Biden Admin Pours $1 Million Into Studies Aimed At Denying There Are Only Two Genders | The Daily Wire
By: The Daily Wire
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
A federally funded effort to make biology classes 'inclusive' for transgender students blasts the belief that there are two genders as 'inaccurate'
BySpencer Lindquist•Feb 14, 2024 DailyWire.com•FacebookXMail(Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)
A federal government agency tasked with promoting scientific progress and securing national defense is dumping nearly one million taxpayer dollars into an effort to make biology "inclusive" by denying that there are only two genders.
The National Science Foundation is granting three institutions the large sum of money based on the claim that "biology courses often inaccurately categorize sex and gender as binary." The study, titled "Collaborative Research: A qualitative inquiry into sex/gender narratives in undergraduate biology and their impacts on transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming students," hopes to make undergraduate biology classes more "inclusive" for transgender students, in part by denying the fact that sex is binary.
The effort to deny biological reality with taxpayer dollars comes amid a broader push from the Biden administration to leverage the federal bureaucracy to advance far-left beliefs, with large grants flowing towards efforts to embed extreme ideologies in America's institutions. The National Science Foundation calls the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) agenda a "high priority," and boasts that it has multiple identity-based employee resource groups, including one for "LGBTQ+ and Allies."
Three academic institutions, the University of Minnesota, Colorado State University, and Florida International University, have all received government funding to partake in the study, with a total of $905,694 taxpayer dollars slated to go towards the effort, according to government funding disclosures. The government funding was awarded by the National Science Foundation, a federal agency tasked with promoting scientific progress and securing national defense.
"The oversimplification of sex and gender into binary categories can make biology classrooms particularly challenging for TNG students," the award abstract reads, referring to those who identify as transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming. The description goes on to claim "early data suggest that how sex and gender topics are represented in the biology curriculum impacts TNG students' sense of belonging and interest in biology."
The National Science Foundation did not directly answer a Daily Wire inquiry asking whether the federal agency believed that there are more than two genders, with a spokesperson instead doubling down on the federal agency's financial support of the effort to deny the binary nature of sex.
"There is a strong theoretical foundation on which the research questions are based," a foundation spokesperson told The Daily Wire, also boasting that its "merit review process is recognized as the 'gold standard' of scientific review."
The spokesperson added that the effort to make biology more inclusive for those who identify as transgender was "identified as having intellectual merit and broader impacts because the proposers made a strong case to the peer reviewers."
The study specifically intends to examine "how a more accurate curriculum about the diversity of sexes found across species, the role of the environment in sex determination, and the complex relationship between sex and gender can create a more inclusive environment for transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming (TNG) students in undergraduate biology courses."
Three primary goals are also articulated for the government-backed study, which hopes to "explore how sex and gender are currently represented in the undergraduate biology content," "describe the impact this content has on classroom climate and belonging for [transgender, non-binary, and gender non-confirming] students," and finally "characterize the current efforts of biology instructors to create a more inclusive climate for [transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming] students."
The government-backed effort also seeks to "support the design of interventions and curriculum inclusive of both TNG and intersex students" and will allegedly "help all biology students develop inclusive and scientifically accurate understandings of sex and gender."
Data collected via interviews with students and professors will be analyzed using "[f]eminist phenomenology, qualitative content analysis, and document analysis."
Carrie Hall, who works for the National Science Foundation's Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM, was listed as the Program Manager for the effort. The individual universities did not respond to requests for comment on their ongoing studies.
The foundation's funding of the study is far from the only time that the federal government has used taxpayer dollars to push radical gender ideology and the diversity, equity, and inclusion agenda.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), for example, allocated just under $700k in taxpayer funds to an organization by HHS for the purpose of developing transgender-inclusive sex education programs for children as young as 14 years old, The Daily Wire revealed.
While taxpayer funds have been repeatedly used to push extreme leftwing efforts on gender, the Biden administration was recently exposed for relying on just two pages of literature to support so-called "gender-affirming care." Meanwhile, a growing number of studies have found that so-called "gender-affirming" medical interventions do not benefit patients.
Various agencies within the federal government have aggressively pushed ideological initiatives under President Biden, who signed multiple executive orders intending to use the federal government to advance leftwing beliefs on race and the diversity, equity, and inclusion agenda.
Former Trump administration officials, as well as former President Trump himself, have advocated for plans to gut the administrative state under the next administration, intending to reign in and fire unelected bureaucrats who may obstruct the president's objectives.
