Toxic culture on the right or left is wrong

The most recent clash in the ongoing culture war over sex, gender, and transgender identities has to do with a canceled panel at the joint meeting of the American Anthropological Association and Canadian Anthropology Society, a key event in the field of anthropology scheduled to take place in Toronto next month.

The panel, with the catchy title “Let’s Talk About Sex, Baby: Why biological sex remains a necessary analytic category in anthropology,” was nixed on the grounds that it would promote “transphobia” and “cause harm” to LGBT members of the community. The leaders of the two organizations, who have acknowledged that the decision is controversial, say that it’s a matter of respect, safety and dignity. To the panelists themselves, and to many observers, it’s more evidence of intolerant academic orthodoxy that destroys free inquiry.

The panel, featuring five female speakers, was going to examine anthropology’s shift in focus from sex (male or female as defined by reproductive biology) to gender, a complex concept that can include male, female, or other identity as well as cultural beliefs about gender roles. It was also going to showcase the argument that, whether studying human remains or social and cultural practices, biological sex remains a valid and necessary category. Judging by the panel description, some speakers were explicitly going to note that gender is also a valid focus but the two must be identified separately.

Objections arose in part because of the panelists and their known positions. One speaker, Canadian feminist activist Michèle Sirois, has referred to transgender surgeries as “mutilations.” Another, Autonomous University of Barcelona anthropology professor Silvia Carrasco, believes transgender identities in children are “fabricated.” Anthropologist Elizabeth Weiss, who is retiring from San Jose State University, opposes the reburial of Native American bones. Panel organizer Kathleen Lowrey, an associate professor of anthropology at the University of Alberta, has criticized personal pronoun statements.

Some of those views may be provocative. They also reflect scientific debates that are far from being settled.

And some of the protests do, in fact, reflect political dogma. The statement from the panel's critics denounced its supposed assumption that “sex and gender are simplistically binary” — a view the objectors described as not only contrary to "settled science," but comparable to pseudoscientific beliefs about racial inferiority. Yet the panel summary makes no assumptions about binary gender, and the view of sex as binary is still overwhelmingly shared by biologists. Lowrey has been attacked for arguing that the XXY syndrome, an extra X chromosome in a male, is not a nonbinary sex but an anomaly. In fact, the Mayo Clinic website calls it a “random error” linked to medical problems.

The statement also castigates the reference to “determining” (rather than “estimating”) sex from human remains. But Weiss, who was going to discuss that subject, says she would have gladly used “estimating.”

The cancellation of the panel, whose speakers had spent thousands of dollars on airfares and conference fees, has drawn strong objections from other academics. Fortunately, the orphaned panel is being revived as a live webinar by the Heterodox Academy, an organization dedicated to intellectual diversity and free inquiry. If some of the panel’s arguments are unsound, they can be vigorously debated and critiqued.

Meanwhile, as progressive historian and bioethicist Alice Dreger has pointed out, the controversy validates conservative tropes about cancel culture. It’s a good reminder that, in this age of right-wing extremism, a toxic culture on the left must also be opposed.

Opinions expressed by Cathy Young, a writer for The Bulwark, are her own.

By Cathy Young

Cathy Young is a writer for The Bulwark.