4 ms·

I am not saying the proposal is bad, I'm saying I automatically don't trust the authors because they use the term "latinx" in something that's theoretically int

I am not saying the proposal is bad, I'm saying I automatically don't trust the authors because they use the term "latinx" in something that's theoretically intended to help the Latin American community. Additionally, the fact our funding climate is such that people feel they have to insert coded language for white academic elites into their proposals for them to be accepted for a grant is part of the problem in at least 3 layers, and probably more than that, of this very complex social issue.

ModernMech 1y ago
That's fine if you don't trust the title of this proposal, or this researcher, but that's why you're not in charge of funding science. Typically people who are in charge of funding science reserve their opinions about the efficacy of something until after actually reading the details of the proposal. All I know from our several back and forths is that you don't like the term latinx and some other people don't, and therefore this proposal, of which you cannot even articulate the details, is a priori defacto harmful. If that's all you have than I think I've learned all I can from exchange. > people feel they have to insert coded language for white academic elites Assumed; there's no proof that happened here. You're inventing the genesis of this proposal in your mind. > this very complex social issue. Agreed, and that's why we shouldn't draw conclusions (like "they actively seek to destroy other people's cultures and languages") from a single word or a title, and why we usually rely on panels of domain experts who understand the nuance to fund such complex social research. Which is what happened in this case.