dagblog - Comments for "The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct"

Daryl Bem Proved ESP Is Real

A Guy Called LULU — Mon, 22 May 2017 01:29:51 +0000

Daryl Bem Proved ESP Is Real This is a related topic, I think.

I don't know that we disagree

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 21 May 2017 21:40:25 +0000

In reply to Same reason you defend Louise

I don't know that we disagree on the journal - if they're publishing pap with no controls, then they deserve a reputation for publishing pap with no controls. Which might be fine - something to be said for a more open site that takes the good with the bad, perhaps let's the vetting happen *with* online publication rather than before. But I don't think that discredits liberal discourse on social topics per se, and even there I'm fine with questioning sacred cows. Plus there's a big difference between pushing a paper into peer review and being a couch blogger.

Same reason you defend Louise

Obey — Sun, 21 May 2017 21:19:44 +0000

In reply to I don't care about this

Same reason you defend Louise Mensch I guess. We disagree on both.

I am a progressive to the extent that I think their reasoning and arguments are more convincing on the value questions as well as their general valuing of truth and debate as a means to getting there. It's not my tribe where I feel committed to defending every dipshit purveyor of hot air. If a whole field of enquiry is so feeble they can't face up to the shortcomings of a terrible journal and defend the value of their research in general, they have a lot of introspection to do. This is their occasion to shine - argue for quality gender studies and the vital illuminating conclusions that it produces. Social media is paying attention, go for it.

I don't care about this

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 21 May 2017 21:04:21 +0000

In reply to There is a raging debate now

I don't care about this journal. I care about unfair trashing of all liberal opinion and issues being painted with the same brush of elitist, vapid, out-of-touch, silly, etc. Maybe that's not these guys' intent, but it's getting a lot of love on conservative sites.

There is a raging debate now

Obey — Sun, 21 May 2017 20:42:46 +0000

In reply to "Their intention, they said,

There is a raging debate now it seems, just as after the more successful Sokal affair from the 90s. Then, as now, it isn't a right-left affair. Sokal for one was fighting against sloppy obscurantism - i.e. bullshit - on the left, in order to save the left. There are severe quality control issues in certain areas of sociology and related fields. Just as there are distinct worries in psychology (replication crisis) and in Neuroscience (the dead fish affair). And they need to be addressed. The knee-jerk circling of the wagons is not helpful. If this journal dies and goes away and other journal editors and reviewers now think twice about accepting things for publication because it has the relevant keywords and conclusion, then that is a good thing.

"Their intention, they said,

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 21 May 2017 20:05:00 +0000

In reply to Here is a quote from some one

"Their intention, they said, was to highlight two problems; the low standards of pay-to-publish journals and the meaningless nonsense that can be accepted by the social sciences in general and gender studies in particular, providing it upholds fashionable postmodern ideas of gender." - so without any research at all, I found through speculation room for agreement with the authors on point 1 (sorry Helen, but the pay-to-play market doesn't seem to be that highly regarded, and this article won't improve its reputation for "thorough scholarly peer review").

What I *don't* think it proves is that overwrought perspectives on gender and such have taken over Sociology, though maybe a review of distinguished journals could prove that - or possibly other theories, such as real progress in society in spite of efforts by sociologists and others to draw attention to entrenched issues.

It should also be noted that society is changing rather rapidly, and that there can be papers that address needed up-and-coming areas but that research or quality isn't quite there yet, but still needs to be encouraged as a topic, and other topics addressing more bizarre areas of human comportment will draw chuckles as usual. I recall when my school dropped its Sociology program due to budget cuts - a shame, despite all the hippie-punching that surrounds making fun of the supposed uselessness of the field. As a somewhat kindred field, if we took Psychology more seriously and trained more people in everyday deception, maybe we wouldn't have the idiot-in-thief we have as President. But sure, another laugh at liberal values - how expected.

Here is a quote from some one

A Guy Called LULU — Sun, 21 May 2017 19:44:17 +0000

In reply to Dammit, you tricked me into

Here is a quote from someone who did the tricky thing of reading the article and then talking about it. It could be a direct response to this comment of yours.

The problem with that is that it is listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), the International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS), Academic Search Ultimate (EBSCO), ProQuest Social Science Journals, the British Library, Cabell’s International and many more of the largest indices. It is not highlighted as a problem in the much-relied upon Beall’s list of predatory journals and was recommended to Lindsay and Boghossian by the NORMA journal. It is part of the highly-regarded Taylor & Francis Group which confirms that Cogent offers thorough scholarly peer review and has all the “traditional values and high standards associated with Taylor & Francis and Routledge at its core.” Helen Pluckrose

Dammit, you tricked me into

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 21 May 2017 19:06:00 +0000

In reply to This is great. It reads like

Dammit, you tricked me into reading. Cogent Open Access is a 4-year-old "open access" pay-to-play "journal", basically with as much credentials as those Who's Who in XYZ orgs that keep sending me vanity press applications. It's for your loser brother who can't get a job with his sociology degree from a lower-tier school, so needs to up his creds quickly with some "I wuz published" references before that next interview at Wendy's.

Worse, the whole point of this piece was to make fun of liberals showing how retarded their PC behavior is and subsequently how all liberal thinking is asinine - by getting a journal article published in a vanity press outlet? It's like the time I tricked the trash man into letting me throw away fake garbage - it was really MY MOM'S NEW BLENDER. Damn was he stupid - he thought it was the real thing.

Considering we on the leftt didn't elect someone with the brains of a colostomy bag to be our President, who just happens to really be building Moscow on the Hudson/Potomac, it seems a silly time for the other side to get all uppity and arrogant about that values & judgment thing, but I guess getting a fake article in a fake journal is the height of some people's achievements - others are more adventurous and willing to go the extra step to destroying important democracies and replacing them with clown car cut out parodies of what governments are supposed to be. Shame all that adolescent energy was left to percolate untapped.

This is great. It reads like

Obey — Sun, 21 May 2017 15:52:26 +0000

In reply to The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct

This is great. It reads like half the humanities research grant applications I'm reviewing these days. Very oddly, clear writing is something that they are great at teaching, and somehow regard as not applicable to their academic writing.

"Toxic maculinity", eh? Scuse

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 21 May 2017 13:52:00 +0000

In reply to A breakthrough in

"Toxic maculinity", eh? Scuse if my maochistuc urges are off today.