Viewpoint: The National Science Foundation has launched a pilot project to track the ‘sexual orientation and gender identity’ of people in science, engineering and math careers. Is that constructive?

new study identifies main culprit behind lithium metal battery failure
Credit: UCSD (CC BY-NC 3.0 US)

The Survey of Earned Doctorates is an annual census of new postgraduate research degrees. The National Science Foundation, a federal agency, collects data on academic discipline, sex, race, ethnicity, debt burden, disability and citizenship. The results are used by government, universities and industry to track the demographics of women and minorities in STEM—science, technology, engineering and math.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

A pilot project was announced [recently] to track “sexual orientation and gender identity.” In addition to being asked about their sex—now qualified as the sex “assigned at birth”—they will be asked if they “currently describe” themselves as male, female, “transgender” or “a different term”; whether they consider themselves a “gender minority,” a “sexual minority” and “LGBT+”; and whether they accept one of a dizzying list of labels: “Non-binary, Gender nonconforming, Genderfluid, Genderqueer . . . Gay, lesbian, bisexual, queer or another orientation.”

The list of reasons why this is a bad idea is almost as long. For one, asking about sexual preferences is a violation of privacy. Will the NSF next be asking how many sexual partners each degree recipient had during graduate school, in case promiscuous students are underrepresented?

This is an excerpt. Read the full article here

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-May-7-2026-12_16_37-PM-2
Viewpoint: Are cancer rates ‘skyrocketing’ as RFK, Jr. and MAHA claims? The evidence says mostly the opposite
Screenshot-2026-04-13-at-1.39.26-PM
Viewpoint: ‘Safer for children?’ Stonyfield yogurt under fire for deceptive organic marketing
Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-10.46.29-AM
Viewpoint: How to counter science disinformation? Science journalist offers 12 practical tips
png-pill-omega-Supp-fish-oil
Millions take omega-3 fish oil for brain health. New research suggests it may do the opposite.
ChatGPT Image May 14, 2026, 09_51_35 PM
Facebook swamped by hundreds of thousands of scam ads for illegal or dangerous medical products
ChatGPT Image May 12, 2026, 01_21_30 PM
How big health brands are funding online medical misinformation 
Screenshot-2026-04-23-at-11.00.36-AM
Regulators' dilemma: Thalidomide, Metformin, and the cost of getting drug approvals wrong
Picture1-5
Science Disinformation Gap: The transatlantic battle over social media and censorship
ChatGPT-Image-May-13-2026-12_43_37-PM-2
Longevity: Is cellular rejuvenation even possible?
ChatGPT-Image-May-12-2026-08_39_41-PM
GLP podcast: Big Pharma, Big Ag, Big Food—health harming industries or life-saving innovators?
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.