[feltmann]

> That's pretty immediately a circular dependency though?

By the female reproductive system, I meant the type that produces large gametes, and so on. Versus the male one that produces small gametes.

> Actually the most important question what makes something a "developmental pathway"? How do you define such? How do you distinguish two similar but different "developmental pathways"?

It's a very interesting question, here's what is known about this in humans, if you are curious: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK279001

> The more important question is why anyone should take your reasoning over any other about what "Man" and "Woman" mean.

What's your alternative, and why?

[mrguyorama]

Funnily, my alternative comes from the same "authority" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9341318/ though to be specific it does not in any way disagree with your citation, as yours deals with sexual organs. The NIH is clear that "Sex" and "Gender" are two different things.

Though my actual alternative is: Why should I care about specific definitions of "Man" and "woman"? I prefer duck typing for human stuff, because we are messy and every "line" is more like a fuzzy spectrum, and each and every time we have tried to place an arbitrary line, it's been wrong. I'm especially keen to this as a programmer, who is well aware that things people tend to think are "clear", like names, gender, time, etc, rarely are.

[feltmann]

I'm unclear as to what your alternative actually is. Your claim seems to be that the concepts of "woman" and "man" are too difficult to define, but then, what next? Please could you elaborate on your view.