Mark

@Erazmus Blake Between 60-70% of software developers have computer science degrees but even the remaining ones who were trained at non academic institutions are trained in software engineering, not information technology. These are two very different fields. The former develops new software while the latter use existing software and hardware products to set up and maintain systems. The former is concerned with bugs, the latter is not. IT and Software Engineering are two different occupations which have very little overlap (a fact that I become keenly aware of whenever someone asks me to fix their computer) and should be clued as such

@Francis I also hated this puzzle and don't understand the comments of people here who thought it was good

@Barry Ancona I agree that the idea that a category includes both the people in it as well as those who are not in it but think that they are isn't specifically science denying. It's more of a logical contradiction (which is worse) in that it tries to define a category while obliterating it's boundaries - the essence of the concept of a category. What is science-denying is pointing at a person who is obviously a man in a dress and insisting he is female because he is under the illusion that he is. This is actually worse than say, a flat-earther since the latter is making a false claim about reality based on what he cannot see (he's never been to space or travelled around the world and he doesn't watch ships' masts appearing on the horizon etc etc etc) while the former is pointing directly at a reality in front of him and saying it's false based on another person's interpretation. My objection to the use of CIS (in the context of gender, not in the context of the former USSR) is that it is a slur meant to demean and exclude biological men and women from their genders by implying that their gender is meaningless and up for grabs to anyone wishing to adopt it. The vast majority of the world today and the entire world up until three seconds ago didn't accept the tenets of gender ideology which are themselves anti science and designed to break down the concept of scientific categories. This is offensive to most people and as such should not be part of the NYT crossword puzzle.

@CaptainQuahog the idea that sex and gender are one and the same isn't simplistic. It has been a universally accepted truth since the dawn of time until 3 seconds ago. (Also, simplistic isn't the same thing as uncomplicated.) And you're right. It is comforting to live in a world where abstract concepts mirror the reality they describe.

@Francis Be careful about making assumptions about the close-mindedness of people with whom you disagree. It is, more often than not, a form of projection used to avoid dealing with logical argument. I read your article and there is nothing (at least in the evidence that is presented, assuming it's true) there to indicate the ability of man to become a woman and vice versa. Today's gender ideology cult points to none of the biological characteristics mentioned in the article and uses an individual's feelings as sole proof of their gender. The prefixing of "CIS' to the word "man" (in my case) is detached from biological reality in that includes within a category (men) both actual men as well as people who are not men but think that they are. (No display of any of the characteristics mentioned in your article are a requirement for admission to the category). The addition of a prefix to the actual members of the category is offensive and has no place in a supposedly inclusive crossword puzzle

@Michael I think you can arrested in some states for admitting that :)