Hilarious prank shows how ridiculous the academic left has become

[Dan Druff]

Check out this article: https://www.newsweek.com/ben-shapiro...t-care-1155013

Three professors, medieval religious scholar Helen Pluckrose, author and mathematician James Lindsay, and philosopher Peter Boghossian, submitted intentionally absurd academic papers for publishing in prestigious academic journals.

Of the 20 they submitted, 35% of them (seven) were accepted for publication!

How ridiculous were they?

Here were some of the papers:

"Going In Through The Back Door: Challenging The Straight Male Homohysteria, Transhysteria and Transphobia Through Receptive Penetrative Sex Toy Use" (a paper claiming that straight men need to be anally penetrated in order to better understand the plight of gays and trans people).

"Human Reactions To Rape Culture And Queer Performativity At Urban Dog Parks In Portland, Oregon" (a paper claiming that people seeing dogs having sex at public parks causes both the desire to rape and the dismissal of queer culture).

"Who Are They To Judge?: Overcoming Anthropometry and a Framework for Fat" (a paper making the case that "fat bodybuilding" should be a thing).

"An Ethnography of Breastaurant Masculinity: Themes of Objectification, Sexual Conquest, Male Control, and Masculine Toughness in a Sexually Objectifying Restaurant" (a paper about why men visit Hooters).



These professors submitted the papers in order to prove that academia has become so out of touch and victim-obsessed, that any paper vilifying heterosexual white males will be accepted, no matter how absurd.

Perhaps the funniest part was that the three authors of these hoax papers were "asked to peer-review other papers based on the expertise they displayed in their academic papers."

[duped_samaritan]

You do realize "liberal arts" doesn't have anything to do with political view... Math and Science are "liberal arts".

Still mad about this?

[Dan Druff]

Not mad about it, but this is proof that the left has as many ridiculous "respected" figures as the right.

That was my point the entire time when criticizing Cohen's show, in that he only tried to make one side of the spectrum look foolish.

[donkdowndonedied]

Not mad about it, but this is proof that the left has as many ridiculous "respected" figures as the right.

That was my point the entire time when criticizing Cohen's show, in that he only tried to make one side of the spectrum look foolish.

It funny. To me, this showed how academic journals are nonsense far more than some weird political thing.

It wasn't actual professors that accepted these. Nor was it really "academia" that reviewed the papers. They call the journals "prestigious", but don't actually mention them by name. LOL.

List the journals at least.

I mean, they would need to submit shit papers in other fields etc to have some of comparison, to draw any conclusion similar to the one drawn. How do we know that similar things wouldn't be approved at similar rates when not weirdo identity jargon?

Do you see that your conclusions are nonsensical?

[The Shrink]

Not mad about it, but this is proof that the left has as many ridiculous "respected" figures as the right.

That was my point the entire time when criticizing Cohen's show, in that he only tried to make one side of the spectrum look foolish.

It funny. To me, this showed how academic journals are nonsense far more than some weird political thing.

It wasn't actual professors that accepted these. Nor was it really "academia" that reviewed the papers. They call the journals "prestigious", but don't actually mention them by name. LOL.

List the journals at least.

I mean, they would need to submit shit papers in other fields etc to have some of comparison, to draw any conclusion similar to the one drawn. How do we know that similar things wouldn't be approved at similar rates when not weirdo identity jargon?

Do you see that your conclusions are nonsensical?

Donkdowndonemadeagreatpoint

"I mean, they would need to submit shit papers in other fields etc to have some of comparison, to draw any conclusion similar to the one drawn. How do we know that similar things wouldn't be approved at similar rates when not weirdo identity jargon?"

This all day.

I sit on an ethics committee and review research ethics proposals from all sorts of fields. My subjective impression is that the most fucked out proposals come from fields like sociology and women's studies. However, we can only really evaluate the proposals based on whether they pose a risk to the participants or not. We can't really deny ethics clearance if the studies lack scientific rigor. So I know full well the bullshit research that comes from these fields. But this "gotcha study" does not really prove anything. The whole "study" is predicated on the idea that because the papers were published they are viewed as legitimate within their respective fields. However, they fabricated data in the fake studies so as a peer reviewer the studies might actually be viewed as having merit regardless of the leftist language used. You need a comparison condition to demonstrate some kind of bias towards publication of what Druff calls the "academic left."

[JohnCommode]

I am at the point that I could no longer recommend a liberal arts education to a high school grad, even as an academic prequel to law or medical school. The lack of intellectual integrity on most college campuses is incredible. Some kind of independent study involving selected books in a number of different subjects by a trusted academician combined with a volunteer job that involves dealing with the public in order to develop social skills might be a better way to go. Of course, medical and law schools would have to become more flexible in their acceptance standards.

[lol wow]

BITE EM BACK TODGEALINO

[sonatine]

not knowing what liberal arts means is almost as great as having no idea this was a documented issue going back like decades while falling for the deliberate 'vilifying white males' alt-right clickbait.

[duped_samaritan]

=> Liberal Art: medieval religious scholar Helen Pluckrose
=> Liberal Art: mathematician James Lindsay
=> Liberal Arthilosopher Peter Boghossian

Wonder where these 3 were educated in their liberal arts?

[FPS_Russia]

Even video games are banning the white man.
legit lol

[ErickAA]

=> Liberal Art: medieval religious scholar Helen Pluckrose
=> Liberal Art: mathematician James Lindsay
=> Liberal Arthilosopher Peter Boghossian

Wonder where these 3 were educated in their liberal arts?

So you are going to completely ignore the actual point of the post (how absurd the academic left is) to nitpick a phrase that I assume Druff used that was edited out (because I can't find it)?

Sounds about right.

I am sure you will even consider it a "win" on your part completely ignoring the point of the post to nitpick an inconsequential minor detail.

