Even though science is – or at least should be – inherently apolitical, Nature Human Behavior has decided that only leftist-approved "science" should be allowed because telling the truth about transgender regret, for instance, might make someone with gender dysphoria feel bad.
"Although academic freedom is fundamental, it is not unbounded," the editorial declares, laying the groundwork for the normalization of scientific censorship.
Academic freedom, the article goes on to suggest, must be restrained by a "well-established ethics framework" in order to ensure that "humans who do not participate in the research" are not "harmed indirectly" by a finding that "inadvertently ... stigmatizes individuals or human groups."
This includes research that someone might perceive as "discriminatory, racist, sexist, ableist, or homophobic," the editorial goes on to state, because such research "may provide justification for undermining the rights of specific groups, simply because of their social characteristics."
Truth: Science does NOT support the prevailing gender ideologies that rule our day
What this is all referring to, of course, is the public backlash we are now seeing against the transgender mutilation of children, which is being pushed by public school teachers, businesses and libraries that support and promote drag queens, TikTok and more.
In response to all this perversion, independent scientists, doctors and public health experts are increasingly coming forward with scientific evidence showing that bodily mutilation in the name of transgenderism is highly destructive and not supported by actual science.
In an attempt to defuse the criticism, Nature Human Behavior is drawing a line in the sand for the scientific community to stay away from this subject, or else risk offending someone in the Cult of LGBT who might have "zim's" fee-fees hurt by the truth.
"This is, in short, the solution of ideologues to the lack of a scientific basis for gender ideology and the mounting evidence that it is nonsense – not to mention the horrifying testimonies of those who have undergone the 'transition' experiment," writes Jonathon Van Maren for LifeSiteNews.
"Thus, research that the LGBT community does not like can now be dismissed not because it is wrong, but because it might 'undermine' the LGBT agenda. Plenty of institutions and academics have been operating this way for quite some time – but this puts it out into the open. The editorial isn't just staking a position for Nature Human Behavior – it urges the entire research community to 'address these potential harms' and to apply this framework to 'any academic publication.'"
Bo Winegard made similar statements in a piece he wrote for Quillette that utterly destroys the Nature Human Behavior editorial. In short, Winegard says that this new format is just censorship in disguise, as it will bar any and all science that those from protected special interest groups do not like.
"Within a few sentences, we have moved from a banal statement of the obvious to draconian and censorious editorial discretion," Winegard writes about the format of the op-ed, which barely even attempts to veil its true intent.
"Editors will now enjoy unprecedented power to reject articles on the basis of nebulous moral concerns and anticipated harms."
What this means for the future of "science" – if you can even call it that anymore – is that only politically correct positions will be approved for publishing. Everything else will hit the dustbin – which means you will probably hear about it from the independent media.
The transgender mafia is destroying science. To keep up with the latest, visit Transhumanism.news.
Sources for this article include:
Please contact us for more information.
