It sounds like it may be triggered by the woman who wrote an assignment responding to a psychology paper discussing pressures and bullying of people about gender norms. Her “thoughtful” reaction was essentially “they aren’t bullied or pressured, and it totally makes sense that they are being bullied and pressured and they need to accept they don’t belong to themselves but belong to God and need to be womanly or manly because God said so”
Didn’t even cite the Bible, but the critique was not about citations but about not using evidence to support the claim. Also the inconsistent nature of simultaneously saying there’s no bullying or pressure and saying the bullying and pressure are justified in the name of God. Further from a psychology perspective, displays a complete unwillingness to even consider the psychological situation of another human being if it doesn’t fully align with the world view.
It probably could have gotten credit if she cited some study extolling the benefits of traditional gender norms and/or the mental stresses of non traditional explorations, I’m sure some conservative nutjiobs have managed to publish such a study, or falling that she could probably dig into 19th century “science” and find something to support her view. It would have been odious. But at least would have demonstrated a willingness to go searching for something to support her stance instead of just shutting down and copping out with a vague “God disagrees”
It sounds like it may be triggered by the woman who wrote an assignment responding to a psychology paper discussing pressures and bullying of people about gender norms. Her “thoughtful” reaction was essentially “they aren’t bullied or pressured, and it totally makes sense that they are being bullied and pressured and they need to accept they don’t belong to themselves but belong to God and need to be womanly or manly because God said so”
Didn’t even cite the Bible, but the critique was not about citations but about not using evidence to support the claim. Also the inconsistent nature of simultaneously saying there’s no bullying or pressure and saying the bullying and pressure are justified in the name of God. Further from a psychology perspective, displays a complete unwillingness to even consider the psychological situation of another human being if it doesn’t fully align with the world view.
It probably could have gotten credit if she cited some study extolling the benefits of traditional gender norms and/or the mental stresses of non traditional explorations, I’m sure some conservative nutjiobs have managed to publish such a study, or falling that she could probably dig into 19th century “science” and find something to support her view. It would have been odious. But at least would have demonstrated a willingness to go searching for something to support her stance instead of just shutting down and copping out with a vague “God disagrees”