Alice Roberts - what the hell?

[GenderApostate19]

I can’t tell you how utterly disappointed I feel by her comments about Sex and reproduction not being binary. She knows the truth, what the hell is she doing? I’m even more upset by her than by Sarah Champion, she’s a Scientist ffs.

Did they have muffins then or were they chucking...I dunno, Yorkshire puddings maybe? Would be a bit messy, because gravy.

English muffins, of course. Not the big floofy chocolate or blueberry ones. In the period around the 1500 to 1600's, muffins didn't identify in quite the way they do now. In fact, archaeologists have discovered stale muffins that could quite easily be used with rubbery eggs and bacon in MacDonalds breakfasts.

I like crumpets myself

Random but did they have gingerbread then? When did the UK get ginger? I know we have some history bods here.

Ah, it was around, as were many spices, in King Henry's time, but not in vast quantities, and wasn't seen as a food thing primarily, but more like a medicine. Much like how I stick it in soup when I have a fecking awful cold.

You can also just boil it in water to make a tea, which I recommend if you have a sore throat! I'd be sad to have it for medicinal purposes only though.

Scientists engage with questions about their assertions. irridium is doing science a disservice.

Drive by biscuiting.

deep bow

As this thread has been resurrected it's worth sharing the good Professor's latest tweet (in relation to life after death):

As Carl Sagan put it, “It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.”

Back at ya, Alice!

that was pretty much a drive by biscuiting

I fully support the work of fellow (published) scientists like Alice Roberts, and also the right of biological women to safe women only spaces.

That's nice. Alice, on the other hand, thinks you're a horrible unkind transphobe. Have a (mug) to go with your biscuit.

Liking your leftfield emoji work Ereshkigal.

I went to an event last night where AR was speaking. It was about 'the body', beauty, social media, and the ethical issues surrounding body modification. Most of the evening was a Q&A, and it was great to see a panel of four female academics discussing their fascinating work.

A woman in the audience asked a question about the ethics surrounding young gay women increasingly deciding to go down a route of body modification (chest binding, mastectomies, hormones) that would potentially cause them infertility, and lifelong physical issues, but Alice didn't give the ethics professor chance to answer chance to answer, and moved on to another question . I found it infuriating and depressing in equal measure that this was clearly not allowed to be discussed. These are the sorts of people who should be able to offer some insight into these issues, and yet it was just shut down. This doesn't serve the interests of the young people who are making these choices, I genuinely can't understand the reasoning behind why it's all so hushed up .

But on a positive, Professor Heather Widdows' work around beauty is fascinating and insightful. She has written a great book called, 'Perfect Me'.

Ohh - I was also at that event and I was impressed at how clear that question was from the youth worker and really peeved that it was not able to be answered in any detail. I dragged my husband along and even he was able to see the whitewashing.

I too, having totally dismissed "beauty" as a topic that I would not be interested in had my horizon expanded. Professor Heather Widdows' work sounds facinating and her book is now on my christmas wish list.

Thanks for your posts Ibloodylove and louise. Always interesting to see what feminist philosophers are talking about.. (or not allowed to talk about )

I saw that on Prof Heather Widdows’ twitter that you can download the introduction of her book mobile.twitter.com/ProfWiddows/status/1139089797740474368

Also spotted her RTing what looks an interesting book-related event in Cambridge next weekend relevant to young people’s thinking (and presumably their search for identity):
www.cambridgeliteraryfestival.com/whatson/sarah-jayne-blakemore/

Talk from a speaker on the teenage brain, ‘Sarah-Jayne Blakemore’s award-winning ‘Inventing Ourselves’ delves into the mysteries of the adolescent mind, uncovering just what drives the wild risk-taking, intense attachments and challenging behaviour – and highlighting the enormous creativity and opportunity that can be unlocked.‘

Ooooh loving all these links to other extremely fab sounding women scientists, I shall add them to my amazon wish list. Love supporting women researchers and scientists!

Not at the expense of actual research and debate of course. So reserve my right to disagree.

Will spend all day wondering exactly when ginger came to the uk

Perfect Me looks like it sits along side The Affluenza Virus. Absolutely up my street. We are visual, subjective, tribal creatures.

Alice Roberts is the guest on The Life Scientific on Radio 4 in 5 minutes. It's a repeat from this morning.

Listening to her explain her background and go on at length about her love of anatomy and of how to use bones to learn about the people they came from, and then thinking about her hardline "transwomen are women", had me boggling at the radio. It was such a reality gap it gave me a feeling a bit like vertigo.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000lghd

What can we learn from human remains? - Clearly not much unless you know the gender identity of the person they came from.

I'd forgotten the drive by biscuiting. That's a tonic. I think I might go and throw some Jammy Dodgers at passing cars in gratitude for the reminder.

Biscuit and Run

There are more than two sexes. There are people who have two XX chromosomes and a Y.
There are humans with three XXX

There are humans with extra chromosome material in their cells - (trisomy) down syndrome people for example.

There is so much wrong with this, isn't there. The first are disorders in relation to the sex chromosomes. They aren't different sexes.

If as the poster says, a disorder in relation to the sex chromosomes are examples of different sexes, this is problematic in relation to the example given of trisomy. The same premise (according to that posters logic) would lead to people who have chromosomal/genetic disorders being given as examples of different species. It is all quite offensive really.

If as the poster says, a disorder in relation to the sex chromosomes are examples of different sexes, this is problematic in relation to the example given of trisomy. The same premise (according to that posters logic) would lead to people who have chromosomal/genetic disorders being given as examples of different species. It is all quite offensive really.

This is why I lurk on FWR.

Intelligent women who know what they are talking about, and share their knowledge with the rest of us.

Yes nauticant, I listened to a bit of it yesterday and thought the same.

I used to think she was great - a brilliant communicator and good role model for girls interested in science. Perhaps I shouldn't feel this way but I can hardly bear to watch or listen to her now. So disappointing.

@Cailleach1

There are more than two sexes. There are people who have two XX chromosomes and a Y. There are humans with three XXX

There are humans with extra chromosome material in their cells - (trisomy) down syndrome people for example.

There is so much wrong with this, isn't there. The first are disorders in relation to the sex chromosomes. They aren't different sexes.

If as the poster says, a disorder in relation to the sex chromosomes are examples of different sexes, this is problematic in relation to the example given of trisomy. The same premise (according to that posters logic) would lead to people who have chromosomal/genetic disorders being given as examples of different species. It is all quite offensive really.

I was told that my characterisation of XXY etc as DSDs was wrong. I paraphrase, but apparently old, pale, stale, "cishet" men decided they were developmental differences and surely that means it's just sexist and everything-phobic to suggest that they are a difference at all and not just part of the wonderful spectrum of sex.

@Cailleach1

There are more than two sexes. There are people who have two XX chromosomes and a Y. There are humans with three XXX

There are humans with extra chromosome material in their cells - (trisomy) down syndrome people for example.

There is so much wrong with this, isn't there. The first are disorders in relation to the sex chromosomes. They aren't different sexes.

If as the poster says, a disorder in relation to the sex chromosomes are examples of different sexes, this is problematic in relation to the example given of trisomy. The same premise (according to that posters logic) would lead to people who have chromosomal/genetic disorders being given as examples of different species. It is all quite offensive really.

That is such a good point - such a relief to hear logic and facts working together. I am so disappointed with AR - I don’t know how she can reconcile these opposing standpoints in all seriousness.