Talk:Ulrich Kutschera

'restricted to lecture at state-sponsored universities'

'Ulrich Kutschera ranks among those academics in Germany who are restricted to lecture at state-sponsored universities in this country, due to his “politically incorrect” views on gender and related issues.[21][22]'

What is this supposed to mean? Who is 'restricting' Kutschera to lecture at state-sponsored universities? As opposed to what 'unrestricted' alternative? Lecturing at private universities (which are few and far between in germany)? Neither of the references given seems to provide evidence for such a claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:908:C32:6B20:F1FB:A39D:F5A9:AA0B (talk) 14:57, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Activism against Gender Studies?

Kutschera is a Critic of Gender Studies he takes the line that Gender Studies are pseudoscience.--The SBC Guy (talk) 08:51, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

The 2 sentences „Based on … rescheduled“ ...

The 2 sentences „Based on … rescheduled“ have been removed, inclusive of the references 24, und 25. According to German Law, a person who is accused of something is innocent as long as there is no conviction. The court case against Prof. Kutschera has been suspended—he is innocent until the last “Instance” has been reached – with a conviction-guilty or not. This has not yet been the case. The refs. 24 and 25 are biased opinion articles, which have no place in a Wiki- Bio If included, at least 2 other opinions on this case should be cited. -- Diwata2 10:00, 10. Dez. 2019 (CET) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diwata2 (talk • contribs) 09:00, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

outdated Information

On Monday, August 3, 2020, the charges against Kutschera concerning his arguments against the adoption of children by gay and lesbian couples were dropped in court. The mild verdict "Beleidigung" is not yet "rechtskräftig", so that he remains an innocent person, until a higher court (Landbgericht) has evaluated the case in a new trial. -- diwata2 11:23, 06. august. 2020 (CET) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diwata2 (talk • contribs) 09:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

References

outdated Information for "Since the mid-2010s... until... appeal"

The section "Since the mid-2010s.... until... appeal" is factually wrong and outdated. Prof. Kutschera has left the Desiderius Erasmus-Stiftung in February 2021, and is no member of any political party; he has nothing to do with the Alternative fuer Deutschland, or politics in general, and is, from a legal point of view, an innocent person. The whole section is a smear campaign -- like the accusations against him with respect to an interview he gave on "Gender and John Money", published in Kath.net on 05. July. 2017, see the Mercator.net- Interview "An evolutionary biologist dissects Gender Theory, 11.Sept. 2018" listed in the previous version of the article. See the recent book "U. Kutschera, 2021: Strafsache Sexualbiologie. Darwinische Wahrheiten zu Ehe und Kindeswohl vor Gericht, Verlag Tredition, Hamburg, 2021", 588 Pages, 88 Figs., for details, notably the description of the Court case 2020-21 that resulted in a "Freispruch", i.e., Prof. Kutschera is innocent. -- diwata2 16:53, 30.october.2021 (CET) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diwata2 (talk • contribs) 14:59, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

The information is neither wrong nor outdated. It includes specific references for each statement, such as his board membership with the foundation. If he as since left that position, you are free to contribute a reputable source saying as much. But even in that case, the information would not be deleted from the article, only updated to include the end of that membership. The same is true for the trial and controversy: just because the trial ended does not mean it never happened. Nor does his acquittal make the controversy around his statements irrelevant. There are plenty of controversies over hateful things people say even if it is perfectly legal to say those things. The section on the trial included the information that Kutschera was acquitted and references for that, as well as any other statement of fact. That particular episode is also not "outdated": The trial itself ended in 2021.

As to your insinuations that there's something special about the German legal system that would prevent the publication of this information: the English-language wikipedia also would not necessarily care about German law in such cases, but that doesn't even matter because nothing in German law prohibits factual statements about trials in the recent past. This is easily confirmed by the continued existence of all the articles in the German press that are included and linked as references.

In any case, you need to reply to the request to state your conflicts of interest. It is entirely obvious that you are connected to Kutschera in some meaningful way, considering the attention you give exclusively to this article as well as Rajnish Khanna and Winslow Briggs, two business parters of his (as stated in the article). Your other account on commons has even uploaded images explicitly(1) stating(2) that(3) they(4) are works of Kutschera. Your third account uploaded this picture of Kutschera's father in 1962, but only after your attempt to upload it failed. You are also close enough to take photos of Rajnish Khanna, which also implies a conflict of interest, if there are any doubts on the matter after the first attempt to create the article was deleted as "unambiguous advertising". You have now also reverted five different attempts by people to add the criticism of Kutschera in this article: 12 3 4 5. That shows rather convincingly that there is ample interest in having that information in the article. It's really the only interest anyone has, as far as I can tell. Continuing to whitewash the article can end in an account ban, as you probably know, considering the recent experience with your (I have lost count... 5th?) account in Germany. (Apart from the name, you once failed to switch accounts when editing here, by the way.) --Karl Oblique (talk) 02:27, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Most of the material added by User:Karl Oblique appears to be reasonably sourced; I've restored most of it, though I've attempted to make some of the wording more neutral, and moved some of it out of the lede, per WP:LEDE. User:Diwata2, please be more specific with your objections. If you believe some of the material is out-of-date (i.e., he's no longer a member of a certain organization, etc), please provider a reliable source to support that assertion. Do not attempt to re-add your own commentary on the article (e.g. His Wikipedia-CV has been vanalized...). OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:19, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Kutschera 2021 article - "Sex and Covid-19" (ref. 34)

"In 2021, Kutschera published a controversial article on "Sex and Covid-19",[34] co-authored with the British writer and biologist Carole Jahme (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carole_Jahme), University College London."

