Yeah but toilets and changing rooms aren't for reproduction.

If you go entirely by who has a penis or not, at least you allow some post operative trans people to live freely, but I'm not going to be checking any genitals at the toilet door, nor doing any blood tests for that matter.

This guidance deliberately leaves trans people with two bad options: go in one toilet and be harassed or attacked for being trans or go in another and risk being attacked legally.

Tell me you didn't watch the video without telling me you didn't watch the video. This cringey war against facts you're waging is why people talk shit about you when you're not around.

And no it's not "cAuSe ThEy ArEn'T bRaVe EnOuGh To SaY iT tO mY fAcE!" It's because you're exhausting.

"Why there are exactly two sexes" - what an irrelevant point. Here you are, as usual, turning up in a story about trans people to start another stupid debate about your favourite topic - the definition of the word sex. You always love to bring up your hero Trump's definition of sex and call everyone else stupid.

It's completely and utterly irrelevant. This is about trans people being denied access to toilets. Telling us your pet theories on sex is irrelevant. Not even this transphobic guidance suggests we check someone's gamete size.

You're just a transphobic troll.

Colin M. Wright, the author of the book you linked, is an "anti-transgender activist". Here is a nice collection of his bigotry.

That "paper" literally starts off deliberately conflating sex and gender in order to muddy the waters to reframe the conversation. He used a lot of words to essentially define male as "has penis that can go in vagina for purpose of procreation" and female as "has vagina to receive penis for purpose of procreation" (which still wouldn't make sex binary since intersex exist) and had very little to do with biology on the whole.

Gotcha. Their point is kind of right though; sex is less of a strict binary category and more 2 clusters we (people) created that allow us to more easily classify specimens based on strongly correlated traits. Both clusters have some overlap, and no trait on its own completely determines the cluster.

E.g. I knew a case of this woman who grew up her whole life never knowing she has XY chromosomes, because she had typical seemingly typical female sex characteristics. It was only when she and her husband where struggling to conceive that that fact came to light. “Biological male” might be the cluster you’d want to put her under, but she lacks many of the features of that cluster, so in that case the binary classification is a little weak.

Of course most people/animals are not intersex (or transitioned), but the point is that the biological sex binary is kind of a shorthand / way of making life easier to classify most of the population, but it’s not perfect or tidy.

The easiest way to stay accurate is to just narrow down to the specific relevant trait (“person with facial hair”, “person with androgenetic alopecia”, etc.) depending on what specifically is measured/being talked about. But being that precise can come at the expense of being less clear/accessible to the layman, which is why we use biological sex as a concept.

That's tautological.