# Nature is sexist

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nature-is-sexist/641809>\
**Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\
**Created:** [November 22, 2012, 5:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nature-is-sexist/641809 "2012-11-22T05:17:42Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Invisible\_Chimp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/f05b48/32.png) [@Invisible\_Chimp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Invisible_Chimp)\
**Post date:** [November 22, 2012, 5:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nature-is-sexist/641809/1 "2012-11-22T05:17:42Z")

</div>

And they’re going to take steps to [correct](http://www.nature.com/news/nature-s-sexism-1.11850) it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![blindboyard](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blindboyard/32/2833_2.png) [@blindboyard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blindboyard)\
**Post date:** [November 22, 2012, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nature-is-sexist/641809/2 "2012-11-22T14:24:33Z")

</div>

Nature, the magazine, mostly employs women on their staff, despite the predominance of men in the relevant fields, in addition to which they are making a conscious effort to put women forward because of their genitals rather than their work.

So yes, very sexist indeed, just not against women.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\
**Post date:** [November 23, 2012, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nature-is-sexist/641809/3 "2012-11-23T13:12:38Z")

</div>

On the other hand, **Reality** doesn’t have an obviously liberal bias:  
[http://realityweeklymagazine.net/](http://realityweeklymagazine.net/)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\
**Post date:** [November 23, 2012, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nature-is-sexist/641809/4 "2012-11-23T13:17:40Z")

</div>

> [@blindboyard](#):
>
> Nature, the magazine, mostly employs women on their staff, despite the predominance of men in the relevant fields, in addition to which they are making a conscious effort to put women forward because of their genitals rather than their work.
> 
> So yes, very sexist indeed, just not against women.

According to the article:

> [@](#):
>
> Of the 70 editors and reporters around the globe who commission, select, write or oversee Nature’s daily and weekly content, 38 (54%) are women.

That’s about 1-2 women more than you’d expect by random chance. Am I being whooshed?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\
**Post date:** [November 23, 2012, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nature-is-sexist/641809/5 "2012-11-23T13:22:44Z")

</div>

Keep reading.