Springer Nature, an academic publisher, retracted a transgenderism study on a technicality after receiving an open letter from pro-transgender activists calling for greater “integrity on LGBTQ+ matters.”
The study supports the rapid-onset gender dysphoria theory, which holds that gender dysphoria results from social contagion or social influence and thus disproportionately affects pubescent females. This study’s hypothesis undermines the gender-affirming, pro-transition approach to gender dysphoria. (RELATED: Catholic Bishops Vote to Address Transgender Health Care)
The study’s authors, J. Michael Bailey and the pseudonymous Suzanna Diaz, disputed the retraction.
According to an article recently published in City Journal, “Anatomy of a Scientific Scandal,” it is becoming increasingly difficult to publish studies that do not affirm the pro-transition position on transgenderism. The Archives of Sexual Behavior, a peer-reviewed journal that has so far withstood pressure from activists to affirm transgenderism, has recently come under activist fire.
The open letter was addressed to Springer and the International Academy of Sex Research and called for the removal of the editor of the Archives of Sexual Behavior, which is published by Springer. The letter claimed the ASB poses “ethical concerns.”
The signatories “lost confidence in the journal’s editor, Dr. Kenneth Zucker,” because the journal “has routinely published articles on LGBTQ+ topics that in [their] view did not adhere to the highest standards of intellectual integrity and publication ethics, raising concerns over editorial bias.”
Furthermore, the letter threatened to undermine the Archives of Sexual Behavior’s credibility if the publication did not comply with the demand to remove Zucker as editor.
“We will no longer submit to the journal, act as peer reviewers, or serve in an editorial capacity until Dr. Zucker is replaced with an editor who has a demonstrated record of integrity on LGBTQ+ matters and, especially, trans matters,” the letter read.
The open letter garnered support from LGBTQ and transgender advocacy organizations, including the Center for Applied Transgender Studies, the National Center for Transgender Equality, and the Transgender Professional Association for Transgender Health, among others.
The retraction note on Springer’s website claims that Diaz and Bailey did not comply with the publication’s policies regarding participant consent. That is, the participants in the study did not explicitly consent to being featured in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. However, the participants in the study did provide consent for the findings to be published as a survey.
As Colin Wright points out in City Journal, “It strains credulity to think that the participants’ consent does not extend to a situation in which their data are being handled with more care and caution than what they had initially agreed to.”
Despite the trouble the authors of the study went through, other studies on the site that reinforce pro-transgender beliefs did not uphold such rigorous standards, according to City Journal.
A prominent example is researcher Jack Turban, whose research holds that gender dysphoria is not a result of social contagion.
Bailey pointed out Turban did not seem to acquire consent to publish from his survey’s participants before publishing his research, either.
Turban’s work also contains fundamental research blunders. The data used do not distinguish between biological sex and the sex with which participants identify.
Turban also receives grant money from the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, which constitutes a conflict of interest, as the AACAP receives funding from Pfizer and Arbor Pharmaceuticals — pharmaceutical companies that manufacture Depo-estradiol, Depo-Provera, and Aldactone, hormones frequently used in medical transitions.
Yet this obvious conflict of interest remains overlooked. According to City Journal, Springer has not yet brought Turban’s studies under the same level of scrutiny as it did the research of Diaz and Bailey, either.
The retraction of Diaz and Bailey’s research demonstrates the worrying influence of political activists and pharmaceutical companies on the scientific community.
Other examples of unscientific censorship include Amazon’s removal of Ryan T. Anderson’s book on transgenderism, When Harry Became Sally, and Brown University’s questionable removal of a study that upheld the rapid-onset gender dysphoria theory over concerns regarding the “paper’s research design and methodology.”
Emma Verrigni is a rising sophomore at Hillsdale College studying history and journalism. A member of The American Spectator’s 2023 intern class, Emma enjoys reading philosophy and the news.
READ MORE:
Government-Backed Censors Confuse ‘Disinformation’ With Mainstream Opinions
‘Fertility Equality’ is the Next Frontier for California’s Civil Rights Regime
