Engineers aren’t buying this ‘microaggression’ rubbish

Caption: If you looked at this picture and thought, “Engineer”, you’re probably a racist, or something

Engineers are pretty practical folk, as a rule*. Make things, keep them running, fix ‘em when they don’t. Engineers deal with things that either work, or that don’t, theory be buggered. On the other hand, ‘intellectuals’ deal almost entirely with theory. Empirical evidence is a secondary concern, if not an actual hindrance to their cosy theories.

So, when a group of engineers were subjected to the flowery mental flatulence of leftist social theory, the result was bafflement. Quote:

Louisiana State University hosted its second annual Consortium for Innovation in Manufacturing and Materials (CIMM) RII Symposium on July 24, but some attendees who showed up expecting to learn about advances in engineering were surprised to find themselves instead “dealing with snowflakes and trigger warnings.” End of quote.

Not surprisingly, the tool-pushers were less than impressed. Quote:

“Who all has had implicit bias, sterotypes, microinsults, microaggressions, and [T]itle IX training?” the post asks. “Cause I’m at an engineering symposium in lod cook today and have been dealing with snowflakes and trigger warnings all morning. They scheduled an hour for us to learn about all this…At one point they had us write a microaggression that we gave or someone gave us.” End of quote.

“Microaggressions” are by definition trivial. If an ‘aggression’ is so small and pointless as to be “micro”, then it isn’t something you need to worry about. Unless you’re a whining cry-baby who needs a blankie and crayons just to cope with something as inconsequential as a merely different opinion.

The sort of microaggressions the boffins eventually struggled to come up with hardly painted a picture of a hellhole of rampant discrimination. Quote:

“When people learn that I am from Colorado, they assume I smoke weed,” complained one participant, while others referenced stereotypes such as “I thought all Asians were good at math” and “You probably lived on the west side of campus, right?” End of quote.

Egad. How do these poor techies ever cope?

Luckily they have SJWs to come to the rescue. Quote:

Sara Hernandez, the Associate Dean for Inclusion and Student Engagement at Cornell University, and Dr. Jenna Carpenter, the Dean of Engineering at Campbell University, presented the implicit bias workshop as part of their roles with CIMM’s Diversity Advisory Council (DAC).

Carpenter told Campus Reform that the DAC recommends everybody be educated about the impacts of implicit bias, asserting that “When faculty and students aren’t aware of implicit bias, they unwittingly engage in behaviors that continue the discrimination and discouragement of women and underrepresented minorities in science, mathematics, and engineering disciplines.” End of quote.

“Implicit bias” is pseudo-scientific bunkum. There is no evidence whatsoever to support this ninny-headed theory beyond the most frivolous of examples. All it amounts to is a fluffy re-wording of “ThoughtCrime”.

But, whenever did a lack of evidence bother a “social scientist”? Quote:

Dr. Pedro Derosa, who chaired the panel discussion, agreed that “social stereotypes” are the main reason for the lack of women and minorities in STEM fields, explicitly rejecting the notion that the observed differences have anything to do with qualities inherent to any of those groups. End of quote.

This is self-contradictory rubbish. On the one hand, these addle-pated SJWs argue that “implicit bias” (in other words, inherent mental qualities) are the villain, while in the next breath they swear bluntly that inherent qualities have anything to do with it.

As The Cut’s Jesse Singal puts it, while for SJWs, “there’s a certain intuitive appeal to this story. But here’s where science taps us on the shoulder and reminds us that intuition isn’t enough”. Logically consistent theories, falsifiable predictions and empirical evidence maketh science. “Social science” must stop arrogating the “science” moniker to itself.

*As with every rule, there are always exceptions. The exception in engineering is that engineering students from certain places or cultures are more likely than any other professional group to become Islamic extremists. Luckily, engineers from everywhere else still seem pretty sensible.

Do you want:

  • Ad-free access?
  • Access to our very popular daily crossword?
  • Access to daily sudoku?
  • Access to Incite Politics magazine articles?
  • Access to podcasts?
  • Access to political polls?

Our subscribers’ financial support is the reason why we have been able to offer our latest service; Audio blogs. 

Click Here  to support us and watch the number of services grow.

Who is Lushington D. Brady?

Well, a pseudonym. Obviously.

But the name Lushington Dalrymple Brady has been chosen carefully. Not only for the sum of its overall mien of seedy gentility, reminiscent perhaps of a slightly disreputable gentlemen of letters, but also for its parts, each of which borrows from the name of a Vandemonian of more-or-less fame (or notoriety) who represents some admirable quality which will hopefully animate the persona of Lushington D. Brady.

Listen to this post: