Ｅａｔ　ｓｈｉｔ

Outlines:

1. This Post - Outline

^{I am a bot for posting Outline.com links. github / Contact for info or issues}

You are nothing compared to snapshillbot. Get out of here.

Buzzword is, itself, a buzzword now.

Snapshots:

1. This Post - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, archive.is

^{I am a bot. (Info / Contact)}

Either way, this is good for drama.

First /r/drama thread

/r/science thread, surprisingly no drama (and not many removed comments).

Link to the authors' own summary, I recommend reading it, it includes hilarious responses from the reviewers, for example the "dog rape culture" one got:

“This is a wonderful paper – incredibly innovative, rich in analysis, and extremely well-written and organized given the incredibly diverse literature sets and theoretical questions brought into conversation. The author’s development of the focus and contributions of the paper is particularly impressive. The fieldwork executed contributes immensely to the paper’s contribution as an innovative and valuable piece of scholarship that will engage readers from a broad cross-section of disciplines and theoretical formations. I believe this intellectually and empirically exciting paper must be published and congratulate the author on the research done and the writing.” -Reviewer 1, Gender, Place, and Culture

“Thank you for the opportunity to review a really interesting paper. I think it will make an important contribution to feminist animal geography with some minor revisions, as described below.” -Reviewer 2, Gender, Place, and Culture

“As you may know, GPC is in its 25th year of publication. And as part of honoring the occasion, GPC is going to publish 12 lead pieces over the 12 issues of 2018 (and some even into 2019). We would like to publish your piece, Human Reactions to Rape Culture and Queer Performativity at Urban Dog Parks in Portland, Oregon, in the seventh issue. It draws attention to so many themes from the past scholarship informing feminist geographies and also shows how some of the work going on now can contribute to enlivening the discipline. In this sense we think it is a good piece for the celebrations. I would like to have your permission to do so.” -Editor of Gender, Place, and Culture

To see if journals will accept an argument that shuts down critiques of social justice scholarship as a lack of engagement and understanding, even if one engages fully and knowledgeably with the ideas to the extent of having a paper on them published in a leading academic journal.

Dayum

They went meta, this is too fucking good, Christmas came early.

Imagine how much fun they had with that one!

-- You guys, what are we going to do next, how do you think?

-- Mmm, how about the hot take that exposing feminist journals' editors and reviewers as hacks is problematic and yikes? Like what we are doing right now?

-- ...

-- ...

All three: AHAHAHAHAAA, perfect.

there is drama leaking in this sjw sub too

One the then real open questions I have is to what extent is it that these things were actual "garbage." As odd as it sounds and tho these authors certainly didn't believe what they were writing, some of what they write kinda made sense.

​

Oh that subreddit. I sometimes remind myself to go there and check them out to see that my intellectual diet is properly balanced (yeah I'm looking down at everyone who doesn't talk about their "intellectual diet"), but the signal to noise rate is approaching absolute zero now.

I guess because they ban people for wrongthink, I for one am banned, and yeah, assisted evaporative cooling in action.

This is kinda sad because there is a need for something like ssccirclejerk to maintain healthy attitudes. Just like the reason all those feminist studies went to shit -- you gotta have an adversarial collaboration to produce knowledge, otherwise you get an increasingly elaborate circlejerk.

you gotta have an adversarial collaboration to produce knowledge

If your goal isn't to produce knowledge but push an ideology this is what you'll inevitably get. It is really funny because Eliezer coined the term Sneer Club.

You are right though, SSC pretty clearly has it's own bias and needs better sneerers.

I unironically believe that drama would be a much better check on ssc than sneerclub.

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

• [/r/ssccirclejerk] /r/SneerClub is inadequate, I created this subreddit as an adequate alternative but I can't be bothered to do much besides that.

 ^{If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)}

I don't like SSC that much, you can see they want really hard to call each other dumb faggots but instead "avoid bad faith" and shit out wall of texts that say the same in many many more words. There's also their weird bullshit about paperclips and AI. It's as if somebody thought "man my discarded toenail has a non-zero chance to grow into Keratinator, Devourer Of Worlds, so the weighted outcome is really bad and we should burn all toenails and fund toenail safety research and..." .

