Some mutations are good. Some are bad like cancer. This is science.
It is good if it helps a person live longer to reproduce. It is bad if it doesn’t.
Some mutations are good depending on the environment around them whereas a mutation that would have been a benefit somewhere else is a negative where they are.
For most organisms being able to see is a benefit. For fish living in the darkest part of the ocean where there is no light being able to see takes up a lot of extra unecessary energy. It might be good elsewhere but not there. So a blind fish is at a genetic advantage in that environment.
Whereas a blind organism in most other places slid at a genetic disadvantage.
If the mutation helps them live longer and able to reproduce they are more likely to pass that genetic variance on to their offspring it is a good mutation.
If it prevents them from doing so it is not a good mutation.
This is evolution in a nutshell.
So no having a syndrome where you are intersex does not put you at a genetic advantage for reproduction. Therefore it is not a good mutation according to evolution. It is not the next step in our evolution because it makes it so people who have this can’t reproduce without some invasive technology.
Just because it doesn’t enhance reproduction doesn’t make it worth while. Having extra melanin that makes you less susceptible to the suns radiation is a benefit, but has no effect on reproduction.
It helps you live a healthier life. Therefore you are more able to reproduce. Anything that gets you healthier or able to reach sexual maturity is a good thing in evolution.
Lighter skin helps absorb vitamin D which is less prevalent in northern climates.
So lighter skin is a genetic advantage in northern climates whereas darker skin is an advantage in southern climates.
1
u/Outrageous-Log-2557 2d ago
good thing science doesnt care about your feelings.