but even then people who can’t produce either can’t be simply classified into what they were “supposed” to produce without involving karyotypes or other sex characteristics, which the paper you linked explicitly argues can’t be used for sex definition:

Here I synthesize evolutionary and developmental evidence to demonstrate that sex is binary (i.e., there are only two sexes) in all anisogamous species and that males and females are defined universally by the type of gamete they have the biological function to produce—not by karyotypes, secondary sexual characteristics, or other correlates

so for someone with complete gonadal dysgenesis:

• they produce no gametes
• their sex is defined by… which gamete they have the “function to produce”
• we determine this function by… looking at their chromosomes (XY = male function, XX = female function) or other correlates

but then this is circular:

• if sex is defined by gamete function
• and gamete function can only be identified via determination mechanisms in non-gamete-producing cases
• then determination mechanisms are also doing the definitional work

and I feel your lacking-an-arm comment doesn’t really apply here as humans aren’t solely defined by how many arms we have - the analogy would only work if:

• sex were defined like humanity - as a cluster of traits with gametes being just one feature
• but the paper explicitly rejects that (arguing the monothethic model is the only true one when the polythetic clearly covers more cases)

but I think the bigger question this whole biological definition/determinism sidesteps is the one that seems close to heart of the very-same intersex people linked in that Wikipedia page:

Paradigms for care are still based on socio-cultural factors including expectations of “normality” and evidence in support of surgeries remains lacking.

“Nearly every parent” in the study reported pressure for their children to undergo surgery, and many reported misinformation.

The report calls for a ban on “surgical procedures that seek to alter the gonads, genitals, or internal sex organs of children with atypical sex characteristics too young to participate in the decision when those procedures both carry a meaningful risk of harm and can be safely deferred.”

when these things affect human beings we can’t try to wash our hands by clinging to models that seem to give us simple answers - if we insist on monothethic definitions that don’t recognize the complexity of sexual development - we end up forcing ambiguous cases into boxes and providing intellectual cover to deny people agency over their own bodies.

but what about ovotesticular people? if they can produce both gametes what determines their sex? based on what gamete they were “supposed” to produce? but how do you determine what they’re “supposed” to produce? chromosomes? phenotypes? a combination of all of these? but then we’re back at square one where gametes may be binary but sex isn’t?

Valid, those sources do paint a pretty appalling picture of Ukraine and it’s massive Neo-Nazi problem - I can argue on the specific numbers as they don’t fully reflect what you said but I agree that there are real issues with Azov’s integration, Bandera glorification, and the disproportionate far-right influence.

However, I’d ask you to also acknowledge that Russia has an equally serious neo-Nazi problem that fundamentally undermines the “denazification” justification for the invasion. And I don’t think it’s whataboutism to pointing out that the stated moral basis for the war is hypocritical. And this is clearly established by both Russian state and independent media:

1.Putin himself admitted Wagner PMC was fully state-funded:

• RIA Novosti (Russian state news): Wagner received 86.262 billion rubles from the state budget just from May 2022-May 2023

2.Wagner’s neo-Nazi leadership:

• Wagner founder Dmitry Utkin has documented SS tattoos (InformNapalm)
• Wagner incorporated the openly neo-Nazi “Rusich” group (Meduza)

3.“Rusich” leader Aleksey Milchakov - is an openly psychopathic Nazi:

• He cut off a puppy’s head and ate it when he was 20 while calling himself a Neo-Nazi and posing with swastikas
• And literally yesterday was teaching “Lessons of Courage” in Russian schools and received an offical state certificate for it, while planning “camps for combat training of children and teenagers” (Zona Media and the actual Telegram message with a certificate from the Государственное бюджетное образовательное учреждение - ГБОУ - an official State Budgetary Educational Institution)

4.Neo-Nazi Russian Imperial Movement (RIM) founder Denis Gariyev received at least 15 million rubles worth of government contracts from Russia’s FSB, FSO, and Ministry of Internal Affairs

• And it goes without saying that they are a pro russian-imperialist entity as clearly stated in their Вконтакте page: https://m.vk.com/imper_legion

5.Putin’s contradictions:

• Even during Wagner’s mutiny, while calling Prigozhin a traitor, Putin called Wagner fighters “heroes who liberated Soledar and Artyomovsk” fighting for “the unity of the Russian World” (Life.ru)
• After Prigozhin’s death, Putin praised Wagner’s “significant contribution to our common cause of fighting the neo-Nazi regime in Ukraine”

So my point overall: Ukraine absolutely has a far-right problem that needs addressing and the US and Europe are propping them up as they align with their neoliberal and geopolitical values. But Russia claiming to “denazify” Ukraine while:

• Fully funding Wagner
• Wagner being founded by a neo-Nazi with SS tattoos
• Incorporating openly neo-Nazi “Rusich” into military operations
• Allowing neo-Nazi Milchakov to teach Russian children
• Giving government contracts to neo-Nazis

…makes “denazification” a cynical propaganda justification rather than a genuine moral concern.

So I think if we’re serious about being anti-imperialist we have to recognize that if it’s bad for neolibs to use Nazis in Ukraine for their imperial interests then it’s also bad for Russia to use Nazis for their own imperialist goals.

It’s possible for two imperialist forces to be bad - and you can then start comparing which is worse but at that point you’re doing imperialist apologia which imo isn’t a serious critique for a socialist to be doing.

These are a lot of assertions that you’ve stated as fact without any proof - can you provide independent non-government sanctioned sources for your claims?