You don't get to throw out the outliers just because they don't fit into your categorization scheme. Nor am I only referring to that. The majority of the interlock of systems in our body is chemical, not mechanical, and that's where the real complexity is and where the issues arise.

> Also, the path from DNA to organism is deterministic. My children aren't frogs.

You are either not arguing in good faith or you do not understand what deterministic means. Or your understanding of biology is sufficiently shallow that you don't understand what I'm talking about.

No, its not. X vs Y for chromosome 23 is approximately true (but still very much oversimplified), but X-bearing and Y-bearing spermatazoa are morphologically similar, so gamete size is not, even approximately, the issue.

> those are the exceptions that prove the rule.

That phrase uses an outdated sense of “prove” (which means more what “test”, “challenge”, or even “disprove” means in general modern usage.) So you are precisely correct, in the opposite sense of what you intend.