[Academiadotorg]

Academics are so cute when they try to spin the egg off their faces.

[I want the USA back]

College today is a joke.

[Leep]

Would have been interesting if they would have got a scientic consensus.

[jimmygrace]

With gender studies, it is harder and harder to tell the difference between real crazy and made-up crazy.

[Billthedrill]

Alan Sokal's Quantum Gravity hoax is no less than 22 years old now. They still bite hook, line, and sinker. HERE is a link to an explanation of the Conceptual Penis paper, and HERE is a link to the paper itself. Here's a snippet:

The conceptual penis is the operative representation of the penis in society as it obtains via a variety of performative acts and statements related to and concerning gender. Conceptualization is the best way to understand the penis, as the notion of “penis as a male anatomical organ” suffers typical androcentric and meta-scientific limitations and errors as it is both overly reductive, in failing to represent the full reality of penis-bearing human experiences, and incoherent, as the penis itself has little or nothing to do with gender (West & Zimmerman, 1987).

Come on, Perfesser, can you really read this and not know somebody's yanking yer chain? Which is, after all, a conceptual penis itself?