из них появился первыми?
 
TheVat said:
Could you please post thread titles in English?
Click to expand...
Да, Теват, обычно я так и делаю. Просто в тот момент не было переводчика под рукой.
 
Who appeared first - the males or the females?
Click to expand...

Early reproduction was sexless mitosis. It was the arrival of eukaryotes that introduced sex. Though, the asexual option also still persisted at that microscopic level, for eukaryotes.

But LECA -- the precursor or last common ancestor of eukaryotes, putatively didn't have distinct male and female gametes (eggs and sperm). Instead, the cell membranes and their contents just sloppily merged (or so it is speculated). Over the ages they may have distinguished themselves into differing types that eventually became either opposite or multiple sexes.

When it comes to macroscopic organisms, parthenogenesis is an asexual method where unfertilized eggs still yield offspring. Obviously, the egg bearers are female. From that, one might torturously construe that the ovum was more crucial, and the male gamete more a luxury add-on.

To touch back on "multiple sexes"... With respect to humans, incursions of political ideology in biology have tried to interpret "rare" clinical conditions as meaning that humans are actually not sexually binary (in a physical or body context, not merely gender treated as a personality and behavior orientation). The purpose being to relax social persecution and oppression on some population groups in the LGBT+ sphere. It's a recent highlight of how science has been historically vulnerable to both the dark and the utopian sides of mutable secular morality. Ironically, the pseudoscientific attacks of religions might be easier to fend off than the virtuously noble resonances and free-will motivated portrayals of anti-naturalism in political movements. Due to the former's blatant supernatural elements. (The Idea of 2 Sexes Is Overly Simplistic)
_
 
Last edited:
C C said:
Early reproduction was sexless mitosis. It was the arrival of eukaryotes that introduced sex. Though, the asexual option also still persisted at that microscopic level, for eukaryotes.

But LECA -- the precursor or last common ancestor of eukaryotes, putatively didn't have distinct male and female gametes (eggs and sperm). Instead, the cell membranes and their contents just sloppily merged (or so it is speculated). Over the ages they may have distinguished themselves into differing types that eventually became either opposite or multiple sexes.

When it comes to macroscopic organisms, parthenogenesis is an asexual method where unfertilized eggs still yield offspring. Obviously, the egg bearers are female. From that, one might torturously construe that the ovum was more crucial, and the male gamete more a luxury add-on.

To touch back on "multiple sexes"... With respect to humans, incursions of political ideology in biology have tried to interpret "rare" clinical conditions as meaning that humans are actually not sexually binary (in a physical or body context, not merely gender treated as a personality and behavior orientation). The purpose being to relax social persecution and oppression on some population groups in the LGBT+ sphere. It's a recent highlight of how science has been historically vulnerable to both the dark and the utopian sides of mutable secular morality. Ironically, the pseudoscientific attacks of religions might be easier to fend off than the virtuously noble resonances and free-will motivated portrayals of anti-naturalism in political movements. Due to the former's blatant supernatural elements. (The Idea of 2 Sexes Is Overly Simplistic)
_
Click to expand...
Is there anything you are not knowledgeable and articulate on? ANYTHING!?
I feel dumb as shit reading your posts sometimes and I am supposed to be qualified in this area.
 
Olga said:
Пин, они же не имели пола? А когда появились мужские и женские особи? И кто из них появился первыми?
Click to expand...
It's a question that requires some discussion regarding cells, asexual reproduction and sexual reproduction.
 
Olga said:
И в животном, и в растительном мире.
Click to expand...
That is lazy Olga, it is one sentence so you can post the Title and OP at the very least in English.
I have been accused of giving you more leeway than anyone else because you are Russian, female and beautiful.
Obviously that is wrong I don't give you leeway, I treat you the same as everyone else.
Perhaps I give a little leeway?
Ok some leeway.
So it is a criticism, a very small one, so please don't get mad and wish all English men were boiled in oil at birth then fed to wild dogs. :)
 
З
C C said:
Early reproduction was sexless mitosis. It was the arrival of eukaryotes that introduced sex. Though, the asexual option also still persisted at that microscopic level, for eukaryotes.

