A recent review published in The Lancet, a highly esteemed medical journal, has ignited significant discussion within the academic community regarding the definition of biological sex. Authored by Harvard Professor Sarah Richardson, the review praises Yale Professor Agustín Fuentes' new book, Sex is a Spectrum, while strongly asserting that the "gametic definition" of sex—which defines male and female by sperm or egg production—is "sophistry, not science." This stance has drawn sharp criticism from some scholars who uphold the traditional gametic view.
Professor Fuentes, a biological anthropologist at Princeton University, posits in Sex is a Spectrum that sex is a "biocultural construct," integrating various components beyond gametes, such as gonads, hormones, and gender identity. Richardson, a Professor of the History of Science and of Studies of Women, Gender, and Sexuality at Harvard, aligns with this perspective. She contends that those who promote the gametic definition do so to facilitate "political aims" and fuel "unhinged panic" about transgender issues.
Carole Hooven, a lecturer in Harvard's Department of Human Evolutionary Biology and a proponent of the gametic view, publicly expressed her concerns regarding the review's tone and implications. In a social media post, Hooven stated, > "The Lancet review goes well beyond disagreement about the facts." She argued that the review "impugn[s] the ostensible motives and character of those who endorse" the gametic definition, suggesting it links them to "scientific bigots of yore."
Hooven's tweet highlights a growing tension within academia concerning scientific discourse and perceived ideological pressures. She noted that the review implies that "simply following the evidence is ill-advised if you... think it will lead to social harms." This sentiment points to a broader debate about academic freedom and the boundaries of scientific inquiry, particularly in sensitive areas like sex and gender. Hooven herself has previously faced professional repercussions for her teaching on biological sex.
The discussion underscores fundamental differences in how biological sex is conceptualized across various scientific disciplines. While many evolutionary biologists maintain the gametic definition, fields like the history of science and gender studies often advocate for a more expansive, multi-faceted understanding. This ongoing dialogue in prestigious publications like The Lancet reflects the evolving landscape of scientific and societal understandings of sex and gender.