No Trump, Fascism References, Memes, Source Dissing.
Tags
Who is online
412 visitors
Your federal tax dollars hard at work.............../S
Actually, I don't know what it's like to have gender dysphoria or what, if anything, causes it but, since the State of Florida has already spent way more than a million trying to isolate and oppress these people, this sounds reasonable to me. How can you make good policy if you don't know anything about it?
good points
Exactly.
Very data driven with a hard science approach.
[Violation of Red Box Rules]
[DELETED]
Speaking of wasted federal tax dollars, have you ever seen Sen. Rand Paul's annual Festivus reports? Here's the one for 2023:
Democrats are literally redefining everything.
Can't define what a woman is.
Think that a blow job isn't sex. Bill Clinton
Can't define the definition of is.
Can't define what an "open border" is. Or tell the difference between a "legal" and "illegal" immigrant.
So an attack on biological definitions is to be expected.
Can you?
Are you sure?
A human with X/Y chromosomes.
Period
And yes, I am sure...as are sane Americans
Good try, but wrong. Typically, males are XY and females are XX. Even a decades-old high school understanding of biology should have given you that much.
And how useful is that? Have you ever done a chromosome analysis on someone you met?
However, XX and XY are not the only possibilities. There is also an endless variety of physical and chemical development within individuals that can be at odds with chromosomes. That’s why it should be taught and studied in a biology class.
Yes, I mistyped, but thanks for acknowledging the point of what I posted.
I see you ignored everything else I wrote. Unsurprising.
Here you go. The National Institute of Health. If they aren't good enough for you- I don't know what to tell you.
Pretending there are no differences between the two is assinine.
I looked into the long article. Do tell us what is the argument you are making using it. I want to focus on that point.
Yeah, I hate how they put the x key and the y key right next to each other and made us use ajacent hands to shift to upper case.
Complete waste of tax dollars.
Complete!
Lots of causes are fed into by the government. . . because unfortunately when you are the preeminent nation in the world holding the position can not be maintained on the cheap! A mere million dollars is low-ball considering those millions-billions spent on other citizen causes and projects.
Gender is a social construct (albeit with a biological factor). It is not strictly a biological consideration. Biology focuses on sex, not gender.
And nowadays, those with static minds among us refuse to acknowledge that gender-if not on the spectrum before-definitely is on a spectrum now. That is, freedom to 'move' around inside the framework of gender has been gained. Male and female subsets may have always been around-merely suppressed in our nation. With the leaps made by science, people are given 'over' to more gender and sexual expressions across the male and female sphere.
A significant number of renowned experts claim that race is a social construct. Yet we're spending a lot of taxpayer money to reinforce racial distinctions.
So, is the expert argument that gender is a social construct intended to further divide us, as has been done with race? Why should taxpayers fund political outrage over artificially created victims?
And there it is in a nutshell
Progressive ideology is so fundamentally stupid they don't even bother with trying to maintain principles.
Hard to say what the intent is since every human being could have a different intent.
I do not see a good reason for spending taxpayer dollars on studies like this.
[✘]
Interesting how those who couldn't pass sci,101 back in high school now hate all who did and now deny all science.
How many genders did you learn about in high school? I got an A and we didn't learn about gender du jour at all.
Y'all are the ones denying science.
High school = 70s?
Gender —a social construct— has expanded significantly since then.
Read the comment I was responding to again.
Is discrimination artificially created? If someone is discriminated against because of their sexual orientation, are they an artificial victim?
And even regarding sex, there are times when things aren't black and white.
But understanding this requires looking past the more simplistic version of the facts of life taught at the middle school/junior high level of biology class.
Indeed. Biologically speaking there are two sexes: M and F, but there are many combinations in-between those pure extremes. Kind of like colors. With Red and Blue we can produce many different shades of purple.
And here I thought that the study of biology involved every aspect of living beings. Get your minds out of the gutter folks. Bunch of perverts!
Are you making a joke of some kind?
So, this "scientific" study is based on students' emotions and "feelings" rather than centuries of factual science. ROFL!
Are you always content to rely on centuries-old scientific understanding? Why even have modern scientists, if that’s the case?
Yeah, that's where some folks seem to want to live - centuries ago, nothing new ever comes along to take into account.
All the more reason to ensure that Trump does not win. After all, he would be better served to go take care of his failing professional life and losses of court cases and leave public service to, well, winners.
Hillary and her useful idiots would love that.
I realize you need to move away from Trump to bash democrats for your own reasons, but Hillary is not even relevant politically these days!
We witness Hillary through her heretics every day. The resist movement she championed shortly after Trump had the temerity to beat her in 2016.
The chosen one ….
No, actually "we" don't witness "her" every day. Not sure how you do, but to each his or her own. And 2016 is receding into the background and, of course, Trump has put more than enough 'new' bull on the table—doing so nearly 'every day.'
How strange. I rarely even witness her name being mentioned anymore.
To be clear, Mrs. Clinton was on MSNBC about two weeks ago, I think I saw her live there right after the big bruha-ha of the Hur report 'dissing' of Biden's age-related factors. Even so I wondered out-loud to myself why she was considered a proper 'talking head' on whatsoever the issue was she was invited in to discuss. Consequently, I did not listen to closely to what was being offered up.
The resistance movement she championed just days after Trump kicked her ass has been in play every day since. To not accept that is to be in a constant state of denial and/or infested with such intense TDS as to not being capable of seeing reality.
The sea hag being “invisible” to her useful idiots:
So your message is that Hillary is working behind the scenes and her efforts manifest daily through her minions?
The "resistance" is something you keep front and center of your politically engaged warfare. Some of us would like for you (and others) to put it down and walk away. As for what Trump has said about walking away from NATO read what those with the power of the pen have written about it:
As this article details, you don't have to do dirty 'yeoman's work' to smear Hillary Clinton when there are republican-conservatives who were once a part of the former president's administration who have been prepped on his intentions regarding NATO in a second administration.
Yes, I’m sure you would.
Now you are exposed for your silence after being correctly informed of those who served Trump, but discovered that he would like them to go too far in service to him and not in service for the country as a whole. "Sunlight is a disinfectant,: bask in it. . . please. Or, continue to pretend that the head of the GOP/MAGAs is beyond your ability to discuss even as you ATTACK democrats at will.
NATO? Is that the best you have?
Why don't you research how many NATO countries are combat ready and could aid the US in a war. Then look at how many are unable to even defend themselves.
Macron promised Trump the EU would form their own damn army for self defense in 2018. Where the fuck is it?
Even though she would make a great president.
Sad that Putin's propaganda machine deprived the US of a great president.
(Putin was scared to death of Hillary)
Hillary does so appreciate her useful idiots …. Still …..
Actually he preferred her, because she was corrupt and could be easily manipulated. Do your research.
There's that projection.
CJ is correct.
I would agree with you but then all three of us would be wrong instead of just you two.
No questions, please. Make statements and I will see what I can do. That said, I don't appreciate your tone. Dial it back.
No, YOU are wrong, as usual.
Oooh good comeback
That projection is true of the former 'president' as well.
Fact - 1-2 of 100 births (1.7%) are born with a form of intersex...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex#:~:text=According%20to%20InterACT%2C%20a%20major,%25%20have%20mixed%2Fambiguous%20genitalia.
Draft dodgers used to try the same argument. Nowadays that argument justifies everyone registering for selective service. Gender is no longer an obstacle to becoming a trained killer.
Of course, turning gender into a social construct (instead of a biological constraint) won't do away with the social construct of body shaming. In fact, the transition should provide more opportunities. Man, that is one ugly woman.
I got a funny feeling that however the classroom is politicized, nothing will change in the real world. These gender confused people won't be favored by evolutionary discrimination.
And yet once again you make no sense whatsoever.
Same old song & dance from section 8.
Yup, that's what you provide, always.
People's brains are literally broken in service of their progressive ideology. It's nonsensical.
Hopefully, sanity will be restored at some point and future generations will look back a things like this and call it "The Stupid Era."
Another in a long line of condescending remarks. . .pitched against thinking people.
Idiocracy
That is loose change in the federal budget.
That attitude is the reason the national debt continues to be out of control.
The national debt is all on the backs of the republicans.
Look it up and do the research folks.
Trump inherited a great economy from Obama and then proceeded to destroy it within months.
Rewriting history I see.
2+2=5
No, he is telling the truth, as usual.
In a fiction novel maybe..............as usual
Oooh, great comeback!!!!!
Maybe gender is like race, no real science behind the construct, just feelings.
Have you ever read Orwell's 1984? In Biden's America, anything - from the economy/finance, laws, language, race, sex, gender, and science - is fluid, opposite, contrary, or whatever The Government decides they should be.
