Victoria Pendleton

Actually, this dispute is ultimately about what is the primary explanatory science, out of biology and philosophy (leaving out theology for the moment).

there is no need to invoke a metaphysical/epistemological debate about which branch of understanding has the greatest explanatory power to see that biology has a solid claim here. philosophy has its uses (not least of which is the philosophy of science) but at some point you have to admit that the scientific method is a very powerful explanatory tool when applied correctly - such as understanding biology.

Many philosophers would argue that a lot of this simply lacks a proper explanation from first principles--i.e., the whole shebang, from metaphysics to ethics to epistemology, etc. A biologist would invoke other explanatory methods.

Too big a question to debate on the forum. :)

debating metaphysics and epistemology here would achieve little more than obfuscation of the well demonstrated, well understood, observed facts - namely that in the real world biological entities are subject to biological processes, and these include hormones which cause different features in male and female animals (and people).

gender politics must accept that.