For a subscription. I would totally pay a one-time fee for this information. Having people sign up for a subscription is just a way to make people forget they're spending money seems pretty predatory to me.

FYI - www.michaelnayna.com/p/exiting-the-mass-media-machine @@IamTheCaptainNow

@@MikeNayna Unless I'm misunderstanding your article, what you're trying to say by posting in this way is you've started a platform that you can use free from corporate and mainstream influences and the subscription is necessary to those ends. Would this be a sound conclusion?

Spot on, yes. The content-churn model (advertising/free to all) doesn't work for the kind of work I'm trying to do. I don't have think-tank backing because I'm ideologically odd and I'm not yet established enough to create a film in private and then release it for $10 and have costs covered. I'm hoping to get there at some point but I need to experiment with new ways of doing things and this seemingly odd Substack angle seems to be working so far.@@IamTheCaptainNow​

@@MikeNayna okay, I understand that. With that said, what do you do to make sure that the subscriptions are not predatory? I only ask because the subscription service was designed to be predatory. 42% of Americans pay for subscriptions that they don't know about. Do you send out emails every month letting people know that they're about to be charged? I'm all for independent news media. I just don't think you should use the practices created by them without thorough thought. I totally will pay a subscription now that I've spoken to you as long as there are ways that you are trying to make this as transparent and forward as possible. I'm not trying to be demanding. I understand it's your business and you can do it however you want but as somebody that's trying to go away and against the mega corporate news organizations It would be weird to use their tactics.

Second to Alan Sokal.

Are you gonna cover it Whang! ?

Agree

I'm not sure it helps much tbh but a for effort.

Maybe; but what about good ol' Alan Sokal?

I hope you do some fun video based on this.

Hero status obtained was my first thought too! I would also love your take on this, happy news time

PSA Sitch He is my old teacher!

holy shit! nice to see u here

We're less than a couple years away from "it's happening"

this should be in every liberal college!

Are you serious? This is fantastic!

They must be "I hate this teacher, we are not nazi just because we agree with hitler!"...

My university teacher showed my class this yesterday. I think it's pure gold of how dogmatic the university is.

Philosophy departments usually aren't as bad as the ones mentioned in the video.

It really does tho

There is a YT playlist: kzfaq.info/sun/PLLHyNSlsz449SOhzpo7ClMEKe9WkXt5GO

@@taryn2736 Thank You! YOU get nn attaboy. ATTABOY

Or a series, this is too good!

@@taryn2736 Thank you!! 🥰🥳

Critical Condition! Say whaaaaaaaa.

Literally lmao

And that kids is how to turn Trolling into an academic pursuit.

Their PhDs were aquired in the Alma matter from University of Kekistan.

It's not trolling if it's the truth.

Was it ever?

I wonder what section of mein kampf they rewrote and where they put it since I cant actually believe that study got accepted into a journal

Mein Kampf: Chapter 12 .Volume 1. See notes and downloadable PDF file.

@@franskat213 What's the name of the PDF file?

Yes

Wtf thats terrible!

dude, good luck!

People have learned nothing about mistreating art students...

@@yoster39 - Haha. Quite right. That has never resulted in catastrophe or...uh...genocides.

that faculty member isnt an academic, theyre an acolyte and I have nothing but disdain for them. What's more pathetic is how they claim to be against sexism, racism etc but as soon as you depart from their doctrine they will immediately discredit you on grounds of identity, particularly when (according to them) you have intersectional privilege (male, straight, white etc). Woke is the pseudo intellectual bane of current western culture. It's legitimately a cancer and it's metastasizing

The entirety of the gender studies science is based on the false premise that all non-physical differences between genders is caused by environmental factors (as opposed to biology/genetics). Any unequal results between genders is proof of unequal treatment by society, therefore society must be changed to restore balance. Did I get this right?

@Michiel Honestly? These students take these classes because they aren't intelligent enough to succeed in real majors. Everyone was told to go to college no matter what, but once you get there and find out you weren't suited to anything practical, you take the easy way out. Unfortunately, they start to believe the fiction.

That's why Trump and Alumni should cut funding to these universities by 1/3rd and make them fight over what curriculum is actually important. Though I shudder at the thought of what some would choose.

It is not sustainable. Something needs to be done ASAP to address these pointless majors. They are literally impacting the entire economy. This is one of several reasons why students have over $20,000 in student loans to pay off.

Easy to explain. Derived Demand and The Law of Unintended Consequences. Just like BEFORE Medicare was legislated in the 60's the elderly paid about 4% of their disposable income on healthcare, now AFTER Medicare they spend over half. Likewise, government tells greedy bankers... "don't worry about deciding on the probability these loans will EVER be paid back, we will guarantee them.." which of course guarantees banks earn a minimum low-risk profit. Politicians can say, see, we support education and students..now vote for me so I can stay in power. .." Since free goods are always over-consumed, morons over-consume subsidized education. Many, if not most, new entering Freshmen, would have done better financially and experienced happier lives if government had not "helped" them get an embarrassing worthless degree. Hence, the degrees still exist because most university administrators are afraid to say Gender Studies as taught today in the US is bullshit and its students are non-government unemployable morons and its professors frauds. Don't necessarily listen to me, I'm just some guy on the internet. Use your own good judgement. Take an inventory of your professors and do a thought experiment -- you own a business... how employable are they outside of government wages?... wht would they be worth per hour to your business? Do they actually know how to do anything an employer might value? Chances are good, in these sorts of bullshit disciplines, the answer is NO.. So you honestly think the students of worthless professors are generally likely to be awesome or something?

