I feel like I need to listen to this Naomi Wolf thing but I’m like scared to. Okay I’m going in.
-
-
Why the F would you read court records for an English Ph. D. with no legal guidance as to the terminology? It would read as gibberish (as it seemingly did for her, but that didn’t stop her)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
As someone who advises PhD theses: if I were her advisor, I would have insisted she talk to someone who knew the relevant terminology inside out. This is not a tough call. On the other hand, if I were Naomi Wolf, I would have found such a person to talk to regardless.
-
Agree. This is pretty basic. You can’t make sense of records distant in the past (or frankly even recent ones) without some technical grounding in the documents. And 5x that if you’re saying all the established lit missed something so big.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I’m not clear on the broader context. This was for a dissertation? I thought it was like her most recent book?
-
I think the book was based on her dissertation research?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Even for weedy stuff, in the UK doctoral system you'd expect to have an outside examiner with sufficient background expertise to pick that up. (And yeah, she finished her thesis: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/may/19/naomi-wolf-fight-for-democracy-free-speech-outrages-interview … )
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is the second time today I have run into someone *assuming* some lack in English as a discipline. Do you honestly think we don't "get training" in navigating sources?!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Ah. Explains a lot.
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.