Raiford Gardiner Posted over 3 years ago Sexism a product of reproductive misunderstanding "Mitochondrial DNA is irrelevant insofar as our personal attributes are concerned, unless it goes wrong. Mitochondria are the descendants of once-free-swimming bacteria, which joined with another ancient single-celled organisms to form the eukaryotes, of which we, and plants, and fungi, are all just a part. They act, as Prof Turnbull said, as little batteries in our cells; but they don't interact with "our" DNA, they reproduce independently within our cells, providing energy with their waste products. "A baby born using this procedure will have the characteristics of its mother and father; it will have DNA from a third person, but mitochondrial DNA only affects how the battery works, not who we are. Changing the battery does not change the computer," says Prof Turnbull. "The development of everything that makes us us, our brains, our hair colour etc, is in the nuclear DNA." It appears that mtDNA is metaphorically like tonsils, no known use but a real pain when they go wrong. Overall not a strong argument for any theory of sexual value. Biologically ascribing social variables is always fraught with danger, partly because of the enormous scope and complexity of our biology so far as we know it, but more so because of the even greater portion that we don't. Your presumption that we exaggerate difference between the sexes culturally is just an opinion, possibly influenced by your interest in feminism, but the assertion that we need to attribute different value to each sex based on some reproductive philosophy is, well, something of a curiosity.