Yep, I almost feel sorry for these people. I know the vindictiveness of the left/academia. They will be lucky to get a job as a Walmart "greeter" after this dust clears from this...

Exactly right!

Yes.

@MoltenMonsters how so specifically?

Not quite right. We are all doing the best we can and are fighting harder than ever. But the corruption is worse in spite of this effort - we just need to keep exposing it.

Sharing today with 2 connected educators hoping to stand in the way of a Western Massachusetts subversion of our school district. @@MikeNayna

I know it's crazy. But I don't really find it funny. This is history repeating it self. The white male is becoming the hated jew in Nazi Germany. I don't find that funny at all.

mi raz he dude chill, he's just saiyan

This indoctrination is based off the Frankfurt School.

This is an exercise everyone should do. Take feminist posts/articles and replace men/white men/male/patriarchy with blacks/muslims/black/black culture/islam and check the result. Most of the times it sounds like something straight out of hardcore neo-nazi groups.

no he's super saiyan.

The credibility of academic institutions are failing in the general public purely because of the agenda pushed by project donators and the corruption in the methods used for publishing peer reviewed journals. The consequences of reduced credibility will mean lower enrollments, lower diversification in studies, and harmful radicalization in ideology which further polarizes the American public. Professors are not rich, they are not politically powerful, and the only think they have in status is their credibility for their area of expertise. If they wish to keep this credibility, more need to stand up with these brave professors in grievance studies to fix the academic system before they lose everything.

I took it too, and it was a man hating course. The whole thing was just about hating men, instead of celebrating women.

Ideally, in academia, the pursuit of knowledge is it's own goal. There doesn't have to be a practical application. Unfortunately, we've witnessed a hijacking of our academia to pursue ideologically driven goals to the point of false science. Their papers are trolling them and exposing the corruption of the current peer review system.

For me? In state of California, I had to take Multicultural & Genderisms class because it was required under General Education for all degrees. The class is meant for SJWs. You also can't bring cameras, videos, or tape recorders to the class or else get an F in the course. Immigration is one of the biggest topics, but also warning on the rise of alt-right Nazism. My best question for the professor was "How many jews had weapons and firearms when Hitler came to power for self defense?" She answered, "None, they took them all." I took some heat for asking that question, but it was more of a statement.. that the genocide would never have happened if they had a 2nd Amendment.

@@clarissadanae7370 guns where still allowed, only for "true" germans tho. Like how even native americans ain't seen as "true" Americans, but asian by most anglos

There are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them.

"There is usually only a limited amount of damage that can be done by dull or stupid people. For creating a truly monumental disaster, you need people with high IQs." -- Dr. Thomas Sowell

You guys realize that this video doesn't prove anything, right? They published some false papers. That is fairly possible. The findings in those papers are not taken as dogma or anything. If you publish something, afterwards there will be other research teams looking up your paper, and then they will test themselves, and publish their findings. Only way your findings are considered relevant is if a plurality of scientific research comes to the same conclusions.

