In which an academic explains how the Academic Elite became absolutely obsessed with the sexual predilections of a tiny minority of people and elevated them to become the central focus of the humanities.
The TLDR version is this. In the 1990′s, a bunch of liberal white college professors seized on gay rights as a way of taking up or re-living the black civil rights cause of the 1960′s. One-upmanship followed as professors tried to prove they were more into the cause than their colleagues. Over time, ‘Queer Theory’ became the dominant mode of all academia; because it was trendy and liberal professors wanted to be perceived as “with it.”
From this 30-year vantage point, the intrepid idiom and bold disclosures that thrilled and emboldened the 1990s faculty look less descriptive than hortatory. Take away the magnification and we have a more modest and accurate assessment of parts of our culture—and a less thrilling and theoretical one. Only when we define queerness as anything outside simple and straightforward heterosexual behavior, and only when we interpret homophobia as anything less than full political and personal support of homosexuality, do the sweeping contentions of queer theory hold up. Without that extension, queerness slips back into the margin—not by an act of power, but as the consequence of relative lack of interest.
That’s what we see today, the fatigue that afflicts any theory once the universal claims lose their emotional force, as inevitably happens over time and with repetition. The enclave of humanities research has always had its rituals and taboos, and they lead inhabitants to think that what holds true and proper within also holds without. Reading queer theory and attending queer lectures is to enter an impassioned universe fraught with sexual complication and risk. But most people don’t share the outlook. Representations of sexual variation are common in higher education today, not to mention in movies, TV, and the news, but the vast majority of Americans are firm in their basic sexual aims and selves, and homosexual impulse and homophobic fear and hate aren’t part of their condition. We still have heteronormative attitudes. They are the natural result of nearly all Americans having heterosexual feelings. Queerness is part of the human condition, a small part. Queer theory began with an exaggeration, an overestimation of homosexuality and anti-homosexuality, and the emotional and political and institutional contexts of its origination allowed the exaggeration to stand uncorrected. Queer theory is now a part of American intellectual history, but it will be remembered more as an advocacy effort than as a school of thought. [Emphasis added]
Pale Penis-Bearer is hit with a “gender misconduct” complaint for referring to himself as handsome.
“The University’s Gender-Based Misconduct Office contacted us because they received a complaint about your behavior towards your Elementary Chinese II professor. It is important we meet to discuss this as soon as possible.”
I met with my dean the next afternoon. She told me the same thing my professor had: I had called myself handsome and this was unacceptable. My dean tried to make me agree that I would never do this again. I flat out refused. I laid into her about how upset I was about the situation and I said something along the lines of: “If you’re asking me to not be myself, then I guarantee I will end up back in your office again.”
I was then put in touch with a case manager from the Gender-Based Misconduct office, who set up a “re-education” meeting in his office for the following Monday. I remember this frightening little office was located outside of Columbia’s west gates, where no one can hear you scream (it may have moved since then).
The office was empty; it was just me in the waiting room: Ben “Gender Misconduct” Sweetwood. For the first few minutes of our meeting, the case manager launched into an edifying speech on how my white privilege was playing a major factor in my lack of clarity into the depravity of my actions. Then I shot back with a plea for sanity, in much the same way I had done with my advising dean.
I won’t spoil the ending. Suffice it to say, it partly involves a gay dude in a worthless bureaucratic taxpayer-funded job created for social justice wankers with no marketable skills. Read the whole thing.
The University of Michigan Asylum of Higher Learning has jumped on the Trendy “Do-It-Yourself-Gender-Identification” Bandwagon and, as a matter of policy, lets students choose their own pronoun to be addressed with (thus objectifying them as a gender, rather than a person), because denial of reality is now seen as the height of enlightenment.
Failure to address a delusional student by their preferred gender or made-up pronoun can be considered a microaggression — one thousand of which can be redeemed for an actual aggression. Disciplinary action can result for failing to indulge the student’s denial of reality.
OK, said University of Michigan student Grant Stobl, if I get to choose my own pronoun, I choose “Your Majesty.”
In an interview with The College Fix, Strobl said that “I have no problem with students asking to be identified a certain way, almost like someone named Richard who would like to be called Dick. It is respectful to make a reasonable effort to refer to students in the way that they prefer.”
However, he added that he does have a problem when the university institutionalizes the use of pronouns that are completely arbitrary and may possibly sanction people for referring to someone different than their preference.
Strobl continued, “So, I henceforth shall be referred to as: His Majesty, Grant Strobl. I encourage all U-M students to go onto Wolverine Access, and insert the identity of their dreams.”
It is no less delusional for a student to insist that he is a hereditary monarch than it is for a person with a penis to insist that he’s a woman.
According to Ms. Laura Parson, a “Teaching and Learning, Graduate Student” at the University of North Dakota, the reason more women aren’t pursuing STEM fields is because the scientific method relies too much on facts and logic and not subjective perspectives. I am not making this up.
Syllabi promote the positivist view of knowledge by suggesting that there are correct conclusions that can be drawn with the right tools:
- “A critical thinker considers all available evidence with an open mind and uses appropriate techniques to analyze that evidence and reach a conclusion (Lower level geology).”
- “The main goal is to attain knowledge and comprehension of major concepts and techniques of organic chemistry (Upper level chemistry).”
As these examples show, the STEM syllabi explored in this study demonstrated a view of knowledge that was to be acquired by the student, which promotes a view of knowledge as unchanging. This is further reinforced by the use of adverbs to imply certainty such as “actually” and “in fact” which are used in syllabi to identify information as factual and beyond dispute (Biber, 2006a; 2006b). For example, “draw accurate conclusions from scientific data presented in different formats” (Lower level math). Instead of promoting the idea that knowledge is constructed by the student and dynamic, subject to change as it would in a more feminist view of knowledge, the syllabi reinforce the larger male-dominant view of knowledge as one that students acquire and use make (sic) the correct decision.
See, you may think water boils at 100C, but that’s just what the Patriarchy *wants* you to think, and they reinforce their tyranny by insisting that everyone learn the “fact” that water boils at 100C they exclude feminist perspectives, such as the perspective that “fire can’t melt steel,” from the STEM fields, thus reinforcing them as a preserve of sexism and misogyny.
It’s the intersectionalities, you guys!
Brown University (Annual Cost of Attendance: $68,000 per year) is, like most universities these days,
an insane asylum.
Brown University’s student body president will be hand-delivering menstrual products to all nonresidential bathrooms on campus, including men’s rooms, with the help of 20 other students.
“Low-income students struggle with having the necessary funding for food, let alone tampons.”
By putting menstrual products in women’s, men’s, and gender-inclusive bathrooms, Nguyen aims to “set a tone of trans-inclusivity, and not forget that they’re an important part of the population.”
So, students can afford to pay $68,000 a year in tuition and expenses, but can’t scrape up $10 a month for tampons.
And just exactly how and in what way are they “an important part of the population?”
Or are y’all just being trendy with your virtue signaling and whatall?
$68,000 a year to be taught that girls have penises and boys have vaginas.
People are paying $33,000 a year in tuition for this:
A small college in Vermont is kicking off the new school year by encouraging students to wear special pins declaring their pronouns, so nobody accidentally uses the wrong one.
“Hello, my pronouns are Xe/Xem/Xyrs,” one button declares. Another expresses a preference for “They/Them/Theirs,” even when referring to a singular person. There’s even a pin declaring “Hello, my pronouns are fluid. Please ask me!” available for those whose gender identity and accompanying pronouns allegedly change over time….
This cultural obsession with the 0.03% of the population with a trendy mental health issue is probably going to continue until some other “oppressed group” becomes trendy. Because it’s very, very important for middle-aged white women to be able to virtue-signal their tolerance and awareness of social trends.
Oh, Good Lord.
A University of Iowa professor is asking the athletics department to make the university’s mascot, Herky the Hawk, display friendlier facial expressions, arguing that his angry grimace is traumatizing students.
“I believe incoming students should be met with welcoming, nurturing, calm, accepting and happy messages, ”Resmiye Oral, a clinical professor of pediatrics, wrote Tuesday in an email to athletic department officials, obtained by the Iowa City Press-Citizen….
And in case you suspect that Resmiye Oral was a middle-aged liberal woman, you are correct, sir.
First, they brought back segregation in the form of minority-only lounges and dorms. Now, an American university is bringing back prohibition.
Stanford University has banned all hard liquor at undergraduate parties in an effort to reduce binge drinking on campus.
The new policy comes after Brock Turner, a former Stanford swimmer, received a six-month sentence for sexual assault after a night of heavy drinking, which triggered national outrage and launched a several months long discussion a Stanford about student alcohol consumption.
Well done, Stanford. Your stern stance against alcohol use will doubtless accomplish what your stern stance against sexual assault failed.
Grad students are still allowed to possess liquor (see how generous your bureaucratic masters are) subject to strict regulations about container size, keeping it in the original container, buying it from a state approved source, and consuming it only within strict guidelines set by the university.
See, you still have your freedoms, provided they are exercised in strict compliance with the regulations of the state, the violation of any one of which will result in severe penalties unless your last name is ‘Clinton.’
Remember when we used to live in America? Good times.
“Specifically there were two topics of debate that triggered them and personally felt like an attack on their identity (GodHatesFags.com: is this harmful? Is this acceptable? Is this Christianity? And Gay Marriage: should it be legal? Is homosexuality immoral as Christians suggest?)”
