As part of my work as an educator, I see the need to surface for discussion what might indeed be considered as acts of oppression on the part of peer reviewers when certain aspects of knowing and meaning are misrecognized, obscured, or suppressed. Drawing on observations concerning coercive and oppressive relational and educational practices found in Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed as well as scholarly works in Critical Discourse Analysis critiquing inequitable practices within academic and social domains, I argue that a more academically (and socially) accountable, conscionable and humanizing alternative is one which engenders greater openness to questions concerning: (1) who it might be that gets to determine what counts as (publishable) knowledge; and (2) how such formulations of knowledge may be tied to powerful or ideologized ways of knowing and meaning making. This article is also an appeal for greater awareness that acts which work directly or indirectly to silence earnest attempts to highlight inequitable and/or dehumanizing educational beliefs and practices are also acts which will disadvantage, marginalize, or silence people directly or indirectly involved, including parents and children who may be placed at the receiving end of such inequities and inhumanities.

中文翻译：

---

两篇评论的故事：审视两篇单盲评论的内容和意识形态

作为我作为一名教育工作者工作的一部分，我认为有必要讨论当知识和意义的某些方面被错误认识、模糊或压制时，同行评审者确实可能被视为压迫行为。借鉴保罗·弗莱雷（Paulo Freire）的《被压迫者教育学》中关于强制和压迫性关系和教育实践的观察，以及批判性话语分析中批评学术和社会领域内不公平做法的学术著作，我认为，一个在学术上（和社会上）更负责任、更负责任的组织人性化的替代方案可以对以下问题产生更大的开放性：（1）谁可以决定什么算作（可出版的）知识；（2）这种知识表述如何与强大的或意识形态化的认知和意义创造方式联系起来。本文还呼吁人们更多地认识到，直接或间接压制强调不公平和/或非人性化教育信仰和做法的真诚努力的行为，也会使直接或间接参与的人（包括家长）处于不利地位、边缘化或沉默。以及可能遭受此类不公平和不人道行为的儿童。