Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

1,600 Scientists Just Signed A Letter Opposing A Legal Definition Of A Gender Binary

220 replies

Bonions · 02/11/2018 15:12

Ffs

www.buzzfeednews.com/article/azeenghorayshi/scientists-vs-gender-binary

I tried to choose the worst bits but couldn’t as it’s all pretty awful

An open letter that denounces attempts to define gender as a binary trait based on anatomy or genetic tests has gathered signatures from more than 1,600 scientists.

The letter, which includes the signatures of eight Nobel laureates, was written in response to a memo drafted in spring of 2017 by the Department of Health and Human Services, according to the New York Times. The memo reportedly urged government agencies to adopt a legal definition of sex “on a biological basis that is clear, grounded in science, objective and administrable,” according to the Times.

The memo also reportedly stated that any disputes over a person’s sex would be clarified using genetic testing, a claim that scientists say is unscientific and unethical.

The Trump administration has not confirmed the memo or issued any statement — or proposed regulation — that adopts the views in the memo.

The report incited much debate on Twitter, and today more than 50 companies, including Apple, Google, and Facebook, released a letter condemning it. It also prompted 22 scientists to put together an opposition letter, addressed to “our elected representatives.”

“This proposal is fundamentally inconsistent not only with science, but also with ethical practices, human rights, and basic dignity,” the scientists wrote. “Though scientists are just beginning to understand the biological basis of gender identity, it is clear that many factors, known and unknown, mediate the complex links between identity, genes, and anatomy.”

The letter stressed that both biological sex and gender fall on a spectrum. Roughly 1 in every 2,000 babies in the US are born with what are called intersex traits: anatomy, hormone levels, or chromosomes that fall somewhere between what’s typically defined as male or female. An estimated 1.4 million adults in the US identify as transgender, meaning their gender identity does not correspond to the gender they were assigned at birth.

“As a geneticist and as someone who studies reproduction on a biological level, I can safely say that their scientific reasons are simply not based in science,” Mollie Manier, an assistant professor of biology at George Washington University and one of the coauthors of the letter, told BuzzFeed News. “The science on gender is very much still in development, but more importantly, the lived experiences of transgender and intersex people should not be co-opted by a genetic test.”

Others pointed out that genes and chromosomes alone can’t predict someone’s sex or gender.

“The relationship between someone’s genotype, or their DNA, and their phenotype, or their traits, is very complicated, and sex and gender are no exception,” said Russell Neches, a postdoc studying the evolution of genomes at the Joint Genome Institute at Lawrence Berkeley Labs. “These are human beings we're talking about, so it's not enough to have a concept of sex and gender that only works for the majority.”

For transgender scientists, the letter was personal.

“As a trans woman and as a scientist, it’s inherently an attack on my humanity, my ability to exist in the world, and to safely navigate certain spaces,” said Mika Tosca, an assistant professor of climate science at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago. “It was really important that we gather as many scientists as we could to say that so scientists ourselves were not complicit in promoting this wholly flawed nonscientific effort.”

The letter also emphasized the dangers of any policy forcing medical professionals to stray from recognizing an individual’s self-identified gender. “Our best available evidence shows that affirmation of gender identity is paramount to the survival, health, and livelihood of transgender and intersex people,” the letter states.

OP posts:
VintageFur · 02/11/2018 16:21

Exactly as nauticant said - brains left at the door when they signed an "anti-trump" petition - I'd have to assume, without reading.

BuffaloCauliflower · 02/11/2018 16:21

As a social scientist I apologise for my discipline. That sources list is horrendously biased.

This is the problem though, sociologists above all should recognise the difference between the social and political concept of ‘gender’ and the biological reality of ‘sex’. One doesn’t need to be binary, although we have historically created it that way to the benefit of no one, the other is binary by its very nature.

Ereshkigal · 02/11/2018 16:21

And who can argue with 1600 scientists

Anyone. Because it's ideological bullshit.

gendercritter · 02/11/2018 16:21

Plus it's all such bullshit.

Would a biologist advise a woman and a ('lesbian') transwoman not to use contraception when they sleep together because biology is complex and there's only a possible risk of pregnancy?

Would they recommend a transwoman get a blood transfusion from a woman who's had a baby (which, incidentally could kill them)?

Would they recommend a transwoman have extensive tests done on their cervix or ovaries if they are getting stomach pain?

Would they recommend embarking on IVF if a transwoman went to them crying because of being distressed at suffering 'infertility?'

Yeah, thought not. There's quite a simple reason for that.

VickyEadie · 02/11/2018 16:24

It's not "complex" at all - these people are claiming the exact opposite o the truth.

Juells · 02/11/2018 16:25

Thousands of scientists have denied that there could possibly be such a thing as climate change, so my respect for scientists who fly in the face of common sense is pretty low.

AspieAndProud · 02/11/2018 16:26

I think if you ran a poll of Soviet scientists at the right time you’d have found a 100% agreement with Lysenko too.

FermatsTheorem · 02/11/2018 16:30

1600 social scientists telling people what they think of genetics as gospel truth would be like me marching into CERN and demanding to rewire a particle accelerator because I think i can.

Bowl, once more, I think I love you.