The student, whose name is redacted and who is referred to as “they” in the report, complained that “other students are required to watch the in-class debate and hear both arguments presented.”
“I do not believe that students should be required to listen to their own rights and personhood debated,” the student wrote. “[This professor] should remove these topics from the list of debate topics. Debating the personhood of an entire minority demographic should not be a classroom exercise, as the classroom should not be an actively hostile space for people with underprivileged identities.”
The University Asylum of Missouri covers itself in glory, yet again.
A vigil Monday planned by several University of Missouri student organizations was supposed to honor victims of Sunday morning’s deadly shooting rampage in a popular gay nightclub in Orlando, Fla. It turned into a blame session against Mizzou’s LGBTQ community for not being intersectional enough. Latino activists, including a Mizzou official, scolded the mostly white gathering for ignoring racial issues.
Memo to Gay People: The people you think are your allies are not really your allies. The people you think are your enemies are not actually your enemies.
This was an actual academic article; because people in the Asylums of Academia really believe that ‘Queer Studies’ is an actual worthwhile endeavor.
The following article introduces the hobosexual as a concept in queer materialism. Mapped at the intersection of not-for-profit hobo sex and labor practices historically, the hobosexual collapses the apparent impasse between the material and the symbolic so prevalent in queer studies. The concept represents the redeployment of queer as anti-capitalist practice; highlighted are the non-normative hobo practices of nonproductive expenditure, but also the recognition that these abnormalities are organized by capitalist systems of normalization designed to engender profit. The article also considers the degree to which industrial capitalism affected both hobo mobility and hobo anti-capitalist practice in the 19th century. Generated out of hobo history and queer as anti-capitalist practice, the hobosexual represents resistance to capitalist systems of normalization and enables connections, not necessarily between identities, but between anti-capitalist practices generated out of difference.
Christina Hoff Sommers, Milo Yiannopulous, and Steven Crowder
walk into a bar tried to give a talk on the value of Free Speech at the Massachusetts Asylum at Amherst. Apparently, the talk was so outrageous that it caused Chris Farley to rise from the dead, dress up like hipster Lena Dunham and scream obscenities at them.
Also, Melissa Click — who was fired from the Asylum of Missouri after threatening students with violence for trying to ask questions of #BlackLivesMatter protesters — now whines that the only reason she was fired was because she’s a white woman. (She’s sort of right, the Asylum’s Chancellors wouldn’t have dared fired a black woman no matter how outrageous her behavior.)
“This is all about racial politics,” she said in a profile published in The Chronicle of Higher Education. “I’m a white lady. I’m an easy target.”
In the fawning profile of Click in the Chronicle, Click says that even though she may have gone too far, it should be all right, because Social Justice. She is proud of her involvement in what she thinks was a legitimate protest against systemic institutional racism.
Never mind what she was really involved in was an overhyped temper tantrums over relatively minor “racial incidents” of highly dubious provenance.
An LGBT (Lesbian Gay Bullying Totalitarian) social justice wanker decided to make some sort of point about gay suicides or something by hanging nooses in rainbow colors from a tree at an Asylum of Higher Learning in Tennessee. However, some of the other inmates got all scared and offended and stuff.
“At Austin Peay University in Tennessee, the campus erupted in outrage when rainbow nooses were discovered hanging from a tree. Social media exploded and every social justice warrior on campus felt the need to express their displeasure. But later, it was discovered that the nooses were an art project by a student looking to draw attention to the high number of suicides in the LGBT community.”
Yeah, not even the wankers can understand each others’ points any more. Besides, isn’t it cultural appropriation for an LGBTQAA69IAXXXYZ artist to use nooses in a display?
Would the nooses have been okay if Sarah Palin and Ted Cruz had been hanging from them?
I’m not really sure how hanging rainbow colored nooses in a tree was supposed to help suicidal gay folk, but whatever.
DePaul University has banned sidewalk chalk; because cisnormative microaggression triggers.
“While these chalk messages are part of national agendas in a heated political battle, they appeared on campus at a time of significant racial tension in our country and on college campuses. DePaul is no exception,” Depaul’s vice president for student affairs Eugene Zdziarski wrote in a campus-wide email obtained by Campus Reform. “The university has been addressing campus climate issues in an effort to provide an inclusive and supportive educational environment. In this context, many students, faculty and staff found the chalk messages offensive, hurtful and divisive.”
One of the reasons… one of the many reasons… I think Bernie Sanders is an idiot is because of his promise of ‘free college for everybody, man.’ The main product of American Higher Education, theses days, is idiotic screeds like this in the guise of scholarly research.
Smart Cookies: The Gendered Spaces of Labor, Citizenship, and Nationalism in the Girl Scout Cookie Sale
Based on a two-year study on the Girl Scout cookie sale, using qualitative methods and rooted in feminist methodologies, this project seeks to understand how ‘spaces of giving’ emerge in the cookie sale and how these spaces shape social constructions of gender, citizenship, and national identity.
