Code of Conducts / Guidelines on Campus

[Anonymous No.11353889]

Whats up /sci/tizens?

I work towards my physical anthropology master that I will have finished in 2021 at one of the better known universities in Germany. Our department recently announced new guidelines for speech used when presenting papers, in a bid to make them more inclusive and non-discriminatory. Use of "Easy Language" is encouraged, some words are not to be used anymore, the concept of race has been declared non-existent, instead of race we should refer to ethnicity. All fine and dandy with me, the problem I have is that it is contradictory to what is to be said, according to the new guidelines.

For example if I have a skeleton, I can tell with a high degree of confidence which sex, race/ethnicity it belonged to, I can make general and sometimes very precise assumption about his eating habits, lifestyle, health, even his IQ, speech impairments, many of his abilities. Observations like this inevitably lead to a qualitative classification or at least an qualitative assertion of abilities and such. It is impossible to look at any product of evolution without doing so when classifying it, but it is stark contrast to the new guidelines that have been published. To be specific: Making assumptions about the sex/race/health etc should not be made based on a qualitative basis that allows classification that is discriminatory. The example given was that a female skeleton is not to be classified as a "weaker" build. But what if it is? Its female, it doesnt have the same bone density, the same capacity to load muscle, etc. Under the new guidelines, assumptions like these are considered discriminatory.

>>cont.

[Anonymous No.11353890]

>>11353889

I have talked to the department about it and was not able to make my case, because, as usual, they dont have any idea what anthropologists do. They often mistake us for archeologists. Also the guidelines were not written with the input of the natural science department, they were written by the humanities department and later adopted.

How do you deal with that? Given that there is permanent outrage over the overtly politically correct left pushing their ideas of equality on many science, some /sci/ticens must have encountered this. How do you approach this issue?
I have been banned from reddit for asking this, they banned my 5 year old account over different science subs (thanks, supermods) for implying I only want to talk about race, sex and IQ in a qualitative way to spread division and hatred, when all I want to do is to finish my degree without running into problems. But how do you say what is factually true without breaching these guidelines? I already tried to talk to some geneticists about it, but I am not good at socializing and they were very distrustful, like I want to get them to make statements they later regret.

So how do you approach this?

[Anonymous No.11354020]

>>11353889
Science is inherently racist, sexist, islamophobic, ableist, transphobic, homophobic, pedophobic, antiorientalist and - worst of all - antisemitic.

On a more serious note: Science always only found out what the ruling class deemed appropriate. It was never neutral, it was always agenda pushing. In the 3rd Reich the justified their racialism with science, even denying IQ and stuff. During the dark ages all scientist agreed on flat earth and bro in the sky and now they just agree on negros being normal humans and women being equal to men.

Truth will never be found in mainstream science.

[Anonymous No.11355172]

>>11353889
Write your findings anyway, this shit is designed to maintain the current dogma
Their kvetching is just you telling them their programming is wrong

[Anonymous No.11355188]

>>11353889
>Germany
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ztOV2wrrkY

[Anonymous No.11355218]

>>11353889
Have a bump friendo

[Anonymous No.11355281]

Today I will remind them

>(1) According to the old anthropological tradition big human morphological variations which are the result of polymorphism united by common origin in certain geographical areas had been given the name »races«
>(2) Reality of the racial subdivisions of Homo sapiens are supported by the totality of the scientific data investigated on the different levels of human organism: morphological, physiological and genetical. Racial classification created with regard for morphological criteria clearly enough reflect the phylogeny of the separate populations and groups of populations.
>(3) Negativism to the race concept which became apparent during the last decades, in many respects might be explained by the psychological shock which all progressive humanity had felt in the epoch of Hitlerism."

t. 1998 Moscow conference on race.

[Anonymous No.11355311]

>>11353889
It's pretty amazing really, the amount of hoops we all now have to jump through to accommodate property development and banking corporations.... with regards to climate change, pollution, and ecosystem fragmentation, we all need to pretend that the "optimal" carbon tax is the ultimate solution; we need to pretend that wildlife "management" will save species from extinction; we need to pretend that global trade is more important than preventing disease outbreaks. all to support the totally unsustainable neoliberal ideology of continual population growth that they need to be remain viable. I wonder when/if people will smarten up say enough is enough, and stop paying for the consequences of these peoples opulent lifestyles.

[Anonymous No.11356528]

>>11353889
Get your degree, then move away from the collapsing star that is academia as quickly and far as possible.
The influence of the industry (check the backgrounds of your university's leaders), publish or perish and Bologna have made it a hellhole of broken dreams. Reliable scientists come not here.

Or stay, try to make it better, and fail against the horde of the uneducated who think they know better.

[Anonymous No.11356571]

>>11353889
>>11353890
>>11354020
Till now, you saw what humans are like. Now you see what society is like.

Once you see that you're a prosecuted minority, you can't un-see it.

A certain level of forced conformity has always been an expectation in academia. After all, what else is a peer review other than receiving and OK from "elders" that your thoughts are correct.

Academia, for all good it has given the human race, remains a dirty game.

You have two options. Fight it, and most likely lose, or get your degree and try to change it.

[Anonymous No.11356656]

>>11353889
>IQ
I doubt this post is genuine.

[Anonymous No.11356964]

>>11353890
>So how do you approach this?
I gave up

Eppur si muove

[Anonymous No.11358360]

>>11353889
>if I have a skeleton, I can tell with a high degree of confidence which sex, race/ethnicity it belonged to, I can make general and sometimes very precise assumption about his eating habits, lifestyle, health, even his IQ, speech impairments, many of his abilities.
>high degree of confidence
Not good enough, bigot.

[Anonymous No.11358568]

>>11354020
Yes indeed fellow redditor.
[tips fedora towards you]

[Anonymous No.11358808]

>>11353889
I feel bad for you bro. Cannot answer ypur question since this kind of stuff has not (yet) made it into our physics department, but I can imagine its horrible having to think twice on every written word if its politically correct, regardless of factual truth.

Fellow German here btw, where are you at?