There's a bit more to it than this. He also added 'RT if women don't have penises'. It seems pretty targeted towards transwomen. Angelos Sofocleous, an assistant editor at Durham University's philosophy journal, has an obligation to advocate for lgbt rights or at the very least not go directly against them. There's also the fact that he was indeed wrong.
He had deleted the tweets, but I've read that he has also made several other anti-LGBT statements.
Further, the president of the Philosophy Society, Ryan Lo, said, "Durham University Philosophy Society has a duty to act within the best interests of all of its members, therefore is committed to equality and diversity and to our democratic principles as a group of Durham Student's Union. We do not tolerate practices of racism, sexism, or trans-exclusionary sentiments."
tl;dr He made a comment that directly opposed his orginazation and was fired for it. Not really a surprise.
Even in biology that's pretty questionable. Trans people are very much biological. You wouldn't call the urge to survive non-biological just because it seems to mostly happen in the brain.
Not to mention that sex isn't exactly a dichotomy... There are multiple factors within the body that are "Male" and "Female". Women will have some male factors at various levels and vice versa. It generally balances out to either one of the two. 51 round up to 100 and 49 down to 0, but that doesn't mean that they are either 0 or 100.
Biology is way too complicated for chatboxes like this.
Biology is very clear at this question. There are two sexes and one deviation linked to genes problem. There are only two sex chromosomes. Don't confuse your bubble hypothesis with since.
@spiderwoman- thank you, and I get DV’s to whenever I say this too. Upvotes for you. @wassertern and everyone- yes, but no. In currently mass accepted biology there are 2 recognized sexes for humans. No, in that “woman” isn’t a sex. You won’t read a biology paper written acesemically in which they say: “the man snake and the woman snake...” you would read a psychology paper, social anthropology maybe. Gender and sex are not the same thing. Gender is a spectrum and a fluid concept. That isn’t a theory it is a fact, and if you want to disagree I can provide a link to the dictionary. Sex however has long been contentious as well. Many movements and valid cases exist to expand sex on a spectrum. Your assertation that there are only 2 sex chromosomes is wrong. There are many, just two primary sex chromosomes. That’s basic biology. A dual gender system is taxonomically convenient but not a precise description of all the possible combinations of chromosomes which can result in various traits.
What is most important in discussing such matters though isn’t “theory” or emotion, but the simple fact that people too often confuse and conflate concepts and terms relating to gender/gender identity, sexuality, and biological sex. They are distinct concepts and exist independent of each other.
1. Woman/Man: Your language hasn't sex difference for animals (although... tomcat/cat), but our has. Moreover... our language uses (nearest translate) man/woman words as primary sex definition for any animal. Male/female are used too at equal position. It is not biology, it is just linguistics and your private case.
2. If "Gender is a spectrum and a fluid concept." then it's not "That isn’t a theory it is a fact".
3. "2 sex chromosomes is wrong". You may use any medical reference book. And there is only 2 sex chromosomes: X, Y. Nothing else. But not these chromosomes define sex of mammals exactly. But combinations of these genes define sex that represent only two required types on individuals that can reproduce other individuals. It's clear definition of sexes without unclear "fluids" and "spectrums".
1. There is no niche case. There is silence and English. In English, “Male,” “Female” “Intersex” are the recognized scientific sexual categories and are not interchangeable with “man” and “woman” anymore than “Fella” and “Lady” are not sexes. If you’d like we can have this discussion using citations.
2. My point was that regardless of theory the fact pertinent to the issue is that gender and sex are separate and distinct and the language of each is specific to the case. However you want to phrase or slice up catagorozations that is the backbone so long as the use is consistent. You’re taking quotes from different sentences and different posts, editing out the subject and context, and pasting them together to write what you wante to say because you have no argument to what was actually said.
3. Apologies. It was written poorly. Diploid mammals have pairs of allosomes which determine sex. That isn’t disputed. However the idea of binary X Y chromosomes and the pairings of XY/XX....
As the only mammalian genders in humans is disputed, and the use of only the allosomes to determine sex is contended since allosomes aren’t the only source of primary sex characteristics. It’s irrelevant to the point though as the post was never that biological sex is a spectrum, only that gender is a spectrum and that people confuse gender and biological sex- so thank you for proving my point by getting bogged down in the semantics of sexual dimorphism. I will add that it is funny that in #1 you make an appeal toward acceptance of popular use of terms over technical use, but you then get very hung up on the clinical usage and application of concepts and terms where it seems to suit the point you are making. Which is it? Do you propose that we let the letter of science determine the discussion, or do you propose that we allow the social shaping of the discussion? Because right now you are trying to argue from both positions as it suits you best.
I didn't mark main problem that huge part of gender-defenders interpolate genders to biological sex questions. They-self don't understand difference.
In any case i'm glad to discuss it with one who understand and can argue his point.
And it's normal that we have own opinion and we try assert point of view.
Ever notice how nature documentaries never say the "women of the species display [trait]"?
Penis is a physiological description of a specific type of genitalia. Woman is not a scientific term. If he was talking about science he would have said "homo sapiens females don't typically develop a penis." And if we weren't so obsessed with other people's genitals it wouldn't be conversation. Mind what's in your pants and the pants of the people/person you chose to share a sexual relationship with.
"homo sapiens females don't typically develop a penis." isnt even technically correct as its entirely possible for someone of the XX variety (technically also not a hard and fast rule as being the only possible female configuration) can totally develop a penis in some situations
He had deleted the tweets, but I've read that he has also made several other anti-LGBT statements.
Further, the president of the Philosophy Society, Ryan Lo, said, "Durham University Philosophy Society has a duty to act within the best interests of all of its members, therefore is committed to equality and diversity and to our democratic principles as a group of Durham Student's Union. We do not tolerate practices of racism, sexism, or trans-exclusionary sentiments."
tl;dr He made a comment that directly opposed his orginazation and was fired for it. Not really a surprise.
Biology is way too complicated for chatboxes like this.
2. If "Gender is a spectrum and a fluid concept." then it's not "That isn’t a theory it is a fact".
3. "2 sex chromosomes is wrong". You may use any medical reference book. And there is only 2 sex chromosomes: X, Y. Nothing else. But not these chromosomes define sex of mammals exactly. But combinations of these genes define sex that represent only two required types on individuals that can reproduce other individuals. It's clear definition of sexes without unclear "fluids" and "spectrums".
2. My point was that regardless of theory the fact pertinent to the issue is that gender and sex are separate and distinct and the language of each is specific to the case. However you want to phrase or slice up catagorozations that is the backbone so long as the use is consistent. You’re taking quotes from different sentences and different posts, editing out the subject and context, and pasting them together to write what you wante to say because you have no argument to what was actually said.
3. Apologies. It was written poorly. Diploid mammals have pairs of allosomes which determine sex. That isn’t disputed. However the idea of binary X Y chromosomes and the pairings of XY/XX....
In any case i'm glad to discuss it with one who understand and can argue his point.
And it's normal that we have own opinion and we try assert point of view.
Penis is a physiological description of a specific type of genitalia. Woman is not a scientific term. If he was talking about science he would have said "homo sapiens females don't typically develop a penis." And if we weren't so obsessed with other people's genitals it wouldn't be conversation. Mind what's in your pants and the pants of the people/person you chose to share a sexual relationship with.