If you mean my statement that chormosomes are the most important determinant of a person's sex as opposed to your statement that hormones are more important than chromosomes--then here's my question to you and to medical science:
Does anyone lacking the Y chromosome ever grow testes that produce sperm containing Y chromosomes?
If not, then they are not male.
And if the scientific establishment disagrees with me about this--then the scientific establishment needs to rethink its definition of sex.
What you don't seem to understand is that DNA is the blue print, but hormones are the building blocks. Now, in sometimes the hormones produced in the womb ignores either XX or XY and creates the child into the opposite gender.
Does anyone lacking the Y chromosome ever grow testes that produce sperm containing Y chromosomes?
Actually yes. But it is rare. Most of the time the man is sterile.
If not, then they are not male.
You have a very shallow opinion of what it is to be a man. Why don't you include all males who are sterile.
And if the scientific establishment disagrees with me about this--then the scientific establishment needs to rethink its definition of sex.
Now that is a very arrogant statement. Your ego is beginning to show.