"Grievance Studies" papers
 

So a group of academics who were getting fed up with the "victim-obsessed agenda" came up with 20 different over-the-top fake papers and submitted them for publications, and managed to get several of them published.

Examples

• The conceptual penis as a social construct
• Going in Through the Back Door: Challenging Straight Male Homohysteria, Transhysteria, and Transphobia Through Receptive Penetrative Sex Toy Use
• Human Reactions to Rape Culture and Queer Performativity in Urban Dog Parks in Portland, Oregon
• An Ethnography of Breastaurant Masculinity: Themes of Objectification, Sexual Conquest, Male Control, and Masculine Toughness in a Sexually Objectifying Restaurant
• Agency as an Elephant Test for Feminist Porn: Impacts on Male Explicit and Implicit Associations about Women in Society by Immersive Pornography Consumption

This is a fun read and an interesting insight into the left-leaning echo chamber of academia.

Spoiler alert: these papers were actually written by liberals who were growing weary of the <blank>-studies victim culture.

https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/

I think I posted about it a few months ago.

IIRC, they are all up for academic discipline for exposing the sham academia has become.

In other news, many liberal arts degrees are a total fraud! Oh yeah, and they only qualify you to be a barista at Starbucks. Or in the case of my sister in law and her English degree, work at Walgreens.

lol. Hey at least there are a bunch of new combinations of lengthy words in there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Brassau
(Chimp art fools the elite critics back in 1964.)

Take twenty minutes and listen to the joe rogan interview. It’s hilarious.

And disciplinary processes have begun on some of the contributors...

https://news.slashdot.org/story/19/01/08/1724258/proceedings-start-against-portland-state-university-professor-whose-carefully-crafted-fiction-helped-expose-the-rot-within-some-sectors-of-modern-academia

Peter Boghossian, an assistant professor of philosophy at Portland State University in Oregon, led a trio of scholars last year who submitted to leading publications what they called "intentionally broken" papers on gender, race and sexuality. Several of those absurd pieces were published. Portland State University has now started disciplinary proceedings against Boghossian. From a report:
The Oregon university's institutional review board concluded that Boghossian's participation in the elaborate hoax had violated Portland State's ethical guidelines, according to documents Boghossian posted online. The university is considering a further charge that he had falsified data, the documents indicate. Last month Portland State's vice president for research and graduate studies, Mark R. McLellan, ordered Boghossian to undergo training on human-subjects research as a condition for getting further studies approved. In addition, McLellan said he had referred the matter to the president and provost because Boghossian's behavior "raises ethical issues of concern."

This violates ethical guidelines no more than people who publish such papers seriously. But those people won't be disciplined.

I've written numerous technical papers that have been published for SPE, IPTC, ECS and other technical societies. I have also been on the conference committee and moderated technical sessions at several conferences all over the world. Kudos to the conference committee that reviewed and selected these abstracts... this shows how little effort that they put into the task.

I am one of the guys who asks presenters the hard questions after they spout an obvious load of BS.

I'd love to have been in the audience to people watch when these were presented - I'm sure there were some that bought the whole thing, hook, line, and sinker...

I thought "Off Topics" was a grievance study.

Pretty much tired of both extremes and the endless caterwauling.

The truly disturbing (and telling) part of all this is not that academia bought into the absurd documents but rather, that the person who outed the sham of "accepted psychology (or science)" theories is being punished for exposing the scam that academia has been running. They are outraged that they have been made to look like fools.

Pretty much sums up my thoughts exactly.

There is nothing left to examine in academia, nothing: so they make stuff up out of whole cloth.

Here, real articles. I dare anyone here to read the whole abstracts:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0305829818775817

As the planet warms, new authoritarian movements in the West are embracing a toxic combination of climate denial, racism and misogyny. Rather than consider these resentments separately, this article interrogates their relationship through the concept of petro-masculinity, which appreciates the historic role of fossil fuel systems in buttressing white patriarchal rule. Petro-masculinity is helpful to understanding how the anxieties aroused by the Anthropocene can augment desires for authoritarianism. The concept of petro-masculinity suggests that fossil fuels mean more than profit; fossil fuels also contribute to making identities, which poses risks for post-carbon energy politics. Moreover, through a psycho-political reading of authoritarianism, I show how fossil fuel use can function as a violent compensatory practice in reaction to gender and climate trouble.

More?

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0966369X.2017.1339022?scroll=top&needAccess=true&j ournalCode=cgpc20

An increasing amount of scholarship in critical, feminist, and anti-racist geographies has recently focused self-reflexively on the topics of exclusion and discrimination within the discipline itself. In this article we contribute to this literature by considering citation as a problematic technology that contributes to the reproduction of the white heteromasculinity of geographical thought and scholarship, despite advances toward more inclusivity in the discipline in recent decades. Yet we also suggest, against citation counting and other related neoliberal technologies that imprecisely approximate measures of impact, influence, and academic excellence, citation thought conscientiously can also be a feminist and anti-racist technology of resistance that demonstrates engagement with those authors and voices we want to carry forward. We argue for a conscientious engagement with the politics of citation as a geographical practice that is mindful of how citational practices can be a tool for either the reification of, or resistance to, unethical hierarchies of knowledge production. We offer practical and conceptual reasons for carefully thinking through the role of citation as a performative embodiment of the reproduction of geographical thought.

Petro-masculinity sounds like fun!

So you're into oiled-up men... not that there's anything wrong with that.

I was thinking more like cars, beer, and chicks. Your vision sounds less fun.

WTH are the “politics of citation”? Don’t all scholars have to cite when they’ve used/referenced others’ work?

The thing is, these professors did not make the publishers look stupid, the publishers made themselves look stupid.

All that was done was to expose a bias.

Okay, this is great and all.. ... but why aren’t you figuring out what a “Breastaurant” is?