I've watched several of these tribunals now and I don't think I've ever seen a claimant make use of expert scientific/medical evidence to clarify that sex is a clearly defined scientific/medical characteristic; that male and female can be clearly distinguished from one another; and that sex is immutable
Why is that? Is it because it was never necessary before because there has never been a medical witness before asserting that sex is not clear cut?
I ask because it's not clear to me that a tribunal or court can necessarily take judicial notice of what to me - and others here - is an obvious fact when one of the witnesses says it isn't and it isn't challenged.
NB - I don't mean philosphers like Kathleen Stock or other humanaities academics, I mean medical or scientific experts