Another fantastic video from GenderSci Lab... this time about sex disparities in adverse drug events. Great resource for teaching!
04.03.2026 16:25 — 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Another fantastic video from GenderSci Lab... this time about sex disparities in adverse drug events. Great resource for teaching!
04.03.2026 16:25 — 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
This week's cover @thelancet.com
26.02.2026 23:48 — 👍 3111 🔁 1458 💬 44 📌 80
Yesterday, those who teach Intro to Sociology at Florida colleges (as opposed to universities) received a ready-made curriculum from the state and were ordered to teach it.
Yes, you read that correctly. The *state* is enforcing a curriculum on college profs, complete w/ the following restrictions:
Our new research shows that hundreds of federal surveys removed questions about sexual orientation and gender identity since the start of the second Trump administration. Read the full report at: tinyurl.com/SOGIdata
17.02.2026 19:00 — 👍 16 🔁 16 💬 0 📌 6
postdoctoral associate at Princeton ad
New Postdoctoral Research Associate positions at @Princeton's Office of Population Research!
17.02.2026 18:08 — 👍 22 🔁 28 💬 1 📌 0
As the 2026 Winter Olympics kick off with projected record-setting representation of women athletes, the GenderSci Lab is excited to share a new video we’ve created explaining how gendered social factors contribute to a higher risk of injury for women athletes. www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmLv...
03.02.2026 22:51 — 👍 7 🔁 5 💬 1 📌 1
“the state-approved version doesn’t include chapters on media and technology, global inequality, race and ethnicity, social stratification, or gender, sex and sexuality.” State. Approved.
www.insidehighered.com/news/faculty...
As explained in our short video, we found that these algorithms risk perpetuating “crude ontologies of sex and gender that undermine both scientific validity and health justice” (p. 1).
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TqL...
Check out this new research by GSL!!! It comes with a short video and blog-- great resource for teaching!
28.01.2026 16:21 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 1There's no better way to observe MLK Day than to go on the news and insist that the civil rights protesters objecting to police brutality are actually "paid agitators"
19.01.2026 16:22 — 👍 3808 🔁 919 💬 215 📌 64
“NIH is in crisis, grants are being terminated, labs are closing….but they found $1.6 million for an unsolicited proposal to study whether we should delay a vaccine we’ve been safely giving for 40 years, in a country where infants are at high risk of infection”
www.cidrap.umn.edu/childhood-va...
For a more realistic take on discrimination in the workplace, might I suggest my once again relevant articles.
17.12.2025 13:08 — 👍 121 🔁 37 💬 3 📌 2
"Three maxims for countering sex essentialism in scientific research" --excellent work, and important insight, from the always amazing @genderscilab.bsky.social link.springer.com/article/10.1...
20.11.2025 14:08 — 👍 6 🔁 2 💬 0 📌 0Hot off the press! See our new paper: “Three maxims for countering sex essentialism in scientific research” in the journal Biology of Sex Differences. We show how sex essentialism distorts research & propose 3 ways to avoid making these mistakes. (1/12) rdcu.be/eNcRM
19.11.2025 17:14 — 👍 26 🔁 11 💬 2 📌 2
NEW: ProPublica has found multiple cases of women with underlying health conditions who died when they couldn’t access abortions.
Tierra Walker, a 37-year-old mother, was told by doctors there was no emergency before preeclampsia killed her.
Congrats to CPC Fellow and Assistant Professor of Sociology Lauren Valentino, who was selected for a Russell Sage Foundation Visiting Scholar Fellowship for the 2026-27 academic year!
19.11.2025 16:06 — 👍 6 🔁 2 💬 0 📌 0
Great article in the conversation by David Baker et al. on how US crackdown on academic freedom undermines global collaboration and scientific productivity: theconversation.com/research-bre...
18.11.2025 18:54 — 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Does women’s health need protecting? The administration thinks so. But what does this mean? Evidence-based assessment of first 30 days of changes to womenshealth[dot]gov with @pahoman.bsky.social in @lancetrh-americ.bsky.social
12.11.2025 15:34 — 👍 2 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0
Image shows a screenshot of the first page of the article, State-Level Structural Sexism and Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes in the United States, published in Social Science & Medicine
Our new study shows that living in states with higher levels of structural sexism was associated with worse cardiovascular disease outcomes for both men and women, especially for diabetes and stroke.
@pahoman.bsky.social @deborascience.bsky.social
www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
Turns out Trump's "Defending Women" executive order is not, in fact, about defending women's health. It has led to the removal of of a lot of crucial information about women's health. This just out in a peer reviewed article by Patricia Homan and Susan Short. www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
31.10.2025 14:20 — 👍 18 🔁 10 💬 2 📌 0In the absence of trustworthy federal health communication, researchers, clinicians, and advocates must fill the gap and get accurate info to the public wherever we can.
30.10.2025 17:54 — 👍 3 🔁 3 💬 0 📌 0Federal health sites must share credible evidence-based info aligned with expert consensus, not politicized messaging that erases or distorts science.
30.10.2025 17:54 — 👍 3 🔁 1 💬 1 📌 0
Why it matters:
-U.S. maternal health outcomes are already in crisis.
-Disinformation from federal agencies compounds public mistrust.
-When science is replaced with ideology, population health suffers.
Our analysis shows that womenshealth[dot]gov was repurposed to promote gendered power inequalities and anti-LGBTQ+ narratives, rather than to improve health outcomes.
This shift undermines health for everyone.
In place of evidence-based info, new content promoted biological sex essentialism -- portraying women’s bodies as weak or in need of protection, and trans people as a “threat.”
This isn’t health communication. It’s ideology.
Between Jan-Feb 2025, key evidence-based info on maternal health, reproductive health, and social determinants of health was removed from womenshealth[dot]gov.
No credible health content was added.
New publication with @susanshort.bsky.social in @lancetrh-americ.bsky.social. We analyzed 2025 revisions to womenshealth[dot]gov under the Trump administration -documenting how credible health content was replaced with ideology: www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
30.10.2025 17:54 — 👍 31 🔁 22 💬 1 📌 3
