That “paper” literally starts off deliberately conflating sex and gender in order to muddy the waters to reframe the conversation. He used a lot of words to essentially define male as “has penis that can go in vagina for purpose of procreation” and female as “has vagina to receive penis for purpose of procreation” (which still wouldn’t make sex binary since intersex exist) and had very little to do with biology on the whole.
The paper is peer-reviewed, from a Evolutionary Biology PhD, submitted to a journal specializing in the topic. He starts off talking about sex, mentions gender briefly for context, and then sticks to sex for the rest of the paper. The mention is “In recent years, however, this previously uncontroversial fact has been challenged in popular discourse, […] seemingly driven by cultural and political debates surrounding the concept of “gender identity” and transgender rights.” The paper is entirely about sex, and says “some people misunderstand sex because of gender”. That’s not conflating sex and gender, that’s specifically calling out other people that have confused them.
The thesis relies on conflating sex and gender. Sex from an evolutionary biology standpoint and gender from a modern sociology standpoint are mutually exclusive. Literally apples to oranges.
The thesis relies on explicitly differentiating sex from gender, because it defends the overwhelming consensus in biology that sex is binary. It doesn’t address gender at all other than to briefly note that some people confuse them.
That “paper” literally starts off deliberately conflating sex and gender in order to muddy the waters to reframe the conversation. He used a lot of words to essentially define male as “has penis that can go in vagina for purpose of procreation” and female as “has vagina to receive penis for purpose of procreation” (which still wouldn’t make sex binary since intersex exist) and had very little to do with biology on the whole.
The paper is peer-reviewed, from a Evolutionary Biology PhD, submitted to a journal specializing in the topic. He starts off talking about sex, mentions gender briefly for context, and then sticks to sex for the rest of the paper. The mention is “In recent years, however, this previously uncontroversial fact has been challenged in popular discourse, […] seemingly driven by cultural and political debates surrounding the concept of “gender identity” and transgender rights.” The paper is entirely about sex, and says “some people misunderstand sex because of gender”. That’s not conflating sex and gender, that’s specifically calling out other people that have confused them.
🤦
You should fix your ignorance. It’s painful
The thesis relies on conflating sex and gender. Sex from an evolutionary biology standpoint and gender from a modern sociology standpoint are mutually exclusive. Literally apples to oranges.
The thesis relies on explicitly differentiating sex from gender, because it defends the overwhelming consensus in biology that sex is binary. It doesn’t address gender at all other than to briefly note that some people confuse them.