A mediados de agosto, cultura 3.0 publicaba un comentario breve titulado "¿Están sesgados los 'estudios de género'?", en el que se ofrecía una breve acotación sobre dos hechos de naturaleza muy diferente, que ilustran las peculiaridades de las "ciencias sociales" en tiempos regidos por la posmodernidad, el posestructuralismo y sus corrientes afines y derivadas:
"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.
An explicit isomorphic relationship exists between the conceptual penis and the most problematic
themes in toxic masculinity, and that relationship is mediated by the machismo braggadocio aspect
of male hypermasculine thought and performance. A change in our discourses in science, technology,
policy, economics, society, and various communities is needed to protect marginalized groups,
promote the advancement of women, trans, and gender-queer individuals (including non-gendered
and gender-skeptical people), and to remedy environmental impacts that follow from climate
change driven by capitalist and neocapitalist overreliance on hypermasculine themes and exploitative
utilization of fossil fuels."
Resumiendo: el pene —por supuesto, conceptual— es el responsable de todos los males que afectan a la sociedad de nuestros día, incluido, por supuesto, el cambio climático.
Por una vez y sin que sirva de precedente, prefiero no hacer un comentario amplio que sería redundante desde las veces que me he referido, directa o indirectamente, al "asunto Sokal"; además, desde los enlaces ofrecidos sería innecesario.
- 1. El artículo de Therese Söderlund y Guy Madison, de la universidad de Umeå y publicado en la revista Scientometrics, 105 (3); p. 1347-1387 (2015) que fue desarrollado en dos textos más de 2016 y 2017, a su vez, editados en The Scientist (Philadelphia, Pa.). Con metodología casi matemática, en ellos se ponen de manifiesto los sesgos ideológicos (acientíficos) apreciables en los trabajos académicos suecos sobre cuestiones de género.
- 2. El "escándalo" al estilo Sokal generado por la publicación de un artículo de argumentos absurdos y surrealistas firmado por Jamie Lindsay y Peter Boyle (en realidad, James Lindsey y Peter Boghossian) y titulado "El pene conceptual como construcción social", en Cogent OA Social Sciences (2017), 3. El "trabajo" llegaba a las siguientes conclusiones:
"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.
An explicit isomorphic relationship exists between the conceptual penis and the most problematic
themes in toxic masculinity, and that relationship is mediated by the machismo braggadocio aspect
of male hypermasculine thought and performance. A change in our discourses in science, technology,
policy, economics, society, and various communities is needed to protect marginalized groups,
promote the advancement of women, trans, and gender-queer individuals (including non-gendered
and gender-skeptical people), and to remedy environmental impacts that follow from climate
change driven by capitalist and neocapitalist overreliance on hypermasculine themes and exploitative
utilization of fossil fuels."
Peter Boghossian. Imagen tomada de Skeptic |
Por una vez y sin que sirva de precedente, prefiero no hacer un comentario amplio que sería redundante desde las veces que me he referido, directa o indirectamente, al "asunto Sokal"; además, desde los enlaces ofrecidos sería innecesario.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario