Re: Origin of female

r norman wrote:

On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 16:26:14 -0600, Ferrous Patella
<FerrousPatella@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Lauren <laurenh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in news:d8f1eb29-4f63-4644-88c4-
898f222cb9cc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:


Not so long ago I read a post in one of the threads in this group
giving an explanation how the original cells of abiogenesis split to
form what is now known as the first female. I can not find it again.
Will someone please help me find it? If the original poster sees this,
please help me to find it. If someone can put me on track to find
something similar, I shall be very grateful.
Tnx,
Lauren


I think females are like atheists. The concept would not exist if it
weren't for males/theists. Life was happily reproducing before genders came
along. Even sexual recombination was possible without sexual dimorphism
(see earthworms). So I see the whole baby-carrying state as being the
default mode (again like atheism) until someone comes up with this bizarre
divisive concept to mess with our heads.


Sorry about the blank post ---

You are sort of wrong about earthworms. They are fully sexual, with
male and female sex organs and produce fully functional sperm and
eggs. It is just that they, like very many other organisms,
especially plants, have single individuals that carry both male and
female parts. Some the individual is not sexually dimorphic, but the
organs or distinctly sexual in morph. Still, they have aspects that
are distinctly male and other aspects that are distinctly female.

There are, indeed, eukaryotes like Chlamydia who go through full
sexual reproduction: fertilization (or, more technically, syngamy) and
meiosis, with no morphological distinction at all between different
sexes (although there is a biochemical-molecular biological
distinction between mating groups).

But more fundamentally, as you indeed suggest, the real question is
not the origin of 'female' but rather the origin of 'male'.

I wouldn't say that. It's more the origin of distinct gender
reproductive cells, one (the egg/megaspore/whatever) specialized to
provide nutrients to an embryo and the other (the
sperm/pollen/microspore) specialized to move around and find eggs. You
don't get one without the other (you can lose the male, but all such
cases are secondary loss as far as I know).

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Origin of female
    ... form what is now known as the first female. ... have single individuals that carry both male and ... distinction between mating groups). ... sperm/pollen/microspore) specialized to move around and find eggs. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Origin of female
    ... form what is now known as the first female. ... have single individuals that carry both male and ... distinction between mating groups). ... applied to gametes: female gametes are big ones that sit and wait for ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Origin of female
    ... giving an explanation how the original cells of abiogenesis split to ... form what is now known as the first female. ... have single individuals that carry both male and ... distinction between mating groups). ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Origin of female
    ... form what is now known as the first female. ... have single individuals that carry both male and ... distinction between mating groups). ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Origin of female
    ... dimorphism. ... You are sort of wrong about earthworms. ... female parts. ... distinction between mating groups). ...
    (talk.origins)