Transgenderism is not science, it's neo-lysenkoism

In the last year or two the narrative of the far left has become littered with claims about how science is "learning", or "coming to the realization", that gender, or biological sex, or both, are not a "binary". Indeed, this notion has been pushed so hard, even by many scientists, even biologists, that it has become pretty much an indisputable fact, and anybody, especially a scientist, who claims otherwise is just categorically wrong, and has completely antiquated views and ideas, and has yet not "learned" these facts.

You can see this narrative more and more often in social media, blogs and YouTube comments. Claims about how "science" this, and "science" that, and how both "science" and society has become aware of this fact. This especially so if such comments are in response to some scientist hinting otherwise.

But this "statement of fact" goes beyond just stating it. The narrative is not limited to "this is a scientific fact". It's much more than that. It's aggressive activism. If you doubt this "scientific fact" you are not merely ignorant and uninformed, but in fact dangerous. You are "denying the existence of people", erasing them, hurting them. You are quite literally committing acts of violence towards these people. And thus, obviously, all the necessary actions should be taken against you in order to punish you, silence you, shun you, remove you from society, and make your life as much of a living hell as possible.

This activism is not confined to just some anonymous random people in online social media. This kind of aggressive discriminatory activism is happening more and more within the scientific community itself.

Since all of these ideas are full of neologisms, I'm going to call all these ideas about "sex is not binary" with the term "transgenderism", which is actually a common term used by leftist themselves.

Transgenderism is not science, but ideology

The core feature of science, especially the "hard sciences", is that all claims and statements of fact are based on actual physical evidence. Things that can be physically observed, measured and tested, using controlled double-blind repeatable tests (where possible) which are independent of people's subjective perceptions and opinions.

Science is not, and must not, be based on people's personal feelings and perceptions, no matter how strong they may be. Someone may feel extremely strongly about something and be utterly convinced of it at every possible level with absolutely zero doubts, but from the perspective of science that means nothing. How people feel and think is completely irrevelant to whether something is physically true or not.

Someone may have the extremely strong feeling that God exists, is real, and acts on his life, and that he can directly converse with God. There's absolutely no doubt in his mind that God is real and actually exists, and he would do absolutely anything to prove so, and would rather die than deny this irrefutable reality. Yet, this absolute conviction means absolutely nothing in science. Science does not determine the reality and factuality of things according to how some people personally feel about it. Science does not go claiming that, indeed, God does exist and this is an indisputable fact, just because hundreds of millions of people are absolutely convinced of that fact and have no doubt in their minds.

Yet, this is exactly what's being done when it comes to transgenderism. Transgenderism, someone feeling that they are of the opposite sex they are, or "something in between", or neither, or both at the same time, is not based on physical measurements and tests. You cannot build a machine that will tell you, independently of that person's personal thoughts, whether that person is something else than his or her chromosomes say. You cannot build a machine, or any sort of experiment (that's independent of that person's personal subjective thoughts and feelings), that will thoroughly measure a person and tell that their "gender they identify with" is something other than their chromosomes indicate.

Mammals being a sexually reproducing clade of animals, and sexual reproduction requiring exactly two individuals of a species, both of whom fulfill a very specific role, which requires their chromosomes and thus physical biology to be a particular way, is a measurable and testable scientific fact.

People deeply feeling inside that they are something other than their physical sex is not.

If you want to include this phenomenon into the purview of psychology, then by all means do so. But science it's not (other than what we could classify psychology to be, which is certainly not a hard science.)

Racism vs. transgenderism in science

One could, perhaps, draw parallels between the somewhat prevalent racist notions among scientists, especially biologists, hundreds of years ago, and the notions about sex and gender in science today.

After all, a portion of the scientific community hundreds of years ago had notions about humans that can arguably be considered very racist. Among a portion of such scientists white people were indeed considered the pinnacle of living beings, and African black people were factually considered an inferior sub-species. Some biologists even went to great lengths to "prove" this as a fact.

We now know that this is factually not true.

Incidentally, Charles Darwin was one of the biggest proponents of his time that all humans are completely equal, and that there are no "superior" and "inferior" races/species among them, nor relevant distinctions between them. He makes this clear in his books, and heavily criticizes those biologists who classified people into separate species. (Note that back in Darwin's time there was no clear distinction between "race" and "species", and these words were used pretty much as synonyms. Meaning that when some biologists classified people into "races", they were, using the notions of the time, literally separating them into their own separate species. Related to each other, but still separate species. Darwin heavily opposed this notion.)

