Clear, cogent, and crushing. I would hope this would/should be the last word on the matter. Sadly, I doubt that will be the case. The ideological stakes for retreat at this point are too high, I fear.
Interestingly you can classify all attempts at refutation of the sex binary into a simple strategy of hiding sex.
The behavior of hiding sex is a behavior which emerges from time to time in the animal kingdom in males in order to avoid male aggression, and to bypass sex competition in order to gain deceptive access to females enclaves for sexual gratification - sexual mimicry - a topic studied in sociobiology, ethobiology, and evolutionary biology.
It is part of a class of deceptive behaviors including lying, ordinary mimetic deception, stealing, and freeloading.
In humans, the behavior exhibits itself as compulsive sex mimicry, which they can perform easily due to grooming habits, lack of pheromone systems, use of clothing, and complex sex signaling built into language.
Sex mimicry also induces recruitment of humans to increase sex concealment by signaling sex doesn’t exist, signaling observable (male) sex is not male sex, that sex is subjective, or creating parasexual terminology (gender) in place of sex.
Sex mimicry also induces social engineering to hide sex by claiming men hiding sex are members of social classes which have been historically disadvantaged, oppressed by men, or stigmatized (gay, lesbian, female, minority, victims of violence) - a form of class mimicry which allows them to gain social capital (freeloading) to which they, as ordinary men (who incidentally have less incidents of violent assault) have no rights to.
As study of sexual mimicry in humans and the correlated effects - sex denial, social capital appropriation, sex delusion, systematic confabulation in science, the future is rich in research targets for a surprisingly complex phenomenon.
Humans as animals share behaviors which we wish we didn’t and those behaviors extend into the very systems we use to understand ourselves.
It will be fascinating one day to read about how sex mimicry in humans (a behavior similar to that in animals defined by a compulsion to hide sex and imitating the opposite sex) has been able to parasitically attach itself to a wide variety of social organization and co-opt them into abandoning their areas of expertise and focus on defending mimicry.
When it attached itself to different specialties in science, they simply abandoned their basis of knowledge and began to espouse solely the mimicry positon. A sort of intellectual “Cuckoo” function.
It happened with so many other groups - Lesbian and Gay politics, MeToo, Feminism, Sports, Media, Adolescent psychology, Pedagogy, Legislative bodies - that it is to me a unique situation. I can’t really find an historic parallel, because simple social contagion doesn’t cause seasoned experts to abandon their fields in such a wholesale manner.
I recently read GLAAD cite a catastrophic rise in Trans violence. However, when you probe, the simplest possible statistics from public sources, it immediately shows that “trans” violence whether fatal or not, is between 1/10 and 1/50th the rate of male-to-male violence.
Isn’t that fascinating? What other human behavior reduces male violence so much? Yet criminologists, sociologists, and others for whom this precise data is of great import are exactly those who tell the exact opposite. Abandoning their field.
Amazing.
Thanks again. Why you don’t own the entire field yet of study of this phenomena I suspect is a matter of time, because nobody can ever refute you.
I agree with the article. You don't want the word "sex" to be redefined. Just as JK Rowling does not want the word "woman" to be redefined.
You don't mention the word "gender" in your article. I use the framework of "sex" as the way you define it and "gender" as the way trans-people talk about the word "sex". "Sex" is based in scientific rigor. "Gender" is societal and in the domain of anthropological study.
Gender reveal parties are really sex reveal parties.
The bigger question this leaves open is when the use of "sex" versus "gender" is necessary on government documents. As an example, why is "sex" defined on birth certificates and government IDs. Especially drivers licenses and passports. I suspect its because many countries still have laws that specifically apply to the sex of a person. The Muslim world be the most flagrant case.
But in those cases, are they really interested in sex or are they more interested in gender. Does screening of a trans-woman at an airport have meaningful use of sex on the passport?
Bottom line, I believe even trans-activists know that the end state will be a distinction between sex and gender. What will it take for us in the English speaking world to cement that distinction including in government policy and documents.
Step one - Reject objectivity and claim that all spoken and written "facts" are in fact relative constructs of gender bias and gender oppression for the purpose of males achieving power over females.
Step two - Use step one to deny the scientific evidence that proves there are exactly two sexes.
Step three - Ignore the blatant cognitive dissonance in pushing this gender ideology concept that there are more than two sexes to advance female power.
Step four - Support the assassination of anyone calling out this cognitive dissonance.
You mention that the karotype definition leaves open the opportunity for gender activists to raise the issue of aneuploidy of the 23 chromosome. But, from what I can make out from recent publications, I don't think the aneuploidy arguments render the karotype definition away from binary sex.
From the above paper, it is clear that even aneuploidy does not lead to biological sex being on a spectrum. If the 23rd chromosome has at least one Y, it yields male gametes, and if it doesn't have a Y, but only Xs, it produces female gametes.
Clear, cogent, and crushing. I would hope this would/should be the last word on the matter. Sadly, I doubt that will be the case. The ideological stakes for retreat at this point are too high, I fear.
