Political Correctness Is Ruining Academic Journals

The stupidity of these journals says a lot about what's taught at colleges today.


If you are an American college professor, the way you get a raise or tenure is by getting papers published in "academic journals."

The stupidity of these journals says a lot about what's taught at colleges today.

Recently, three people sent in intentionally ridiculous "research" to prominent journals of women studies, gender studies, race studies, sexuality studies, obesity studies, and queer studies.

"The scholarship in these disciplines is utterly corrupted," says Dr. Peter Boghossian of Portland State University. "They have placed an agenda before the truth."

To show that, hoaxer and mathematician James Lindsay says, "We rewrote a section of Mein Kampf as intersectional feminism" and got it published in Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work.

For another paper, they claimed to have "closely" examined genitals of 10,000 dogs in dog parks to learn about "rape culture and queer performativity."

Boghossian had assumed, "There's no way they're gonna believe that we did this!"

But the journal Gender, Place & Culture did, calling the paper "excellent scholarship."

Seven journals accepted the absurd papers, as I show in my latest video.

Hoaxers Boghossian, Lindsay, and Areo magazine editor Helen Pluckrose explain the reason for their trick.

"We think studying topics like gender, race and sexuality is worthwhile and getting it right is extremely important," says Lindsay

But researchers of these topics have gotten lazy and political, they say. "A culture has developed in which only certain conclusions are allowed—like those that make whiteness and masculinity problematic," Lindsay says.

Reach politically "correct" conclusions and you can get most anything published.

"Kind of a last straw happened," says Lindsay. "There was this paper well-funded by the National Science Foundation that studied 'feminist glaciology.' It said glacier science is sexist."

As a glaciologist giving a TED Talk put it, "the majority of glaciological knowledge that we have today stems from knowledge created by men about men within existing masculinist stories."


One paper suggested the solution to sexism in glacier science is "feminist paintings of glaciers and feminist art projects," says Lindsay. They praised art projects like one where they "hooked up a phone line to a glacier so you could call the glacier on the phone and listen to it." That was "the last straw" for him.

Lindsay adds, "What appears beyond dispute is that making absurd and horrible ideas sufficiently politically fashionable can get them validated at the highest levels of academic grievance studies."

The hoaxers didn't get to finish their experiment because The Wall Street Journal's Jillian Kay Melchior noticed the absurdity of the paper on dog humping. She exposed the hoax before all 20 journals weighed in.

What upsets me most is what happened—or rather, didn't happen—next.

No university said it would stop using those journals, and no journal editor publicly said, "We must raise our standards."

"Think about if you did this to civil engineers with bridge building," says Boghossian. "They would've thanked us, right? Because they're driving over the bridges with their families, so they don't want the bridges to collapse."

But the journal editors, instead of admitting that they sometimes publish nonsense, attacked the hoaxers. They accused them of doing "unethical research."

A dozen of Boghossian's colleagues at Portland State University criticized him anonymously in the school newspaper, which depicted him as a clown. He's become a pariah at his own school.

"I've been spat on…physically threatened," he says.

Instead of applauding him for exposing nonsense, Portland State threatened him.

I called the school asking for an interview, but it declined.

How can a college criticize the hoaxers but revere ridiculous journals that publish nonsense?

"When you live in these tight ecosystems, this stuff makes total sense," says Boghossian. For people in the tiny bubble of academic thinking, "there's a pervading rape culture; men are bad—the whole ball of wax."

It's been going on for some time. A physicist once submitted a nonsense paper claiming gravity is just a "social construct." The journal Social Text published it. That embarrassed the journal, but 20 years later, it is still going strong.

At universities, "scholarship" has gotten even crazier.

The real "hoax" is on students who pay thousands of dollars for useless degrees in fields that end in "studies."


NEXT: The Market Says Climate Change Is Happening

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. This is scary. What’s that first step — first they laugh at you? That’s us laughing at them. But they are beyond that step.

    1. I get paid over $180 per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I just got paid $ 8550 in my previous month It Sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it.
      ?????AND GOOD LUCK?????

  2. We are the same people that lived the dark ages. We just have better technology.

    Today in this post truth politically correct society irrational emotions and ideology replace truth, facts and reality.

    Of course it’s happening in schools.

    When you bastardize language and science with PC pronouns you are part of the problem.

    1. I must disagree. If we did not watch over the content of our journals (and many of us here at NYU serve in highly respectable roles as journal editors and peer reviewers), they would be filled with inappropriate criticism of distinguished faculty members. The “research” writings touted by Mr. Stossel were clearly submitted for publication under false pretenses, causing considerable damage to reputations, and should thus be illegal and punished with the full force of the law, under whatever legal pretext needs to be invoked. Since people will believe anything, strong measures need to be taken to suppress every inappropriate form of deceit, especially in the journals that publish our scholarly opinions about world history and the future of our great nation. There is ample president for taking such measures. Who, for example, would dare to defend the outrageous “First Amendment dissent” of a single, isolated judge in our nation’s leading criminal “satire” case? See the documentation at:

      1. This comment, so over-the-top in its premises, is satire, right?

      2. Credibility, reputation, comes from doing what you portend to do well.

        Places of higher education get theirs from their faculty’s understanding and advancement of the disciplines they represent.

        When they bastardize them for any reason, only their exposure will result in the reputation they deserve.

        Not exposing their corruption is the real deception.

        The only way to ensure this is to allow everyone to demonstrate their corruption by not suppressing it, then by punishing them for it.

        1. Excuse me, if you have actual evidence of “corruption,” you may bring it to the attention of faculty administrators through normal, civilized procedures, or, in certain contexts, submit you claims to one of our journals, where it will be reviewed for possible publication; but if you seek to “expose” your claims wrongfully through “hoaxes,” “parody,” and the like, we will take appropriate measures to defend the reputations of our respected colleagues, including, when necessary, by reaching out to law enforcement professionals who know how to track, arrest, and jail those who cross the line.

          1. The corruption was passing off garbage, regardless of how they found it, as peer reviewed science..

            Faculty members who do so are corrupt and tarnish the reputations of themselves and the institutions who vouch for them. That is what they deserve. It is justice.

            Here is the definition of corrupt.

            3. Containing errors or alterations, especially ones that prevent proper understanding or use:

            I hope you’re not an English major.

            1. Excuse me again, but these articles were submitted under false pretenses, and their authors should be dealt with accordingly. And, as I said, there is ample president for doing so. Our faculty members have to deal with enough prurient behavior already in the classroom, we are not going to allow order to be disrupted, and reputations to be harmed, through any kind of inappropriate conduct.

            2. just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law woz like actualey making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twentey months and at present cleared the depts on there appartment and bourt a great new Citro?n 2CV . look here…….
              Clik This Link inYour Browser.


      3. This dork reprints this comment, citing the same article (which doesn’t support his stupid claims) on every post even remotely related to professional ethics or scholarly integrity.

        I support free speech, but someone who stands on the same street corner every day and shouts the same idiotic theology should be scorned.

        1. Exactly

          Scorn without evidence refuting the free speech doesn’t add much value though.

      4. … parody account?

  3. In order to get published, in fact just to get your PhD, you have to produce some research that’s new and meaningful, and what can you pick from the bones of a subject matter that thousands of previous researchers have picked clean? You have to come up with some pretty far-out there bullshit to be “new”. And these “serious” academic journals use a form of circular reasoning – we’re important because we publish important research and the research is important because it’s published in important journals – not unlike arguing that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God because the Bible itself says so and the Bible is the inerrant Word of God.

  4. First off, I was jailed in 1961 in Baton Rouge for removing segregated bathroom signs from the county courthouse as a protest of segregation. So I am not an evil “racist”, but I AM an anthropologist.
    So if I point out that the black race is especially good at sports and music, but that Asians are good at logic, or that northern Europeans are law-abiding, I am speaking of statistics, NOT evil RACISM.

    1. No; that is not how it works.
      If YOU say those things, you are racist.
      I a PC socialist says white men are the source of all evil, they are using an accurate generalization. (Since three white men donate a lot of money, not ALL white men are evil)

      Got it now? Or should we send you to the camps?

    2. It’s a natural for your mind to see that but you’re being tricked. The human mind is constantly trying to make order out the world. It sees faces where there are none. It sees patterns that it creates and then mistakes the creation as something on the outside. There are no blacks or whites. Those ideas are social constructs. Everyone is an individual with individual potential.

  5. My intersectionality score is : 5

    I am more privileged than 96% of others!

    1. Why, even as we speak, you’re probably looking for a transgender Muslim to oppress! 😉

      Seriously, thanks for the link.

