LGB ErasureExposing The Reality of Transgender Science & Trans Activism | Debra Soh | ACADEMIA | Rubin Report

submitted by notdelusionalbased faggot from self.LGBDropTheT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]GConly 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

This is the first time I've heard the term "left wing science denial"

I'm heavily involved with anthropology and psychology. The left has been getting progressively anti science since about 2000 when it became clear science was just not supporting a lot of Marxist core theory.

For example:

Sex based behaviour differences are mostly down to pre natal hormones. Bang goes the claim institutional sexism is still keeping women out of STEM or killing their pay. Women aren't men.

Class and income: turns out SES is largely derived from your IQ and behaviour, not the other way round.

IQ and behaviour are large down to genetics. The evidence that western poverty lowers IQ is way less compelling that the evidence that it doesn't.

Group differences in IQ have largely been supported by science for decades, and in a few years this one is really going to hit the fan as IQ predictive DNA tests hit the market in a few years.

About 1/3 of millionaires and billionaires have zero financial assistance from family. Turns out hard work and brains (and capitalism) really can improve the lives of the poor.

So there you have it. Men and women are different, SES differences are mostly down to behaviour and genetics. Capitalism works as a way for the industrious to get out of poverty. There are biology based differences that lead to different ethnic outcomes (and most people involved in studying these fields have these opinions).

The upshot of this, if it becomes widely understood by the public, a hard shift to the conservative right/liberal because it's obvious we live in an approximate and reasonably fair meritocracy.

It will ensure Marxist theory never has a chance if being taken seriously or getting a grip on power again.

Literally the only option left to the far left is full on science denial.

This has been helped by the educational system. Govts have decreed a larger percentage need to be shoved through degrees, and provided loans not based on the future earnings the degree would provide.

Only way to pass the lower ability students is easier degrees, and this is where the humanities blossomed.

A lot of these colleges are now sucking money from the teats of 'progressive' (Marxist) NGOs, and have yielded to pressure to install more progressive staff and policies.

And that's how we got to where we are now.

[–]notdelusionalbased faggot[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I imagine many people who identify as being on the left are experiencing a crisis of faith due to the extreme faction's outsized influence over this topic--we see plenty evidence of that here on this sub. A similar thing happened between conservatives and the religious right. So wild how in just a couple of decades the shoe is now on the other foot. If people on the left want to avoid a popular snapback to the hard right, they need to contain these leftist extremists, right now it's doing them a lot of harm in the court of public opinion.

[–]Astrid2448 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

I talked about this in another post, but as someone who has a lot of experience in healthcare and the sciences (entire family is pretty much involved in it, so I grew up around it as well)... this person seems to have a habit of misrepresenting studies. Much of what they’re saying everybody agrees with them on are actually widely debated and actually have a lot of opposition. For example, most psychologists don’t even endorse IQ as a measurement of intelligence (there’s a lot of debate over whether it’s even accurate) and it’s generally agreed that even if it were one, it is only a measure of one form of intelligence. There are quite a few theories on intelligence and none of them have full backing. These types of issues are present with literally every point they just raised. I’m not sure if they’re just unintentionally being biased or if they’re misrepresenting things. Not to mention that apparently the humanities are for stupid people, but their expertise is in the soft sciences that are adjacent to the humanities. My peers in the hard sciences used to take courses in psychology and anthropology to boost their GPA.

I’m really, really tired of science being weaponized by people in these kinds of debates.

[–]notdelusionalbased faggot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Who is "they" you keep referencing? Debra Soh?