​@@hugosilva400 ​ @Hugo Silva Every single sentence you said is 100% false and the opposite is true. *You guys realize that this video doesn't prove anything, right? They published some false papers.* False! This video proves that people with agendas are publishing nonsense for millions to read, rather than publishing properly vetted science. *The findings in those papers are not taken as dogma or anything.* False! The finding in the papers are most certainly taken by millions of people who share the same ideologies as dogma. Every time a new article is published, people read them and when the article jives with their currently held beliefs, they become even more steadfast in their beliefs. This is true for a large portion of the scientific community as well. *If you publish something, afterwards there will be other research teams looking up your paper, and then they will test themselves, and publish their findings.* False! 80% of studies and papers coming from the humanities departments in Universities have zero citations. They are finding that a small percentage of even the hard science papers are peer reviewed and in the rare instance that they do, the peer review is not rigorous and on many occasions, and in most instances the results end up not matching the original findings. There are some non-profit organizations that exist whose sole purpose is to peer review studies. They have tried to peer review many studies and articles on Climate Change and when they get results that do not match, they will try to reach out to the authors of the original study and they find that only about 10% of their phone calls get returned. I personally know a guy who became an oral surgeon who was involved in an oral cancer research project that was lead by a University professor for his doctorate thesis. The results of the testing they were performing was showing a massive like 85% rate of cancer growth in tissue when exposed to a certain chemical. They eventually found that the machines they were using were giving false readings. The professor told him to publish the results anyway without reporting that the tests were being run incorrectly. The truth is that very few studies and research papers are carefully scrutinized, peer reviewed, and verified. *Only way your findings are considered relevant is if a plurality of scientific research comes to the same conclusions.* False! Very few studies are actually peer reviewed and verified properly these days. News stations around the world will have a "science" segment and they will have a supposed journalist pick up a "scientific study" in these "scientific journals" that they like and they will do a segment on it. Millions of regular people will watch the segment and this will stick in their minds. When there are thousands of news stories like this, public perception begins to change on a mass scale. This is why we are seeing millions upon millions of people believing all this nonsense about gender fluidity and more, and it is beginning to change the culture and affect people directly as well as influencing government operations. Here are three examples of junk science that is harming people and culture and government. A while ago a real scientist wanted to know if the Energy Star certification by the government meant anything. He created a fake invention that was a "gasoline powered alarm clock". He submitted the documentation to the Energy Star department. A short while later he received a phone call from the department and they simply asked him if his claims were true. He said, "yes", and he was granted the right to put the Energy Star logo on his fake alarm clock. There are many "studies" that have been done on BPA, food irradiation, and GMOs that have been proven false or inconclusive, but BPA, GMOs and food irradiation are being banned by governments anyway. Even the ultra radical Left government of Canada could not find any major issues with BPA, but they banned it anyway because of public pressure. And finally about 10ish years ago, there was a new fake diet that came out. The Coffee and Butter diet. Supposedly a "scientist" created a diet where you take half a cup of strong black coffee and add a full stick of butter to it and you drink it and it is supposed to make you lose weight. During the new story I heard, the journalist said at the end, "this diet only works when you have free-range, grass fed, organic butter.". The instant that she said that, I knew that the diet was BS. Millions of people started to try this new "diet". Sure enough a year or two later I saw another real scientist prove how easy it is to get fake science published. He assembled a small group of people and gave them chocolate. Some of them did indeed lose some weight. He published, "the new chocolate diet", and sure enough, the news media read the article and started pushing it out like it was truth. One of the guys who is the owner of one of these supposed "reputable" scientific journals was interviewed by John Stossel about his journal publishing this fake science. You are in just as much denial as he was.

@@karozans I'm not in denial cuz I published a paper, and I know the digging I had to do in regards to finding citations. What you said is bs. Find me papers, that are academically relevant, without citations. I'll be waiting. And I reject your premise that people take any scientific conclusion as dogma as sson as its published. That is blatant pseudoscience, research teams are continuously doing this work of repeating someone else's research. That is what most scientific research teams do. I ask you to prove your assertions with any evidence. Provide me links to academically relevant studies without citations (good luck with that, cuz any paper without citations is a fucking joke) and something that proves a scientific fact was deemed as so without any compelling evidence, just based on 1 or 2 studies made by the same biased research team.

They should get some Nobel prices, including Nobel peace price.

@@aleksinuutila2315 lol. That would be the champagne moment.

Joseph Braun The worst thing about the experiment is how many people believe it was successful at all. They submitted 20 papers, made 50 resubmissions, and only got 4 papers published before being exposed. It’s not an effective critique of “grievance” studies since they could’ve made the experiment with equal outcome in any area of research without question. It’s also not an effective critique of ideological bias in “grievance” studies since they never even attempted publishing papers with different kinds of ideology. It’s not even an effective critique of science in general since getting a paper published is meaningless if it’s not even cited by anyone. According to the authors, their intent was literally to expose ideological bias in science and in the end... only their own bias is apparent. Let’s summarise: politically driven amateurs attack scientific journals, even though they didn’t have any scientific reasoning... and this is apparently heroic for reason X? Because it’s framed as revealing an ideological agenda? To clarify: in this video they allege they’ve uncovered an agenda where only politically fashionable papers are accepted... but they never even ATTEMPTED that! They never included politically unfashionable papers as controls. They also suggest their garbage research could influence universities or politicians, when in reality you can publish randomly generated nonsense if you really wish... however, nobody will cite or even read it! Passing pre-publication peer review is only the first stage of peer review and they were CAUGHT!

@@theespatier4456 thE WORsT tHINg abOUt tHE eXpeRImenT IS How MAnY PeOPle bELIeVE iT WAs SUCceSSfUL aT ALL. THEY SuBmItTEd 20 PaPERS, mADe 50 REsUbMISsioNs, aND OnLy got 4 papERs pUBLisHED BEfORe beINg ExpoSed. IT’S NOt AN EfFeCTIve CRItIQuE of “grIeVAncE” StUDiES siNcE tHEY cOULD’ve mADe the ExperiMEnt WITH eqUAl OUtCoME iN anY Area OF rEsEaRch WIthOut QUESTion. It’S alSO nOt an EffECtiVE Critique Of ideologIcAl bIas iN “griEvaNCe” sTUdIES sINce thEy nEvER eVEn aTtEmPTed pUBlIshInG pAPerS wITh DIfFerent KINDS Of iDEoLOgy. IT’S nOT even An EFfeCTIVE cRITique of ScIeNcE in GeneRal Since GeTTing A PaPER PuBLISHED IS MEaningleSs iF It’s NOT eVen citeD by ANyOnE. acCOrdINg to tHe Authors, theIR inTEnt waS liTERaLLy TO eXPoSE iDEOLoGIcal bIAs iN scIeNCE And In THE enD... OnlY TheIr owN Bias IS ApPARENt. let’S SUMMArIse: poLitiCAlLy dRiveN AmaTeURs AttACK ScIENtIfIc joUrnalS, eVEn ThOUgh

It is even more delicious if you consider that they literally put "mein Kampf" (my struggle) in the title of the paper. They named it "Our struggle is my struggle". It's absolutely hilarious... and scary at the same time.

The joke is that most people, who aren't familiar how far off the deep end these "studies" have gone, will claim you're a conspiracy theorist if you compare their rhetoric to the antisemitic rhetoric of pre World War academia.

Ron Yeahwiggie im not surprised.

It's not that suprising. Nazis were socialist like their name say. Also Benito Mussolini were a socialist, he were active member of the Italian Socialist party before creating the Fascist party. Communists, maxists and others are socialists as well. Here is a video of antifa applaudind a speech made from Hitler quotes. (Hitler didn't wrote the "were are socialists..." but he did use it) kzfaq.info/get/bejne/p7R9dNNp0L67opc.html

It exposes a LOT of hate... And interestingly they are the one talking about so much hate speech in society...

I saw an interview with James, Peter and Helen describing what they did specifically. They took that section and every instance that Hitler wrote "Jew" they substituted "white male". THAT got published.

N S takedown btw lol 99% of people I know believe all this garbage

bishes be mad dumbass

What the hell is "postmodern" supposed to mean?

@@chadthundercock4982 It's a current of philosophy. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism

This is a take down of academia and academics. Fuck those people. They have no idea what they are doing or talking about, but the public is bullied into acting like they do.

Reddit's greatest meme lords pale in comparison, and forchan's offerings fail to impress.

I'm 100% sure the KZfaq algorithm is working overtime to make sure that nobody who isn't DIRECTLY linked here will EVER see this video in their recommendations.

:) social justice is being taught k-12 in ontario the priming is there.

Give these heroes some eye lasers

The crusades brought to the USA . Kill the heretics

This is not religious thinking - it is ideological thinking.

@@martqbd The crusades were a defensive war against an invasion.

Not really shocking, considering how they are (for years) statistics that have been debunked over and over and over again (most prominent examples: all the 1 in 4/ 1 in 5 statistics and the wage gap)

@@11mousa yeah it's 1/3 for girls and boys

4 years have passed, and things got much worse. Woke lunacy spilled out from academia into everyday life, from big corporations to the White House itself. Male rapists all of a sudden start "identifying" as women when they get arrested and they get placed in cells with their victims. A man is a female NCAA swimming champion. Hormone therapy and puberty blockers for children. Disgusting racists provide "training" on white privilege for corporation employees. Etc. etc. And the sheeple don't seem to mind. This country might be past the point of no return.

Yes! John McWhorter has a book on it coming out this month, subtitled "How a New Religion Has Betrayed Black America".

These are called "political religions" or "secular religions". Publishing about this, however, may make you a target of the animosity of their following.

It's the Spirit of Anti Christ at work in these Telling times. AKA Tribulations. Right is wrong and WRONG IS RIGHT!?? The Author of Confusion Reigns temporarily..Amen

Thanks Steven

Which campuses?

bashpr0mpt The worst thing about the experiment is how many people believe it was successful at all. They submitted 20 papers, made 50 resubmissions, and only got 4 papers published before being exposed. It’s not an effective critique of “grievance” studies since they could’ve made the experiment with equal outcome in any area of research without question. It’s also not an effective critique of ideological bias in “grievance” studies since they never even attempted publishing papers with different kinds of ideology. It’s not even an effective critique of science in general since getting a paper published is meaningless if it’s not even cited by anyone. According to the authors, their intent was literally to expose ideological bias in science and in the end... only their own bias is apparent. Let’s summarise: politically driven amateurs attack scientific journals, even though they didn’t have any scientific reasoning... and this is apparently heroic for reason X? Because it’s framed as revealing an ideological agenda? To clarify: in this video they allege they’ve uncovered an agenda where only politically fashionable papers are accepted... but they never even ATTEMPTED that! They never included politically unfashionable papers as controls. They also suggest their garbage research could influence universities or politicians, when in reality you can publish randomly generated nonsense if you really wish... however, nobody will cite or even read it! Passing pre-publication peer review is only the first stage of peer review and they were CAUGHT!

Brett Anthony What sense does it make to equate all publishing? You may as well include non peer-reviewed publishing then, in which case literally anyone can publish literally anything. Only because something is printed in black on white that doesn’t make it any truer. In order to be influential, especially in order to influence higher education like the hoaxsters say in the video, papers must be published in high ranking journals or no one will read it. What this video doesn’t tell you is that one of the papers they published only got published in a journal that ranks in top 2244th place among social science journals... in other words they got published in a journal that’s not even in the top 2000! And they describe these as high ranking and even “leading” journals.

