As we know, gender activists peddle their pseudoscience denying the existence of the sex binary. I found a clever one on Twitter and engaged. You’ll notice how the gender activist props up her smug belief by positioning it against a straw man version of reality – the existence of the sex binary must entail the existence of perfection in an entropic universe.
Amy M: You’ve listed off many different characteristics, each of which can be out of alignment with the others within the same individual. You can describe gonadal sex, chromosomal sex, hormonal sex, anatomical sex, etc… but they don’t always align to make a binary organism.
Me: Yes, out of alignment. As in disorders. The various, rare medical disorders (where something goes wrong during development) don’t erase the reality of the male/female binary. It is the male/female binary that allows our species to exist across time.
Amy M: You’re confused. The existence of organisms which do not fit the theory disproves the theory. If you claim that sex in humans is binary, and I can provide you with examples of humans who don’t fit a binary sex model, then your model is disproven.
Me: The binary nature of sex does not entail that every single example of development always goes perfectly. We live in a world where mistakes happen. But that does not erase the reality of the sex binary.
Amy M: Nature doesn’t follow human-imposed binaries. I’ve said this already. You acknowledge that there are variations (not *mistakes*, because nature doesn’t have intent or judgement, and “mistake” applies a value judgement) which fall outside the binary. Exceptions disprove theory. If you cannot grasp this, we cannot continue this conversation, because this is a fundamental trait of science — exceptions disprove theories.
Me:According to biology, humans have pentadactyl limbs. But sometimes, due to errors in development, a child is born with less or more than five digits. Does that disprove the notion that humans have pentadactyl limbs?
Amy M: No, but it disproves a notion that all humans have 5 digits on each limb. Thanks for proving my point. Wanna try again.
Me: You claimed “exceptions disprove theories,” but now concede that exception to the pentadactyl pattern does not disprove that humans are pentadactyl. Just as exceptions to perfect male or female development does not disprove the biological reality of the sexual binary.
Amy M: No, If you’re going to be a pedant, then I will say that the existence of people with less than (or more than) 5 digits per limb disproves that all humans are pentadactyl. And that is true. You can say that humans are typically pentadactyl, and you’d be correct.
Me: Yet there is a pentadactyl body plan that humans use during development. It’s only when something goes wrong with development that there is divergence from the plan. Same theme with the sexual binary.
Amy M: My statement remains true. Just because there’s a pattern does not mean there is a hard-and-fast, always-followed rule. Period. Sex is not binary. End of debate.
Me: The sexual binary does not depend on the the perfect development of males and females everywhere, all the time. Just as the reality of pentadactyl body plan does not depend on its perfect execution each and everytime.