 social science and the scholarly communication that's built around exchanging social science knowledge has been kind of built on this myth of meritocracy so we actually believe that the ways that we evaluate both people and their scholarship means that the best rises to the top and you know that those Those journals that are ranked very highly whether we believe an impact factor We just believe that you know a high rejection rate means that they must be the ones that do get in are really good Or whether we believe that it's because the names we recognize are on the editorial board and therefore It must be really good. We really do kind of it's it's bizarre to me How much we as social scientists believe in the myth of meritocracy when we apply it to our own work instead of building it on the values of You know inclusion and equity and diversity and we very rarely Do we ask? You know sort of the kinds of questions that Frankly a feminist methodology would have us ask who's missing