It is the position of this current administration to welcome and support acceptable, workable, policies that engage all the citizens in this country where no criminal conduct is part of the lifestyle. Surely, you don't have a problem with a man choosing to bed another man or a woman choosing to bed another woman. After all, as a conservative you 'say' you have mastered having freedoms as an art! Let others enjoy their freedoms to be different from yourself! Moreover, it that requires government assistance to bring about so be it.
Just curious, what governmental policies, or assistance, and by that I take it you mean laws, can the government create, that they already haven't, do you think is needed? And how can they go about enforcement?
As I said below, most people already have most of this figured out for themselves to their own individual satisfaction.
No questions. . . just statements, please.
People do have this figured out, and thus they live their 'truth' which some conservatives wish/intend/purposefully turn blind eyes to understanding.
Ok no questions then.
But without questions, there is no reason for the studies , and thus no need for funding.
To conduct the studies is to ask questions. And they would need to be asked.
Yes I have said twice now people have figured this out for themselves to their own individual satisfaction that is acceptable and workable for themselves.
No one has asked me individually how I have done so for myself,or how I view the specific issue/s that I found both acceptable and workable for me, so I will keep them private until asked.
The only question then is why would or should the government get involved in policy or assistance if they have already created policy and law that covers the issues?
We have had this 'talk' before about me and questions from MAGAs or MAGAs' sympathizers due to abuse of the process. And I will not be bullied by 'anybody' here. So I removed the process (on their account). It should make them "happy." (Because I am not going to change the policy anytime soon.)
You can ask questions of others about the "study" as it is not driven by NTers and their comments.
As to the rest of the comment: It's vague and leaves room for "scattered" thinking. I don't choose to engage in scattered thinking on this one.
If you have something to discuss; let's discuss otherwise we are just blowing good quality time and space provided through squander.
Understood.
Biological sex/ gender. There are 2, with the possibility of 4.
There is male and female.
The 2 possibilities nature offers in rarity would be true hermaphrodites,having both sex organs and one that has none at birth.
Anything else is sexual or gender orientation.
The discussion goes from there depending on which is to be discussed.
What some of your fellow citizens are attempting to tell you, we, even me (a homosexual) is that they have been on a sexual spectrum all along, ranging from male to female to those in-between the two poles. I, you, we, don't have to like them being there with their activities and experimentations on sexual themes but they are there-will be there-anyway. It is what it is.
What remains is recognition by those who, ignore, shun, shame, dismiss, bully, and abuse them!
Thanks for narrowing it down slightly, so the discussion is going to be about the spectrum of gender orientation.
I agree there is many points along the orientation spectrum that have and will continue to exist, and that will always be the case. No one will ever be able to change it.
With the exceptions of bully and abuse,which can fall under illegal activity in my view, the rest is actually a personal individual choice any person is free to make, to change that is going to take time and the willingness to change the attitude of the person's doing those things. And there lies the problem.
I can not and will not speak for others, I can only speak of my views and how I handle and think of the issue.
My citizens? Not quite since I don't follow the crowd.
I believe that liberty and freedom mandate that conservatives let liberals be who they are and not try to stuff liberals in a very narrow box with a lid on it! One can not be for liberty and freedom just for themselves and their group alone in the U.S. unless we call it for what it is: Selfishness.
So far I am not in disagreement.
But still waiting for the meat of the gender orientation discussion, and the perceptions and public reactions.
Give you a little factoid about me, individually, I don't care about how a person is sexually oriented to include gender, I know I am a heterosexually leaning male and all that entails, what others are is not really a concern of mine unless I become intimately attracted to some one, otherwise I treat everyone as a human being.
I don't know what you mean by having liberty and freedom , unless you mean it as they can attempt to approach someone and try and start an intimate relationship, that would fall under the rules of any intimate relationship, it either works or they get rejected and shut down.
As for me people all across the spectrum have the freedom and liberty to live and do as they wish, with the same risks and rewards of success and rejection I face myself.
Then, you Sir, are not a part of the political problem that occurs when certain conservatives take extraordinary interest in the lifestyles of other citizens to the point of creating long-term (short-term too) strategies and using short-term tactics to not grant or remove liberties and freedoms from their fellow citizens!
In this case, I can and will commend you.
For those conservatives who wish to dictate the form of life to be lived by people who can not live the 'ways and manners' of themselves. . . they need to let go of their selfish agendas and be glad they have a place in society wholly unto themselves and stop denying Others their places in the sun.
Cheers!
