Войти в систему

Home
    - Создать дневник
    - Написать в дневник
       - Подробный режим

LJ.Rossia.org
    - Новости сайта
    - Общие настройки
    - Sitemap
    - Оплата
    - ljr-fif

Редактировать...
    - Настройки
    - Список друзей
    - Дневник
    - Картинки
    - Пароль
    - Вид дневника

Сообщества

Настроить S2

Помощь
    - Забыли пароль?
    - FAQ
    - Тех. поддержка



Пишет Misha Verbitsky ([info]tiphareth)
@ 2018-10-03 13:01:00

Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Настроение: sick
Музыка:coil - the snow EP

grievance studies
Прекрасно
https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/fake-news-comes-to-academia-1538520950
Граждане изучили феминистские и антирасистские
науки (gender studies, women studie, gay and lesbian studies)
и обнаружили, что в этих науках можно опубликовать любую белиберду,
даже в самых лучших журналах, если хорошо освоить
жаргон и логику дискурса; чем бредовее, тем лучше.
Опубликовали их чуть более чем дохуя.

Вот, например, статья

Human reactions to rape culture and queer performativity
at urban dog parks in Portland, Oregon

Keywords: Animaling, Black feminist criminology, dog park,
feminist geography, queer geography, rape culture

https://lockerroom.johnlocke.org/2018/06/11/human-reactions-to-rape-culture-and-queer-performativity-at-urban-dog-parks-in-portland-oregon/
https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/45648/
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/dog-park-study-rape-culture-portland-ungendering-research-initiative/
https://www.pluralist.com/posts/1607-feminist-journal-published-study-on-dog-rape-culture-by-fake-scholar
https://www.dailywire.com/news/33593/peer-reviewed-feminist-journal-says-dog-parks-kassy-dillon
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=11158
https://pjmedia.com/trending/doctor-of-feminist-studies-gropes-10k-dogs-to-study-rape-culture-at-dog-parks/

This article addresses questions in human geography and
the geographies of sexuality by drawing upon one year of
embedded in situ observations of dogs and their human
companions at three public dog parks in Portland,
Oregon. The purpose of this research is to uncover
emerging themes in human and canine interactive behavioral
patterns in urban dog parks to better understand human
a-/moral decision-making in public spaces and uncover bias
and emergent assumptions around gender, race, and
sexuality. Specifically, and in order of priority, I
examine the following questions: (1) How do human
companions manage, contribute, and respond to violence in
dogs? (2) What issues surround queer performativity and
human reaction to homosexual sex between and among dogs?
and (3) Do dogs suffer oppression based upon (perceived)
gender? It concludes by applying Black feminist
criminology categories through which my observations can
be understood and by inferring from lessons relevant to
human and dog interactions to suggest practical
applications that disrupts hegemonic masculinities and
improves access to emancipatory spaces.

The cultural norms operating within and upon these spaces
form microcultures where acceptable and unacceptable
behavior in human communities may be reflected in the way
human companions construct their interactions with dogs,
particularly in regard to rape culture and queering, and
a-/moral interpretations of such behaviors and their human
analogues under the assumptions of rape culture.

There are many ways to define and conceptualize
oppression. In the context of this work, I'll borrow from
Taylor's definition which has gained considerable
traction, 'What it means to occupy a public space in
non-normative ways' (Taylor 2013). In this sense the only
dogs who were oppressed were those engaging in queering
behavior. ... What is particularly interesting is that on
Taylor's definition, raped female dogs were not oppressed
because rape was normative at dog parks. This raises
interesting and highly problematic issues as to the agency
of female dogs in particular spaces as well as with
intrinsic victim blaming in female dogs which obviously
extends into the analogous circumstance under (human) rape
cultures within rape-condoning spaces.

Simply put, rape is normative in rape cultures and overtly
permissible in rape-condoning spaces, and therefore (human
and canine) victims of rape suffer the injustice of not
being seen as victimized by so much as complicit in having
been sexually assaulted, which can even extend to the
feminist researcher herself (cf. De Craene 2017).

* * *

про то, как можно бороться с rape culture
на собачьих площадках, и каким образом
методы тренировки собак следует применять
к мужчинам.

