The once-important Lancet medical journal has gone all in on gender ideologues’ redefinition of sexual differentiation, abandoning any pretense of “science” along the way.
It is important to “ensure that individuals whose gender differs from their sex are visible in study data,” the Lancet solemnly pronounces in its latest issue.
“Sex encompasses chromosomes, anatomy, and endogenous hormones and gender is a multidimensional construct that can be captured in terms of gender identity, gender expression, or gender modality (ie, whether a person is cisgender or transgender),” the journal explains.
Gender “refers to an aspect of a person’s identity,” it continues. “When accounting for gender, it is worth keeping in mind that an individual’s gender exists on a spectrum, can change over time, and intersects with other aspects of their identity such as age, ethnicity, and sexual orientation.”
By the Lancet’s reckoning, sex is an observable, objective, anatomical phenomenon (which is the province of science), whereas gender embraces the foggy, grey sphere of how a person views himself in any given moment, which inexplicably overrides biology.
To be true to gender ideology, scientists must pretend not to know whether a person is male or female and abandon their empirical observations when these conflict with a patient’s current mindset.
Gone are the days where gynecologists treated women. Now — at least by the Lancet’s warped standards — they treat individuals with two X chromosomes, whether they “identify” as women or not.
While systematically dismantling biology, the authors also take a gratuitous swipe at English grammar, painfully asserting that gender expression means “how a person outwardly presents themselves in relation to gendered forces.” Such twisted syntax should have seen our writers flunk seventh-grade English.
“Current data collection practices — which often conflate sex and gender and are not sufficiently precise — render trans, non-binary, and intersex/variations of sex characteristics (I/VSC) people invisible in the evidence base,” the Lancet laments, while failing to mention the more egregious invisibility of people who think they are frogs.
Over the past years, the Lancet has drifted further and further from its original mission, embracing ideological positions with little to do with medicine. Founded in 1823 as a medical journal, the Lancet has evolved into a mouthpiece of what it calls “the progressive agenda,” squandering its hard-earned moral and scientific capital on issues such as climate change, immigration, and gay rights.
In 2019, the Lancet ran a five-part series of articles on “gender equality, norms, and health” that denounced a conservative “backlash” against the global LGBTQ agenda.
“The progressive agenda that demands gender equality for girls and women and gender norms that promote health and wellbeing for all, including gender minorities,” a team of Lancet writers wrote, includes “advocating against toxic masculinities” and “promoting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) justice.”
If this is how low the U.K.’s flagship medical journal has sunk, one can only mourn the death of serious medical journalism.
