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

As Granny would say,

"Ach, but his brain's recilin' in a bath chair.

I’m not sure we ever had one. Oh wait, is it that thing we’ve been using to prop the door open? None of us knew what it was...

That wasn't the purity spiral, it's the auger of discontent. 😀

Howseitgoin · Today 21:40

Sex being bi/multi modal isn't in least scientifically controversial so no you don't in the way you think

Ah now. A piece of undefined, fact free philosophical wibbling is uncontroversial scientifically, especially on the grounds that it has no basis in science.

Lol, are you seriously suggesting that there aren't within the reproductive system multiple traits, with variable distributions? IE individuals may possess different combinations of chromosome type, gamete size, hormone level, morphology, and social roles, which do not always align in 'female- and male'-specific ways?

Of course RD correctly assumed gender criticals were either too stupid or too confronted to understand anything beyond oversimplifications & ran with it.
Gotta hand it to him, he knows a useful idiot when he sees one…

Please no one respond to this tripe.

the lancet should be next. I am never going to get over being a ‘body with a vagina’ to their editors. Unfortunately for them, women actually aren’t all corpses with female parts and we have long memories.

!

You might want to consider damage done to women in the east as well as the west. And also perhaps look at Nigeria, for example, if you want to compare damage.

It's worrying, though, isn't it? Seems harder and harder to find the simple facts of a situation these days. Sources that were considered authorative, and you would have accepted without question, now seem dubious.

Have you noticed the number of predominantly black churches in the UK?

Never let the facts...

While 'some' gender criticals promote RD as a defender of 'women's rights'

Fixed that for you. We're not the Borg collective.

i think we need disclaimers all over FWR. A kind of delete/replace.

For "GC" (or Gender Critical") Delete and replace with "sex realist"

The OPs link is paywalled I think, and the archive links don’t seem right. This ‘gift’ one may work… maybe we could get back to it
(Ad hominem attacks on someone who supported Prof Krylov’s position aren’t indicative of serious critique of the subject)

Leading journal accused of abandoning science over ‘social justice agenda’
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/3e32b8e30e4e633e

I had a look on google scholar to see what sort of work Prof Anna Krylov does … QM software … but found this which illuminates why she is so concerned about Nature policy. (Published by the American Chemical Society, no less)

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.jpclett.1c01475

You say “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”
Now I know you are trolling.

Honestly you should see some of the howlers she/he comes out with on other posts.

Thanks for this. A very interesting article. And a salutary reminder that "cancel culture" is not a recent invention, merely a new name for a very old practice.

It's not Islam that's directly responsible for the curtailing of reproductive freedom in the US but the Christian right's influence is the point.

Yes. Cancel culture, ad hominem attacks, suppression of real science for the sake of a dogma - she’s seen it all.
I hadn’t quite realised how recently the soviet state was trying to impose politics on science.

'Unpopular' conclusions from research = "abandoning science in favour of a “social justice agenda”? Hmmm:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-81567-9

Based on Reddit…hmmmm indeed. I think you may have proved Krylov’s point. Did you mean to?
What do you think of her piece I linked to?

My problem with the critique of research including phenomena that is social justice related is that it assumes that because it is it must be:

A. Scientifically irrelevant
B. Non scientific
C. Bias

You could say that about Climate Change, Vaccines & many many other areas. That these are politically controversial or not hard sciences doesn't mean they aren't relevant or 'scientific'. Whilst I appreciate the concern over bias that's easily mitigated in peer review, reproducibility & analysis of methodology which wasn't really possible in the examples Kyylov gave of totalitarian regimes. IE its not as if checks & balances don't exist in democratic nations.

My daughter works in cancer research & let me tell you if think the corruption of journals because of social justice is anything to write home about I can assure you there's much worse & its called 'money & prestige in science'.

Maaaate. Are you trying to accuse feminists of feminist if wrong? As a man? Mate. No, just no. I know you’re upset women here won’t obey you and believe men can be women but you’re making yourself look a bit dull now. You’ll be quoting Butler at us next.