Connect with us

Education

‘Academic’ journal editor Roberto Refinetti tries to explain why they published absurd hoax papers, fails miserably

Published

on

An under-reported story last year revealed multiple “academic” journals, where only the highest levels of academic thought leadership is allowed to publish, put nonsense hoax articles in their publications simply because they perpetuated radical progressive thought. These peer-reviewed journals were willing to publish utter garbage as long as the garbage smelled like the hyper-leftist garbage they normally publish anyway.

Libertarian pundit John Stossel tried to interview the editors of these prestigious journals which were hoaxed, and was only able to find one willing to go on camera. Roberto Refinetti from the academic journal Sexuality and Culture came on air to discuss the hoax and the problems with academic journals. But even he was unable to come up with a valid response about why these journals were so easy to fool.

Stossel read some of the reviews from “experts” in the field that were used to determine whether or not the papers should be published. When Stossel noted that one of the reviewers was an idiot, Refinetti rushed to the defense by blaming the hoaxers and said, “They made up data that he or she [the reviewer] wished he had but he didn’t, so when he sees, ‘Wow, these people did this study that I wanted to do and they got the results that I thought should be there, this is great!'”

In other words, Refinetti came to the same conclusion as the hoaxers and Stossel: Some if not most of those who review these papers make their decision based on whether or not the conclusions fit their worldview, not whether or not the papers were actually correct.

This is just one of many examples of why leftist academia, which is the vast majority of all academia, operates with the sole goal of reinforcing their biases rather than informing students or giving the education system proper facts about the world.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Advertisement
Click to comment

Culture and Religion

PragerU’s Will Witt informs UCSD students Che Guevara was fiercely against LGBTQ

Published

on

PragerUs Will Witt informs UCSD students Che Guevara was fiercely against LGBTQ

Cuban Revolutionary Che Guevara imprisoned and murdered many homosexuals in his days fighting the “good fight” that so many progressives seem to admire. This fact of his history seems to have been wiped from the general progressive consciousness. Today, the University of California in San Diego even has a “Che Cafe” that is supposed to be a safe space in honor of the socialist icon.

Members of the LGBTQ endorsing violently homophobic Che Guevara is like African-Americans endorsing Planned Parenthood’s racist founder, Margaret Sanger. And the left wonders why conservatives often label them ignorant hypocrites.

PragerU’s Will Witt went on campus to get some perspectives from students. Surprisingly, very few actually knew much about their Marxist icon. They recognized his face from T-shirts and even professed to “love him,” but seemed oblivious to his actual history.

If it’s on a T-shirt worn by progressives, it must be safe-space-approved, right?

We’re at a point in history when a post-truth society seems inevitable. But that doesn’t give us license to stop trying, stop fighting, or stop educating budding leftists. There’s plenty of work to be done.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Study: 96.9% of straight people uninterested in dating transgenders

Published

on

Study 969 of straight people uninterested in dating transgenders

An column by Psychology Today lamented about the findings of a study published in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships titled “Transgender exclusion from the world of dating: Patterns of acceptance and rejection of hypothetical trans dating partners as a function of sexual and gender identity.” found that 96.9% of straight people do not include transgenders in their hypothetical dating pool. the study asked:

“Regardless of your current relationship status, imagine for a moment that at some point in the future you were to find yourself single and looking. Under such hypothetical circumstances, which of the following people would you consider as a potential dating partner:

  • a cisgender woman
  • a cisgender man
  • a transgender woman
  • a transgender man
  • a person with a non-binary gender identification”

Evidently, the results weren’t good for trangenders. Karen L. Blair, the researcher behind the study, noted that only 3.1% of straight people were willing to date a trans person, which means only 3.1% of straight people think you can date a transgender and still be straight or are willing to engage in a situation that is technically heterosexual but homosexual according to politically correctness ie(man dating a girl that thinks she’s a man). Another way to word this is that 96.9% of straight people only want to date the opposite gender. Another way to look at this is a straight person willing to date a transgender person is over two standard deviations away from the average. People under the gay umbrella were only included transgenders in their dating pool only 55% of the time. Men who identify as women were the least favored according to the study. Karen Blair lets on that the results were more “disappointing” than she anticipated.

