Came here from abigail's post and have to say that I was not disappointed. Although I have been deemed to have some, well, controversial views when covering this subject it appears that to some extent that they are shared with information given in this post for instance that there is a biological aspect to sex and as such it isn't in itself a complete social construct. Nor is it binary however due to the rarity of many of those mutations it is generally, in my opinion, acceptable to generalize certain things to those whom fit the regular XX or XY definition. What I mean is you could say something like "[biological] females have a higher risk for osteoporosis." and it would be deemed correct.

I don't know if I am making some convoluted argument that makes no sense. My apologies, I liked the post Zest and I am looking forward to the subsequent dispatches within the series.