@@theespatier4456 Copy and paste the same lie moar.

hippyjason Are personal attacks all you have?

Amen

faultroy It’s not just women who are struggling with their everyday, it’s various people (men and women who are from various cultures and backgrounds).

Faultroy that was the dumbest shit I've ever read. "Hurr durr muh irrational WOMEN REEEE". Citation needed. I'm surprised you didn't actually call them femoids.

@faultroy TL;DR FeMOiDs aRE DeStROyiNg SCieNcE!!111!!!!1! Like, holy fuck, why did 18 people like that? But seriously, science tip #1: correlation =/= causation. People feel much less ashamed of getting psychiatric help and there is much more help available these days, so the numbers are increasing. It's just like how coronavirus diagnoses spiked when testing increased. It was representative of the amount of testing, not number of cases. And society still isn't great about not shaming men for showing emotions, so less men consider getting help for mental illness as a viable option in the first place. What's really concerning is the increasing suicide rates, which is dominated by men :/ That's a real sign that they're not getting the help they need and it's heartbreaking.

That could be said only of social psychology. Other fields ar great and objective tools that are fighting against PC authoritarianism that you described. Perfect examples are Personality psychology, Cognitive psychology, neuro-psychology, and so on...

They don't

Exactly, I really liked it and also Hasan Minhaj and now it seem they both have become sermon services from the chruch of woke.

**slow clap** Nicely done

#dropsmic

hilarious

'NOT ZEE KAMPFY CHAIR!!!'

Yep! That Kinsey guy was a real upstanding serious scientist with moral and academic integrity, all right! Let’s all build on his rock solid work. Probably an oversimplification, but am I wrong?

Petter Nerman The worst thing about the experiment is how many people believe it was successful at all. They submitted 20 papers, made 50 resubmissions, and only got 4 papers published before being exposed. It’s not an effective critique of “grievance” studies since they could’ve made the experiment with equal outcome in any area of research without question. It’s also not an effective critique of ideological bias in “grievance” studies since they never even attempted publishing papers with different kinds of ideology. It’s not even an effective critique of science in general since getting a paper published is meaningless if it’s not even cited by anyone. According to the authors, their intent was literally to expose ideological bias in science and in the end... only their own bias is apparent. Let’s summarise: politically driven amateurs attack scientific journals, even though they didn’t have any scientific reasoning... and this is apparently heroic for reason X? Because it’s framed as revealing an ideological agenda? To clarify: in this video they allege they’ve uncovered an agenda where only politically fashionable papers are accepted... but they never even ATTEMPTED that! They never included politically unfashionable papers as controls. They also suggest their garbage research could influence universities or politicians, when in reality you can publish randomly generated nonsense if you really wish... however, nobody will cite or even read it! Passing pre-publication peer review is only the first stage of peer review and they were CAUGHT!

@@theespatier4456 What these people were able to do was significant...very significant. They made their point even if you don't think so.

@@DanielCardin_ATX ~ Dude. No. This is not how you debate/debunk a comment that makes those kinds of specific points. Saying "it WAS significant, I know it was" is the kind of dumb and obvious confirmation bias I'm seeing up and down this comments section. I think it's great they did this little stunt and I think it was worthwhile. I don't know the details except for this short video and neither do you. When someone bothers to give factual, expert input (I mean, certainly more expert than you), you can't debunk by saying "nuh uh."

@@alibobali4032 Your use of the word “expert” tells most of the story. You are quite wrong to suggest that my knowledge of these great professors’ work is limited to this single video. It’s something I have known about for about two years. Furthermore it’s not just a stunt. In one interview, Peter Boghossian admits it was not nearly as easy as he had thought it would be. The fact remains however that four articles which were obvious rubbish-by-design were published in these nonsense peer reviewed academic journals. I will go so far as to say it illuminates a problem that is extremely pervasive in all things connected to the modern University. Just a bunch of narcissistic fools patting each other on the back and citing each other’s nonsense. That’s what’s happening in the social sciences at each and every university that I know of.

@@theespatier4456 “We didn’t lose... they had 20 shots on target and only scored four goals...” lol But it was a lot worse than that. The hoax was uncovered and brought to a halt prematurely. Another three papers had been accepted but hadn’t been published yet. (So from those 20 shots on target, it was actually SEVEN that beat the keeper.) Another seven had yet to be decided. Only six were rejected. If the peer review process were a sports team, it’d be US women’s soccer when they got hammered by those under-15 kids.

not an argument

"No u" is all they got on this claim.

Social Terrorism*

They didn't even bother submitting to high ranking journals because they knew they'd get rejected, so they went after shit-tier low ranked academic journals and still got rejected most of the time. So important to know that middling and pay to post academic journals aren't very circumspect.

