It's been awhile:

'The coloniality of philosophies of biology':
http://meeting.physanth.org/program/2017/session41/mclean-2017-the-coloniality-of-philosophies-of-biology.html

'Authentic Allyship for white-bodied persons'
http://selfishactivist.com/authentic-allyship-for-white-bodied-folks/

From 'Journal of Black Masculinity':
https://philpapers.org/rec/JAMOIA

From 'Racial Physics or a theory of everything that's ever happened'
http://tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01419870.2017.1285040

I can't even bring myself to contexutalize this. Apparently a couple peer-reviewed feminists were angry that they're chosen male partners didn't cooperate with baby duties and that this made them victims of violence:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09589236.2017.1340151

This paper has been cited 600 times:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277539584900797

There are no words

that there's intellectual work out there that you don't understand?

https://media.giphy.com/media/l0MYFJvpc7M15KaaI/giphy.gif

------
“There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn.” -Albert Camus

"I argue that “cultural appropriation” is never merely the appropriation of culture, but also of gender, sexuality, class, etc."

Let's discuss. This is an assertion that all incidents of cultural appropriation are intersectional. More specifically...they are NEVER exclusively about race to the exclusion of any and all other forms of oppression. Fair reading or no?

not surprised

And Strav isn't gonna take it because you are stupid.

How was Eric Garner a victim of cisgender normative society?

the many murdered by the violent repression/oppression of the neocolonial state, dumb ass. Which cisgender normative society is a function of, dumb ass. cisgender being persons born biological males, performing (toxic) masculine codes that are learned social constructs, dumb ass. normative society in American being white supremacist, dumb ass.

so when Eric Garner, who was constantly harassed by cops for selling loosies, which the state sees as a "financial threat" to capital, because they pass laws to make it illegal, (aka an informal economy - one that functions without the permit of the state), Garner decided to confront and resist the ridiculousness of that part of normative order in society. Thus, those cops who saw Garner performing outside the norm, which in that moment was listening to white men with badges, was murdered. It did not help that Garner was a big, dark skinned Black male, which white supremacist society throughout history has criminalized and dehumanized as the most threatening and therefore likely to be murdered

dumb ass

The distinction between males and females are the creation of white capitalism?

Did Ancient Asian societies differentiate between males and females? Ancient Africa? Pre-industrial Europe?

Are you crazy?

> "I argue that “cultural appropriation” is never merely
>the appropriation of culture, but also of gender, sexuality,
>class, etc."
>
>Let's discuss. This is an assertion that all incidents of
>cultural appropriation are intersectional. More
>specifically...they are NEVER exclusively about race to the
>exclusion of any and all other forms of oppression. Fair
>reading or no?

I'm not going to waste my time reading it, but I'm pretty sure the author made their case to support their argument. Doesn't mean you have to agree with the conclusions. I bet a lot of people in the field disagree with the theory proposed in the article.


So what? That's the way academics work. If the work is interesting enough, someone will write an opposing piece with a different take on things and their own supporting evidence.

So just like the last time you did this, you continue to be outraged by stuff you don't understand

_______________________________________

I spent three years studying modern philosophy (on full academic scholarship no less) so the ad hominems don't apply to me. I have spent years reading this stuff.

Her claim that 'ALL' instances of cultural appropriation are NECESSARILY intersectional is absurd. If someone wears a sombrero for Halloween and we assume this constitutes cultural appropriation.....how on earth is it anything but racial? It's also sexist? It's also homophobic? BY DEFINITION?

Do you think there are no possible disagreements to be had with David Hume, John Locke, etc? Of course not. There are endless disagreements and critiques to be had especially with non experimental work

>Her claim that 'ALL' instances of cultural appropriation are
>NECESSARILY intersectional is absurd. If someone wears a
>sombrero for Halloween and we assume this constitutes cultural
>appropriation.....how on earth is it anything but racial?
>It's also sexist? It's also homophobic? BY DEFINITION?

