As Auckland University continues down the path of transforming itself into a seminary for Māori nationalists and others with “progressive left” views, it is perhaps inevitable that it would try to force fashionable views about sex onto academic staff members.
Unfortunately, it made a tactical error by trying to bully Elizabeth Rata, a professor in the Education Faculty. Anyone who followed the fallout from the Listener letter in mid-2021 signed by seven Auckland professors — including Rata — would have been aware that she is not easily intimidated.
Rata and six of her professorial colleagues argued in the letter that while “Indigenous knowledge [mātauranga Māori] may indeed help advance scientific knowledge in some ways… it is not science.” In the firestorm that ensued — including the Vice-Chancellor distancing herself from her eminent staff members — the professors stayed firm.
Rata has also been one of the very few academics to publicly criticise the Waipapa Taumata Rau course promoting a revisionist view of the Treaty of Waitangi at Auckland University, which was trialled in a pilot last year and is now compulsory for all first-year students.
In October 2024, the university’s Equity Office — whose declared purpose is “achieving equity, diversity, and inclusion in employment and education” — decided to correct what it saw as a serious doctrinal error that Rata had relayed to students last September. Her online lecture for first-year students titled “Women and Education”, which covered historical topics such as the progress of women’s rights, concluded with three slides on modern debates about sex and gender. Rata stated that there are only two sexes. She told her students: “The curriculum refers to three sexes where biologists would say that’s not scientific, there are only two sexes.”
Apparently, one or more students complained anonymously. The Equity Office emailed the professor to say her lecture needed to be amended because: “It is a scientific fact that human biological sex is not binary. The biological sex of some people is neither female nor male.”
The office justified its demand for a correction by stating: “The university has a moral obligation to provide accurate information to the affected students, in line with our values of excellence and integrity.”
Rata stood her ground, replying that she would neither alter her slides nor send out a correction, as that would be inaccurate. She cited three principal reasons for her refusal to obey the EO’s order:
- First, the Equity Office was interfering with the fundamental nature of her employment as an academic — “work which requires me to exercise academic freedom in the selection of scholarly and accurate knowledge for the courses I teach”.
- Second, the office’s self-appointment as the university’s moral guardian of student intellectual welfare was wholly inappropriate. “It is my responsibility, one I take seriously, to ensure that students develop the ability to think critically about the complex ideas they encounter at university.”
- Third, the office had no authority to take a position on the knowledge taught by academics.
Her trump card was a lengthy statement signed by eight eminent academics at the University of Auckland affirming there are only two sexes — male and female. Four of the signatories — Kendall Clements, Tony Hickey, Anthony Poole and Garth Cooper — are professors in the School of Biological Sciences.
The statement was also signed by Nicholas Matzke, Senior Lecturer, School of Biological Sciences; Russell Gray, Professor, School of Psychology; Peter Hunter, Distinguished Professor, Auckland Bioengineering Institute; and David Cumin, Senior Lecturer, School of Medicine.
Professor Hunter made it clear that, while he was “not an expert in this field, I’m signing this letter because I think it is very important in a research-led university that statements about scientific issues should be left to scientists with the appropriate expertise. Proposing a viewpoint on the basis of social acceptability is entirely counter both to our commitment to scholarship and to our government-mandated commitment to academic freedom.”
The academics pointed out, “Professor Rata’s comment that the ‘curriculum refers to three sexes’ was a reference to the NZ Ministry of Education’s 2019 Relationships and Sexuality Education Guidelines. In the glossary, these guidelines give this definition: ‘Sex: The biological sex characteristics of an individual (male, female, intersex).’”
They said this view is incorrect. “The division of humans and other mammals into two sexes, female and male, derives from the fact that each individual is created by the union of a sperm and an egg. On the basis of the type of germ cell (gamete) that reproducing individuals are able to produce, there are only two sex categories in mammals. (Intersex is not a third category with respect to the type of gamete individuals can produce.)
“Biological sex is defined by reference to gametes. There are only two types of gametes in humans and millions of other animals… Every sexually reproducing species produces two distinct types of gamete, which are either large (eggs in animals, ovules in plants) or small (sperm in animals, pollen in plants). There are no ‘speggs’ or ‘pollules’ (gametes of intermediate size)… All there is are two reproductive strategies based on two distinct categories of gametes that fuse to make offspring…
“Moreover, it is important to note that the fundamental definition of the biological sexes (based on gamete size) must be distinguished from any operational usage of the term, for example that based on chromosomes or genes, etc, because fundamental and operational definitions are not equivalent…
“Sex denialism has recently become rampant inside and outside the academy, with strained attempts to deny the sex binary... While these statements may be well intentioned, they are misguided attempts to co-opt biology to support particular societal and political positions regarding culturally constructed genders.
“Organismal biology does not care what positions humans take. While gender (in the modern academic usage of the term) is socially constructed — like money, claimed racial categories, numerous cultural conventions, etc — sexes have been produced by evolution. They pre-date not just modern social categories but the existence of mammals.”
To Professor Rata’s surprise, last week Cathy Stinear, the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Equity), “unreservedly” apologised to her for the Equity Office “providing advice that led to interference in your academic practices”. She promised that “any further complaints about scientific matters that come to the Equity Office will be referred to disciplinary experts”.
Rata says: “I’m very pleased with how the university dealt with my complaint and with the outcome so I’ve closed the complaint.
“There are a number of implications [arising from the complaint]. The main one to my mind concerns the authority for knowledge. I maintain that the authority for knowledge is with the disciplinary experts. Indeed, the biologists’ statement was a perfect example of this, hence my gratitude to them for writing it.
“I’ve mentioned before that I know such authority depends on the integrity of the discipline. This makes the provisionality of knowledge and its constant criticism of immense importance — the constant testing of accuracy and procedures to maintain a discipline’s integrity. But these are matters for the scientists not for the institution. I see the broad issue as that of scientists taking back authority from institutional administrators, and hope my complaint plays a role in this.”
Furthermore, she said she was “extremely pleased” that Professor Stinear asked if the biologists’ statement could be shared with others because, Rata says, “it is such a valuable account of the binary-sex and gender-fluidity issue”.
Given that NZ First minister Casey Costello is currently catching flak for reminding Health New Zealand that, “Only women and people of the female sex can get pregnant and birth a child no matter how they identify,” the scientists’ analysis could hardly be more timely.
Not to mention the fact that the UK Supreme Court has ruled that: “The concept of sex is binary — a person is either a woman or a man.”
Graham Adams is an Auckland-based freelance editor, journalist and columnist.
23 comments:
Maybe the Ruling as Handed down by The English Supreme Court on the subject of " two sexes" should be taken up by The Chancellor of said University, studied and " delivered to all Academic Staff " and the other low life staff, that The University will " accept without reservation the Judicial Statement (even if made by a Supreme Court In England) as being FACT".
Believe it or not, said statement has been welcomed in the United States of America - by the majority of Women, who concur with said statement.
I would also hope that The Management of Auckland University had a frank discussion with staff of the Equity Office over said incident.
A Trump-like figure is needed to sort out AU - a disgrace and a shadow if its former self.
Well said, Graham. ‘Debates’ such as this are bedevilled by an inability to distinguish between the scientific ‘is’ from the socio-political ‘ought’. A particular manifestation of this has been the political reaction to books such as Human Diversity by Charles Murray, and its predecessor The Bell Curve.
I might add that ironically, critics of the ‘Listener seven’ actually destroyed their own argument by conveniently forgetting the motto of the British Royal Society: Nullius in verba (“take nobody’s word for it”).
The essence of science is open criticism in untrammelled debate. By implying that maturanga Maori should not be subject to criticism, a protest letter organised by two University of Auckland academics, Professor Shaun Hendy and Associate Professor Siouxsie Wiles, and signed by 2000+ academics throughout New Zealand showed that academia in New Zealand is circling the drain.
It appears the increase of the rainbow community is now as a result of lifestyle choices, which bear no resemblance to biological realities. There can only ever be men and women.
Close the AU Equity office . Job Done . Move on
DOGE the DEI department on the basis they are spreading misinformation.
Now, can the scientific method be applied to those identifying as Māori.
I think it would render, all such claims as null in void.
Let this be a lesson to all universities across the country. The quality of graduates leaving the universities has seen a sad decline to the point that many employers do not want to touch them with a barge pole. The lack of critical thought and the zealotry they promote in workplace cultures is negative and damaging. There's a sense of entitlement amongst a vast majority of new grads that beggars belief.Good on Dr Rata and the biologists who stood their ground and stuck to the scientific method, rather than allowing themselves to be bullied by the DEI nonsense that is simply a cult in disguise, a cult that then targets anyone who does not bow down to their fantastical thinking. Maybe those academics who still believe in science ought to create an online university so that those students who prefer critical thinking and science have somewhere to expand their learning.
