At least since I was an undergraduate, I have noticed that some of the most intolerant leftists I have come across hold tenured positions on university faculties. Those who should be best equipped to wrestle with ideas at odds with their own often show the greatest outrage when students present such ideas. The latest example comes from the Hawkeye State:
University of Iowa professor who studies same-sex relationships was so upset by an email from a campus Republican group promoting “Conservative Coming Out Week” that she fired off a vulgarity aimed at all Republicans, according to messages released by the school Wednesday.
“F— you, Republicans” was professor Ellen Lewin’s response Monday to the recruiting pitch from UI College Republicans. She sent the email from her school account, drawing outrage from conservative students and one Republican lawmaker.
UI President Sally Mason responded to the incident Wednesday by condemning intolerant political speech.
The university president may have condemned intolerant political speech in broad terms,* but she did not single out, as she should have, the professor nor even identify her political views, as if such intolerance were not legion on the left. The university should be questioning why a scholar who reacts as Ms. Lewin did was doing on its faculty.
A conservative who spoke out as did she would likely be subject to sensitivity training. Instead of grappling with her prejudice, this academic used her apology to lash out against Republicans. In an “email to the leaders of the College Republicans,” Ms. Lewin explained “that she had just finished reading about ‘fresh outrages committed by Republicans in government’ when she received the pitch”:
“I admit the language was inappropriate, and apologize for any affront to anyone’s delicate sensibilities,” Lewin wrote.
But she said the group’s email contained several statements that were “extremely offensive, nearly rising to the level of obscenity.” She said she was upset that Republicans used the “coming out” language to describe the week given what she called their general disdain for gay rights. She said the email also mocked labor protesters in Wisconsin and animal rights.
This woman just can’t let go of her prejudices and even includes a jibe against those critical of her angry riposte — dubbing their sensibilities “delicate”. Would she consider a gay man’s sensibilities delicate if he were outraged that a professor replied to his invitation to a talk on anti-gay bigotry with, “F*** you f****t”?
“Her subsequent comments” reminded Glenn Reynolds of Forrest Gump: “It’s just this war and that lying son of a bitch, Johnson! I would never hurt you. You know that.” In another post, Glenn links Michael Walsh who observes that some leftists
. . . never miss an opportunity to let the mask of hatred slip. It’s practically Pavlovian; they are so invested in the myth of their own righteousness that their “tolerance” fetish goes right out the window whenever they suffer the slightest affront to their delusional notion of how the world works.
It is an interesting irony that I read this story after returning from a trip to my alma mater where I had occasion to dine with my favorite political science professor, a now near-nonagenarian Marxist who was a favorite among conservative students for challenging us to explore conservative ideas and develop better arguments. He introduced me to Leo Strauss and Eric Voegelin, helping me understand their arguments and delighted when I used the knowledge he helped me acquire to debate him.
Would it that more academics could learn from Kurt Tabuer and his kind and condemn Ellen Lewin and her ilk. The former has strong opinions, yet shows respect for those with views at odds with his own. The latter can’t even acknowledge her bias.
I do want to believe that there are more of the former on university faculties than there are the latter, but the latter do seem legion. Why is it, I wonder, that so many post-secondary institutions include so many supposed scholars whose very narrow-mindedness is at odds with the very purpose of a university?
——-
*This link via Instapundit.
Why? Because there is no consequence for their actions (or spoken words)…think of the Duke 88. After Mike Nifong was caught and the accuser was caught in a web of lies and the lacrosse players exonerated, did the Duke 88 apologize? Of course not…because they were (and are ) incapable of acknowledging they did anything wrong. They believe themselves to be sacrosanct.
Why? I think it comes down to the basics.
1) Academics love Big Government, because they picture themselves staffing it (and they often do staff it) and being showered with grants and subsidies (so-called student loans) and board positions and prestige.
2) Republicans, on average, are less in favor of Big Government.
3) Therefore academics instinctively favor Democrats, hate Republicans.
That simple.
I would guess it’s the abject lack of intellectual curiosity displayed by most conservatives/Republicans. That and the utter contempt for intellectuals and scientific inquiry that trumps belief.
Why is it you like to whine about not being part of the club when you seem to hate the very principles it stands for? It’s like nerds whining about not being part of the jocks clique but saying how stupid they are anyway.
