Advanced search

National Geographic

(51 Posts)
FloraFox Sat 17-Dec-16 14:09:46

Can you spot what's missing from this picture?

BeyondIBringYouGoodTidings Sat 17-Dec-16 14:16:06


amispartacus Sat 17-Dec-16 14:39:53

You'd have thought someone would have noticed. They've also got transwoman twice.

amispartacus Sat 17-Dec-16 14:41:24

I'd also love to see how they explain gender....

tubasinthemoonlight Sat 17-Dec-16 14:44:45

So are there actually eight biological males in that photograph?

FloraFox Sat 17-Dec-16 14:58:43

No the transgender male is female. Not sure about the androgynous one or the bigender one.

amispartacus Sat 17-Dec-16 15:10:37

It's a bit of a fail though. I suppose they were worried about the Twitter reaction if they used woman and transwoman - although they did use transman and man...

DameDeDoubtance Sat 17-Dec-16 15:13:52

yup, transwoman always trumps woman.

FloraFox Sat 17-Dec-16 15:41:20

No twitter storm about the use of "male" rather than "cis male" though. hmm

BeyondIBringYouGoodTidings Sat 17-Dec-16 16:02:21

Nope flora, only us women who have to use to cis quantifier. How peculiar hmm

RufusTheSpartacusReindeer Sat 17-Dec-16 20:13:28


Fuckwits hmm

RufusTheSpartacusReindeer Sat 17-Dec-16 20:13:57

Aimed at the magazine obvs !!!! shock

Dodged a bullet there

lovelearning Sat 17-Dec-16 20:17:51

Am I the only one who finds this all rather confusing?

DeviTheGaelet Sat 17-Dec-16 20:26:19

No I do too love
Think it's cos I am old. Male/female, homo/bi/heterosexual = easy
76 genders plus sexualities including gray/fray sexual = exploded head

LumelaMme Sat 17-Dec-16 20:51:28

I know how you feel, Devi.

lovelearning Sat 17-Dec-16 20:57:59

Remember when it was just boys and girls?

Twogoats Sat 17-Dec-16 20:59:54

There goes their scientific credibility... sad

TheCompanyOfCats Sat 17-Dec-16 21:05:49

As fucking if! angry

TheCompanyOfCats Sat 17-Dec-16 21:07:50

And what a pile of bollocks. Literally.

TeiTetua Sat 17-Dec-16 21:48:09

Everyone here knows that National Geographic is part of Rupert Murdoch's empire, right? As the Guardian wrote it, "Over the last few years the National Geographic Society has been slowly vanishing into the Murdoch family’s Fox media empire like a gazelle being swallowed by a python in one of the former’s famous videos."

So I wouldn't be looking there for much in the way scientific inquiry these days. Crowd-pleasing attempts at increasing sales are more likely.

EmpressOfTheSpartacusOceans Sat 17-Dec-16 21:52:39

This version is going round on Twitter.

FloraFox Sat 17-Dec-16 23:11:01

Yes that pretty much sums it up emptess

Prawnofthepatriarchy Sun 18-Dec-16 05:54:41

Love that new cover. Hope it travels far across the web.

EmpressOfTheSpartacusOceans Sun 18-Dec-16 07:10:52

Speed it on its way!

ChocChocPorridge Sun 18-Dec-16 09:09:20

It's not a new cover - that's the subscriber only edition - the one with lots of peopleis the newstand version. The picture is of Avery Jackson - a 9 year old transgirl

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: