This.

That's exactly the situation I'm in. Even though I am in the French department at a major university, I co-teach a number of classes in women and gender studies and am required to teach points of view on gender, sexuality, and society that I know to be patently false. I just do what I'm told, however, because I know if I will lose my job and reputation if I question any of the course materials.

Agreed...

imagede zach you should really form some secret union with other professors and contact FIRE or something. Not trying to be melodramatic, but it really starts with all of you in academia speaking out against this.

It's a good start. What we need is MORE people who are taken seriously to come out and put their name out there. For every person who does it, it makes it that much easier for the next person.

The authors of this specifically said that the vast majority of academics are fine and that there's nothing wrong with gender studies (see their article on Areo Magazine). The problem is that some people are trying to use this issue as an excuse for forcing academics to comply with their own political leanings, this idea that the answer to extremism is extremism from the other side is insane.

They will shout you down as soon as you try to speak up. They use bullying and intimidation tactics to get you submit.

John Ames fuck them; you have to stand up to bullies.

Calum Sanderson not doing anything is aiding to the degradation of science, reason, and society.

All that is required for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing. That's a paraphrase.

Calum Sanderson … well, you better start rocking then!

We have "Big Oil" and Big Pharma".. Why not "Big Grievance" ?? I'm sure money has got to be bound up in this somewhere.

Bongo Supreme *Cut it if the departments are unwilling to apply sufficient academic rigor to their research.

@@penaxor It's impossible to apply academic rigor to this stuff.

It's maddening thinking of the amount of money that has been wasted in these that could've actualy been directed to minorizing social inequalities, like improving schools and housing, etc. It's probably the thing that most upsets me about curruption, the allocation of resources to where they aren't needed, diminishing the amount that goes to the places that actually do need it

What other disciplines does it go into?

@@johnames6430 I studied psychology and I can say that without any doubt it has affected this discipline as well. Especially social psychology, intercultural psychology and subjects that deal with intelligence and group differences. We've been literally fed lies. I now study biomedical sciences and I'm happy to say my current professors deal in facts, even if they point to differences between the sexes and population groups.

@@johnames6430 More than likely psychology; socal work & child protection; Anthropology, especially Social Anthropology; Philosophy (with the heavy influences of the Frankfurt School, and, ergo, 'Critical Theory'); in fact, anything you can label as 'Humanities', inclusive of History; English Language and Literature; Art ... the list suddenly becomes endless, just as long as you can inject fallacious and facetious arguments into a subject, using the appropriate theory and pedagogy, inclusive of the language they use, that isn't part of quantitative analysis ... and even then, one can easily argue, they have already used statistics as part of their arguments ... The only field, so far, left relatively untouched is the hard sciences, as in Science (Biology, Chemistry, & Physics), Technology, Engineering, & Mathematics (STEM) ... But even then, there are inroads being made into it ... As Dr. Weinstein found out, Evolutionary Biology is under attack for reasons I don't fully understand, but is connected to Race Theory, somehow. In fact, part of the accusation is as a great deal of the science and technological innovation and revolution, was driven by 'white, Cis-heteronormative men', with only the occasion input by 'White Cis heteronormative woman, the history of science and technologies in the last, say, 300 years, is too heavily skewed towards the Western World'; in short, it totally ignores the heritage of other cultures, especially of 'non-white races aka People of Colour (PoC)", and, in fact, if you look on KZfaq carefully, you will find PoCs arguing that 'Western Science' needs to be scrapped in favour of 'African Sciences' (and no, I don't have the faintest idea myself ...) ... My guy feeling is that not only 'Grievance Studies' are at the gates, they have surrounded the walls as well ...

Watch Jordan Peterson’s long format discussion with Camille Paglia. In it he discusses how zebra coloring allow them blend with the herd and provides camouflage within a herd. When scientists tagged them with paint to identify individuals those with paint became distinguishable and were singled out by lions for kills. Similarly education faculty blend with the herd by going along in group thought and employing obtuse language. If one steps out, like these individuals, they are identified for kills. Witness what Portland State University is doing now.

