Each week author Tess Lynne takes us into the depths of all things left emanating from those on where else -- the Left Coast. Here's this week's installment:
Science is rooted in facts, but apparently racism too.
Sara Giordano, a former neuroscientist and currently a women’s studies professor at the University of California-Davis has decided that science needs a good dose of feminism – a new “feminist” science. Giordano said that science has “earned its epistemic authority through its co-constitution with colonization and slavery," relying on a "colonial and racialized form of power."
In other words, science, according to the feminist professor, has a racist bent “that has inflicted oppression upon people through colonialism.”
“We need to disrupt the epistemic authority of Science … [and] the assumption that science = truth,” Giordano writes, which she says can be done through a new “feminist science practice that explicitly unsticks Science from Truth.”
Giordano’s goal is to get people to “embrace an irreverent disdain for traditional science and instead practice feminist science,” adding the time has come for a “much needed anti-science, antiracist, feminist approach to knowledge production.”
Science is factual and unbiased. Its purpose is to research and discover answers without emotion, politics, or any other outside factors and feelings muddling the results. It is supposed to provide us with the truth, collected and compared after a series of related tests and experiments. Yes, the outcome can sometimes be skewed depending upon how the conclusions are drawn, but saying it is racist is a bit much.
How, then, will feminist science provide anything relevant and truthful? The study is all-encompassing, yet what Giordano suggests would indeed be biased. Imagine a group of radical women scientists conducting an experiment or study – scary thought. We already know the outcome will be influenced by their feminist beliefs. The projects will not likely be set up with all-inclusive questions meant to get to the truth of the matter. Instead, we can posit the questions will lead to a feminist bent and outcome.
“Let the facts speak for themselves” does not seem to be the goal with this new form of proposed science. Instead, it adjusts the effects, so the outcome is bias, sexist and as far from the truth as possible. Will we now need race related science so that every nationality can have its slant?
How is it possible have come so far only to slide so quickly downhill? When will this leftist madness end? Even the truth is considered racist, and science, which has been an essential part of our lives – from medicines to safety – is being threatened by women who think they have all of the answers. Science should remain genderless and based on truth, not opinion.
