Secretary of Ag. Brooke Rollins Stops Wasteful $600k Grant
Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins cancelled a $600,000 grant to the Southern University Agricultural and Mechanical College in Louisiana that included studying menstrual cycles in “transgender men”. This grant was intended to support research that encompassed various topics including trans men menstrual cycles. Notably, while the research was not exclusively focused on this particular aspect, its inclusion has initiated discussions surrounding the implications of such funding in agricultural research.
“A WOMAN WILL HAVE A MONTHLY MENSTRUAL CYCLE FOR ABOUT 40 YEARS OF HER LIFE AVERAGING TO ABOUT 450 PERIODS OVER THE COURSE OF HER LIFETIME (NAPPI, ET AL, 2016). IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT TRANSGENDER MEN AND PEOPLE WITH MASCULINE GENDER IDENTITIES, INTERSEX AND NON-BINARY PERSONS MAY ALSO MENSTRUATE (WEISELBERG 2022).”
https://www.usaspending.gov/award/ASST_NON_20243882142035_12H3/
Arguments For the Study Are Flimsy
The decision to withdraw funding has elicited a range of responses from different sectors. Advocates for the research highlight the importance of inclusive studies that encompass all individuals. Advocates, such as CBS News, also keep echoing that DOGE and USDA are mischaracterizing the study. Others, like them.us, make the flimsy case that “it mentioned trans men literally one time.” I guess we are to assume that since the study was supposedly mischaracterized by DOGE and that trans men were only mentioned one time, we should be okay with our tax dollars being spent on this project. On the flip side, critics argue that prioritizing such research may divert resources from more essential agricultural studies. In other words, why are we allocating funds for this in the first place? Also, how is this even considered an agricultural study in the first place?
In light of these developments, it is crucial for communities, especially those within rural settings, to engage in this ongoing dialogue. This is a prime example that this particular ideology stretches to even the most unsuspecting sectors including agriculture. We will most likely begin to see even more projects, such as this one, and grants, along side them, come to light as DOGE continues to uncover wasteful spending. The ramifications of such funding decisions resonate within the communities they serve and not in a good way. As we reflect on this issue, understanding the multiple facets of grant funding in agriculture becomes increasingly important for ensuring we are allocating funds to projects and programs that are worthy of such funding in the first place.
A Patriot’s View
The main problem with this study is that it feeds into the delusion we have seen progress throughout the past decade or so. Women menstruate. No matter which form of dress up you are playing at the time, only a BIOLOGICAL HUMAN FEMALE can menstruate. The fact that our society is still engaging in this nonsense is mind boggling. In the past, if any institution went along with the delusion that there are more than two genders, they would have been labeled unreliable, uneducated, not reputable and so on. Now, those of us that still apply simple biology and common sense to the subject are labeled as such.
Honestly, I will never understand how we were able to fall this far into this delusion as a nation overall, but I think we are starting to see the tide turn on this issue. Sure we will still be called trans-phobic, along with all the other slurs, but the previous election proved that the majority of Americans are tired of this nonsense. I no longer care about your degree and profession if you come up with any other number besides two genders. The reason why “transgender men and people with masculine gender identities, intersex and non-binary persons may also menstruate,” per the description of the study, is because each of those dress up titles are WOMEN. Next time you request a grant like this, please consult a non-woke biology professor or your own common sense if you are capable of doing so.
