“Gender” ideology is entrenched scientific denial

In the 80s and 90s fashionable ?progressives? sneered at the religious right?s embrace of Creationism and ?Intelligent Design?. At its worst, ?ID? was indeed little more than ?Creationism gussied up in scientific-sounding prose?, but, as philosopher Thomas Nagel argues, its more sophisticated arguments are less easily dismissed, and at least pose a thoughtful challenge to some of the weaker scientific arguments.

But, as an evolutionary biologist writes in Quillette, the waning of Creationism on the right has been more than compensated by the rise of a new brand of evolution denial on the left.

The fashionable dogma challenged by evolution today is the ?progressive? belief that sex is non-binary and infinitely malleable. Creationists fought to erase evolution from textbooks, the new deniers are fighting even more viciously to expunge science that challenges their whacky ideology. Quote:

The group that most fervently opposed, and still opposes, evolutionary explanations for behavioral sex differences in humans were/are social justice activists?armed with what they perceive to be an indisputable truth questioned only by sexist bigots, they respond with well-practiced outrage to alternative views. This has resulted in a chilling effect that causes scientists to self-censor?

As a biologist, it is hard to understand how anyone could believe something so outlandish. It?s a belief on a par with the belief in a flat Earth. End of quote.

As Orwell said, you have to belong to the ?intelligentsia? to believe certain outlandish things. These over-educated ignoramuses sprang from the fluffiest fringe of the humanities. Unlike the intellectually rigorous end of the humanities, like philosophy, an inability to think coupled with a general ignorance of science is no hindrance to a stellar career in marshmallow-brained disciplines like ?gender studies?.

What is infinitely worse is when these power-mad know-nothings start bullying the sciences ? who should know better ? into complicity. Quote:

Even more recently, the most prestigious scientific journal in the world, Nature, published an editorial claiming that classifying people?s sex ?on the basis of anatomy or genetics should be abandoned? and ?has no basis in science? and that ?the research and medical community now sees sex as more complex than male and female.? In the Nature article, the motive is stated clearly enough: acknowledging the reality of biological sex will ?undermine efforts to reduce discrimination against transgender people and those who do not fall into the binary categories of male or female.? End of quote.

In other words, it?s not science, it?s politics. This is only about making a bunch of mentally ill men in dresses and women with beards happy ? which they almost never are, of course ? and furthering a power-mad neo-Marxist agenda.

Because, despite what Bill Nye the creepy anti-science-guy says, sex in humans is binary. That?s all there is to it. Quote:

The final result of sex development in humans are unambiguously male or female over 99.98 percent of the time?intersex conditions correspond to less than 0.02 percent of all births, and intersex people are not a third sex. Intersex is simply a catch-all category for sex ambiguity and/or a mismatch between sex genotype and phenotype, regardless of its etiology. Furthermore, the claim that ?sex is a spectrum? is also misleading, as a spectrum implies a continuous distribution?Biological sex in humans, however, is clear-cut over 99.98 percent of the time. End of quote.

But this is about power, facts be damned. Quote:

Despite the unquestionable reality of biological sex in humans, social justice and trans activists continue to push this belief, and respond with outrage when challenged?.Twitter [is] now actively banning users for stating true facts about basic human biology. And biologists like myself often sit quietly, afraid to defend our own field?

Back when evolution was under attack from proponents of Biblical Creation and Intelligent Design, academic scientists were under no pressure to hold back criticism. This is because these anti-evolution movements were almost exclusively a product of right-wing evangelicals who held no power in academia. Now we have a much bigger problem, because evolution denialism is back, but this time it?s coming from left-wing activists who do hold power in academia. End of quote.

As Cpl. Dwayne Hicks once said, ?Nuke the entire site from orbit–it’s the only way to be sure?.