The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
(Difference between revisions)
| Revision as of 17:45, 22 February 2020 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Current revision Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| {{Template}} | {{Template}} | ||
| - | The '''Grievance studies affair''', also referred to as the "'''Sokal Squared'''" scandal, was the project of a team of three authors—James A. Lindsay, [[Peter Boghossian]], and Helen Pluckrose—to highlight what they regarded as poor scholarship in several academic fields. Taking place over 2017 and 2018, their project entailed submitting bogus [[academic papers]] to [[academic journals]] in [[cultural studies|cultural]], [[Queer studies|queer]], [[Race studies|race]], [[gender studies|gender]], [[Fat acceptance movement#Fat studies|fat]], and sexuality studies to determine if they would pass through [[peer review]] and be accepted for publication. Several of these papers were subsequently published, which the authors cited in support of their contention. | + | "[[The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct]]" (2017) is a faux academic article by Jamie Lindsay and Peter Boyle satirizing [[gender studies]] and [[queer studies]]. |
| - | + | ||
| - | Prior to the affair, various academics had expressed concerns about the intellectual validity of much [[Postmodernism|postmodern]] and [[critical theory]]-influenced research and highlighted this by publishing hoax articles in various journals. One of the most noted examples was [[Alan Sokal]]'s [[Sokal affair|1996 hoax]] in ''[[Social Text]]'', a cultural studies journal. Sokal's hoax influenced Boghossian and Lindsay, who in 2017 published a hoax article stating that penises should be viewed not as male but as [[social construct]]s in the journal ''Cogent Social Sciences''. Joined by Pluckrose, they then decided to repeat the exercise on a broader scale. Their intent was to expose problems in "grievance studies", a term they apply to a subcategory of these academic areas, in which they say "a culture has developed in which only certain conclusions are allowed ... and put social grievances ahead of objective truth." The trio identified as [[Left-wing politics|leftists]] and [[Liberalism|liberals]] and described their project as an attempt to raise awareness at what they believed was the damage that postmodernism and [[identity politics]]-based scholarship was having on leftist political projects. | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | Boghossian, Lindsay, and Pluckrose wrote twenty articles that promoted deliberately absurd ideas or morally questionable acts and submitted them to various peer-reviewed journals. Although they had planned for the project to run until January 2019, the trio admitted the hoax in October 2018 after journalists from ''[[The Wall Street Journal]]'' revealed that Helen Wilson, the purported author of their published article in ''[[Gender, Place & Culture]]'', did not exist. The hoax was then brought to wider attention by media outlets and the trio's documentary of the project, which was uploaded to [[YouTube]]. By the time of the reveal, four of their 20 papers had been published, three had been accepted but not yet published, six had been rejected, and seven were still under review. One of the published papers had won special recognition from the journal that published it. These published articles included arguments that dogs engage in [[rape culture]] and that men could reduce their [[transphobia]] by anally penetrating themselves with [[sex toys]], and a rewrite of [[Adolf Hitler]]'s ''[[Mein Kampf]]'' in [[feminism|feminist]] language. | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | The hoax received a mixed reception within academia. Some academics praised it for exposing flaws that they believed to be widespread among sectors of the [[humanities]] and [[social sciences]] influenced by postmodernism, critical theory, and [[identity politics]]. Others criticised what they saw as the unethical nature of submitting deliberately bogus research; for this reason Boghossian's employer, [[Portland State University]], initiated a misconduct investigation over his involvement in the project. Critics also asserted that the work did not represent a scientific investigation given that the project did not include a [[Treatment and control groups|control group]], further arguing that invalid arguments and poor standards of peer-review were not restricted to "grievance studies" subjects but found across much of academia. | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | == See also == | + | |
| - | * ''[[Fashionable Nonsense]]'' | + | |
| - | * [[Postmodernism Generator]] | + | |
| - | * [[List of scholarly publishing stings]] | + | |
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| {{GFDL}} | {{GFDL}} | ||
Current revision
|
"Anatomical penises may exist, but as pre-operative transgendered women also have anatomical penises, the penis vis-à-vis maleness is an incoherent construct. We argue that the conceptual penis is better understood not as an anatomical organ but as a social construct isomorphic to performative toxic masculinity. Through detailed poststructuralist discursive criticism and the example of climate change, this paper will challenge the prevailing and damaging social trope that penises are best understood as the male sexual organ and reassign it a more fitting role as a type of masculine performance."--"The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct" (2017) by Jamie Lindsay and Peter Boyle |
|
Related e |
|
Featured: |
"The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct" (2017) is a faux academic article by Jamie Lindsay and Peter Boyle satirizing gender studies and queer studies.
Unless indicated otherwise, the text in this article is either based on Wikipedia article "The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct" or another language Wikipedia page thereof used under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License; or on research by Jahsonic and friends. See Art and Popular Culture's copyright notice.