I am not making this up.
Once upon a time, in a Fairyland known as ‘Brandeis University,’ two young princes got into a sexual relationship that didn’t work out. Almost two years later, one little prince decided that their entire relationship was nothing but one long rape. He filed a complaint with a University and demanded that the other prince be punished. The University obliged, and after carrying out a secret process without any opportunity for argument or appeal (apparently modeled after a system used in North Korea), the other prince was declared a rapist and a sexual predator.
Here are the alleged offenses that constituted sexual assault according to Brandeis University.
- Putting his hand on the complainant “JC’s” groin at a movie date, without verbal consent. (The two had consensual sex the next day.)
- Sometimes waking up JC during their relationship by kissing him, without consent.
- Sometimes looking at JC’s private areas during their relationship, while showering.
By those criteria, this blogger has literally raped and sexually assaulted almost everyone he has ever gone out with.
Anyway, the guy who was accused of sexual assault was not very happy and sued Brandeis University. The University, of course, fought the suit on the basis — apparently — that there is no actual harm in denying a student Due Process and labeling him a dangerious sexual predator. The court disagreed, and now the lawsuit can go forward.
By the way, this insanity doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The Obama Administration has literally ordained that colleges must handle sexual assaults through North Korean style court systems that deny the accused any semblance of Due Process.
One thing to always keep in mind: Colleges are not just doing this on their own initiative. The Obama Administration effectively ordered them to do this with its notorious “Dear Colleague” letter, instructing colleges that they had better begin installing exciting new kangaroo court innovations unless they wanted to be found in violation of Title IX and lose their federal funding.
Note: The No-Fly list is also an example of something the Government puts you on without Due Process. Hillary wants it to be the basis for denying people the Right of Self-Defense.
Much like a bad science fiction where it turns out the monsters can be destroyed using simple table salt (or a simple Apple computer virus), it turns out that the Special Snowflake Socialist Juicebox Wankers have an unforeseen vulnerability to a common substance that is harmless to humans: ordinary chalk.
Turns out that leftist Millennials are even more terrified of chalk than they are of gluten.
The American System of Higher Education is entirely run by and for left-wing socialists. How is it, then, that college campuses have become such hotbeds of racism, to hear the Special Juicebox Wankers tell it?
Alanna Hardy, a black student at the University of Rochester, a $64,000-a-year private school in New York, recently lamented having to spend time at the “barren, racist wasteland that is the U of R.”
Another, Charlisa Goodlet, said that she is a “prisoner within my own city” by having to attend the elite college.
Both live in a blacks-only on-campus mansion that was built by a fraternity and then seized by the school and made into a dorm called the Frederick Douglass Leadership House. Hardy called the segregated dorm an “oasis” where she could recover from the pain of having to be near whites and Asians while walking to class.
Instead of being called out as a spoiled brat, the college president shook her hand and thanked her for having the “courage” to speak out.
The Association of Queer Women and Allies passed out “free contraception” and touted its office as a “safe space.” (It is unclear why the Lesbians thought they needed contraception.)
That last is a puzzler.
Meanwhile, on the left coast:
An activist group at Stanford University is demanding that white people — as well as men of any race who are not transgender — be forbidden from being appointed as the school’s next president or provost.
How about Condoleezza Rice?
The Emory University students who protested because of “Trump 2016″ chalked on their sidewalks whine to Newsweek about how their tantrum was totally justified and stuff.
“I legitimately feared for my life,” a freshman who identifies as Latino told The Daily Beast. Another student told the publication, “Some of us were expecting shootings. We feared walking alone.”
Because they saw the words “Trump 2016″ scrawled in chalk on a sidewalk.
It must be terrible to live in constant, abject fear that someone might say something rude to you, or challenge the things you believe with different arguments and stuff (i.e. “Hate speech”).
Not even Bill Maher is defending this bullshirt.
At least they are somewhat aware of how stupid they look to the rest of America and the world.
Really, what well-adjusted individual wants to be this:
Calling this person a “f—-t” would be an insult to effeminate gay men throughout history.
Someone wrote “Trump 2016″ in chalk on a sidewalk at Emory University (annual cost of attendance $63,058). Students were traumatized by it and the university is promising to root out and punish the perpetrators of this terrible hate crime.
“I’m supposed to feel comfortable and safe [here],” one student said. “But this man is being supported by students on our campus and our administration shows that they, by their silence, support it as well … I don’t deserve to feel afraid at my school,” she added.”
Here’s a photo of the offended snowflakes. I am not making this up. Gay people who throw tantrums because Christian bakers don’t want to bake cakes for your wedding, these are the children your hissy-fits have spawned.