[tuesday afternoon]

Mine does it by genes -- Ticked off a couple of legislators royally when a normal woman and a transgender married recently, but it was all perfectly legal.

Are you saying the transgender was a woman who was genetically a man?

Meanwhile, did you know that the gender on birth certificates can be changed? Muddies up that neat dichotomy a bit for you, no?

You mean if someone changes there external genitalia they can change their sex on their birth certificate?

What do you think the basis SHOULD be, if it's such a neat dichotomy?

I would guess genetic aberrations of gender (which, by definition, does not count people who believe their gender is wrong) are statistically insignificant.

[Kahonek]

"Are you saying the transgender was a woman who was genetically a man?"

Yup.

"You mean if someone changes there external genitalia they can change their sex on their birth certificate?"

Yup, or if it changes on its own...

"I would guess genetic aberrations of gender (which, by definition, does not count people who believe their gender is wrong) are statistically insignificant."

First, I think you should probably use the term "biological sex" here to avoid confusion. I think that someone who believes his or her gender is wrong definitely has an aberration of gender.

Second, I doubt you would see it as insignificant if it were your daughter's/son's life impacted -- that your daughter found out that she couldn't marry the man she loved because she turned out to be a man, herself. It happens...