I'd say the irony is Zwarte Piet coming undone when he faces scrutiny for his posts about social scientists coming undone when they face scrutiny.

But wtf do I know, I never even graduated HS.

I still think this would've been a good Student Life thread. I mean, a lot of people take these classes.

I'd bet there are some who were bored to tears, and came to the conclusion, "lol gender studies". Basically we're subsidizing SJWs.

At least that's my take.

Actually, Galileo was asked to back up a heliocentric orbit using the Bible, that is, he was asked to show that a heliocentric orbit was consistent with Christian doctrine. This led to "Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina," a letter arguing for a particular method of interpreting the Bible such that it was consistent with Copernicianism. Since most of the people he was speaking to were Christians, this argument was an important one to make, and it seems salutary for Galileo to have written it.

Similar considerations might apply to contemporary norms around gender as well.

OP,

Most of your criticisms in regards to social science such as confirmation bias, replicability, and falsified data apply just as much to hard sciences. Also, it's kind of hard to take someone who can't manage to post a working link seriously.

ex:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/20...ruth-wears-off

Bump.

Years ago female musicians complained that they were discriminated against in the orchestra audition process. Many orchestras instituted "blind" auditions to ensure fairness. What was the result?

Maybe this is unscientific or something? Still waiting.

http://www.chronicle.com/article/Can...mplicit/238807

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manito...cism-1.2958551

Well named might find this interesting if he hasnt already seen it. Implicit bias

Doesn't look like it. The fact you don't understand this isn't really a rebuttal to anything in the thread isn't a surprise. Is this contrary to what is being taught in gender studies? Is this contrary to some sort of biological scientific claim? The world is sexist, especially in developing countries. I would imagine its less appealing to you to condemn these cases since its not at the hands of a white man. This is likely due to your maternal instincts which are found to be stronger in women, sjw's, and beta males

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=8591

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.358423ca2be3

There is nothing to rebut here. You've presented zero evidence.

This is a remarkably dumb statement.

As is this. How "alpha male" was it to start a thread and then run away when challenged?

I mean, what claims in GS are both scientific and backed by evidence? The onus should be on GS, and the curriculum should be examined first, which is what juan is driving at with his link.

I don't know. juan made this thread and made the claim that gender studies was unscientific. The onus is clearly on him to support his claim.

I don't think it's too surprising that in-group/out-group biases in general (not just with race) are tied to anxiety, and so it's not too surprising that altering brain chemistry in a way that reduces anxiety reduces the expression of bias against out-group members, although I have to say that the idea of achieving positive social outcomes by drugging everyone sounds like the stuff of a dystopian sci-fi future.

I'd suggest alternatively that this result also supports the conclusions often drawn about the rapid growth of acceptance of homosexuality, i.e. that it was a result of heterosexual people having greatly increasing contact with LGBT people. Knowing people as people and not as abstract social categories makes it easier to associate them with an in-group. Familiarity reduces anxiety. With regard to race, this suggests that the high level of segregation in US society is one of the larger forces sustaining race-based anxieties. Decreasing segregation might decrease anxiety without chemical help.


I hadn't read this particular article but I'm aware of (and have previously expressed) that the IAT is not a predictor of discrimination:

With sociology you have Durkheim, Spencer, and a foundation to build on. In psychology's infancy, there was Jung. In gender studies, there's nada. I think you're abusing the word science. I mean, there's no reason to think GS is more scientific than parapsychology.

FYP. Just say no to Spencerian social darwinism :P

I'm not sure that people in Gender Studies consider it to be a specific field comparable to some other specific field, because it's interdisciplinary. I'm also not sure people in Gender Studies generally consider it to be a science, or if that is their goal.

I'm not making any claims about science or gender studies. I'm saying that juan valdez has not supported his statement.

It's either scientific or unscientific, so I'm completely lost. If the statement "X is unscientific", and your position is, "there's no proof that X is unscientific", rhen why can't it be parasociology/parapsychology? Why must that line of reasoning only work if it's gender studies?

Gender is definitely worth talking about from time to time, but college credit is a bit much.

What does this have to do with anything?

Keep Spencer, ditch Marx. My sociology professor would probably kill me.

What 13ball means is that juan has claimed that Gender Studies departments "are teaching material in contradiction with mainstream science and using unscientific methodology", but he hasn't presented any evidence that Gender studies departments are doing so.

What material are they teaching which is in contradiction to mainstream science? Who (which universities) are teaching this material? What methodologies are they teaching which are unscientific?

Okay, well it's obvious. Can't discuss that without looking at curriculum, and getting into the nitty gritty. I can't accept that it's worth college credit based on nothing.

I'm not sure how your last sentence has anything to do with the question, but I'm also not sure how juan's claims are obviously true. And yes, in order to substantiate a claim about what gender studies departments are teaching, you do have to look at curriculum.