> science around those,
there's no science around those, just word twisting and mental gymnastics. "Gender studies" and such are not science in any form.
there's no science around those, just word twisting and mental gymnastics. "Gender studies" and such are not science in any form.
In contrast, people whose work is more generally accepted as scientific, such as psychological and medical researchers, have certainly studied both gender identity and sex characteristics. I imagine (but might be wrong) that ascribed gender is more a topic for sociologists and other social scientists that empirically study social behavior or legal structures, but they definitely do study it.
Astrologists study stars, too. Empirically.
Why do you say that? What makes you so sure?
https://www.quora.com/Is-there-any-scientific-evidence-to-su...
Scientifically, they are (or, rather, gender identity and sex-correlated biological traits) are actually, apparently, fairly related, in ways which seem consistent with the idea that trans and non-binary gender identity is an expression of an underlying non-binary (if strongly bimodal) biological reality, and that ascribed gender based on a binary conception of sex is as poor a match for biology as it is for gender identity.
> Nowadays, it's all about 'identity'.
The three-way divide between objective traits, externally ascribed status, and identity or self-ascribed status, and it's generally importance a in uunderstandinghuman social interaction, is decidedly not a new thing.
There's considerable science around them and there interrelationship.
> "Gender studies" and such are not science in any form.
Gender (and, likewise, ethnic, etc.) studies is an interdisciplinary domain that includes both science and non-science elements; the science around sex, gender, and gender identity, though, is found in human biology, psychology/neuroscience, sociology, anthropology, and other fields, though it is, of course, often of interest to gender/women's/queer studies.
Yes, like astrology and homeopathy