Kulturkampf

[Eric Cartman]

this just reminds me of team siren, which just reminds me about dunkeys video about team siren and now im laughing again

[benji]

Their answers to the question are...

Shapeshift: increased my interest in the game
Rhyle: opportunity.
Shysept: we lift each other up.
Billy Worth: uplifting women and people of marginalized gender.
Avril: passion to play the game.
Heloisia: showcase that women and other marginalized genders play esports.

I don't even know what this program is supposed to be or what it does. I learned nothing from this video.

[benji]

KILL. ALL. MEN.

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

HERE'S A CUP

[TylenolJones]

[HaughtyFrank]

Youngest Biden Del. Now—Host #OnTheMove

All I hear is "you made my guys look bad "

[HaughtyFrank]

The reasons given for the cancellation was that the panel conflicted with their values, compromised "the safety and dignity of our members," and diminished the program's "scientific integrity."
They claimed the ideas the panel was planning to advance (i.e., sex is a real and scientifically important biological variable) would "cause harm to members represented by the Trans and LGBTQI of the anthropological community as well as the community at large."

Its crazy how sex has become such a sensitive topic

[Nintex]

Especially because the person that wrote that statement probably just closed their pornhub tab.

[Potato]

Youngest Biden Del. Now—Host #OnTheMove

All I hear is "you made my guys look bad "

He absolutely would have been fine if it was just Trump with a walker and McConnell shitting himself

[Potato]

The reasons given for the cancellation was that the panel conflicted with their values, compromised "the safety and dignity of our members," and diminished the program's "scientific integrity."
They claimed the ideas the panel was planning to advance (i.e., sex is a real and scientifically important biological variable) would "cause harm to members represented by the Trans and LGBTQI of the anthropological community as well as the community at large."

Its crazy how sex has become such a sensitive topic

Canadians...Not OK with discussing sex at an anthropological conference, but OK with celebrating genocidal SS Nazis in parliament.


EDIT: I mean, Canada sure has history in the genocide stakes, soooooooooo......

[Eric Cartman]

The reasons given for the cancellation was that the panel conflicted with their values, compromised "the safety and dignity of our members," and diminished the program's "scientific integrity."
They claimed the ideas the panel was planning to advance (i.e., sex is a real and scientifically important biological variable) would "cause harm to members represented by the Trans and LGBTQI of the anthropological community as well as the community at large."

Its crazy how sex has become such a sensitive topic

Can you even imagine how 🤡 things must be that at an archaeological dig you can't say the bones you've found belong to a woman based on the pelvis, rib cage and skull without getting accused of transphobia because you don't know what their chosen pronouns were?

[Besticus Maximus]

They'll have a hard time in the long run battling anthropologists working out the sex of bones

[benji]

This past April, I gave a talk at the yearly TED conference in Vancouver, Canada. In my talk, I defended color blindness: the idea that we should treat people without regard to race, both in our personal lives and in our public policy. (This is also the topic of my forthcoming book.)

...

But the day after my talk, I heard from Chris Anderson, the head of TED. He told me that a group called “Black@TED”—which TED’s website describes as an “Employee Resource Group that exists to provide a safe space for TED staff who identify as Black”—was “upset” by my talk. Over email, Chris asked if I’d be willing to speak with them privately.

I agreed to speak with them on principle, that principle being that you should always speak with your critics because they may expose crucial blind spots in your worldview. No sooner did I agree to speak with them than Chris told me that Black@TED actually was not willing to speak to me. I never learned why. I hoped that this strange about-face was the end of the drama. But it was only the beginning.

On the final day of the conference, TED held its yearly “town hall”—at which the audience can give feedback on the conference. The event opened with two people denouncing my talk back-to-back. The first woman called my talk “racist” as well as “dangerous and irresponsible”—comments that were met with cheers from the crowd. The second commentator, Otho Kerr, a program director at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, claimed that I was “willing to have us slide back into the days of separate but equal.” (The talk is online, so you can judge for yourself whether those accusations bear any resemblance to reality.)

In response to their comments, Anderson took the mic and thanked them for their remarks. He also reminded the audience that “TED can’t shy away from controversy on issues that matter so much”—a statement I very much agreed with and appreciated. Because he said as much, I left the conference fairly confident that TED would release and promote my talk just like any other, in spite of the staff and audience members who were upset by it.

Two weeks later, Anderson emailed to tell me that there was “blowback” on my talk and that “[s]ome internally are arguing we shouldn’t post it.” In the email, he told me that the “most challenging” blowback had come from a “well-known” social scientist (who I later learned was Adam Grant). He quoted from Grant’s message directly:

Really glad to see TED offering viewpoint diversity—we need more conservative voices—but as a social scientist, was dismayed to see Coleman Hughes deliver an inaccurate message.

His case for color blindness is directly contradicted by an extensive body of rigorous research; for the state of the science, see Leslie, Bono, Kim & Beaver (2020, Journal of Applied Psychology). In a meta-analysis of 296 studies, they found that whereas color-conscious models reduce prejudice and discrimination, color-blind approaches often fail to help and sometimes backfire.

I read the paper that Grant referenced, titled “On Melting Pots and Salad Bowls: A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Identity-Blind and Identity-Conscious Diversity Ideologies,” expecting to find arguments against color blindness. I was shocked to find that the paper largely supported my talk. In the results section, the authors write that “colorblindness is negatively related to stereotyping” and “is also negatively related to prejudice.” They also found that “meritocracy is negatively related to discrimination.”

