Geography professors Carrie Mott of Rutgers University and Daniel Cockayne of the University of Waterloo published an article in the Feminist Journal of Geography cautioning fellow colleagues against citing white males in their research.
Both professors argue that citation is a “problematic technology that contributes to the reproduction of the white heteromasculinity of geographical thought and scholarship.”
White heteromasculinity, according to these nutjobs… excuse me, professors, is defined as, “an intersectional system of oppression describing on-going processes that bolster the status of those who are white, male, able-bodied, economically privileged, heterosexual, and cisgendered.” That’s right. If a scholar’s citations are not “diverse” enough they are now potentially a Nazi.
Speaking to Campus Reform, Professor Mott stated that, “white men tend to be cited in much higher numbers than people from other backgrounds.” The fact that the majority of geographers are white males would easily explain why those often cited fall into that group apparently does not matter.
According to the American Association of Geographers, 68.6 percent of AAG members reported their race as White/Non-Hispanic, 20.6 reported to be Asian, and only 4.2 percent labeled themselves as African American. The AAG also released figures showing that 62 percent of their members were male. All of this is irrelevant because, as we know, facts do not matter to the left, only feelings do.
The lesson here is simple: If your skin tone is not dark, if you are not sexually attracted to members of the same sex, if you are not disabled, or if you do not have female reproductive organs, the P.C. police better not catch you drawing a map, and if you dare do geographical research, every citation better be authored by a person of color or you are literally Hitler.