Morons of the Internet: Medusa Magazine (Part 5)

This is the segment where I scour my favourite forums around the internet and find some particularly interesting articles about current affairs told in the words of my favourite human beings.

In this edition we're once again back with Medusa Magazine, who are now taking on science. Oh yes, we're finally going to see the most anticipated bout of the century between some nutty feminist magazine with a history of publishing pure shit, and the scientific community. This definitely won't be a one sided battle at all.
_____________________________________________________________________________
https://medusamagazine.com/reclaiming-facts-and-logic-from-the-male-domination-of-the-past-centuries
_____________________________________________________________________________

So just because a select few men made great discoveries the idea of discovering anything, and also the concept of rational thought, is an inherently negative thing. It's irrelevant what their political stance or sense of logic is because the great thing about their scientific findings is that they're objective facts backed up with a wealth of evidence, unlike your meandering nonsense. The subject of science and the search for the truth doesn't care if you're a man, or have a dominant perspective, because these traits are irrelevant to the advancement of the scientific community. You know that phrase 'facts don't care about your feelings'? Yeah, that applies here.

I just love how you can brush off any other reasons why women tend not to take STEM courses, because of course sexism just has to be the answer. You don't explain why sexism is the cause, yet alone provide a shred of evidence, but as long as you're convinced then I'm sure this is a done deal. I can instantly see the many downfalls of science when faced with this impeccable reasoning. However, please tell me, if this enlightenment favors a male perspective then why are the vast majority of biology students female? If you're suggesting the reason women tend not to study certain sciences is because of male defined reasoning then why should anyone give a fuck if women aren't being accepted onto STEM courses? If you don't understand basic reasoning then how could you ever possibly understand or appreciate scientific disciplines. In any case, what does it matter who pioneered what area? I'm pretty sure Marie Curie was a pioneer for both chemistry and physics, which are two subjects you claim women don't participate in. Tell me, why is her feminine bias any more valid than the masculine bias of Newton?

So now the argument is that this male superiority was a positive thing. Nice reasoning skills on display here. The good news is we get some evidence for once. The bad news is that these philosophers and psychologists have no relevance to this argument over scientific methods, because as far as I'm concerned they're just spurting their unfounded opinions that are HEAVILY influenced by their personal biases, with some of them being that dreaded male bias. Tell me, if all perspectives are used to maintain power then what fucking use is it reclaiming facts from men when women would obviously have an equally biased perspective?

I still have absolutely no idea how this is supposed to be a serious revision of the Enlightenment Era, as the core of the argument is just vague waffle that either contradicts itself or isn't remotely related to science. For example it turns out that expressions are used to maintain power in society. Expressions that aren't related to science. Presumably this heinous trend can be solved if a woman says 'breadwinner' enough times, and she becomes the man of the house, therefore gaining societal power. I still have no idea what this has to do with science, and I'm not even going to address a point as stupid as that one about first names and last names. You can't seriously believe that's suitable and valid evidence for a generalisation of this scale do you? I would however agree that many female scientists have been purposefully obscured by their male counterparts over time, but that doesn't mean their discoveries are any more valid than those of their male counterparts. If you have this attitude then you clearly have little respect for the subject of science, and actually just want to use it as a feeble excuse to push your own narrative.

Why do you assume women can't get their head around logic? This is one fucked up argument based on biological determinism straight out of the eighteenth century. This is like claiming that years of cookery knowledge should be thrown out the window because traditionally women have been chained to the kitchen stove, and therefore have instigated this biased narrative on the world of cookery that men can't possibly decipher. Calling cookery sexist is actually far more rational than this writer, who believes that logic and facts are sexist. Even the principles of science are oppressive to this moron. Can someone please just shoot me in the brain and put me out of my misery. Why do I put myself through this idiotic shit?

To be honest I'm fucking glad that individuals like this writer who can't understand basic logic and reasoning are hounded out of advanced scientific degrees. That's not sexism, you just haven't met the entry standards of your courses. It's then even worse to claim that anything men say or formulate is sexist, no matter how truthful that particular piece of information may be. Honestly, this is one of the most fucked up and idiotic conspiracy theories I've ever had the misfortune of reading.

Well thank God we finally got to the central, and only relevant point made in this argument. It's only taken us two paragraphs of pointless drivel to get too. I'm still not sure what difference I would rather have in the world: The pursuit of knowledge driven by rational thought and factual information that leads to such benefits as the eradication of certain diseases and a greater understanding of the world around us, or women's studies that revolves around nothing but the feelings of a selected few subjective opinions spreading nothing but misinformation and moronic blog posts. Oh wait, you need to engineer the internet in order to make moronic blog posts. Good job gender studies has that covered then. You said it yourself, the male dominated Age of Enlightenment led to unparalleled intellectual dominance in the Western World.

Remember guys, factual information is far more valid if you're oppressed. Darwin for example came from a wealthy background, and so therefore we can easily deduce that the theory of evolution is a lie. However L. Ron Hubbard, who was associated with the oppressed Native Americans during his early years, must therefore hold the objective truths of the world in his religious cult of Scientology. Yes, I can instantly see why this is a more rational way of thinking.

How in any way is science being a centuries old method of thought a bad thing? The wonder of science is that the area is constantly developing with every major breakthrough, yet you want to overturn this process because apparently you think it hasn't aged well. Ironically the idea of rational thought is ageing much better than the cult of radical feminism, thanks in no small part to morons like yourself that just love to impose your sociological shite into areas they don't belong.

Somehow I highly doubt this idiot could ever reclaim logic, as claiming something means you have to actually have a concept of the thing you're claiming in the first place. And in any case, how the fuck do you reclaim objective reasoning? The subject of science is built upon objective facts, so fuck off with your view that somehow a subjective narrative is superior to hundreds of years of scientific research. The pursuit of knowledge doesn't give a single fuck about your ideas of inclusivity, or who discovered what particular area, unlike the laughable degree that is women's studies, so take that shit and shove it up your ass. Leave academic work to academics and go back to whinging about how oppressed you think you are.