Member
What is even more disturbing is that most of these "academics" are being paid very large salaries from the federal government. They have set up a system where their supporters are paid to produce political propaganda.
This is what Eisenhower foresaw when he warned about the military-academic-industrial complex.
Imagine how much different the world would be if instead of funding political propaganda, taxes were cut in half. Private funding of the sciences and academia are what established America's technological and educational edge initially. Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Carnegie, Rockefeller and Bezos have produced much better educational and academic results than the government-funded science model.
Member
If that implies that a congenital male on hormones to transition (and maybe post-castration) is still advantaged over a congenital female on PEDs, then the women in the no-testing class/feds have a point. Weigh-ins checking for original sex could get awkward for some congenital women it seems, or do you accept an original date birth certificate?Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
✓ Member
Coaches, todays NYT’s has an Op-Ed that illustrates the utter self inflicted confusion and hypocrisy of labeling left-right, science deniers, and natural conflicts between specialized interests. It is a good example of the points made by Baker and Wolf.
Opinion | How British Feminism Became Anti-Trans - The New York Times
Honestly I cant understand the details. It reminds me a lot of being the recipient of an excruciating “he said - she said” complaint, (my pronouns are arbitrary - of course.)
All I “hear” is wha-wha-wha.
This is also a good example of the failed attempts to treat such subjects, ie modern gender theory and gender rights, as a scientific and academic topic. Its really just first world pablum.
Member
If you are referring to President Eisenhower's farewell address in 1961, he didn't mention academia once.
Our Documents - Transcript of President Dwight D. Eisenhower's Farewell Address (1961)
IPB
Member
Some things are as obvious as the nose on your face - for example tranny type men have a biological advantage over women (I use the phrase "tranny type" not to offend but because because it covers the divers possibilities of pre-op, post op, hormone taking, non hormone taking, female presenting, butch, femme, etc. that comproises this whole shitheaded realm of discourse) in sports.
If someone presents "science" or "data" in the face of such obviousness, laugh at them. They are engaging in a fallacy called "appeal to authority". We don't need to cite an authority such as the Psychology Dep't of University of Libtardia to tell us what we already to know. And no, snowflakes, its not "science denier!" to deny what we know in our guts is true and good. No appeal to authority (i.e. citations to fraudulent, manipulated, massaged data presented by bad people with bad biases and agendas) will actually convince you of something you know is false. But you might slink away and let them win the argument. Don't do that.
Instead, laugh at them, point out their fallacious appeal to authority, then laugh some more. Call them a name, such as "pinhead," and move on. Delete them from your friendslist and dis-invite them to Thanksgiving dinner.
This strategy does not just apply to arguments over trannies in sport, but to all the other truths you know in your gut to be right and true but that "Science!" and the corrupt, infested university research departments tell you is wrong. Ignore them all. You KNOW the truth. And Dr. Fraudenstein of the sociology dep't cannot convince you otherwise.
TMPHBITEU
Implies??? Have I been unclear, somehow?
Yeah, all I remember was the "Military Industrial Complex."
Member
Have you actually ever listened to or read the address? Or did you just hit ctrl f and search for the word "academic"?
Please read the address.
What could I possibly be thinking. Nobody will actually read an original source anymore. Here are the "academic complex" highlights:
"...A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research-these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we which to travel..."
"...Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been over shadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite..."
Member
I wasn’t trying to be dense, I just don’t recall anything about negative strength impacts of whatever feminizing hormones/etc. men might take.
I gather their impact is not greater than giving T to a congenital female, and that the effect size of the advantages of being born male are more than 2x of either sex hormones.
TMPHBITEU
Once again, the primary effects of exposure to testosterone occur in utero. This cannot be compensated for at any point post-natal. And once again:
Training Female Lifters: Neuromuscular Efficiency | Mark Rippetoe
Member
But strangely, research is all garbage and should be abolished, by way of cutting all spending.
Garbage research has been around since Plato, and probably even before then. Newton supposedly believed he could find the alchemical solution to turn lead into gold. There's even an expression in natural sciences called "gigo", which means "garbage in, garbage out": if you base your experiments on bogus claims and evidence, you'll get bogus results. I hear people like Lawrence Krauss talk breathlessly about how 99% of journals and articles are useless garbage he never reads. Guess we should just axe all of it, fuck it.
In truth, this whole feminism, garbage research in the useless humanities, conversation is one that's only being had online. I have yet to encounter a second researcher who takes any of the sensational garbage seriously. Most people are really just interested in their own field, and hardly move into politics at all ever, though they obviously have their own opinions. The one I have encountered is one no one takes seriously; not students, not colleagues, no one. Cos this stuff sounds absolutely crazy to absolutely everyone. Nor have I ever had anyone tell me I was being "toxically masculine" or berate me for holding the door open. All of this is highly flammable on the internet only.
Cos that's exactly where dumb teenagers get these garbage takes: online. They browse tumblr and reddit and youtube and deviantart and wherever else and just gravitate towards dumb stuff. Oh, what's that? A bunch of people with no personalities are claiming they have some specialised identity that's based on a phony conception of their gender and how the world is against them? Here, let me join in. Because who didn't feel like they were in a "me vs. the world" struggle for life as a teenager? And now otherwise pretty harmless phases in maturation are being elongated into ways of life, thanks to the confirmation bias of the internet. And look at that, those dumb teenagers happen to be loud, as well. Good luck drowning them out with solemn stoicism that you know what's best when they're shouting at the top of their raspy lungs.
The internet is not a public space, it's an enormous collection of private spaces. Really, the dichotomy public/private no longer holds up thanks to the internet; that's how revolutionary an invention it really is. Public discourse is about the same it was in the 90s, possibly even the 80s and 70s, too. The only difference is that now everyone has some evidence for some claim. You can prove anything online, because you no longer have to prove anything. Because all evidence is now so amazingly open to tampering and manufacturing that it hardly even qualifies anymore. Make up anyone, make up anything. Who will really tell the difference? Who will really care? News media does it every day, and hardly anyone cares.
Because with the internet, the discourse has changed. These big spats you see, the feminism in physics and the women's march in DC and the whatever you want? Those only exist in the media anymore. In the day to day, they're not there at all. Cos everyone's checked out; no one's paying attention. Not specialists, or experts, or fans, or people in the know, and not your everyday people, your laymen, your shlubs. These feminist physics and these "postmodern neomarxist anticapitalist insert adjective here" only exist, and can only exist, online, and thereby in the media. And outside they have so little impact on anything they may not even exist at all.
Guess we should abolish the internet, too. Just abolish everything. Get rid of all of it. Not that anyone's listening to me; I'm talking on the internet.
Posting Permissions
