Stereotypes Are Accurate (and Feminists at DePaul Are Man-Hating Witches)

Posted on | June 3, 2016 | 24 Comments

Kate Hardiman reports at the College Fix:

A Rutgers University social science professor set out to research how stereotypes are inaccurate so he could proclaim and promote that to the world with hard scientific data — but eventually made a startling discovery: most stereotypes are accurate.
Scholarly claims of “stereotype inaccuracy” are baseless, Dr. Lee Jussim told The College Fix in an interview.
“When I first began my research, I had assumed all those social scientists declaring stereotypes to be inaccurate were right, so I wanted to know the basis for those claims,” he said. “I would track down the source in an attempt to get the evidence. And slowly, over many years, I made a startling discovery — claims of stereotype inaccuracy were based on nothing.” . . .
Many researchers cite social psychologist Gordon Allport’s classic book “The Nature of Prejudice” in support of the claim that stereotypes are inaccurate or at least exaggerations of real differences. But Allport relied on a few anecdotes — hardly scientific evidence, Jussim said.
“Famous psychologists declaring stereotypes inaccurate without a citation or evidence meant anyone could likewise do so, thereby creating an illusion that pervasive stereotype inaccuracy was ‘settled science,’” Jussim said. “It was only if one looked for the empirical research underlying such claims did one discover that there was nothing there, just a black hole.” . . .

Read the whole thing. This is one of the ways “consensus” among intellectuals is harmful. Beliefs that are widely accepted in academia are never examined skeptically, and contradictory evidence is ignored or suppressed. A classic case was Dr. John Money’s theories of gender which were hugely influential in the 1970s and ’80s based on the so-called “John/Joan” case. Yet it turned out that Money’s research was fraudulent, and the “John/Joan” case actually proved the opposite of what he claimed. (See As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised as a Girl by John Colapinto.) Still, the lessons of that case have not been fully learned, because feminists have politicized research to such an extent that no one in academia can speak the simple truth: Boys and girls are different (as Lawrence Summers learned at Harvard).

One of the books I most often recommend is Thomas Sowell’s The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy, which examines how certain liberal prejudices distort public policy discussions. Chapter Four, “The Irrelevance of Evidence” shows how liberal beliefs are simply immune to facts. For example, no matter how much evidence you produce showing that the breakdown of the family is a major cause of poverty, liberals insist that racism is the main reason for poverty in America, even though it can be shown that family breakdown causes poverty for white people, too.

The willingness of people to accept explanations that confirm their own prejudices produces myths of “settled science” that can endure for decades within the elite intelligentsia. In his book The Quest for Cosmic Justice, Sowell examines the claims made in Vladimir Lenin’s Imperialism. Lenin asserted that the collapse of capitalism (which Marx had claimed was imminent in the mid-1800s) had been delayed because capitalists had found new sources of profit by exploiting the poor in undeveloped countries. It takes Sowell precisely two pages to destroy Lenin’s claim, showing that the “evidence” provided by Lenin was simply false. And yet, despite the demonstrable falsity of Lenin’s core thesis, and despite the subsequent failure of the Soviet economy, anti-capitalist ideas about “imperialism” and “exploitation” continue to be influential among intellectuals and policy makers. This is just one example of how the leftist prejudices in academia have prevented us from learning useful lessons from recent history. In fact, as John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr explain in their 2005 book In Denial: Historians, Communism, and Espionage, academics refuse even to admit the most basic truths of Cold War history, i.e., that the Communist Party in the United States was controlled by Moscow as an instrument of Soviet policy, used for espionage and subversion. The idea that “McCarthyism” was essentially paranoid — that there was no domestic threat from Soviet agents and that innocent liberals were wrongfully persecuted in a “witch hunt” — continues to be promoted in American universities, despite the abundant evidence that Joe McCarthy was basically right about the Communist menace. (See Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America’s Enemies by M. Stanton Evans.) The world looks much different when you are willing to examine facts that may contradict your own prejudices, but for decades the academic elite in America has ignored evidence that doesn’t conform to the “progressive” worldview.

DePaul University Is Decadent and Depraved

Those who dissent from the liberal consensus are routinely accused of “hate” — racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. — and critics are dismissed as “anti-intellectual,” a label that implies they are ignorant and opposed to education, per se. Deliberate slander is used to vilify opponents of political correctness, and we become accustomed to wildly inaccurate descriptions of academia’s critics. Just yesterday, the president of DePaul University issued an email describing Milo Yiannopoulos as “a speaker whose intent was to ignite racial tensions and demean those most marginalized.” The only possible response to such a bizarre smear is to quote George Orwell: “One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool.”

