This is definitely a self-tell. They will see an article or comments that only refers to her as a “scientist” with no gender and assume the article or person is referring to them as male because that’s what they think when they see “scientist”.
From a different account no less. Why does Lemmy have bots? Is there really any money to make here?
It’s a complete mott and bailey. Obviously 95% of people can avoid back issues by just working out a few times a week. But when you point that out you apparently just happen to be speaking to the one person who has severe scoliosis and it’s implied that that’s who all of the people complaining about bad backs are dealing with.
It’s an identical situation when you talk to people who complain about sleep or diet issues.
The male experience is being told men have their own spaces and then looking into them and finding bigotry violence and misogyny. It’s completely gross.
That’s kind of self-referential gaslighting. How can you tell if society is progressing in awareness (which it is) if every time you see “scientist” you think “white man” and justify it as assuming they were racist enough to put that? (Not you, the person we are talking about.)
That idea that “scientists discover x” being a substitute is correct, but is well-known today because it is a historical trend that was described by modern academics. Not a rampant current issue (despite single examples one might be able to find).
All I’m saying is that progress starts with the institution and the reader and should meet somewhere in the middle. The reader assuming this is what articles mean downright perpetuates the problem.