You do not need microscopes, telescopes, or even eyeglasses to determine sex differences. The existence of chromosomal abnormalities does not mean we need to change the meaning of words.

and you can tell with the naked eye that an intersex baby is intersex, and neither "properly" male or female. except when the baby looks very female but is genetically male due to androgen insensitivity syndrome. then you need that microscope again...

kindergarten level logic fails at physiological sex ambiguity.

and it fails even more so at gender identity issues.

Not following your point, unless it's merely to say that parsing observable reality isn't good enough to determine the precise levels of hormones flowing through someone's body, which, fine. That's certainly true. However ... physiological characteristics are in fact dictated to a large extent by hormones, and as a result one can realistically make a good inference about e.g. who has more testosterone.

my point is: biological sex follows a bimodal distribution with some in-between data points that are not trivially assignable to one or the other pole, called "intersex" humans. they are a biological, medical reality, and they themselves ask to leave children alone and allow them to decide when and if at all they want medical interventions.

Even calling it bimodal obscures the truth, though. When people read "bimodal" they think of the two-humped-camel plot, when reality is like two 60-story skyscrapers a mile apart with an apartment building or two in between.

People routinely can't tell I'm trans. The differences are a lot more subtle than people realize.

"when their bible was invented"

I can tell you that in Czechia and former East Germany, two most atheist places in the Western world, the concept of sex as a spectrum isn't especially popular either. People can be somewhat socially conservative without believing in the bible.

>But that's my whole point, "sex" a spectrum and it's one of the big lies perpetuated by people who insist everything was known

Yes I know it's a spectrum, and all 'intelligent' people I know this (the spectrum is unevenly distributed with 2 peaks).

Of all the things in the world that people understand or misunderstand, why, to you, is this particular subject even an issue?

did you read the link? there are humans with ambiguous genitals (fka "intersex"), there are women with androgen insensitivity, genitally xy, born as perfect little girls, vulva and all, but alas, testicles. bummer

no. sex, biological sex, is not binary.

No

I know that not every single human fits.

That does nor stop it being a binary, or that binary being a major fault line

This is a natural biological system, not a logical system. Cases that do not fit do not disprove the rule

the strict binary is a world view, not science. scientifically, biological sex in humans follows a bimodal distribution with few but not zero data points between the two modes. and these are not just one single third data point but a number of them.

forcibly assigning those to one of the two modes is unscientific and based of a binary world view.

which is why some nations allow to put "diverse" as sex at birth, or do away with that at all.