Gender activists opposed the division of human remains by archaeologists into male and female

(ORDO NEWS) — From the point of view of “gender archaeologists”, the concept of the duality of the sexes was brought by the “Christian colonizers”. Their opponents call such ideas a “step back.”

Canadian gender activist Emma Paladino stated (and her tweet went viral) that if some “shitty” archaeologist of the future defines someone from the living representatives of various genders as “male” or “female”, then this may not be true and ” it will never change who you were in life.

You are you, a worthy person, and you will always be, even after death. The young researcher is an applicant for a scientific degree in the field of archeology, but a number of other scientists have recently supported similar theses.

Earlier this year, University of Kansas (USA) associate professor Jennifer Raph published Origins : A Genetic History of the Americas, in which she stated: “There are no clear divisions between physically or genetically ‘male’ and ‘female’ [individuals].”

Raf wrote this in the context of the skeletal remains found by archaeologists. She postulates that scientists cannot know the “gender” of a Peruvian huntress who lived nine thousand years ago and was recently covered by the media, because the authors of the works do not know whether she identified herself as a woman or as a man.

According to the researcher, the “dual” concept of sex was “imposed by Christian colonizers”.

Gender activists opposed the division of human remains by archaeologists into male and female 2
Emma Paladino

Previously, similar views have been expressed in forensic medicine, even a whole group of Trans Doe Task Force has arisen , arguing that identifying corpses by sex “does a disservice to people who do not have a gender binary.”

Skeleton sex identification is a long-standing norm in archeology. In most cases, the bones of men and women are seriously different in a number of ways.

The skeleton of women is “lighter”, more graceful, most of the bones are thinner, their different density is often observed. In addition, genetic identification of the last decades makes it possible to establish gender and genetically. As we know from school, women do not have a Y chromosome.

Although there may be a situation when in men (in old age) some of the cells have lost this chromosome, but such a condition is a pathology that reduces both life expectancy and cognitive abilities.

The problem with abandoning the identification of the remains by gender remains that, if it is consistently implemented, a number of scientific publications may not be possible.

For example, the authors of the same work on a 9,000-year-old Peruvian hunter devote special attention to explaining how and why a woman could engage in such a thing as hunting, for which men are normally better physically adapted.

They are usually faster, stronger and more enduring, which is not least due to a fundamentally different level of testosterone and a number of other physical adaptations that depend on the genes of the Y chromosome, as well as other regulation of about 6.5 thousand genes and outside this chromosome.

Gender activists opposed the division of human remains by archaeologists into male and female 1
Part of the features that make it possible to distinguish between the skeletons of men and women

As another example, a number of past studies have compared the average height of men and women. This is significant because it indicates the difference in their diet and lifestyle, due to the fact that in almost all traditional societies, both are different for men and women.

A number of scientists are trying to protest against new trends in Western archeology. Elizabeth Weiss of the University of California at San Jose calls the attempt to “cancel” the gender identity of human remains “an ideologically motivated concoction.”

Weiss goes even further and notes that the recent surge in the number of people identifying as transgender indicates that this trend is “social, not biological.” In her words, “the attempt to retrospectively de-gender obscures this obvious fact.”

“This new policy of erasing the progress of archeology [in identifying women] is a step backwards for science and women,” the scientist concludes . She also notes that the failure to identify the remains by gender would deal a blow to forensic medicine.

At the same time, one must understand that Weiss’s position is not very typical for the modern United States of America. No wonder the researcher is suing her own university because the university calls her a “racist” and denied access to the remains with which she worked.

With a high degree of probability, the rejection of the gender identification of skeletons has every chance of winning in Western archeology.

At least, this is indicated by the experience with the rejection of their classification by race, which in the last 30 years has basically been completed (though only for the Western world: in Russia this process is only underway).


Contact us: [email protected]

Our Standards, Terms of Use: Standard Terms And Conditions.