No biologist defines sex based on gametes alone, there are many characteristics that make up sex. Why would you define it that way? Because you started with your answer, that sex MUST be binary, and worked backwards from there.
Unfortunately that’s backwards. Sex is defined by gamete size because it’s the only coherent definition across so much of the animal kingdom. As an example, did you know that male seahorses give birth? It’s true, but how do we know that they’re male? Because they make the smaller of the two gamete sizes. Same thing with female hyenas. They have a pseudo-penis, so why don’t we consider them male? Because they produce the larger of two gamete sizes
O person whose comment history is mainly trolling on trans-supportive posts for hours at a stretch, it is you who have it backwards.
(You are using trump’s recently legislated definition of sex, and I’m afraid you’re picking the wrong teacher there. Trump can no more legislate a revision to science than whatever state it was that stupidly passed a bill claiming that pi was 3! The liar in chief isn’t being factually accurate.)
Your sex determimes whether you produce sperm or eggs or neither, yes, in the sense that cause has effect, but you’re claiming that the effect is the same thing as the cause or that gamete size determines sex. This is a classic logical blunder. Species determines number of legs, but number of legs does not determine species. Typically, species have 0,2,4,6,8 and occasionally more legs (or 1), but this does not mean that there are only 5 species!
You also claim in other threads that you prefer to use sex over gender in reference to people, which is strongly antitrans despite you pretending that your opponents are anti-trans.
No biologist defines sex based on gametes alone, there are many characteristics that make up sex. Why would you define it that way? Because you started with your answer, that sex MUST be binary, and worked backwards from there.
Unfortunately that’s backwards. Sex is defined by gamete size because it’s the only coherent definition across so much of the animal kingdom. As an example, did you know that male seahorses give birth? It’s true, but how do we know that they’re male? Because they make the smaller of the two gamete sizes. Same thing with female hyenas. They have a pseudo-penis, so why don’t we consider them male? Because they produce the larger of two gamete sizes
O person whose comment history is mainly trolling on trans-supportive posts for hours at a stretch, it is you who have it backwards.
(You are using trump’s recently legislated definition of sex, and I’m afraid you’re picking the wrong teacher there. Trump can no more legislate a revision to science than whatever state it was that stupidly passed a bill claiming that pi was 3! The liar in chief isn’t being factually accurate.)
Your sex determimes whether you produce sperm or eggs or neither, yes, in the sense that cause has effect, but you’re claiming that the effect is the same thing as the cause or that gamete size determines sex. This is a classic logical blunder. Species determines number of legs, but number of legs does not determine species. Typically, species have 0,2,4,6,8 and occasionally more legs (or 1), but this does not mean that there are only 5 species!
You also claim in other threads that you prefer to use sex over gender in reference to people, which is strongly antitrans despite you pretending that your opponents are anti-trans.
You’re very focused on Trump. Not sure why, but whatever he’s doing is irrelevant to the science. I also didn’t make a statement about what I prefer.
If you have a beef with sex determination vs definition, take it up with the field of biology.
As usual, you ignored pretty much every substantive point because you don’t have facts on your side, just bigotry, determination and trump.
Now you’re lying about your shitty anti trans post history.