According to the PDF linked in reference 34, and according to indexing on Google Scholar, the article is properly titled "Biological sex and Covid-19: Science versus ideology". But that is not my primary concern.

This article was published in Journal of Behavioral Health (JBH), a journal that has been identified as predatory by many, including Kscien's List and Beall's List -- both the original list and the anonymously updated version maintained today.

This seems an apt characterisation to me: the journal charges a $2000 USD article processing charge of its authors and misspells the word "and" in its header button: "Aims ans Scope". It is not indexed in PubMed or other major critically-evaluated databases of scholarly work, and makes grammatical errors in its "About Journal" webpage. It is a classic example of a predatory journal.

There is no reference for the claim that this article was controversial, and if it is not controversial, it is not noteworthy enough to warrant mention and should be removed.

If this publication is to be referenced in any encyclopaedic article, the article ought to indicate that the publisher is a predatory journal, as predatory journals such as JBH rarely offer genuine peer review, though they present a veneer of authenticity.

NeuroJasper (talk) 12:10, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Having received no additional input as of yet, I will go ahead and remove the sentence referring to this article of Kutschera's.

This is one article in a predatory journal. It has not garnered significant attention among Kutschera’s academic peers or among the press. At the time of writing, it has a single citation indexed by Google Scholar, and a quick search for keywords related to the article's title and subject matter fails to bring up any news coverage of the article.

Thus, per WP:MINORASPECT, this does not warrant inclusion. It is one article of Kutschera's 300+ published articles, and the article has not generated much controversy at all. To maintain mention of this article would give it undue emphasis. NeuroJasper (talk) 05:04, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't have strong feelings either way. But, presumably, a predatory prays on the weak and needy, which a retired professor typically isn't. If the author knowingly plays along with such a pay-for-play scheme, they must be hoping for some other audience to fall for it, i. e. for the general public to consider it evidence of his status and productivity. In that case, it might be relevant not for what it says about COVID, but about the author.

That's probably a bit too original to warrant inclusion, however, so I'm fine with leaving it out for now. K. Oblique 02:06, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

It's an interesting point that's been made a few times! It seems increasingly clear that many of the "preyed upon" academics see predatory publishing practises as more symbiotic than predatory. And why wouldn't they? It's an easy venue in which to publish your work with a veneer of authenticity through sham peer review. See the Explanatory note a on the article for predatory publishing:

"These publications often are called predatory journals, on the assumption that well-meaning academics are duped into working with them – tricked by flattering emails from the journals inviting them to submit a paper or fooled by a name that sounded like a journal they knew.

"But it's increasingly clear that many academics know exactly what they're getting into, which explains why these journals have proliferated despite wide criticism. The relationship is less predator and prey, some experts say, than a new and ugly symbiosis."[7]

That being said, it would always be quite tricky to demonstrate what an author's intentions and motivations might have been in selecting a particular journal, so these kinds of speculation certainly wouldn't pass muster for inclusion on Wikipedia.

NeuroJasper (talk) 11:40, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

False Information on a respected scientist , author and musician

As a former biology student in Germany, I have access to infos about Professor Ulrich Kutschera: Sorry, this Wiki-CV contains false infos. In the German University System, a Full Rpofessor remains "Professor" for the rest of his life, even if he has no longer teaching responsibilities after leaving his Department. Prof. Kutschera joined the Desiderius Erasmus Stiftung in 2018, but left this Organistion in Febr. 2021, because of lack of inerest in political issues, see his public statements. He descirbed his Court case, inclusive of background infos, in an article entitled "Meet the German biologist hauled into court after criticizing gender theory, Mercator net, 2021", and in his 588-pages-book "Strafsache Sexualbiologie. Darwinische Wahrheiten zu Ehe und Kindeswohl vor Gericht",2021-2.Ed. 2022. Finally, Prof. Kutscher the cause of Hoffmann s death, see Mercator.net, 2022, and a CD-plus Music Video "Requiem for E.T.A. Hoffmann-2022". After leaving his German University and joining I-Cultiver in Manteca, CA-USA, he continues to publish original research papers, writing books, and releasing Music CDs, which contain his own Neo-Classical Music, distributed worldwide via Compact Disc Services, U. K. As far as I know, he music has a professional background. Diwata2 (talk) 16:21, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

This isn't a "Wiki-CV," it's an encyclopedia article. We rely on reliable sources for sourcing of material, not personal testimonies. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:23, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, but you did not use "reliable sources", but biased-false infos, often created by Prof. Kutschera s enemies in Germay,-- it is unethical to claim things that are fantasy and not fact, such as Kutschera s alledged membership in a political organisation he left more than 2 years ago-- in addition, he was never "verurteilt",in a legal sense, but always innocent , because never a "Rechtskräftige Verurteilung", verdict approved by court, occurred.-- Now,I have done what I can, and it is your turn to correct his bio- or not.-- As far as I have read in german newsreports, Prof. Kutschera completely ignores the 2 Wiki-articles about him,see his Twitter-account with Infos on his person. Diwata2 (talk) 16:39, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

If you don't like the material cited from reliable sources, you're welcome to ignore it as well. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:42, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

You “have access to infos about Professor Ulrich Kutschera”? I would imagine, considering you created this article 11 years ago and uploaded a photo of his father (with your first account, now blocked in some projects). K. Oblique 14:12, 26 July 2023 (UTC)