Woke Researchers To Stop Using Terms Like Father And Mother

Just when it seemed the Woke could not sink any lower, a group of Canadian and U.S. researchers is now pushing for scientists to end the use of terms like “male and female” and “mother and father.” According to the New York Post, the researchers argued that using those terms assumes gender is binary and attraction between opposite genders is the norm.

The researchers now want scientists to use alternate words, such as “sperm-producing” and “egg-producing” for “male and female,” respectively. They also proposed the use of” “egg donor” and “sperm donor” in place of mother and father.

According to The Times of London, the researchers believe that the use of these terms often bolsters a discriminatory status quo.

“Much of western science is rooted in colonialism, white supremacy, and patriarchy, and these power structures continue to permeate our scientific culture,” said the researchers from the EEB (Ecology and Evolutionary Biology) Language Project.

Other words the speech police researchers want to be banned include primitive, invasive, and “survival of the fittest” — which they argue is linked to “eugenics, ableism, and social Darwinism.”

The researchers frown upon the use of the word primitive and advanced, arguing that they are scientifically inaccurate as they imply an evolutionary hierarchy and are used derogatorily towards humans or human practices.

The researchers also want to cancel terms like “citizen science,” which they claim could be offensive to non-citizens who may feel left out. In place of “citizen science,” the researchers suggest using “participant science or community science.”

UBC assistant professor Dr. Kaitlyn Gaynor said the research began from a Twitter conversation and revealed that the researchers reached out to various ecology and evolution networks focused on increasing inclusion and equity in the field.

Gaynor said the researcher reached out to the various networks to gather support for revising terminologies that might be “harmful” to certain people.

Professor Frank Furedi of the University of Kent criticized the researchers while labeling their characterization of the terms as “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.”