Welcome to the new (and now only) Fora!
Started by history_grrrl, September 30, 2023, 07:45:49 AM
Quote from: history_grrrl on September 30, 2023, 07:45:49 AMSo I would love to know, not what people think about "the gender issue," but what people think about this strategy of shutting down discussion in an academic context. Do folks actually think this is acceptable? If so, what makes it so?
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 30, 2023, 10:35:39 AMQuote from: history_grrrl on September 30, 2023, 07:45:49 AMSo I would love to know, not what people think about "the gender issue," but what people think about this strategy of shutting down discussion in an academic context. Do folks actually think this is acceptable? If so, what makes it so?This is why I think "activism", for almost any cause, is antithetical to the principles of academic inquiry; i.e. following the data wherever it lead, even if that goes counter to the researcher's own theories.No matter which end of the political spectrum someone comes from, the more committed they are to an ideology, the less objective their research will be, and the less useful for the rest of society.
Quote from: downer on October 03, 2023, 04:32:21 AMMy guess is that people saw the names of the presenters and recognized them as gender critical activists, and said "hell no, not on my watch." They caused a stir and said we have take this panel off. Then they cooked up some story about the scientific status which is just obvious BS.
Quote from: Hegemony on September 30, 2023, 08:01:05 PMI don't agree that they should have cancelled the session, but I do agree with the worries they probably had, which that the actual session would almost certainly result not in calm and reasoned debate between the two sides, but name-calling, charges of hatred, furious "cancellations" on social media, and flying fur, if not outright rioting.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 03, 2023, 01:57:05 PM1) We should trust our colleagues in anthropology. The experts said the panel in question did not have "scientific rigor." If the experts are gatekeepers (and we need gatekeepers in science) then let them keep the gate. I know almost nothing about the discipline, so if experts in the field tell me that a panel is not appropriate for their conference, who am I to disagree?2) The conference already has something like 30 panels on sexuality----it is clearly not a taboo subject.3) Thus, while I know nothing about the subject, it seems obvious that sexuality is still a part of anthropological study; do we need to differential between "sex" and "gender" if they are both still being used?4) We need to support LGBTQ scholars----they are under attack by a wide range of people, academics and otherwise, who have been swept into a fanatical cultural movement on the right. The time to try and be fair and balanced is gone for the moment. Maybe it will come back some day, but I do notice that one of the panelists on the panel in question already lost a job because of her views----do we want Sean Hannity, Jay Sekulow, or Mike Lindell on a panel? They have views. They can articulate their views. But they are nutballs. Perhaps the panelists in question are not quite so extreme, but the principle is the same.5) It is time to stop trying to be adult about some things. The radicals on the right are not. And they are very dangerous.What might put all this to rest is if we had all the information. The panelists could put their presentation materials on a blog, and the AAA and CAA could place all their meeting minutes and other materials on a blog. Let's see what everyone is actually saying.
Quote from: downer on October 03, 2023, 04:45:26 PMWahoo, your argument relies on binary thinking, left and right.