The so-called Scientific American claimed “inequity” between male and female athletes is due to “biases” in the treatment of both genders in sports.
The journal has become somewhat of a left-wing propaganda machine in recent years, focusing heavily on liberal perspectives and findings within science. In September, it endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris for the upcoming election.
A piece from Scientific American went viral on Sunday, October 6. Focusing on ultrarunning, the article claimed, “inequity between male and female athletes is a result not of inherent biological differences between the sexes but of bias in how they are treated in sports”.
“As an example, some endurance-running events allow the use of professional runners called pacesetters to help competitors perform their best,” the article continued. “Men are not permitted to act as pacesetters in many women’s events because of the belief that they will make the women ‘artificially faster,’ as though women were not actually doing the running themselves.”
Of course, this is disproved by track and field records across every discipline of the sport, but hey ho!
It is somewhat sad the science journal has become subject to political influence in such a manner.
Such content may even be banned if the Democrats get their way!