You wonder why gay people would have a problem with a political party that regularly endorses measures opposing gay marriage, gays in the military, gay adoption, even going so far as refusing to remove sodomy laws from the state rolls despite Lawrence v. Texas. It’s about the social issues guys, as well you know. Isn’t this “I don’t know why they don’t just love little old conservatives” Southern belle schtick a little long in the tooth? Gay people are to check their gayness at the door but you want to wear your conservative colors loud and proud on your sleeves?
I suppose it’s this intellectual non-understanding (or dishonesty?) that makes universities better off without you.
“Counter”, what does your comment have to do with Dan’s topic?
I always hear the left flaunting their supposed intellectual superiority, but when they show up on this blog, they have nothing to offer but tired talking points copied from other left-wing blogs. Frankly, it’s the righties on the blog that actually analyze and debate the issues.
V the K, that’s because people with a more conservative viewpoint use logic when looking a a situation while those of a more liberal bent always choose to go with emotion instead. Liberals are generally not interested in an actual intellectual debate of any topic. They just want to brow beat their opponents or guilt them into backing down. This “professor”, and many of those who have posted in the thread defending her actions, have more in commom with toddlers stamping their feet & throwing a tantrum than they do with anyone that could actually be considered an intellectual. Real intellectuals are open to opposing viewpoints and are interested in different perspectives. This woman seems only to be interested with lashing out at anyone she assumes has a viewpoint different from her own. So typical of the oh so “tolerant” left!
It takes an abject lack of intellectual curiosity to believe in global warmism merely because a few scienticians and a fat chump (who couldn’t even steal an election) say so.
Meanwhile, I’m gonna spend Vladimir Lenin’s birthday worrying about the excess of Dihydrogen Monoxide in IN and the lack of it in TX. Further, I’m gonna do my part to stop Continental Drift and reunite Pangaea.
I am so stealing that for a Facebook status, TGC.
I’d also point out the ‘lack of intellectual curiosity’ comment is even more funny coming from a hit and run poster.
Counterfail retreats to its ivory tower when we ask it questions it can’t answer.
Fixed it.
This is news? It has been this way for sometime. Republicans, in general, and conservatives, in particular, have abandoned the field of education. School and college boards, schools, colleges and universities are super saturated with ¨progressives.¨I have suggested on other threads of a similar theme that conservatives should seek election to the boards to have some influence in formulating the curricula for primary and secondary schools. This is where it all starts and is nutured, We should be encouraging our youth to enter into the teaching profession at all levels. Until we do, we will have to put up withthis intolerant situation.
I would guess it’s the abject lack of intellectual curiosity displayed by most conservatives/Republicans. That and the utter contempt for intellectuals and scientific inquiry that trumps belief.
Oh, is that what you’re calling it?
I mean, certainly it is “scientific” to fake your PhD, fake your credentials, then publish dubious research that is used by the Obama Party to push ridiculous regulations — and then fire anyone who dares to criticize your methods or behavior, isn’t it?
Look at that, Counterfail. Your Obama Party has stated that a fake diploma is OK. Your Obama Party and your fellow gays and lesbians have stated that badly-done research is OK. Your Obama Party and your fellow gays and lesbians have stated that people who criticize fake diplomas and badly-done research are showing “utter contempt for intellectuals and scientific inquiry” and should be fired from their jobs.
Or how about this one: the Association of Gay and Lesbian Psychiatrists, a “scientific” organization of “credentialed” professionals, is stating that dressing toddler-age children as sexual slaves and taking them to a sex fair to “show off” in front of naked and masturbating adults is an “educational experience” and that anyone who disagrees is “close-minded”.
Look at that, Counterfail. Your Obama Party and your fellow gays and lesbians have stated that dressing children as sexual slaves and using them to entertain naked and masturbating adults is OK. Your Obama Party and your fellow gays and lesbians have stated that taking children to sex fairs dressed as sex slaves is OK. Your Obama Party and your fellow gays and lesbians insist that doing so is good for children’s “education” and that anyone who disagrees is a homophobe.
And then we have the example of the intellectual prowess that Obama Party members like you support, endorse, and practice with your Ivy League-educated Sheila Jackson-Lee, demanding that NASA produce pictures of the flag left by astronauts on Mars.
