Okay It's a light okay in here I just read my email. We have our first win the dog bark paper has been accepted. They don't know we're about to tell Got to read you something Dear Dr. Helen Wilson I've now closely considered the revisions of your manuscript dog bark and And will recommend its publication in gender place and culture You've done very good work to address the issues Thank you for your contribution to gender place and culture and I hope to be seeing your manuscript imprint Yours truly We Accepting papers in the number one fabulous geography channel since approximately June of 2017 I along with two other concerned academics Peter Bergotian and Helen Pluckrose have been writing intentionally broken Academic papers and submitting them to highly respected journals and fields that study gender race sexuality and similar topics We did this to expose a political corruption that's taken hold of the university By this point several of these papers have been accepted and highly respected journals and one that claims that dog Humping incidents can be taken as evidence of rape culture has been officially honored as excellent scholarship I'm not going to lie to you. We had a lot of fun with this project But don't let that lead you to believe that we're not addressing a serious problem If you have a few minutes, I'll try to explain to be clear up front We think studying topics like gender race and sexuality is worthwhile and getting it right is extremely important The problem is how these topics are being studied right now a Culture has developed in which only certain conclusions are allowed like those that make whiteness and masculinity problematic The fields were concerned about put social grievances ahead of objective truth So as a simple summary we call the problem grievance studies To test the depth of this problem my collaborators and I dedicated ourselves to a one to two-year secret project Targeting top grievance studies journals with an agreement to publicly release our findings no matter what the outcome We started officially on August 16th 2017 and by Thanksgiving we were in trouble We had begun ambitiously and mostly stupidly our first papers were really only suited to test the hypothesis that we could penetrate They're leading journals with poorly researched hoax papers that wasn't the case and we were wrong for thinking we might be able to So by late November it looked like all we'd accomplished is ruining our reputations if this doesn't achieve anything It would actually frighten me We needed to change our approach So we walked back from the hoaxing and began to engage with the existing scholarship in these fields more deeply This led us to learn a lot more about the inner workings of grievance studies The best I can tap into is that there's this kind of like religious architecture in their mind where privilege is Sin privilege is evil and then they've identified education as the place where it has to be fixed So you can come up with these really nasty arguments like what's put white kids in chains in the floor at school as an educational Opportunity and if you frame it in terms of Overcoming privilege and then you you frame their Their resistance that they won't want this to happen to them that they would complain about this If you frame that in terms of oh, they only complain about that because they're privileged and they can't handle it because their privilege made them weak Then it's right in paper started getting in By March with two papers accepted and one published it would be fair to say that we'd become accepted grievance scholars By June it was three with one having been officially honored by the journal as excellent scholarship By July it was five By August seven this shouldn't have been possible So far what we're learning is rather astonishing with the data we've gathered require more analysis to fully comprehend What appears beyond dispute is that making absurd and horrible ideas sufficiently politically fashionable can get them validated at the highest levels of academic grievance studies we rewrote a section of mind comp as intersectional feminism and this journal has accepted it Social work This is deeply concerning because the work of grievance scholars goes on to be taught in classes to design educational curricula To be taken up by activists to influence how media is produced and to misinformed journalists and politicians about the true nature of our cultural realities No one tolerates this sort of corruption when they find out in industry is funding biased research to make itself look a certain way The same scrutiny should apply to research when it pushes a political agenda and we haven't covered enough evidence to suggest that this corruption is pervasive among many disciplines including women's and gender studies feminist studies race studies sexuality studies fat studies queer studies cultural studies and sociology You may be thinking that the work done in these fields must be good because it seems to continue the noble work of the civil rights movement Well after having spent a year immersed in it and becoming recognized as experts in it we have to disagree Grievance studies does not continue the work of the civil rights movements It corrupts it and it trades upon their good names to keep pushing a kind of social snake oil onto a public that keeps getting sicker progress is easier without grievance studies My collaborators and I are left-wing academics who can now say with confidence these people don't speak for us This is now a plea to all the progressives and minority groups these people claim to speak for We suggest you spend some time critically engaging with the ideas coming out of these fields and decide for yourself whether they speak for you you