So the whole “in 1000 years the archaeologists will know/be deeply aggrieved that you were AMAB!” thing
1) won’t big endocrine shifts turn up in long bone heads especially?
2) won’t lack of grave goods mean hypothetical archaeologists can’t get much useful data from most modern first world bodies?
2) archaeology historically gets coopted for racism and nationalism right? So I’d figure any transphobic archaeologists would be screaming about exactly this right now but AFAIK it’s not happening?
@Leucrotta from what I've heard, most archeologists actually realize it's super hard to gender from bones and remains and there are several cases where they eventually basically accepted "oh I guess this warrior was a woman" or "huh these 'male' bones were buried in the way of a woman"
much like their knowledge of biology, transphobes are stuck in like what their grade school textbook said
@chimerror I really wish high school/earlier classes in everything were clearer about “this topic is so big we’re trying to give you some basics, and you can read up in depth more about whatever part of history/literature/biology/etc if some of it catches your interest.” Rather than it being holy writ. Like binary gender isn’t a BAD place to start, but it’s basically the Bohr model for gender.
