Is this a problem? We expect universities to have a pro-truth, pro-reality, pro-knowledge bias, which are things the Republican party overtly rejects. We could expect that Republicans might not make it to universities as often, or they might not want to attend, or they might cease being Republicans upon learning facts and logic. None of this would be surprising and none of this would necessarily be a problem by itself.
How very brave of you to create this new account just to post something "obvious". I'm guessing it's "obvious" because of cyclic definitions, and deliberate imperviousness to the idea that chromosonal sex, phenotypical sex and gender aren't strictly equivalent.
I don't subscribe to the sexist belief system that women and men are defined by collections of cultural stereotypes or as mere identities to be opted into.
Quite astounding that people sincerely believe this nonsense and end up so proudly expressing stupidity like "men can get pregnant" because of it.
Speaking of fingers in ears…
That happens in conservative circles too. But instead of 4 years, Americans like myself are stuck with 40 years of business indoctrination from pro-business and conservative “leadership”.
The same leadership, by the way, that largely insisted on college degrees in the first place.
> We expect universities to have a pro-truth, pro-reality, pro-knowledge bias, which are things the Republican party overtly rejects.
The people you’re pretending to be harbingers of truth believe that men can get pregnant.
> or they might cease being Republicans upon learning facts and logic.
So why is the bias the strongest in the least rigorous fields (communications, anthropology, music) and weakest is the most rigorous (mathematics, engineering, medicine, physics)?