Earlier in the week, I noticed a story in the Telegraph, about a gay caveman. I glanced at it, but I admit, the Title made me suspicious, and I wondered if it was an April Fool’s post with a messed up date or something. “First homosexual caveman found.” What was that then- the first homosexual, or the first homosexual found? Then, each day, there seemed to be another story about this, and none of the stories seemed to shed any more light on story, saying the same thing over and over, except with added jokes or sassiness.

I’d like personally to take the story on face value. Archeologists found the remains that date to 2900-2500BCE and sexed them as male, except they were pre parted for burial in a way reserved for a woman. I don’t find that story to hard to believe. I think, in my very unscientific way, that there have been women and men in all generations since the start of time that, for one reason or another fell outside of the social norms of what we expect of gender roles and behavior. In other words, Sex and Gender (or at the very least Gender Roles) are not one in the same thing.  Through out most every era of known history, there have been individuals who fell outside this social norm of gender, and I believe the biggest objection to the full acceptance of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender persons is because we, as a whole, call into question the gender role norms that a sexually repressive culture presupposes and forces upon everyone. Or attempts to force.

But good Science would be needed to propel that story forward, and while it may be coming when peer reviewed manuscripts about the work are published, now we have only the general media and poor Science writing.

But first, some of the good Science. The remains were not a caveman at all, but rather date to the Bronze era, and a culture known as the “Corded-Ware” for the type of pottery that produced. No where as old as cavemen. But as Rosemary Joyce puts it, the use of “caveman” is intentional:

But of course, “caveman” is used here to dramatize a contrast: caveman/gay man. Hulking shambling macho hunter vs. ??

Joyce actually summarizes the Science better than anyone:

While the original article still leaves out the critical details of age, it is notable for being much less problematic than what was made of it in the later press coverage. And it allows us to focus on what the archaeologists were really saying: that, in a cultural milieu where burials normally fall into two groups based on position and grave goods, they have uncovered an anomalous burial.

The discovering archeologists want to term this a “third gender” grave, which is an interesting idea for sure, but in reality, there isn’t enough data to make such a statement. And despite what the archeologists said, the media has taken the ball and run with it, labeling this guy everything from a homosexual to a transexual, to transgender, and even intersexed.

So, how is it that a complicated and intriguing (and important) scientific find, is so easily derided and used as fodder for jokes? The DailyMail went so far as to caption the picture of the grave site as”Y-M-C_Cave.” The Salon article is just as basin a way, although it seems as if the writer intended to be flip. But why? Why is gender variance seen as funny in and of itself?

Not every gay man is feminine. And not every feminine man is gayer than a “Glee” marathon. Seriously, they’re called metrosexuals; where have you been for the past decade, USA Today? Jeez, a guy makes one comment about the wild boar being a little overdone and he’s labeled for eternity.

Biological Anthropologist, Kristina Killgrove, in her blog, Bone Girl articulates it the best:

Anthropological studies of sex and gender often highlight people of alternate genders, such as the two-spirits (formerly known as berdache) among Native American groups and hjira in South Asia. These well-known trans-gendered individuals typically perform a feminine gender identity. However, it’s important to note that biological sex, gender, and the choice of sexual partner are not interchangeable terms, as much as we interchange them in American culture. Most people are born into one of two sexes (male/female), but there are intersexed or third-sex individuals, sometimes people with chromosomal abnormalities. But people are conditioned by culture to perform a gender role (man/woman, masculine/feminine). And people generally choose to engage in sexual intercourse with: someone of the opposite sex (heterosexuality or “straight”), the same sex (homosexuality or “gay”), both sexes (bisexuality), or no one (asexuality).

So, in summary, perhaps we have achieved little when the media doesn’t know how to talk about an interesting, and complicated Science story without trying to make it all about Homosexuality, as if that is some monolithic catchall that covers everything not straight. And the differences between Gender, SEx, Sexual Orientation, and Gender Roles remain as undifferentiated as before.