Posted on 07/19/2022 6:26:00 AM PDT by ChipMarne
As soon as ancient human remains are excavated, archaeologists begin the work of determining a number of traits about the individual, including age, race and gender.
But a new school of thought within archaeology is pushing scientists to think twice about assigning gender to ancient human remains.
It is possible to determine whether a skeleton is from a biological male or female using objective observations based on the size and shape of the bones. Criminal forensic detectives, for example, do it frequently in their line of work.
But gender activists argue scientists cannot know how an ancient individual identified themselves.
“You might know the argument that the archaeologists who find your bones one day will assign you the same gender as you had at birth, so regardless of whether you transition, you can’t escape your assigned sex,” tweeted Canadian Master’s degree candidate Emma Palladino last week.
Palladino, who is seeking an advanced degree in archaeology, called assigning gender to an ancient human “bullshit.”
“Labelling remains ‘male’ or ‘female’ is rarely the end goal of any excavation, anyway,” wrote Palladino. “The ‘bioarchaeology of the individual’ is what we aim for, factoring in absolutely everything we discover about a person into a nuanced and open-ended biography of their life.”
She is not alone. Gender activists have formed a group called the Trans Doe Task Force to “explore ways in which current standards in forensic human identification do a disservice to people who do not clearly fit the gender binary.”
“We propose a gender-expansive approach to human identification by combing missing and unidentified databases looking for contextual clues such as decedents wearing clothing culturally coded to a gender other than their assigned sex,” the group’s mission statement reads.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecollegefix.com ...
🙄🤦🏻♀️
Which should happen anyway. Along with the poofters.
Just when you thought things couldn’t get any more idiotic...
“determining a number of traits about the individual, including age, race and gender”
Incorrect. They determine SEX not “gender”. Bones do not have a “gender”.
It's that old thing called "confirmation bias."
Once you make your mind up about something and close off other possibilities, your mind starts only seeing things that confirm your bias and discards or ignores everything that doesn't.
Your "perception" of reality becomes perverted.
“Only a fool will fall into that trap.”
The problem is, the world is chock full of fools.
Pure BS.
+1
When all you have is a hammer, every problem is a nail.
Ridicule and derision is what this stupid young asshole deserves.
Well they pretty much identified as traditional heterosexuals or we wouldn't be here. Some did think they were gods though, like pelosi and obama do now.
Why does the article use the word “gender” where it should use “sex?”
Is SEX a naughty word?
Postmodernism has taken hold of science like it has women’s sports.
Is it an unwritten rule that if your group is small and on the fringe, to hide your true numbers, by claiming to be an activist in a larger anomalous more amorphous group. And the Media will never question anything said (by previous agreement) as long as the above rule is followed and the group is not conservative. After all, naming names and reporting on the true size of these groups would be like reporting.
“Male” and “female” aren’t “genders,” they’re sexes.
Yep! That's the problem.
Her degree should be withheld for being stupid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
