Mathematician's Paper on Intelligence Rejected For Being Politically Incorrect
We've long warned you of academia being rife with anti-intellectual douchenuggets who value leftist allegiance over objectivity. Well, this incident involving a mathematician pretty much proves it to be true.
Get a load of this:
Theodore Hill, a retired professor of mathematics at Georgia Tech, claims that activists successfully pressured the New York Journal of Mathematics to delete an article he had written for the academic journal because it considered a politically incorrect subject: the achievement gap between men and women at very high levels of human intelligence.
Yep, this fella was walking on a minefield right from the start.
As might have been anticipated, the paper was poorly received by feminist scholars. Hill's co-author, Sergei Tabachnikov, faced strident opposition at Penn State, where he is employed as a professor of mathematics.
This stands in stark contrast to
feminist claptrap "science." Everyone knows women and men are equal in every way. With the only exception being women are better at everything. You can best sum it up with the equation "girls rule and boys drool." To say otherwise is to be a patriarchal, pseudoscientific jackass.
Mathematical Intelligencer rescinded its acceptance of the paper. According to its editor-in-chief, publishing Hill and Tabachnikov's work would create a "very real possibility that the right-wing media may pick this up and hype it internationally."
Look it, let's not get bogged down in the details or premise of the paper. We're going big picture here. It's not about what was written or theorized. But about the right to write and theorize.
Because notice how the paper's rejection has nothing to do with the mathematician's model being flawed or unscientific. Nope, the real concern here is the paper's existence and what one side may do with its findings, however true (or untrue) the findings may be. Ideas which merely hypothesize and question a leftist narrative are verboten.
Whatever happened to the freedom to express a point of view, even if it's unpopular? Isn't postulating different theories part of science? If everyone on Earth refused to explore new ideas and to question orthodoxy, we'd still be thinking this rock is flat. Mercury cures syphillis. Kevin Spacey is a morally upstanding thespian who is perfectly safe around young boys.
If feminists and other lefties truly believed these were unscientific right-wing ramblings, they'd demand the publishers release the article immediately. So they could rebut it and make the "anti-lady" mathematician look like a real sexist lunatic intent on keeping women barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen. If feminists want ideas such as what this mathematician is postulating to be seen for the barbaric thinking they believe it to be, then publish it in as many outlets as possible. So the same feminists can point to it and use it in their evidentiary toolboxes whenever they may need it.
Instead, they're conspiring to silence the ideas they oppose politically. For the left, a debate is not allowed. Silence is the only way to handle the opposition.
~Co-written by Corey Stallings and Courtney Kirchoff