The book itself is called "testosterone rex" by Cordelia Fine. It is openly a feminist propaganda book which primarily concerns itself with defeating obvious straw man arguments and denying the truth of the well established biology surrounding testosterone and its influence on maleness. This ideological feminist book has recently won the (formerly) prestigious science book prize from the royal society, which is one of the oldest and most respected scientific organizations in the world. In making this choice, the institution is wearing its ideological bias on its sleeves.

Here is a good podcast on red ice discussing why this book is very bad. [ here is an alternate link ]

Roderick [Kaine, author of Smart and Sexy] returns to Red Ice to discuss Testosterone Rex. Written by feminist Cordelia Fine, the book is a biased attempt to dismiss biological differences between the sexes. As Roderick explains, Testosterone Rex is politics first, and science second. Nevertheless, Testosterone Rex won the (once) prestigious Royal Society prize for science book of the year. We discuss the many ways in which Fine used bad research to attack a complete straw man, and ponder what her motivations might be. The show covers much more, including gender-neutral schools, children as political pawns, and the main problems with the modern university system.

The red pill community is very well versed with sexual strategies. You know that women and men both have dualistic mating strategies. Alpha fux/beta bucks for women, and the madonna-whore dichotomy for men. Evolutionary psychologists were developing these theories in detail as far back as the 1980s and books for lay-people were coming out in the early 90s. (the moral animal by Robert Wright is a great book on evolutionary psychology.) Cordelia's book blatantly ignores both this work by academics and the increasingly widely known, thanks to places like the red pill, nuances in human promiscuity to create an easily attacked strawman. In essence, she projected that it is widely believed that men and women have 1-dimensional mating strategies. Basically, Men are only promiscuous and women are only not promiscuous. The question is, no one with any relevancy actually believes this. Certainly not her anti-feminist political opponents or the evolutionary psychologists she likes to hate.

At every turn, she tries to deny or downplay the well known and established role that testosterone plays in differentiating men and women both in cognition and in the body and tries to sell the gender is a social construct lie. She even goes so far as to imbecilically discount the critical role of the SRY gene.. This is of course pseudo-science emanating out of the highly feminist and discredited social sciences.

I recently read an older and very good return of kings article which discusses how the false distinction between sex and gender came about. In short, a baby boy named David Reimer had a botched circumcision and lost most of his penis. His parents brought him to a crazy and perverted doctor named Dr. money at Johns Hopkins who originally proposed the idea that sex is a social construct. He convinced the parents to let him cut off the rest of this baby's genitals and to raise him as a girl. He also said he would treat the baby and his twin brother to regular treatments to make sure he was adjusted "well" to being a girl. In these sessions, he had these younger than 10-year-old brothers perform sexual acts like dry humping and mounting and probably even more perverted things. At times he had them strip naked and he took pictures of them doing these things. This guy was sick. He published research saying how great his research was going and it wasn't long until this gender is a social construct idea spread far and wide. It was widely praised by delusional academics in the social sciences and the social construct theory of gender is still very popular today. However, what they don't tell you is that both boys were seriously harmed by this abusive treatment. The boy turned girl threatened to kill himself at 13 if his parents tried to bring him back to Doctor Money. His parents later revealed he was born a boy, and as of then he started acting like his natural born sex and received testosterone treatments. Of course, Dr. Money never published about the two boys ever again after they stopped coming or ever admitted that his sick experiment was actually a complete failure. The boy turned girl eventually committed suicide in his mid-twenties and his brother died of a drug overdose in his mid-thirties, his drug addiction was likely related to the abuse he also experienced at the hands of Dr. Money as a child.

This comment at the article by Dokter Jeep was particularly apt:

Dr. Money was a child molestor and pervert and everything this empire of tranny-dom is built on was built on the lies and fantasies of a pervert. This explains the tumberinas and their mental conditions very well actually. If you live a lie founded by perverted nutjobs, you become a product of their work.

Despite this dubious and horrific origin of the "gender is a social construct" myth, radical feminists like Cordelia Fine are still propagating it and feminists, in general, are trying to promote it to children. Children who can be expected to suffer the same grizzly and miserable life that happened to the original unwilling transgender David Reimer. Not only that, but formerly prestigious science institutions like the royal society are actively promoting this harmful belief with large cash rewards. Cordelia received 25000 pounds which is about 33,500 dollars for writing this travesty of a "science" book. Our most prestigious institutions are completely converged and the "experts" are aggressively promoting harmful false beliefs about gender.