Penises Cause Global Warming?

A hoax study in a peer reviewed journal made the case with gibberish, and got published:

Gender studies is a fake academic industry populated by charlatans, deranged activists and gullible idiots.

Now, a pair of enterprising hoaxers has proved it scientifically by persuading an academic journal to peer-review and publish their paper claiming that the penis is not really a male genital organ but a social construct.

The paper, published by Cogent Social Sciences – “a multidisciplinary open access journal offering high quality peer review across the social sciences” – also claims that penises are responsible for causing climate change.

It is amazing. These people are all talking about things in gibberish, trying to gain social status by leaving each other unable to understand them, and hoping people will think it is a measure of how incomprehensibly smart they are. It is all about social signaling, or rather trying to fake social signaling to make yourself look smarter than you are. Here, the peer reviewers actually were awed by the hoaxers, because the hoaxers appeared to be speaking in such complicated language that nobody could understand it. They must be geniuses, if none of us can understand it!

Here is a paragraph from it:

Inasmuch as masculinity is essentially performative, so too is the conceptual penis. The penis, in the words of Judith Butler, “can only be understood through reference to what is barred from the signifier within the domain of corporeal legibility” (Butler, 1993). The penis should not be understood as an honest expression of the performer’s intent should it be presented in a performance of masculinity or hypermasculinity. Thus, the isomorphism between the conceptual penis and what’s referred to throughout discursive feminist literature as “toxic hypermasculinity,” is one defined upon a vector of male cultural machismo braggadocio, with the conceptual penis playing the roles of subject, object, and verb of action. The result of this trichotomy of roles is to place hypermasculine men both within and outside of competing discourses whose dynamics, as seen via post-structuralist discourse analysis, enact a systematic interplay of power in which hypermasculine men use the conceptual penis to move themselves from powerless subject positions to powerful ones (confer: Foucault, 1972).

Everything in r-selection is about flash, snap-perceptions, and peacocking. Since there is no real test of fitness in r-selection, all that matters is the ability to gain the attention of mates quickly. Once a mate-attention-attractor emerges, it becomes popular not for any fitness enhancing ability, but merely for the fact it is able to attract mates, and will produce children that attract a lot of mates.

Everything about the r-strategy is nonsensical, and I do not think that is just the K-strategy in me blinding me to it. Even the traits it evolves are nonsensical.

Spread r/K Theory, because isometric atabulation of the reverse chirality is superior to the penis of a mimetic centipede