Look at that, Counterfail. Your Obama Party and your fellow gays and lesbians demand that Ivy League diplomas be given to someone who lacks any grip whatsoever on American history and reality. Your Obama Party and your fellow gays and lesbians elected this individual with no grip at all on American history and reality to high governmental office. And most hilariously, your Obama Party and your fellow gays and lesbians insist that anyone who criticizes this person and her idiot proclamations about astronauts having landed on Mars is a racist.
Here’s what it is, Counterfail: you insist we accept fake diplomas, affirmative-action gimmes, research that is dubious at best, and outright support and endorsement of child rape and sexual exploitation — and then scream that we’re lacking in “intellectual curiosity” and showing “utter contempt for intellectuals and scientific inquiry”, even that we’re “homophobes”, when we criticize it and refuse.
This is why I call you a child rapist, Counterfail; you endorse and support fake diplomas, bad research, inane statements, and public sexual exploitation of children as “intellectual” and “scientific”.
Republicans, in general, and conservatives, in particular, have abandoned the field of education. School and college boards, schools, colleges and universities are super saturated with ¨progressives.¨
I would add one small caveat to that — they’ve generally abandoned the field of public education. Go to the private and parochial schools, plus the homeschoolers and charter schools, and you’ll see some really-engaged conservatives and Republicans.
Why should any conservative or Republican want to associate themselves with an institution where this woman, who is clearly mentally incapable and emotionally immature, is put in a position of responsibility and paid nearly $100k a year? The hilarious part is that this foul-mouthed and pathetic individual, who has an apparent insane fit of rage every time she hears or sees anything about Republicans, is an endorsee of the “nonpartisan” NGLTF and HRC as a fine example of “science” and “intellectualism”.
You mean intellectual scienticians like Meryl Streep and Sean Penn etc.?
Yep. That’s all that needs to be said. Especially that bolded part.
Well, its official: Counterflail babbles nearly incomprehensibly and Levitoid hears Shakespeare.
Joined at birth or one in the same? Either way, blathering loves company.
Let’s not pretend that each and every one of us has refrained completely from having similar sentiments about people with different political opinions. Of course, it’s pretty stupid to be doing it with your work e-mail, but come on. NDT is accusing people of being child rapists a few posts up, and we’re supposed to have a fit because someone said the F-word?
Levi says that this: …..
…… is equivalent to the F-word. To wit:
I noticed that NDT’s comment does not contain the F-word and I do not see where the F-word would have enhanced the comment.
So, until Levi can show us that the F-word is a useful part of civility and common decency, I will defer to the concept that those who use it as an exclamation point and for effect are probably more than a little bereft in the ability to communicate cogently department.
However, try as I might, I can not find great meaning or lyric sense in this Counterflail comment Levi repeated and put in bold type:
Minds of a feather flutter together. Or something.
I just have one thing to add to Heliotrope’s shredding of the racist Levi.
“Hush Levi, adults are talking.”
I work at a small Catholic college, so it’s a mix (as far as I know) regarding politics. I tend not to get political, although I have expressed my views when a political issue has been brought up. And I make it a point to not express my views to students.
Recently, I had a student who approached me to say that another instructor of hers had expressed some anti-gay views. Although she is straight (she had mentioned she had a bf), she is gay friendly, and was disappointed with the instructor. I don’t know if she knows that I’m gay, or even gay friendly, but she obviously felt comfortable approaching me about this. Despite this, I still approached the issue from both sides, and rationalized the instructor’s comments.
I think the FOX News motto is best when it comes to politics in college.
Bravo! and well done, Pat.
I think its because most university money for research comes from the public tit and therefore they love big government. Democrats also want the professor-student relationship to be basically what government -citizens get and anyone who works in academia knows they are power freaks.
I also find it interesting that they can avoid the arguments of biology and evolution when it comes to people yet call Republicans anti-science.
Here’s an interview with University of Iowa Professors Timothy Hagle and Kembrew McLeod, Matt Sowada, the conservative co-host of the political talk radio show American Reason on KRUI, and Rod Sullivan from the Johnson County Board of Supervisors about Professor Ellen Lewin’s “F— You, Republicans!” email response to the University of Iowa College Republicans campus-wide invite for people to participate in “Conservative Coming Out Week.”
http://patv.tv/blog/2011/04/27/talking-with-yale-cohn-discussing-professor-ellen-lewins-f-you-email-response-to-the-university-of-iowa-college-republicans/