Discussing sex is no longer allowed at Anthropology conferences
September 25, 2023, my fellow panelists and I received a letter from the American Anthropological Association (AAA) and the Canadian Anthropology Society (CASCA) informing us that our conference panel, “Let’s Talk About Sex, Baby: Why biological sex remains a necessary analytic category in anthropology”, which had been accepted, is being removed from the program due to the “harm” it will cause the “Trans and LGBTQI community”. We’ve responded to their accusation. Below is our response, the AAA/CASCA letter, and our panel submission. Feel free to quote any of these materials in whole or in part. HaTTiP
BREAKING: The American Anthropological Association the Canadian Anthropology Society have cancelled the panel “Let’s Talk About Sex, Baby: Why biological sex remains a necessary analytic category in anthropology” scheduled to take place at their annual conference.
The reasons given for the cancellation was that the panel conflicted with their values, compromised “the safety and dignity of our members,” and diminished the program’s “scientific integrity.”
They claimed the ideas the panel was planning to advance (i.e., sex is a real and scientifically important biological variable) would “cause harm to members represented by the Trans and LGBTQI of the anthropological community as well as the community at large.”
The AAA and CASCA have vowed to “undertake a major review of the processes associated with vetting sessions at our annual meetings” to ensure that such discussion panels about the reality and importance of sex will not be approved in the future. HaTTiP
The panelists responded to the sudden cancellation of the scheduled panel discussion, expressing their disappointment that the AAA and CASCA “have chosen to forbid scholarly dialogue” on this topic.
They also firmly rejected the “false accusation” that “to support the continued use of biological sex categories (e.g., male and female; man and woman) is to imperil the safety of the LGBTQI community.”
The panelists say the suggestion that the panel would compromise “…the scientific integrity of the programme” is “particularly egregious,” noting that, on the contrary, “the decision to anathematize our panel looks very much like an anti-science response to a politicized lobbying campaign.”
Finally, the panelists claimed that the AAA’s and CASCA’s attempt to chill future debate on this topic represents a “declaration of war on dissent and on scholarly controversy” and a “profound betrayal of their stated commitment to “advancing human understanding and applying this understanding to the world’s most pressing problems.”