"brainwash" -- norwegian documentary examines how fields like sociology and feminist studies reject actual science because it doesn't fit with their ideology

BeginnerSociologist · 2013-06-25T20:19:59+00:00

As someone studying Sociology, I know this perfectly. 2 out of 4 of lecturers undermine the subject with their blind idiology, 1 out of 4 is completely rational and the last one is also rational but has been forced away from gender or other volitile subjects and instead looks into roads, communication networks or something that is also harmless.

Edit: Not to look down on those who study roads, communication networks or similar harmless subjects. You do great work, just not what I would choose personally.

5th_Law_of_Robotics · 2013-06-25T19:49:54+00:00

Any field of study is open to bias. A researcher wants to get a certain answer. Even the best scientist isn't free from this influence (although the good ones take steps to prevent it from interfering with their work).

I'd say the pseudo-sciences are as prone to this as anyone (if not more so considering they get people who want to change the world by getting everyone to agree with them). But let's say they're no more or less prone to investigator bias than any other discipline initially. Their weakness here is that nothing they do can be tested really. There is no objective answer. So there really isn't any check against biases.

If a physicist wants a ball to bounce 5 meters under certain circumstances he can lie and say that's what happened. But others can easily refute this and his career is over. If a feminist "scholar" wants to say all men secretly want to rape all women . . . how can that be disproven? You could ask men, but she'd just say they're lying in the responses. It's untestable and nonfalsifiable. Making it basically no different from philosophy or any other non-science.

Which is fine . . . except when they stray in to areas of actual science. Then they can either admit they were wrong (which calls their entire field in to question) or they can dig in their heels and insist the scientists are part of some vast male conspiracy against them (Patriarchy). I think history has clearly shown which path they choose.

Sarstan · 2013-06-25T23:04:12+00:00

If gender played little/no role in social behavior (and not vice versa), why would practically every culture in the world across thousands of years, connected to one another or not, place men as hunters/warriors/head of the family (or equivalent) while women are the gathers/stayed at the home/village, general care takers, etc?
If gender roles are a social construct, why is it even today amongst all the pressure to find "equality" that men and women both strongly move toward their respective "roles"? Those that push so hard against the mold are usually undesirable to the other gender: Result of society saying they're wrong or feminine behavior in men and masculine behavior in women is ingrained in us to being unwanted?
Why is it that the appearance and nature of one culture's sexy is appealing to a person in another significantly different culture?
I'm sure there's a lot more questions that can be asked to point out that gender roles are not just a label we accept for ourselves.

ytismylife · 2013-06-25T23:50:39+00:00

I'm studying Chemical Engineering and took some Sociology courses as electives. I have honestly never experienced so much unscientific bullshit in my life, especially with regard to the topic of sex and gender.

jtj-H · 2013-06-26T06:59:32+00:00

I have not done any research it was a just a thought i thought once and iv kinda stuck in my brain

If men and women have the exact same brains, how come they say transgender people are people born with the opposite brain type then there body?

palagoon · 2013-06-25T21:07:12+00:00

Part 1 exquisitely eviscerates the social science perspective. The host seems to want to believe that gender is a social construct: he goes to great lengths to point out how society shapes male and female roles. When push comes to shove, however, he finds the social science perspective hypocritical and seriously questionable.

This should be showed to everyone who doesn't understand what MRAs are complaining about. Academia is rife with idiots who deign to call themselves "Scientists" but who have no idea what actual scientific inquiry is about.

EDIT: I didn't grammar so good the first time through.

palagoon · 2013-06-26T05:59:54+00:00

8 minutes in and I am already annoyed by how weak their research is. Maybe this is an older documentary, but it has been extensively researched. Male and female brains are wired differently. (I don't know how this plays out for intersex and trans folk: they weren't collecting enough data for that)

shoegazer666 · 2013-06-26T06:12:51+00:00

Hey, thanks for this. One of the most intellectually stimulating things that I've watched in a very long while. I especially loved what the Simon Boren-Cohen dude had to say.

rightsbot · 2013-06-25T19:42:17+00:00

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

Barbx · 2013-06-26T12:52:24+00:00

I love the male Norwegian Gender Studies researcher, he asks 'why is it so important that we find out the biological differences in gender?'. Keen scientific mind, that one.

