been thinking more about this. I think it's super good & moves discussion in a productive direction. I've never advocated throwing out all scholarship on Crusades (despite accusations to the contrary). We should be aware of its sometimes colonial subtext though. #medievaltwitterhttps://twitter.com/homophonous/status/946763848522043394 …
-
-
Also, an excellent example, how good is someone scholarly work if they are a raging misogynist. The odds are high this means they will ignore, diminish, erase, or misattribute evidence, work, accomplishments b/c women.
-
Yes, and that’s largely what happened in history before the 70s. But as you said, that doesn’t mean we can’t use the MGH. Just need to always be aware
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If you ignore 50% of the bodies in history b/c of your virulently misogynist biases, exactly how is that good, evidence-based, groundbreaking scholarly work? It's not. So when things come out about scholars with some virulent ideologies, the odds r high their work has problems.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Likewise, how is it going to break new ground if they cannot address usually backward looking ideologies? How is that ever going to be generative and fantastic scholarship?
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.