fandom, how I love you.

[kaigou]

Pursuant to kdorian's wonderment about the apparent lack of tags on the US-version of the wearing-the-juice mansplaining crap from SurveyFail, I went and looked. Turns out there are just so many tags, they're hidden. (Sheesh.) Click on the link under the section title, and suddenly you see the first twenty or so tags... with five more pages of tags behind that.

---

mansplaining(469)
bad science(453)
bad research(419)
authors failed research methods 101(413)
psuedoscience(376)
surveyfail(369)
phds written in crayon(366)
complete crap(346)
disclaimed by boston university(342)
junk science(324)

who needs peer review(294)
biased heterosexist and wrong(289)
a billion made up conclusions(254)
wrong on the internet(238)
evo psych is make believe(202)
misogyny(174)
methodology fail(173)
gender essentialism(163)
transphobia(135)
waste of time(116)

your sample population hates you now(110)
unethical(104)
bad methodology(79)
whats an irb(76)
terrible(64)
unforgivable tripe(61)
men explaining women(52)
made up(44)
raise your hand if they tried to get you to take their survey(43)

did not pass ethics review board(28)
horse hockey(26)
pt barnum would be proud(23)
taking credit for the internet(23)
you fail science forever(23)
made of fail(22)
my cat does better research(21)
the authors can t get dates(15)
waste of a good tree(15)
publisher failed fact check 101(13)

sensationalism(13)
you fail the internet forever(13)
academics of gor(11)
drank their own koolaid(10)
their thoughts on yaoi(10)
sexism(9)
cisplaining(8)
fantasies of cis het men(8)
overpriced snake oil(8)
sensationalist tripe(8)

transphobic(8)
boston university withdrew support from this(7)
whiskey tango foxtrot(7)
boston university review board removed bu imprimatur(6)
bs(6)
building a career on imaginary data(6)
homophobic(6)
so much fail(6)
this book is bad and you should feel bad(6)

wearing the juice(6)
game show doctors(5)
research what research(5)
science fiction fantasy(5)
unethical research(5)
when research subjects bite back(5)
cherrypicked research(4)
i can make up theories too(4)
unhindered by scientific rigor(4)
bad book is bad(3)

biased(3)
biased tripe(3)
fandom denouces junk science(3)
heteronormative(3)
tabloid writing disguised as science(3)
who needs ethics approval ive got a book to sell(3)
a thousand pages of no(2)
crap methodology(2)
doing it wrong(2)
don t know how to research(2)

fail(2)
garbage in psychology today out(2)
irb-ogus(2)
it burns it burns(2)
lolwhat try again(2)
our fanasies aren t about you(2)
phrenology is not science(2)
pseudo-science(2)
say what(2)

science - ur doin it wrong(2)
thank god you explained that(2)
they made how much for this crap(2)
waste of trees(2)
what is this i don t even(2)
000 of those clicks were mine(1)
2011 winner marty rimm research prize(1)
but i thought the tags were amusing(1)

confirmation bias for dummies(1)
crap science(1)
embarassing nonsense(1)
example of why people distrust and mock social sciences (1)
fake data(1)
good for kindling(1)
hot mess(1)
how so awful(1)
i hate you and i hate your work(1)
internet social experiment troll(1)

ludicrous(1)
modern phrenology(1)
my male appendage is bigger than your ladybrain(1)
oh good grief(1)
peer review(1)
peer review what(1)
promoting the binary is the only way these guys get laid(1)
research that says nothing at all(1)
sexist crap(1)

stop doing science(1)
thank you so much for mansplaining this to us(1)
think they invented sliced bread didn t(1)
this tripe killed a forest(1)

utter nonsense(1)
vote with your feet(1)
what(1)
why did anyone think this should be published(1)

why do real research when there s a pet hypothesis to prop up(1)
written by pissants(1)

---

Oh, fandom, never change.

Comments

[branchandroot]

but i thought the tags were amusing(1)

*laughing forever*

[kaigou]

The real sadness is that you're limited to only fifteen. I have way more than fifteen favorites among those tags!

[majoline]

They changed that just recently on amazon. Lots of "good" reviews, no tags unless you dug around for them.

And yes, it's only that book.

[kaigou]

I didn't even realize the link -- very much a fail (possibly purposeful, I suspect) on the interaction design there -- would reveal the tags, and only clicked it when nothing else worked: "explore product tags". I didn't immediately associate "product" with "this particular book" and the "explore" made it sound like "to know more about" instead of "look at". Ambiguous. And probably intentional, because I don't think there's a single friendly tag in the bunch.

Pity (though I understand the business reasons) that you can only review if you've purchased a copy. Eh, well.

[windsorblue]

our fanasies aren t about you(2)

I'm making t-shirts of this.

[thejeopardymaze]

I love social science, but I can't blame people for hating it because of idiots like these.

The fact that Psychology Today lets Ogi Ogas blog on their site horrifies me, and I encourage nothing less than a complete boycott of their advertisers over this. To be fair, I'd rather slit my wrists than ever pay for that magazine in general due to their history of stupid articles, but allowing Ogas on there... I have no words, at least in polite company.