[EnergyAmy]

The gamete-based definition of sex is merely a description of reality.

I continue to look forward to your citation disputing the truth of what he lays out in that paper, or the other links I provided that affirm the same stance. Ad hominems are boring, don't you have anything?

You unfortunately don't really understand the point here, but to reiterate, just because someone is born with nonfunctional/missing gonads doesn't mean their body isn't sexed. As an analogy, if someone is born without a hand, we don't just shrug and say that it could've been a fin, or antlers, or a firetruck. That's the point of saying that their body is organized around the production of one of exactly two gamete types.

There's no conflict, physical form and chromosomes are variations within a sex, which is entirely defined by gametes. Chromosomes are part of how sex is determined, but gametes are how sex is defined.

I look forward to your citations of these people doing field work that support your points.

[defrost]

> The gamete-based definition of sex is merely a description of reality.

An incomplete one that fails to cover all cases.

You unfortunately don't really understand the point here

[EnergyAmy]

I look forward to your citations supporting any of your points.

[defrost]

You must be living under a rock if you've missed out the past 140 years of debate on this subject.

There has been multiple definitions put forward, they all fall at a few (very few out of nine billion) edge cases.

I look forward to your explaination of why you feel that every human on on the planet must be assigned as either [M] or [F] at birth with no recognition of the real circumstances in the actual edge cases.

Not even the class of South African hermaphrodites cleanly all fall one way or the other.. there's furious individual by individual debate over which of the two potential gamate producing mechanisms is less mangled than the other - as you should be aware given your apparent singular obsession here.

I'm curious as to why so recently so much money has been spent on pushing Colin Wright as the new prophet of an old idea that doesn't provide a complete classification.

[EnergyAmy]

You're still not providing any citations, why is that? Surely you can ask some of the people in field work that you run with.

I'm also not sure why you're so focused on Colin Wright when I provided other examples of people affirming the same stance, as previously stated. Take your pick, or provide citations of your own.

Do you have a particular example in mind for the South African hermaphrodites?

[defrost]

And you're still not addressing anything that I have asked of you

[EnergyAmy]

I'm literally asking you to get specific so we can talk about particulars, so I'm not sure where you're getting that from.

I don't really get the point of this dance you're doing. Why not just admit that you don't have anything to back your comments up?