SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
Bath Spa University is conducting an internal inquiry into claims that it turned down an application for research on gender reassignment reversal because it was "potentially politically incorrect" and would attract criticism on social media.
James Caspian, a psychotherapist who specialises in working with transgender people, proposed the research about "detransitioning" to the university in south-west England, which, he said, initially approved the application.
When he went back with his preliminary findings that suggested growing numbers of young people, particularly women, were regretting gender reassignment, Bath Spa said his proposal would have to be resubmitted to the ethics committee, which rejected it.
Caspian, who enrolled on an MA course at the university, said he was "astonished" by the decision and had sought legal advice.
"The fundamental reason given was that it might cause criticism of the research on social media, and criticism of the research would be criticism of the university. They also added it's better not to offend people," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Monday.
I was going to add some snark here but they pretty well covered making a mockery of academia for me.
Source: The Guardian
Also at: The Times
(Score: 3, Interesting) by isostatic on Tuesday October 10 2017, @03:32PM (5 children)
I believe the argument goes "if you have privilege you can't complain". Anyone with "privilege" has to virtue-signal at every opportunity otherwise they get shunned by the type of society that isn't the other end of the spectrum.
Social media, and the liberation of peoples voices, has broken the overton window, which used to be set by central powers - the newspapers, TV shows that everyone watched, etc.
There are two windows now, both moving from the centre in extreme directions. If you are traditionally "centre-left", you find that the only ones close to your views are to the left, so you tend to shift left. If you'd traditionally centre-right the same applies. Voices compete to signal their belongedness in each group, which pushes the two groups further and further apart, and makes compromise unthinkable. Even if you don't personally shift your own views, and intellectually you recognise people from the unextreme in the other group, your tribes are so far away that you can't make the leap.
Until there's enough people that realise "enough is enough" and a 3rd tribe in the middle forms, using both people from the left and the right, we'll carry on with more and more signalling on both sides, pushing the extremes more and more :(
(Score: 1) by i286NiNJA on Tuesday October 10 2017, @06:10PM (3 children)
It really seems like we're moving farther to extremes but the extremes are just getting louder.
I know the right thinks the whole left are privileged crybullies who cry about safe spaces and dye their hair green.... I know as a leftie I was pleasantly surprised how unanimously my right leaning friends denounced the charlottesville nazis, I didn't see any of "there were two sides" shit. At worst they bashed antifa who I don't really like either.
It's a huge problem though I got no answers. If you see someone on your team acting out be quick to shout them down and laugh when they try and paint you as a false follower I guess.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday October 10 2017, @07:21PM (1 child)
Is that why they're dying their hair green? Here in the People's Republic of Park Slope, Brooklyn, there have been quite a few people doing that. I figured it had to be some kind of progressive tribal marking, but didn't know the provenance. Do you? Is it environmentalist or something?
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1) by i286NiNJA on Tuesday October 10 2017, @11:20PM
I just picked a random color.
I think the tendency to dye their hair comes from a belief that they're quirky and special and a desire for attention. These are some of the most rich and privileged kids in america and somehow they think their time in ivy league social science classrooms will enable them to become hero to the marginalized people of america. When you're that special people need to be able to see it right away.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by isostatic on Tuesday October 10 2017, @11:02PM
I think that's the point though - the extremes end up drowning out the majority, however the majority formed their world view at a time when extremes weren't normal, when the people you saw on the nightly news were disagreeable, but not mad.
How do people form worldviews today, when what they're exposed to is the volume of the extremes. 20 years ago news may have been the guardian or telegraph or mirror or sun, with the knowledge that Trevor McDonald and John Simpson filled the air. That status quo hadn't changed that much for 50 years. Sure there was the occasional "German Jews pouring into the country", but on the whole things you read weren't as extreme, or as accepted. Scummy publications along the lines of The Canary or Brietbart just didn't have any traction.
Now they do, and a whole generation seem to follow those types of publications and people. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe they don't have as big a following for the future.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday October 10 2017, @07:27PM
Or it's another device to divide everyone and keep the outrage machine primed. Everyone stopped giving a crap about marijuana and gays getting married, and The Powers That Be had to scramble to come up with something else. Honestly, choosing transgenders is weak beer. Who cares? Statistically speaking 99% of humans have never met a transgender in their life, so asking them to get worked up about their plight is like asking your average man on the street to wax apoplectic about the theoretical rights of aliens on Alpha Centauri. At best you'd elicit a shrug.
Washington DC delenda est.