Arlieth · 2013-06-26T02:31:57+00:00

Goddamn, this entire thread is giving me flashbacks to the bullshit I had to put up with in college. I think I truly flipped out for the first time in my academic career when I was presented with an argument that feminist subjective methodology was superior to "male-dominated" objective methodology.

Last I checked, sociology was a science, and it should be treated like one.

Vordreller · 2013-06-25T21:26:52+00:00

Banned in Sweden.

That's a joke btw, I have no idea if it really is but it wouldn't surprise me.

Zhangar · 2013-06-25T20:41:47+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Raidicus · 2013-06-26T14:02:33+00:00

I'd love to read a well done rebuttal to this documentary.

Phototoxin · 2013-06-25T22:19:45+00:00

Basically biased people are biased.

mstrkrft- · 2013-06-26T16:09:13+00:00

Okay, so I have only watched the first episode of this series and I found it both rather disappointing and irrelevant to a discussion about gender politics/discrimination/whatever (so anything beyond scientific discussion).

Sure, the social scientists in this part seem somewhat ignorant and don't come off well. That may or may not be true of the whole field. I have no idea. The thing is, the claim of 'the other side' (as in: the biologists) isn't that everything is biology. It is instead: some part of it is biology.

If you actually look at Baron-Cohen's work, for example, if i remember correctly, the differences between male and female brains were rather small and the individual variance wasn't all that small. In other words: on average it may indeed be the case that male and female brains tend to be different, but the invidual variance is high enough that the consequence is not "all men have brain x, all women have brain y". Hence, this does not justify rigid gender roles in any way.

By way of example: women on average may be slightly worse at math (although from what I have read that's far from a universally acknowledged fact). That does not mean, however, that women aren't supposed to study math and the difference is way, way to small to account for the distribution of math students at universities. If biology can't explain that difference, it sure as hell looks like it's cultural. The other way around, women are said to be a bit better at empathy/emotional things, but the difference found in the studies isn't big enough to explain the distribution in the jobs in that area. (Moreover, in those studies you're usually testing teenager and/or adults, where socialization has already had a huge influence).

So, sure, a 50/50 distribution of genders in every job may not actually be what follows from a society where people aren't pushed into certain gender roles and where there is no discrimination. But that doesn't mean that the gender roles do not exist and are to at the very least a certain extent cultural in nature. In other words: people who do not want to do x or be like x are pushed to be that way because of gender roles. That part definitely isn't any kind of pseudoscience, those are facts.

The degree to which the difference between males and females is biological or cultural, is very difficult to measure. Gender roles pretty much start at birth and it's incredibly difficult to erase those variables (socialization) in an experiment in order to try and figure out how much biology plays a role (I hinted at that earlier). Sure, you have hormones etc and all of that certainly makes it seem plausible that there is a difference biologically (and I don't deny that), but we're actually pretty far from understanding how exactly all of that works. We are pretty good, however, at figuring out social dynamics etc.

tl;dr: The claim of the biologist's side is actually fairly weak (in scientific terms): it's not "all nature" but "there's some nature in there, it's not just nurture". Actually finding out how much nature plays a role is difficult, and regardless of that, it doesn't negate or justify the cultural side of things.

insanemetal187 · 2013-06-26T00:41:35+00:00

one of the most important things men look for in women for long-term relationships is faithfulness. women who have a lot of casual sex are rejected due to fears of infidelity.

This was eye opening. It's funny when you think that the idea of men sleeping with anything that moves and calling women who do the same sluts might actually be genetically ingrained in us.

NINETY_3 · 2013-06-25T20:48:55+00:00

[permanently deleted]

2013-06-26T02:15:59+00:00

Sociology is like Religion when it comes to answering real world questions.