Who is the real threat to DePaul University students? DePaul is in Chicago, one of the most dangerous cities in America, where already 1,500 people have been shot so far this year, and where 66 people were murdered last month. A few years ago, DePaul honor student Francisco “Frankie” Valencia was shot to death and his girlfriend Daisy Camacho wounded by a member of the Maniac Latin Disciples gang. How can anyone imagine that a speech by Milo Yiannopoulos is more harmful to DePaul students than the criminal violence that plagues Chicago?

Students pay annual tuition of $36,361 to attend DePaul University, and evidence suggests the “education” they receive there actually makes them more ignorant than they were before they enrolled at DePaul.

Women’s and Gender Studies emphasizes feminist and social justice theory with focuses on agency, social responsibility, advocacy and activism. We help you understand the interconnectedness of systems and structures of gender, race, class, sexuality, age, ability, culture, religion and nation within broader historical, social, global, and transnational contexts.

So, what sort of “feminist and social justice theory” do you suppose DePaul students learn from their Women’s and Gender Studies classes?

Professor Beth Catlett (left); Professor Ann Russo (right)

The director of the program, Professor Beth Catlett, is an anti-marriage activist whose academic specialty is demonizing males as perpetrators of rape and domestic violence. Professor Catlett is the author of such works as “Class-Based Masculinities: Fatherhood, Divorce, and Hegemonic Ideals,” which denounces married men for their alleged “dominance over their wives and children,” calling for “the reorganization of family relationships” as a “positive social change” to be accomplished by “a massive campaign across our social structure.” The graduate program in Women’s and Gender Studies at DePaul, meanwhile, is directed by Professor Ann Russo, a militant lesbian who is co-author of a book praising the notorious man-hater Andrea Dworkin. In 2011, Professor Russo used her university email account to harass a Chicago restaurant that was hosting a Tea Party event. In February this year, Professor Russo was a featured speaker at an event at DePaul University:

The Center for Identity, Inclusion & Social Change, LGBTQ Studies and the LGBTQ Faculty and Staff Network at DePaul University hosted an intergenerational discussion concerning the identity label “lesbian” Feb. 29 at DePaul University’s Student Center.
Faculty members Lourdes Torres (professor of Latin American and Latino Studies) and Ann Russo (associate professor and graduate program director in women’s and gender studies and director of LGBTQ Studies) facilitated the talk.
Also on hand were DePaul University students and staff members Katy Weseman (LGBTQA student services coordinator at the Center for Identity, Inclusion & Social Change), Sara Furr (director, Center for Intercultural Programs) and Suresh Mudragada (assistant director at the Center for Identity, Inclusion & Social Change), among others. . . .
Russo said she identifies as a “lesbian with queer politics and a queer vision.” She noted the work she’s done in the area of lesbian-centered scholarship and activism, including the Battered Lesbian Network (in Boston), Lesbians Against Racism and Dykes Against Oppression.

Yes, an activist with “Dykes Against Oppression” is director of LGBTQ Studies at DePaul University, an allegedly Catholic institution where (a) students march in the annual Chicago Pride parade, but (b) riot when a homosexual speaker like Milo Yiannopoulos appears on campus.

What becomes obvious, to those who are willing to take a skeptical view of academia, is that “progressive” intellectuals are only interested in issues of sexuality for the same reason they are interested in race and gender, namely to convince young people that (a) they are victims of oppression, and (b) the way to end their oppression is to vote for Democrats.

Just by the way, did you know there are witches in Chicago?

In real life, a trio of performance artists who call themselves WITCH will confront gentrification by placing a “hex” on Logan Square, thereby putting a “protective spell” on the area. That hex is ostensibly meant to ward off the evil spirits better known as luxury apartments.
The trio said that their performance is a mixture of art and protest. “We are calling them actions because it brings a level of seriousness and attention to the social justice aspects,” Jessica Caponigro, told Chicagoist. “We’re not sitting around playing dress up.”
The performers hope to bring the witchcraft’s historic role in social movements to the forefront.

Thirty years ago, in April 1986, DePaul University hosted “Her Holiness: Maiden, Mother, Crone,” a celebration of the so-called “Triple Goddess” of neo-pagan Wicca sponsored by Limina, a heretical Chicago-based group of pro-abortion Catholic feminists (see p. 81 in Ungodly Rage: The Hidden Face of Catholic Feminism by Donna Steichen). Also, for more than 15 years, DePaul University employed the late Professor Patricia Monaghan, author of such works as Seasons of the Witch: Poetry and Songs to the Goddess (1992) and The Goddess Path: Myths, Invocations, and Rituals (1999). But all this is probably just a coincidence, I’m sure.