    2. Haha! I scored 12 so I’m more discriminated against than you.

      I think you owe me something. What do I win?

      1. 5 for me. I didn’t realize I was such a bigot. What altar to I confess my privilege at?

    3. 21. Bring me a sandwich, bitch.


    4. 9

      An odd number for me.

      1. “What about peanut allergies?
        We know that 100s of other factors such political affiliation, height, attractiveness, weight and even peanut allergies can impact your personal intersectionality score. Hopefully, we will be able to address these factors in the future.”

        That is almost OBL level satire!

      2. 9 for me as well

    5. I’m a 7. My wife is a 57. No need to leave the house to oppress.

      1. I could get down to 1 with a few changes, but could only get to 100 by being both jewish and muslim.

    6. This is my favorite comment on that website.

      “How the hell is being a poor disabled male person better than being a gay POC rich female person? You are literally saying someone with no legs, who lives under a bridge in the third world has an easier life than a black lesbian able bodied person in a mansion. That is crazy.”

      1. C’mon, Oprah is always going to be oppressed for her weight, while the homeless/legless man will not.

  6. Remember when David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt filmed Planned Parenthood employees and the state of California attacked them for filming employees discussing selling fetus tissue?

    Two anti-abortion activists who filmed controversial undercover videos as they attempted to buy fetal tissue from Planned Parenthood have been charged in California with 15 felonies for allegedly invading the privacy of medical providers by filming without consent.
    State prosecutors filed the charges Tuesday against David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt of the Center for Medical Progress, eight months after similar charges were dropped in Texas.
    Meanwhile, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday upheld an injunction barring anti-abortion activists from distributing the controversial recordings.
    California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, a former Democratic member of Congress, said in a statement that the state “will not tolerate the criminal recording of conversations.”

    2 activists who secretly filmed Planned Parenthood charged with felonies

    1. They were recording their memories.

      Doing so needs to be made a human right.

      Only the corrupt who need to deny the truth oppose this.

      The founders of the constitution didn’t have this technology. If they had, it would be a right already and we would have now had over two hundred years of corruption free evolution.

      1. Agreed. I would relish having my visual input data “backed up” to digital storage. Perhaps companies like Neuralink can aid in developing such a technology.

        1. We have the technology to record what we see and hear and store that data in the cloud.

          Has it been developed for all citizens? No, because it is illegal.

        2. You obviously haven’t been watching Black Mirror.

          1. No. I’ve been talking about this since before cell phones had cameras.

    2. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, a former Democratic member of Congress, said in a statement that the state “will not tolerate the criminal recording of conversations.”

      Said The Beast in a criminal statement that he wanted recorded…………… and which WAS recorded.

      He got his words mixed up: in reality Deleiden and Merritt were not criminally recording conversations, they were recording criminal converstions, anf right THERE’s the rub: but since The Becerra the Beast approves of what the Planned BabyDeath operatives were doing, and DISapproves of Deleiden/Merritt’s actioins to expose them, guess who got prosecuted? (not the Beast’s speshull frenns who were clearly breaking the law but those desiring to expose their lawbreaking).

      Blind Mother Justice on a pile of manure……….

  7. The Left wing line is that the “hoaxers” committed unethical research fraud by making up a fake study with fake data and the Professor should be brought up on charges and or fired.

    The Left has gone nuts.

  8. It’s not any crazier than the beliefs of religious people and that insanity is even more entrenched and pervasive. You can’t even point it out or you’re some kind of bigot.

    1. Except belief can’t define truth without conflicting beliefs making fact and reality meaningless.

    2. Thought you might enjoy this, OP.

      1. You almost have to admire how far it’s been taken.

        1. The artist in me admires it anyway.

        2. And yet we still have so much to learn about The Unknowable!

    3. Very few religious people deny genetic science completely. Intersectionality doesnt give a shit about facts and even states facts are subjective to the person.

  9. “You mean Patriotic Correctness is runing academic journals, amirite?


  10. “When you live in these tight ecosystems, this stuff makes total sense,” says Boghossian. For people in the tiny bubble of academic thinking, “there’s a pervading rape culture; men are bad?the whole ball of wax.”

    I don’t think system side bias is the explanation.

    The tenured professors at his school wrote articles like that to establish tenure. They depend on journals like that to justify taxpayer funding for their research. The bias is probably secondary. He’s threatening the legitimacy and the livelihood of professors everywhere who work in “grievance studies”.

  11. This stuff took over academia while the rest of us were working in the real world. We didn’t notice it happening. Then, when we did notice, we laughed. Now, it has washed through society. Now who is laughing?

    1. And the real root of the problem – Academia is “Socialized” in this nation.

  12. Still stretching the material? WHERE’S VIDEO #2?

  13. But these journals are “peer-reviewed”, so it’s OK. Right?

    1. As the old saying goes, “Birds of a feather flock together”. The peer-review is done by like-minded societal liabilities who couldn’t even feed themselves if it weren’t for the value adding working class.

  14. To really expose the journals, they should have taken positively constructed studies and manipulated them to produce a slight non-orthodox conclusion.

    And then publish the pearl clutching rejection letters.

  15. Could this article BE any less timely?

  16. Well, when we solve all the problems that women and minorities face, we can get to the remaining, utterly petty grievances of white males. Fair?

    This magazine publishes nonsense on a daily basis. It even publishes John Stossel. Talk about a mote and a log situation.

    1. The only problem with “women” and “minorities” is they’ve NEVER been held ACCOUNTABLE for their own actions.

  17. “The real “hoax” is on students who pay thousands of dollars for useless degrees in fields that end in “studies.””

    No, let me fix that line for you. “The real “hoax” is on students who pay thousands of dollars for useless degrees”.

    1. ‘Hoax’ — The effects of “Socialism” in the educational field. What’s funny is that companies STILL have to train/educate almost EVERY “socialized educated” person to create value and an effective employee. Ben Shapiro once stated that the nations educational system is nothing more than a ‘sorting’ facility for the motivated / unmotivated and has very little to do with actual ‘education’ which seems to peg the nail almost right on the head.

  18. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.

  19. Just read a book by one of the world’s leading Nobel-laureate geneticists in which he does the obligatory genuflection to absolute racial identicality in all except skin color.

    In other words, when you are watch NBA games and most of them time see ten people of African American heritage on the floor, especially in the top teams in the league, don’t believe your lyin’ eyes, believe the lefty academic Establishment PC police. Same goes for the NFL. Many defensive units are all black. Most are 90%.

    The biggest lie in anthropology is the claim that white American athletes are under-represented in basketball and football because too few of them are strongg enough, tall enough, or work hard enough. What a colossal, arrogant, egregious, and easily disprovable outright falsehood.

    The Caucasian gene pool kids work their butts off, million of hours in gyms and weight rooms all across this big country. Most of them come up short. The White players who do well in these big money sports often come from a pretty select genealogical line themselves and get coached up by parents who were pros.

    Yes, nature is trying to tell us something that seems distasteful and is prone to wrong interpretation. It is very tricky business. Judeo-Christian ethics handled it by concluding people are equal because souls are equal, not any measurable performance characteristics whatsoever. Humans are lousy judges of performance anyhow. Look how the Saints were screwed in that play-off game with L.A.

  20. Most people are stupid, and that will never change until there is genetic engineering that screens out dumb embryos or modifies their DNA to be smarter.

    Until then, expect more of this.

  21. Hungary banned government funding for these useless “studies” majors. Students not majoring in one of the STEM field must pay for their own education. No student loans or state funding. This makes sense because student with STEM degrees tends to focus on what matters in the world. It’s the broke ass losers with useless degrees that are angry at everything, and achieve nothing in life.

  22. The truth is, in almost all the politically charged subjects (race, gender, economics, gun death stats, etc) the exact opposite of the politically correct view is what is backed by hard science that actually has sound methodology behind it.

    Men and women ARE different, and men are BETTER than women in many areas, and women are BETTER than men in other areas. Free markets produce wealthier societies overall, period. More guns has ZERO relation to overall murder rates, which is why states like Idaho have more guns than anywhere else on earth, and fewer murders than anywhere in Europe. On and on.

    Yet, half the studies won’t be allowed into the most prestigious journals, even when their methodology is flawless… Because the conclusion that there are more ultra high IQ men, AND more ultra low IQ men, is somehow evil… Despite that it means there are a good grip of women that are smarter than a good grip of men because of that variability. Rinse and repeat for other subjects.

    This complete denial of reality cannot continue forever, as it is so contrary to reality it just won’t stand.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.