@Nika D Sadly, you are correct, for the most part. My understanding is that it hasn't yet reached the 'hard' subjects of the stem field ... yet ... (although 'feminist glacierology' may yet prove me wrong ...). But outside those subjects, which one can (very ...) losely call the 'humanities', like an incredibly invasive weed, it has sunk its roots pretty deep, in a anazingly short period of time. Even hallowed halls of learning, such as Yale, & UCLA at Berkeley, have succumbed to this rhetoric ... which means the very future of decent higher education may be at stake ... If true, it is more terrifying than we can imagine ...

Thanks for sharing, Charity - much appreciated

Postmodernism begins with "All truth is subjective," and "There's no such thing as objective truth." In essence, this boils down to "There's no such thing as truth." And in the more vulgar applications of postmodernist epistemological principles, the former gets turned around into "All of my subjective inclinations are truths," as in "If you feel oppressed, you are oppressed." -- Consider what kind of mental habits and disciplines we have to cultivate to maintain a society of truth and trust. We have to cultivate a willingness to engage in an often-humbling practice of surrendering what we want to believe to evidence to the contrary of those beliefs. We have to cultivate pre-emptive practices that sort out our subjective inclinations according to their plausibility, coherency, and accordance with evidence we've already seen. And we have to cultivate a certain reverence for truth. -- Postmodernism rejects these disciplines, and encourages emotional and intellectual self-indulgence. Consider the long-term cumulative effect of cultivating postmodernist mental habits. It's hard to imagine an ideology better suited to nudging its adherents toward delusion and mental illness. -- The "truth system" isn't perfect. When we learn language, our means of representing reality truly or falsely, we learn to fudge reality slightly in order to represent it. Learning language entails that we learn to objectify things, to render them mathematically distinct from one another (via singular and plural nouns referring to countable objects). In the real world, though, everything is connected to everything else, most concretely by attractive forces, especially gravity. -- An old question from the Greeks: Is the world one thing, or many? Both simple answers lead to skepticism. Simple, absolute holism/monism leads to the conclusion that the distinctions we observe in the world are illusions, and simple, absolute pluralism leads to the conclusion that the connections are illusions (cf. Hume and Leibniz). -- Newton himself didn't make a clear choice between calling gravity "a property of matter" and "a force," two very different sorts of things with very different metaphysical implications. Einstein suggested that matter might be a manifestation of gravity, reversing the priority, but still maintaining the suggestion of an intimate inherence relation. Newton, btw, argued in his Principia that it would be fruitful to view physical phenomena through a mathematical lens, not that this mathematization was a simple and absolute representation of reality. -- In our most passive mental states, our sensory fields are not distinctly divided into countable objects, but are variegated tapestries of sensation. -- When we engage our brains in conscious activity, that activity depends on objectification, which is the imposition of a mathematical framework onto the world. But this isn't the same as making it up out of whole cloth. The real world partakes of both singularity and plurality, connectedness and distinctness, though the latter pair are direct antonyms. From the perspective our means of representation, the world is ambiguous with respect to connectedness and distinctness, but the world is as it is, and our means of representation are the means by which we stand back from it and make sense of it. -- Objectification is a form of abstraction, perceiving objects as distinct, conceptually "shearing" them from their connections to the rest of the world. Objectification is more commonly seen in terms of holding objects apart from the perceiving subject, and this is part of the same process. When we render things as distinct from one another, we render them as distinct from ourselves. -- AND, in the same process, when we render all objects distinct from ourselves, we render ourselves distinct from the world. We abstract ourselves from the world, and gain a standpoint for observing it. This is how subjectivity happens. -- There are grounds for some skepticism regarding the verisimilitude of our view of reality, but for millennia, people have been refining the truth system to enhance its consistency, coherency, and practical truth value. It works. Science, and science's manifestations in technology are examples. -- Postmodernism grew out of 20th century phenomenology, especially Husserl's phenomenology, which Husserl saw as a science of subjective experience. He got himself into a bind in his later career. Once into the box of viewing subjectivity from the inside, he couldn't find a way out again, specifically with regard to affirming that the world of subjective experience coincided with a real world out there. This isn't such a problem. The world affirms its existence for us pre-consciously and holistically, prior to our objectifying it into distinct objects. Those distinct objects don't exist absolutely AS distinct objects, due to their ambiguity as partly distinct, and partly as connected parts of larger wholes and wholes consisting of smaller parts. But Husserl didn't see this. Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty tried to ground phenomenology in their own ways, but Derrida ran with the skepticism. -- Another question from the Greeks: should human intellect ("philosophy") be used for the pursuit of manipulative winning ("glory in the agora") or in the more humble pursuit of truth. This theme is covered in Plato's Republic and in Gorgias. Postmodernism is a reversion back to the pursuit of manipulative winning, and the pursuit of "Hey, look at me. I'm saying something outrageously nihilistic!" -- Postmodernism takes the justifications for skepticism and ignores the justifications for the truth system, in order to provide an excuse to dismiss whatever truths one doesn't want to face. We can know this from its "accomplishments." -- Sorry to ramble on like this. I wanted to make the point that postmodernism is the key intellectual cancer that infects academia today. Scientism is another problem, one that had something to do with why postmodernism got legs, but that's another matter. (Scientism is the unselfconscious application of the scientific approach to human affairs with no awareness of its inherent artificiality, manipulativeness, and proneness to elitism. Until we have a more adequate grasp of things, the scientific approach will continue to efface the human spirit.) Scientism is one of the original impulses that gave us Marxism, and the marriage of these two extremes is a marriage of two intellectual cancers.

