I sympathize with the spirit of your proposal. However, expecting university REBs to rise above the reigning dogmas of the age to anticipate harm is far beyond their capabilities. Disinformation is bad! Research to combat it is good! Approved! Gender affirming care is good! Research to support it is good! Approved! Critiques of genderism are bad! Research into its potential harms is bad! Not approved! Promoting vaccination is good! Research to support promoting maximum vaccination at all times is good! Approved! Etc etc.
The rise of ethics talk at unis has accompanied astonishingly egregious ethics failures which we will lament in due time. The fact is that for most people “ethics” means nothing more complicated than “current conventional wisdom on who is naughty and who is nice”. If you demand REBs “do more” you are asking for more of that definition of ethics, good and hard.
I sympathize with you as someone who researched the Involuntary Celibacy Community since 2017 for a threat assessment thesis paper. I have had the same experience with my own colleagues who were researching Incels as a novel terrorist organization.
When I presented my own research on Incels proving that Incels do not pose any real danger nor a threat to national security of the United States, my colleagues were appalled, some tried to fail me, and blocked me via online because I simply did not agree with imprisoning innocent people for speaking freely about the problems of dating and how feminism is hurting men & women online.
BRICS interests also co-own/underwrite the University grant research systems. UW has all kinds of PRC money/research embedded in their operations and overhead. These are digital capitalists on the FOREX by day and people who will poach medical and research data from ANYONE until they are blind for the additional money at night. I am so sorry. They truly suck at being ethical if they work at UW. Don't believe any of them. Ethics is as ethics does.
I sympathize with the spirit of your proposal. However, expecting university REBs to rise above the reigning dogmas of the age to anticipate harm is far beyond their capabilities. Disinformation is bad! Research to combat it is good! Approved! Gender affirming care is good! Research to support it is good! Approved! Critiques of genderism are bad! Research into its potential harms is bad! Not approved! Promoting vaccination is good! Research to support promoting maximum vaccination at all times is good! Approved! Etc etc.
The rise of ethics talk at unis has accompanied astonishingly egregious ethics failures which we will lament in due time. The fact is that for most people “ethics” means nothing more complicated than “current conventional wisdom on who is naughty and who is nice”. If you demand REBs “do more” you are asking for more of that definition of ethics, good and hard.
I sympathize with you as someone who researched the Involuntary Celibacy Community since 2017 for a threat assessment thesis paper. I have had the same experience with my own colleagues who were researching Incels as a novel terrorist organization.
When I presented my own research on Incels proving that Incels do not pose any real danger nor a threat to national security of the United States, my colleagues were appalled, some tried to fail me, and blocked me via online because I simply did not agree with imprisoning innocent people for speaking freely about the problems of dating and how feminism is hurting men & women online.
BRICS interests also co-own/underwrite the University grant research systems. UW has all kinds of PRC money/research embedded in their operations and overhead. These are digital capitalists on the FOREX by day and people who will poach medical and research data from ANYONE until they are blind for the additional money at night. I am so sorry. They truly suck at being ethical if they work at UW. Don't believe any of them. Ethics is as ethics does.