You'll already be aware of the "Academic Grievance studies scandal" which, to anybody who has been paying attention to mainstream culture in the past few years, is basically the social justice academia being embarrassed yet again. This scandal is providing some good evidence of what we already knew, that people working in the social justice arena are not intelligent, their work is a sham and their PhDs are false awards. They are not called professor for being intelligent, knowledgeable or capable of providing anything useful to modern research. They are given it to meet diversity quotas. They are given these titles to shut them up. They are awarded these PhDs to quiet their shouts of misogyny.
Respected independent magazine Quillette has published a set of responses to this Sokal affair 2.0 from academics in various fields. It is a worthwhile read for the entire article. However for this post I want to look at one response in particular which is very relevant to the recent quarantining of TRP. For context, our quarantine is due to a claim of "misogyny" which is thrown quite calmly around without any specifics. Backed by the academic idea of positive masculinity endorsed by what is acceptable to feminist academics. We have not adhered to that, so we must be punished. Except... there's a very interesting statement regarding the school of thought we refuse to adhere to in this response piece.
Neven Sesardic is a Croatian philosopher who has taught philosophy at universities in Croatia, the United States, Japan, England, and Hong Kong.
One cannot properly judge this new (multiple) version of the Sokal affair before studying the fake articles that were part of the project conducted by Lindsay, Boghossian, and Pluckrose.
Among all these submitted papers mixing “absurdities and morally fashionable political ideas” the project collaborators single out the article that was accepted by the journal Hypatia (A Journal of Feminist Philosophy) as their most important success. Indeed, kudos to them. Yet the reader should know that it is a carefully guarded secret in philosophy that feminist philosophy is often not characterized by intellectual rigor and high academic standards. (The secret is so well-guarded, though, that many philosophers do not dare to admit even to themselves to know it, let alone express it publicly.) So Hypatia was a logical and easy choice for the attempt to place a fake paper in one of the well-known philosophy journals.
Emphasis mine. It is an open secret that the feminists have been given a seat at the table despite the fact everybody knows their ramblings are unworthy of giving even slight consideration. I wonder why they did that? And I wonder why they keep it a secret that they all know these feminists are spouting illogical nonsense? Might it be a cry of misogyny that they are trying to stay away from? That perhaps holds weight as an accusation even when it is being applied incorrectly? Are we living in a society where terms like sexist and racist are flung about with great abandon, applied incorrectly on a regular basis, simply as a manner of smearing political or ideological opponents who won't fall in line with your religious doctrine? I do not answer these questions but leave them for you to consider. Let us continue to the example evidence that Neven provides:
Occasionally, however, unintentional absurdities of feminist thinking have crept into much better philosophical journals than Hypatia. A good example is an article from the Australasian Journal of Philosophy in which a feminist describes a “phallic drama” involving two statements, p and ~p (the negation of p):
There is really only one actor, p, and ~p is merely its receptacle. In the representation of the Venn diagram, p penetrates a passive, undifferentiated universal other which is speciﬁed as a lack, which offers no resistance, and whose behavior it controls completely.
Note that this is no longer a Sokal-type hoax but an instance of authentic feminist philosophy. Sometimes it is impossible to tell the difference. For more information about how caving in to feminism damages philosophy as a discipline see the 2014 article co-authored by Rafael De Clercq and me.
(Emphasis for Sesardic's quote from another paper.) Most interesting. It appears that feminist nonsense (and I use the term advisedly because that example is most certainly what Sokal would have referred to as nonsense) is seeping outside of their own little echo chamber despite failing to reach basic academic evidence and theoretical standards.
This is the measurement by which we are judged by reddit to be misogynists. They have openly stated such by linking to show "this is what positive masculinity is" and linking to feminist academia. Academia itself considers it to be nonsense, so I'm relatively confident that the reddit admins are also spouting nonsense in an attempt to appear smart... not unlike these feminism PhD holders.
The Red Pill is the idea that there is forbidden truth. Something going on behind the curtain. When the reddit admin make up a spurious reason to reject any appeal and ban us for this nebulous "misogyny" as defined by their feminism academics, we have yet further proof of our own position. This is a persecution. A witch hunt against those who will not fall in line with the feminist religion and dare to have the heretical thought that men, men's thoughts and men's interests actually matter too.
Register over on TRP.red today unless you wish to have the blue pill forced upon you.