Guest post: The correct scientific response is to improve the method
Originally a comment by Rob on Et tu Brown?
I mean, putting aside the potential issues of contagion and methodology for a minute; there are people who are morbidly obese, or smokers, or alcohol drinkers, or drug users, who feel aggrieved at health and medical advice becoming part of public policy and discussion. They feel their lifestyle choices are negatively highlighted (not necessarily saying that being trans is a lifestyle choice). Tough shit. There is sound evidence that it’s so and sound reasons for said medical advice and public policy. You might be happy as fat person, a drinker or a smoker. That doesn’t mean that there are not negative social outcomes or that certain facts are not in play.
Why should an emerging social issue go unresearched, just because some people dislike the results of research. If there is a problem with the methodology of the research, the correct scientific response is to critique and improve the method, then repeat the research. not to suppress the original research. Plenty of the original research in many fields is initially shallow and not best practice. Often this is because there is poor funding or support. Sometimes it is through lack of knowledge in an emerging field. Poor methodology alone does not also mean that the conclusion reached is wrong or has not raised useful questions for further study.
Petition in support of Dr. Littman and her study:
https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/brown-university-and-plos-one-defend-academic
More information on the study here:
https://www.transgendertrend.com/new-study-on-rapid-onset-gender-dysphoria/
How interesting that the study seems to suggest that it’s mostly girls who very suddenly experience gender dysphoria when they hit puberty. That’s also the precise moment when roughly half of their peer group and nearly all the adults around them start treating these girls differently.
Well shit, Sherlock, do you think there’s a connection between those things?
What will become of violent trans-orthodoxy if 70% of the trans population are trans-men?
An interesting line of thought. Trans women are usually larger than their desired peer group, being that they developed as males; trans men are usually smaller. I don’t suppose there would be even remotely the same level of concern that a trans man might corner a man in a male segregated space and abuse him, and even if there was such an attempt, the general resistence in the male population would be characterised with far more violence than women opposing trans women.
You laydeez have to admit we MANLY MEN are better at aggression than you *chest thump*
I agree with Rob’s comment, I’ll just check this administratively.
Prof. Lisa Littman is in the Department of Behavioral and Social Sciences (BSS), where they say their research areas include LGBT mental health conditions. And the BSS department is in the School of Public Health, where the Dean of the School of Public Health Bess Marcus wrote:
That documents a conflict of interest that their future studies should declare: 1) In their journal submission paperwork, and 2) In the text of a paper, for example:
Or the dean could realize how stupid that would look, and support science instead.
Right? As I said in the post – “Since when is public health research or any other scientific research required to “validate the perspectives” of anyone? Perspectives are personal and subjective, and validation of them is not mandatory anywhere but especially not in evidence-based disciplines.”
Yet this idea has become a core principle of woke leftism, which is a huge part of why woke leftism is so excruciatingly idiotic.
It wasn’t so very long ago that ‘feelz ain’t realz’ was the mantra from the woke; ‘your feelings about x don’t alter the facts. Now, everybody is free to make their own reality, facts be damned and don’t you dare dispute it.