wizzy555 said:
Mr F. said:
Sorry, I catch a lot of flakk for my degree. Most of my friends are either hard scientists, historians or engineers. And, well, its taught, its used, but its not necessarily necessary. I write 2500+ word essays that do not contain a single statistic or, alternatively, 2500+ word essays that are two thirds statistical analyses. It really depends on the essay. I do wonder why you are bringing it up because at no point in the current series is statistics needed. It seems rather irrelevant. Whether or not she analysed statistics wrong (In your eyes, at least) is rather irrelevant, she obviously analysed them well enough to pass. I do not know how well and I do not know why that matters. That said, perhaps she did a different aspect of sociology, I mean I am going into research to prepare myself for the MA course I want to do in sociological research (As in, becoming a trained researcher) so I bounce off statistics more often then some.
And with regards to her thesis? Again, I ask for the relevance. My siblings MA thesis has very few similarities to their PhD thesis and even fewer with the book she is writing. I hope that after I am done with my thesis I will continue to improve, much like my sibling is improving, and will produce better work.
Lets try and keep this discussion about the video series.
Well I do get somewhat considered when people are pointing out social trends without statistics, although certainly there are cases when it is not applicable.
In her thesis she attempts to identify racism (and homophobia) in science fiction by comparing the number of female characters that die based on their race, the numbers actually slow a lack of discernable racism but she claims otherwise. This doesn't necessarily prove everything she says is academically invalid (and certainly not the whole field in general), but I do think it does highlight the dangers of self deception in these issues.
Anyway, you asked for a genuine academic criticism of her work and there it is. I'm not qualified to comment on the other aspects.
Well, would that not be a criticism leveled purely at her thesis? Having not read it, I cannot comment, but I would assume there was a lot more to it then one level of statistical analyses. However, having not read it, I will refrain from commenting.
I just find it incredibly annoying when people with no understanding of the nuances of social sciences, people who have never even heard of Butler (Seriously, somewhat important with regards to this particular topic) who attack her points despite having no grounding from which to do so. It is, honestly, akin to questioning the laws of gravity without ever having read anything to do with the subject. Or, something less tangible, questioning string theory because "The world is not made of strings you are wrong". That is the level to which it is stupid. Someone with absolutely no understanding of the subject claiming some level of understanding.
And now we get to the crux of the matter, the subject which the webcomic addresses. Youtube comments. You are making that statement here, would you make the same statement, and ask the same question, on youtube? What happened when Rebecca Blacks "Friday" started trending because of how bad it was. It became an avalanche of hatred, comments were posted at an incredible rate, 99.5% of which were just pointless abuse. You know (And, apparently, choose to ignore) that this would be the case, that if those comment sections were open it would simply be a tide of people calling for her to die, get raped, hurling abuse, just saying she is wrong, making racist remarks, insulting her, demeaning her, using foul and sexist language... You get the idea. You KNOW this is the case.
I know one of the reasons she gets some abuse from people here is her videos found their way to /v/ and 4chan promptly was what 4chan is (The fact that its acceptable is foul but thats another topic entirely) and people blame her for how they reacted (Which is utterly stupid, but whatever). If her videos had comments open, that would happen again. Not only would every attempt at rational debate be drowned out by the insults and threats, but fuel would be poured onto the fire that people are claiming does not exist. You would be giving her more interesting followers ammunition, and plenty of it. Hell, slippery slope argument here, but what if an actual REAL news provider grabbed onto it?
"Jewish academic abused for pointing out the inherent sexism in some video games", that would be a BRILLIANT headline for us on, say, the Guardian. It would damage the hobby.
People like to talk about her academic credentials (And claim that she has none). I would state that it is academically dishonest for such people to turn around and then state that her removals of the comments and ratings is "Dishonest" and stifling free speech. You all KNOW that it would just be abuse, that any discussion would be drowned out. You mention statistics and how she misused them. I state that you are willfully ignoring statistics if you claim anything rational would appear from the youtube comments.
The fact of the matter is she is trying to start a discussion about these topics. But she knows it is a discussion better taken to places other then Youtube. If nothing of any value has been lost I fail to see what the issue is.