god i fucking hate academics
Let’s see if i understand this right
drone strikes make the murderers question their sexuality/gender expression(?), because killing things and fighting is traditionally a masc thing, and that makes it easier for their brains to decide if they are morally in the right(? )…for some reason
but with drones because they are very far away, they don’t feel masc when levelling a school with high explosives, and that makes them question their gender or some shit
“You don’t have a moral problem with killing civilians, Private Drone Pilot #347. You’re just questioning your sexuality and gender because drones naturally make you do that - if don’t believe me, just read this liberal arts paper on spatiotemporal phenomenological binaries. The strong soldiers are able to keep killing without succumbing to this, but if you’re weak and make another peep about it being “just a wedding” or some other bullshit, we’re gonna have to revoke your straight male card.”
TIL it’s okay to not have more gay women drone pilots
because being a drone pilot makes you gay in the first place
Best part of academic jargon is it’s basically impossible to argue against it because none of these words mean fucking anything, and whoever writes it can always do a Petersonian claim that you “misrepressented” what they said if you do.
Current Affairs wrote a pretty good piece on the problems with Academic language
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/07/academic-language-and-the-problem-of-meaninglessness
I remember the Sokal affair or something. So a physicist wrote a bullshit paper with sociological jargon about some real physics shit (totally false) and the sociological journal totally published it
Exactly, a lot of defensive sociologists will point out that it’s not hard to get fake papers published in predatory journals (I recall some papers about Midiclorians, from Star Wars, being published in a bio journal).
But Sokal got his completely bullshit paper published in Social Text, one of the leading American Sociology journals, which should have at least done enough verification to know that this is bullshit
Here my aim is to carry these deep analyses one step farther, by taking account of recent developments in quantum gravity: the emerging branch of physics in which Heisenberg’s quantum mechanics and Einstein’s general relativity are at once synthesized and superseded. In quantum gravity, as we shall see, the space-time manifold ceases to exist as an objective physical reality; geometry becomes relational and contextual; and the foundational conceptual categories of prior science—among them, existence itself—become problematized and relativized. This conceptual revolution, I will argue, has profound implications for the content of a future postmodern and liberatory science.
The journal that published Sokal didn’t use peer review and they rejected him at first, then requested a bunch of changes that he refused. They published him because they were collecting articles dealing with the “science wars” between scientists and the humanities and he was one of only two scientists to submit papers for it.
It’s less of a big deal than everyone makes it out to be.
The more I read about the Sokal affair the more I hate everyone involved honestly.
gender isn’t binary, it’s a spectrometer
This is what warren stans actually believe.