[duped_samaritan]

=> Liberal Art: medieval religious scholar Helen Pluckrose
=> Liberal Art: mathematician James Lindsay
=> Liberal Arthilosopher Peter Boghossian

Wonder where these 3 were educated in their liberal arts?

So you are going to completely ignore the actual point of the post (how absurd the academic left is) to nitpick a phrase that I assume Druff used that was edited out (because I can't find it)?

Sounds about right.

I am sure you will even consider it a "win" on your part completely ignoring the point of the post to nitpick an inconsequential minor detail.

The point of the article Druffs post was based on was to attack schools with Liberal Arts Programs (basically all of them).

Ben Shapiro was just counting on all the Tucker Carlson fanboys to assume 'Liberal Arts' has something to do with politics. Druff just swapped out 'Liberal Arts' for 'Academic Left'

[ErickAA]

I just skimmed the article. The article is criticizing critical theory and constructivism, which it claims has permeated liberal arts programs as a whole, leading towards the ridiculousness outlined.

The article is fine. I don’t think you understood it completely Is all, mainly because you are incentivized by your ideological beliefs to not understand it.

We move on.

[Dan Druff]

So you are going to completely ignore the actual point of the post (how absurd the academic left is) to nitpick a phrase that I assume Druff used that was edited out (because I can't find it)?

Sounds about right.

I am sure you will even consider it a "win" on your part completely ignoring the point of the post to nitpick an inconsequential minor detail.

The point of the article Druffs post was based on was to attack schools with Liberal Arts Programs (basically all of them).

Ben Shapiro was just counting on all the Tucker Carlson fanboys to assume 'Liberal Arts' has something to do with politics. Druff just swapped out 'Liberal Arts' for 'Academic Left'

You are too obsessed with the "liberal arts" portion of this.

Yes, some people will be confused about what "liberal arts" really means (especially those who never attended college themselves), but I doubt that was Shapiro's intention. Regardless of what you might think of Shapiro, his articles don't rely upon buzzwords and clickbait.

While Shapiro could have worded it better, his point was that academia, which leans overwhelmingly left, is so entrenched in identity politics and hetero white male hatred that they will often rubber stamp nearly any paper "on their side" as legitimate.

Your earlier comparison to Sascha Baron Cohen's special was actually closer than you realize.

Cohen's entire special revolved around getting conservatives (some prominent, some simply representing specific interests) to say and do ridiculous things, simply based upon the belief that they're talking with a friendly party.

The humor in what Cohen did came from the fact that America is so politically tribal at this point that few are willing to challenge any assertion made by someone on their own political side, regardless of how outrageous. My problem with Cohe's special was that he only attacked the right, even though there were loads of opportunities to also make the left look stupid. He included a few very gentle segments with Democrats in his show, in order to give the impression he wasn't biased.

This prank was similar to what Cohen did, but targeting the other side. The same rigid political dogma which caused right-wingers to support arming 5-year-olds in school is what caused lefty professors to believe that it's reasonable to study humping dogs causing homophobia and rape culture. It's the same echo chamber stupidity currently plaguing BOTH parties.

I've also already explained what I mean by the "academic left". That is not another term for "liberal arts", nor is it meant to be the opposite of the "academic right" (of which there is very little).

The academic left is the a subset of the American left -- the portion which is entrenched in academia. The academic left tends to be the most extreme and ridiculous portion of the left, hence it being responsible for the creation of modern day SJWs and other idiot fringe leftist groups which give reasonable Democrats a bad name.

As I believe you are on the political left but not an SJW, I'm surprised that you're not offering more harsh words for this portion of your party.

FYI, the extremism of the academic and Hollywood left is a lot of what led to Trump's victory. They came to be seen as representative of Democrats as a whole, and blue collar middle America decided that Trump was the antithesis of that.

[Dan Druff]

You do realize "liberal arts" doesn't have anything to do with political view... Math and Science are "liberal arts".

Yes, I know what liberal arts are.

Why are you commenting on this? My post said nothing about liberal arts. I know they were mentioned in Shaprio's article I linked, but that's not really the important issue here.

The important issue is that intentionally absurd articles like this are happily accepted by the political left in academia, provided they are accusatory toward the correct villain group.

[devidee]

They literally got Mein Kampf published.

So, you know, I can't even hate.

[Dan Druff]

One of the papers, “Our Struggle is My Struggle: Solidarity Feminism as an Intersectional Reply to Neoliberal and Choice,” was written under the alias Maria Gonzalez, PhD, who claimed to be based out of the fictitious Feminist Activist Collective for Truth (FACT).

According to the real-life authors, “The last two-thirds of this paper is based upon a rewriting of roughly 3,600 words of Chapter 12 of Volume 1 of ‘Mein Kampf,’ by Adolf Hitler, though it diverges significantly from the original. This chapter is the one in which Hitler lays out in a multi-point plan which we partially reproduced why the Nazi party is needed and what it requires of its members.”

[Dan Druff]

A more detailed writeup, from devidee's favorite site, The Times of Israel: https://www.timesofisrael.com/duped-...ist-manifesto/

[sonatine]

fps_russia, is this true?

[duped_samaritan]

You do realize "liberal arts" doesn't have anything to do with political view... Math and Science are "liberal arts".

Yes, I know what liberal arts are.

Why are you commenting on this? My post said nothing about liberal arts. I know they were mentioned in Shaprio's article I linked, but that's not really the important issue here.

The important issue is that intentionally absurd articles like this are happily accepted by the political left in academia, provided they are accusatory toward the correct villain group.

Mentioned? It's the title of the article. Is not 'Academic Left' your way of saying 'Liberal Arts'? And if not, wtf is 'Academic Left' (or more importantly, is there such a thing as 'Academic Right')