@@garr123 They only really got rejected most of the time IF you count the papers they wrote before they figured out the "language" and the ones that were still in process at the time that they were found out.

By "language" you mean "lying about having extensive empirical research" and "making up data." And they still got rejected by or never bothered submitting to any journal worth a damn. The journals submitted to were either low tier bullshit that will publish anything or low impact factor meta-commentary/postmodern journals that don't have much meaningful influence in the field because they publish things far outside the mainstream with far less rigorous review. Call me when they get published in Mind.

@@garr123 hi! by "language", I meant exactly what they described in this video about the difference between their first 6 "hoax" papers and what they learned about [blaming people's privilege for those people's inappropriate desire to not be chained to the floor or something] that helped them write papers with the minimum necessary level of complete poo. As for your other comments, they are irrelevant to what I was interested in commenting on, so you do you. thanks for the reply! be well.

This video is a pile of bullshit. You can look up what journals they were accepted to and they sure as hell aren't top journals of the field. Top journals would be like Ethics, Mind, Philosophical Review, and Nous. If I recall, they didn't bother submitting to any of them, probably because they knew they'd be rejected flat out due to their extensive peer review process. Even going after low ranking journals, falsifying data, and trying to abuse the peer review system by editing based on the critiques of higher ranked journals (the "language"), then submitting the edited versions to lower ranked journals, their papers still only had a 33% acceptance rate and a good portion of the accepted papers flat out made up data to look like they'd done legitimate, empirical research. Don't be so gullible.

@Jay L Calm down.

What's JK?

Save up money for a private high school (and middle school if you can) instead of saving for college.

Seriously.

It has already been down in my neighboring country, Norway, after the documentary Hjaernevask (Brainwashing) exposed the gender "science" as the pure quackery it is ... and thanks to these three heroes I believe it will soon come to Sweden as well. Ironically enough, I also think that the crescendo of perversion, MeToo, will actually help liberate the world from religious feminism.

WickedDealer Cutting the funding isn’t going to make the standards go up. If anything it would probably embolden the people because they can spin it as repressing the truth. The reality is they get funding because people attend these classes. When people don’t attend they get cut.

jojo boko If we put new laws in place for Student Loans it would stop it almost entirely. When you force someone to actually justify what kind of job there "degree" can actually be used for which in the case of Women and Gender Studies it's either becoming a professor to indoctrinate more youth into that cult or it's screaming on the street corners bitching about the "Patriarchy". In either case funding cut and if you wanna take the courses pay for them yourselves out of pocket and learn what real equality is. It's a Win Win all the way around and this stupid bullshit will die out in a generation or so.

The rot has also spread to the DoE, if it didn't even start there.

TheRisky9 The irony of it all is if the modern feminists had it their way they would have a world where no man would dare speak to, look at or ever think of touching a woman due to it being "too risky". Flirting? Nope. They will flock to social media and accuse you of victimizing them with unwanted attention and then bully you (because exploiting victim status means you get a free pass to engage in worse behavior than the accuser). Looking at them? Nope. Not even when they dress provocatively, because they are only doing that for themselves and you are NOT allowed to notice OR make comments (good or bad), despite them making it all a public display. Going out on a date and "think" of holding her hand or kissing her? Nope. And definitely do NOT sleep with the woman, because the chance of your career and life being ruined when said person gets "political" somewhere down the road and "remembers" what was once consensual was really "you raping them" is too great.

@@Ingerimm They are self-instigating humanocide. Maybe they think they are solving the world's overpopulation problem. Useful idiots.

@Ingerimm I agree. It's a power play. Women have always used sexuality to control men and this is no different. We women have always had men by the balls, so to speak. It's a tried and true tactic dating back millenniums. Just look at Joseph and Pottipher's wife in the Book of Genesis. It's no wonder to me that men are doing as Joseph did and running. Now they're even saying that women can revoke consent after the fact. That's absurd! I can already revoke consent at anytime I feel uncomfortable or if something tips me off that it's just a bad idea. But after the fact? No. The time to realize something is a bad idea is before you do it! Once you do it, it falls into the "What's done is done" category. Then everything that happens after that falls into the "Too bad" category. Oh, you got pregnant from that one night stand with that guy who was really bad in bed? That's too bad. You woke up and realized that you did something stupid and that jerk you did it with just walked away while you're still sleeping? Too bad! Yes, teach men not to rape. However, I think it's worthwhile to teach women to use good judgement. Teach them that you can say no and you don't owe anyone sex for anything. Let's use our sexuality in healthy ways. Understand the consequences of sex and the hook up culture. You might find that sleeping with every man that crosses your path isn't as empowering as you think. You can't erase all the consequences.

What is even worse is that feminists find okay to do what they call out men for doing, because they have an history of being oppressed so now it's their turn. They can objectify men, they can catcall, they can interrupt, they can hit and abuse. The double standard is disgusting.

