you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]bastetkat 53 insightful - 2 fun53 insightful - 1 fun54 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Can you give me examples of radfems denying science?

[–]GConly 7 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

Can you give me examples of radfems denying science?

I can.

So the overwhelming majority of researchers looking at sexual differentiation in the human brain will tell you that there is a difference, and you can affect adult behaviour and sexual orientation with prenatal hormones.

The radfems post the same paper by Daphne Joel on a loop (she claims there are virtually no differences) even though multiple neuroscientists have written strong critiques of it, pointing out that you can spot the sex of someone from a brain scan about 95% of the time. Where you can't, it's almost always because the person is gay.

So.. this same crappy and debunked paper is their some source of 'no such thing as brain sex', it gets endlessly recycled and they ignore the thousands, and I'm not exaggerating, of papers and neuroscientists that have the opposite opinion. We've known since the fifties that prenatal testosterone affects adult aggression and play behaviour in mammals. We even know that giving it to female embryos at different times can give you a lesbian or tomboy monkey.

If you don't tow the line on this, sooner or later they will block you.

The reason they stick to it is that they are heavily invested in the Marxist viewpoint that all inequality is caused by environment and discrimination. They are heavily anti capitalist and pro socialist.

If they accept that average man and woman have different levels of aggression, interest in STEM, etc, they lose their basis to claim that that income and outcome differences are caused by oppression. Bang goes their 'we are oppressed' leverage. They'd lose the victim card.

It makes them look like a complete bunch of muppets to anyone who studies the subject.

[–]weakfantasy 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Daphne Joel is not nearly the only neuroscientist that criticizes stereotypical ideas about brain sex. The very black and white, women are from venus and men are from mars vision of male/female brains has been even more strongly critiqued in the last decades with the discovery that many areas of the brain are not sexually dimorphic. I think you are also misrepresenting that stance, which is that radfems and those neuroscientists don't deny sex differences, but the way that they are grossly distorted in popular culture, from the 1800s where they found women's brains to be lighter and therefore it was decided it made them inferior, to the point that men think they have female brains if they have traits associated with women. Some good reading : https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896627311010439 https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/10/151029185544.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/01/170117135943.htm https://www.haaretz.com/.premium-male-vs-female-brains-1.5326598 https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/talking-back/is-the-brain-gendereda-q-a-with-harvard-s-catherine-dulac/

[–]MezozoicGayoldschool gay 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Whole male/female brain idea is the basis of current gender ideology. While oldschool transsexuals had no deal with it at all.

[–]reluctant_commenter 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

which is that radfems and those neuroscientists don't deny sex differences,

I don't know about radfems, but neuroscientists and gender psychology researchers definitely used to.

The articles you listed are quite recent. I'm glad things are moving more in a direction of nuance, seems like it's sorely needed. I'll take a look.