~1000 words


1. Introduction
2. The Authors
3. The Burial
4. The Study
5. The Facts TL;DR

1. Introduction

A recent study conducted by fat feminist women claimed that the Finnish Viking of the Suontaka burial was “non-binary,” meaning that they did not identify as either a man or a woman, or something like that. The study cites fantastic sources, like ‘Towards a Transgender Archaeology: A Queer Rampage Through Prehistory’ by Mary Weismantel (no prizes for guessing her ethnicity). We love our academics, don’t we folks?

2. The Authors

Before getting into the details of the study, these are some of the authors — just so you know what sort of people we’re dealing with here:

Here’s a blog post from Kirkinen promoting “intersectional feminism” :

And here’s a Tweet from one of the authors (the self-described “gender archaeologist”) clarifying that the purpose of this study was to project modern gender ideology — which was invented in 1955 by a literal pedophile called John Money — onto ancient European history:

3. The Burial

The Suontaka burial was found in 1968. It contains a handful of bones and bone fragments, described by the 2021 study as “highly degraded,” alongside two swords, a knife, a sickle, a pendant, and some brooch pins. Some academics previously assumed that the grave contained a woman, “based on dress accessories and jewellery, which suggest that the individual was dressed in feminine clothes.” Of course, this claim has never been conclusively proven, and it never will be, because the clothes no longer exist. However, that did not stop Leftists from using the Suontaka burial to argue in favor of Viking shield maidens, stronk independent women warriors, girl power, and so on. Unfortunately, shield maidens aren’t woke enough for 2021. Modern gender ideology dictates that Vikings must be gay or transgender, or non-binary, or whatever — which is where the 2021 study comes in.

4. The Study

The feminists’ study discovered via genetic testing that the Suontaka Viking may, in fact, have been a biological male with Klinefelter syndrome. Although the authors admit that the sample was “extremely low coverage” (poor quality), they claim that they are 99.96% certain that the sample is a Klinefelter male. The sample could also have been contaminated, since it was discovered way back in 1968, but let’s trust the geneticists for argument’s sake.

For those who aren’t familiar: Klinefelter syndrome is a genetic disorder that causes men to be born with an additional X chromosome, giving them XXY chromosomes rather than the regular XY chromosomes. For reference, women only have XX chromosomes (no Y chromosome).

While this may sound like a pretty severe disorder, the vast majority (83.4%) of men with Klinefelter syndrome remain undiagnosed, because they are anatomically indistinguishable from regular XY males. However, in some cases, Klinefelter men may suffer from reduced body hair, smaller testicles, infertility, less muscle growth, increased height, and enlarged breasts.

Below is an individual displaying typical Klinefelter symptoms. Again, most men’s symptoms are so negligible that they remain undiagnosed.

So, at worst, a man with Klinefelter syndrome could have poor muscle development, small testicles, and moobs and, unfortunately, look like a doughy soyboy.

Having Klinefelter syndrome does not make a man “non-binary” or intersex, or transgender, or anything like that. However, the 2021 study claimed that…

“If the early medieval society divided individuals into men and women based on certain characteristics, the pubertal changes—or the lack of them—could have led the individual being associated with a non-binary gender role.”

Note that they call into question the idea that medieval Europeans divided society into men and women.

The study also claims that the buried individual may have been held in high regard specifically because they “debunked gender norms” — very progressive!

“The idea of binary gender assumes that there is a strict way of being a man or a woman, but […] the Suontaka burial could be seen as evidence of non-binary gender identities being given a prominent value and visibility in early medieval northern European society. The individual could have been a respected member of a community because of their physical and psychological differences from the other members of that community”

They alternatively suggest that the man may have been born to a high-status family, and thus his supposed “non-binaryness” was accepted by society due to his power and influence (note the insertion of modern ideology, highlighted in bold):

“A secure social position may have also enabled untraditional life choices that would otherwise not have been tolerated. It may also be possible that the strict binary models proposed for Late Iron Age and early medieval gender are not always holding true

Paradoxically, the study simultaneously admits that ancient Finland had rigid gender roles that men were expected to conform to (this contradictory nonsense is what happens when you fill academia with diversity hires):

“In early modern Finland, the masculine roles were sometimes dependent on sexual ability and capability of producing offspring (Stark-Arola, 1998: 34). An infertile man, which an XXY male is likely to have been, could have lost his manliness in the eyes of society.”

The study concludes as follows:

“These new research results indicate that even in early medieval Finland, which is often considered a masculine and warlike society, there may have been individuals who did not fit into a binary gender model. These individuals could also have been respected and considered important, and their gendered identities could be elaborately represented and remembered in the content of their burials.”

They covered their own backs by leaving things ambiguous, possibly knowing that the mainstream media would go full throttle with LGBT ideology and claim all sorts of nonsense — which they did. For example, The Smithsonian claimed that the Suontaka man was “intersex,” which is completely incorrect.

5. The Facts TL;DR

In summary, what do we actually know about this burial? Not much.

  • It’s a handful of bones, with a few weapons, and three brooch pins that some academics have used to make the speculative assumption that the individual was dressed in women’s clothing. The clothing doesn’t exist, so this claim can never be proven or disproven. Nevertheless, it was argued by many Leftists that this individual was a stronk independent woman shield maiden.
  • Genetic testing has now indicated that the individual may have been a man with Klinefelter syndrome, but the DNA coverage was extremely poor quality and contamination cannot be ruled out.
  • Klinefelter syndrome is a genetic disorder that specifically affects men. It does not mean “non-binary,” nor does it mean intersex, or transgender, or anything like that.
  • 83.4% of men with Klinefelter syndrome are undiagnosed because their symptoms are so mild that they are indistinguishable from regular men with XY chromosomes.
  • There is literally zero evidence for the ludicrous claim that this individual was so-called “non-binary.”

As is often the case, this study is mostly Leftist propaganda and ideology, with a smattering of factual information, warped to fit the narrative.

Here’s a Tweet from one of the authors saying that they have no way of knowing the so-called “gender identity” of the buried warrior:

Conclusion: Speculative bullshit built upon more speculative bullshit.

That’s all, folks.

P.S. Please forgive typos I was eating burgers while I wrote this and I don’t have time to check/edit.