Jump to content
DOSBODS
  • Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

Monstrous Predatory Vampires and Beneficent Fairy-Godmother


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Bear Hug said:

My own technical course was a bit of a waste for my current job, but this sort of "research" is not only a waste, it's actively making our lives worse. 

I disagree, and whatever bollox is published, will no doubt be seen to be bollux, by the discerning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MrPin said:

I disagree, and whatever bollox is published, will no doubt be seen to be bollux, by the discerning.

I've stared into SJW abyss: I have a feeling (! that's what I have to go by as I have other things to do with my life) that there is a whole industry based on feelings rather than logic and facts.  

I can see some parallels with religions in there; this is a new, 21st century religion in some way

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bear Hug said:

I've stared into SJW abyss: I have a feeling (! that's what I have to go by as I have other things to do with my life) that there is a whole industry based on feelings rather than logic and facts.  

I can see some parallels with religions in there; this is a new, 21st century religion in some way

Yes, the world is flat, even though even the ancient mariners could see ships going over the horizon. We are not in an age of enlightenment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Bear Hug said:

I had a dubious honour of proof-reading an SJW dissertation by a friend from a long time ago recenly. 

I have corrected a few errors and pointed out that that there wasn't much in its contents to support its main argument.  Of course it passed with flying colours and a suggestion that it should be published. 

I do hope that universities simply collapse from the current corona lockdown. My own technical course was a bit of a waste for my current job, but this sort of "research" is not only a waste, it's actively making our lives worse. 

The victor gets to write the history  ....

 

Thing is, anyone who puts the following in their flyer:

Dr Charlotte Riley is a Lecturer in Twentieth-Century British History at the University of Southampton.

I am a feminist historian of twentieth century Britain, with particular focus on the Labour Party, decolonization, and overseas aid and development programmes. More broadly, I am interested in the culture of British politics and society in the twentieth century.

I teach across a variety of topics in modern British social, cultural and political history, including women's history in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the history and memory of the Second World War, the 1960s as a British cultural moment, and the long and tangled history of the Labour Party. I would be interested in supervising research students across these topics and my research interests more widely. I also convene our first year core course, World Histories: Contact, Conflict and Culture from Ancient to Modern.

I am one of the convenors of the Britain at Home and Abroad since 1800 seminar at the IHR, and I am one of the reviews editors for Journal of Contemporary History.

is hardly going to offer you an even handed account of the period.

Whats the summary - White Men who voted Conservative did it *

* - And Fatcher, who was effectively a white man.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bear Hug said:

I had a dubious honour of proof-reading an SJW dissertation by a friend from a long time ago recenly. 

I have corrected a few errors and pointed out that that there wasn't much in its contents to support its main argument.  Of course it passed with flying colours and a suggestion that it should be published. 

I do hope that universities simply collapse from the current corona lockdown. My own technical course was a bit of a waste for my current job, but this sort of "research" is not only a waste, it's actively making our lives worse. 

I think we do need a Cultural Revolution in the UK and it should start by simply blowing up or demolishing all the academic institutions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, spygirl said:

The victor gets to write the history  ....

 

Thing is, anyone who puts the following in their flyer:

Dr Charlotte Riley is a Lecturer in Twentieth-Century British History at the University of Southampton.

I am a feminist historian of twentieth century Britain, with particular focus on the Labour Party, decolonization, and overseas aid and development programmes. More broadly, I am interested in the culture of British politics and society in the twentieth century.

I teach across a variety of topics in modern British social, cultural and political history, including women's history in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the history and memory of the Second World War, the 1960s as a British cultural moment, and the long and tangled history of the Labour Party. I would be interested in supervising research students across these topics and my research interests more widely. I also convene our first year core course, World Histories: Contact, Conflict and Culture from Ancient to Modern.

I am one of the convenors of the Britain at Home and Abroad since 1800 seminar at the IHR, and I am one of the reviews editors for Journal of Contemporary History.

is hardly going to offer you an even handed account of the period.

Whats the summary - White Men who voted Conservative did it *

* - And Fatcher, who was effectively a white man.

 

 

 

That's just it. It's not so much the subject areas, it's that I can't imagine her having any kind of objective view of anything in history. Everything will be seen through the lens of some sort of 'ism'. Of course, we all have our biases, but the triumph of the Enlightenment was the concept of liberal humanism and an attempt, at least, to see history with a rational, balanced view. It's the same mindset that influenced the original Reithian concepts of impartiality at the BBC.

Yet anyone who holds with those views would now be considered a dangerous member of the 'far right'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, spygirl said:

The victor gets to write the history  ....

 

Thing is, anyone who puts the following in their flyer:

Dr Charlotte Riley is a Lecturer in Twentieth-Century British History at the University of Southampton.

I am a feminist historian of twentieth century Britain, with particular focus on the Labour Party, decolonization, and overseas aid and development programmes. More broadly, I am interested in the culture of British politics and society in the twentieth century.

I teach across a variety of topics in modern British social, cultural and political history, including women's history in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the history and memory of the Second World War, the 1960s as a British cultural moment, and the long and tangled history of the Labour Party. I would be interested in supervising research students across these topics and my research interests more widely. I also convene our first year core course, World Histories: Contact, Conflict and Culture from Ancient to Modern.

I am one of the convenors of the Britain at Home and Abroad since 1800 seminar at the IHR, and I am one of the reviews editors for Journal of Contemporary History.

is hardly going to offer you an even handed account of the period.

Whats the summary - White Men who voted Conservative did it *

* - And Fatcher, who was effectively a white man.

I bet she somehow thinks her work is really risqué and “counter-cultural” rather than being the same arbitrary, dreary group think that (almost) everyone else in academia is already parroting. Even the fake childish whimsy of the title is nauseatingly pandering to the infantilisation zeitgeist.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hail the Tripod said:

I bet she somehow thinks her work is really risqué and “counter-cultural” rather than being the same arbitrary, dreary group think that (almost) everyone else in academia is already parroting. Even the fake childish whimsy of the title is nauseatingly pandering to the infantilisation zeitgeist.

Yes, a couple of summers ago I was outside my one of my local bars enjoying the sunshine and having a few cold ones with some friends and got chatting to a group next to the table my friends and I were sat at. Really attractive younger woman, fancied my chances. Full time PhD student - interesting I thought. Shortly then the discovery that it was some gender studies claptrap.

I can't remember what the technique is called, a friend who worked in film explained it to me once, but the camera thing that they do in Jaws to Roy Scheider when he is sat in his deck chair and the kid on the yellow lilo gets it happened to me in real life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MrLibertyRedux said:

 

I can't remember what the technique is called, a friend who worked in film explained it to me once, but the camera thing that they do in Jaws to Roy Scheider when he is sat in his deck chair and the kid on the yellow lilo gets it happened to me in real life.

I think that what they do is start on full zoom, move the camera towards the central character and zoom out at the same time always keeping the main character the same size.

This makes the background appear to flee away from the subject

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbh I think that's a cracking title!

It's reminiscent of that scene in Apocalypse now where they machine gun the peasant boat "We tear them in half with a machine gun and then put a sticking plaster on it".

It is the way a lot of global industries work and in particular China recently in Africa; extracting minerals or cutting down forests and paying low wages whilst building the odd road and school and bribing the local politicians.

Or developers - huge estate on a green field but leave a handkerchief sized piece as a play area.

It's standard practice the world over.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bear Hug said:

I've stared into SJW abyss: I have a feeling (! that's what I have to go by as I have other things to do with my life) that there is a whole industry based on feelings rather than logic and facts.  

I can see some parallels with religions in there; this is a new, 21st century religion in some way

When I were at college.....

There were distinct schools of archaeology.  One was the Anglo-American / north European which was founded in facts and evidence (to the extent you can have a fact but let's not go all Karl Popper here) whereas the French / Mediterranean schools had what we described as a "mediaeval idea of truth".

As in: the past should be as we think it to be and that is how we will report it.  To them a nice and fitting storyline was the most important thing and don't let the evidence get in the way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Hail the Tripod said:

I bet she somehow thinks her work is really risqué and “counter-cultural” rather than being the same arbitrary, dreary group think that (almost) everyone else in academia is already parroting. Even the fake childish whimsy of the title is nauseatingly pandering to the infantilisation zeitgeist.

It just sounds utterly conventional, reactionary and turgid. How about she does a book on how Marxism has infiltrated British institutions from the 1920s onwards? Or how 'post colonial regimes' have squandered all the opportunities they had?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Byron said:

I think that what they do is start on full zoom, move the camera towards the central character and zoom out at the same time always keeping the main character the same size.

This makes the background appear to flee away from the subject

That's the one!

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Frank Hovis said:

Tbh I think that's a cracking title!

I agree. If it wasn't for "Ghislane Didn't Kill Herself" as the surefire winner for this year's thread title competition, I'd gladly nominate it.

Far from being evidence of the infantilisation of British academia, I see it as a challenge, a gauntlet thrown down to those with a different view of recent world history. 

