On September 14, 2021, two Polish female professors headed to the Great Salt Lake in Utah to marry some brine shrimp in an ecosexual wedding.
Presided over by Bonnie Baxter PhD, a biology professor at Westminster University in nearby Salt Lake City, the two Polish professor brides in clinging wedding dresses approached holding hands and together with the rest of the wedding party which included a sexologist and Elizabeth Stephens, the chair of UC Santa Cruz’s Art Department, who helped create the ‘Ecosexual’ movement, went into the lake to marry the shrimp through an exchange of psychic vows.
As bizarre as the officially titled ‘Cyber Wedding to the Brine Shrimp’ might seem, it involved the collaboration of academics from at least four universities, and sponsorship by the Polish Cultural Institute of New York, which operates under the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
What might seem like mental illness is by now a well-established academic field under the aegis of the environmental ‘posthumanities’ which set out to ‘decolonize’ the study of the planet. Rather than the scientific study of the ocean, ‘blue humanities’ applied the usual ‘studies’ formula to viewing the human relationship to the ocean through a Marxist lens. Blue posthumanities then set out to decenter human beings and to center marine life. Blue feminist posthumanities applied feminism to promote a non-binary sexual relationship with the water.
And that is how you end up with academics and universities holding a brine shrimp wedding.
Assistant Professor Ewelina Jarosz and Assistant Professor Justyna Górowska, the two ‘queer brides’ who married the brine shrimp, founded the ‘hydrosexual’ movement, describing themselves as ‘cyber nymphs’ who are moving the ‘ecosexual’ movement forward using ‘queer and feminist blue posthumanism’. Much of their activism is indistinguishable from pornography.
But it’s also the subject of academic papers including ‘Loving the Brine Shrimp: Exploring Queer Feminist Blue Posthumanities’ in the Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics which claims to challenge “settler science by exploring the connection between the reproductive system of brine shrimp and the economy, ecology and culture” to “alter white humans’ perceptions and understanding of the brine shrimp.”
The Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics solicited “indigenous, anti-colonial, queer, gender and intersectional approaches to marine and coastal sea farming” and feminist approaches for a special issue on Feminist Blue Humanities.
The Journal has an editorial board consisting of two dozen PhDs from as far away as Finland, Oklahoma, India and South Africa under the aegis of the massive German Springer science publishing giant which decided to normalize the idea of a psychic brine shrimp wedding.
Blue Feminism got an early public exposure when a TED Talk about ‘feminist glaciology’ went viral to mass mockery. Despite the ridicule, the submission of parody papers and outrage over a 5-year National Science Foundation grant to the author of “Glaciers, gender, and science: A feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research”: it’s here and thriving.
Feminist glaciology proposed “merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.” It’s easy to dismiss that as mad gibberish, but it really means that glaciology (and all science) must be viewed from a Marxist perspective.
Academia has come to mostly consist of applying Marxist feminist, ‘queer’, anti-colonial and other such forms of discourse to every conceivable subject. Culture now means deconstructing every work of art and literature through the oppressed and oppressor paradigms of Marxism. History, where the infection began, has long since fallen victim to it. The various ‘Studies’ fields then spread their ‘critical readings’ of everything that human beings do.
Much like the brine shrimp wedding, ordinary people only became aware of the corruption of the field when outrageous examples of it broke through the academic wall, such as the claims emerging from American Studies that Americans drink milk because of their racism.
Feminist glaciology and brine shrimp weddings represent the colonization and replacement of actual science with the critical ‘studies’ approach to viewing the entire planet and then the universe as oppressive constructs invented by white male slave owners. And what is at stake is the end of any kind of framework of rational inquiry in favor of woke pseudoscience.
Science pursues objectivity while the woke studies fields frame everything in terms of their unique intersectional perspective. In intersectionality, facts are unimportant and what matters above all else is the place of every participant in the oppressor/oppressed paradigm.
A feminist or ‘queer’ perspective on brine shrimp or the workings of the universe is of far more value than what an old white man like Albert Einstein or a hundred of them had to say. To the Marxist mind, everything is a matter of power relations and nothing can be known except by deconstructing and unlearning all the things that capitalism and the patriarchy had taught us.
When applied to science and mathematics, grievance culture leads to claims that whiteboards perpetuate ‘whiteness’ in physics, empiricism is a construct of ‘whiteness’ and contentions that “the idea of math being culturally neutral because two plus two equals four reeks of white supremacist patriarchy” and that “the very nature of the knowledge and who’s produced it and what has counted as mathematics is itself dominated by whiteness and racism.”
But when science is ‘decolonized’ of all its white male past, what do its new diverse intersectional pioneers with their feminist, queer and anti-colonial perspectives contribute to the sum of human knowledge? Brine shrimp weddings, research about “indigenous knowledge” in the secret advanced sciences of Africa and American Indians, and evolutionary biology papers claiming that ‘racist housing policies’ altered the genetic structure of American ants.
Woke science, like woke religion, woke culture and woke everything, is just wokeness wearing any and every subject as a disguise over its usual activism and freakish tendencies. A feminist lens on science reduces objects and phenomena outside the human spectrum to a crude ‘herstory’ binary in which life-giving forces resist male objectivity and exploitation while a queer lens sexualizes everything even right down to water ‘hydrosexuality’ and brine shrimp.
The brine shrimp cyber-wedding is not an aberration, it is exactly what applying intersectionality to science is meant to produce. Radical activism and deviant sexual posturing doesn’t enrich science: it hijacks science for the benefit of activists who view it as a radical art project.
The Soviet Union mandated that all science must be viewed from an ideological perspective, but the rigid discipline of the totalitarian regime suppressed individualism and the system soon ossified into obligatory quotes from Marx and Lenin rather than anything especially innovative. Without that ideological discipline, Marxism in academia devolves into brine shrimp weddings.
Ecosexuality abundantly expresses the narcissism at the heart of the Left. With no intellectual or ideological discipline, the entire world is rewritten to express the identities of a small group. Science must not only accept that men can become women by just thinking about it, but that even the skies and the oceans express the sexuality of the women who would marry shrimp.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/underwater-feminism/
