Gender studies hoax exposes leftist ideologies

[Dill]

(05-26-2017, 09:49 AM)TVlad Wrote: The male penis causes climate change.

A never should have been published "paper" comprised of unintelligible strings of words actually gets published.

We conclude that penises are not best understood as the male sexual organ, or as a male reproductive organ, but instead as an enacted social construct that is both damaging and problematic for society and future generations. The conceptual penis presents significant problems for gender identity and reproductive identity within social and family dynamics, is exclusionary to disenfranchised communities based upon gender or reproductive identity, is an enduring source of abuse for women and other gender-marginalized groups and individuals, is the universal performative source of rape, and is the conceptual driver behind much of climate change.

You read that right. We argued that climate change is “conceptually” caused by penises. How do we defend that assertion? Like this:

If not exposed as a hoax, this would make perfect sense to liberals The penis causes climate change, and climate change causes terrorism.
How the hoax was conducted:
http://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/conceptual-penis-social-contruct-sokal-style-hoax-on-gender-studies/

These authors aren't representing their own work correctly. Their "hoax" paper uses the term "penis" as the label of a CONCEPT, hypermasculinity, not the actual male organ. Then they argued that hypermascunlinity drives competitive capitalism, which is not that hard to connect to climate change. So they aren't really arguing that penises cause climate change.

The hoax is itself a kind of hoax, designed more to confirm suspicions of people who don't know much about gender studies and can't read some of the work in that area because of the dense jargon--and to do so without the authors demonstrating themselves that they know what they are talking about.