Luana S. Maroja is a renowned evolutionary biologist, Professor of Biology, and Chair of the Biochemistry & Molecular Biology Program at Williams College. She was taken aback when the Society for the Study of Evolution released a statement promoting sex as a spectrum and declaring the validity of “lived experience” in sexual identity. What would inspire such a misguided, conspicuously anti-scientific declaration? In this conversation with Peter, she answers that question.
I'm very surprised she's allowed to continue her career at Williams. I went to Williams back in the '80s, and I've been appalled at the intellectual rot there over the last thirty years.
These discussions frustrate me, because biologists don't seem to understand gender identity (which is different than gender), at least the ones I've listened to, which is admittedly not that many. Also, there are usually allusions to these "crazy people" at some point, signaling that the limits of understanding and tolerance have been reached.
But this conversation did clarify something for me: the definition of biological sex (gametes) vs the determinants of biological sex (sex chromosomes). She mentioned this in passing, and I think it deserves more attention because I think a lot of conflict arises because of differences in what people mean by what they say. For instance, in general usage, "gender" is used interchangeably with biological sex, but to transgender people, gender and sex are very different, and "gender" usually means "gender identity."
I think if a transgender person were to be asked, "Does your body produce sperm or eggs (or neither)," I doubt that they wouldn't be able to answer in a biologically accurate way, while if that same person were to say that they were a woman when they were a biological male, they would be accused of being in denial about their biology by someone who understood the definition of "woman" to be determined by, or at least inextricable from their biological sex.
That was interesting. Obviously very smart and likable, very good interview. She doesn't seem aware of the role of prolactin in generating breast milk, that's been known about for decades. While the case Dr. Boghossian mentions is indeed cringey, 'male breast milk' produced in these cases is about the same as female.
It seemed obvious to me that she was working hard to keep her voice low and deep at the beginning of the interview. By the end, when she had relaxed, it was much more natural.
Thanks so much for this great conversation!
Thank you for sharing this brilliant article.
For those who are unaware, one of the most important conversations on this topic is taking place in Santa Fe, New Mexico September 30 and October 1. https://santafeboys.org/participants-in-the-big-conversation/
Thanks, Sean.
I'm very surprised she's allowed to continue her career at Williams. I went to Williams back in the '80s, and I've been appalled at the intellectual rot there over the last thirty years.
Its a horrible thing to say I know, but could it be because she is an ethnic minority female?
These discussions frustrate me, because biologists don't seem to understand gender identity (which is different than gender), at least the ones I've listened to, which is admittedly not that many. Also, there are usually allusions to these "crazy people" at some point, signaling that the limits of understanding and tolerance have been reached.
But this conversation did clarify something for me: the definition of biological sex (gametes) vs the determinants of biological sex (sex chromosomes). She mentioned this in passing, and I think it deserves more attention because I think a lot of conflict arises because of differences in what people mean by what they say. For instance, in general usage, "gender" is used interchangeably with biological sex, but to transgender people, gender and sex are very different, and "gender" usually means "gender identity."
I think if a transgender person were to be asked, "Does your body produce sperm or eggs (or neither)," I doubt that they wouldn't be able to answer in a biologically accurate way, while if that same person were to say that they were a woman when they were a biological male, they would be accused of being in denial about their biology by someone who understood the definition of "woman" to be determined by, or at least inextricable from their biological sex.
That was interesting. Obviously very smart and likable, very good interview. She doesn't seem aware of the role of prolactin in generating breast milk, that's been known about for decades. While the case Dr. Boghossian mentions is indeed cringey, 'male breast milk' produced in these cases is about the same as female.
It seemed obvious to me that she was working hard to keep her voice low and deep at the beginning of the interview. By the end, when she had relaxed, it was much more natural.
What a great interview.