Are universities interested in discovering truth? Not if the truth is not politically correct. Consider this story reported by the radically-leftist, government-run BBC.
James Caspian wanted to write a thesis on “detransition” as part of his master’s degree in counselling and psychotherapy at Bath Spa University.
He said it was rejected by the university’s ethics committee because it could be “politically incorrect”.
[…]Mr Caspian, a counsellor who specialises in therapy for transgender people, told Radio 4: “I was astonished at that decision.
“I think that a university exists to encourage discussion, research – dissent even, challenging perhaps ideas that are out of date or not particularly useful.”
He says he wanted to study people who had swapped gender and then changed their minds after coming across evidence of a growing number of people who regretted having the surgery and finding no research had been done into the subject.
His proposal was rejected by the university’s “ethics committee”. How come?
“The fundamental reason given was that it might cause criticism of the research on social media and criticism of the research would be criticism of the university and they also added it was better not to offend people,” he said.
According to the Times, it was rejected because “engaging in a potentially politically incorrect piece of research carries a risk to the university”.
Life Site News notes that there is no problem with the author’s bias – he is progressive on transgender rights:
Caspian is decidedly pro-“transgender.” According to his bio, since 2001 he has been a Trustee of the Beaumont Trust, a British charity “dedicated to education about and support of transgendered, transsexual and cross-dressing individuals.”
A perusal of Beaumont Trust’s website reveals it to be very friendly to “transgender” ideology. For example, one piece on the site inveighs against “internalized transphobia,” the “T” parallel to “internalized homophobia” (an idea used to rationalize homosexuality as a natural and normal “orientation”).
This story shows the real priorities of the university, especially on social and moral issues. If the university is not a place to discover truth, then why should we give them any respect in our society? It’s one thing to spend money to get an education, and something else entirely to spend money to get an indoctrination.
Canada is a country that likes to show the world how generous and compassionate they are by letting in thousands and thousands of refugees, many of whom cannot speak English and do not accept the values of Western Civilization, such as human rights and the rule of law.
The Canadian police arrested a refugee from Somalia on suspicion of terrorist acts early Sunday after a police officer in Edmonton was struck with a car and stabbed outside a football game. Four other people were later deliberately hit by a U-Haul truck driven by the same suspect, the authorities said.
[…]The police did not identify the suspect beyond saying he was Somali. CBC News, quoting unidentified sources, said his name was Abdulahi Hasan Sharif.
Rod Knecht, chief of the Edmonton Police Service, said that officers had found an Islamic State flag in the car that hit the police officer. “Currently, we believe this is an individual who acted alone,” Chief Knecht said in a statement released on Sunday morning.
An article from the far-left, government-run CBC reported:
A former co-worker of the Somali refugee CBC News has identified as the man arrested in a weekend attack in Edmonton says Abdulahi Hasan Sharif was an ISIS sympathizer years before Saturday’s violent events, and that he had reported him to police.
[…]”He had major issues with polytheists. He said they need to die. That sort of thing. I only had a handful of conversations with him about it; those only occurred when there were just two of us in the work room.”
Muslims often refer to Christians as polytheists because of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. But these anti-Christian threats of genocide were no concern for the Edmonton police. Police in Canada are carefully trained in political correctness and promoting diversity. They are warned that they will lose their jobs if they have any bias against Canada’s favored Liberal Party voting blocs. When the co-worker warned the police about the refugee, they had to decide whether to take the threat seriously or side with political correctness and diversity. There is even a criminal law against “Islamophobia” in Canada that punishes people who disagree with radical Islam. The politically correct police would not want to lose their jobs and their fat pensions by running afoul of that. So they ignored the red flags raised by the Canadian taxpayer.
This was not the only time he was investigated, though, as the far-left CBC reports:
In 2015, after a complaint was made to the Edmonton Police Service that the man was displaying signs of extremism, members of the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team (INSET) launched an investigation, Degrand said.
The suspect was interviewed by members of INSET, but there was “insufficient evidence” to make an arrest and the suspect was deemed “not a threat,” Degrand said.
Again, there is a law against Islamophobia, and all the police are carefully trained not to do anything that could get them into trouble with their politically correct bosses. This is not the first time that Canadian police have turned their backs on victims because of the “diversity” of the criminals. At other times, citizens called the police to protect their property and their safety from First Nations criminals, and the police just turned their backs as the vehicles of the taxpayers were burned. Because of political correctness. Taxpayers are good enough to pay the salaries of the politically correct policemen. But taxpayers are not good enough to have their property and safety protected by policemen.