Well I can see where we differ . I see the issue as a societal issue and not political and as a social issue i ask questions of people to try and get to the root of their individual concerns.
To me making an issue political has not got a very good track record for desirable results , where as i have found out asking questions and understanding the other point of view , actually does have an impact . I am not saying it works all the time , it has just worked most times for me . people just need time and have to have the willingness to change their perspective .
people will try what they think works for them .
I have voted for your comment! Being that, you are making the effort to relate to others dissimilar to your way of living. As for waiting for others to come to a positive conclusion that leaves, in this case, liberals alone to find their own way in this life and in this country—not a good track record of their doing so. There are conservatives who would like nothing better but for the 'end' of liberalism/liberals. Nor is that acceptable, it is too long to wait for change to come on its own. Those of us in the "Other" category are paying taxes and sharing our 'all' with the country same as conservatives and we ought to enjoy the fruits of our labors too. Does not make for a perfect life-we will not get all we want-but it will make for a 'balanced' life when it comes and is allowed to stay without the usually hand of politics trying to slap it down.
Nice discussion so far.
Let's see where it can end up!
Remember this: Political policies affect somebody, somewhere, as ALL times. Therefore, we have to listen to those who are under those policies, to see if there can be any changes that can be made to make life bearable, even more than that, livable. And not just for the moment, but for a LIFETIME. It's for a lifetime. If we 'harm' people with policies that affect them negatively-it can be for a lifetime. That is just too long to be in distress for those under it and we should think about it and empathize and even try to make better policies.
Spoken like a true science denier.
Stories like this confuse the conversation before it can even get started by conflating terms. For the average layperson in ordinary circumstances, gender and sex are interchangeable terms. But if you’re going to be academic about it, they are different things.
Gender is a social construction defining the roles of men and women. Not every culture handles these things the same way.
Sex is about biology, and is determined by chromosomes, hormones, gonads, and genitals. Not just one of those things, but all of them. That allows for some variability.
For most people this is an either/or proposition and not something we doubt, even for a moment. But for a select few, these factors can be jumbled enough that their existence is more complex than a simple male/female binary. Estimates vary, but even if the number is just a couple of percent, you’re talking about hundreds of millions of people.
Because these people exist, there should absolutely be related instruction in a college biology class.
And science is currently scaling the heights in their full-on exploration of sex hormones, genitalia, and gonads. When such are cut away, no pun intended, sexuality is manipulated! There is without a doubt a new 'emergent' set of properties presented in the world. Thus, a new category (and label) is created. Sadly, the obstinate and stubborn insist on not recognizing change.
They convince themselves that if they just close their eyes and stick their fingers in their ears, the people who make them uncomfortable will just go away.
Many hope that the collective "we" accept our former 'stations' as second-class citizens again and/or just not be seen or heard from-except when needed.
It might be interesting to see how some of these studies work out and what supposed questions they attempt to answer.
IMHO most people have figured most of this stuff out for themselves to their own satisfaction.
Pours? A million dollars from the federal government is “pouring?” Out of a $6.5 Trillion budget, they’re “pouring” a mere million into three different schools. Seem a little hyperbolic?
Also, I may not be able to define what a woman is, but I can define what a million is, and it’s not
This story is so lame, they even had to exaggerate 900 grand up to a million, and then it’s being “poured.”
Let’s see . . . What mundane thing can we get worked up about today?
That's about the size of it.
That type of thinking is what helps cause a $6.5 trillion budget; and our national debt.
Each individual amount spent doesn't mean anything until it is added up.
Neither party is innocent when it comes to wasted money. Right now Democrats are leading the charge as they control both the Senate and White House.
Sure. I don’t know if my math is perfect, but I think this little program works out to about 1/100th of 1% of that budget.
Yeah, that seems like it would be worth all the angst. /s
Be honest. It’s not the money. It’s the topic that bothers you.
They probably could have funded this with the loose change found in the cushions of the Senate dining room.
Just in case you missed it: This study is not designed to be a 'crowd pleaser.' It is a minimal amount of money spent on a select issue affecting impacts for a select grouping of the citizenry. As we all should know well, it is through 'enlightenment' that understanding is achieved and nuances come boldly into the light and even some unexpectedly positive. . .or negative findings are exposed.
Why some people feel the need to air their complaints about such matters just goes to show you their intent is to be selfish and deny others understanding of problems affecting the few. Governing is at its best (rarely achieved) when it does it best for all of its people when possible- as soon as possible.
I repeat (for emphasis):