This reads like edgy "I am very smart" cliche.
I've presented evidence for all of these claims. But I'll try and briefly go over them again.
1) See all the disciplines in the humanities, notably English and Philosophy, straying from Socrates, Shakespeare and other 'white men' along with patriarchy. See also revisionist history, tearing down monuments and re-telling a biased view from the 'oppressed' perspective.
2) Many disciplines aren't even updated to the modern day because they refuse to take into account genetics and ascribe to 'Tabula Rasa', a discredited hypothesis that we're all blank slates and society only impacts us, we have no inborn behaviors, beliefs and the like, which as I've outlined before, is pure bullshit.
3) Beyonce Studies, Fat Studies, Gender Studies without Biology, Pop-Culture Studies and on and on and on.
4) The academic treadmill is real in the humanities. Very rarely do you get a decent paying job with a humanities degree. I broke down the difference between the cost of a STEM degree to a school and the cost of a humanities degree to a school. A STEM degree program requires you offer incentives that industry can't, requires you to maintain expensive equipment and labs to remain competitive, attract decent students to up the rep of your school, pay stipends to your graduate students. A humanities degree requires an adjunct professor you can pay 5k a class with, charge 40k per student and make a killing off of materials. It requires no expensive equipment, talent or knowledge to do. Some even get all their materials off the internet and just make them write papers that align with their views. There are no stipends for humanities graduate students, which means if they want to get more than 35k per year, they have to pay it themselves or utilize student loans. Humanities degrees for universities are INCREDIBLY lucrative, with next to no overhead and charging out the ass per student. That's why universities are safe spaces for them. Wouldn't want to upset the consumer, now would we?
5) How many studies do I need to pull up? Feminist Glacers? Fucking awful studies with terrible sample sizes and populations? The fake 1 in 5 rape statistic study that shot off the modern nightmare of Title IX? The prominent feminist who wrote about decrying the physics of liquid because of menstruation? (This is real. I wish it wasn't).
You don't need to be super smart to know any of this. This is critical thinking here. You step back and look at the evidence, presented by universities and the modern humanities themselves.
It is a feature, not a bug. Definitions privilege a certain form of discourse while silencing others.
Exactly. The whole thing is predicated on marginalizing opposition. That's why the progressive stack exists. Post-Modernism also allows you to twist 'oppressed' people being against you to them being brainwashed, so you can outright dismiss them. There is the changing of definitions and language when it is convenient for them, twisting it back and forth so 'its only for me, not for thee'.
Modernism was an examination of societal structures using critical thinking, different techniques as a method of obtaining truth. It played with traditional structures of art, story-telling, social structures, economics, everything. However, it did not deny that there WAS truth. It posited itself that society was changing, so a re-examination of that society was needed to cut the old from the new. Basically, it was examining a more efficient way to do things by thinking outside of the box.
Post-Modernism denies any structures whatsoever. There is no truth, there is only your truth. It doesn't seek to make structure more efficient or better, but it seeks to destroy those structures entirely.
The confusion comes in that Modernism and Post-Modernism sought/seek to disrupt the rigid structure of society. That's true. However, Modernism is a way of doing things differently/more efficiently/more creatively to improve societal structures. Meaning, there's a better way of doing things. Post-Modernism rejects this entirely, positing there is no right way to do things, that societal structures don't exist, and there is no truth.
That's the key difference between Modernism and Post-Modernism. Modernism sought a better way to improve societal notions that were different from the old order and way of things. Post-Modernism rejects that there is any way to do things, societal structures/biological divisions/gender are made-up concepts that exist to be torn apart, there is no objective truth, the only truth is what you make it. Which is why Post-Modern thought can twist definitions and have idiotic concepts like 'internalized misogyny' to boot out wrong think and still be 'internally consistent'. Well, to itself at least. To everyone else it just makes you a massive fucking hypocrite and obviously making shit up to prove your point.
