There's a certain poetry to the narrative.

1. a group of ideologues submit a terrible paper about how science is too woke

2. it gets rejected because it is crap

3. they feel feel horribly aggrieved because surely they are entitled to publish this shit where ever they choose

4. these subaltern voices—silenced victims of cancel culture—air their grievances in the NY TImes, WSJ, etc

5. the whole episode disproves their thesis. In science, if not op-ed pages, quality clearly still matters

@ct_bergstrom I assume this is what the Pamela Paul piece in the NYT was about. I never read her tripe, but I saw the title of her piece and my first thought was “of course the paper was probably garbage.”
@whabib @ct_bergstrom Hah, was just about to post a comment about that article. Yep, the one and only Pamela Paul.