Weekly Roundup
Jun 8 - 14, 2026
LEADING ARTICLE
The Existential Contrarian
But Women Have Unprecedented Control over, and Hence Responsibility for, How Men Are Raised.
WEEKLY VOICE
ARTICLES AND ESSAYS
Sex/Gender
The left fueled the male crisis. Now it’s shocked
USA Today
Boys are falling behind in school, and some experts say it starts in kindergarten
CBC
New Quebec report says boys ‘systemically disadvantaged’ in school system.
Education
For the 100th anniversary of the SAT, a look at standardized test scores over time
Pew Research Center
UNC uses bridge funds for DEI-targeted research
The Carolina Journal
bioRxiv (pre-print)
Abstract: Traditional peer review is often slowed by delays in identifying willing reviewers and waiting for completed review reports. In a 2024 pilot on the journal Biology Open, we showed that Fast & Fair peer review, which uses pre-contracted paid reviewers and a structured editorial timeline, could deliver rapid, high-quality peer. Here, we report the expanded implementation of Fast & Fair at Biology Open in 2025. From 1 April 2025 onward, all direct submissions to the journal were considered for Fast & Fair peer review unless appropriate pre-contracted reviewer expertise was unavailable. Reviewers were paid £220 per manuscript only if they completed the review on time, and the review met editorial quality expectations. Among peer-reviewed manuscripts submitted in 2025, Fast & Fair reduced time to first decision with reviews from a mean of 37.7 working days under conventional peer review to 5.5 working days. Reviewer commitment also improved. Fast & Fair invitations were accepted more often than conventional invitations (67% versus 23%), had lower nonresponse (13% versus 39%), and had higher completion among accepted invitations (98% versus 87%). Faster review was not associated with reduced review quality. Handling editors scored each review for usefulness in editorial decision-making. Fast & Fair produced fewer low-scoring reports than conventional peer review. Editorial behavior was also unchanged, with similar first-decision profiles and final acceptance rates (59% versus 61%). While financial sustainability remains to be tested at scale, the Fast & Fair model addresses a major bottleneck in traditional peer review by replacing ad hoc reviewer recruitment with conditional compensation, predefined quality standards and a strict editorial timeline.”
Health Science
National Center for Health Statistics
Excerpt: A total of 3,628,934 births occurred in the United States in 2024, an increase of 1% from the record low reported for 2023. The general fertility rate declined 1% from 2023 to 53.8 births per 1,000 females ages 15–44 in 2024.
A Decade of Decline in Twin Childbearing in the United States, 2014–2024
National Center for Health Statistics
Three New Papers on Wokeness in Psychology
Nature-Nuture-Nietzsche Newsletter
How activist scholars are suppressing science, squandering public trust, and undermining psychotherapy.
Leading Medical Journals Care More About DEI Than Major Diseases
City Journal
A new report finds that the JAMA Network ran more articles recently mentioning “inequity” than “asthma.”
Trends in National Institutes of Health Investigators by Sex, Race, Ethnicity, and Disability Status
JAMA
MISCELLANEOUS
Moral Acceptability Falls for Several Behaviors
Gallup
Moral acceptability of birth control, having a baby outside of marriage, gambling, teenage sex and cloning animals down significantly.
On the Country’s 250th Anniversary, the American People Are in a Sour Mood
Pew Research Center
But there are some signs of optimism about the future.
RUBBISH BIN
Bumble ends the era of “women first” and the romantic swipe
Women’s Agenda
(My brief comment on this article is available on X here.)
‘It’s not about heroes and villains’: the triumphant return of long-lost indie I Shot Andy Warhol
The Guardian
(My brief comment on this article is available on X here.)
An Evaluation of the Gender Inclusivity of UK Senior Academic Job Advertisements
Gender, Work & Organization
Abstract: Previous research demonstrates that small changes to the content of job advertisements can influence an applicant’s perceived fit with the role being advertised and has analyzed the effects of specific features on women. This paper presents an original gender inclusion analysis framework and reports on its use to critically assess 140 senior academic job adverts as an underexplored institutional mechanism that may help sustain gender inequality in academic leadership. This research concludes that such adverts are not gender inclusive, as most do not explicitly encourage nor support gender diversity, and many contain subtle signals that could increase women’s perceived lack of fit with advertised roles; 41% of adverts utilized masculine wording, which could deter female candidates; just 15% (n = 21) prioritized women via a positive action statement; specific employee benefits, which could signal support for applicants with (child)caring responsibilities, were not prioritized, with 11% (n = 15) and 6% (n = 9) of adverts promoting family-friendly policies or an on-site nursery, respectively, and only 6% of roles were listed with a part-time working opportunity. 97% of institutes in this research held an Athena Swan Charter award in recognition of gender equality work, suggesting a lack of impact on recruitment and highlighting scope for development of gender-fair recruitment practices.
SUPPORT THE NUZZO LETTER
If you appreciated this content, please consider supporting The Nuzzo Letter with a one-time or recurring donation. Your support is greatly appreciated. It helps me to continue to work on independent research projects and fight for my evidence-based discourse. To donate, click the DonorBox logo. In two simple steps, you can donate using ApplePay, PayPal, or another service. Thank you!
If you prefer to donate to a specific project, please see the Go Fund Me page for my current research on sex differences in muscle strength in children.
Thank you, James. The USA Today article comes as a pleasant surprise, as they have been very femicentric in past years.
UNC uses bridge funds for DEI-targeted research
The article mentions about Tax Payers Money being used, but it is also a good reminder to be wary where one donates money to.