Leftist Pseudo-Intellectuals Peer-Review and Publish Hoax Study

[Timsup2nothin]

from my experience the majority of the so called "alt right" community aren't proper fascists, but rather bored conservatives or centrists online-LARPing as hardcore national socialists, fascists, "race realists" or similiar labels.

It's a mental illness.

Irresistible quote mining in an otherwise dead thread.

 

[RomanKing]

certainly, there is a very wide range of human behaviors that are dictated and/or influenced greatly by biology. However, most all clinical mental disorders are considered so when they affect the individual's ability to function in society....so, what is considered a mental illness is essentially decided by the society in which you live

No. Mental illness does exist and it's not a "social construct." Schizophrenia, for example isn't a social construct.

The left is now doing with science, what they have done to ethics with their "moral relativism." There are such a thing as right and wrong, just as much as there's science and pseudo-science.

A really sickening and bizarre example where these two leftists thoughts converge is the left's postmodernist view of pedophilia. Due to their relativist debasement of both science and morals, radical leftists claim that pedophilia is not only a genuine sexual orientation, but they go further, to assert that pedophiles should not be discriminated against for their sexual urges. This is utterly and completely disgusting.

Here's a story that was posted on the Far-Left website Salon:

still, isn't it somewhat presumptuous to assume that female warriors were lesbian or transgendered?

It's called pseudo-science and it's Cultural Marxism.

 

[Perfection]

A really sickening and bizarre example where these two leftists thoughts converge is the left's postmodernist view of pedophilia. Due to their relativist degeneration of both science and morals, radical leftists claim that pedophilia is not only a genuine sexual orientation, but they go further, to assert that pedophiles should not be discriminated against for their sexual urges. This is utterly and completely disgusting.

If someone claims to have sexual attraction to minors and seeks treatment so as not to act on those attractions, then we should respect their intention to do the right thing. Dehumanizing people and treating them as monsters is going to push them farther on the margins and make them more likely to offend.

 

[Ryika]

If someone claims to have sexual attraction to minors and seeks treatment so as not to act on those attractions, then we should respect their intention to do the right thing.

Agreed. Not only for the person, but also because it probably yields better results to have people who feel that way get psychiatric help, than shaming them and leaving them alone with their urges.

However, that's not at all how Salon treated this thing. That pedophile doesn't want treatment, he wants to be around kids, and even argues that because of his urges, he is better suited for caring for children, and Salon didn't challenge that narrative at all in their coverage, they depicted him as if he made total sense, in the videos as well in the articles that have since been deleted.

So as much as I hate agreeing with RomanKing, those articles were indeed pretty sickening.

 

[RomanKing]

If someone claims to have sexual attraction to minors and seeks treatment so as not to act on those attractions, then we should respect their intention to do the right thing. Dehumanizing people and treating them as monsters is going to push them farther on the margins and make them more likely to offend.

You can't treat a pedophile and they are monsters. They are also among the highest rates of recidivism (repeat offending).

Not only this, but Salon and other far-left groups go further. They claim that the sexual urges of pedophiles should not be looked upon any differently than normal, healthy, sexual attraction between an adult man and woman, otherwise it's discrimination. They also state that sexual orientation and sexual desire is simply a "social construct" and society is not in a position to determine which sexual urges are healthy and which are not.

 

[Ajidica]

I would dread to know your thoughts on homosexuals.

Either way, good job derailing your own thread! I guess you weren't all that interesting in talking about the academic publishing process.

 

[Perfection]

You can't treat a pedophile and they are monsters. They are also among the highest rates of recidivism (repeat offending).

The recidivism rate is based on repeat offending not on never offending. The man in the video never offended so therefore doesn't count toward recidivism rate.

Should that man be locked up? He has committed no crime, and I don't think he is likely to.

Not only this, but Salon and other far-left groups go further. They claim that the sexual urges of pedophiles should not be looked upon any differently than normal, healthy, sexual attraction between an adult man and woman, otherwise it's discrimination. They state that sexual orientation and sexual desire is simply a "social construct" and society is not in a position to determine which sexual urges are healthy and which are not.

I'm not going to get into a protracted semantic debate, but what I will point out that practically no liberals believe that pedophiles should be allowed to act out on their urges.

 

[RomanKing]

Either way, good job derailing your own thread! I guess you weren't all that interesting in talking about the academic publishing process.

Au contraire, this all has everything to do with Gender "Studies" and postmodernist liberal pseudo-intellectualism in academia.

 

[Perfection]

Au contraire, this all has everything to do with Gender "Studies" and postmodernist liberal pseudo-intellectualism in academia.

Dude, you only say that because you want to spew your brand of baloney. You're not anti baloney.

 

[RomanKing]

The recidivism rate is based on repeat offending not on never offending. The man in the video never offended so therefore doesn't count toward recidivism rate.

Should that man be locked up? He has committed no crime, and I don't think he is likely to.

I never made the claim he was convicted of a crime, but when he does offend/get caught, I'm sure he'll get locked up and some liberal apologist like yourself will try and tell everyone that:

If someone claims to have sexual attraction to minors and seeks treatment so as not to act on those attractions, then we should respect their intention to do the right thing. Dehumanizing people and treating them as monsters is going to push them farther on the margins and make them more likely to offend.

Then he'll be let out on parole to molest and ruin the lives of more underage girls and boys.

Should that man be locked up? He has committed no crime, and I don't think he is likely to.

You'll probably say nearly the same thing after he's convicted and released from prison, except then you'll be saying "and I don't think he's likely to re-offend."

 

[Ajidica]

Au contraire, this all has everything to do with Gender "Studies" and postmodernist liberal pseudo-intellectualism in academia.

