Those are good reasons, true.

Why is he still drawing breath?

They are not always so distinct, and your definition of sex=gametes is completely arbitrary semantics that only serves to marginalize people.

It’s not my definition of course. And the binary nature of mammalian sex “marginalises” no one. Does the binocular vision of mammals marginalise the blind? Mammals have two kidneys but people born with renal agenesis have one or none, and yet no one is arguing that the mammalian renal system “is a spectrum”. Why use such obfuscatory language?

Why not describe human locomotion as a spectrum?

Because that would be factually incorrect at every level. Humans are bipedal. Canis lupis is quadropedal. If you describe both as having “spectral locomotive” properties, you have no language to distinguish between them. It is a ludicrous exercise in semantics that adds nothing to the explanatory power of science and only diminishes it.

The essay is not specifically targeted at scientists.

Of course it is “Biology faces a grave threat from “progressive” politics that are changing the way our work is done, delimiting areas of biology that are taboo and will not be funded by the government or published in scientific journals…”

clearly this is not in reference to random joes, but to career sceintists who decide what is funded or published.

You may be shocked to learn that “non-scientists” also read scientific journals and may also care about proper allocation of research funding. I am not a professional (or amateur even) tennis player yet the governance of the sport is of interest to me and many other “non-tennis” players.

It is not always worth having ideas challenged.

Oh no, it is always worth it. JS Mill makes the case for the vital necessity of dissent in ‘on liberty’ which is far too long to paste here but should he added to anyone’s reading list.

i’m not wasting my time with people arguing in bad faith like this article clearly is.

Then why engage? Why profess your desire to remain ignorant of the text? It adds nothing. Simply hold your peace and move on.

They contradict themselves in the very same sentence. “nearly every human on earth falls into one of two distinct categories” is just another way of saying "sex is a spectrum

That’s not a contradiction because a binary with some exceptions is not, therefore, a spectrum. A spectrum is a continuously varying attribute like height. An individual can move along the height spectrum. There is no continuous variable in mammalian sex; there are only two discrete gametes.

You may as well say humans aren’t bipedal because some individuals have one leg or none. But to describe human locomotion as a spectrum would be laughably misleading. And why corrupt the language in this way? Ideology, of course.

deserve to be considered in scientific research.

They are that’s why we know about them. Strawman suggesting the authors are implying NOT including them in research.

2. All behavioral and psychological differences between human males and females are due to socialization.

I very much doubt this is a common statement made by any legitimate scientist.

The essay is not specifically targeted at scientists. They cite examples of blankslate-ism in the media and the idea itself as a theory of mind has been around in philosophy from the likes of John Locke and Descarte.

Good psychologists of course know the effects of evolution and sexual dichotomy on human psychology, but this doesn’t always penetrate into society at large.

Given that they opened their article with these two clearly IDEOLOGICAL statements, I see no reason to read any further. The authors need to examine themselves for ideological biases, not accuse everyone else of it.

It’s worth a read and it’s not terribly long. Always worth to have ideas challenged.

Men harming ex-partners. Unfortunately not uncommon.

Well Rishi I was on the fence but fuck me you’ve sold me.

Sorry where is the ‘neuroscience’ in the article?

deleted by creator

Oh my mistake there then. Rockhoppers are one species that are monogamous for life.

That doesn’t explain why the same couples keep coming back to each other season after season.

A BTG a day keeps the vatniks at bay.

10 hours per month? It’s a start at least.

Thanks, I guess it was the part where how this caused “malicious harm” given he didn’t reveal any sort of hidden scandal or illegal acitivty but the other user explained it’ll result in patients being afraid to access medical care which is beginning to make sense to me. I’m not based in the US, this is all so alien to me.

Thank for taking the time to lay that out for me. I am unable to comprehend the motives, but that at least starts to explain it. Unthinkable.

Dude forgot his hippocratic oath.

Could you spell it out for me? Genuinely drawing a blank here.

Edit: No need, some kind user came through. Horrifying.

It just says he passed it on to conversative activists, I still cannot begin to understand how this furthers a conservative agenda? The hospital wasn’t doing anything illegal and now he’s looking at a 10 year prison sentence. He committed a felony, threw away his entire career and he didn’t even ‘own the libs’.

Dolphins have been observed engaging in purely recreational sex.

Penguins are monogamous and that applies to gay penguins as well.

Here’s two that built a nest together https://mashable.com/article/same-sex-penguin-couple

Animals don’t think “I’m gonna go find another dude to have gay sex with,” they just get the urge and act on it with whoever looks good nearby.

Several animal species are famously monogamous, penguns for example.

If the government wants more babies surely it would be more effective to invest in childcare and a mandatory reduction of working hours to something more manageable?