• Whirlybird@aussie.zone
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    That’s not “scientific fact”. For something to be scientific fact it has to have scientific facts supporting it.

    From that article:

    In the study of human subjects, the term gender should be used to refer to a person’s self-representation as male or female, or how that person is responded to by social institutions on the basis of the individual’s gender presentation.

    “self representation” is how you feel. It’s a feeling. That’s not scientific fact. Going “we acknowledge that society now treats gender as a new thing separate to sex” isn’t the same as it being a scientifically proven fact.

    • TeryVeneno@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’m really not seeing the logic here, so called “feelings” are scientific facts and we do studies on them all the time. Is hunger not a feeling? Same thing with self-representation. Those aren’t nebulous concepts. Those are well-established scientific facts. Gender is an important part of self-representation and from all indications, one people have very little control over.

      • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Gender is an important part of self-representation and from all indications, one people have very little control over.

        So why are there people changing their “gender identity” multiple times a day?

        so called “feelings” are scientific facts and we do studies on them all the time

        Show me a scientific study that has found any existence whatsoever of “gender identity” through science. The very article linked here says it’s a social construct. Social constructs are not “scientific facts”.