Become a backer of Daniel or Jack to get exclusive access to a new bonus episode. Becoming a patron also brings access to all other bonus episodes. This time, we have a general chat taking in the recent antics of Tim Pool, Jimmy Dore, Bret & Heather, etc, before concentrating on the Rittenhouse case, and the trial as it enters its final phase. Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper/posts Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618&fan_landing=true EXTRA Content Warnings for discussion of violence and abuse. Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent.  Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1  

So UATX happened. Dear God I wish stuff would stop happening. Thankfully we got Kristin Rawls and Jeff Eaton from Christian Rightcast to come back to help us talk about it.  * Content Warnings. Podcast Notes: Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent.  Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618 IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1 Christian Rightcast https://rightcast.substack.com/ CHristian Rightcast on Twitter https://twitter.com/crightcast?lang=en Kristin's Twitter https://twitter.com/kristinrawls Jeff's Twitter https://twitter.com/eaton   Show Notes: Pano Kanelos at Bari Weiss's Substack We Can't Wait For Universities to Fix Themselves. So We're Starting a New One The numbers tell the story as well as any anecdote you’ve read in the headlines or heard within your own circles. Nearly a quarter of American academics in the social sciences or humanities endorse ousting a colleague for having a wrong opinion about hot-button issues such as immigration or gender differences. Over a third of conservative academics and PhD students say they had been threatened with disciplinary action for their views. Four out of five American PhD students are willing to discriminate against right-leaning scholars, according to a report by the Center for the Study of Partisanship and Ideology. The picture among undergraduates is even bleaker. In Heterodox Academy’s 2020 Campus Expression Survey, 62% of sampled college students agreed that the climate on their campus prevented students from saying things they believe. Nearly 70% of students favor reporting professors if the professor says something students find offensive, according to a Challey Institute for Global Innovation survey. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education reports at least 491 disinvitation campaigns since 2000. Roughly half were successful. University of Austin Wikipedia The University of Austin website Under "Our principles" Universities devoted to the unfettered pursuit of truth are the cornerstone of a free and flourishing democratic society. For universities to serve their purpose, they must be fully committed to freedom of inquiry, freedom of conscience, and civil discourse. In order to maintain these principles, UATX will be fiercely independent—financially, intellectually, and politically. Under "What Makes UATX Different" A COMMITMENT TO FREEDOM OF INQUIRY We’re reclaiming a place in higher education for freedom of inquiry and civil discourse. Our students and faculty will confront the most vexing questions of human life and civil society. We will create a community of conversation grounded in intellectual humility that respects the dignity of each individual and cultivates a passion for truth. A NEW FINANCIAL MODEL We’re completely rethinking how a university operates by developing a novel financial model. We will lower tuition by avoiding costly administrative excess and overreach. We will focus our resources intensively on academics, rather than amenities. We will align institutional incentives with student outcomes. AN INNOVATIVE CURRICULUM Our curriculum is being designed in partnership not only with the world’s great thinkers but also with its great doers—visionaries who have founded bold ventures, artists and writers of the highest order, pioneers in tech, and the leading lights in engineering and the natural sciences. Students will apply their foundational skills to practical problems in fields such as entrepreneurship, public policy, education, and engineering. Under "Programs" Beginning Summer 2022 The Forbidden Courses Our Forbidden Courses summer program invites top students from other universities to join us for a spirited discussion about the most provocative questions that often lead to censorship or self-censorship in many universities. Students will become proficient and comfortable with productive disagreement. Instructors will range from top professors to accomplished business leaders, journalists, and artists. Beginning Fall 2022 ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND LEADERSHIP MA PROGRAM The primary purpose of most conventional business programs is to credential large cohorts of passive learners with a lowest-common-denominator curriculum comprised of the most abstract principles of accounting, finance, management, and organizational leadership. In this 12-month program, UATX will recruit elite students from top schools, teach them the classical principles of leadership and market foundations, and then embed them into a network of successful technologists, entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, and public-policy reformers. Students will then actively apply their learning to the most urgent and seemingly intractable problems facing our society, both in the private and public sectors. Under "Frequently Asked Questions" Do you have a physical location? Our headquarters are located in central Austin: 2112 Rio Grande Street, Austin, TX 78705 RashChapman, Attorneys at Law Texas Tribune, The new University of Austin hopes to counter what its founders say is a culture of censorship at most colleges They also haven’t officially received nonprofit status from the federal government. They are using Cicero Research, which is run by Austin-based tech investor and advisory board member Joe Lonsdale, as a temporary nonprofit sponsor. According to the 2020 tax filing for Cicero Research, its mission is to “create and distribute non-partisan documents recommending free-market based solutions to public policy issues,” and “produce and distribute non-partisan educational materials about the importance of preserving Texan policies, values and history.” Lonsdale tweet about Pete Buttigieg's parternity leave Great for fathers to spend time w their kids and support moms, but any man in an important position who takes 6 months of leave for a newborn is a loser. In the old days men had babies and worked harder to provide for their future - that’s the correct masculine response. US tech investor Joe Lonsdale refuses to apologise for ‘loser’ paternity tweet Why Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale is leaving Silicon Valley Lonsdale said that 10 to 15 of his firm’s 45 employees are likely to join him in the Austin area. He’s also moving his policy organization, Cicero Institute, to the city. Among 8VC’s better-known investments to date are Palmer Luckey’s start-up, Anduril, which is building a virtual border wall, and Dustin Moskovitz’s software company, Asana, which went public in September. He’s also putting a lot of money in health-care companies like insurance provider Oscar Health and men’s health company Hims.  