Its subtext is, "You believe that on balance, the British Empire was a force for good? Well, that's a fairy story! And to show you how much contempt I have for your load of made-up bollocks, here's an alternative load of crap I threw together to tell a story that fits the narrative I want to believe!"

She knows that you know that she knows her stuff is 100% synthetic bullshit. That's not the point. She's also convinced that either you have the same hypocritical view on your own crap, and can be challenged on it; or you're too thick to realise what's really going on.

We see this in theology too. "Your myths are just made-up constructed to control the masses. Here's some alternative myths I've made up to take their place!"

"This is why I reject your alternative myths!"

"Aha! So you concede that your myths are just made-up bullshit like mine; all you've demonstrated is that yours are better at controlling the  way that ignorant people think!"

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, MrLibertyRedux said:

I can't remember what the technique is called, a friend who worked in film explained it to me once, but the camera thing that they do in Jaws to Roy Scheider when he is sat in his deck chair and the kid on the yellow lilo gets it happened to me in real life.

The Dolly (or Hitchcock) Zoom:

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p08jjfpv

 

Edited by The Idiocrat
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, unregistered_guest said:

I agree. If it wasn't for "Ghislane Didn't Kill Herself" as the surefire winner for this year's thread title competition, I'd gladly nominate it.

Far from being evidence of the infantilisation of British academia, I see it as a challenge, a gauntlet thrown down to those with a different view of recent world history. 

Its subtext is, "You believe that on balance, the British Empire was a force for good? Well, that's a fairy story! And to show you how much contempt I have for your load of made-up bollocks, here's an alternative load of crap I threw together to tell a story that fits the narrative I want to believe!"

She knows that you know that she knows her stuff is 100% synthetic bullshit. That's not the point. She's also convinced that either you have the same hypocritical view on your own crap, and can be challenged on it; or you're too thick to realise what's really going on.

We see this in theology too. "Your myths are just made-up constructed to control the masses. Here's some alternative myths I've made up to take their place!"

"This is why I reject your alternative myths!"

"Aha! So you concede that your myths are just made-up bullshit like mine; all you've demonstrated is that yours are better at controlling the  way that ignorant people think!"

People can have their beliefs. No objection.

I object to paying for the person to work on those beliefs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, unregistered_guest said:

 

Its subtext is, "You believe that on balance, the British Empire was a force for good? Well, that's a fairy story! And to show you how much contempt I have for your load of made-up bollocks, here's an alternative load of crap I threw together to tell a story that fits the narrative I want to believe!"

She knows that you know that she knows her stuff is 100% synthetic bullshit. That's not the point. She's also convinced that either you have the same hypocritical view on your own crap, and can be challenged on it; or you're too thick to realise what's really going on.

You are giving her too much credit. I'd love it to be true but I don't think it is. She wouldn't be on that show talking racist crap if it was. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, MrPin said:

Yes, the world is flat, even though even the ancient mariners could see ships going over the horizon. We are not in an age of enlightenment.

Perhaps we've got the same absolute number of geniuses as during the Enlightenment but now we have an excess of 8 billion mouth-breathing wastrels to carry 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, eta-carinae said:

Perhaps we've got the same absolute number of geniuses as during the Enlightenment but now we have an excess of 8 billion mouth-breathing wastrels to carry 

We have too much media space, and it fills with complete bollux. Any wacky view can be published, and "followed".

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, spygirl said:

The victor gets to write the history  ....

 

Thing is, anyone who puts the following in their flyer:

Dr Charlotte Riley is a Lecturer in Twentieth-Century British History at the University of Southampton.

I am a feminist historian of twentieth century Britain, with particular focus on the Labour Party, decolonization, and overseas aid and development programmes. More broadly, I am interested in the culture of British politics and society in the twentieth century.

I teach across a variety of topics in modern British social, cultural and political history, including women's history in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the history and memory of the Second World War, the 1960s as a British cultural moment, and the long and tangled history of the Labour Party. I would be interested in supervising research students across these topics and my research interests more widely. I also convene our first year core course, World Histories: Contact, Conflict and Culture from Ancient to Modern.

I am one of the convenors of the Britain at Home and Abroad since 1800 seminar at the IHR, and I am one of the reviews editors for Journal of Contemporary History.

is hardly going to offer you an even handed account of the period.

Whats the summary - White Men who voted Conservative did it *

* - And Fatcher, who was effectively a white man.

 

 

 

Heres another Fatcher.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53330105

Worse than Hitler.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...