You don't think that maybe we should make sure there's one person on the research team who can be like, "so, you aren't accounting for this variable, which is cultural but also probably hidden from those who don't come from the culture"?
any research that finds that X is worse at Y must be wrong somehow because we know it cannot possibly be like that - so we are not publishing it at all - no discourse is allowed on the matter
one censor decides what is "stigmatizing"
You are saying it's unreasonable to check in with a member of a culture you are about to publish something negative about.
The only thing that's important is whether the research was conducted honestly and whether the data is accurate or not.
Stigmatizing is something other people can do or not do with that information, and the people doing the stigmatizing are the ones who should be held responsible for it. Suppressing research because you're afraid someone else might misinterpret it or use it as a justification to do something wrong is not a way to make scientific progress.
Whatever truth about the world the research reveals will still be there and we will be less equipped to deal with it by hiding in ignorance out of fear.
If you've got someone who is a part of that group who participated in the research, you go ahead and publish it.
You are putting words in their mouths and then condemning them for it. You want to keep beating up a strawman, go ahead.
The lack of integrity you're displaying is the important part.