I hate to cite the Daily Wire but they took the trouble to ask the Toronto police about that “woman” whose photograph makes it so obvious that he’s a man.

In a follow-up email, The Daily Wire asked the department to confirm Ruby’s biological sex and to “please indicate if the suspect was booked in a male or female facility.”

Toronto Police Service’s Meaghan Gray replied (emphasis added):

Your question, and the answer, are irrelevant to our investigation. Our focus is on the sexual assault of a child and identifying any additional victims. The best way to do that is to share information with the public that would assist them with recognizing the person involved, such as a name and photograph. In this case, this person identifies as a woman, named Ruby, using the pronouns she/her. It is our practice to use the names and pronouns with which a person identifies, and to use a photograph that most closely resembles their current likeness.  That was done in this case.

That’s ridiculous. Sure, the photograph and the name are useful, but that doesn’t make the accurate sex irrelevant – the more accurate information the better, as I’m quite sure the police know perfectly well. The actual sex of the suspect is not irrelevant. Saying “such as a name and photograph” makes it sound as if minimal information is best, like a strong ingredient in a recipe – you don’t want to overpower the dish with this one strong flavor. It’s not like that. Knowing a name and the sex and a photo is better than two of the three.