Chapter 1: The Grievance Studies Hoax Unveiled

In a revealing discussion with Quillette, Peter Boghossian, an assistant professor of philosophy at Portland State University (PSU) and a member of the Intellectual Dark Web, disclosed that he is facing a misconduct investigation. This inquiry is being conducted by the very social justice academic circles his team previously exposed for unethical practices during the Grievance Studies Hoax. Following this revelation, PSU has placed restrictions on Boghossian, prohibiting him from engaging in any university-sponsored research until a thorough administrative review is completed.

In 2018, alongside fellow researcher James Lindsay and Areo Magazine editor Helen Pluckrose, Boghossian aimed to scrutinize the credibility of academic journals within social sciences. They submitted over a dozen fictitious academic papers centered on themes such as gender, race, queer studies, and social justice to assess how many would navigate the peer-review and publication processes, even though the content was intentionally nonsensical. This satirical act was designed to highlight genuine academic misconduct, revealing the peer-review system as deeply flawed.

The team produced over 21 papers, of which 9 were outright rejected, 5 were left stagnant in the review process, 3 were accepted without publication, and 4 were actually published. These submissions included absurd claims, such as the non-existence of the male penis, the dining habits of straight men at Hooters, and even the recontextualization of quotes from Adolf Hitler as feminist discourse, all couched in academic jargon. Only one paper was officially retracted without an apology. The findings from the Grievance Studies endeavor are detailed in the following video:

Alan Sokal, a prominent figure from the 1990s known for exposing ethical issues within "fashionable academic culture," has defended Boghossian and his colleagues. He praised their work for drawing significant media attention to their findings, featured in outlets like The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and Quillette. Reflecting on their work, Boghossian posed a critical question to the Times: "Is it feasible for individuals without a Ph.D. to produce publishable papers in their fields every couple of weeks?" However, PSU’s Institutional Review Board deemed their methods a "violation of human subjects’ rights and protections," arguing that the whistleblowers were themselves engaging in misconduct by failing to obtain consent from those they aimed to expose.

Boghossian and his colleagues articulated their concerns in an article for Areo Magazine, stating, "There is a troubling trend in the university, particularly within certain humanities fields, where the focus has shifted from truth-seeking to attending to social grievances. This perspective has become dominant, and scholars are increasingly pressuring students and faculty to conform to their ideologies, which lack scientific rigor." The inquiry into their methods has now led to selective enforcement of ethical standards by the university.

The board's claims suggest that their actions raised "serious concerns regarding academic integrity, ethical conduct, and breaches of employee regulations," resulting in Boghossian's research suspension. The ongoing investigation is examining the treatment of animal subjects (none were involved), human subjects (the editors who did not verify the papers), and potential "plagiarism, fabrication, and falsification"—essentially, a look at whether the misinformation presented was valid enough to prompt editorial verification. Notably, there has been no investigation into the misconduct of the academic journals involved.

In a follow-up statement to Campus Reform, Boghossian expressed that he had yet to fully process the situation due to his commitments to recording a new audiobook. He conveyed appreciation for the overwhelming support he has received from students, faculty, and scholars worldwide. The Grievance Studies project has forced prestigious academic institutions to confront a choice between upholding the truth and defending a flawed narrative. In the context of this imbalance, one might say that the essence of truth is now gravely endangered.

Thank you for reading! This article was initially published on TrigTent.com, a platform for diverse political and social viewpoints that prioritize factual accuracy over political correctness. Bailey Steen is a journalist, graphic designer, and film critic based in Australia. You can discover more of his work on Medium and in publications like Janks Reviews. For updates, follow @atheist_cvnt across social media or contact him at [email protected] for inquiries.

Stay honest and radical. Cheers!