Bad point. Violating the privacy of individuals is worlds different from studying gender differences on average.
(... everything has a political dimension, including data accumulation. Because ultimately, humans use the data, and what humans do is politics).
But from that, it can't follow that we should alter the results to avoid hurt feelings. That would render the "data" no better than mythical just-so stories. Politics should be subservient to empirical data and science. We've seen what doing it the other way results in historically.
This says a lot about our world today.
Because that's how wacko some of the Far Left have become. Because some of the Far Left would like for there to be something like Lysenkoism forwarding a version of science which explicitly fits their narratives, and for this to be taught to young people. (If you look into it, they basically have a "good start.")
No, I wasn't referring to collecting your social security number or address for science. We were talking about uncomfortable conclusions in neurology research.
Great question. Unrelatedly, mind if I correlate your medical history and a genetic profile of you with your purchase history at three major retail chains and the contents of your inbox? I'm not intending to do anything special with it; I'm just accumulating data.
(... everything has a political dimension, including data accumulation. Because ultimately, humans use the data, and what humans do is politics).