Professor Rata has become one of my personal heroes. I would love to thank her personally for standing firm against the rising tide of bullshit.
I think it would be fair to posit that Prof Rata be given a Dame-ship, that might restore a bit of reality and respectability to the award. There are a few who should be stripped of that accolade, many of us could name them I am sure!
"....socially constructed — like money, claimed racial categories, numerous cultural conventions, etc,..."
Racial categories are clearly real, but it is politically fraught to admit this, because when egalitarianism is shown to be a false ideology, all of the usual explanations for different average group outcomes go with it (e.g. "systemic racism" "historically disadvantaged/underrepresented groups" "White supremacy" and so on).
Does anyone seriously think that the reason every Olympic 100m mens champion, (and practically every starter in the finals) since 1980 has been Black is because being Black is a mere social construct, or because it has a clear basis in biological reality and, on average, Black men are often more athletically suited for the event? In terms of running 100m very fast, Blacks (particularly West African Blacks - as opposed to the further racially distinct East Africans, who dominate distance running because of their genetics), Whites are at a disadvantage that will probably never be overcome.
Every physical metric between races (including cognitive capacity) has real-world implications that no amount of political policies will overcome (and because they will never work, there are always claims for even more such policies - which will never work, but help to maintain people's careers who work in the "race hustling" industry).
Biological differences (in terms of lower average IQ) also explain why, in the US for instance, despite affirmative action policies being in place for 60 or 70 years, average Black achievement metrics have actually become worse.
Race is real, so racial differences are real. One reason why this fact is so strongly resisted is because, if it was acknowledged, then the idea of mass third world immigration starts to look like a very bad idea, for all sorts of reasons, and "anti-racism" policies (designed to negatively impact White people) begin to look more punitive in nature and motivated by hatred of White people, rather than the alleged stated goals of "equality" and "fairness" and "redressing past wrongs."
Thank you for your article Graeme. This is real journalism which explains quite complex topics in an easy to understood way for those not specialized in the area. So much of the rainbow rubbish is bluff relying on people's ignorance.
Can we hope to see a ruling like the clearly obvious binary sex call, for a person to be either Maori or not ?
A ruling like Canada with their percentages of Native American blood.
NZ can not continue to have people who have tiny amounts, or none at all, of Maori DNA being allowed extraordinary privileges, including having supreme power to govern NZ .
MfK
DEI operating in the appointment of Vice Chancellor..
Indeed.... "Honours" have become a FARCE...
Methinks a 'worm is turning'..... belatedly and globally.
I supect , like Helen Clark, Rata would prefer not to be associated with such a bunch of opportunistic pretenders.
Thanks, Martin. I agree that the Wiles-Hendy letter was disgraceful. It is entirely legitimate to oppose a viewpoint in an open letter (indeed the seven profs did so in their letter to the Listener), but the W-H letter was asinine. It was incoherent and even asserted that science shouldn't be put on a pedestal in solving the problem of Covid. That seems an extraordinary claim by two scientists who were publicly encouraging NZers to follow the science.
Well said Professor Rata has integrity among other attributes
All the old out of touch nanny's here, leaping on an inherited issue for the US, telling thousands of mature students how to run their university. How exactly all of you, does this issue personally affect you, or do you just not have much happening in your lives as alternative ways to pass the time.
Stand in truth and light, with courage and conviction and "the shadow" dissipates. What could we achieve if we all followed this example of "push back" against the corporate agenda.
Anon5.17 - having fun are you? Presumably you will not grow old so you will not become some nanny with nothing to do. Indeed indeed threatened future NZ you won't have to think and certainly won't have a voice. I hope you thoroughly enjoy the tribal chaos that is forming over NZ and engulfing it's people. I hope you thrive under an apartheid based system and that you have enough of the right genetic material to protect you. But in the meantime, laugh while the ship sinks. I am certainly laughing at you, poor sad shrimp.
Peter Dutton, the Opposition Leader in Oz, does not think the issue is important. I think Luxon is of the same view.
Peter Dutton couldn’t ‘define what a woman was’: Hanson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5fXiTWUpwE
Post a Comment