Indeed, nearly 20% fewer people indicated an interest in trans women than would have been expected based on the sexual identities of the individuals within the sample.

Need For More Education

The intentions of the study were made clear in Blair’s column in Psychology Today. She wants to actively improve dating prospects for transgenders. This study was performed with SJW intentions.

One reason for this may be that individuals with queer or bisexual sexual orientations are already looking beyond gender in many ways when selecting a person to date.

The tone of this sentence reads as though progress has been made by homosexuals, but Blair continues by trivializing procreation, employing gnosticism, and pulling the hate card.

The published study did not ask participants for the reasons behind their responses, so future research is needed in order to understand more about what leads to inclusion or exclusion. For example, some may only want to date people whom they can procreate with, others may not fully understand what a trans identity means or entails within a dating relationship, and some may simply hold negative views towards the transgender community.

Overall, it would appear that the most important step moving forward in terms of increasing the dating prospects for transgender and non-binary individuals is improving general knowledge and understanding concerning the diversity of gender identities and what each identity means. Furthermore, increasing accurate media representations of trans and non-binary people, as well as finding ways to increase contact may also be promising, as other research has found that contact with, and additional knowledge about, transgender individuals can effectively reduce trans prejudice.

The goal of the study seems to have been to demonstrate a need to educate people on transgenderism.

Worldviews and Logical Conclusions

Despite media blitzkrieg and pride months, straight people and almost half of gay people are unconvinced by transgenderism. If people believed that a man can be a woman trapped in man’s body, then that person would believe they are still straight if they fornicate with said person. Therefore the proportion of straight people who would include transgenders in their dating pool should align with the portion of the sample that has a stated affirmation of transgenderism. But this is not the case because people, if they say they believe in transgenderism, aren’t willing to take their own beliefs to their logical conclusions.

It’s the same as sanctuary cities not wanting to accept illegal immigrants. All the media and academic promotion only in the world, and 96.9% of straight people still don’t really believe in transgenderism.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Education

Harvard rescinds admission for Parkland survivor Kyle Kashuv

Published

on

Harvard rescinds admission for Parkland survivor Kyle Kashuv

Being accepted for admission into Harvard University takes excellent grades, top test scores, strong extra-curricular activities, and recommendations by influential people. Having that admission rescinded takes irresponsible Tweets by a 16-year-old.

That’s the case for Kyle Kashuv, a survivor of the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Florida. After being accepted to Harvard with plans on attending this fall, the person labeled by some on the left as the “Parkland provocateur” received a letter from the university rescinding his invitation to attend.

Did 16-year-old Kashuv make mistakes by being cultural insensitive, even outright racist? Yes. But as he pointed out in his Twitter thread, the posts he made were the mistakes of someone before experiencing the massacre of his classmates. Things are different, now. He’s different. Everyone at his school is different.

The message Harvard is sending is a belief that someone qualified to go to their school who receives public backlash for stupid actions when they were younger are irredeemable. What Kashuv did is likely no different or even less severe than many who are or will be attending Harvard. But the others weren’t at the scene of the infamous shooting. They weren’t brought into the spotlight where their pasts were scrutinized. Perhaps most importantly, they probably aren’t the type of common sense gun rights activists Kashuv is.

That last point, which rubbed so many progressives wrong since the shooting, is likely a contributing factor in Harvard’s decision.

In a follow up Tweet, Kashuv posted this:

So what now? I’m figuring it out. I had given up huge scholarships in order to go to Harvard, and the deadline for accepting other college offers has ended. I’m exploring all options at the moment.

For complete transparency, I’m not fan of Harvard’s. Perhaps it’s because I’m Asian; Harvard doesn’t like Asians.

It would be different if they never accepted him in the first place, but accepting him and then rescinding is poor form. He made mistakes. He has apologized. He has grown. Harvard should let him in.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending