Sean Carroll, you don't need to pretend humans can change their sex to defend trans rights.

Sean Carroll does a "what about Intersex?" to reject the human sex binary

The march of gender ideology continues to capture otherwise rational minds. The latest casualty appears to be American Physicist Sean Carroll.

It’s a strong indicator of how far this mind virus has spread that a statement such as the one below could prompt a renowned physicist to publicly object:

Colin Wright @SwipeWright

Biological sex is real, immutable, and binary.

“Biological sex is real, immutable, and binary”.

Colin Wright

is an evolutionary biologist stating an objective fact about the biological reality of human sex. This isn’t a mere opinion—it’s a scientific fact. There are few things in the field of biology that are so emphatically true as the human sex binary.

If anyone were able to demonstrate that human sex wasn’t binary and immutable, their research would win them a Nobel prize and revolutionise our entire understanding of biology. But no such peer-reviewed research exists—for obvious reasons.

This doesn’t stop people that really should know better from from wading in with this sort of stuff though:

Sean Carroll @seanmcarroll

Actual science would like a word.

Colin Wright @SwipeWright

Biological sex is real, immutable, and binary.

Sean seems to arrogantly think he has the ‘actual science’ on his side when rejecting the binary nature of human sex. But in reality, all Sean is doing with this borrowed graphic is using the existence of intersex conditions as a jumping off point for some faulty conclusions.

The existence of intersex conditions or DSDs (difference in sex development) appears to be the graphic’s sole argument against the gender binary. However, although intersex people do exist (as a tiny minority ) they do not constitute a third or separate human sex. In fact, certain intersex conditions are entirely sex-specific—meaning some of them only affect men, and some of them only affect women. And the idea that someone with a ‘micropenis’ or an abnormally large clitoris is no longer unambiguously male or female is as false as it is harmful.

Development Biologist Emma Hilton highlights the peculiar claims within the graphic when she notes:

Emma Hilton @FondOfBeetles

Hello @seanmcarroll Can you explain why this chart places unambiguous males (testes, vas deferens etc, prostate, penis, scrotum) as “more female” than females with ovaries, uterus etc, vagina and an enlarged clitoris?

Sean Carroll @seanmcarroll

Actual science would like a word. https://t.co/pQfMYUqjU7 https://t.co/X76UWJQYCm

And whereas some of the graphic is just outright wrong, much of it doesn’t make sense enough to even be wrong:

Emma Hilton @FondOfBeetles

Why does the chart map males with high testosterone who don’t have a DSD (although they may have other medical issues) to a pathway that says they have normal ovaries/uterus/etc and might suffer irregular periods. I mean, huh? 😂

Thankfully, evolutionary Biologist Jerry Coyne is on hand to succinctly explain the human sex binary in simple terms:

Jerry Coyne @Evolutionistrue

"Actual science" done by biologists shows 2 sexes, one with small mobile gametes and the other with large, immobile ones. There is no third sex. Disorders of sex development are not new sexes, and biological sex is binary. Let's not conflate sex, gender & developmental anomalies.

Sean Carroll @seanmcarroll

Actual science would like a word. https://t.co/pQfMYUqjU7 https://t.co/X76UWJQYCm

And here is a clip from a discussion I had with Colin Wright on this very issue. In under 9 minutes he explains how we know human sex is binary and why intersex conditions do not change this fact:

I suspect the willingness to unthinkingly push pseudoscience of this sort is well-intentioned. People seem to believe that one must reject the human sex binary in order to ensure transgender rights.

First of all, intersex conditions are mostly not applicable to the trans debate—as the overwhelming majority of transgender people do not have an intersex condition—nor should it matter whether they do. Not to mention many actually living with intersex conditions aren’t too keen on their existence being used as a gambit in the spread of gender ideology either.

You don't need to pretend humans can change their sex to be able to defend trans rights. It's the equivalent of demanding we must agree the world is 6,000 years old in order to guarantee religious freedom.

Not only is all of this completely unnecessary in the fight for trans rights, it can be counterproductive too. If you use false premises to argue for certain rights, many will feel inclined to dismiss the validity of these rights along with your junk justifications.

All that is needed to advocate for trans rights is a commitment to individual liberalism. That's it. Pushing false claims about gender as a condition of certain rights turns your cause into a religion. And I will invoke the very same liberalism I use to defend trans rights as I do to reject your new faith. There is no contradiction here.