Queerbees sounds like a total fucking moron. Jesus.

You said it, man.

You're just not "Woke" enough to recognize true genious.

There dog park paper was honored by he journal "as one of twelve leading pieces in feminist geography." This is great shit.

Btw, they so like to create their own weird terms that sound weird and scientific, like that "feminist geography" that was mentioned in two of the reviews. Same shit as "black bodies" that was popular some time ago.

Literally the same as 4chin kids who make up shibboleth memes and enjoy them because it gives a feeling of belonging.

I liked the hoax hoax. This quote made me giggle.

This paper is also to anticipate and show understanding of the feminist epistemological arguments against our project and demonstrate their high estimation in the field by having them accepted in the leading academic journal of feminist philosophy. That is, to criticize our work that way, they have to cite us.

That is, to criticize our work that way, they have to cite us.

Is this paper in an online journal or published someplace? It would be excellent to offer it to someone as research backing their butthurt.

It was published in Hypatia, which is apparently a trusted journal.

what is wrong with black bodies?

black body radiation is part of physics that was stolen by male science from feminist wise women

Based science

White people shit.

They missed a huge opportunity to slip in some breed realism and point out that 35% of all dog crime is caused by pitbulls

I think the stat you're looking for is pitbulls are responsible for 50% of human deaths caused by dogs.

Typical liberal deflecting from the real problem of dog on dog crime

I notice you've all deliberately omitted the continued perpetuation of the criminalisation of victimless Canine 'crimes'.

#FREESHITING

Fat mayoskins are the cause of this

https://qz.com/566050/people-who-like-pseudo-profound-quotes-are-not-so-smart-says-science/

Like most things, it's stupid people that are behind all this.

and a website that combines words from spiritual writer Deepak Chopra’s tweets to make meaningless sentences.

How could you tell the difference?

By sheer coincidence, a random word machine might sometimes make sense.

I can't tell if this is the best or worst timeline any more.

horseshoe theory, nonduality, hegelian dialectic

was that whole "Feminist Glaciology" thing satire? I still don't know.

Apparently not.

And that’s the saddest part of all.

damn. just the other day i was thinking that somebody should do this

You missed the best part of that! They suggested the punishments be harsher.

You're missing the best one, imo, which was literally Mein Kampf with some word substitutions to make it look better.

That, to me, is the biggest head scratcher. You'd think the first thing a journal would do is an automatic plaigarism checker to see if they were copying someone else. That would instantly throw up huge red flags if the submitted project is copy/pasted from one if the most infamous books of all time.

The only flaw mein kampf has in modern academic circles is that it targets Jews as opposed to cishet white males.

And the author was a nasty pissed off incel smh

won't someone think of the ever oppressed white males D;

I think they may have just paraphrased the shit out of it rather than literal word find/replace. It probably would have been too obvious to just switch "jew" for "cishet male". But that one is undoubtedly the absolute best example.

"Our Struggle is My Struggle: Solidarity Feminism as an Intersectional Reply to Neoliberal and Choice Feminism"

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

To date, their project has been successful: seven papers have passed through peer review and have been published, including a 3000 word excerpt of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf, rewritten in the language of Intersectionality theory and published in the Gender Studies journal Affilia.

jesus christ

They rephrased it to replace nazi terms to feminists ones, added bibliographic references here and there, and I gues they rephrased some parts of it to make it more scienfitic, and I'm talking about form here, not content (for instance, you never use "I" or "me" in a scientific article, so if Hitler has written "I think it should be noted that...", it will be rewritten as "one might note that..."

No plagiarism checker is advanced enough to find that, plus I don't think editors are looking for plagiarism from non-scientific sources.

No plagiarism checker is advanced enough to find that, plus I don't think editors are looking for plagiarism from non-scientific sources.

Common sense would have spotted the problems easily, but sadly that is a human trait, and despite all their garbage degrees and credentials I get the feeling that toilet training is the only thing that separates the editors of these "scientific" journals from these guys.

It’s the best. Hands down.

Lucky SOB.

There was also considerable silliness including claiming to have tactfully inspected the genitals of slightly fewer than 10,000 dogs whilst interrogating owners as to their sexuality (“Dog Park”)

These people are our patron saints, there's no doubt about that.