A reminder: Every Single Word of That Is True. pic.twitter.com/MFiK6xdFO3

— FreeStacy (@Not_RSMcCain) April 1, 2016

+ + + + +

Contrary to what feminists have often claimed, patriarchy is usually just another word for “paying the bills,” so please remember the Five Most Important Words in the English Language:

HIT THE FREAKING TIP JAR!

Never doubt God answers prayers. Thanks in advance.

Category: Education, Intellectuals, Sex Trouble

Comments

24 Responses to “Stereotypes Are Accurate (and Feminists at DePaul Are Man-Hating Witches)”

M. Thompson
June 3rd, 2016 @ 11:29 am

And yet, laughing at them is impolite. Their insanity needs to be pointed out.
Fail Burton
June 3rd, 2016 @ 11:49 am

And craziest of all is the fact these social justice liberals believe in these stereotypes no less than so-called “racist” conservatives. No one in Black Lives Matter is doing the obvious thing which is the cure for white supremacy: moving to Africa. And if they have the money I guarantee you they will not be living in black neighborhoods.

Stereotypes are in fact true, but you have to have some context in which to view them. In all my travels in the Third World I have never once seen the vulgar and confrontational behaviors common as dirt to black Americans in public here in Latino or Asian countries. In 3 months each in Bali in successive years, the only time I saw such behavior was when a half dozen black American navy guys on leave were walking around Kuta Beach. Their behavior was shameful.

But that is a cultural thing. You will see similar behaviors in Belize City and Livingston, Guatemala among blacks who constantly harass white tourists but nothing like that among black kids in Aswan, Egypt. Their parents would box their ears if they did something like that.

Feminists are caught in a bizarre black hole of a perceptual trap where they advance the cause of biological supremacy even as they claim to be against it, and they do it based on stereotypes common to all supremacist ideologies. Their “moral ethos” when it comes to such matters is not one whit different than Nazism.
Critical Eye
June 3rd, 2016 @ 1:24 pm

Laughing at them is impolite only if they have a mental illness, and cannot help what they believe. If they choose to be fools, they are fair game, and pointing and laughing is an appropriate response. Someone has to tell the Emperor his new clothes are imaginary.
Fail Burton
June 3rd, 2016 @ 1:34 pm

There is something terribly wrong in this country and it’s going to take a lot more than Trump to fix it. Anyone who’s read the Depaul U’s president’s letter about Milo knows that is the face of madness. In fact a significant part of that U appears to be in the grip of madness. Dworkin? Really? The woman who claimed a matriarchy of Hobbits passed on their powers of “telepathy” and “levitation” to a secret coven of European witches, 9 million of whom were subsequently burned at the stake? That’s not academic rigor, that’s insanity.
DeadMessenger
June 3rd, 2016 @ 3:25 pm

So now we confirm what normal people have known all along, which is that “Scholarly claims of ‘stereotype inaccuracy’ are baseless”. Or rather, normal people confirmed what they knew all along. Academics and liberal “scientists” are affected not a jot.

Even more frightening than carbon emissions (/sarc) is the epidemic of voluntary blindness and stupidity overtaking this country.

We see in Daniel 5, during Belshazzar’s debauched party featuring the defilement of the Jewish Temple implements, the fingers of God appearing and writing on the wall. We have to give Belshazzar some credit here, because he actually had the good sense to soil himself out of fear.

Were this same thing to happen today, academics and liberal “scientists” and SJWs would literally not even see the fingers of God, nor the writing on the wall because they have totally and willingly blinded themselves to any facts that do not conform to their preferred worldview (which is to say, all extant facts.)
DeadMessenger
June 3rd, 2016 @ 3:30 pm

One could use the Dworkin premise to craft a pretty funny SF book, though.
NeoWayland
June 3rd, 2016 @ 3:51 pm

Witches?

No, most of them would run scared if they encountered witchcraft. They could no more handle that than they could get a job outside the university. Real witchcraft requires practicality, not a costume.
Robert Evans
June 3rd, 2016 @ 4:28 pm

I’ve often observed that the only difference between stereotyping and practicing anthropology is a Bachelor’s degree. Both consist of drawing conclusions about human groups by observing the behavior of members of those groups.
Joe Joe
June 3rd, 2016 @ 6:33 pm

There is a difference between prejudice–a pre-judging of others or other groups before you know anything about them–and stereotyping, which, at its best, relies on a great deal of experience with a given group and knowing quite a bit about them.

The two terms became conflated–especially by Allport, whose writings declare that stereotypes lead to prejudice, when, in fact, prejudice requires not having the knowledge that goes into creating stereotypes.
DavidD
June 3rd, 2016 @ 10:06 pm

Do these people ever get headaches from having to pretend to believe all this crap?
Dana
June 4th, 2016 @ 7:39 am

Our esteemed host wrote:

For example, no matter how much evidence you produce showing that the breakdown of the family is a major cause of poverty, liberals insist that racism is the main reason for poverty in America, even though it can be shown that family breakdown causes poverty for white people, too.

Racism has to be the main reason for poverty in America, because if it is family breakdown:

1 – Poor people could be held at least partially responsible for their own poverty;
2 – The liberal idea that a single mother can be just as good a parent as a married couple is challenged;
3 – The notion that there are separate male and female, paternal and maternal roles is reinforced; and
4 – The fact that black families suffer family breakdown at twice the rate of whites becomes an inherent criticism of the black community.

Such things cannot be tolerated!
Dana
June 4th, 2016 @ 7:41 am

Didn’t you know? Real witchcraft has now been defined by Harry Potter.
JT
June 4th, 2016 @ 11:22 am

So you are telling me that humans, who are intelligent and social creatures, have a fine-tuned capacity to make conclusions about other human beings that works quickly and is accurate most of the time?

SHOCKING
Stereotypes Are Accurate (and Feminists at DePaul Are Man-Hating Witches) | Living in Anglo-America
June 4th, 2016 @ 11:29 am

[…] Posted on | June 3, 2016 | 12 Comments […]
Dana
June 4th, 2016 @ 2:43 pm

I believe that you need at least a Master’s, and more probably your Doctorate.
Dana
June 4th, 2016 @ 2:46 pm

Are you kidding? We can’t even tell what sex people are anymore!

I used to be able to tell that not all of these people are girls, yet now I find that I have been wrong, horribly wrong.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/09/02/04/2BE2D08600000578-0-image-a-48_1441165908568.jpg
Jeanette Victoria ?????????
June 4th, 2016 @ 6:07 pm

Never met a “real” witch because there is no such thing. Everyone I knew just made stuff up. and this includes the big guys such as Joe Wilson, the Finnin’s, Ed Fitch and Ray Buckland. They just make their “tradition” up, a pitch of this and dash of that and a good heaping of imagination
CC
June 4th, 2016 @ 6:27 pm

This points out a couple of things about academia.
1) The department these ladies head is NOT an academic department, it is a wing of the democratic party. They are not teaching facts and methods but a party line (a particular activism to achieve particular goals that not everyone in the world agrees with). Since when did one particular party become a valid academic discipline?
2) An academic discipline is supposed to be able to discern the difference between truth and rubbish. Lots of the things written by these people is inane gibberish which should disqualify them from being professors. Witchcraft? Really?
NeoWayland
June 4th, 2016 @ 6:30 pm

You are aware you also just described psychiatry and psychology as well, aren’t you?

Rather than get into a long discussion of what works under what circumstances, as well as debating what should and should not be socially acceptable, I’ll just leave you with one of mine.

?The patterns we see in the universe may be nothing more than longing and human conceit. But if using those patterns give us a desired result, then the patterns are a useful fiction. The “ultimate reality” or even our belief doesn’t necessarily matter, if we behave as if we believe and successfully reach our goals.?
NeoWayland
June 4th, 2016 @ 6:37 pm

Most of the “rank and file” do believe. They want to help save the World.

The ones who know better, well, they are exploiting the others and can’t be trusted. They’re the dangerous ones.
Jeanette Victoria ?????????
June 4th, 2016 @ 6:40 pm

I’m a retired psych nurse and for the most part a substantial amount of psychology is simply garbage.

And most of the junk today that is called psychology is pretty much all garbage driven by prescribed social agendas.
NeoWayland
June 4th, 2016 @ 6:45 pm

Yep.

But it’s socially accepted.

Still mojo though.
From Around the Blogroll – The First Street Journal.
June 5th, 2016 @ 6:47 am

[…] Via Robert Stacey Stacy McCain: […]
News of the Week (June 5th, 2016) | The Political Hat
June 5th, 2016 @ 2:53 pm

[…] Stereotypes Are Accurate (and Feminists at DePaul Are Man-Hating Witches) Students pay annual tuition of $36,361 to attend DePaul University, and evidence suggests the “education” they receive there actually makes them more ignorant than they were before they enrolled at DePaul. […]