Replace female with egg laying and avoid using the term fitness

Replace “female” with “egg-laying” and avoid using the term “fitness,” say bright scientists

Woke scientists have called for the terms “male” and “female” to be replaced as part of a crackdown on “harmful terminology” in science.

Instead, “sperm-producing” and “egg-producing” or “XY/XX individual” should be used to avoid reinforcing “socially imposed notions of a binary gender distribution,” researchers suggest.

The terms mother, father and fitness are also in focus.

Some members of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (EEB) Language Project, founded by scientists in the US and Canada, wrote that “much of Western science is rooted in colonialism, white supremacy, and patriarchy,” which is “our scientific continue to permeate culture”.

To “address this story,” “harmful” scientific terms should be identified and revised to “promote inclusion,” they argued.

The term

The term “optimization” reinforces the idea that a species evolves toward a defined, fixed optimum, researchers said (stock)

It comes amid wider pressure to change the language to make it less offensive, with doctors claiming last summer the term ‘morbidly obese’ should be dropped.

In an article in the journal Trends in Ecology and Evolution, researchers said efforts to create an “inclusive language” in science are “particularly important to counteract the ongoing marginalization of many groups.”

It was co-authored by researchers from the University of British Columbia in Vancouver and universities in the US including Michigan, California and New Jersey.

The EEB Language Project website lists the “Top 24 Harmful Terms” used in science that can be “harmful or offensive” and “surrogate terms”.

Along with ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’, the words ‘mother’ and ‘father’ have been criticized for perpetuating a ‘non-universal’ view of ‘the parenting and birthing process’.

“Parent”, “egg donor” and “sperm donor” are suggested as replacement terms.

Which scientific terms were classified as “harmful”?

Bad term: blind / double blind / plant blindness

Context: disability metaphor

Substitute: consciousness

Harmful term: feminized/masculinized

Context: Feminized implies that “female” and “male” are biological traits rather than social constructs

Replacement : Describe the specific characteristics

Harmful term: male / female

Context: Strongly anthropomorphic/prejudiced against men or masculine traits

Substitute: Male or Female/Human

Bad Word: Survival of the fittest

Context: Eugenics, Ableism and Social Darwinism

Substitutes: Natural selection/survival differences

Harmful term: sex

Context: Gender, a social construct, is often equated with sex

Substitute: gender

Harmful Term: Male/Female

Context: These terms are used to reinforce societally imposed notions of a gender binary, emphasizing cis-normative and heteronormative views

Substitute: sperm producing/egg producing or XY/XX individual

Professor Frank Furedi, a professor emeritus of sociology at the University of Kent, told The Telegraph: “I think if you characterize terms like male/female, mother/father as harmful, you are abandoning academia in favor of ideological advocacy.

“Regardless of the intention, the project to transform the language will leave many confused, and the last thing scientists need is a lack of clarity about the meaning of the words they are using.”

The EEB Language Project was launched this month by a team that includes Dr. Kaitlyn Gaynor, Dr. Alex Moore and Dr. Danielle Ignace – three researchers from the University of British Columbia.

It also flags “survival of the fittest” as a problematic term promoting “eugenics, ableism and social Darwinism”.

Instead, “natural selection” or “survival differences” should be used, they say.

Even the term “double-blind,” used to describe studies in which neither volunteers nor scientists know which participants are taking a drug or a placebo, could be harmful to people with disabilities, the site says.

The researchers wrote in the journal: “Mitigating the institutional problems in EEB will require significant effort and resources, and examining the role of language in these problems must go beyond the attention of academic terms.

“It also needs to be considered how the language is commonly used among scientists and how English is often treated as the dominant language for scientific work.

“Nevertheless, we propose that inclusion can be fostered through a collective commitment to be more conscientious and aware of the scientific terminology we use in teaching, mentoring, collaborating and conducting research.”

It comes after Haley Branch, who is also a researcher at the University of British Columbia, argued that the term ‘fitness’ is ‘harmful’.

The word is vague and derogatory – discriminatory towards people with disabilities – she said.

Another word in their crosshairs is “optimization,” meaning values ​​that maximize an organism’s chances of surviving in a given environment.

But the researchers say it perpetuates the misconception that there is a fixed optimum for species.

The EEB Language Project grew out of a Twitter conversation between some people discussing potentially harmful language.

The project will be a “living document” that people can submit suggestions about online, say the researchers behind it.

dr Gaynor said: “We reached out to various networks in ecology and evolution focused on improving inclusion and equity in this area to rally support for a very specific action – revising terminology that could be harmful to certain people , especially those from historical groups and currently excluded from scholarship.’

The EEB Language Project and Ms Branch’s research team recognize that the harm caused by such terminology is, in most cases, unintentional, since what may be offensive to one person may not be so to another is perceived as problematic.

dr Moore said: “There have been a lot of big conversations about inclusion in the fields and often there aren’t any clear steps that people can take.

“It was important for us to think through an understandable approach that people can apply in their work at an individual level – and at different scales within the discipline – to make informed decisions for the future.”