The question isn’t whether it’s important at all, but whether it’s a worthwhile use of taxpayer money compared to other priorities.

With social sciences much of the “qualitative research” involves interviewing a small handful of people, interpreting their responses to fit a preconceived narrative, and then stretching the results into a lengthy paper. This is usually done by using the most convoluted synonyms available and repeatedly invoking terms like “intersectionality”, “lived experience”, and “power structures” to lend the work an academic veneer. The result? A paper that boils down to anecdotal evidence supporting the author’s opinion, which is almost certainly whatever best meshes with their political ideology.