Here's another indicator/manifestation of social justice lunacy for the Latent Variable Model: Queer Hegemony.
In an era when progressives demand that we celebrate diversity, progressive queerdom is rapidly going about erasing gay men, lesbians and bisexuals. In progressive circles, it's queer this and queer that all the time. To show they're with it, the squares in mainstream media are queering everything that was formerly lavender. And at Portland State University's Queer Resource Center, gay, lesbian and bisexual students do not exist.
I hold a particular animus towards the woke variety of queer that prevails at my university's version of what is known on other campuses as the LGBTQ center. (I am a gay senior citizen taking break from a post-bac degree program at Portland State University "PSU".)
You see, Portland State University's Queer Resource Center (QRC) recognizes only two populations and constituencies: Queer and Trans. The words "gay" and "lesbian" are not to be found in the Queer Resource Center's mission statement. In fact, unless my repeated searches missed it, the word "gay" appears on the QRC's site only when citing unaffiliated outside organizations' use of the word.
As if that weren't bad enough, the QRC's politics are stridently woke:
"OUR PURPOSE The Queer Resource Center supports queer and trans students at Portland State University to achieve their educational goals through advocacy, community, and celebration. The Queer Resource Center prioritizes a racial justice framework to improve campus climate through education, policy change, and campus-wide organizing. "
"OUR VISION The Queer Resource Center strives to provide students with the support they need to persist to graduation through increasing equity and access for queer and trans students at Portland State University." https://www.pdx.edu/queer-resource-center/
It is expected that a good Portland State University queer will model the values of diversity, inclusion, equity and anti-racism. Its activities calendar is a festival of intersectional racial, ethnic and gender identity group culture.
If you're BIPOC and trans - or, better yet, both - well, the QRC is your home away from home. You’ll look in vain for a gay men’s board game night.
When I complained to the QRC about its erasure of gay men, lesbians and bisexuals, the reply as good as admitted that the queer hegemony was intentional. In any case, they added, everyone there was fine with it. If I didn't like it, why, they even provided a helpful link to the complaint form.
It is deplorable that PSU’s only official organization for what used to be known as sexual minorities does not recognize or accommodate the university's mainstream gay, lesbian and bisexual students. That the QRC has so thoroughly embraced the leftist ideology of wokeness is unconscionable. It's as if PSU's French club expected students to support the ideology of Marine Le Pen and organized its programming around it.
Still, what else can one expect at a university whose past president declared that his "highest priority is sustaining and amplifying [the school's] commitment to racial justice"? That's what PSU's ex-president Steven Percy, a generic-looking middle-aged white guy, announced more than three years ago.
During his tenure, the very first item on the list of strategic priorities of the Office of President was "Acting on Equity and Racial Justice."
This meant: "We are fighting racism and advancing social justice across our campus by applying an antiracist lens to everything we do, measuring our progress and holding each other to account. We are taking steps to ensure success for all students, more equitable working conditions and an environment where people feel safe, belong, and prosper.”
PSU’s new president has revised the web page where that text appears. It remains to be seen whether she will repudiate the illiberal ideology the statement reflects. The situation at the Queer Resource Center validates the virus model of the spread of woke ideology within organizations. When president Percy sneezed, everyone came down with a case of diversity, equity and inclusion.
Anyone wishing to learn more about Portland State University's Queer Resource Center can visit its site by clicking on this link: https://www.pdx.edu/queer-resource-center/
whoa! I had no idea, although we know that one of the final goals of the gender mafia is to erase LGB. This should make its way into more media outlets, so I encourage you to write and article and send it to Quillette, for example. More people need to know about this.
Though psychologists can be very entertaining - here more Kirby...
'Unexpected Gains: Being Overweight Buffers Asian Americans From Prejudice Against Foreigners
A meta-analysis of these studies revealed that overweight Asian individuals were perceived as significantly more American than normal-weight versions of the same people, whereas this was not true for White, Black, or Latino individuals. A second meta-analysis showed that overweight Asian men were perceived as less likely to be in the United States without documentation than their normal-weight counterparts'
...they are moving into the censorship world at scale. I guess not just because there is a ton of gov funding there (Trump! Populists! Climate denial! Russia! China!) but also because they believe in their work's benefits for society.
crows about some new 'how to influence people who don't think right' paper every week. (And to be honest those papers also typically discuss the difficulty to make the preferred changes last. In fact, there seem to be people who resist them completely).
Their objective in their own words: 𝐩𝐬𝐲𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐢𝐧𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐞 𝐯𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 against wrongthink. That they are writing a sequel to 1984 doesn't occur to them at all, they believe they are preventing 1984 from becoming reality. But they don't seem too concerned with who vaccinates the vaccinators. I guess the morally healthy simply know they don't need a shot.
A few weeks ago i asked a professor of finance, who is also very interested in applying the efforts of the psychology field to 'shield' people from disinfo, who the 'vulnerable audiences' in need of psychological inoculation were. Basically every answer he gave was typed dodgeball. https://tinyurl.com/58wpack5
Another commenter began her answer with acknowledging that anybody can be influenced but she then narrowed it down to 'gut thinkers, lower digital literacy, age, etc.' I am pretty sure 'etc' doesn't include 'academics on the right side of history'.