No charges of terrorism
Now, you might think that all this violence against police and civilians would be prosecuted as an instance of terrorism. But you don’t know Canada.
The radically-leftist, government-owned CBC reports that the government says that they did nothing wrong, and that no government procedures will be changing:
The man accused of stabbing an Edmonton police constable on the weekend and running down four pedestrians on Jasper Avenue has not been charged with terrorism-related offences.
[…]Sharif came to Canada in 2012, and at the time raised no red flags for immigration officials, Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale said Monday.
Speaking to reporters in Ottawa, Goodale said Sharif arrived through a “regular port of entry” and obtained refugee status at the time.
The minister said events in Edmonton over the weekend in no way indicate that Canada’s screening process needs to be enhanced, or that the system failed.
“The procedures that are in place, that I have had the opportunity to observe and that Minister [Ahmed] Hussen is vigorously administering, are procedures that place a very high premium on public safety and security,” Goodale said.
Ahmed Hussen is the Liberal Party’s Ministry of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship.
I’m all for ethnic diversity, but not when it means letting some people have exemptions if they break the law. The law should apply equally to everyone, and the police should take all reports equally, regardless of political correctness.
Google recently fired a software engineer who asked them to do a better job of promoting diversity by actually appealing to women’s different needs and desires. He suggested more collaborative coding (“pair programming”) and more part-time work options. Google responded to his suggestions by ejecting him forcibly from their left-wing politically correct echo chamber. Google executives claim that their company is rooted in science. Well, is there a science of sex differences? Who is right?
This article from The Globe and Mail, which is the more leftist of Canada’s two national newspapers, is written by a PhD in the field of sexual neuroscience from York University.
Despite how it’s been portrayed, the memo was fair and factually accurate. Scientific studies have confirmed sex differences in the brain that lead to differences in our interests and behaviour.
As mentioned in the memo, gendered interests are predicted by exposure to prenatal testosterone – higher levels are associated with a preference for mechanically interesting things and occupations in adulthood. Lower levels are associated with a preference for people-oriented activities and occupations. This is why STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) fields tend to be dominated by men.
We see evidence for this in girls with a genetic condition called congenital adrenal hyperplasia, who are exposed to unusually high levels of testosterone in the womb. When they are born, these girls prefer male-typical, wheeled toys, such as trucks, even if their parents offer more positive feedback when they play with female-typical toys, such as dolls. Similarly, men who are interested in female-typical activities were likely exposed to lower levels of testosterone.
As well, new research from the field of genetics shows that testosterone alters the programming of neural stem cells, leading to sex differences in the brain even before it’s finished developing in utero. This further suggests that our interests are influenced strongly by biology, as opposed to being learned or socially constructed.
Her article is filled with linked to peer-reviewed papers, although I removed the links when quoting her article.
She even links to peer-reviewed papers to refute the Google science-deniers:
Many people, including a former Google employee, have attempted to refute the memo’s points, alleging that they contradict the latest research.
I’d love to know what “research done […] for decades” he’s referring to, because thousands of studies would suggest otherwise. A single study, published in 2015, did claim that male and female brains existed along a “mosaic” and that it isn’t possible to differentiate them by sex, but this has been refuted by four – yes, four – academicstudies since.
This includes a study that analyzed the exact same brain data from the original study and found that the sex of a given brain could be correctly identified with 69-per-cent to 77-per-cent accuracy.
[…]Contrary to what detractors would have you believe, women are, on average, higher in neuroticism and agreeableness, and lower in stress tolerance.
I think the key point in this debate is one that the author makes herself: women ought to be able to find ways to study and work on things that are interesting to them. Of course some jobs pay more than others because they are more productive, and of course we should make women aware of the consequences of studying nonsense subjects that don’t pay. We don’t want women running up student loans they’ll never pay back, then defaulting on them and passing the costs off to taxpayers. But we shouldn’t try to push women into STEM jobs by watering down the requirements of those jobs – that just treats the people who can do the jobs very unfairly.
In my own case, I prefer women who do have STEM degrees and STEM work experience, but that’s because I think that STEM education and work experience grinds out some of the characteristics of women that make them bad partners for goal-directed men like myself. I have every reason for wanting more women in STEM, but I want them to do it honestly. I want them to be treated fairly, and not get a whole bunch of advantages in education and the workplace just because they are women.
The Toronto Sun reports on a sociology professor who gave her students an assignment – an assignment with some very peculiar constraints.
A Ryerson University student who wanted to write a paper on the “myth” of the male-female wage gap was told by her prof that not only was she wrong, she should only rely on feminist journals for her assignment instead of business sources which “blame women,” her sister says.
Josephine Mathias, 21, a fourth-year political science student at University of Toronto, took to YouTube Wednesday to criticize the assignment given her twin Jane for a sociology class.
[…]After Jane sent an email describing her intention to write about the wag gap, her instructor replied that her premise was wrong, Josephine said.
Here’s what the professor said:
“Perhaps you want to write your paper on the glass ceiling. You need to look at feminist sources on this issue…Do NOT use business sources. They blame women. The reality is patriarchy,” says the instructor’s email, posted online.
In a copy of the assignment provided to the Toronto Sun by Josephine, the instructor also notes that Ontario and Canada government websites and Statistics Canada will not be considered scholarly sources.
“Government websites state government policy that is devoid of analysis, and usually reproduces mainstream stereotypes, assumptions and misconceptions,” the assignment says.
So, that’s what you get when you enroll in non-STEM courses in a non-STEM program. What is interesting is that the professor makes about $167,000 a year. That’s more than I make, and I actually do useful work! It’s also higher than the average professor’s salary.
Here’s a video Josephine made about the assignment, and the so-called wage gap:
This is not the only political correctness going on in Toronto. A professor at the University of Toronto is also in trouble for refusing to use gender-neutral pronouns.
Dr. Jordan Peterson was bemused at my surprise. “I know, when you first discover it, you say ‘What the hell; what’s going on here?’” he acknowledged. “Unfortunately, it’s pretty par for the course. This is standard practice.”
He should know. The U of T psychology prof ignited a firestorm of criticism last fall from trans activists, faculty and students when he ran afoul of the PC police by posting a video on his YouTube channel saying that he wouldn’t use gender-neutral pronouns such as “they,” “ze” and “zir.” Protesters called for his dismissal and someone poured glue into the lock of his office door.
Where’s the intellectual discourse, the room for contrary views?
“This is the thing people don’t understand about postmodernism: postmodernists don’t debate. They don’t believe in debate, it’s not part of the creed,” Peterson argued.
“All these ethnic studies, gender studies, most of the humanities, a good chunk of the social sciences, it’s all gone down the postmodern rabbit hole. There’s no debate. It’s a political war. You don’t talk to the other side.”
Dialogue with those you don’t agree with would be giving them a platform — and respect — they don’t deserve. Instead, you just shut it down. “This is how it is. This is a university,” he sighed. “It sure would be nice if was unbelieveable, but unfortunately, it’s how it is.”
This is why I keep telling young people that they need to avoid non-STEM programs at secular universities. You’re borrowing a ton of money to become less intelligent. The professors tell you what to believe and you believe it and repeat it like a trained parrot, and then they give you a diploma and you’re $40,000 in debt with no job prospects. Don’t be stupid – understand that there are a lot of people at the university who have no business being there. They have no useful knowledge to give you. Pretty much every non-STEM professor or instructor at a secular university is an imbecile.
This is what college does to students:
You’re not learning anything from an imbecile, except how to ape an imbecile yourself.
This problem is only going to stop when we cut off the funding for universities and cut off the per-pupil funding from government as well. Funding for universities should come from loans made by companies to the individual students, who then promise to work for those companies for a certain number of years at graduation. The money should not be handed to students to go party, with no strings attached.
Administrators at Carmel High School are facing the threat of a lawsuit after removing a pro-life poster from the building.
Liberty Counsel, a nonprofit organization “dedicated to advancing religious freedom,” says administrators removed the poster display created by Carmel Teens for Life after another student complained that it was “offensive.”
The club reportedly spent over 25 hours painting the display which included 300 hearts, each representing 10 lives, to symbolize the written statement “3,000 Lives Are Ended Each Day.”
When they were caught red-handed, the fascist administrators tried to threaten the students to stop them from seeking legal advice about their first amendment rights:
In addition, administrators reportedly asked members of the club sign an agreement, which prohibits the club from using the word “abortion” in future displays or other forms of communication. The agreement reads “I will not have communications with outside agencies as a representative of the Teens for Life Club without prior approval from the Sponsors…” and “Prior approval for all communications regarding the Teens for Life Club will be requested from the Teens for Life Club Sponsors…”
The organization says members were threatened that if they did not sign the agreement immediately, the club sponsors would be forced to resign.
Liberty Counsel has more on the strong-arm bully tactics of the radical feminists:
The School District summoned the club’s leaders, demanding that they sign an agreement that they would not seek outside legal counsel or parental input, that they would have to receive prior approval for “all communications,” and that they not use the word “abortion” in any communications, including Facebook. There was also a threat to withdraw teacher sponsorship if the teens did not sign the “Agreement.”
[…]It is highly improper for school officials to demand students forgo their rights and promise to not seek legal counsel or parental input.
That was their response to destroying the poster – cover it up, threaten the teens, don’t tell your parents, don’t tell the lawyers, don’t tell the media. These are the kinds of people who run public schools – little left-wing dictators who hate the values of the parents who pay their salaries. They are more interested in lobbying for pay increases than providing children with an education that allows all points of view to be heard. Zero critical thinking from these secular left education school graduates. They can’t get jobs in the real world, but they are good at bullying children in a government-run monopoly.
Leftist Indiana news station RTV6 reported on the story:
Carmel Clay Schools
Carmel Clay Schools denies the rights of students to express their opinions, except if they agree with the secular leftist fascist school administrators. They are trying to cover up the way that they censored the free speech rights of the students. Their response was to threaten the students, to make the problem go away without having to admit fault. The school district allows posters from young Democrats and LGBT activists, just not from pro-lifers.
It’s important to understand that school adminstrators and their government allies are generally not moral people.
Ben Levin, the man who “appeared to have it all,” was today sentenced to three years in prison for three child pornography offences.
[…]The once-tenured professor at Ontario’s Institute for Studies in Education had a “hidden, dark side” in a “depraved on-line world” as a “deviant mentor” who made “insidious attempts to normalize the sexual exploitation of children,” McArthur noted in her 23-page reasons for sentence.
[…]A member of Liberal Premier Kathleen Wynne’s transition team, Levin was deputy minister of education in 2009 when he and then-minister of education Wynne developed the “equity and inclusive education strategy,” part of which was the 2010 radical sex-ed curriculum shelved by then-Premier Dalton McGuinty after parental backlash. The 2015 sex-ed curriculum is virtually the same as the 2010 version.
[…]Levin himself claimed in a 2010 interview: “I was the deputy minister of education. In that role, I was the chief civil servant. I was responsible for the operation of the Ministry of Education and everything that they do; I was brought in to implement the new education policy.”
[…]Levin pled guilty on March 3, 2015, to three of an original seven child pornography related charges.
Many people go into the education system to normalize immoral behavior, and naturally they teach students to feel offended at any sort of judging of their immorality. When one student is offended by a pro-life viewpoint, the teachers and administrators naturally side with the pro-abortion student. They don’t side with the moral person, they side with the immoral person. Often, they are acting to protect their own immorality because they are sensitive about being judged by those who are moral.
How are we going to solve this problem of administrator discrimination against moral people? We can’t fire the administrators, it’s almost impossible to get education officials removed from a government-supported monopoly. But there is a way to solve it.
The first thing to understand is that parents really need to be promoting school choice as a public policy. When parents pay money to the government, it is handed out to schools willy-nilly, and not tied to school performance. There is no accountability to parents, and that favors the misconduct of the administrators. The simple fact of the matter is that increased spending on education does not result in improved student performance. The money is often eaten up by hiring far left school administrators whose job is to indoctrinate the students with secular leftist propaganda, not to teach them marketable skills. Parents want their kids to get jobs that will pay well.
The right way to achieve this goal of student-centered education is to stop the mandatory collection of taxes for education by the government, abolish the federal Department of Education, and put the money earned by parents back in the hands of the parents, so that they can purchase the education from the school that is focused on teaching children to invent products and services for customers. Indoctrination in global warming, Marxism and LGBT activism is not what parents want for their kids. It doesn’t make the child independent and self-sufficient.