Cor, I'm loving the extra science in here! Cheers for the link @nauticant .
This reads like a bad A level essay.
First red flag:
" we studied ancient DNA (aDNA) from the skeletal remains to infer the chromosomal sex of the individual."
Definitions from Oxford Languages:
infer- verb
deduce or conclude (something) from evidence and reasoning rather than from explicit statements.
One doesn't need to "infer" from specific test results. You can infer from what you know of the world that the sun will rise tomorrow. You don't infer that it's sunny right now if you look out and see the sun, you observe it.
Also "Some recent studies suggest that brains produce personality, cognition, and behaviour similarly regardless of chromosomal sex"
No, really? Quick, phone the Department of stating the bleeding obvious! Behaviour and personality aren't caused by sex!
Also "brains produce cognition" - no they don't, they carry out the process of cognition.
"The binary division of sexes is arguably rooted in a modern, western mindset"
Psst, 2 sexes is how humans reproduce, its got nothing to do with a 'modern mindset'. Sex stereotypes, that's another matter entirely. The two concepts are not the same thing. Someone send these people back to retake GCSE biology. And maybe reading comprehension.
They seem to be saying that behaviour isn't determined by sex - whoda thunk it? But then they go on to say because the subject seems to have had
XXY chromosomes (a male with Klinefelter syndrome), that means they must have been non binary. Why? Where is their evidence that
XXY chromosomes are
expressed as a non binary gender? And what do they mean by "gender"? A good writer defines their terms.
This seems like more co opting of the existence of chromosomal differences to support a belief in gender ideology.
I don't think the authors demonstrate much understanding of what words mean, which means I don't have much hope of their research making sense.
Also, I have swords and I know how to use them. Does that make me not a woman?
No. No it doesn't.