• catloaf@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    17 hours ago

    It wouldn’t be bigender, because that single cell has (again, oversimplifying here) either XX or XY, right?

    Although if that’s how they’re defining gender, then anyone infertile (not producing sperm or eggs) is, by their definition, neither male nor female. So I guess they’re still recognizing a form of nonbinaryness? Just in a really incorrect way.