I'm reminded of the situation back in the early/mid 90s when I had a number of friends studying geology. They were many of them very good geologists, some of them doing PhDs, some with years of experience in the field. I remember one of them saying that one of their lecturers had quite definitively told them "man made climate change was a myth." This lecturer was an expert in his field. He undoubtedly knew his stuff about geology. However, many geologists were inextricably entwined, in terms of funding, grants, job prospects for their students, with the oil industry. So they had a massive personal and political investment in being climate change sceptics. They were also (crucially) not experts in climate science, no matter how great their expertise was in geology (and in many cases, it really was first rate - in geology).

Science is more easily politicised than the lay-person often realises, and it is massively compartmentalised. Knowing a hell of a lot about one science in no way qualifies you to comment on another science (barring run of the mill observations about the statistical analysis of data and things like sample size, which do cross disciplines).

Imnobody4 · 02/11/2018 16:33

Science is in a right mess. All the pseudo sciences -psychology, social science, economics sociobiology are in crisis. Peer review and replication studies are well below 50% and publication of complete rubbish is commonplace. Am starting to think we need to close most university depts for a generation.

Ereshkigal · 02/11/2018 16:34

Bowl, once more, I think I love you.

Me too!

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 02/11/2018 16:34

OP, I think you missed the inverted commas around "scientists"...

AspieAndProud · 02/11/2018 16:35

Being an expert in one field doesn’t make you an expert in others. Fred Hoyle would have deservedly won a Nobel for his work on nucleogenesis if he hadn’t died. He was a total crackpot on evolution.

Whatsnewpussyhat · 02/11/2018 16:37

Wonder how many of those 1600 have personal or financial motivation for going along with the bollocks.

Bowlofbabelfish · 02/11/2018 16:54

What is trump planning on legislating? Is he planning on codifying gender (terrifyingly bad) or separating gender and sex? Or something else?

AspieAndProud · 02/11/2018 16:59

I wonder how many of the women who signed it would be okay with it if they had a research grant application rejected on the grounds their lady brains would render their work unreliable?

FermatsTheorem · 02/11/2018 17:09

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/02/trump-transgender-rights-letter-apple-amazon

Hard to say because of usual conflation of sex and gender, Bowl, but I think it means Trump is going to remove self-ID (and possibly any other processes to "legally gain status to be treated as if one were the opposite sex") and make sure all legislation only refers to sex as recorded at birth. Which I think would be a good move for prisons and women's sports and the like, but clearly a bad thing for the genuinely trans people who were quietly getting on with their lives without pushing into women's spaces, and just want to know they won't be discriminated against for crossing "gender" norms (i.e. socially constructed expectations).

PierreBezukov · 02/11/2018 17:17

The world has gone mad. Really.

nauticant · 02/11/2018 17:20

In very broadbrush terms Bowlofbabelfish, back in 2014 Obama made an executive order that confused sex and gender and threatened the withdrawal of money to federal contractors to get them to comply with this confusion, and now Trump has made a counter order seeking to reassert sex as being a meaningful concept.

In other words, topsy-turvy compared to how the world should work.

If I've got this wrong I'm quite happy to be corrected.

deepwatersolo · 02/11/2018 17:22

This very much sounds like those scienrists willfully misunderstanding the administration. ‚Trump wants to genetically test sex? But the basis of gender is still so obscure and there is no genetic test for pink and blue brains!‘
I see issues with the genetic testing plans, but let‘s face it, that totalitarian absurdity is the direct response to TRAs‘ ‚without Karyotyping everyone's sex is unknowable‘ bullshit.

LangCleg · 02/11/2018 17:27

I think if you ran a poll of Soviet scientists at the right time you’d have found a 100% agreement with Lysenko too.

Yep. Lysenkoism this is.

LangCleg · 02/11/2018 17:32

What is trump planning on legislating? Is he planning on codifying gender (terrifyingly bad) or separating gender and sex? Or something else?

It's tricky because the US doesn't have the same sort of equality legislation that we have (partly tied up with states rights). But Title IX made it illegal for any federally funded (not state level) program to discriminate on the basis of sex. Obama issued an executive order (rather than legislation passing the Senate) to redefine sex as gender identity. Trump plans to revert to sex.

deepwatersolo · 02/11/2018 17:33

nauticant yes, good summary. Worth noting that Obama directly upended title lX, which is about women’s equality and protections on colleges, e.g. making sure women in colleges have the same training facilities & opportunities as men... Obama‘s actions basically opened women college sports, scholarships and I believe dormitories to self is dentifying male ‚women‘. Colleges were forced to comply by threat of loss of federal funding.

KittyKlawsReturns · 02/11/2018 17:38

Science is in a right mess. All the pseudo sciences -psychology, social science, economics sociobiology are in crisis. Peer review and replication studies are well below 50% and publication of complete rubbish is commonplace. Am starting to think we need to close most university depts for a generation.

Yes it is ... and yet it is still the female of the species which carry and give birth to children all this pontificating and that hasn't changed.

nauticant · 02/11/2018 17:40

Ahh, I was hoping you would appear to provide clarification deepwatersolo.

This particular story "Trump uses executive order to deny the existence of trans people" has been a profound moment for me in how I view the media and the way they choose to present news stories.

LangCleg · 02/11/2018 17:43

Yes - the Obama executive order directly resulted in the boys who won state high school championships being eligible for college scholarships as girls. Before that, they wouldn't have been.