So Sam Harris went on Decoding the Gurus, and we decided we had to talk about it. Content warnings. Podcast Notes: Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent.  Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618 IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1 Show Notes: Decoding the Gururs, Special Episode: Sam Harris and Meditation is all you need ( https://decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm/episode/special-episode-sam-harris-meditation-is-all-you-need ) Decoding the Gurus interview with Sam Harris ( https://decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm/episode/sam-harris ) Sam Harris in The Washington Times, December 1, 2004, Mired in a religious war ( https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/dec/1/20041201-090801-2582r/ ) "It is time we admitted that we are not at war with “terrorism.” We are at war with Islam. This is not to say that we are at war with all Muslims, but we are absolutely at war with the vision of life that is prescribed to all Muslims in the Koran. The only reason Muslim fundamentalism is a threat to us is because the fundamentals of Islam are a threat to us. Every American should read the Koran and discover the relentlessness with which non-Muslims are vilified in its pages. The idea that Islam is a “peaceful religion hijacked by extremists” is a dangerous fantasy — and it is now a particularly dangerous fantasy for Muslims to indulge. "It should be of particular concern to us that the beliefs of devout Muslims pose a special problem for nuclear deterrence. There is, after all, little possibility of our having a cold war with an Islamist regime armed with long-range nuclear weapons. A cold war requires that the parties be mutually deterred by the threat of death. Notions of martyrdom and jihad run roughshod over the logic that allowed the United States and the Soviet Union to pass half a century perched, more or less stably, on the brink of Armageddon. We must come to terms with the possibility that men who are every bit as zealous to die as the September 11 hijackers may one day get their hands on long-range nuclear weaponry. Polite Conversations 17 with Sam Harris ( https://soundcloud.com/politeconversations/episode-17-sam-harris )

Sines v. Kessler is finally underway, and Christopher Cantwell is representing himself.  Need we say more?  Actually, yes.  And hence, this episode. Content warnings. Podcast Notes: Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent.  Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618 IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1 Show Notes: Vice News, Charlottesville Race and Terror (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIrcB1sAN8I) Christopher Cantwell transferred to Communication Management Unit in Marion, IL. (https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1402292133483196422?s=20) Pro Se Letter regarding change of address by Christopher Cantwell.(https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.968.0_1.pdf) Hilary Sargent coverage of the Cantwell criminal trial at The Informant. (https://www.informant.news/people/1157338-hilary-sargent) Cantwell Criminal Trial Testimony Day 3 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nhd.53269/gov.uscourts.nhd.53269.118.0.pdf) Cantwell Criminal Trial Testimony Day 4 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nhd.53269/gov.uscourts.nhd.53269.119.0.pdf) Jordan Green at Raw Story: ‘Crying Nazi’ Christoper Cantwell is getting legal assist from a white supremacist as he prepares for Charlottesville trial (https://www.rawstory.com/crying-nazi-trial/) While serving his sentence, Cantwell met Hale along with another man named William A. White, who has played an even more significant role in helping him prepare for his upcoming trial in Charlottesville. White, in turn, is in prison for soliciting violence against the foreman of the federal jury that convicted Hale. According to the US Justice Department, White created the now defunct Overthrow.com website in the late 2000s as a platform for the American National Socialist Workers Party. He used the website to post derogatory comments and personal information about the jury foreman, including their home address and phone numbers. "Anyway, so I run into these guys," Cantwell told a white supremacist podcaster during an interview last week from an Oklahoma prison where he is awaiting transfer to Charlottesville to stand trial. "And allegations against them notwithstanding, they're good to me."   Sines v. Kessler at Courtlistener (https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6168921/sines-v-kessler/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc) Document 1108 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1108.0.pdf) In addition, it has now become apparent that Cantwell, who has been proceeding pro se and has been afforded its corresponding protections and leniency, may be using another inmate, William A. White, to participate in this litigation and “ghost-write” his recent filings. See ECF 1063 at 1 (“Christopher Cantwell ... Moves this Court ... To Provide Cantwell and his Lay Counsel, William A White, Adequate Access to The Electronic Materials...”); ECF 1063-2; compare ECF 1055 (handwritten filing written largely in first person) with ECF 1063 (typewritten filing written in third person). That provides yet another basis to deny these motions. Ghost writing plainly violates legal rules and only reinforces the inappropriate and harassing nature of Cantwell’s numerous recent filings, including ECF 1062, 1063, 1064, 1065, 1066, 1077, 1078, 1084, 1085, 1086, 1087, 1088, 1089, 1090, 1096, 1097, 1098, 1099, 1102, 1103. See Wojcicki v. SCANA/SCE&G, 947 F.3d 240, 244 (4th Cir. 2020) (“Allowing individuals to represent themselves pro se reflects a respect for the choice of an individual citizen to plead his or her own cause, but so does the bar preventing individuals without legal expertise from representing others.” (quotation