DiscussionBeing associated with radical feminism is dragging this movement down.

submitted by Astrid2448 from (self.LGBDropTheT)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
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 -  (2 children)

Can you give me examples of radfems denying science?

[–]GConly 7 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

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.

[–]lairacunda 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Cordelia Fine wrote a really good book on this. My takeaway was that brains have plasticity and are shaped by the person's experiences, thoughts, emotions, etc. But these are highly gendered experiences, thoughts, emotions, etc., because the people having them are in sexed bodies whose experiences of life are different. So it's not about the denial of science, it's about the nuances that people invested in pink and blue brains won't allow for. For example, out of Fine's book, Delusions of Gender, women do just as well and even better in math when they go to all-female schools, take tests in all-female environments, when the tester does not prime them for failure by remarking that males do better on that test. That's the interesting backdrop to STEM which is not universally male-dominated. Nope, in some countries there are more women than men in the sciences, just like in India construction is a female occupation.