In an Orwellian world where up is down and men can think themselves into being women…

The problem with most ideological-driven academics is that they: one, believe they are more intelligent than most everyone else and thus have the moral right to dictate your lifestyle choices; and two, they think that any assertion must be grounded in some defensible argument, thus eliminating historical heuristic lessons and traditions accumulated over thousands of years.

In the realm of sexual argumentation, excluding biological arguments, many academics do not simply accept that incest is wrong and refuse your reflexive, intuitive response, “because it is,” as a valid reason.

Likewise, the same reasoning applies to pedophilia. However, some academics are willing to use historical references when it supports their assertions -- pointing to ancient Greek homosexual pedophilia practices as justification for the allegation that pedophilia is just another “sexual orientation” that falls on a socio-political construct of an LGBTQ+ spectrum.

So why should we be surprised that the progressive communist democrats who want to destroy our nation from within by first destroying our history, traditions, religion, and institutions, argue that the difference between a biological male and female is simply an artificial construct engineered by the white patriarchy to oppress women? Secretly adding, “give us political power, and we will redress these grievances.”

Therefore, it should be of no consequence when a formerly respected scientific magazine, Scientific American, goes woke.

Consequences be damned...

It is the modus operandi of progressives to ignore a reality embodied in human nature, scientific discovery, history, and tradition. When corrected or challenged, they ignore facts and rational debate -- becoming extremely angry and demanding dissident censorship or cancellation of platform access.  Behavior that can be summed up by the cowardice and groupthink described in "The Emperor's New Clothes."

The objective reality is that there are two biological sexes that are complementary and predisposed to the procreation that propagates our species. To the extent that someone does not conform to traditional science-based definitions does not mean that person should be mistreated or otherwise shunned by society. But it is axiomatically true that aberrant individuals should not legally impose their mindset on the general population in order to gain acceptance or make them feel better about themselves.

To the extent that academics can create their own realities, does not give them the right or privilege to force "We the People" to obediently accept their delusions without pushback.

Another example of progressive idiocy... 

Washington Post fact-checker slammed for calling ‘fetal heartbeat’ a ‘misnomer’ in defense of Stacey Abrams

A video of Georgia gubernatorial candidate] Stacey Abrams referring to the idea of the "fetal heartbeat" as a conspiracy against the pro-abortion rights movement went viral on Twitter Wednesday.  In the clip, Abrams said, "There is no such thing as a heartbeat at six weeks. It is a manufactured sound designed to convince people that men have the right to take control of a woman's body."

In response to an RNC Research tweet about Abrams' comments, Kessler claimed the heartbeat of an unborn baby can only be detected at 10 weeks in a pregnancy, that the fetal heartbeat doctors say can be detected at six weeks is merely "electrical activity generated by an embryo" and the sound is noise "created by the ultrasound" machine.  <Source>

A perversion of science to create a progressive communist democrat sexual narrative of control? 

Bottom line...

Disguising absolute idiocy behind the language of a credentialed academic does not make their assumptions and assertions less idiotic.

As for Scientific American, one of the special publications of my youth, it is now not even an afterthought. “Go woke, go broke!”

We are so screwed when scientists pander to politics and perversions.

-- Steve