Replace female with 'egg-producing' and avoid using the term 'fitness', woke scientists say in push to get rid of 'harmful' phrases
Published: 15:19 EST, 14 February 2023 | Updated: 05:03 EST, 15 February 2023
478 shares
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 'societally-imposed ideas of a sex binary', researchers suggest.
Even the terms mother, father and fitness are in the firing line.
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 'continue to permeate our scientific culture'.
To 'address this history', 'harmful' scientific terms should be identified and revised to 'foster inclusion', they argued.
It comes amid a broader push for language to be changed to be less offensive, with doctors last summer claiming the term 'morbidly obese' should be ditched.
Writing in the journal Trends in Ecology and Evolution, researchers said efforts to 'champion inclusive language' in science is 'particularly important for redressing the ongoing marginalization of many groups'.
It was co-authored by scientists 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 may be 'harmful or offensive', as well as 'replacement terms'.
As well as male and female, the words mother and father are criticised for perpetuating a 'a non-universal' view of 'the parenting and birthing process'.
'Parent', 'egg donor' and 'sperm donor' are suggested as replacement terms.
'Regardless of intent, the project of re-engineering language will cause confusion to many and the last thing that scientists need is a lack of clarity about the meaning of the words they use.'
The EEB Language Project was launched this month by a team that includes Dr Kaitlyn Gaynor, Dr Alex Moore and Dr Danielle Ignace — three University of British Columbia researchers.
It also flags 'survival of the fittest' as a problematic term that promotes 'Eugenics, ablelism, and social Darwinism'.
Instead, 'natural selection' or 'survival differences' should be used, it states.
Even the term 'double-blind', which is used to describe studies where neither volunteers or scientists know which participants are taking a drug or a placebo, could be harmful to people with disabilities, the website states.
Writing in the journal, the researchers said: 'Mitigating the institutional problems in EEB will take significant effort and resources, and examining the role of language in these problems must go beyond attention to scientific terms.
'It must also include consideration of how language is used among scientists more broadly, and how English is often treated as the dominant language for scientific work.
'Nevertheless, we propose that inclusion can be fostered by a collective commitment to be more conscientious and intentional about the scientific terminology we use when teaching, mentoring, collaborating, and conducting research.'
It comes after Haley Branch, who is also a researcher at University of British Columbia, argued that the term 'fitness' is 'harmful'.
The word is vague and ableist — discriminatory against people with disabilities — she said.
Another word in their crosshairs is 'optimization', which is used to mean values that maximize an organism's survival chances in a specific environment.
But the researchers say it perpetuates the false idea that there is a fixed optimum for species.
The EEB Language Project, was borne out of a Twitter conversation among a few people discussing potentially harmful language.
The project will be a 'living document' which people can submit suggestions to online, the researchers behind it say.
Dr Gaynor said: 'We reached out to different networks in ecology and evolution that were focused on increasing inclusion and equity in the field to rally support for one very specific action — revising terminology that might be harmful to certain people, particularly those from groups historically and currently excluded from science.'
The EEB Language Project and Ms Branch's research team recognize that in the majority of cases, the harm caused by such terminology is unintentional as what is thought to be offensive by one person may not be perceived as problematic by another.
Dr Moore said: 'There have been many large conversations around inclusion in the fields, and often there are no clear steps that people can take.
'It was important for us to think through one tractable approach that people can take in their work at an individual level — and at varying scales within the discipline — to make thoughtful choices moving forward.'
Source : https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/...archers-call-term-fitness-banned-ableist.html
- 'Male' and 'female' should be replaced in crackdown on 'harmful terminology'
- Scientists say 'sperm-producing' and 'egg-producing' or should be used instead
Published: 15:19 EST, 14 February 2023 | Updated: 05:03 EST, 15 February 2023
478 shares
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 'societally-imposed ideas of a sex binary', researchers suggest.
Even the terms mother, father and fitness are in the firing line.
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 'continue to permeate our scientific culture'.
To 'address this history', 'harmful' scientific terms should be identified and revised to 'foster inclusion', they argued.
- Copy link to paste in your message
It comes amid a broader push for language to be changed to be less offensive, with doctors last summer claiming the term 'morbidly obese' should be ditched.
Writing in the journal Trends in Ecology and Evolution, researchers said efforts to 'champion inclusive language' in science is 'particularly important for redressing the ongoing marginalization of many groups'.
It was co-authored by scientists 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 may be 'harmful or offensive', as well as 'replacement terms'.
As well as male and female, the words mother and father are criticised for perpetuating a 'a non-universal' view of 'the parenting and birthing process'.
'Parent', 'egg donor' and 'sperm donor' are suggested as replacement terms.
Professor Frank Furedi, an emeritus professor of sociology at the University of Kent, told The Telegraph: 'I think that when you characterise terms like male/female, mother/father as harmful you are abandoning science for ideological advocacy.
'Regardless of intent, the project of re-engineering language will cause confusion to many and the last thing that scientists need is a lack of clarity about the meaning of the words they use.'
The EEB Language Project was launched this month by a team that includes Dr Kaitlyn Gaynor, Dr Alex Moore and Dr Danielle Ignace — three University of British Columbia researchers.
It also flags 'survival of the fittest' as a problematic term that promotes 'Eugenics, ablelism, and social Darwinism'.
Instead, 'natural selection' or 'survival differences' should be used, it states.
Even the term 'double-blind', which is used to describe studies where neither volunteers or scientists know which participants are taking a drug or a placebo, could be harmful to people with disabilities, the website states.
Writing in the journal, the researchers said: 'Mitigating the institutional problems in EEB will take significant effort and resources, and examining the role of language in these problems must go beyond attention to scientific terms.
'It must also include consideration of how language is used among scientists more broadly, and how English is often treated as the dominant language for scientific work.
'Nevertheless, we propose that inclusion can be fostered by a collective commitment to be more conscientious and intentional about the scientific terminology we use when teaching, mentoring, collaborating, and conducting research.'
It comes after Haley Branch, who is also a researcher at University of British Columbia, argued that the term 'fitness' is 'harmful'.
The word is vague and ableist — discriminatory against people with disabilities — she said.
Another word in their crosshairs is 'optimization', which is used to mean values that maximize an organism's survival chances in a specific environment.
But the researchers say it perpetuates the false idea that there is a fixed optimum for species.
The EEB Language Project, was borne out of a Twitter conversation among a few people discussing potentially harmful language.
The project will be a 'living document' which people can submit suggestions to online, the researchers behind it say.
Dr Gaynor said: 'We reached out to different networks in ecology and evolution that were focused on increasing inclusion and equity in the field to rally support for one very specific action — revising terminology that might be harmful to certain people, particularly those from groups historically and currently excluded from science.'
The EEB Language Project and Ms Branch's research team recognize that in the majority of cases, the harm caused by such terminology is unintentional as what is thought to be offensive by one person may not be perceived as problematic by another.
Dr Moore said: 'There have been many large conversations around inclusion in the fields, and often there are no clear steps that people can take.
'It was important for us to think through one tractable approach that people can take in their work at an individual level — and at varying scales within the discipline — to make thoughtful choices moving forward.'
Source : https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/...archers-call-term-fitness-banned-ableist.html
