4 ms·
I disagree. Science faces a similar problem with homogeniety, specifically in regards to funding usually coming from the state and in general state influence in
by bko 3y ago
I disagree. Science faces a similar problem with homogeniety, specifically in regards to funding usually coming from the state and in general state influence in research.
To take an obvious example, the debate on the impact of sex and physical ability. It's obvious that males have an advantage over women on most physical tasks. I can't find a single event with an objective comparable scoring (e.g. how fast you finished, how high you jumped etc) where males don't outperform at every level by a significant degree. For instance, high school boy records beat pretty much all female world records in track [0]. And this is fine. We adapt societally by having women's leagues. And every scientist would admit this up until maybe 5 years ago. But now there is a growing "scientific consensus" that really it's some other societal effect.
Humans knew this to be true for thousands of years, but in the last 5 years we're beginning to upturn that for some reason. So maybe some deference to the past is warranted. If thousands of years from now the "consensus" still says sex doesn't really matter, then I'll grant you that. But for now the "scientific consensus" doesn't make something true
[0] https://boysvswomen.com/ https://boysvswomen.com/
[1] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/to-understand-sex-we-need-to-ask-the-right-questions/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/to-understand-sex...
- nickelpro 3y agoThe problems of homogeneity among hard sciences is in no way bettered or solved by introducing quackery and conspiracy theories to the mix. The rest of your post is insane, "War on Christmas"-style. No one reputable is claiming men and women are biologically equivalent in all things.
- bko 3y agoIs scientific American not reputabl? Here are a number of articles suggesting various arguments that there is no physical advantage of males in sports https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trans-girls-belong-on-girls-sports-teams/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trans-girls-belon... https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/hormone-levels-are-being-used-to-discriminate-against-female-athletes/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/hormone-levels-ar... https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/to-understand-sex-we-need-to-ask-the-right-questions/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/to-understand-sex... https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the-idea-of-2-sexes-is-overly-simplistic1/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the...
- nickelpro 3y agoNone of those articles argue that men and women are biologically equivalent in all things. If I might summarize, they mostly argue that hormonal arguments towards unfair advantages in certain sports understate the already existing disparities in hormonal distribution in a given sex. That a given trans athlete might be less hormonally advantaged than a cis woman who competes uncontroversially. The latter articles are even less supportive of your point, and mostly discuss the uncontroversial point that binary biological sex is an incomplete model of humanity as a whole. These are reasonable and evidence-based discussions to have.
- bko 3y ago> the uncontroversial point that binary biological sex is an incomplete model of humanity as a whole. Why does sex have to be a complete model of humanity? It's real and useful. For instance as a male I don't bother getting mamograms. Sex tells you more about predisposition of health conditions than any other factor apart from maybe age and weight. Let's not pretend it doesn't exist
- AlexandrB 3y ago> Let's not pretend it doesn't exist This is a common straw man. No trans advocate I've heard pretends that sex doesn't exist. Indeed, what would be the point of medically transitioning if one thought sex wasn't real? Instead it seems like trans opponents like to pretend that sex is the only thing that exists or that gender identity and expression do not exist. Additionally, sex is more complicated than a binary m/f - the obvious examples of intersex individuals or androgen insensitivity[1] come to mind. So yes, sex exists, it's not a binary state, and it's connected to but not fully descriptive of gender identity. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrom...
- kraftman 3y agoYou seem to have missed these sections: "It turns out that when transgender girls play on girls’ sports teams, cisgender girls can win. In fact, the vast majority of female athletes are cisgender, as are the vast majority of winners. There is no epidemic of transgender girls dominating female sports. " "The Olympics have had trans-inclusive policies since 2004, but a single openly transgender athlete has yet to even qualify." etc. If trans people have such an obvious advantage why aren't they dominating every single category of every single strength-involving event?
- didibus 3y agoI feel like we're just getting more precise. It's not actually true that all men are physically stronger than all women. Some men are physically stronger than some women, and some women are physically stronger than some men. In the past, we were generalizing and that created falsehoods. Now we're able to be much more precise to the actual true reality. It's also true that social factors play a role. We've never properly accounted for that, so it's much more true today to caveat with the fact that we don't know how much social factors play a role. It's probably not the most influential factor, but it's probably a part of the equation.
- pvg 3y agoWikipedia is an encyclopedia, not science and an encyclopedia is not a collection of all human knowledge, it's not an archive. Fringe stuff goes out the same way page-for-every-pokemon-evolution goes out.