Two secular biologists have penned an op-ed combating the notion that biological sex may be more than just male and female, and contending that gender identity ideology has “no basis in reality” but is rather harmful to society. They urged those in the science and medical fields to “stand up for the empirical reality of biological sex.”
“If male and female are merely arbitrary groupings, it follows that everyone, regardless of genetics or anatomy should be free to choose to identify as male or female, or to reject sex entirely in favor of a new bespoke ‘gender identity,'” wrote Colin Wright and Emma Hilton. “To characterize this line of reasoning as having no basis in reality would be an egregious understatement. It is false at every conceivable scale of resolution.”
Wright is an evolutionary biologist at Penn State University and Hilton is a developmental biologist at the University of Manchester.
They outlined that in both human and animal life, biological sex corresponds with reproductive anatomy and the subsequent use of sex cells — whether egg or sperm — to reproduce.
“No third type of sex cell exists in humans, and therefore there is no sex spectrum or additional sexes beyond male and female,” Wright and Hilton wrote. “Sex is binary.”
While intersex individuals, those who were born with ambiguous reproductive organs, do exist and are very much a rarity, they are “neither a third sex nor proof that sex is a spectrum or a social construct.”
The biologists opined that rejecting biological sex for subjective “gender identity” is detrimental to society as it abrogates the work of those who have sought, for example, protections for women — if being a woman is simply up to an individual’s feelings.
“Women have fought hard for sex-based legal protections. Female-only spaces are necessary due to the pervasive threat of male violence and sexual assault. Separate sporting categories are also necessary to ensure that women and girls don’t have to face competitors who have acquired the irreversible performance-enhancing effects conferred by male puberty,” they wrote.
“The different reproductive roles of males and females require laws to safeguard women from discrimination in the workplace and elsewhere. The falsehood that sex is rooted in subjective identity instead of objective biology renders all these sex-based rights impossible to enforce,” Wright and Hilton said.
They also stated that gender ideology eradicates the concept of homosexuality as “same-sex attraction is meaningless without the distinction between the sexes.”
Children are particularly at risk as they are being roped into the “cultural confusion” that if a girl behaves more in a tomboy fashion and a boy takes an interest in female things that they must be transgender. Puberty-blocking drugs and other so-called treatments only set them on a path that could render the individual permanently infertile, they contended.
“The time for politeness on this issue has passed. Biologists and medical professionals need to stand up for the empirical reality of biological sex,” Wright and Hilton concluded. “When authoritative scientific institutions ignore or deny empirical fact in the name of social accommodation, it is an egregious betrayal to the scientific community they represent. It undermines public trust in science, and it is dangerously harmful to those most vulnerable.”
As previously reported, a Christian psychiatrist from Spain remarked to Evangelical Focus this week that gender ideology is simply a “variant of atheistic humanism” — placing oneself as their own god rather than Christ.
“The root of the conflict is not cultural or ideological, it is a moral one. Ultimately, it is not a matter of a new philosophy, but a matter of who has the authority in my life and in the world. Does anyone rule up there or can I rule?” explained Pablo Martinez of the RZ Foundation for the Dialogue between Faith and Culture.
“In the midst of this moral landscape, gender ideology is nourished by two of these consequences: individualism and self-deification. If the truth is within me, then I am the truth,” he outlined. “Let’s observe the subtle parallel of this idea with Jesus’ statement ‘I am … the truth and the life’ (John 14: 6). This usurpation feeds the fantasies of omnipotence that the human being has always had: ‘You will be like gods.'”
“It is ultimately a faith in yourself, a variant of the atheistic humanism that enthrones the ‘I’ as its god,” Martinez said. “It is very significant that one of its favorite words is ‘empowerment.’ Empowering means ‘getting power.’ That is its dream, its untouchable idol. If I can empower myself, then I can do with my life what I want.”
2 Corinthians 5:15 teaches, “He died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto Him which died for them and rose again.”