In a text from To have to of November 29 entitled “What Law 2 fails to understand”, the 224 signatories indicate that “scientific examination of these characteristics allows to observe a wide range of traits that are not restricted to two sexual categories and to conclude that the sexual difference is much more ambiguous than a strict division between male and female ”. Signatories do not specify the nature of their “scientific review”. Yet the science related to the biological reality of sex is not ambiguous. In humans, there are two gametes (sex cells). One is large and not mobile, the ovum, and is produced by the female; the other is small and mobile, the sperm, and is produced by the male. There is no third gamete.
The product of fertilization will be humans with distinct morphologies (men and women) who will produce eggs and sperm. Sex is therefore binary. If the newborn has traits of both sexes, then he will be classified as “intersex”. Being an intersex person is not a third sex, but the result of one of the many possible chromosomal abnormalities that will create an individual with particular traits. This individual, if fertile, will produce male or female gametes. Using rare abnormalities, chromosomal or otherwise, to deny or dilute the binary reality of sex is not science. This binary reality has been around for at least a billion years. It is an unalterable biological reality that is observed in a large number of species, especially in plants and animals.
Gender is a concept relating to social feelings and stereotypes linked to femininity and masculinity. It is therefore a fluid concept, specific to our species, and partly linked to sex. It doesn’t matter if a person of either sex attempts to alter their body through surgery, medication, or any other means, they will never become the other sex (i.e. they will never produce never gametes of the opposite sex).
So the informative content of the two concepts is distinct, and attempts to deconstruct or dilute the informative content of sex do not correspond to any scientific reality. The amalgamation with gender is above all ideological and can harm a significant portion of the population. I am thinking here of (biological) women who want to be recognized in competitive sports, in clinical drug trials or in the study of disease. Moreover, it is immoral and indecent to deny them this absolutely extraordinary unique trait that only a woman can accomplish: giving birth.