383
submitted 5 days ago by Valuy@lemmy.zip to c/world@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 days ago

He uses the justification to talk about sex. The paper is limited to talking about sex. If that's transphobic, then reality is transphobic.

[-] edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago

No he goes out of his way to being up gender and conflate sex and gender to push his transphobic agenda, like you're doing right now too. Gender isn't relevant when discussing gametes but he specifically goes out of his way to conflate gender and sex because he's a transphobic pushing an agenda. He's not respected and generally fringe in his field because he uses junk science to push right wing culture war bullshit. And on top of it all an evolutionary biologist is in no way an expert on anything gender related what with gender having nothing to do with evolutionary biology which again doubles down that he and you are pushing a bigot agenda. Fuck off bigot. Gamete differentiation in mammals is not in any way relevant to any discussion on gender, but you know that because you're here in bad faith to be transphobic. And all this because you right wing chuds are afraid to admit you're attracted to chicks with dicks.

[-] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 days ago

Where does that paper conflate sex and gender, exactly? You're not just making shit up, are you?

And you're wrong yet again. Here's another well-respected biologist confirming that author:

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2025/04/03/colin-wright-gives-a-history-of-the-gametic-definition-of-biological-sex/

The historical and scientific record is clear: from the 19th century to the present day, biologists, medical professionals, philosophers of science, and evolutionary theorists have used gamete type as the defining criterion for sex. This document compiles citations from that record, providing a reference point for students, scientists, educators, and anyone interested in understanding what “male” and “female” mean in biological terms.

These citations span more than a century of scientific literature, showing that the gamete-based definition of sex is not a recent invention or a reactionary response, but a longstanding, fundamental biological principle. While sex roles and secondary sex characteristics can vary, the definition of the sexes does not: male and female are reproductive categories rooted in the type of gamete an individual has the function to produce.

So much for those chowderheads who say that, using the gametic definition, neither a pre-puberty human, a postmenopausal woman, or a sterile person can be male or female. If you see this argument, you know you’re dealing with someone who’s intellectually dishonest.

Here's plenty more people with the credentials of your choice signing a statement affirming the same:

https://projectnettie.wordpress.com/

(Because it needs to be said for some particularly dim-witted individuals, the fact that's it's hosted on wordpress is immaterial. It's about who signed the statement)

Fuck's sake. It is incontestable that this is the scientific consensus. Argue that you want to change it by providing a better framework if you want. Stop lying.

And not that it matters, but I'm a better leftist than you are. Don't be a shitlib. Do better.

this post was submitted on 21 May 2026
383 points (96.6% liked)

World News

56254 readers
2346 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS