Yer Tax $$$,$$$ at “Work”!


RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Here’s a real hoax that almost everybody fell for:

    Sokal’s Hoax

    “An article bearing the portentous title “Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity” ran in the Spring 1996 issue of the cultural studies journal Social Text.”

    Comment by ZZMike — March 8, 2016 @ 12:39 pm

  2. Isn’t it wrong to pre-assign gender roles to ice? We should ask how it identifies first.

    Comment by Fawkes News (Choose Cruz or Lose) — March 8, 2016 @ 1:52 pm

  3. Thanks for posting this, Claire.
    Love the snowflakes allusion.

    Ace of Spades savaged it delightfully, so much better than I can.

    I will gladly vote for a guy who will prosecute academic fraud (tax funded)
    or one who will eliminate the unconstitutional funding and regulation of academic activities.

    Comment by DougM (quiet, keeps to himself, kind of a loner, nobody thought he’d do anything like this) — March 8, 2016 @ 2:08 pm

  4. Do these people qualify as social just ice warriors?

    No just ice – no peace.

    I usually drink my scotch neat, but sometimes I add just ice.

    (Feel free to add others …)

    Comment by Lord of the Fleas — March 8, 2016 @ 3:01 pm

  5. An alternative study on frigidity?

    Comment by mech — March 8, 2016 @ 4:01 pm

  6. What, is one of the special snowflakes upset with the term “hoar frost?”

    Comment by accipiterNW — March 8, 2016 @ 8:42 pm

  7. Can someone explain what the fuck that fourth paragraph is talking about? Looks like a bunch of words randomly puked up onto my screen.

    “Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions,” the paper said.

    Comment by MikeG — March 8, 2016 @ 9:11 pm

  8. ^ Yeah, I didn’t quite get the “human-ice interactions” thing, either.
    DId they mean hockey or cocktails?

    Comment by DougM (quiet, keeps to himself, kind of a loner, nobody thought he’d do anything like this) — March 8, 2016 @ 10:09 pm

  9. The Onion might as well close up shop. They can’t beat this with a hammer.

    Comment by Daemon — March 8, 2016 @ 10:30 pm

  10. ^^Did they mean hockey or cocktails?
    Trapped in the Antarctic ice pack. See ‘Shackleton’.
    100+ years later, she’s upset because the man-pigs didn’t allow no wymyn to see how tough zhey were on that expedition.
    She wouldn’t have liked the pay though.

    Comment by dick, not quite dead white guy — March 9, 2016 @ 8:33 am

  11. 2 ^ Fawkes
    Last I understood, glaciers didn’t give a rat’s ass what gender you, them or anyone else is. They just glacier.

    Comment by bo1921 — March 9, 2016 @ 4:38 pm

  12. MikeG : That’s because you haven’t gone through 3 or 4 years of post-modern textual analysis. To those enlightened beings, it’s crystal clear (ice-clear):

    ” feminist glaciology framework .. lead[s] to more just and equitable science and human-ice interaction.”

    Unlike the 1912 Titanic-ice interaction, which was of course unjust – because poor people died and rich people got saved.

    Comment by ZZMike — March 9, 2016 @ 7:28 pm

  13. ^^ Oh, c’mon. the Titanic committed a micro-aggression against the iceberg, whereupon the iceberg committed an act of social justice in retaliation.

    Sheesh! Do I have to explain everything?

    Comment by Fat Baxter — March 9, 2016 @ 8:52 pm

  14. I want my money back.

    Comment by mojo — March 10, 2016 @ 8:35 am

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Close this window.

0.206 Powered by WordPress