2013-06-26T03:02:00+00:00

After watching this mostly through. I think the reason so many of the Norwegian researchers take the side of social conditioning over biology is that they don't want to be caught being politically incorrect about anyone's genetics, after all, one can hardly help the way they are born. They don't want to be mistaken for anything remotely approaching sympathy for eugenics. To be honest I have to sympathize, I liked the way the dude in episode 4 put it "just because something is natural and biological doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything about it."

I for example, would hate the idea of a genetic screening resulting in my not being allowed to go to a certain school or something.

I think they go too far, they are kind of sticking their head in the sand every time the possibility arises that something is biologically determined.

jtj-H · 2013-06-26T07:32:51+00:00

Just started watching the 2nd video and can i say just from the first part it has already tough me a lot and confirmed a lot of this thing i thought but never asked because i thought i was just being sexist

ZimbaZumba · 2013-06-26T11:27:20+00:00

This series is is must for anyone interested in gender issues, regardless of your stance. I think it is ground breaking and exposes the core issues at stake here. It is brilliant in every respect. Watch it!!!

brinlov · 2013-06-26T13:59:19+00:00

Oh my god I absolutely LOVE science about genders and sexuality! And the best thing is I've never been mad about it so far! I don't care if girls and boys are born different, I think it's good that we're different! Also, then it's fun with those people who brake the norm and is different from everybody else!

jtj-H · 2013-06-26T14:23:45+00:00

Anyone got a torrent link or a direct download?

NrwhlBcnSmrt-ttck · 2013-06-26T14:47:03+00:00

Thank you so much for posting this. Brilliant examination of the research and positions.

Funcuz · 2013-06-26T07:24:37+00:00

I've been calling sociology and psychology bullshit for a long time. Those who believe in it will never see it from my perspective of course (mostly because most of them know somebody in those 'professions' or paid for a course in them themselves) but the more I see of these subjects , the less respect I have for them.

Sociology sounds good in theory. Trying to make sense of human behavior seems like a great idea. Unfortunately , people have drawn conclusions that can't be tested by others or applied in any meaningful way. That hasn't stopped sociologists from trying and things like feminism are what we get.

Psychology is the art (it sure ain't no science) of getting people to pay you while you pretend you care about their lives. It's pure bullshit. All theory that changes every second day but that hasn't stopped psychologists from pretending that they actually have any clue about why people do the things they do.

More importantly is the fact that what good is it to spend years going to a psychologist ? Seriously...think about that : Nobody ever gets cured or has their problems solved but they sure do spend a lot of money. That suggests two things to me. Firstly , it tells me that it's ineffective. If you never get "cured" then what the hell are you paying somebody to cure you for ? Secondly , it's clear that these guys are making a lot of money without having to actually produce anything of objective value.

My contempt for these two fields grows daily and it looks like others are waking up to the sham that they are as well.

ahora · 2013-06-25T23:50:28+00:00

Norway and similar countries have been kidnapped by feminism and pseudo-science.

But why?

Miller0700 · 2013-06-25T22:52:29+00:00

7 nature or nurture:

What about transsexual individuals?

2013-06-26T00:42:38+00:00

most of the people he goes up to to ask questions start giggling. Like when he went into the classroom and people seemed to know who he was.

Is he famous in Sweden for being a comedian?

edit, im sorry, Norway, eek

vaselinepete · 2013-06-25T23:09:19+00:00

That's my bus-ride viewing sorted out, thanks!

Phototoxin · 2013-06-25T23:11:16+00:00

Also do I get points for being male, having low testosterone (pituitary problem), being on HRT and at this very moment of watching said documentaries am teaching myself to crochet?

Mirage08 · 2013-06-26T01:09:35+00:00

Are there subtitles for this? Just downloaded the series.

UDT22 · 2013-06-26T15:17:44+00:00

It's hard to think that The Vikings came from Norway. How things change.

Carpeaux · 2013-06-25T22:31:34+00:00

this is idiotic

the "documentary" compares races to different dog breeds. jesus the pseudo-intellectualism

he literally says that two breeds are more similar than a black and a white person

jesus christ this is some stormfront bullshit.

camcer · 2013-06-26T02:06:38+00:00

Maybe, just maybe we aren't exactly that "equal" after all. Don't get me wrong, I understand egalitarianism doesn't assume all people and groups are equal.

