In this thread, I asked "When has *one* general classification from the research field of biology. . .ever mattered in this way, let alone dictated, how to make laws within human society and its political systems?"
A few more thoughts on that. 1/
A few more thoughts on that. 1/
Those of you who have followed recent debates on trans rights will know that "it's simple biology!", "biology says so, it's a science!," "nobody can go against their biology!", "it's about sex not gender, and we must listen to biology on that!" are recurring claims. 2/
We have heard some philosophers make these kinds of claims, many pundits make these claims, some social scientists make them, and I've heard at least one biologist (Colin Wright) propound them as well. 3/
Whenever stated, these claim are meant to blow other claims out of the water. Simply because "Science!" (Please enjoy attached Jon Kay ridiculousness to that effect.)
But they don't blow other claims out of the water. They can barely even hold themselves up as relevant. 4/
But they don't blow other claims out of the water. They can barely even hold themselves up as relevant. 4/
The relevant questions are:
How should the state be able to know us? Why and how?
What information does the state need to record about each of us? Why and how?
What information about us does the state need to display on documentation? Why and how?
5/
How should the state be able to know us? Why and how?
What information does the state need to record about each of us? Why and how?
What information about us does the state need to display on documentation? Why and how?
5/
These are political questions, not biological ones. States like to measure their citizens, yes, and they have done so for a long time. But biology alone cannot answer us the political questions of what kinds of measures those should be and how they should be used. 6/
Among the disciplines that involve some measure of humans, biology is perhaps the least equipped to be part of this debate. Biologists, please to prove me wrong. It would be awesome, actually, if more of you could speak with insight for your discipline in this public fight. 7/
What we do not need is mere confirmation of how biology measures, classifies, discusses sex. What we need is informed contributions on how these forms of classification interact with human societies, their histories and cultures. We are not distant creatures to be classified. 8/
As human researchers who study humans, we classify ourselves. We are aware of how others classify us. We interact with our classifications. We think about the ethics of classification.
That is what this debate is about. 9/
That is what this debate is about. 9/
"But biology! Science!" is an undue shortcut.
It is often used to avoid more relevant questions.
It is used to sideline those who have the expertise to contribute to those more relevant questions.
10/
It is often used to avoid more relevant questions.
It is used to sideline those who have the expertise to contribute to those more relevant questions.
10/
@threadreaderapp unroll