omitted)); Greene v. United States Dep’t of Educ., No. 4:13cv79, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143678, at 26-27 (E.D. Va. Oct. 1, 2013) (“During the course of this appeal it came to the Court’s attention that Greene, although proceeding pro se and receiving the forbearance afforded such status, was utilizing the services of a ghost writer for many of her filings. The Court emphasizes that the practice of ghost-writing is in no way permissible in the Eastern District of Virginia, or any federal court for that matter. Even if the ghost writer is not an attorney, such practice is still considered the unauthorized practice of law. Those who proceed pro se are afforded certain amounts of leniency that are not afforded represented parties. Ghost writing inexcusably abuses this leniency."). Document 1134 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1134.0_1.pdf) Document 1185 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1185.0.pdf) Document 1306 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1306.0_1.pdf) While Plaintiffs remain adamant that any further delay would be extremely prejudicial given the fact that this case was filed four years ago, jury questionnaires have already been sent out, and many parties, counsel, and witnesses are already in or on their way to Charlottesville, see, e.g., ECF Nos. 1108, 1113, 1196, Plaintiffs are also aware that Mr. Cantwell likely will continue to assert these arguments, which could complicate the issues on appeal. As a result, Plaintiffs have concluded that the best way to resolve the tension between the need to proceed to trial and Mr. Cantwell’s due-process arguments would be for the Court to sever Plaintiffs’ claims against Mr. Cantwell from their claims against the other Defendants in this case for a separate trial pursuant to Rule 42 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Document 1307 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1307.0.pdf) (Kolenich on behalf of Kessler, Damigo, and Identity Evropa) The Court has been aware of Mr. Cantwell’s objections since at least April 2021. The plaintiffs have been opposing Cantwell and not caring about his allegations of procedural or substative rights for at least that long. See ECF 945 filed April 26, 2021. Defendants object to the Court flip flopping on its Cantwell rulings, at the mere letter based request of the plaintiffs, less than 48 hours before trial. The defendants have invested considerable time and expense into preparing a defense strategy that assumes the presence of Mr. Cantwell as a party defendant at trial. Document 1309 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1309.0.pdf) (Smith on behalf of Parrot, Heimbach, and TWP) Plantiff's counsel want to take a “mulligan” here because, prior to Friday’s final pretrial conference, they had their army of jury consultants analyze the jury questionnaires, and concluded (rightly) that they have very little chance of winning their case in front of the eventual jury (even with adverse inferences). In order to manufacture a basis for their mulligan, they’ve been intentionally not caring about Mr. Cantwell’s situation, which they’ve known about for many months now; that way, if they drew an unfavorable jury pool, they could fake a sudden onset of empathy and concern for Mr. Cantwell’s predicament, and bait the Court into postponing the trial with their ridiculous “two Charlottesville trials” (i.e., the regular one, and then some kind of Cantwell-only “mini-trial” a couple years from now) proposal. Document 1314 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1314.0.pdf) (Bloch reads the amended letter.) Document 1328 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1328.0.pdf) Cantwell pro se defendant woes Document 1329 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1329.0.pdf) More Cantwell pro se defendant woes Document 1330 (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120/gov.uscourts.vawd.109120.1330.0.pdf) THIS IS NOT FAIR document Molly Conger Twitter (https://mobile.twitter.com/socialistdogmom) Molly Conger Patreon(https://www.patreon.com/socialistdogmom/posts) Molly's Trial Coverage Day One (https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1452622192555053069?s=20) Jury Selection Day Two (https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1452977775749500930?s=20) Jury Selection Day Three (https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1453344852016607234?s=20) Jury Selection Day Four (https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1453699603879141381?s=20) Opening Arguments Day Five (https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1454066857418362880?s=20) Plaintiff's first two witnesses Emily Gorcenski and Molly Conger. White Supremacists Have Returned to Charlottesville in Another Attempt to ‘Unite the Right’(https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/10/with-the-charlottesville-trial-white-supremacists-try-again-to-unite-the-right.html) Christopher Cantwell opening statement (https://twitter.com/socialistdogmom/status/1453795094591639562?s=20) (Paraphrase) "If you've ever had the intellectual curiosity to read Mein Kampf then you know this case is Mother Jones level nonsense." Trey Garrison dox at the SPLC (https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2019/01/18/spectre-unmasked-racist-alt-right-podcaster-used-be-local-reporter)  

Become a backer of Daniel or Jack to get exclusive access to a new bonus episode. Becoming a patron also brings access to all other bonus episodes. Since we spent the entirety of Bonus Episode 10 moaning about the technical shortcomings of The Dark Knight, Christopher Nolan's 2008 Batman vs the Joker movie, this time we - being who we are - felt the need to spend this episode moaning about the themes and politics and ideology of same.  And so we did.   Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper/posts Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618&fan_landing=true Content Warnings. Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent.  Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1

Yes, we're back with Jimmy Concepts, reliable source of dishonest idiocy.  This time, as a kind of 'bonus feature' to our last episode, Daniel reads out a representative selection of reviewer comments on some of the fake papers submitted to academic journals by Lindsay, Pluckrose and Boghossian during the so-called 'Sokal Squared' prank.  It's very revealing... albeit of something we already knew: namely that Lindsay and his cohorts are absolutely full of shit. Content Warnings. Podcast Notes: Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent.  Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618 IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1   Show Notes for 95: Areo Magazine, Academic Grievance Studies and the Corruption of Scholarship ( https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/ ) Full listing of Grievance Studies Papers and Reviews ( https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/19tBy_fVlYIHTxxjuVMFxh4pqLHM_en18 ). "BJ-Gay" reviewer's comment: - This paper claims to apply a combination of psychoanalysis and feminism to examine and critique styles of masculinity evident within grappling-based martial arts subcultures. Overall, I found the paper very difficult to read and cannot recommend it for publication. This is due to a combination of factors, namely: - A densely theoretical, often confusing style of prose in many parts of the paper; - An inconsistent application of theoretical concepts, most of which were not defined with any clarity for the reader; - Overuse of certain source material, as well as a fairly consistent tendency to misuse sources in support of claims that the papers/books in question do not actually support; - Many sweeping generalizations about (all) men involved in (all) grappling-based martial arts; - A tokenistic inclusion of discussions of women in these spaces, which was not reconciled with the analysis in any meaningful way; - A central thesis which is not, to my knowledge, supported by any of the empirical research in this area (despite the fact that several such studies were cited in the paper); - Bizarre, even farcical concluding recommendations which indicate a lack of knowledge about the martial arts in question, as well as a tenuous and selective grasp of feminism as applied to sport. - There is simply too much wrong with the paper to offer a more robust criticism as a reviewer. I recommend that the author spends far more time acquainting themselves with both the theoretical and empirical literature at the intersection of sport, martial arts and masculinity studies before attempting a re-write. The current offering sits far short of the standards of scholarship expected of academic publication, particularly in a journal such as Men and Masculinities. https://twitter.com/deonteleologist/status/1444709707864674306 https://twitter.com/deonteleologist/status/1402338497617285120 "The Joke's On You" reviewer comment: - Another sign of lack of integration is that there is not clear definition of the comedic. The very first paragraph offers one too narrow for the essay. Northrup Frye provides some useful definitions of irony, parody, and satire in his classic work, Anatomy of Criticism. Note, too, that Cynthia Willett, in Irony in the Age of Empire, shares a similar thesis with this essay, namely that irony works against arrogance and ignorance. That source should be acknowledged even as the author discusses her own different approach, and might help the author clarify definitions of the comedic and integrate argument. - Yet another sign of lack of integration are the mixed references from Oliver to Dotson, Bailey, et al.-- Oliver would support a strong postmodern or poststructuralist stance that would render claims to speak "truth" to power finally ironic or that would yield to a very serious act of witnessing alterity. The latter group of epistemologists (including Dotson and Bailey) seem to affirm a pluralism but also a truth that allows for objective claims. Humor that makes use of the latter approach would typically tend toward satire, not irony. Satire and irony just do not function the same way, and the author would want to decide which direction or use of them would most assist the argument. "Fat Body Builders" reviewer comment: - For instance, statements like these, “In order for fat to be seen as ordinary and familiar, we need to insert ourselves in the extraordinary and unfamiliar. Competitive bodybuilding venues may be unfamiliar, even intrinsically fat-exclusionary, but this can change” and “Though it goes beyond the scope of this paper to provide more specific methods for institutionalizing fat bodybuilding” illustrate the issue with the paper. The author has highlighted the negative implication of fat stigma, but with a lack of connection to implementation, it negates the reason for why fat bodybuilding is a solution over other means or methods. - This reader would encourage the author to improve the connection between fat bodybuilding and its role as a means of fat activism. The author certainly has a wealth of information about the field of bodybuilding and the author should use that experience to strengthen the connections mentioned previously. "Hooters" reviewer comment: - This then takes me to a core challenge in moving forward with your paper at Sex Roles: trustworthiness. All three reviewers share my concern about the lack of demonstrated methodological integrity in the present paper. This is where Reviewer 3 comes in. I recruited Reviewer 3 after the other reviewers, and because she is a member of our in-house staff, I shared both reviewers’ (masked) comments with her. I asked her first if she felt there was enough evidence of rigor to pursue a revision. Because we (at this point) have incomplete methodological information, I cannot commit to making a positive judgment here, but I am committing to giving it a try. - Thus my second challenge to Reviewer 3 was to outline what next steps you will need to take (in addition to addressing the other reviewers’ comments) to fill in these methodological gaps. As you can see from Reviewer 3’s comments, this starts by laying out your procedural details and analytic strategy. My guess is that you will need to focus more specifically on theme development and justification (e.g., thematic analysis) rather than taking this aspect from grounded theory (in that your goal is not to develop theory). I have attached a recently published paper in Sex Roles by Sheryl Chatfield that lays out various approaches to qualitative methodologies and outlines our standards here at Sex Roles. My expectation is that Reviewer 3’s comments and this paper will help you address this critical point, as well as to move one from there to fully flesh out your methods, analyses, and findings. "Dildos" reviewer comment: - In the opening sections, the author notes that "though Allan lays out psychoanalytic theoretical considerations that are strongly suggestive of the co-constitutive relationship between masculinity, thevariables listed above, and anality, currently there is no scholarly literature that engages the topic of straight male penetrative sex toy directly and substantively" (3). The author here is referring to Allan's article, "Phallic Affect," however, Allan's book, Reading from Behind: A Cultural Analysis of the Anus (2016) might prove to be more useful in the context of this study. - The author writes that "there exists a far more extensive and applicable treatment in the book, The Ultimate Guide to Prostate Pleasure, but unfortunately this insightful volumes falls considerably outside of the scholarly academic canon" (3). I'm not certain that this is a problem, perhaps this is a difference of approach, but it seems to me that sex manuals are highly valuable resources in scholarly work and if there is a problem that the problem rests not with The Ultimate Guide but the Academy's inability to imagine value outside of itself. Indeed, the author might consider expanding this to include books like, The Adventurous Couple's Guide to Strap-On Sex by Violet Blue. Sci-Hub link: https://sci-hub.se/10.1353/tech.2007.0066 'So You Wanna Be a Hooters Girl' at The Smoking Gun: https://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/so-you-wanna-be-hooters-girl   Show Notes from 94 Again: https://idontspeakgerman.libsyn.com/94-james-lindsay-and-the-grievance-studies-hoax James Lindsay, New Discourses, "Why You Can Be Transgender But Not Transracial."" https://newdiscourses.com/2021/06/why-you-can-be-transgender-but-not-transracial/ James Lindsay has a day job, apparently. "Maryville man walks path of healing and combat." https://www.thedailytimes.com/news/maryville-man-walks-path-of-healing-and-combat/article_5ea3c0ca-2e98-5283-9e59-06861b8588cb.html Areo Magazine, Academic Grievance Studies and the Corruption of Scholarship. https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/ Full listing of Grievance Studies Papers and Reviews. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/19tBy_fVlYIHTxxjuVMFxh4pqLHM_en18 'Mein Kampf' and the 'Feminazis': What Three Academics' Hitler Hoax Really Reveals About 'Wokeness'. https://web.archive.org/web/20210328112901/https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-hitler-hoax-academic-wokeness-culture-war-1.9629759 "First and foremost, the source material. The chapter the hoaxers chose, not by coincidence, one of the least ideological and racist parts of Hitler's book. Chapter 12, probably written in April/May 1925, deals with how the newly refounded NSDAP should rebuild as a party and amplify its program. "According to their own account, the writers took parts of the chapter and inserted feminist "buzzwords"; they "significantly changed" the "original wording and intent” of the text to make the paper "publishable and about feminism." An observant reader might ask: what could possibly remain of any Nazi content after that? But no one in the media, apparently, did." New Discourses, "There Is No Good Part of Hitler's Mein Kampf" https://newdiscourses.com/2021/03/there-is-no-good-part-of-hitlers-mein-kampf/ On this episode of the New Discourses Podcast, James Lindsay, who helped to write the paper and perpetrate the Grievance Studies Affair, talks about the project and the creation of this particular paper at unprecedented length and in unprecedented detail, revealing Nilssen not to know what he’s talking about. If you have ever wondered about what the backstory of the creation of the “Feminist Mein Kampf” paper really was, including why its authors did it, you won’t want to miss this long-form discussion and rare response to yet another underinformed critic of Lindsay, Boghossian, and Pluckrose’s work. The Grieveance Studies Affair Revealed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVk9a5Jcd1k Reviewer 1 Comments on Dog Park Paper "page 9 - the human subjects are afforded anonymity and not asked about income, etc for ethical reasons. yet, the author as researcher intruded into the dogs' spaces to examine and record genitalia. I realize this was necessary to the project, but could the author acknowledge/explain/justify this (arguably, anthropocentric) difference? Indicating that it was necessary to the research would suffice but at least the difference should be acknowledged." Nestor de Buen, Anti-Science Humping in the Dog Park. https://conceptualdisinformation.substack.com/p/anti-science-humping-in-the-dog-park "What is even more striking is that if the research had actually been conducted and the results showed what the paper says they show, there is absolutely no reason why it should not have been published. And moreover, what it proves is the opposite of what its intention is. It shows that one can make scientifically testable claims based on the conceptual framework of gender studies, and that the field has all the markings of a perfectly functional research programme." "Yes, the dog park paper is based on false data and, like Sokal’s, contains a lot of unnecessary jargon, but it is not nonsense, and the distinction is far from trivial. Nonsense implies one cannot even obtain a truth value from a proposition. In fact, the paper being false, if anything, proves that it is not nonsense, yet the grievance hoaxers try to pass falsity as nonsense. Nonsense is something like Chomsky’s famous sentence “colorless green ideas sleep furiously.” It is nonsense because it is impossible to decide how one might evaluate whether it is true. A false sentence would be “the moon is cubical.” It has a definite meaning, it just happens not to be true.  "So, if the original Sokal Hoax is like Chomsky’s sentence, the dog park paper is much more like “the moon is cubical.” And in fact, a more accurate analogy would be “the moon is cubical and here is a picture that proves it,” and an attached doctored picture of the cubical moon." Reviewer 2 Comments on the Dog-Park Paper "I am a bit curious about your methodology. Can you say more? You describe your methods here (procedures for collecting data), but not really your overall approach to methodology. Did you just show up, observe, write copious notes, talk to people when necessary, and then leave? If so, it might be helpful to explicitly state this. It sounds to me like you did a kind of ethnography (methodology — maybe multispecies ethnography?) but that’s not entirely clear here. Or are you drawing on qualitative methods in social behaviorism/symbolic interactionism? In either case, the methodology chosen should be a bit more clearly articulated." Counterweight. https://counterweightsupport.com/ "Welcome to Counterweight, the home of scholarship and advice on [Critical Social Justice](https://counterweightsupport.com/2021/02/17/what-do-we-mean-by-critical-social-justice/) ideology. We are here to connect you with the resources, advice and guidance you need to address CSJ beliefs as you encounter them in your day-to-day life. The Counterweight community is a non-partisan, grassroots movement advocating for liberal concepts of social justice including individualism, universalism, viewpoint diversity and the free exchange of ideas. [Subscribe](https://counterweightsupport.com/subscribe-to-counterweight/) today to become part of the Counterweight movement."" Inside Higher Ed, "Blowback Against a Hoax." https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/01/08/author-recent-academic-hoax-faces-disciplinary-action-portland-state Peter Boghossian Resignation Latter from PSU. https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/my-university-sacrificed-ideas-for

Become a backer of Daniel or Jack to get exclusive access to a new bonus episode. Becoming a patron also brings access to all other bonus episodes. This time, Daniel and Jack embark on a chat about Christopher Nolan's 2008 Batman movie The Dark Knight.  You know, it's the one with Heath Ledger as the Joker.   In a development that is depressingly less surprising than we wish it were, it turns out we have so much to say about this silly movie that this episode morphs into Part 1 of a two part discussion before our own astonished and frankly ashamed faces as we talk.   This episode focuses mainly on how the movie is a structural mess and a sometimes bafflingly incompetent bit of filmmaking.  The next bit gets more into the themes and ideology. Part 2 along soon. Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper/posts Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618&fan_landing=true Content Warnings. Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent.  Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1

Become a backer of Daniel or Jack to get exclusive access to a new bonus episode in which we chat about 2008's Iron Man, foundation of the biggest media franchise in history and politically dense text in its own right. Becoming a patron also brings access to all other bonus episodes. Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper/posts Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618&fan_landing=true Content Warnings. Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent.  Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1

So, in rank defiance of our recent promise to 'get back to the nazis' instead we continue our James Lindsay coverage.  (What... me? Irony? How dare you?)  This time, Daniel patiently walks a distracted, slightly hyperactive, and increasingly incredulous Jack through the infamous 'Grievance Studies Hoax' (AKA 'Sokal Squared') in which Lindsay and colleagues Helen Pluckrose and Peter Boghossian tried (and then claimed) to prove something or other about modern Humanities academia by submitting a load of stupid fake papers to various feminist and fat studies journals.  As Daniel reveals, the episode was an orgy of dishonesty and tactical point-missing that actually proved the opposite of what the team of snickering tricksters thought they were proving.  Sadly, however, because we live in Hell, the trio have only raised their profiles as a result.  A particular highlight of the episode is Lindsay revealing his staggering ignorance when 'responding' to criticism. Content warnings, as ever. Podcast Notes: Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent.  Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618 IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1   Show Notes: James Lindsay, New Discourses, "Why You Can Be Transgender But Not Transracial."" https://newdiscourses.com/2021/06/why-you-can-be-transgender-but-not-transracial/ James Lindsay has a day job, apparently. "Maryville man walks path of healing and combat." https://www.thedailytimes.com/news/maryville-man-walks-path-of-healing-and-combat/article_5ea3c0ca-2e98-5283-9e59-06861b8588cb.html Areo Magazine, Academic Grievance Studies and the Corruption of Scholarship. https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/ Full listing of Grievance Studies Papers and Reviews. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/19tBy_fVlYIHTxxjuVMFxh4pqLHM_en18 'Mein Kampf' and the 'Feminazis': What Three Academics' Hitler Hoax Really Reveals About 'Wokeness'. https://web.archive.org/web/20210328112901/https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-hitler-hoax-academic-wokeness-culture-war-1.9629759 "First and foremost, the source material. The chapter the hoaxers chose, not by coincidence, one of the least ideological and racist parts of Hitler's book. Chapter 12, probably written in April/May 1925, deals with how the newly refounded NSDAP should rebuild as a party and amplify its program. "According to their own account, the writers took parts of the chapter and inserted feminist "buzzwords"; they "significantly changed" the "original wording and intent” of the text to make the paper "publishable and about feminism." An observant reader might ask: what could possibly remain of any Nazi content after that? But no one in the media, apparently, did." New Discourses, "There Is No Good Part of Hitler's Mein Kampf" https://newdiscourses.com/2021/03/there-is-no-good-part-of-hitlers-mein-kampf/ On this episode of the New Discourses Podcast, James Lindsay, who helped to write the paper and perpetrate the Grievance Studies Affair, talks about the project and the creation of this particular paper at unprecedented length and in unprecedented detail, revealing Nilssen not to know what he’s talking about. If you have ever wondered about what the backstory of the creation of the “Feminist Mein Kampf” paper really was, including why its authors did it, you won’t want to miss this long-form discussion and rare response to yet another underinformed critic of Lindsay, Boghossian, and Pluckrose’s work. The Grieveance Studies Affair Revealed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVk9a5Jcd1k Reviewer 1 Comments on Dog Park Paper "page 9 - the human subjects are afforded anonymity and not asked about income, etc for ethical reasons. yet, the author as researcher intruded into the dogs' spaces to examine and record genitalia. I realize this was necessary to the project, but could the author acknowledge/explain/justify this (arguably, anthropocentric) difference? Indicating that it was necessary to the research would suffice but at least the difference should be acknowledged." Nestor de Buen, Anti-Science Humping in the Dog Park. https://conceptualdisinformation.substack.com/p/anti-science-humping-in-the-dog-park "What is even more striking is that if the research had actually been conducted and the results showed what the paper says they show, there is absolutely no reason why it should not have been published. And moreover, what it proves is the opposite of what its intention is. It shows that one can make scientifically testable claims based on the conceptual framework of gender studies, and that the field has all the markings of a perfectly functional research programme." "Yes, the dog park paper is based on false data and, like Sokal’s, contains a lot of unnecessary jargon, but it is not nonsense, and the distinction is far from trivial. Nonsense implies one cannot even obtain a truth value from a proposition. In fact, the paper being false, if anything, proves that it is not nonsense, yet the grievance hoaxers try to pass falsity as nonsense. Nonsense is something like Chomsky’s famous sentence “colorless green ideas sleep furiously.” It is nonsense because it is impossible to decide how one might evaluate whether it is true. A false sentence would be “the moon is cubical.” It has a definite meaning, it just happens not to be true.  "So, if the original Sokal Hoax is like Chomsky’s sentence, the dog park paper is much more like “the moon is cubical.” And in fact, a more accurate analogy would be “the moon is cubical and here is a picture that proves it,” and an attached doctored picture of the cubical moon." Reviewer 2 Comments on the Dog-Park Paper "I am a bit curious about your methodology. Can you say more? You describe your methods here (procedures for collecting data), but not really your overall approach to methodology. Did you just show up, observe, write copious notes, talk to people when necessary, and then leave? If so, it might be helpful to explicitly state this. It sounds to me like you did a kind of ethnography (methodology — maybe multispecies ethnography?) but that’s not entirely clear here. Or are you drawing on qualitative methods in social behaviorism/symbolic interactionism? In either case, the methodology chosen should be a bit more clearly articulated." Counterweight. https://counterweightsupport.com/ "Welcome to Counterweight, the home of scholarship and advice on [Critical Social Justice](https://counterweightsupport.com/2021/02/17/what-do-we-mean-by-critical-social-justice/) ideology. We are here to connect you with the resources, advice and guidance you need to address CSJ beliefs as you encounter them in your day-to-day life. The Counterweight community is a non-partisan, grassroots movement advocating for liberal concepts of social justice including individualism, universalism, viewpoint diversity and the free exchange of ideas. [Subscribe](https://counterweightsupport.com/subscribe-to-counterweight/) today to become part of the Counterweight movement."" Inside Higher Ed, "Blowback Against a Hoax." https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/01/08/author-recent-academic-hoax-faces-disciplinary-action-portland-state Peter Boghossian Resignation Latter from PSU. https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/my-university-sacrificed-ideas-for  

We revisit the subject of our very first episode, Richard Spencer, catching up with his more recent exploits, all in an attempt to emphasize that a) he's still around, b) he's still dangerous, and c) he means what he says. Content Warnings. Podcast Notes: Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent.  Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618 IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1   Show Notes: Our previous episode on Richard Spencer, Episode 1 The New York Times, How a Small Town Silenced a Neo-Nazi Hate Campaign Rafi Schwartz, Discourse Blog, America’s Top Nazi Is a Broke Little Booger Who Can’t Get a Table The punch, which     prompted plenty of handwringing     and pearl-clutching over whether or not it’s okay to     ever punch a Nazi (it sure is!), occurred during what should have     been the height of Spencer’s career as a full-time racist — the     inauguration of Donald Trump. Instead, it forever branded him as     “that Nazi who got his clock thoroughly cleaned” and helped     define him as the ur-bigot of the Trump era. This, I think, is     crucial to the arc of Spencer’s seeming cancelation by the people     of Whitefish. It’s much easier to identify a Nazi — and identify     what should be done to them — when that Nazi has already become an     internet joke for both being a Nazi, and facing the consequences     thereof. Were Spencer not memed into oblivion as “the Nazi who got     smacked,” my guess is that it wouldn’t have been quite so easy     to rally an entire community to oppose him. Yes, it would likely     still have happened in some form, thanks to the sincerely hard work     of both activists, and ordinary citizens on the ground in Whitefish     and elsewhere, but I can’t help but think that the moment Spencer     got blasted in the jaw, his cancelation, or silencing, or whatever     doofy substitute for “getting what he deserves” became     inevitable. Tablet Mag, No, White Supremacist Richard Spencer Didn’t Seriously Endorse Joe Biden And yet, countless credulous accounts—many on the pro-Trump     right, but also some on the anti-Biden     left—uncritically shared Spencer’s posting as though     it was on the level.     That a disingenuous racist like Spencer would pretend to     support Biden in order to get attention and undercut the former vice     president is not surprising. What is surprising is how many people     still fall for Spencer’s transparent trolling.     In reality, Spencer and other white supremacists have a long     history of purposely adopting their opponents’ causes and     pretending to back them in order to undermine them. That’s exactly     what Spencer did in 2018 by pretending to support “Zionism,”     when he actually has a long history of hate towards both Israel and     Jews, and claims that the Jewish state and its supporters control     America. Daily Progress, RIchard Spencer-led organization ordered to pay $2.4 million in Unite the RIght lawsuit The biggest sum     was awarded last week by an Ohio judge who ordered the National     Policy Institute to pay Burke $2,444,461.15 for the harm he suffered     as a result of the rally. The white supremacist think tank, which is     led by UTR participant and University of Virginia graduate Spencer,     was found to be in default approximately     a year ago. Integrity First For America, Sines v. Kessler Eat the Rich Episode 91 on William Regnery II Paul Gottfried coins the term "alternative right." Richard Spencer introduces Ron Paul at the Robert Taft Club, October 11, 2007. Richard Spencer full NPI speech 2016, the origin of "Heilgate". Full text of that speech We need to remind ourselves of these things. None of this is     natural. None of this is “normal.” This is a sick, disgusting,     society, run by the corrupt, defended by hysterics, drunk on     self-hatred and degeneracy. We invade the world and frantically     invite entire populations who despise us. We subsidize people and     institutions who make our lives worse just by the sheer fact of     their existence. We run up deficits and pretend the laws of history     simply don’t apply to us because of “American Exceptionalism.”     This cannot go on any longer. And it won’t.     At some level, we demand the impossible. Even those     half-joking memes about Donald Trump as God-Emperor or as the     progenitor of some glorious Imperium testify to the yearning for     something more. Yes, we should insist on our dreams – on the     conquest of space, on the development of revolutionary technology,     for a humanity that is greater than we are today, for a race that     travels forever on the upward path.     But at another level, what we want is something normal,     something almost prosaic maybe even boring.     Why is something as simple as starting a family, owning a     house, and leaving a legacy to your children seen as an almost     impossible dream for so many Americans? Why must there be two     incomes for a family simply to break even? Why is it impossible to     build a real civic society because the whim of a federal bureaucrat     or a Social Justice Warrior can impose Section 8 housing, refugee     resettlement, or some other population transfer scheme deliberately     designed to break apart functional white communities? Buzzfeed, Spencer's Wife Says in Divorce Filings that He Physically and Emotionally Abused Her The wife of Richard Spencer, the white     nationalist leader, has accused him of being “physically,     emotionally, verbally and financially abusive” throughout their     marriage, according to divorce filings in Flathead County District     Court in Montana.     Nina Koupriianova, who married Spencer in August 2010 and has     two young children with him, alleges that Spencer physically abused     her, including instances where she was “being hit, being grabbed,     being dragged around by her hair, being held down in a manner     causing bruising, and being prevented from calling for help.”     Koupriianova — who went by Kouprianova in some public     interviews and N.K. in the documents — “has been reluctant to     call police or seek an order of protection for fear of further     reprisal by” Spencer, her lawyers said in court documents. “Much     of the abuse has occurred in the presence of the parties’     children.”