The first instance of redefining a word in the legal sense, that I am aware of, was the word marriage. It was a big deal back then and was, in my opinion, the reason it took so long to legalize civil unions between same sex couples. Had they been okay with “civil union” instead of redefining marriage to include same sex couples, it would have happened much quicker.
Ever since then, they went wild redefining words (racism, woman) and then redefining history (1619). And where did “protected class” come from?
I too would be interested in a legal scholar explaining the origin and meaning of "protected class" and also there's a legal term "suspect class" which I think is related but I don't think synonymous.
I was curious about protected class so I looked into it. What I found was that it refers to group classifications (I.e. sex, race, religion, etc.) which is not how a lot of people use it. People will say that they are part of a protected class, such as women, minorities, LGBTQ. That is incorrect.
The law states that people cannot be discriminated against based on sex, race, religion, etc. so basically we are all part of a protected class. Companies cannot discriminate against men or women, Catholics or Jews, gays or straights.
oh, you were talking about the factual errors? thought you were one of those "1776 project" people, my bad. so instead you're saying getting a historical fact wrong is "redefining history"...yes?
Why are you attacking the messenger? If you don’t believe me, go do a little research of your own. Attacking me in the comments section of someone’s substack serves no purpose whatsoever.
To provide a personal context, I have been in industry since I earned my Ph.D. in engineering over 40 years ago, but have always viewed myself as somewhat of an applied academic.
I had a reasonable amount of respect for the social sciences 40 / 50 years ago, but even then thought that to much of the work tended towards idealism and not accuracy and realism. But in my opinion, the reason for funding work in the social sciences is to gather insights to provide guidance for better policy. This requires that the work be accurate and reproducible, which appears to be increasingly rare. And in particular, there is no justification whatsoever to supporting scholarship whose entire purpose is justification for some particular ideology or value system.
As you might guess, I find little reason to support much of the social sciences at this point and my view of the current generation of studies in the humanities isn't much higher. I look at the psychologists discussion of manliness over the past few decades and have concluded that Kipling had his limitations, but I much prefer his suscinct prescription in his poem 'IF.
Here's another indicator/manifestation of social justice lunacy for the Latent Variable Model: Queer Hegemony.
In an era when progressives demand that we celebrate diversity, progressive queerdom is rapidly going about erasing gay men, lesbians and bisexuals. In progressive circles, it's queer this and queer that all the time. To show they're with it, the squares in mainstream media are queering everything that was formerly lavender. And at Portland State University's Queer Resource Center, gay, lesbian and bisexual students do not exist.
I hold a particular animus towards the woke variety of queer that prevails at my university's version of what is known on other campuses as the LGBTQ center. (I am a gay senior citizen taking break from a post-bac degree program at Portland State University "PSU".)
You see, Portland State University's Queer Resource Center (QRC) recognizes only two populations and constituencies: Queer and Trans. The words "gay" and "lesbian" are not to be found in the Queer Resource Center's mission statement. In fact, unless my repeated searches missed it, the word "gay" appears on the QRC's site only when citing unaffiliated outside organizations' use of the word.
As if that weren't bad enough, the QRC's politics are stridently woke:
"OUR PURPOSE The Queer Resource Center supports queer and trans students at Portland State University to achieve their educational goals through advocacy, community, and celebration. The Queer Resource Center prioritizes a racial justice framework to improve campus climate through education, policy change, and campus-wide organizing. "
"OUR VISION The Queer Resource Center strives to provide students with the support they need to persist to graduation through increasing equity and access for queer and trans students at Portland State University." https://www.pdx.edu/queer-resource-center/
It is expected that a good Portland State University queer will model the values of diversity, inclusion, equity and anti-racism. Its activities calendar is a festival of intersectional racial, ethnic and gender identity group culture.
If you're BIPOC and trans - or, better yet, both - well, the QRC is your home away from home. You’ll look in vain for a gay men’s board game night.
When I complained to the QRC about its erasure of gay men, lesbians and bisexuals, the reply as good as admitted that the queer hegemony was intentional. In any case, they added, everyone there was fine with it. If I didn't like it, why, they even provided a helpful link to the complaint form.
It is deplorable that PSU’s only official organization for what used to be known as sexual minorities does not recognize or accommodate the university's mainstream gay, lesbian and bisexual students. That the QRC has so thoroughly embraced the leftist ideology of wokeness is unconscionable. It's as if PSU's French club expected students to support the ideology of Marine Le Pen and organized its programming around it.
Still, what else can one expect at a university whose past president declared that his "highest priority is sustaining and amplifying [the school's] commitment to racial justice"? That's what PSU's ex-president Steven Percy, a generic-looking middle-aged white guy, announced more than three years ago.
During his tenure, the very first item on the list of strategic priorities of the Office of President was "Acting on Equity and Racial Justice."
