3 ms·

I’m not in the mood to give a lecture on how the real racism is between the lines, if you can’t see it, good for you. The entire article is condescending agains

I’m not in the mood to give a lecture on how the real racism is between the lines, if you can’t see it, good for you. The entire article is condescending against research done outside the main european/north-american axis, using words like “Egyptian” and “Mexican” to set the tone of the comments, as if to say “you know what to expect from these people”. There is absolutely no reason to connect the researcher and the criminal like he did other than prejudice. Surely I can find a criminal in the USA with your surname, but I bet you wouldn’t find it funny if I publicly implied you were related, or even worse, that you were connected to their crimes.

s1artibartfast 5y ago
>The entire article is condescending against research done outside the main european/north-american axis, using words like “Egyptian” and “Mexican” to set the tone of the comments, as if to say “you know what to expect from these people”. I agree that the article is condescending/skeptical of studies outside the european/north-american axis. I don't think the driver is a belief that brown people can't do science, but that medical research coming from these countries is generally lower quality and less likely to be replicable. The latter is a commonly held belief in the medical research community, which has a basis in reality. >There is absolutely no reason to connect the researcher and the criminal like he did other than prejudice. The alternate reason is given at length in the three paragraphs above. Of all the studies, this one is the most likely to be deliberate fraud. The comparison of the joke is demeaning and is intended to be disparaging. The insinuation is that Espitia-Hernandez the doctor is as trustworthy as Espitia-Hernandez the drug dealer, not because they are both Mexican or family, but because Espitia-Hernandez the doctor is a liar and a fraudster.

s1artibartfast 5y ago

>The entire article is condescending against research done outside the main european/north-american axis, using words like “Egyptian” and “Mexican” to set the tone of the comments, as if to say “you know what to expect from these people”. I agree that the article is condescending/skeptical of studies outside the european/north-american axis. I don't think the driver is a belief that brown people can't do science, but that medical research coming from these countries is generally lower quality and less likely to be replicable. The latter is a commonly held belief in the medical research community, which has a basis in reality. >There is absolutely no reason to connect the researcher and the criminal like he did other than prejudice. The alternate reason is given at length in the three paragraphs above. Of all the studies, this one is the most likely to be deliberate fraud. The comparison of the joke is demeaning and is intended to be disparaging. The insinuation is that Espitia-Hernandez the doctor is as trustworthy as Espitia-Hernandez the drug dealer, not because they are both Mexican or family, but because Espitia-Hernandez the doctor is a liar and a fraudster.