By natural I mean "no medical interventions". Is it is accurate to say Swyer cases are infertile, but can give birth using donor eggs and related medical interventions?
I know what you mean by "natural" (although, of course, human medicine is just as (un)natural as are foraging instruments made by the New Caledonian crows). I was merely hoping that you don't equate this "natural" with "good" or "real."
Yes, it is accurate to say so. I don't think that it invalidates my argument or supports yours, however, unless you have a very peculiar definition of what is and isn't female. Let's say we're talking about a woman with Swyer who is not receiving any medical help and is thus unable to get pregnant (patient A). Is it your position, then, that her natural physical characteristic of having a uterus is a male sexual characteristic, or perhaps not a sexual characteristic at all?
Let's also talk about an XX man with a particular instance of de la Chapelle syndrome (patient B). He is a normal male phenotypically, except his testes aren't capable of producing live sperm, since he doesn't have the required Y chromosome genes. Is he a male, in your opinion? Let's also consider an XY man who had a partial deletion within his Y chromosome (patient C), so he also doesn't have the exact same genes as patient B, and is likewise unable to produce live sperm. Is patient C a male?
