Article "Scientific American" is back to distorting the facts to buttress its ideology

[C C]

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2023/10/2...-ideology/

INTRO (Jerry Coyne): It’s been a while since Scientific American has published misleading and distorted articles to buttress its “progressive” Left ideology, and I hoped they had shaped up. (To be honest, I haven’t followed the magazine, and got the following link from a reader.) My hope was dashed yesterday when I read this new article claiming that women constituted a high proportion of hunters in early hunter-gatherer societies. It is full of misconceptions and distortions (some of which must be deliberate), neglects contrary data, is replete with tendentious ideological claims, and even misrepresents the claim they’re debunking. You can read it for free [...] going here..... (MORE - details, analysis of article)

[confused2]

I had all of this from my gf 50 years ago.

After reading Cosmopolitan Magazine ..

She was stronger than me .. she clearly wasn't.
She could run faster than me .. fail by a wide margin.
She could run further than me .. again fail by a wide margin.
She was cleverer than me .. she was. Don't quote me on this but.. you learn by your mistakes.

Given the choice between having to read Comopolitan and a slow and painful death - I think I'd have no choice but to go with the sapd.

Edit..
There's are times and places where Girl Code Central meets up with Ovulation Day - I honestly don't think anyone without ovaries is ever going to be able to get to that place no matter how hard they try.