As always super clear and exact.
Interestingly you can classify all attempts at refutation of the sex binary into a simple strategy of hiding sex.
The behavior of hiding sex is a behavior which emerges from time to time in the animal kingdom in males in order to avoid male aggression, and to bypass sex competition in order to gain deceptive access to females enclaves for sexual gratification - sexual mimicry - a topic studied in sociobiology, ethobiology, and evolutionary biology.
It is part of a class of deceptive behaviors including lying, ordinary mimetic deception, stealing, and freeloading.
In humans, the behavior exhibits itself as compulsive sex mimicry, which they can perform easily due to grooming habits, lack of pheromone systems, use of clothing, and complex sex signaling built into language.
Sex mimicry also induces recruitment of humans to increase sex concealment by signaling sex doesn’t exist, signaling observable (male) sex is not male sex, that sex is subjective, or creating parasexual terminology (gender) in place of sex.
Sex mimicry also induces social engineering to hide sex by claiming men hiding sex are members of social classes which have been historically disadvantaged, oppressed by men, or stigmatized (gay, lesbian, female, minority, victims of violence) - a form of class mimicry which allows them to gain social capital (freeloading) to which they, as ordinary men (who incidentally have less incidents of violent assault) have no rights to.
As study of sexual mimicry in humans and the correlated effects - sex denial, social capital appropriation, sex delusion, systematic confabulation in science, the future is rich in research targets for a surprisingly complex phenomenon.
Humans as animals share behaviors which we wish we didn’t and those behaviors extend into the very systems we use to understand ourselves.
Always a good read.
It will be fascinating one day to read about how sex mimicry in humans (a behavior similar to that in animals defined by a compulsion to hide sex and imitating the opposite sex) has been able to parasitically attach itself to a wide variety of social organization and co-opt them into abandoning their areas of expertise and focus on defending mimicry.
When it attached itself to different specialties in science, they simply abandoned their basis of knowledge and began to espouse solely the mimicry positon. A sort of intellectual “Cuckoo” function.
It happened with so many other groups - Lesbian and Gay politics, MeToo, Feminism, Sports, Media, Adolescent psychology, Pedagogy, Legislative bodies - that it is to me a unique situation. I can’t really find an historic parallel, because simple social contagion doesn’t cause seasoned experts to abandon their fields in such a wholesale manner.
I recently read GLAAD cite a catastrophic rise in Trans violence. However, when you probe, the simplest possible statistics from public sources, it immediately shows that “trans” violence whether fatal or not, is between 1/10 and 1/50th the rate of male-to-male violence.
Isn’t that fascinating? What other human behavior reduces male violence so much? Yet criminologists, sociologists, and others for whom this precise data is of great import are exactly those who tell the exact opposite. Abandoning their field.
Amazing.
Thanks again. Why you don’t own the entire field yet of study of this phenomena I suspect is a matter of time, because nobody can ever refute you.
I agree with the article. You don't want the word "sex" to be redefined. Just as JK Rowling does not want the word "woman" to be redefined.
You don't mention the word "gender" in your article. I use the framework of "sex" as the way you define it and "gender" as the way trans-people talk about the word "sex". "Sex" is based in scientific rigor. "Gender" is societal and in the domain of anthropological study.
Gender reveal parties are really sex reveal parties.
The bigger question this leaves open is when the use of "sex" versus "gender" is necessary on government documents. As an example, why is "sex" defined on birth certificates and government IDs. Especially drivers licenses and passports. I suspect its because many countries still have laws that specifically apply to the sex of a person. The Muslim world be the most flagrant case.
But in those cases, are they really interested in sex or are they more interested in gender. Does screening of a trans-woman at an airport have meaningful use of sex on the passport?
Bottom line, I believe even trans-activists know that the end state will be a distinction between sex and gender. What will it take for us in the English speaking world to cement that distinction including in government policy and documents.
May your words live long and prosper.
Step one - Reject objectivity and claim that all spoken and written "facts" are in fact relative constructs of gender bias and gender oppression for the purpose of males achieving power over females.
Step two - Use step one to deny the scientific evidence that proves there are exactly two sexes.
Step three - Ignore the blatant cognitive dissonance in pushing this gender ideology concept that there are more than two sexes to advance female power.
Step four - Support the assassination of anyone calling out this cognitive dissonance.
Great article.
You mention that the karotype definition leaves open the opportunity for gender activists to raise the issue of aneuploidy of the 23 chromosome. But, from what I can make out from recent publications, I don't think the aneuploidy arguments render the karotype definition away from binary sex.
Here's an open access paper:
https://ec.bioscientifica.com/view/journals/ec/12/9/EC-22-0440.xml
From the above paper, it is clear that even aneuploidy does not lead to biological sex being on a spectrum. If the 23rd chromosome has at least one Y, it yields male gametes, and if it doesn't have a Y, but only Xs, it produces female gametes.
Correct me if I am wrong.