Yes, but then they could just be sociologists or economists. No need for separate department.
-
-
-
I'd like to look at gender. It's fascinating. There's certainly enough there for a department focusing specifically on it & using a range of rigorous methods.
-
There is, but I prefer lumping to splitting. If employed by gender studies department you’re limited to researching gender. More flexibility in larger group. But I think we agree strongly about what’s wrong with the gender studies we have now.
-
Yes, I want to study gender specifically, not sociology or economics more broadly. The gender wars are mounting & the ideological nonsense needs replacing with rigorous, ethical and evidence-based research.
-
how much empirical evidence is there for the theories of Carl Jung?
-
Not a lot as far as I know. I usually see him used in the context of ideological woo. And bible stories.
-
And Petersonism?
-
That was what I was implying, yes!
- 12 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Question. Do you think this is due to it being an “Activist” subject seeking to enact change, rather than a subject trying to understand why things are how they are and how they became so?
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I'm not sure this problem actually exists in Australia? Gender studies look at things like women's health, women retiring into poverty etc. is there a bad example in Oz??
-
Thanks. First one is related to AFL. Last year we began 1st WAFL season, attracted more viewers than the men's competition! The others appear to be a few very short courses over several years. Doesn't seem unreasonable?
-
It is what the Australian Women and Gender Studies Association is promoting right now. I'm afraid I don't know how many of the leading loons are Australian. Maybe Australia is immune but a look at the modules at the University of Sydney make me doubt it. http://sydney.edu.au/arts/gender_cultural_studies/undergrad/gender_major.shtml …
-
I don't know but I am a uni student & we do learn about biological differences. I do know however, that Tony Abbott is loon - driven by ideology not science. Not sure why Claire is so intent on defending a course he was so heavily involved with. Gives her a bad name.
-
I'm not sure what you're studying or where, but extrapolating from Abbott is a loon (yes he is) to everything he is associated with is wrong, is a very basic error in logic. There's a formal term for it, but colloquially we call it guilt by association.
-
It's based on what he said the course was about. But thanks for the insult.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I believe
@sapinker advocates for something like this when he says the humanities 'need more science'. I am always shocked how Gender studies types get so outraged at the presentation of statistical averages, confusing population-level measures as some sort of prescriptionThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Would you agree with Paglia's assessment? http://time.com/3444749/camille-paglia-the-modern-campus-cannot-comprehend-evil/ …pic.twitter.com/LU7zFerFK2
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
continuing James' analogy: that would be like expecting theology departments to investigate the deep psychological reasons why humans believe in divinities at all.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.