@Kroww Jager. Yes, exactly. It's a tit for tat when it comes to the relationship between men and women. Feminists want to put the entire burden of their safety and peace of mind on men. Well, if everyone is responsible for you but you, then that's just not going to work. This is only going to work if we meet each other halfway. The golden rule still applies. And that includes our attitudes towards each other. What's the difference between a guy who just groped a woman and said "She deserves it because of what she's wearing" and a woman groping a man saying, "Well we went through this and so you have to now." To me, there's no difference. It's both sexual assault. It's clearly not a misunderstanding, like a boyfriend groping me and me not being in the mood so I ask him to stop. It's an intentional assault and using something stupid as an excuse. I remember getting into an argument on the internet. A question was brought up in a writing forum about how come more males suffer death in literature. It's an interesting topic. In my opinion, it's just literature mirroring real life like it's supposed to. Men are more likely to die violent deaths then women. And I brought up the data to support that, which included sexual assault and domestic violence statistics. For the most part, it was great. Most people were surprised about the statistics, but were opened to see my sources and find out for themselves. But there was this one chump who, I am not kidding you said, "Well, how does that happen? How can a woman physically overpower a man?" Basically, "Because I don't have the imagination to see how that happens, I'm going to deny statistics taken by the Department of Criminal Justice. BTW, I'm still a writer despite having no imagination." Which, doesn't work if you're a writer. When you're a writer, you don't argue the facts, you bring them to life. Whether that be piecing together a true story or writing a piece of fiction when you can't find the story. And maybe that's why so many SJWs are terrible writers. They're told "The world is unfair to marginalized people" then they read the facts and find there's more to it then just things being unfair. But they don't want to have to potentially let go of their beliefs, so they come up with these outlandish scenarios in their story telling that are just ridiculous.

The problem is that academics with similar leanings (towards, you know, reality) have a hard time getting a job in the academy. I've recently been told by my HoD that even though my classes are enormously popular (they are literally the largest 2nd and 3rd year options we offer, year in and year out!), that the department is 'not likely to expand in your area' and instead is looking to expand more into 'gender' in the coming hiring cycle. This is in a major history department with global (or fairly global) recognition.

Well a lot of them are frauds making money as professional SJWs

I think you mean hilarious, but I agree that these people's courage is really encouraging!

I agree with that, except where is this same realisation on the right...the worst of the right is currently in power! Gun nuts, religion nuts, anti-science morons who think climate change is a hoax created by the chinese, people who hate homosexuals and wave confederate flags...these people currently run the Republican party. As crazy as these elements of the left are, they are mainly confined to some insignificant gender studies classes, they are not running the Democratic party. Indeed Obama, when he was president, called for colleges to stop with the safe space culture.

That's the big difference between the Left and the right. When someone on the right goes to extremes, that are called out by the right. When someone on the left goes to extremes, they are usually ignored or even defended by the left. Right now in Portland There are people out blocking streets and protesting because cops shot a black gang banger who was involved in a gunfight with other gang bangers. They cat like somehow the police are at fault for this. Another example is a man walked up to two cops and stabbed one of them You can guess how that ended. Now the family is demanding justice for the guy who was shot for killing the cop. He already got the justice he deserved! I know there are some accidental shootings that happen, but most of those can be prevented by NOT giving you kids replica handguns to play with out in the public. If you want real justice for the people who are wrongfully killed, stop making a big deal out of all the people who are justifiably killed by the police. It is to the point where no one listens to them anymore because 99% of it is bullshit..

This is a good example of the feral left changing overtime, thus making people on the right, center, or even left of center look like nazis or "alt-right" or whatever the term is. Even though those people haven't changed, the left is constantly pushing further into the extreme, hence why they start cannibalizing themselves.

The problem is that the radical left is being tolerated by liberals. This video is yet another example. The radical right however is not being tolerated by conservatives. I hate the radical right and radical left equally. I respect moderate left and right equally. I myself lean right.

@@Avarioth sorry I forgot I had one other thing to say about the first thing I quoted you on - about never seeing anyone else act or behave like that. Like I said earlier, I think those pride parades are, amongst other things, a chance for people to get a little wild, let loose and celebrate. But they're not the only ones to do something like this. Have you ever been out on St.Patrick's Day? People "getting a little wild" would be putting it mildly. People take that opportunity to be the drunken fuckin idiot that isn't so much acceptable throughout the rest of the year. Things happen on that day that you'd never normally see. Otherwise average folks turn into debaucherous heathens. So there's one example. And do you think that the public at large associates that kind of behavior with what the daily lifestyle of all Irish people? I mean, for some of them that's gonna be true, but (it should be) obviously not _all_ of them. Or howabout spring break or Mardi Gras? Definitely some pretty wild behavior there, right? But as much as I'd like it to be the case, I can't go up to a group of college-age girls on any given day, chuck some cheap bead necklaces at them and expect for them to graciously show me their tits. Goddamit I wish but, that's just not how reality works. Rhetorically speaking, I dunno why it's so acceptable now to speak of groups of people in such general terms - to paint them with such a wide brush. I see most everybody doing it and I just don't get it. How has a well known logical fallacy (hasty generalization) become the norm in current public (or at least online) discourse? It's not a good habit to get into imo. It's never really gonna lead to _good_ things..

