Alice Roberts in The Times

Americans call bungalows "flat houses" ...

I know. It's like saying a house is more than a staircase, because it has rooms, and a garden too and the staircase doesnt dictate how big the kitchen is. Well yes. But without the staircase it wouldn't be a house at all, it would be a bungalow.

From memory "Dominion" posited that our "western" secular views are a direct result of Christian influence that colours our ideas of "good" and "evil" in contrast to the age on antiquity where such concepts do not really apply.

I'm a Dr, so I hope you will all refer to me as Dr Dirt .

I think your point would be entirely valid in a more formal context.

Isn't this the new book "domination" which purports to be about the spread of Christianity? Many ppl have pointed out its similarity to dominion by Tom Holland which she doesn't include at all in her references but does talk about the need to refute certain widespread theories by historians. Attention was drawn to this on twitter by others and a bit of an embarrassing exchange between her & Tim Holland where she said she absolutely definitely didn't mean him/his book but she'd love to come on TRIH

Just me then. Doing feminism wrong.

Again.

😀

I know it's an old thread, but it gives me an opportunity to ask whether "messy and complcated" means the same as "random and chaotic". Is it? If not, why should it stop you looking at the systems involved?

On an SM forum thread?
there are all sorts of people we discuss for whom we don’t use their earned titles. You don’t think posters who’ve got one should have them used do you?

Yes; we’ve recently watched some of her series on britains historical cities and enjoyed them.
The thing is, Roberts is as far as I can see very much a genuine feminist, eg her massive admiration for Emmeline Pankhurst when talking about her statue in Manchester. Just she seems to have this weird blind spot/factual error re sex which is baffling!
well, I hope as reality begins to assert itself she’ll find a way to excavate herself from this particular hole.

Oh, I see, but actually no, I don't need to use someone's full title on a thread that they're highly unlikely to see (and probably robust enough to not get upset about SHOULD they see it).
I respect Lucy W immensely – I hope that isn't going to change when I hear whatever it is she's done to be mentioned along with Alice 'look at clownfish' Roberts – and I don't need to use her title to indicate that to other people.

Genuinely, that's a shame. I'm still looking forward to reading at some point the trilogy she's done (Ancestors, Buried, and Crypt), they get good reviews.

I refer you to my previous post.

Googled Janina Ramirez and yes, I guess she is the goth historian. I don't think I know her.

Not sure what the '(And I believe Professor Lucy Worsley ?)' bit means; are you saying I should have used her title?

Professor Janina Ramirez ?

(And I believe Professor Lucy Worsley ?)

Who's the goth historian and what has Lucy Worsley done? (I'm dreading the answer; I like her),

Ffs she's really masking a fool of herself here.

Also, her book is being slated

Agree - it doesn't matter how messy or complicated it is. A species is also hard to define and there are edge cases where the usual norms don't exactly apply. But that still doesn't mean a fox is a chicken or a horse is a pine tree.

Biological reproduction comes in a wide range of forms and processes. But each thing still is what it is, and isn't something else just because it feels or announces it is. It's a completely false comparison - A male clownfish may become female because that's what its genetics allow it to do, but a male clownfish still isn't a female clownfish because it says it is, thinks it is or dresses up as a female clownfish. It only is when it biologically is. Which is the actual opposite of genderist beliefs.

There are only two types of gametes, but even if there were 150, this would still be true. Each individual would still only have the gamete-producing abilities it actually, biologically had and gender identity wouldn't come into it.

Without getting mired too far 😀I think it's only fair to point out that it's Professor (Prof) Alice Roberts.

Fuck pronouns, but I think it's only fair to use someones academic title when they have earned it. And especially in a world that regularly actively downplays womens achievements. Regardless of how wrong they are.

Same for Profs. Brian Cox, Hannah Fry and (Dame) Mary Beard.

It's also, apparently, complete ignorance of the difference between genotype and phenotype.

Maybe the inability to understand the meanings of words (or to just look them up?) is behind the related category errors of confusing phenotypes and socially constructed gender stereotypes.

Then again, if they let themselves see any of that, they'd discover they were sex realists and that would spell the end of their existence as Kool Kidz. The horror.

Also, clownfish change sex all by themselves. They don't need surgery or drugs to do so.

What's Lucy Worsley done? I admit to having found her programmes tending towards her personal theatrics over time so stopped watching, but I haven't seen her say anything of the gender-woo variety?

Yes. I always think, "they can breathe underwater, too. And?"

“Ask a clownfish”

yes Alice, but we are not clownfish. Nor are we fruit flies or any of the other non-human creatures often used to justify this ridiculous pseudo-argument.

Oh ffs

Most famous archaeologist???
Alex Langland