Meet Scott Yenor.
Yenor is a mild-mannered, bald, bespectacled professor of political science at Boise State University, a college known more for its blue football field and run-and-gun offense than for its history of philosophical debate. Yenor’s intellectual credentials are spotless: He has never received complaints from students or faculty about his classes or his papers. He’s a teacher and a thinker by trade, fully tenured.
But Yenor, you see, is also the devil.
What did he do to earn this? Perhaps he suggested that the blue turf that the Boise State plays is rather silly.
That is not the case. Perhaps denigrating the turf color is forgivable, but what he did do is apparently not.
At least, that’s the new public perception of Yenor at at Boise State. That’s because Yenor published a report in 2016 with the Heritage Foundation titled, Sex, Gender, and the Origins of the Culture War. The central thesis of the piece was simple and rather uncontroversial in conservative circles: that radical feminism’s central argument decrying gender boundaries between the sexes as entirely socially constructed has led directly to transgenderism’s attacks on gender itself as a social construct. As a philosophical matter, this progression is self-evident.
Academics do research and publish stuff. That is what they are paid to do. Let us see what the reaction was.
That’s when the trouble began.
Leftist students took note of Yenor’s perspective. And they seethed.
Actually, they did more than seethe: they complained, they demanded that the piece be taken down, and they insisted that Yenor had personally insulted them. All of this prompted the pusillanimous dean of the school, Corey Cook, to half-heartedly defend Yenor’s right to publish.
And so a knight arose to challenge Yenor’s nefarious, patriarchal dragon: Francisco Salinas, a man with the Orwellian title “Director of Student Diversity and Inclusion.”
Salinas believes that diversity and inclusion do not include perspectives disapproved by Francisco Salinas. Thus, he took up his fiery pen and wrote a post on the school’s website dramatically titled “Connecting The Dots.” Salinas explained that the Yenor controversy had preceded white supremacist rally and murder in Charlottesville, Virginia by a day. This was not, Salinas concluded, a coincidence. “Their proximity in my attention,” Salinas wrote, “is no accident.”
I think that you get the idea. This is not the first time that this type of outcry happened. It won’t be the last.
Academia is supposed to do research and publish the results. They are supposed to operate in pursuit of knowledge, irrespective of the current political influences. This is much of what the term academic freedom is about; that is, research can take a path toward unpopular areas with the full protection of the university. It goes where results lead it.
In reality, here is how it works: when the expected results will not popular with liberals, it is best not to even start down that research path. There is grant money, possible future promotions, and general peace of mind (i.e. not being harassed) at stake. In reality, there really is no academic freedom. It is really an Orwellian sham.
There are many research topics where the results would be very much of interest to the manosphere. Not only that, they would be legitimate research topics based on what academia says that it is supposed to do. Research on them will never start. This all should be a tremendous embarrassment to academia, but it is not. I wonder how many are self-aware enough to notice it. They are, after all, supposed to be the intelligent ones.
No one is ever going to undertake actual, real, scientific research on this. Because when they do, know what they find out?
–women are sexually attracted to masculine, confident, badass douchebag assholes who act like jerks to them
–women are NOT sexually attracted to kind, good, decent, friendly, affable men
–women find only about 20% of men sexually attractive (the OK Cupid survey)
–men who refuse to put up with bullshit from women and set down very clear boundaries for her behavior do better in all aspects of life, including sexually, than men who are the “nice” men women say they want
–biology and genetics plays a much, much bigger role in forming and shaping who we are than anyone wants to admit
–men and women are fundamentally different in their personalities, the way they think and feel, the way they respond to various situations in their lives, and the way they process external information
No one wants to admit this. I’ve seen what happens when women are confronted with these clearly observable (but not replicated in a double blind random controlled peer reviewed “study”) – they run screaming from the room. Because most women don’t have the courage to face the truth.