The article is a fair parody of some of the post-modern gibberish that gets published in gender studies journals these days. Reading it is fairly hilarious, and its accuracy is obvious just by looking at
https://twitter.com/realpeerreview and seeing what gets past peer review in these fields.
That being said, this hoax failed - they tried to get it published in a bunch of journals and were rejected. Like, desk rejected, not even getting to the peer review process. Then they published it in a "pay to play" journal, and treated that as if it proved their point. Not that the point
needed to be proved, but if you were trying to out a journal as having inadequate standards, well, at best, this incident was evidence to the contrary.
Moreover, here's the O.G. of academic hoaxes, writing a paper about how little they actually demonstrate even if they do go off as planned:
http://www.physics.nyu.edu/sokal/noretta.html
So yeah, funny... and Lindsay and Boghossian are smart dudes with good heads on their shoulders for the most part. But their reach exceeded their grasp on this one.
It's worth listening to the podcast Lindsay did with VBW about this (they were hugely critical of him and Boghossian, and Shermer for publishing about it in Skeptic).
https://verybadwizards.fireside.fm/118?t=1875 - The interview starts somewhere around the 31 minute mark.