3 ms·

I don’t actually see any mention of gender identity other than a bit in the introduction that says they’re going to ignore it? Anyway, science has always been

I don’t actually see any mention of gender identity other than a bit in the introduction that says they’re going to ignore it? Anyway, science has always been political, and will continue to be for as long as it’s carried out by humans. (The least charged [hah!] example that immediately comes to mind is Millikan’s measurements of the electron.) Comparing this to Lysenko seems a bit of a stretch, though; this is more akin to the euphemism treadmill, where scientists find that they must select their words very carefully to tiptoe through a thicket of popular opinion. The problem is that, because gender has become a hot-button political issue, textbook authors have to take the Standard Scientific Asterisk (“things are complicated, boundaries are fuzzy, this is a simplification”) and write it out in excruciating detail to prevent their textbook from being cited as ‘proof’ by biological essentialists using it to further their agenda. Eventually the march of progress will (hopefully) relegate all this to a footnote again, but for the moment it’s visible as a lump in the text: a metaphorical callous developed from constant prodding.

kardianos 4y ago
[flagged]
- pessimizer 4y ago
  The famous Marxian gender essays.
  - kardianos 4y ago
    Yes, many radical gender theorists are self proclaimed Marxists.
  - elefanten 4y ago
    No, gp is referring to 1) Marx's claim that social institutions (such as "the scientific community") are part of a superstructure that reinforces and maintains the base mode of production, and 2) Marx's historical materialist position that history unfolds on a set path.
    - kardianos 4y ago
      Correct.
- wolfgang42 4y ago
  (I encountered Marx very briefly in school; the impression I get of his theories is “history has been happening for ages; it will do what I think for exactly one more cycle and then stop” but that’s about the extent of my knowledge on the topic.) At any rate, I was using “march of progress” in the colloquial sense: I intended that “(hopefully)” to indicate that I don’t view it as inevitable; but the scientific method has, historically, tended to converge on reality, albeit often in fits and starts. > We must proceed with care and for great respect for the reality that is. Indeed, which is why the textbooks have become encrusted with such scar tissue: the authors are trying to preclude the present wave of reactionary activism which is impetuously twisting things to fit their conclusion.

kardianos 4y ago

[flagged]

pessimizer 4y ago
The famous Marxian gender essays.
- kardianos 4y ago
  Yes, many radical gender theorists are self proclaimed Marxists.
- elefanten 4y ago
  No, gp is referring to 1) Marx's claim that social institutions (such as "the scientific community") are part of a superstructure that reinforces and maintains the base mode of production, and 2) Marx's historical materialist position that history unfolds on a set path.
  - kardianos 4y ago
    Correct.
wolfgang42 4y ago
(I encountered Marx very briefly in school; the impression I get of his theories is “history has been happening for ages; it will do what I think for exactly one more cycle and then stop” but that’s about the extent of my knowledge on the topic.) At any rate, I was using “march of progress” in the colloquial sense: I intended that “(hopefully)” to indicate that I don’t view it as inevitable; but the scientific method has, historically, tended to converge on reality, albeit often in fits and starts. > We must proceed with care and for great respect for the reality that is. Indeed, which is why the textbooks have become encrusted with such scar tissue: the authors are trying to preclude the present wave of reactionary activism which is impetuously twisting things to fit their conclusion.