However, there is a big difference between the concept of human races/species, and transgenderism. This difference is that the biological relation between human races can actually and literally be measured by a machine, and is completely independent of anybody's subjective personal feelings. Science does not consider all humans to be fully the same species because someone strongly feels like it. It's done because we can actually measure it.

Back in Darwin's time genetics were a great mystery (which, in fact, made Darwin quite a visionary, as he knew the truth even before we had the physical measurable evidence for it). Nowadays we have a lot more data about genetics, and enormously more understanding and knowledge of it, based on actual measurements. We know about DNA, we know about chromosomes (concepts unknown in Darwin's time), we can literally measure if two individuals belong to the same species or not, and it's not up to anybody's opinions or feelings.

This is how we know, scientifically, that all humans form one single species. There are no "sub-species" of humans, as thought hundreds of years ago. Advances and discoveries in science and technology has allowed us to measure and thus corroborate these things.

Not so with transgenderism. There have been no new developments in technology that would allow us to measure these things in ways we weren't able to before. There have been no new scientific discoveries about human biology. We haven't found previously unknown or non-understood parts of our genetic code or physiology that would illuminate the true state of things.

The "scientific" notion of transgenderism is not based on scientific experiments and measurements. It's based purely on ideology, on politics, on people's strong personal subjective feelings.

This is not science. It's ideology.

Discrimination in the scientific community

Many creationists, especially young-Earth creationists, often claim that they experience discrimination and persecution in the scientific community. They talk about the theory of evolution being a religion, a dogma, held with religious conviction, and any dissenting opinions, views and claims are rejected automatically and shut down, and how scientists (especially creationists) who doubt evolution experience shunning and discrimination, and are expunged from the community and considered pretty much heretics.

This is untrue. True science does not fear challenges and criticism. True science welcomes challenges and criticism. When someone presents an objection, or criticism, or an alternative hypothesis to something, its validity is examined and tested, and if it doesn't hold to scrutiny, it's simply discarded as invalid. Creationist papers being rejected from publication is not because science is somehow discriminating against creationists. It's because these papers just don't pass scrutiny and contain obvious flaws, and thus do not qualify as serious hypotheses. Creationists are welcome to submit their hypotheses and papers, but they shouldn't be surprised when they are rejected as invalid.

When it comes to transgenderism, however, the situation is completely different. Here actual discrimination, shunning and persecution is happening. If a scientist presents an opinion that goes against the "indisputable fact" of transgenderism, he will usually be driven out of the scientific community, he will be fired, he will be harassed, he will be persecuted. The attitude is not "this is ridiculous and doesn't hold scrutiny, rejected". The attitude is "you must be punished for going against these established facts, and you must be excommunicated from the scientific community." Such a scientist will essentially be considered a heretic and expunged. No dissent is allowed. There are numerous real life examples of this.

This is, ironically, exactly the kind of attitude and treatment that creationist claim they are experiencing (when in fact they aren't).

This is how you know that transgenderism in science is dogma, an ideology. True science does not fear criticism and dissenting opinions, and in fact welcomes them. Ideology cannot stand criticism nor dissenting opinions, and can only survive by shunning, punishing and casting out anybody who disagrees.

Transgenderism in science is nothing but neo-lysenkoism

"Lysenkoism" was a political campaign led by Soviet biologist Trofim Lysenko against genetics and science-based agriculture in the mid-20th century, rejecting natural selection in favour of a form of Lamarckism, as well as expanding upon the techniques of vernalization and grafting. The term has come to be identified as any deliberate distortion of scientific facts or theories for purposes that are deemed politically, religiously or socially desirable. [1]

Lysenko's theories were not based on scientific fact, but on Lysenko's own notions and ideology, and aggressively enforced by political means. Due to this political campaign and Lysenko's ideas, crop yields declined significantly in the USSR where his ideas were implemented.

Needless to say, Lysenko's ideas were not science. They were dogma. Dogma that was enforced into society by political means.

Currently the west is experiencing an extremely widespread case of Lysenkoism, in the form of the transgenderism dogma. It's not science, it's not based on scientific discoveries, measurements and testing. It's ideology, and it's being very aggressively enforced by political means. Any dissent is aggressively shut down, and only one ideology is allowed to exist, everything else is forcefully silenced and shut down.

This is most definitely not science. Anybody who claims otherwise is completely deluded.