But LECA -- the precursor or last common ancestor of eukaryotes, putatively didn't have distinct male and female gametes (eggs and sperm). Instead, the cell membranes and their contents just sloppily merged (or so it is speculated). Over the ages they may have distinguished themselves into differing types that eventually became either opposite or multiple sexes.

When it comes to macroscopic organisms, parthenogenesis is an asexual method where unfertilized eggs still yield offspring. Obviously, the egg bearers are female. From that, one might torturously construe that the ovum was more crucial, and the male gamete more a luxury add-on.

To touch back on "multiple sexes"... With respect to humans, incursions of political ideology in biology have tried to interpret "rare" clinical conditions as meaning that humans are actually not sexually binary (in a physical or body context, not merely gender treated as a personality and behavior orientation). The purpose being to relax social persecution and oppression on some population groups in the LGBT+ sphere. It's a recent highlight of how science has been historically vulnerable to both the dark and the utopian sides of mutable secular morality. Ironically, the pseudoscientific attacks of religions might be easier to fend off than the virtuously noble resonances and free-will motivated portrayals of anti-naturalism in political movements. Due to the former's blatant supernatural elements. (The Idea of 2 Sexes Is Overly Simplistic)
_
Click to expand...
Зачем природа разделила полы?
 
Pinball1970 said:
That is lazy Olga, it is one sentence so you can post the Title and OP at the very least in English.
I have been accused of giving you more leeway than anyone else because you are Russian, female and beautiful.
Obviously that is wrong I don't give you leeway, I treat you the same as everyone else.
Perhaps I give a little leeway?
Ok some leeway.
So it is a criticism, a very small one, so please don't get mad and wish all English men were boiled in oil at birth then fed to wild dogs. :)
Click to expand...
Я не злюсь на вас, Пин. Мне нравится когда мужчина ведёт себя как джентельмен.
 
Olga said:
Ваши мысли по этому вопросу?
Click to expand...
Short answer is that I don't know. I have read some literature on this but I don't remember it.
I do remember Dawkins discussed it in "the selfish gene" 1976.
I think that basic concept centred around the asymmetry of cells.
 
Olga said:
Why did nature separate the sexes? .... Зачем природа разделила полы?
Click to expand...

Sexual reproduction accelerates the speed of genetic variations arising, presumedly contributing to and enhancing adaptability and survival. The sexual process isn't the only way to accomplish such exchanges, though. There is horizontal gene transfer. Over thousands of years even humans have accumulated genes from invasive viruses and other microorganisms.
_
 
Pinball1970 said:
Is there anything you are not knowledgeable and articulate on? ANYTHING!? [...]
Click to expand...

I'm not even remotely Janet of "The Good Place". Purely restricted to retaining a general map of knowledge and connections between things (intermittently updated by academic news). And being a speed reader is definitely handy when it comes to having to refresh my memory about specific details (which is often). ;)
_
 
C C said:
I'm not even remotely Janet of "The Good Place". Purely restricted to retaining a general map of knowledge and connections between things (intermittently updated by academic news). And being a speed reader is definitely handy when it comes to having to refresh my memory about specific details (which is often). ;)
_
Click to expand...
I can speed read but I have to understand the material.
 
C C said:
Sexual reproduction accelerates the speed of genetic variations arising, presumedly contributing to and enhancing adaptability and survival. The sexual process isn't the only way to accomplish such exchanges, though. There is horizontal gene transfer. Over thousands of years even humans have accumulated genes from invasive viruses and other microorganisms.
_
Click to expand...
Конечно, два набора генов могут дать больше вариантов, чем один. Но мужские особи появились первыми, а затем от них отделились женские?
 
Olga said:
Of course, two sets of genes can provide more variations than one. But did the male individuals appear first, and then the female individuals separated from them? ... Конечно, два набора генов могут дать больше вариантов, чем один. Но мужские особи появились первыми, а затем от них отделились женские?
Click to expand...

No, the events of Genesis in the Bible don't apply in biological research (Adam first, Eve from his rib). That also includes Plato's account about humans originally being androgynous creatures (both male and female attributes) that were then separated by Zeus, and thereafter "cursed" to keep trying to reunite via sexual unions.
_
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top