Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
Bath Spa University is conducting an internal inquiry into claims that it turned down an application for research on gender reassignment reversal because it was "potentially politically incorrect" and would attract criticism on social media.
James Caspian, a psychotherapist who specialises in working with transgender people, proposed the research about "detransitioning" to the university in south-west England, which, he said, initially approved the application.
When he went back with his preliminary findings that suggested growing numbers of young people, particularly women, were regretting gender reassignment, Bath Spa said his proposal would have to be resubmitted to the ethics committee, which rejected it.
Caspian, who enrolled on an MA course at the university, said he was "astonished" by the decision and had sought legal advice.
"The fundamental reason given was that it might cause criticism of the research on social media, and criticism of the research would be criticism of the university. They also added it's better not to offend people," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Monday.
I was going to add some snark here but they pretty well covered making a mockery of academia for me.
Source: The Guardian
Also at: The Times
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 10 2017, @07:25PM (1 child)
You are saying that X is more important than Y? I'm not sure that's been proven/justified. Why remain miserable just so your goodies remain pristine? Goodies aren't sentient (although sometimes seem to have a mind of their own).
I agree that if there are better alternatives (Z), take them, but as blanket statement, I have to question the implied assumption.
(Score: 2) by KiloByte on Wednesday October 11 2017, @03:05AM
The problem is, we don't have yet the technology to produce functional genitals of the other gender. Not good for reproduction, not good for sex.
For the latter, while MtF can create something that looks closely enough to a vagina, you can find porn with such persons, and it's clear they don't feel any pleasure from such sex. As for the other partner — it's not like you can't find an artificial vagina-like object you can penetrate, without mutilating a living human.
Thus: the researcher in the article raises a valid point. There's a big loss but no gain from the surgery. Until a technology breakthrough happens, it's better to leave genitals as-is, and do at most a boob job / subcutaneous fat / hair growth / etc.
Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.