@grizzlygrizzle Dude you need to write this all down into a book or something. If you do please tell me, I want to read it.

Benjamin Rood that’s a very bad mentality. These people will catch up to every single school if they’re not stopped. You think simply picking a different school will protect your child? Absolutely not. If not now, they will catch up to us in the future.

For the sake of those children, keep spreading the word. You see what's happening out on the street now.

I don't have children and i wholeheartedly support this plea!

Appreciate that, thank you

Keep spreading the word, now more than ever.

Keep spreading the word, now more than ever. Look at what's happening here in July 2020.

On spot. I try to teach my students to detect this stuff. My seminar last week showing this caused them to open their eyes. Let's not forget..Publish or Perish vs Teaching

You'll wake up soon.

Regardless of what direction one leans, the truth and the freedom to speak it must be defended by all sides.

TheColdrush22 I lean right, and I love them too

It's both sad and hilarious that you're not exactly wrong. I wonder if these guys know about chimpanzees.

Joe will blow this shot right open. It is what it is.

@@randommcranderson5155 Someone has to be the most popular podcaster, why is it sad and hilarious that it's Joe? A genuinely curious guy who has conversations with interesting people for hours at a time.

Oh shit I forgot.. The alternative influence report. If they go to joe it might make them look partisan since Joe is apparently an alt-right neonazi now. Then again did anyone actually take that horseshit serious? It seems this whole thing is the perfect rebuttle to that. One study comes out and makes baseless claims that anyone critical of certain ideas on the left must be alt-right. Then this comes out and actually has substance and seems to be putting a lot of these people on their backfoot.

Well, yes, but unfortunatly that would also immedietly colour the opinion on them. I think it's better to not associate with what is usually considered the "alt right". The best approach in my opinion is to retain the position as researchers and not take a ideological stance.

Austin Ruh The guy posting this IS making a documentary out of this. This is a snippet.

Lol, I see.

@@Name-zf7qc You can help here, Austin - www.patreon.com/mikenayna :)

It's even more critical, for understanding what's going on in July 2020.

Not so much.

That's why they call it "Social Just Us", group narcissism with the associated delusions of cultural and moral superiority over anyone who does is not part of "the group" and we all know how that played out last time around.

No, you are not wrong ... in fact, many Clinical Psychologists have noted that there is a distinct correlation between the rise of "Social Justice", and just how many staff, faculty, and students, whom are in "Greivance Studies", fall in line with a Cluster B Personality diagnosis ...

