You’ll never guess from where advocates of transgender ideology gather evidence against the male-female sex binary. They realize that a core premise undergirding the transgender movement is that sex is not binary but on a spectrum. Not every person is either male or female, they claim. Some fall outside that binary and along a spectrum of sexes. Though some men are “assigned male at birth,” we’re told they can change their “gender.” Is this true?
One champion of this ideology is Agustin Fuentes, a Princeton University anthropologist and author of the book Sex Is a Spectrum: The Biological Limits of the Binary. In a Scientific American article, he writes, “Plentiful data and analyses support the assertions that sex is very complex in humans and that binary and simplistic explanations for human sex biology are either wholly incorrect or substantially incomplete.” What data challenges the male-female binary in humans? Fuentes writes, “Some worms produce both [gametes—sperm and egg]. Some fish start producing one kind and then switch to the other, and some switch back and forth throughout their lives.” If you dig a little deeper, you discover Fuentes is referring to earthworms and clownfish. It sounds surprising, but let’s see if these examples justify denying the sex binary in humans.
Consider the example of worms. Yes, it’s true that some worms (e.g., earthworms, flatworms, etc.) are hermaphroditic. That means they are a species that contains both male and female sex systems within the same organism. But note the important and obvious distinction: Humans are not worms! They are an entirely different category of animal. Specifically, humans are gonochoristic, meaning they are a species with two separate sexes. Every member of the human species remains male or female throughout their entire life.
In fact, most species in the animal kingdom (approximately 95%) are gonochoristic and require a male and female to reproduce. Therefore, while it’s appropriate to classify worms as hermaphroditic, it is scientifically naïve and demonstrably incorrect to cite worms as evidence for denying the sex binary in humans.
It’s also worth noting that even though worms are hermaphrodites, their sex systems are still binary. In other words, they contain two-sex systems. Both sexes just happen to exist in the same individual organism.
What about Fuentes’s mention of fish? As already mentioned, he’s referring to clownfish, which can change from male to female. This is an amazing feature. Through an environmental trigger, a clownfish can reorganize its male gonads into female ones, changing its testes to ovaries. Though a clownfish once produced sperm, it can now produce eggs. Though that’s incredible, it bears emphasizing: Humans are not clownfish. Humans are gonochoristic and remain male or female for life. By contrast, clownfish are a type of hermaphroditic species. Unlike worms, which contain both male and female sex systems simultaneously, clownfish produce male and female systems sequentially (one at a time and not both at once). While clownfish possess this capacity to change, humans do not. Fish belong to an entirely separate taxonomic class of animal with a different type of reproductive system. Hermaphroditism in fish, therefore, is not evidence that humans can change their sex systems in any way.
In addition, the clownfish is further evidence that sex is binary. Notice that clownfish can only produce one of two possible gametes: sperm or egg. It can’t turn into a third sex or produce a third type of gamete. Sex, even in clownfish, therefore, is binary.
It’s also worth noting that clownfish transformation from male to female is hardly analogous to a human male who tries to change to female (or vice versa) through hormones and surgery. Humans need external intervention by psychiatrists and surgeons, and even then, the new “organs” don’t fully function like those of the opposite sex. By contrast, clownfish rearrange their anatomy and physiology by an internal process that is inherent in their biology. They’re designed to do that. After their “transition,” clownfish have fully functioning gonads of the opposite sex, unlike human “transitioners,” who remain infertile.
Notice the spurious attempts in these “arguments.” An author claims sex is not binary and cites a radically different animal species (a worm or fish) as evidence. This is either willful ignorance or intentional deception. In any case, it’s fallacious thinking. By that same reasoning, one could argue that humans are not necessarily bipedal (walk on two legs). After all, horses have four legs. Or one could argue that brains aren’t essential to humans because there’s a creature—a jellyfish—that lacks one. But humans aren’t horses or jellyfish. It’s faulty reasoning to compare an animal with a fundamentally different body system to a human.
In this case, Fuentes’s evidence doesn’t work. Animals like worms and clownfish don’t disqualify the sexual binary in humans. This evidence for the sex spectrum fails and therefore can’t be used to support the transgender movement.