However, no XXY male should automatically assume he is infertile without further testing. In a very small number of cases, XXY males have been able to father children.
That was a direct response to your original question. It took some time with internet searches to find the reference, and I provided a link to the reference. I had hoped you would at least read the part I quoted before flying off the handle.
There's also post #327 that responds to your question.
That makes two clearly worded answers to you question about chromosome count that you haven't read. Not noticing the word "beyond" makes three. This is not snottiness. It's a simple request for the courtesy of reading before flying off the handle.
As for your question about terminology, I can't answer. But I assure you that if you did a google search on chromosome count you could find the answer. That's the way I find stuff.
However, no XXY male should automatically assume he is infertile without further testing. In a very small number of cases, XXY males have been able to father children.Actually, no. I missed this. But looking at it now I see that the next paragraph discusses XXY/XY males which I guess means guys who have a mixture of normal cells and abnormal cells. So I wonder if all of the XXY folks or at least those who have fathered children have some small number of normal cells.
The questions of importance for this discussion though, are: was there anything remarkable about the structure of the mothers' cells; and what was the genetic makeup of the cells of the children. And don't tell me to go do my own research. You cite this XXY stuff as being relevant to the discussion so I would assume you have some knowledge beyond what you heard in a bar last week, and can pass it on.
As for post #327, I do not understand how it addresses either of the questions I raised with the professor. Perhaps you could explain.
ML/NJ