"Why aren't children sexless even though they can not release eggs or sperms?

Sure someone who removes all their sex organs in a surgery once had sex organs, but now they don't, and they don't meet the definition of sex, which requires one to have certain organs and release gametes. So why aren't they considered sexless or less of a sex?"

FairyPrincess you're the one who brought up this ridiculous idea in the first place, then freak out when someone is being somewhat charitable to this nonsense saying they could see it that way in very specific circumstances figuratively but not literally. You're the one making sex out to be much more complicated than it actually is. Even asking these questions in the first place proves you don't know what you are talking about. Sex isn't some abstract philosophical quandary than can be postulated, redefined and undefined to death. It's an easily verifiable objective fact that we have understood for 1,000s of years. We just a have a deeper understanding of it through modern science now.

If you cut off a cat's tale it is still a cat. If you surgically install a dog tail on the cat it is still a freaking cat! Same thing applies to human sex. All the surgeries, hormones and roleplay in the world cannot turn a man into a woman. If you cut a man's dick off he is still a man. If you surgically install a poor imitation of a vagina on him he is still a man. He still has a male body. It is physically impossible to turn a male body into a female body. The most we can do with our current technology is make a poor imitation. Ted talk about how fundamental and all encompassing in every cell of your body sex differences are Binary sex denialism/obtuseness just makes the Query Theorists look foolish and ignorant.

You're taking things way too literally and being deliberately obtuse. If your only method of engaging with GC is deliberately misunderstanding and misrepresenting what we are actually saying there is no point in discussing anything with you.