...Many papers advocated highly dubious ethics including

training men like dogs ("Dog Park"), punishing white male
college students for historical slavery by asking them to
sit in silence in the floor in chains during class and to
be expected to learn from the discomfort ("Progressive
Stack"), celebrating morbid obesity as a healthy
life-choice ("Fat Bodybuilding"), treating privately
conducted masturbation as a form of sexual violence
against women ("Masturbation"), and programming
superintelligent AI with irrational and ideological
nonsense before letting it rule the world ("Feminist
AI"). 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"), becoming
seemingly mystified about why heterosexual men are
attracted to women ("Hooters"), insisting there is
something to be learned about feminism by having four guys
watch thousands of hours of hardcore pornography over the
course of a year while repeatedly taking the Gender and
Science Implicit Associations Test ("Porn"), expressing
confusion over why people are more concerned about the
genitalia others have when considering having sex with
them ("CisNorm"), and recommending men anally
self-penetrate in order to become less transphobic, more
feminist, and more concerned about the horrors of rape
culture ("Dildos"). None of this, except that Helen Wilson
recorded one "dog rape per hour" at urban dog parks in
Portland, Oregon, raised so much as a single reviewer
eyebrow, so far as their reports show.

* * *

В результате своего исследования, граждане
установили, что феминистские науки
("grievance studies") разрушают академию,
потому что исходят из моральных императивов, а не
из научного метода. Результатом grievance studies
является, опять-таки, не исследование, а методика
борьбы с сексизмом, расизмом, неоколониализмом,
исламофобией. То есть "gender studies" это не
столько наука, сколько набор этических догм
и требований. Более того, в фундаменте grievance
studies лежит постулат о вредоносности
обычной науки и несогласие с научным методом, который
этически неоправдан, ибо является сексистским, расистским,
неоколониальным и гомофобским.

...Any scholarship that proceeds from radically skeptical

assumptions about objective truth by definition does not
and cannot find objective truth. Instead it promotes
prejudices and opinions and calls them "truths." For
radical constructivists, these opinions are specifically
rooted a political agenda of "Social Justice" (which we
have intentionally made into a proper noun to distinguish
it from the type of real social progress falling under the
same name). Because of critical constructivism, which sees
knowledge as a product of unjust power balances, and
because of this brand of radical skepticism, which rejects
objective truth, these scholars are like snake-oil
salespeople who diagnose our society as being riddled with
a disease only they can cure. That disease, as they see
it, is endemic to any society that forwards the agency of
the individual and the existence of objective (or
scientifically knowable) truths.

Изрядная часть статей (принятых к печати)
представляют собой обработку нескольких глав Mein Kampf,
полученную заменой еврейского капитала на патриархию,
с добавлением цитат из именитых исследователей, которые
подтверждают тезисы авторов.

Мораль номер один (но мы и так это знали):
академические стандарты в "gender studies"
(и в целом в "social studies") практически
отсутствуют.

Мораль номер два - можно делать много полезных
выводов из публикаций, даже несмотря на то, что
это бред: далеко не каждый бред публикуем, а только
тот, что укладывается в доминантный дискурс. Поэтому
чтение бреда полезно, ибо позволяет лучше понимать
начальственные позывы.

Конечно, данное нам в ощущениях начальство не всегда
следует феминизму, антиколониализму и прочим артефактам
доминантного дискурса. Но это частности. Истинная власть
это та, которая контролирует слова и мысли, а не та,
которая сидит в белом доме и пишет идиотскую чепуху в
твиттер.

Привет



(Читать комментарии)

Добавить комментарий:

Как:
(комментарий будет скрыт)
Identity URL: 
имя пользователя:    
Вы должны предварительно войти в LiveJournal.com
 
E-mail для ответов: 
Вы сможете оставлять комментарии, даже если не введете e-mail.
Но вы не сможете получать уведомления об ответах на ваши комментарии!
Внимание: на указанный адрес будет выслано подтверждение.
Имя пользователя:
Пароль:
Тема:
HTML нельзя использовать в теме сообщения
Сообщение:



Обратите внимание! Этот пользователь включил опцию сохранения IP-адресов пишущих комментарии к его дневнику.