The debate about allowing transgender girls (who were born dudes) to compete against girls has been raging since the 2010s. Ever since Fallon Fox was smashing orbital bones and Mack Beggs was choking girls out. A professor would like to research the topic, but his proposal has been rejected. Using the word "male" -- in research about males competing against females -- is misgendering so his university yeeted the proposal.

King’s College London Professor John Armstrong wanted to research the controversial topic. He was ASKED TO by the UK Athlete’s Commission. They were working on a policy about trans inclusion in sports, and had a crazy idea that the opinions and voices of athletes affected by the policy should be heard. Professor Armstrong did too.

King's College did not.

I submitted a proposal for ethical review at Kings College London which stated that the aim of the research was “to find the views of athletes and volunteers on the question of when males should be allowed to compete in the female category in athletics”. The ethics committee rejected the proposal, on the grounds that using the terms “male” and “female” in this sentence constituted “misgendering”.

The college didn't have a problem with the survey questions. Just if the word "male" or "female" was anywhere in the research, Research, on how athletes feels about people who were born males competing against people who were born females.

I'm assuming the research would also include thoughts on people born females competing against people born males as well. But for some unknown reason, it isn't people born female dominating in male sports. Nor is it people born female giving people born male concussions. Armstrong's research could have shed light on why this is.

The professor was told he had to speak to the university's Equality Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) team about, quote, “wording used in the survey” and as well as the “presentation of the research”.

Asking our EDI team for assistance seems unlikely to improve the quality of the research. Our EDI team is part of the university’s human resources function and has no particular research expertise. Until recently, it was teaching in a course aimed at senior managers that sex was a spectrum from male to female with “intersex” somewhere in between.

Odd that an elite university would hamper scientific research by having it micromanaged by a department that has no science or research background. It would be as if Big Tech companies allowed partisan non-profits to determine what is "misinformation" when discussing medical issues on Facebook, even though the non-profits have no scientific background themselves.

In America, the House of Representatives passed the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act. The bill faces a veto threat from President Biden. Critics are unclear why Biden supports watching girls having their hopes and dreams (and bones) crushed by boys who went through male puberty. He is expected to announce his reelection campaign this week.

><><><><><><

Brodigan is Grand Poobah of this here website and when he isn't writing words about things enjoys day drinking, pro-wrestling, and country music. You can find him on the Twitter too.

Facebook doesn't want you reading this post or any others lately. Their algorithm hides our stories and shenanigans as best it can. The best way to stick it to Zuckerface? Sign up for our DAILY EMAIL BLASTS! They can't stop us from delivering our content straight to your inbox. Yet.