A Fractured Discipline Over Biological Definitions
The American Anthropological Association (AAA) is currently embroiled in an internal schism. At the heart of the conflict is a fundamental disagreement over the definition of biological sex, pitting the organization’s leadership against scholars who maintain that sex remains a binary, analytical category defined by gamete production.
Leadership Rejects Binary Classification
Carolyn M. Rouse, president of the AAA and a tenured professor at Princeton University, has rejected the assertion that human sex is binary. In a recent interview with The Chronicle of Higher Education, Rouse stated that the idea of two sexes is “factually incorrect,” citing variations in chromosomes and gender expression.
Rouse went further, characterizing the belief in a sex binary as “nonsensical” and comparing it to astrology. She suggested that such views lack merit for academic consideration within the field. During the same interview, she described the persistence of the binary belief among some scholars as “very strange.”
Clash Over Forensic Data and Credentials
The dispute has spilled into the interpretation of professional data. A 2022 survey published in the journal Forensic Anthropology found that 42.4% of forensic anthropologists identified sex as binary. When presented with these figures, Rouse dismissed the relevance of the survey, stating she does not “believe in opinion research.”
Rouse further remarked that many forensic anthropologists are “coroners” who may lack “advanced schooling.” However, data published in Forensic Anthropology contradicts this characterization: 57.9% of the survey respondents held a doctorate, 25.7% held a master’s degree, and only 20.5% worked in a coroner’s office.
The Gametic View vs. Chromosomal Variance
The academic divide pits those focusing on chromosomal variance against proponents of the “gametic view.” Evolutionary biologist Carole Hooven, who has a Ph.D. in biological anthropology, argues that sex is binary because human reproduction is organized around two distinct types of gametes: large ova and small sperm.
Colin M. Wright, who holds a Ph.D. in evolution, ecology, and marine biology, agrees. He posits that the “sex binary does not entail that every individual can be unambiguously categorized.” For Wright and Hooven, developmental ambiguity does not equate to the creation of a new gamete type.
Censorship and the Future of Inquiry
The tension reached a breaking point in 2023, when organizers of an anthropology conference canceled a panel intended to defend the importance of biological sex as an analytical category. The AAA has maintained that viewing sex as a binary is at odds with “settled science” and may pose a threat to “safety and dignity.”
Critics argue that the dismissal of the gametic view hinders the discipline’s mission to understand human beliefs and diversity. The ongoing discussion highlights a fundamental disagreement: is biological sex a binary system based on gamete production, or a fluid spectrum influenced by broader biological and social factors?
Related reading