Let's protect diverse science

The letter published in Science on 19 June (Sinnott-Armstrong et al., 2025), signed by some twenty scientists from US institutions, is a wake-up call that the global scientific community cannot ignore. It clearly denounces how recent measures taken by the Trump administration—the removal of legal protections, restrictions on mobility, funding cuts and exclusion from diversity programmes, and even the reversal of gender markers on official documents—are directly affecting trans and non-binary people in science. Not only is their well-being at stake, but also their very place in the academic system. And when a political environment—especially from the executive branch—targets a part of the scientific community, it not only attacks those individuals, it impoverishes and weakens the entire system.

What is happening in the United States is a direct attack on the fundamental principles of science: academic freedom and freedom of research, independence from ideology, and its vocation to produce knowledge that is useful to all people. Science without freedom and diversity will struggle to provide real and effective solutions in a world in crisis. The withdrawal of public funding for lines of research that support scientific evidence, combined with the manipulation or concealment of data, exacerbates this situation. Even before these measures, there was already data showing that a high percentage of trans people in the United States were considering moving to another state or country (survey of LGTBIQA+ people in the United States Data for Progress, 2023,N=1023). Today, in an even more stifling political climate, there are scientists looking for work outside the country and students considering reorienting their academic future to escape discrimination.

A science without freedom or diversity will struggle to provide real and effective solutions in a world in crisis

This uncomfortable mirror is not unique to the United States. We in Europe must also take a look at ourselves. Science is not exempt from the structural violence that permeates our societies and, as we have seen recently in the United Kingdom, transgender people are in the crosshairs. In this context, reports such as the Cass report (Cass et al, 2024) are a clear example of how scientific evidence has been twisted in favour of a position that puts ideology before data (Mcnamara et al, 2024). This is accompanied by a lack of recognition of trans identities and rights in much of Europe. Without going any further, in the case of non-binary people, only three countries on the continent (Malta, Germany and Iceland) have a legal framework that allows for the existence of these realities.

An unsafe environment for the LGTBIQA+ community in science

Various international studies have documented how the LGTBIQA+ community in science experiences less safe working environments, greater discrimination and more frequent abandonment of academic careers. Trans and non-binary people suffer disproportionate harassment and marginalisation (Cech and Waidzunas, 2021; Dawson and Yates, 2019). At the national level, the report by the Business Network for LGBTI Diversity and Inclusion (REDi, 2022) revealed that more than 60% of LGTBI people surveyed in STEM sectors have experienced or witnessed discrimination or invisibility in their workplaces. In particular, trans people reported higher levels of fear of not being valued, accepted or even dismissed. The supposed neutrality of many scientific institutions functions, in practice, as a form of passive collusion. It is not enough not to discriminate: it is urgent to actively protect those who are already being discriminated against.

Some of us who sign this text, as members of the Board of Directors of PRISMA —Association for Affective Sexual and Gender Diversity in Science, Technology and Innovation— do so also as trans and non-binary scientists and technologists. We have experienced first-hand many of the situations denounced here. We know what it means to have our legitimacy, our professional capacity or our safety in the workplace questioned. This new warning does not fall on deaf ears: we take it seriously, yes, but also with determination and affection. Because we know that better science will only be possible if it protects and celebrates all the people who make it possible. And it is not just a matter of changing laws: it is about changing structures, reviewing attitudes, listening without prejudice and acting with institutional responsibility. Throughout a research career, it is common — and often necessary — to move between centres or countries; should we have to weigh our personal safety against our academic future? Is it fair to have to give up opportunities for scientific excellence for fear of discrimination?

It is not enough to express concern: we must act, invest, guarantee resources, protect those who need it most, and ensure that science lives up to its own principles

At PRISMA, we have been working for years to highlight these inequalities and propose concrete measures to reverse them. The 10 PRISMA Measures (2020) are a necessary starting point for creating safer, more inclusive and diverse spaces that are not only fairer but also scientifically more fertile. Because diversity is not a decoration: it is a driver of innovation, a guarantee that science questions what it cannot yet see. Hindering the participation of LGTBIQA+ people, especially the most vulnerable, means losing human capital, leaving questions unasked, forgetting perspectives that enrich knowledge, and impoverishing teams and their findings.

Protecting diversity in science is not an ideological gesture: it is an essential requirement of good scientific practice. Protecting trans scientists is, above all, a human rights issue. But it is also a matter of scientific quality and justice, which affects the entire community.

Today more than ever, we call on the scientific community and society as a whole to take a stand. It is not enough to express concern: we must act, invest, guarantee resources, protect those who need it most and ensure that science lives up to its own principles. As Martin Niemöller wrote long ago: ‘When they came for me, there was no one left to protest.’