It's just "equality" might be a little more unrealistic to achieve. It's a noble goal, but I question it. Should standards be set equally if groups are not equal? I agree that we shouldn't set standards differently in the army for example, but isn't it also obvious different groups have different biological limitations maybe?

^{^don't} ^{^kill} ^{^me} ^{^please...} ^ⁱ ^{^don't} ^{^frequent} ^{^this} ^{^reddit} ^{^often.}

^{^ⁱ} ^{^{^probably}} ^{^{^pissed}} ^{^{^off}} ^{^{^srsers}}

Ragnar09 · 2013-06-26T03:21:32+00:00

I bet they think women can be just as good football players as a man right?

jt2398034 · 2013-06-26T11:02:17+00:00

The extra money men earn per year, over women, goes towards women always. Do the math.

TumblrSocialJustice · 2013-06-25T20:02:41+00:00

Feminism is NOT brainwashing. Nobody can tell me that I'm not equal to a man just because I don't have a penis. The only brainwashing I'm seeing is the brainwashing done by MRAs with their bullshit. We need to take down the patriarchy and start to appreciate women more.

deadalnix · 2013-06-26T06:13:21+00:00

The documentary does a quite big logical mistake.

It is stated that the more "advanced" the country is the less women want to work in technical fields. Then it explore area like biologic differences between men and women.

If that explanation was sufficient, we would observe different jobs for men and women, but would see the pattern described above.

Another point that isn't considered is that culture are selected by nature as well as genetic. For the very same reasons : this is something you transmit to your children, and the group that have the more children ends up being the dominant one at the end.

It is also kind of weird how the 2 norvegian scientist exclude some possibilities without having strong argument (especially the woman one makes no logical argument at all in that direction).

I think the wise words are the one from the scientist at the end. We are here facing a mixture of cultural and biologic differences.

avantvernacular · 2013-06-26T11:24:03+00:00

The difference between anthropology and sociology is facts.

pleasebequietdonny · 2013-06-25T23:05:39+00:00

not safe for work: nudity

why the fuck are you watching any documentaries at work you lazy slacker piece of shit

bitterbuttrue · 2013-06-26T12:59:01+00:00

Some new radical writing has tried to throw a spanner in the works of gender Sociology. Basically it claims that many offerings of these sociologists, basically a relatively new form of "science" study (i.e around 100 years old etc..)has been flawed. The case is argued that most heterosexual males have an inborn "female perception disability" FPD, a mild form of autism that lies on the outer spectrum. Because of this the males (i.e male social scientists etc) cannot perceive the whole environment properly.There are "Utilities" that are either not afforded any value, or over-valued. Therefore there are too many missing 'study' variables. Any such "male-analysis" of Social Exchange then risks being out of context (usually in favor of the female, I should add). All of this is without considering other "corruptions"--i.e institutional dogma and vested control mechanisms, which throw even more doubt into the mix. Anyway, for a world-first exposure to the radical theory of FPD...try Googling..HETERO MANIFESTO...(No 1 in searches)...whole chapter on FPD. But be warned its not an academic study, but rather a prose-poetic rant, albeit a scholarly one. However its ideas and "proofs" will challenge the experts.

theresamouseinmyhous · 2013-06-26T03:17:44+00:00

If you're going to lean on science here, a study of one on the first point is too small to gather any conclusive data.

I don't really lean towards one belief or the other, I'm just saying.

"brainwash" -- norwegian documentary examines how fields like sociology and feminist studies reject actual science because it doesn't fit with their ideology

7 nature or nurture:

5 sex:

Comments

Title	"brainwash" -- norwegian documentary examines how fields like sociology and feminist studies reject actual science because it doesn't fit with their ideology
Author	toptrool
Upvotes	1106
Comments	380
Date	June 25, 2013 7:41 PM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1h23bq/brainwash_norwegian_documentary_examines_how/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/brainwash-norwegian-documentary-examines-how.1170197 https://theredarchive.com/post/1170197