Technically narcissistic behaviour concerns “individual behaviour” so no it can’t be, however the analogy is accurate with a pinch of poetic licence 🙂

Communal narcissism on a mass scale

That is exactly what I was thinking earlier today. They all have to pretend to out-do each other by virtue signalling but no one can dare say the truth about how they feel...so they all just have to keep pretending to go along with it. It's like being trapped inside a cult.

A cult is exactly what feminism and identity politics are. They give Scientology a run for their money in how they seek to destroy apostates.

I pretty sure it only had a few thousand when I subbed last week

Give them a chance the "useful idiots that is", just as soon as the twatter outrage mobs gets a hold of this they will spread it all over the web just like they always do. They are the fastest cheapest viral marketing machine available and they work for free.

CrisTooR - It has already started, they have gone from 280 on 1st Oct to 12k in ten days, graphtreon.com/creator/mikenayna

They are probably being held down by youtube, they actively will remove "Trending" videos that don't agree with leftist politics.

Exactly as TheFaceless Men says. socialblade.com/youtube/channel/UCzk08fzh5c_BhjQa1w35wtA/monthly shows a few more stats regarding youtube.

Cooliotopnotch how would critical race theory and marxism be inculcated into biomeds? Does your research team need to comprise of x amount of y ethnic group? Is funding not awarded for certain research programmes?

How 'Grievance Studies' could even begin to creep into basic bench science, scares the daylights out of me; but then hardly surprising ... suffice to say I lost my shot at a career in biomedical science due to ... well, a long story, but suffice to say Human Resources Departments, especially attached to Government Research Labs, are seemingly being rapidly filled with those with a 'Grievance Studies' background ...

@@nigelft I despise this form of intellectual subjectivism. Abstraction of concrete truths should not even be messed with. It will destroy medical research and the entire medical field at the seams.

@@kickassssnation027 Indeed ... When I first heard about the hoax papers, I laughed hard enough until my ribs hurt ... Then reality hit like a sledgehammer to my guts ... Granted, I would expect any 'journal' specialising in the 'Grievance Studies' would have pretty poor peer-review. But just how far has this rot gone, and for how long ...? In my own field of biomedical science and research, I have to ask the hard questions: how rigourious is the peer-review process, especially after past events (cf. the Andrew Wakefield scandle in The Lancet); and how much evidence-based medicine can rely on treatment studies being published ...? So when you wrote '[a]bstraction of concrete truths should not even be messed with. It will destroy medical research and the entire medical field at the seams', sadly I have to agree with you for the large part. If, say, journals like the New England Journal of Medicine can no longer be trusted, due to uncertainty over the quality of their review and publishing standards, it will certainly stifle any futher medical advancements. In addition, that will cause even greater public distrust of medical professionals, which may well lead to more people turning to quack medicine and snake oil peddlers ... and God only knows what will happen then ...

@@nigelft I see this as a much too great a crisis. I'm a pediatrician and I plan to specialize in Developmental Pediatrics and I will not risk the life of my patients and my future children on a dubious study that will only destroy a child's mind. There is a reason why we need to have a thorough gate-keeping panel of experts to look at our papers and see the trouble with them. Call me conservative, but I find that the politization and enterprising of healthcare to be the utter scumbag move I've ever had to deal with. These prats do not deserve to step on a panel without first seeing first hand in handling a patient.

I prefer the metaphor "pod people"; where somebody you've known for decades and trusted to be sensible seems to wake up one morning an entirely different person, with altered loyalties, scrambled logic, and a willingness to denounce you to the other pod people for the slightest disagreement with them.

That's the goal. If you'd like to help - www.patreon.com/mikenayna

mike@checkpointmedia.com.au

Great fun was in a previous video where they are reading the response of one of the reviewers of "Dog Park", where the reviewer was concerned that the privacy of the dogs was preserved!. So PC, and so beside the point.

Thanks, Erwin. The kind words are very much appreciated. I'll pass them on to the others.

@@MikeNayna oh awesome, good luck with making the full documentary, accountability for all.

Thanks a bunch. The footage I'm collecting will be turned into a feature-length documentary, I'm playing around with some of the footage on KZfaq while figuring this thing out

Elaborate, please.