Leading journal accused of abandoning science over ‘social justice agenda’

[IwantToRetire]

A top journal publisher has been accused of abandoning science in favour of a “social justice agenda”.

Nature, which produces several leading science journals, has faced criticism over its position on equality, diversity and inclusion from leading scientists.

Prof Anna Krylov, a professor of chemistry at the University of Southern California, shared an open letter online encouraging fellow scientists to boycott Nature until it “recommits to scientific excellence”.

She said: “The Nature group has abandoned its mission in favour of advancing a social justice agenda.”

She accused it of trying to play identity politics and promote specific demographics instead of focusing on science, which is supposed to be “guided by a commitment to finding objective truth”.

The letter was backed by Prof Richard Dawkins, an expert in evolutionary biology, who said on X: “Nature used to be the world’s most prestigious science journal. Now it’s one of many accused of favouring authors because of their identity group rather than the excellence and importance of their science.”

Full article at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/10/26/bbc-allows-work-from-home-if-worried-about-trans-toilet/

And at https://archive.is/q5JlX

They aren't wrong.

I happen to know that one Nature editor has a trans identified child. Others also may do.

And of course you have the capture of academia in general by genderism.

Unsurprising though disgraceful.

Is that the right link you've got there, OP? I can remember similar comment about Scientific American, and no doubt others.

Well if world renowned scientist Richard Dawkins who spent his life weaponising islamophobia said so, he would know…

Oops. will try and find right link.

Sorry

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/10/26/top-journal-accused-science-over-social-justice-agenda/

and https://archive.is/ecsPH

😂"spent his life"

Apart from the 50 odd years he spent teaching biology, and all the time it took to write 24 books not to mention all the time it took to write 80 plus academic papers.

When you add politics to science it becomes politics not science, it's the reason why the book The War On Science was written.

It's not like the TRAs are paragons of virtue.
Whatever anyone thinks about RD (I happen to be rather fond of him) scientific truth doesn't depend on if the person saying it is nice or not, and I do think abandoning scientific integrity will come to bite Nature (and some other instititutions) on their arse.

Also in the Times:
https://www.thetimes.com/article/37e5d341-9706-4b44-aaf1-b9df899ec035?shareToken=4fdaec4ddba690631496d137a2b42763

Oh yeah and lets not forget all those misogyny 'papers'…

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/18/richard-dawkins-sexist-atheists-bad-name

None of which detracts from the fact that he is a world renowned scientist.

The point you are spectacularly missing is RD has exploited his credentials as a scientist to push his own warped 'social justice' agenda. Kinda what he is accusing Nature of…

Seems Gender Critical 'feminists' are only too happy to turn a blind eye to misogyny when convenient.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend….even if he is my enemy?

Nature Medicine has published this article by a trans activist:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-025-04023-9

The title suggests some high level of science. But what it actually is, and this is no joke, a paper that demonstrates

• if you put men on oestrogen for 6 months and measure their oestrogen levels, they are raised.
• being on high doses of oestrogen causes negative changes to their bodies.

This is it. And this is the groundbreaking “science” that Nature now deems valuable research worth publishing.

Seems Gender Critical 'feminists' are only too happy to turn a blind eye to misogyny when convenient.

Please don't generalise. While I agree with Dawson on some issues, I acknowledge he can be a knob when it comes to feminism. There are instances when he radiates sexism and at times, misogyny.

I thought he spent his life "weaponizing islamophobia ", how many lives do you think this fellows had.

I think the FWR purity spiral function is broken. To Howse's eternal chagrin, the posters here don't perform that function correctly, even with the best mansplaining available to help them.

While gender criticals promote RD as a defender of 'women's rights' without scrutiny they will have to wear the fall out. You can't have it both ways.

Given RD's 'record' I suspect his sudden turn to defending women is more about white washing his past with a side of relevance seeking & pay back to the left for being called out for misogyny.

I’m not surprised to see accusations of Islamophobia laid at the feet of Richard Dawkins, hasn’t he recently gone on some sort of crusade defending Christianity all of a sudden? A strange angle if true, considering the damage Christianity has done to women in the west far exceeds that of Islam, which as I understand it is relatively progressive on women’s rights for an Abrahamic based faith.

You don't get to exploit the mantle of feminism others built & then shit on it. That you & your hypocritical fellow travellers personally don't care isn't lost on rational people….

Atheism has lost favour with the racist New Right given Christianity being more of a proxy for whiteness in terms of immigration.

It may not seem like it but RD is being consistent….

Do you know any rational people?

It's interesting to see how the formerly New Atheists have found a new religion in gender ideology and have turned on RD.

I would like to see the evidence that you have based these assertions on.

Translation: 'Anyone who doesn't agree with me is misogynistic'…

You people have rendered that word meaningless with your exploitation of it not unlike like Zionist anti semitism 'allegations'…