There is talk in liberal quarters of people—straight white men, mostly—working to preserve their unearned privilege. And it is true that being born into a phenotype that has historically held power constitutes unearned privilege. We all have some, some more than others. However:
-
-
Here's a quote from one reviewer from
@NASPA_MMKC: Toward the end of the paper, he even suggests that the “power always flows from customer to server”—i.e., men have and exert power over women. This analysis is reductionist. The fake authors were in way over their head. -
Or this: The use of “pastiche hegemony” and “ersatz sexual availability” is unnecessary and relieves the author of having to be more specific. They sound smart but really stand in for more tangible identification and explanations of practices. Jargon can't hide bad scholarship
-
“Jargon can’t hide bad scholarship.” Well, yes. This was, after all, one of the main points of their project/hoax, wasn’t it. Whole fields are based on gossamer string and fairy tales, but multisyllabic words and impenetrable syntax confuse many into believing it’s good work.
-
"Bad scholarship" good enough to get into major journals with merely a few months of experience. Haha.
-
With respect, I think a math background has given you an innacurate impression of ethnography. Writing is the easy part. I could win a physics Nobel if they'd just let me fabricate all the data!
-
Can I get a witness
@HeatherEHeying? How many bio papers could you publish this year if you got to make up data? -
You seem to have a serious horse in this race. Do you really believe there is no intellectual problem with any of these fields?
-
Problems? Yes. Gossamer string and fairy tales? Give me a break.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
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.