_______________________________________

The simple example I cited was sufficient.

I'm confused as to your tactics here.....one shouldn't voice an opinion on OKP cause that's what 'academia' is for?

My motivation/purpose is to ring an alarm bell here. These ideas are DANGEROUS. If taken literally....they lead to a worldview that reflects authoritarian values.

That's what you first "peer review" post was about. That they were not sufficiently quantitative for your liking. Therefore they are not worth doing.

This one is that these arguments in these papers are incorrect and dangerous. If you want to discuss/critique the papers, then have it.
But if all you want to do is point and yell "Liberals on college campuses are running amuck", then you're just a cheap Tucker Carlson knockoff.

>The simple example I cited was sufficient.
>
>I'm confused as to your tactics here.....one shouldn't voice
>an opinion on OKP cause that's what 'academia' is for?
>
>My motivation/purpose is to ring an alarm bell here. These
>ideas are DANGEROUS. If taken literally....they lead to a
>worldview that reflects authoritarian values.

_______________________________________

It's not that they are insufficiently quantitative. It's that they are attacking the underlying value of quantitative analysis itself. There is more than enough literature that supports this. The anti-intellectual shift from quantitative to qualitative analysis is shown by the emergence of 'autoethnographical' method. Look it up. It's literally everywhere now. Within what? 15 years? The past 5 years and EVERY humanities student is doing autoethnography for their PHD? WHAT?

It's essentially a diary entry because 'intellectual discourse' itself is a tool to maintain patriarchy, white supremacy and penises going into vaginas. Numbers are racist sexist lgbtphobic. Data analysis is the tool of straight white men. Dialectic discourse is sanctioned violence.

than a discussion of philosophy, critical theory, or the social sciences. So I stay out of those discussions, and leave them to the people who care. It seems like you'd be an ideal candidate for the same.

Now, you claim to know and care about these subjects, so if you want to discuss and argue about them, then that's great. You might want to focus on finding a forum where people are actually interested in conversing with you. This probably isn't it. I don't remember the last time I tried to talk about quantum gravity around here, but it didn't lead to much.

But even if you do want to have a discussion, the problem is you don't seem to have come with any discussion in either of these posts, even *if* someone wanted to play along. You've literally come with right-wing, explicitly anti-intellectual websites cataloguing what appear to be silly titles and abstracts, devoid of any attempt at context. I recoil at this because time and time again it's been the method by which right wing politicians have deligitimized, and in many cases killed, research that I know to be profoundly important.

Real Peer Review is NOT right wing nor is it anti-intellectual. They are mostly east-asian engineering students with a traditional liberal bent.

EVERYBODY should be concerned about critical theory. Astralblack posted a bunch of jibberish above and he's a teacher. (read it for yourself) Because students of critical theory are becoming one of three things. Teachers, activists and/or bureaucrats. Those are very powerful positions. So to claim that one shouldn't speak about the ideas they espouse is ludicrous.

In fact...the more I think about your position...the more ludicrous it becomes. 'That's not my field so I shouldn't interfere'. Many of them are advocating for social revolution?!?! How does one 'not have say' in that?

And the anti-intellectualism is coming from the progressive left side not me. Intellectualism, science and reason have been characterized as tools to maintain straight white male power by this idealogy. They're attacking biology and your field will eventually be attacked too. It's also not very 'intellectual' to suggest I look for another forum or that you don't 'feel like' addressing the issues. This idealogy is present here....so I'll be present here too.

.

Logic has prevailed lol.

Your perception of idealogical victory has a VERY low standard.

.

https://gamesetgif.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/serena_returntbao.gif

"The second is the lie of the male erection, which is necessary only for the penis to be used as a weapon in rape, for, experientially, hard erections are neither comfortable nor pleasurable nor anything other than symptoms of the aggressive tenseness and rigidity of the macho man."

My kid's teacher studied this? Oh, but it's not my field. I'm not a radical critical feminist so I don't understand what the author is saying.