Casey Sheppard well hello there friendo. Fancy seeing you here

Hah! Indeed. Especially since I got zucced.

Classical-liberalism is the true American center. It is why the country was created.

What has this to do with liberalism?

@@thechadeuropeanfederalist893 they're liberating our minds from the shackles of fraud, deception, and corruption.

Realize that it shares a root with "liberty" and you'll begin to get the picture.

@@thechadeuropeanfederalist893 The word Liberal has been co-opted (like many words by the left - marriage, masculine, woman, health care, rights, Nazi, racist, etc.) by the "progressive" AKA regressive left. Classic liberalism is now called libertarian. Classic Liberal & former host at the Young Turks, Dave Rubin made a good video about it, "why I left the left" kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ns-GhJun162lj2w.html

and if they do, i can only hope other people will pick up on it and start to employ the very same strategy pluckrose, lindsay and boghossian have utilized, further inhibiting the fields of grievance study by coming out as hoaxes, ultimately (hopefully) dismantling this entire sham... one can hope.

That's why the proponents of these fields will push for harsh punishments and will try to make an example out of Pluckrose, Lindsay and Boghossian by unpersoning them via social and mainstream media. As I predicted in my previous post, various professors of these fields aready have lashed out at them on social media, smearing them as alt-right and labelled the hoax a "coordinated right wing attack". They even have tied them to Gamergate, ffs. The next step will be a barrage of slanderous articles by the Guardian, WaPo, NYT, Vox, Vice, Slate etc., just give them a day or two. There will be no introspection whatsoever, on the contrary: they will double and triple down.

I don't want to bet. You nailed it. Let's be vigilant in fighting back. Their guard is down, now is the time to strike!

Mein Kampf when you boil it down was about how to correct the imbalance of power between the oppressors and the oppressed and the justification for using any means necessary. Sound familiar?

Anon fair question. American, 24 with bachelors degree in finance. I remember hearing that Hitler wrote a book, but didn’t know it by name. I like to think I’m pretty well versed in history compared to most people my age too. But I didn’t know this off the top of my head.

Mein Kampf isn't really even that radical compared to a lot of other political manifests around that time and later. It's mostly just Hitler complaining about the burgeoisie and their tricks. People just think Nazis and every one of their supporters were somehow absolutely evil right from the start and that they themselves are unable to commit evil deeds with righteous intentions. If people realized that good intentions can and relatively often do have bad results, maybe they would be better able to see the historical parallels of what is happening in the present.

@@jamesr169 Hitler actually wrote two books. First Mein Kampf (My Struggle/My Fight) in two volumes, and then, in 1928, another one, that was never published during his lifetime. The manuscript survived the war. It has no title and was finally published in 1961 by the eminent scholar of the Third Reich Gerhard L. Weinberg. It goes by the name 'Hitlers Zweites Buch' (Hitler's Second Book). Few people have read it.

Sounds like socialism because it is. They weren't called the Nationalist Socialist party for nothing.

You just need to look at the most obvious misinformation that was carried out as true for the last years: The whole "1 in 4"/"1 in 5" etc. Statistics. Anyone with the logical ability of an 14-year old calls bullshit on those statistics once they read about the methodology and participation rates. But somehow, nobody in academics or big media seems to challenge it. Similar - but not so obvious - with the wage gap. Statistics that compare all working women earn 25% less then all working men, and in the media it somehow goes down as women get 25% less for the same job.

Finally someone who gets how important this is. I literally cry tears of joy hearing this. One of my greatest wishes for the last decades has been to see this cancerous religion/hate movement die. This gives me hope ...

I really hope you're right, thanks for watching

Project Pete The worst thing about the experiment is how many people believe it was successful at all. They submitted 20 papers, made 50 resubmissions, and only got 4 papers published before being exposed. It’s not an effective critique of “grievance” studies since they could’ve made the experiment with equal outcome in any area of research without question. It’s also not an effective critique of ideological bias in “grievance” studies since they never even attempted publishing papers with different kinds of ideology. It’s not even an effective critique of science in general since getting a paper published is meaningless if it’s not even cited by anyone. According to the authors, their intent was literally to expose ideological bias in science and in the end... only their own bias is apparent. Let’s summarise: politically driven amateurs attack scientific journals, even though they didn’t have any scientific reasoning... and this is apparently heroic for reason X? Because it’s framed as revealing an ideological agenda? To clarify: in this video they allege they’ve uncovered an agenda where only politically fashionable papers are accepted... but they never even ATTEMPTED that! They never included politically unfashionable papers as controls. They also suggest their garbage research could influence universities or politicians, when in reality you can publish randomly generated nonsense if you really wish... however, nobody will cite or even read it! Passing pre-publication peer review is only the first stage of peer review and they were CAUGHT!

@@theespatier4456 ~ You're making too much sense here.

Or degrees in "My life isnt my fault".