I think if we’re going to use the construction plan metaphor, it would be more accurate to say that the builders didn’t get the message to alter the plans. Like if there was a house plan that was designed so it could be a duplex or a single family home by adding or removing one wall. Both options actually exist in the plans for the house at all times (yes, XX still has the genetic code for male anatomy), the SRY gene isn’t the plans to build male anatomy, that’s stored elsewhere, the SRY gene is more like a text to the builder saying “go with option B”. Except in this case the text failed to send, so the builder defaulted to option A.

So at the end of the day, the builder doesn’t put the wall in and builds a single family home, not a duplex. The owner may have wanted a duplex, but that isn’t what got built. So is it a duplex or not? I would lean towards saying no, but we’re not talking about houses, we’re talking about people, so it should probably just be their call

I think you’re trying to oversimplify things a bit. Sexual differentiation is an extremely complex process. To be frank, a biological perspective doesn’t really care about “what’s recorded on the government ID”. As you get more and more granular, those kinds of generalizations become less useful.

For a pure science take, such an individual might be described as:

A 14-year-old unmarried girl was referred with complaints of primary amenorrhea and nondevelopment of breast. Her build was normal. Examination of her secondary sexual characteristics revealed no breast development, absent axillary hairs, and sparse pubic hairs. External genitalia was of female type. Karyotype showed genotype of 46, XY. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed hypoplastic uterus with absent fallopian tubes and ovaries. A diagnosis of Swyer syndrome was made. (Swyer Syndrome Case Study)

But that doesn’t really fit on a driver’s license, so…