Sex is Binary say a majority of scientists

How many truly thought that though, and how many thought it was the nice lie to say, were kind lying or virtue signal lying, or were afraid to not lie?

It's depressing that 1/3 think sex isnt binary (even if they were social scientists).

I mean if you can get that wrong, how can you expect anyone to take your research seriously?

No scientist could honestly answer the question ‘is human sex binary?’ other than ‘yes’.

Similarly, no scientist could honestly answer the question ‘can a human change sex?’ other than ‘no’.

Professor Robert Winston spelt it out in simplified scientific terms on Question Time. Every cell of our bodies is encoded male or female.

There’s nothing else to debate.

Well, all I can say is that I hope you haven't got QWERTY imprinted on your forehead!

This was discussed on another thread, recently and it turned out that quite a few of the "scientists" were actually social scientists and therefore, not versed in the hard sciences.

What is it coming to that I'm actually relieved it was at least still a majority on the side of reality?

ExtraDay · Yesterday 22:40

I'm enjoying the accidental poetry, Binturong:

"I've been elbow deep
In my share of sheep.
Not a job for people who
Can't tell ram from ewe."

A ramku?

Reasonable-ish, apart from the Gender Identity part. Surely it should say something along these lines:

Gender identity – some individuals’ conception of self as involving an internal experience of a gender role. This is analogous to some people’s belief that they have an inner soul, based on their religious faith. Such beliefs should be respected but are unlikely to be relevant for most scientific research

“At AstraZeneca our aim is to cultivate inclusion and belonging by fostering an environment where everyone feels valued, heard and respected.”

A company carrying out medical research - an area in which sex is both hugely important and frequently overlooked - should not value and respect utter codswallop. Or the people who produce it.

Sorry, it was a cack-handed way of agreeing with you.

🤦‍♀️

They’re not- hence the laughing emoji which usually means “I’m making a joke here.”

its ok if you didn’t find it funny but you can pull the stick out of your arse, you’ll be more comfy.

In what way is a 'social scientist' a real scientist?

One for Beetle's next edition.

Ha! I hadn't spotted that.

I'm enjoying the accidental poetry, Binturong:

I've been elbow deep
In my share of sheep.
Not a job for people who
Can't tell ram from ewe.

I've been elbow deep in my share of sheep. Not a job for people who can't tell ram from ewe.

Vets definitley fall into the 'WTF?! You know this!' category.

To all those hoping these weren’t “real scientists” there are quite a few in the veterinary profession who’ve bought into all this nonsense. I wish I could say my profession is immune, but it isn’t.

As a matter of interest, here are the guidelines in Nature's (science journal's) advice to authors:
'Authors should use the terms sex (biological attribute) and gender (shaped by social and cultural circumstances) carefully in order to avoid confusing both terms.
Sex – refers to currently understood biological differences between females and males, including chromosomes, sex organs, and endogenous hormonal profiles. Sex is usually categorized as female or male, although there is variation in the biological attributes that constitute sex.
Gender – refers to socially constructed and enacted roles and behaviours which occur in a historical and cultural context and vary across societies and over time. Gender is usually incorrectly conceptualized as a binary (man / woman or feminine/masculine) factor. In reality, there is a spectrum of gender identities and expressions defining how individuals identify themselves and express their gender
Gender identity – an individual’s conception of self as being a man, woman, masculine, feminine, nonbinary, ambivalent, etc., based in part on physical, psychological and social factors. It is the internal experience of a gender role. There is a broad range of gender identities including, but not limited to, transgender, gender-queer, gender-fluid, non-binary, gender-variant, genderless, agender, nongender, bi-gender, trans man, trans woman, trans masculine, trans feminine and cisgender
Gender presentation – how a person publicly expresses or presents their gender identity. This can include behaviour and outward appearance such as dress, hair, make-up, body language and voice. A person’s chosen name and pronouns are also common ways of expressing gender. Others perceive a person’s gender through these attributes. Another term is “gender expression.”'

I read that and think, thank goodness I'm a physicist; but it seems reasonable, even if they missed off 'not a clue, don't really care' from the gender ID bit.

I agree it needs a breakdown by discipline.

If 25% were scientists with a relevant qualification (life sciences or medicine) who I really hope know what they're talking about, 18% social sciences - most likely to account for the nonsense answers, it looks as if chemists, physicists etc are about 50:50.

Which is disappointing. Even though it's completely out side their area you'd hope they'd be better at weighing evidence - so it's a sign they simply aren't paying attention or applying their brains.

I'll excuse quantum physicists. It's reasonable for them to be terminally confused when working daily with a world built on fundamental impossibilities.

Two plus two equals four, say a majority of mathematicians.

Oh. Good. The majority eh? So much more to post to those constant mantraing that we are the minority and dinosaurs.