“Evidently the new progressive virtue signal is grousing about those who are grousing about rioters breaking windows and pulling people from cars for their overdue beatings.
Because white privilege. Seriously. Though it’s phrased as “the System works for you, so you can’t judge!”
Except that I can. To wit: If you’re mobbing around vandalizing and looting you’re a vandal and a thief. And if you’re a white, bespeckled progressive apologist for such behavior, you’re a condescending asshole who thinks it *progress* to treat entire groups of autonomous humans granted the blessing of free will as vessels for some ridiculous materialist historicism.
These people aren’t pets, and luxuriating over your own white guilt isn’t noble. In fact, it’s self-serving, arrogant, and ostentatious.
You sympathy is rote. It’s canned. It’s abstract and fundamentally dishonest. Because were it not, you’d be celebrating those who use their free will and personal integrity to turn away from the wilding mobs, not giving faux-sociological cover to those who join them.
You’re social Calvinists. To you, grace is pre-ordained — only instead of God granting it, it’s skin color or location that decides it. Which only cheapens the accomplishments of those who work hard to climb out of poverty or rise above racialism. It’s ugly fatalism disguised as intellectualism.
But hey. Clap each other on the back and pretend you’re making a difference as entire neighborhoods burn. Then retire to your book clubs and your lily white coterie.
I’ll send you a cookie.”
Archives for September 25, 2016
According to Ms. Laura Parson, a “Teaching and Learning, Graduate Student” at the University of North Dakota, the reason more women aren’t pursuing STEM fields is because the scientific method relies too much on facts and logic and not subjective perspectives. I am not making this up.
Syllabi promote the positivist view of knowledge by suggesting that there are correct conclusions that can be drawn with the right tools:
- “A critical thinker considers all available evidence with an open mind and uses appropriate techniques to analyze that evidence and reach a conclusion (Lower level geology).”
- “The main goal is to attain knowledge and comprehension of major concepts and techniques of organic chemistry (Upper level chemistry).”
As these examples show, the STEM syllabi explored in this study demonstrated a view of knowledge that was to be acquired by the student, which promotes a view of knowledge as unchanging. This is further reinforced by the use of adverbs to imply certainty such as “actually” and “in fact” which are used in syllabi to identify information as factual and beyond dispute (Biber, 2006a; 2006b). For example, “draw accurate conclusions from scientific data presented in different formats” (Lower level math). Instead of promoting the idea that knowledge is constructed by the student and dynamic, subject to change as it would in a more feminist view of knowledge, the syllabi reinforce the larger male-dominant view of knowledge as one that students acquire and use make (sic) the correct decision.
See, you may think water boils at 100C, but that’s just what the Patriarchy *wants* you to think, and they reinforce their tyranny by insisting that everyone learn the “fact” that water boils at 100C they exclude feminist perspectives, such as the perspective that “fire can’t melt steel,” from the STEM fields, thus reinforcing them as a preserve of sexism and misogyny.
It’s the intersectionalities, you guys!