Dr. Marco A. C. Varella

Mapping the Conceptual Terrain Avoiding Common Conflations: Tentative Guide to Fruitful Discussion about Sexes and Genders | Request PDF Request PDF | Mapping the Conceptual Terrain Avoiding Common Conflations: Tentative Guide to Fruitful Discussion about Sexes and Genders | At first glance, the debate seems straightforward: a binary b...

18) Feel free to privately request the complete pdf of our commentary via research gate. I thank the Editor and my great team of coauthors. rb.gy/l0gs0o /End

17) We hope our commentary improves the quality of the scientific & political debate globally. By mapping the conceptual terrain and avoiding these 10 conflations, we can foster discussions that are rigorous, responsible, and finally free of the confusions that have long impeded progress.

16) Our goal is a nuanced, evidence-based approach that honors both biopsychosocial reality and ethics. Distinguishing description from prescription protects science from ideological revisionism and prevents misuse of science to justify social inequities.

15) We urge researchers to develop precise tools that measure biological sex, gender identity, and psychobehavioral facets separately. We also call for more funding for research into the biological and sociocultural bases of sex-related traits. Knowledge enlightens society.

14) We reaffirm the interspecies explanatory power of anisogamy (ova/sperm) while fully stressing the validity of its bimodally distributed overlapping phenotypic proxies (anatomy, psychology). Denying science doesn't advance equality; clear reasoning from undistorted facts does.

13) Conflation 10: Atypicality vs. Pathology.
Being statistically rare doesn't make something a disorder. Pathologizing minority traits (transgender identities, intersex variations) based on rarity is ethically & scientifically wrong. A harm-based model of pathology is needed.

12) Conflation 9: Is = Ought.
The Des/Prescription trap: Biology (two gametes) don't justify social norms (naturalistic fallacy). Ethical ideals (inclusivity) don't require redefining biology (moralistic fallacy). Stereotypes are rooted in psychological essentialism, not biology.

11) Conflation 8: Population vs Individual.
Average sex differences exist, but there are within-sex variation and between-sex overlap. Population patterns don't dictate individual destinies. Both biology & culture constructs unique individuals. Comparative research disentangles them.

10) Conflation 7: "Gender" oversimplifies.
Gender isn't one thing! It involves dispositions, identity, expression, affiliations, and roles. These facets don't always align within a person, creating unique androgynous profiles. Conflating them (identity with expression) is erroneous.

9) Conflation 6: Biological Sex equals Gender Identity.
Anisogamic sex is not one's deeply felt gender identity. Assuming one 100% dictates the other ignores the fact that layers of differentiation don't always align. We must assess both as distinct but related variables.

8) Conflation 5: Potential, Cause, Process & Outcome Sex determination (SRY gene) is the potential/cause. Sexual differentiation is the probabilistic process leading to a bimodal outcome of phenotypes (genitals, psychology, etc). Confusing these levels leads to fundamental erros.

7) Conflation 4: Proximate vs Evolutionary Sex
The chicken-or-egg dilemma: gametes or chromosomes? The proximate view stresses developmental variation (a bimodal spectrum). The evolutionary view focuses the ancient binary function of gametes. Development is nested within evolution.

6) Conflation 3: Inconsistent Usage.
"Sex" is often erroneously conflated with phenotypic proxies (chromosomes, genitalia). "Gender" is variably defined, sometimes so broadly it loses analytical power. This inconsistent usage blurs concepts and muddles the debate. Precision is key.

5) Conflation 2: Flawed Dualism.
Assigning sex to "biology/body" and gender to "culture/mind" is a mistake. It reinforces false dichotomies. Biology influences gender (genetic components of identity), and culture shapes the body. We need an integrative, biopsychosocial approach.

4) Conflation 1: Sex equals Gender.
Biology defines "sexes" by gamete type (ova/sperm), an ancient evolutionary trade-off leading to disruptive selection. "Gender" addresses sociocultural influences on identity & roles. Using them interchangeably is erroneous. They are distinct.

3) We aim to start mapping this terrain, untangle the top 10 key conflations that muddle the debate, and propose pathways to clarity. This isn't about taking a "side," but about fostering a more rigorous, productive, and honest discussion.

2) The debate on sexes & genders is often oversimplified as "binary biology vs multiple genders." But this obscures a vast, multidimensional conceptual terrain spanning epistemology, terminology, time, space, analysis etc. Navigating it is hard due to rhetoric & cognitive biases.

Mapping the Conceptual Terrain Avoiding Common Conflations: Tentative Guide to Fruitful Discussion about Sexes and Genders - Archives of Sexual Behavior Archives of Sexual Behavior -

1) We’ve just published a commentary in Archives of Sexual Behavior: "Mapping the Conceptual Terrain: Avoiding Common Conflations. A Tentative Guide to Fruitful Discussion about Sexes and Genders."
A thread on why clarity is crucial.
doi.org/10.1007/s105...

Need an Original Idea? Ask an Ovulating Woman Boosts in female creativity occur during the fertile window.

Nice cover of our research on sexual selection and creativity beringinmind.substack.com/p/need-an-or...

4 thousand reasons to keep on sciencing!!!

1/ 🌍 New paper alert: "Not evolved to save the planet, yet capable to promote pro-environmental action leveraging human nature" by @marcovarella.bsky.social and others, incl. me
This study challenges how we think about sustainability & human nature. A 🧵on what it says and why it matters👇

The Influence of Mating Context on Creativity: Insights from Simulated Dating Scenarios - Katarzyna Galasinska, Aleksandra Szymkow, Marco Antonio Correa Varella, 2025 Creativity offers both survival and reproductive benefits, being a desirable trait in potential mates and linked to fertility and sexuality. We investigated whe...

In Study 1 n=483 & 2 n=494, we found modest effects of mating context on creativity. Men were more flexible/original, women more fluent/self-promotional. Sexual arousal reduced women’s creativity in long-term mate selection. Effects were small, replication needed journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

Oi Amanda, o Wall tbm tá por aqui bsky.app/profile/wall...