I received my copy today, and in typical NatGeo style they cover the gender issue.
I'm reminded of a particular item from Carl Sagan's 'Baloney Detection Kit':
"Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view."
I feel it is lacking here.
Specifically, due to lack of input from proponents of the type of objectivity represented by the above.
Carl Sagan is a hero of mine, a positive male role model.
Is it because he is a man, or because he represents to me something positive within humanity?
I go with the latter.
There are so few who are representative of this idea, people of any gender.
The quotation of statistics to support the arguments, the repetition and echo of the status quo.
All to much a part of current popular media.
Who are the people this is for? Is it for those who would continue an old argument, or those who would come to understand and create something new?
The focus on youth is commendable, and where else would one start but with a history of the present.
This edition of the National Geographic is by name the same periodical that introduced me to other cultures while I lived in a mono-culture environment. It allowed me freedom and understanding when I was given no other recourse.
Given hind-sight the national geographic is a thing that only gave me inkling to how to be who I am, but it was important.
The lack of articles in this issue cause me reticence; no Billy Tipton, no Christine Jorgensen.
No talk of the fact that so many Human Tribes had names for us, names for me.
Two Spirit People, Koekchuch, others I can't find.
Well, you get the idea.
