I thought multiple-Y was non-viable, but it's been a while since I've looked it up.
Orientation is really orthogonal to gender identity -- I can see counting it as "non-traditional expression of one's gender", but it really feels like a completely separate question to me. Maybe one you want to ask, maybe not (depending on what you're studying), but it feels like a different category.
(Besides, trying to plot orientation on a linear scale, such as the Kinsey scale, only works if the relevant genders (that of the respondent and of the people to whom the respondent is attracted) are defined as endpoints, and we're already away from binary gender. "Opposite sex" gets confusing for a lot of folks who are in-between or who keep shifting back and forth. I used to know someone online who was attracted to men when dressed femme and attracted to women when dressed butch, and identified as "het het het you can't say bi or gay 'cause I'm het" because sie was only ever attracted to the opposite of whichever sie was being at the time. And once you add in "attracted to intergendered people" as an orientation (I've encountered it), linear mapping of orientation requires really odd contortions.)
YY is non-viable. XYY is a relatively common mutation (1/1000 boys). As one might expect, XYY individuals tend to have a stronger dose of testosterone and other androgens.
Some controversial studies have noted the greater concentration of XYY individuals in the prison system than in the general population, and suggested that XYY boys be singled out for counseling and interventions. (Yeah, send them off to 'camps' together.)
Hm, apparently my information was outdated. See, for example, XYY -- Stereotype of the Karyotype (This page, written by a doctor who suspects himself to be an XYY but afraid to check for fear of losing his health insurance, has the agenda of convincing parents not to abort XYY fetuses. He does say, though, that XXYY boys do tend to have lots of problems.)
(no subject)
Orientation is really orthogonal to gender identity -- I can see counting it as "non-traditional expression of one's gender", but it really feels like a completely separate question to me. Maybe one you want to ask, maybe not (depending on what you're studying), but it feels like a different category.
(Besides, trying to plot orientation on a linear scale, such as the Kinsey scale, only works if the relevant genders (that of the respondent and of the people to whom the respondent is attracted) are defined as endpoints, and we're already away from binary gender. "Opposite sex" gets confusing for a lot of folks who are in-between or who keep shifting back and forth. I used to know someone online who was attracted to men when dressed femme and attracted to women when dressed butch, and identified as "het het het you can't say bi or gay 'cause I'm het" because sie was only ever attracted to the opposite of whichever sie was being at the time. And once you add in "attracted to intergendered people" as an orientation (I've encountered it), linear mapping of orientation requires really odd contortions.)
(no subject)
YY is non-viable. XYY is a relatively common mutation (1/1000 boys). As one might expect, XYY individuals tend to have a stronger dose of testosterone and other androgens.
Some controversial studies have noted the greater concentration of XYY individuals in the prison system than in the general population, and suggested that XYY boys be singled out for counseling and interventions. (Yeah, send them off to 'camps' together.)
Hm, apparently my information was outdated. See, for example, XYY -- Stereotype of the Karyotype (This page, written by a doctor who suspects himself to be an XYY but afraid to check for fear of losing his health insurance, has the agenda of convincing parents not to abort XYY fetuses. He does say, though, that XXYY boys do tend to have lots of problems.)