🌬Doctrix SnowVerified account

The thing is—my goals, and those with whom I've come into contact, are the same: eliminating racism from HE. I differ on the methods, of course, as we're fully allowed to do.

Working towards equity in general, yeah. And I understand the need to be skeptical of colleagues lest they turn out to be racist/sexist/classist/whorephobes in disguise, but this is…different lol

It's odd because I'm not actually opposed to CRT, as some alleged (obvs have criticised as well). Especially in scholarship (e.g. my next article) looking at imperialism/race in set of texts. I view CRT as one 'tool' among many I can draw on. But it's not my identity, as such.

Oh I love CRT, I think it’s really helpful esp when students get stuck on assigning individual failure to the effects of systemic inequality. It’s also great for grounding texts & other theories in their historical context. This seems…uncontroversial lol?

Exactly! It's a theory-one way of interpreting the world/culture. Scholars have other tools too (e.g. Marxist analyses). I don't think (searching back through Twitter) I've actually ever criticised CRT itself, in spite of being accused of being one of its constant critics.

idk if that’s one of the lies that’s been leveled against me (yet) but yeah exactly. Only tool I find to be horseshit in almost all cases is psychoanalysis lol

Haha I remain unacquainted with that so I shan't pass comment. My favourite geeky sub-discipline (not a theory though) is book binding history (don't laugh )

…lol