The pursuit of science is in deep, deep crisis. One of the crowning achievements of the human intellect is on a possibly terminal trajectory back into the darkness of the “demon-haunted world”, as Carl Sagan called it. Everywhere, superstition is displacing scientific reason.
Nowhere more so than in the institutions of science itself. So-called “scientists” are holding up Stone Age superstition as “equal to ‘Western’ science” — and calling down Inquisitions on anyone who disagrees.
Like so much that plagues the Western world, it’s just another front in the Long March through the Institutions, the decades-long Marxist strategy of bringing down the institutions of the West from within. Naturally, they’re attacking science at its weakest point: the so-called “social sciences”.
But they’re gradually moving in on harder and harder targets.
A new school of thought within archaeology is pushing scientists to think twice about assigning gender to ancient human remains.
It is possible to determine whether a skeleton is from a biological male or female using objective observations based on the size and shape of the bones. Criminal forensic detectives, for example, do it frequently in their line of work.
But gender activists argue scientists cannot know how an ancient individual identified themselves.
“You might know the argument that the archaeologists who find your bones one day will assign you the same gender as you had at birth, so regardless of whether you transition, you can’t escape your assigned sex,” tweeted Canadian Master’s degree candidate Emma Palladino last week.
The ludicrous self-contradiction of this nonsense is clear to anyone not encumbered with a modern university education. Sex is gender. Gender is sex. Any argument to the contrary is the most bizarrely dualistic argument made since Rene Descartes claimed that the mind existed entirely separately from the body.
The bizarre self-contradiction doesn’t end there.
This February, University of Kansas Associate Professor Jennifer Raff published “Origin: A Genetic History of the Americas,” in which she argued that there are “no neat divisions between physically or genetically ‘male’ or ‘female’ individuals.”
Raff […] suggested scientists cannot know the gender of a 9,000 year-old biologically Peruvian hunter because they don’t know whether the hunter identified as male or female – a “duality” concept she says was “imposed by Christian colonizers.”
The College Fix
On the contrary, the division between human males and females is about as neat as it’s possible to get in nature. Nearly all humans are genetically either male or female. Of the extremely tiny minority who are not, nearly all of those are phenotypically male or female (that is, their outward appearance conforms to the genetic binary).
Nature is, by, well, nature, rarely neatly divided. Even the boundary between species gets blurred. It should be no surprise that a tiny subset of abnormalities that blurs the genetic binary exists.
Arguing that this disproves the sex/gender binary is like arguing that the occasional unfortunate born with missing or added appendages proves that humans aren’t bipeds with twenty digits.
As for sneering at “duality”: dualism is the very thing these loons are trying to impose on nature. Instead of the demonstrable fact of the duality of sex, they’re trying to impose a supernatural duality: a non-corporeal, intangible “thing” called “gender” which supposedly exists independently of the physical reality of sex.
This is superstition on stilts. Once, we sneered at Mediaeval theologians counting angels on the head of a pin. Now, we’re supposed to bow unquestioningly to post-modern theologians counting genders on the head of a prick.
