Queer Theory is big in anthropology

It's shocking how stupid educated people can be. Maybe it's because women outnumber men in college degrees (since 2008). And you can't compromise with them. It's gone way beyond using the correct pronoun with a colleague or not dead naming people, now they must foist their insane beliefs on people dead for thousands of years. We lost the battle when we agreed to use the word "gender" as a biological thing instead of a sick fantasy. Leftists have created a new tower of Babel in attempting to be god. It won't end well.

"We used to say there’s sex, and gender. Sex is biological, and gender is not. Then it’s no, you can no longer talk about sex. Sex and gender are one, and separating the two makes you a transphobe, when of course it doesn’t. In anthropology and many topics, the goalposts are continuously moved. And, because of that, we need to stand up and say, “I’m not moving from my place unless there’s good scientific evidence that my place is wrong.” And I don’t think there is good scientific evidence that there are more than two sexes." Elizabeth Weiss, a professor of anthropology at San José State University, whose panel discussion for the November Toronto conference was deep-sixed as not being "settled science." https://www.city-journal.org/article/dis-empaneled?

There is much to respond to in this portion of AAA’s statement. First, it’s ironic for the organization to accuse scientists of committing the “cardinal sin” of “assuming the truth” of something, and then to justify cancelling those scientists’ panel on the grounds that the panelists refuse to accept purportedly “settled science.” Second, the panel was organized to discuss biological sex (i.e., the biology of males and females), not “gender roles”; pivoting from discussions of basic biology to murkier debates about sex-related social roles and expectations is a common tactic of gender ideologues. Third, the AAA’s argument that a person’s “gender role” might not “align neatly” with his or her reproductive anatomy implies the existence of normative behaviors for members of each sex. Indeed, this is a central tenet of gender ideology that many people dispute and warrants the kind of discussion the panel intended to provide.  (Colin Wright, author of the CJ article)