> Yes, it's fact that humans are male, female, or other. And it is a fact that humans have zero, one, two, or more legs. But you would never argue with the s

> Yes, it's fact that humans are male, female, or other. And it is a fact that humans have zero, one, two, or more legs. But you would never argue with the scientific claim that humans are a bipedal mammal. The exceptions do not invalidate the norm. > This runs contrary to your claim. It does not run contrary to my claim. My claim is that humans are either male or female. And this is wildly, overwhelmingly true. I don't feel any need to qualify the statement that humans are two-legged creatures either. There are exceptions in both cases, but they're not the norm. > Intersex people are more common than gold. It was your analogy, not mine.