1. Then again, who cares? People who take “gender studies” are never going to amount to anything. If lucky they may get a job as a hamburger flipper.

   5

   1. Two reasons to care.

      1: student loans are given to people who major in this as well as less, ah, directly remunerative fields of study.

      2: at some point, with sufficient lobbying, this person’s courses (or ones like them) could become part of core curricula for every major.

      6

      1. It’s becoming that way, these indoctrination courses are becoming mandatory.

         I’ve been hearing from people I know that schools are adding diversity and gender class requirements to science and engineering programs. You won’t be able to become an engineer or chemist without having this shit jammed down your throat.

         5

         1. Is that true for all universities or just the stupid ones? I would assume the latter. If so, the answer is (a) don’t go there, (b) don’t hire from there.

            1

            1. Trending towards all, I’m afraid. The graduate schools are somewhat insulated, at least for now.

               Even worse, across the board the undergrad programs have a worsening problem with unprepared freshmen who can’t parse a paragraph or do basic math, let alone algebra or trig. Adding courses like this will only give less time for remedial education, and at the same time convince them it’s unfair to suggest they need it.

               4

         2. We learned real diversity in my engineering classes — mainly by having professors from five different continents and students from three.

            As for gender… well, there were only a handful of women, but one of them was actually majoring in engineering physics — electrical engineering and modern physics combined, so she could work with chips down at the atomic level. Scary smart.

            2

2. At some point they’ll come for “unit matching.” A highly useful tool in engineering, and fundamental and applied physics, to make sure the equations and results come out right. But it sounds too much like gender assignment, and “unit preference” is just a way of mathing differently, so in the name of unit equity…

   Oh, look, there goes another bridge. Hmm. How’d that happen, I wonder? Must be one of those nasty mks-norm engineers what caused it.

   3

   1. If they get rid of unit matching, they’ll actually have to teach thermodynamics in thermodynamics class.

      (There was a little bit of material about heat transfer, etc, but most of the class I took was focused on making sure you worked through all the unit conversions in the problem. Since I took it as a junior, I was not impressed.)

      1. Since I grew up metric, unit conversion wasn’t something that needed to be taught. Not beyond elementary school, anyway.

         1. Not unit conversion (e.g. inches to cm), unit checking. For instance, if you multiply a force times a length, your answer will have units of energy (or torque, if you prefer), no matter the system of units you’re using.

            Checking the units doesn’t prove your answer is correct, but if the units aren’t right you know you did something wrong somewhere.

            1. Oh, ok. Yes, I know that as “dimension” checking, though that may be the Dutch term. And in fact one design aspect of the SI (“metric”) system is that this is worked through carefully and in detail and explicitly.
               I still remember my puzzlement at an old unit of capacitance you can find in some early 20th century articles: “centimeter”. I think it’s the actual correct unit (“dimension”) if you use one of the obsolete electromagnetic unit systems combined with a system in which weight is a base unit and mass isn’t. Or something like that; it’s been 30 years at least since I worked through that.

3. This is the philosophical equivalent of saying how do you know cat is cat and not actually dog.

   Yes OK true, but not helpful. Concessions for the practical use of language must be made so we can communicate so we agree cat means the furry little creature plotting your demise and dog is the furry creature that wags its tail and loves you for existing.

   All of these things being brought up are 1st year stoner tier philosophy, that like most ignores the necessary realities required to communicate coherently. It is IMO, literally 1984 shit where the language is being broken down so far you can no longer determine what is being expressed. We see that with the dumb censorship of words like rape in new stories, the censorship of accusations, the questioning of definitions like this, etc.

   5

   1. Exactly. The clowns who were arguing that “2 + 2 CAN EQUAL 5” were basing their “position” on the ability to redefine the symbols. Which means they were throwing out the process of communication in favor of pseudo-intellectualism so they can think they’re smart.

4. If the dictionary does not say what you want it to say, change the dictionary.

   That is all there is to this claptrap.

   Added editorial:
   If Dr. Brandon were shown 100 pictures of random humans, and asked to point to the 10 he found attractive, I am 99% sure they would all be women.
   This is nothing more than wearing the home team colors because they made it to the playoffs this year. Trans/genderfluid is “cool” now, and he is just saying/acting the right way to get woke points.

   1

   1. Don’t underestimate the depths of their self-brainwashing.

      1

5. F off, Brandon. 8>)

   3

6. If some future archeologist is somehow able to uncover and decode this post, please note that the fashionable spread of the politically correct denial of reality is why the civilization of the late 20th- early 21st collapsed.

Comments are closed.