I wrote back to Anderson:

Far from a refutation of my talk, this meta-analysis is closer to an endorsement of it.

The only anti–color blindness finding in the paper is that color blindness & meritocracy are associated with opposing DEI policies. Well, I do oppose race-based DEI policies in most (but not all) cases. Unapologetically. But that is a philosophical disagreement, not an example of me delivering incorrect social science.

I feel it would be unjustified not to release my talk simply because many people disagree with my philosophical perspective. By that standard, most TED talks would never get released.

To which he responded: “Thanks, Coleman. Great note. More soon.”

Before this email exchange, I hadn’t seriously considered the possibility that TED might not post my talk at all. What’s more, the fact that the “most challenging” blowback to my talk was a social science paper showing that color blindness reduces stereotyping and prejudice puzzled me.

About a week later, I received an email from Whitney Pennington Rodgers, the current affairs curator at TED and the point person for the curation of my talk. Whitney said that in lieu of releasing my TED talk normally, TED was inviting me “to participate in a moderated conversation that we would publish as an extension of your talk.” I’m always happy to converse and debate, so I agreed—too hastily, in retrospect. I had assumed that the phrase “an extension of your talk” was meant metaphorically—i.e., that this “moderated conversation” would be a separate video. Only later in the email exchange did I realize that it was meant literally. In other words, TED wanted my talk and this “moderated conversation” to be released as a single, combined video.

[Potato]

LOL, someone read "negatively related" and misinterpreted it to mean negative!!!

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

Have I mentioned most academics are idiots...especially in the social sciences?

Yes?

OK, I just need to reiterate that in light of that article.

[HaughtyFrank]

It's interesting how there's a downright fear of hearing the other side. Like maybe he's wrong about the colorblindness but then why not just disprove that? 

We're not talking about an inherently offensive idea here, just someone arguing that the current approach might not be the best one.

Basically the reaction makes me wonder if people really are offended by the idea or more offended by the suggestion that they could be wrong

[benji]

LOL, someone read "negatively related" and misinterpreted it to mean negative!!!

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

Have I mentioned most academics are idiots...especially in the social sciences?

Yes?

OK, I just need to reiterate that in light of that article.

In my experience, and this was initially surprising, most humanities/social science academics do not understand statistics. Not even the ones who constantly use them. Maybe especially them.

[Potato]

It's interesting how there's a downright fear of hearing the other side. Like maybe he's wrong about the colorblindness but then why not just disprove that? 

We're not talking about an inherently offensive idea here, just someone arguing that the current approach might not be the best one.

Basically the reaction makes me wonder if people really are offended by the idea or more offended by the suggestion that they could be wrong

Traditional scientific method: Propose a hypothesis, gather evidence, arrive at conclusions, encourage testing of conclusions by others, hopefully arrive at best estimation of truth. Rinse, repeat to the betterment of human understanding.

Millennial scientific method: Create truth, cherry pick evidence to support truth, declare end of need for research, question morals of anyone who dares to test declared truth. End. Human understanding doesn't need to be bettered because of my feelings.

[benji]

Science is a capitalist, colonialist and white supremacist plot.

[benji]

Today in billion dollar fortune heirs:

[Potato]

LOL, what a good troll

[benji]

BOOM, ROASTED

[Eric Cartman]

It's interesting how there's a downright fear of hearing the other side. Like maybe he's wrong about the colorblindness but then why not just disprove that? 

We're not talking about an inherently offensive idea here, just someone arguing that the current approach might not be the best one.

Basically the reaction makes me wonder if people really are offended by the idea or more offended by the suggestion that they could be wrong

The explicitly stated problem with colour blindness (or any other 'treat difference like it doesn't exist' behaviour, like sexuality or disability) is that it doesn't give extra credit for what a special little soldier you are to have overcome everything that being black / gay / disabled implies and just treats you like a fellow human who has had shit to deal with in their life like every other human has. It inherently leads to 'oppression olympics'.

[Polident]

Adding to the existing responses and theories. Tactics have become so volatile, the idea that you could’ve been wrong means you’ve been acting horribly evil. That you are. Some people can’t cope with that. So it can’t be true.

[Uncle]

[HaughtyFrank]

Wouldn't it have made more sense to honor the victims of police violence?

Edit: okay important context is that the previous stained glass depicted confederate generals Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson which is pretty absurd to have in a church
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/see-the-new-racial-justice-themed-stained-glass-windows-at-washington-national-cathedral-180982961/

Still think it would be more appropriate to dedicate it to the victims and not the protesters

[Uncle]

ah that is good context, it seems the church intentionally has stained glass depicting history rather than religious iconography

do wish it wasn't ugly, though, maybe focus on people rather than text on signs

[benji]

[benji]

[Potato]

Why shouldn't the name of an authoritarian, genocidal dictatorial regime be a pejorative? We do it with Nazi...

[TylenolJones]

Chinese Communist Party is not the preferred nomenclature.
Asian American Communist Party please!

[Eric Cartman]

ah that is good context, it seems the church intentionally has stained glass depicting history rather than religious iconography

do wish it wasn't ugly, though, maybe focus on people rather than text on signs

Church evangelicals sure do hate text on signs