Could gender fluidity be a sign of evolution?

The book “The origin of the species” is a very vague book concerning humankind. The book was written for non-specialist readers and attracted widespread interest upon its publication. Darwin was already highly regarded as a scientist, so his findings were taken seriously and the evidence he presented generated scientific, philosophical, and religious discussion. The debate over the book contributed to the campaign by T. H. Huxley and his fellow members of the X Club to secularise science by promoting scientific naturalism. Within two decades, there was widespread scientific agreement that evolution, with a branching pattern of common descent, had occurred, but scientists were slow to give natural selection the significance that Darwin thought appropriate. During "the eclipse of Darwinism" from the 1880s to the 1930s, various other mechanisms of evolution were given more credit. With the development of the modern evolutionary synthesis in the 1930s and 1940s, Darwin's concept of evolutionary adaptation through natural selection became central to modern evolutionary theory, and it has now become the unifying concept of the life sciences.

in10RjFox · M

Yes. In fact gender was already accepted for a fact but never analysed to find truth when society influenced a lot in depicting gender.

Charles Darwin, Sigmond Fried and others were the first to establish studies that had a functional element. Since it was new and amusing, they were taken for granted as none else had the experience and hence read their work for amusement.

Gender was always Dynamic, but was made static and all gender studies were a post mortem with the belief that gender is static and differentiated by genitals, when genitalia had nothing to do with gender.