Since we are sexually dimorphic mammals, @nature, it must follow that you also believe NO other mammal can be classified as male or female based on genitalia or genetics. Correct? And thus all mammals have "gender identities" which supercede biological sex?
-
-
Show this thread
-
This isn't about politics. It isn't about who is in office. It's isn't about virtue signaling. It's about material reality. Evolution. Humans as members of the animal kingdom. What's your game,
@nature ?Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
It’s a power statement, not part of an argument. I think it often works.
End of conversation
-
-
-
Nice to see *Nature*, the most prestigious scientific journal along with Science, leap down the rabbit hole.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Perhaps our
@nature boys (and girls, if I may) might take a break from examining navels under the microscope and dissecting them into tiny bits in order to contemplate them for moment or two???Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I do kinda fancy being able to identify as an attack helicopter (look at the diagram)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"Founded in science" should mean looking at genes, not genitals
#SwyerSyndromeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.