Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Thursday October 04 2018, @07:22AM   Printer-friendly
from the mein-wort dept.

In an effort to show how politically correct nonsense and evil (but I repeat myself) can get through academic peer review and be published, some academics did just that with seven papers. More are partly through the process.

A particularly funny and horrifying case is the Gender Studies journal Affilia. Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf only needed to be translated with wording in the typical style of intersectionality theory, and it passed muster.

Another published paper, considered exemplary scholarship by the journal that published it, contains this whopper: "Dog parks are microcosms where hegemonic masculinist norms governing queering behavior and compulsory heterosexuality can be observed in a cross-species environment."

The Grievance Studies Scandal: Five Academics Respond

Now, three academics have submitted twenty spoof manuscripts to journals chosen for respectability in their various disciplines. Seven papers were accepted before the experiment stopped; more are surviving peer review. This new raid on screamingly barmy pseudo-scholarship is the Alan Sokal Opening, weaponised. Like dedicated traceurs in a Parkour-fest, the trio scrambled over the terrain of what they call Grievance Studies. And they dropped fire-crackers. One published paper proposed that dog parks are "rape-condoning spaces." Another, entitled "Our Struggle is My Struggle: Solidarity Feminism as an Intersectional Reply to Neoliberal and Choice Feminism" reworked, and substantially altered, part of Mein Kampf. The most shocking, (not published, its status is "revise and resubmit") is a "Feminist Approach to Pedagogy." It proposes "experiential reparations" as a corrective for privileged students. These include sitting on the floor, wearing chains, or being purposely spoken over. Reviewers have commented that the authors risk exploiting underprivileged students by burdening them with an expectation to teach about privilege.

Also at WSJ.

Related: Publishing Stings Find Shoddy Peer Review
Absurd Paper Accepted by Open-Access Computer Science Journal
Media World Fooled with Bogus Chocolate Diet Story


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 04 2018, @05:21PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 04 2018, @05:21PM (#744193)

    What he was was a guy whose sense of morals was so twisted by his circumstances that he thought mass murder was a righteous act

    The elitist and eugenicist European socialists of the time supported him because they knew he was going to kill people. Only when the ethnic extermination of the jews became common knowledge did they begin to object.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   -1  
       Troll=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Troll' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   -1  
  • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday October 04 2018, @05:40PM (2 children)

    by Thexalon (636) on Thursday October 04 2018, @05:40PM (#744206)

    Only when the ethnic extermination of the Jews became common knowledge did they begin to object.

    My impression, and this could be wrong, is that public opinion turned against the Nazis more because of the various Allied armies (particularly the Red Army) on their doorstep than any other factor, including knowledge of the Holocaust.

    For example, none of the July 20 plotters gave a damn about the üntermench one way or the other, and many were involved in the German war atrocities, but were very concerned about what concessions might have to be made to the Allies if they didn't try to negotiate and also very concerned about being in charge when the dust settled.

    --
    The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 04 2018, @06:32PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 04 2018, @06:32PM (#744236)

      My impression, and this could be wrong, is that public opinion turned against the Nazis more because of the various Allied armies (particularly the Red Army) on their doorstep than any other factor, including knowledge of the Holocaust.

      Public opinion yes, the opinion of prominent elitist socialists... unfortunately not. [the-tls.co.uk] Shaw was not only hugely influential (even I grew up reading GBS) but espoused beliefs that were also reflective of attitudes held by his contemporaries.

      • (Score: 2) by Pav on Friday October 05 2018, @11:00PM

        by Pav (114) on Friday October 05 2018, @11:00PM (#744835)

        GBS was a eugenicist nazi sympathiser, which certainly doesn't negate his achievements in other domains. He was into socialism, but it was an age of incoherent isms used to justify what you really wanted. At that time the Japanese regime was justifying its militarism partly through buddhism(?!), Stalin justified his dictatorship using a democratic philosophy (??) (BTW, communism - whatever you may think of it, is inherently democratic by definition), and Hitler called himself a socialist because ... hmmm... apparently inequality ceases to even be a problem if it's ARYAN elites at the top and not those dirty jew elites(?!?). Oh, and FDR rescued capitalism byyyy... embracing socialist policies(?!!).