This meant: "We are fighting racism and advancing social justice across our campus by applying an antiracist lens to everything we do, measuring our progress and holding each other to account. We are taking steps to ensure success for all students, more equitable working conditions and an environment where people feel safe, belong, and prosper.”
PSU’s new president has revised the web page where that text appears. It remains to be seen whether she will repudiate the illiberal ideology the statement reflects. The situation at the Queer Resource Center validates the virus model of the spread of woke ideology within organizations. When president Percy sneezed, everyone came down with a case of diversity, equity and inclusion.
Anyone wishing to learn more about Portland State University's Queer Resource Center can visit its site by clicking on this link: https://www.pdx.edu/queer-resource-center/
whoa! I had no idea, although we know that one of the final goals of the gender mafia is to erase LGB. This should make its way into more media outlets, so I encourage you to write and article and send it to Quillette, for example. More people need to know about this.
My word that was good. Nailed it.
Another great article! The very short version: Diversity is a Motte and Bailey doctrine, mostly constructed by Humpty Dumptying.
Though psychologists can be very entertaining - here more Kirby...
'Unexpected Gains: Being Overweight Buffers Asian Americans From Prejudice Against Foreigners
A meta-analysis of these studies revealed that overweight Asian individuals were perceived as significantly more American than normal-weight versions of the same people, whereas this was not true for White, Black, or Latino individuals. A second meta-analysis showed that overweight Asian men were perceived as less likely to be in the United States without documentation than their normal-weight counterparts'
...they are moving into the censorship world at scale. I guess not just because there is a ton of gov funding there (Trump! Populists! Climate denial! Russia! China!) but also because they believe in their work's benefits for society.
Their language is straight out creepy. This Oxford prof's LI thread https://tinyurl.com/3ru7v43j
crows about some new 'how to influence people who don't think right' paper every week. (And to be honest those papers also typically discuss the difficulty to make the preferred changes last. In fact, there seem to be people who resist them completely).
Their objective in their own words: 𝐩𝐬𝐲𝐜𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐢𝐧𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐞 𝐯𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 against wrongthink. That they are writing a sequel to 1984 doesn't occur to them at all, they believe they are preventing 1984 from becoming reality. But they don't seem too concerned with who vaccinates the vaccinators. I guess the morally healthy simply know they don't need a shot.
A few weeks ago i asked a professor of finance, who is also very interested in applying the efforts of the psychology field to 'shield' people from disinfo, who the 'vulnerable audiences' in need of psychological inoculation were. Basically every answer he gave was typed dodgeball. https://tinyurl.com/58wpack5
Another commenter began her answer with acknowledging that anybody can be influenced but she then narrowed it down to 'gut thinkers, lower digital literacy, age, etc.' I am pretty sure 'etc' doesn't include 'academics on the right side of history'.
The first instance of redefining a word in the legal sense, that I am aware of, was the word marriage. It was a big deal back then and was, in my opinion, the reason it took so long to legalize civil unions between same sex couples. Had they been okay with “civil union” instead of redefining marriage to include same sex couples, it would have happened much quicker.
Ever since then, they went wild redefining words (racism, woman) and then redefining history (1619). And where did “protected class” come from?
I too would be interested in a legal scholar explaining the origin and meaning of "protected class" and also there's a legal term "suspect class" which I think is related but I don't think synonymous.
I was curious about protected class so I looked into it. What I found was that it refers to group classifications (I.e. sex, race, religion, etc.) which is not how a lot of people use it. People will say that they are part of a protected class, such as women, minorities, LGBTQ. That is incorrect.
The law states that people cannot be discriminated against based on sex, race, religion, etc. so basically we are all part of a protected class. Companies cannot discriminate against men or women, Catholics or Jews, gays or straights.
Seems protected class has been redefined now too.
wait sorry are you saying studying things that happened in the year 1619 is "redefining history"
Not at all. I’m referring to “The 1619 Project” which contains many incorrect assertions and false claims.
oh, you were talking about the factual errors? thought you were one of those "1776 project" people, my bad. so instead you're saying getting a historical fact wrong is "redefining history"...yes?
Why are you attacking the messenger? If you don’t believe me, go do a little research of your own. Attacking me in the comments section of someone’s substack serves no purpose whatsoever.
attacking? did i say something to offend you?
To provide a personal context, I have been in industry since I earned my Ph.D. in engineering over 40 years ago, but have always viewed myself as somewhat of an applied academic.
I had a reasonable amount of respect for the social sciences 40 / 50 years ago, but even then thought that to much of the work tended towards idealism and not accuracy and realism. But in my opinion, the reason for funding work in the social sciences is to gather insights to provide guidance for better policy. This requires that the work be accurate and reproducible, which appears to be increasingly rare. And in particular, there is no justification whatsoever to supporting scholarship whose entire purpose is justification for some particular ideology or value system.
As you might guess, I find little reason to support much of the social sciences at this point and my view of the current generation of studies in the humanities isn't much higher. I look at the psychologists discussion of manliness over the past few decades and have concluded that Kipling had his limitations, but I much prefer his suscinct prescription in his poem 'IF.