you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]iguanidae 35 insightful - 6 fun35 insightful - 5 fun36 insightful - 6 fun -  (5 children)

Scientific American has, ironically, become VERY unscientific in the past few years. I stopped reading them when they had an article about women's inclination to "gold digging".

[–]BEB 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You're kidding - I hope?

[–]iguanidae 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I'm definitely not. I was incredibly pissed off about it. Back when I had facebook I posted a rather pointed comment about how there's nothing remotely scientific about that term.

[–]BEB 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I just cannot understand how science has just been thrown out the window in the space of a few years, even with the huge funding behind Trans, Inc.

How does an individual biologist live with themselves after supporting this nonsense?

[–]Realwoman 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Do you have a link? That's horrifying

[–]Kikeniggertransfaggo 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

No falsewoman