Yes, because saying that transgender people don't exist and discussing how the criminal justice system should handle pedophiles who are seeking help seems quite relevant to a thread about the peer review process in academic publishing.

Then he'll be let out on parole to molest and ruin the lives of more underage girls and boys.

Didn't the alt-right queen Milo Yian-whateverhisnameis say pedophilia can be a good thing?

No, no, no. You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means,” Mr. Yiannopoulos says on the tape, in which he is talking to radio hosts in a video chat. “Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13 years old who is sexually mature. Pedophilia is attraction to children who have not reached puberty,” he adds, dismissing the fact that 13-year-olds are children.

The notion of consent, he says, is “arbitrary and oppressive.”

At one point in the video, an unknown speaker says that the behavior being defended by Mr. Yiannopoulos is akin to molestation by Catholic priests. Mr. Yiannopoulos responds, in an ironic tone, by crediting a priest for having helped develop his sexual technique.

Why yes, yes he did.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/20/us/politics/cpac-milo-yiannopoulos.html?_r=0

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

Au contraire, this all has everything to do with Gender "Studies" and postmodernist liberal pseudo-intellectualism in academia.

hey pro tip putting quotes around ideas you don't like doesn't debunk them

 

[RomanKing]

Yes, because saying that transgender people don't exist and discussing how the criminal justice system should handle pedophiles who are seeking help seems quite relevant to a thread about the peer review process in academic publishing.

Looks like you missed this part:

No. Mental illness does exist and it's not a "social construct." Schizophrenia, for example isn't a social construct.

The left is now doing with science, what they have done to ethics with their "moral relativism." There are such a thing as right and wrong, just as much as there's science and pseudo-science.

A really sickening and bizarre example where these two leftists thoughts converge is the left's postmodernist view of pedophilia. Due to their relativist debasement of both science and morals, radical leftists claim that pedophilia is not only a genuine sexual orientation, but they go further, to assert that pedophiles should not be discriminated against for their sexual urges. This is utterly and completely disgusting.
.

Feel free to join the discussion anytime.

 

[RomanKing]

Didn't the alt-right queen Milo Yian-whateverhisnameis say pedophilia can be a good thing?

Why yes, yes he did.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/20/us/politics/cpac-milo-yiannopoulos.html?_r=0

Yes, he sure did and there's also a very strong link between homosexuality and sexual abuse as a minor.

Milo Yiannopoulos was sexually abused as a minor by a pedophile.

 

[Perfection]

I never made the claim he was convicted of a crime, but when he does offend/get caught, I'm sure he'll get locked up and some liberal apologist like yourself will try and tell everyone that:



Then he'll be let out on parole to molest and ruin the lives of more underage girls and boys.



You'll probably say nearly the same thing after he's convicted and released from prison, except then you'll be saying "and I don't think he's likely to re-offend."

If he were to offend I would not not say such things.

Please don't assume you know how I think, because you've clearly demonstrated yourself incapable.

 

[mrt144]

I don't see discussion, I see you making assertions.

 

[Ajidica]

Well, I tried to join the discussion by providing a list of academic journals you could submit hoax articles to in order to test your theory regarding intellectual dishonesty in academic publishing, but that went nowhere when you decided you were more interested in pedos that academic publishing.

 

[mrt144]

Well, I tried to join the discussion by providing a list of academic journals you could submit hoax articles to in order to test your theory regarding intellectual dishonesty in academic publishing, but that went nowhere when you decided you were more interested in pedos that academic publishing.

Wonder what that's about.

 

[RomanKing]

Well, I tried to join the discussion by providing a list of academic journals you could submit hoax articles to in order to test your theory regarding intellectual dishonesty in academic publishing, but that went nowhere when you decided you were more interested in pedos that academic publishing.

Ordering someone to write and submit a hoax paper for publishing is not only an unreasonable demand, but I fail to see how it contributes to the discussion at all, much less your recent off-topic posts. I'm sure we would all appreciate it if you tried to remain on-topic.

Now here's an interesting read on how the liberal bias in academia is killing the social sciences.

"I am speaking with a professional academic who is a liberal. The subject of the underrepresentation of conservatives in academia comes up. My interlocutor admits that this is indeed a reality, but says the reason why conservatives are underrepresented in academia is because they don't want to be there, or they're just not smart enough to cut it. I say: "That's interesting. For which other underrepresented groups do you think that's true?" An uncomfortable silence follows.

I point this out not to score culture-war points, but because it's actually a serious problem. Social sciences and humanities cannot be completely divorced from the philosophy of those who practice it. And groupthink causes some questions not to be asked, and some answers not to be overly scrutinized. It is making our science worse. Anyone who cares about the advancement of knowledge and science should care about this problem.

That's why I was very gratified to read this very enlightening draft paper written by a number of social psychologists on precisely this topic, attacking the lack of political diversity in their profession and calling for reform. For those who have the time and care about academia, the whole thing truly makes for enlightening reading. The main author of the paper is Jonathan Haidt, well known for his Moral Foundations Theory (and a self-described liberal, if you care to know)."

http://theweek.com/articles/441474/how-academias-liberal-bias-killing-social-science

 

[Ajidica]

Ordering someone to write and submit a hoax paper for publishing is not only an unreasonable demand, but I fail to see how it contributes to the discussion at all, much less your recent off-topic posts.

I was also noting with those posts the vast numbers of highly rigorous academic publishing journals; highlighting how your assertion that intellectual dishonesty in one deplorable pay-to-publish online "journal" is in any way applicable to the wider realm of academic publishing runs into some pretty severe empirical brick walls.

As far as off topic goes, I wasn't the one who has the unnatural fixation on pedos. You chose to drive the thread into the ditch rather than accept that gender studies is used by serious historians in understanding the distribution of grave goods in furnished inhumations in areas under Merovignian Frankish control.