The Scientific American published an op-ed claiming the definition of male and female is fluid. Ova and sperm don’t make a woman or a man, according to The Scientific American.
When The Scientific American rejects biology, you know you’re in trouble.
The point seems to be that the animal kingdom doesn’t limit itself, so we shouldn’t either.
“The bottom line is that while animal gametes can be described as binary (of two distinct kinds), the physiological systems, behaviors, and individuals that produce them are not. ,” author Augustin Fuentes wrote.
…
“So when someone states that “An organism’s sex is defined by the type of gamete (sperm or ova) it has the function of producing” and argues that legal and social policy should be “rooted in properties of bodies,” they are not really talking about gametes and sex biology. They are arguing for a specific political, and discriminatory, definition of what is “natural” and “right” for humans based on a false representation of biology.”
…
“Given what we know about biology across animals and in humans, efforts to represent human sex as binary based solely on what gametes one produces are not about biology but are about trying to restrict who counts as a full human in society.”
This is not science. It’s the twisting of science. We should be able to define a woman and a man. No one is saying that someone with gender dysphoria isn’t a “full human.”
Trust the science. A woman is whatever a person calling themselves a woman wants it to be, apparently. pic.twitter.com/zqmvKySqir
— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) May 1, 2023
Fuentes is a Professor of Anthropology at Princeton. One of his books is Monogamy and Other Lies They Told You. He’s an iconoclast. Fuentes is overthinking the definition of male and female. It’s not that hard.
You can comment on the article after the ads and subscribe to the Daily Newsletter here if you would like a quick view of the articles of the day and any late news:
For those of us trained in the sciences when ‘science’ was still science, we can only look on with horror and amazement.
The use of ‘science’ as a political tool illustrates that the scientific method is no longer in use.
When one looks at the illogical theory of evolution and it’s ridiculous acceptance as fact. wen it does not meet the criteria of real science, one can see how lost the current generation has become. The old saying from the early days of computers is still true: garbage in! garbage out!
When the presuppositions are based in fantasy and not in fact disaster should not be a surprise.
What we are about to see is Darwinism on a massive scale where the Liberals exterminate themselves!
May your dreams come true