Kerby Anderson

Until recently, reading articles in Scientific American was an important way for those of us who love science to keep up with research trends. That isn’t the case anymore. Last year at this time, an article in Scientific American argued against banning gender-reassignment surgery because it ignores the health benefits to trans people.

This month, Scientific American published an essay by a Princeton professor with the provocative title, “Here’s Why Human Sex Is Not Binary.” He starts with a statement we can accept that “ova don’t make a woman, and sperm don’t make a man.” That is true, but the rest of the essay strains at trying to make the case for sex being more than male and female.

It is hard to imagine two decades ago an essay like this showing up in a scientific magazine. But I was encouraged to read some of the reactions to this essay that are summarized in an article by Joshua Klein.

Colin Wright fumes “This new piece . . . arguing that ‘Human Sex Is Not Binary’ is so poorly argued I’m embarrassed on his behalf. I don’t even know if it even qualifies as ‘pseudoscience’ because it's just so supremely confused.”

Another on Twitter exclaimed, “Another load of balderdash published in Unscientific American. Where do they dig up these grifters?”

Stephen Knight proclaims, “This is insane. This article attempts to argue that by using objective biological criteria to differentiate between the two human sexes (large gametes or small gametes), we are actually just ‘trying to restrict who counts as a full human in society.’”

It’s good to see this backlash from scientists who haven’t lost their common sense and scientific integrity.