Reply With Quote
I see Xray has been listening to Hannity lately. Hannity's been all about the liberal atmosphere in higher eduction on his show recently.
The following two articles I found today really did point out what is
going on in our colleges/universities where our young people are suppose
to be getting a quality education, not brainwashed in political correctness.
The first about a liberal from the Clinton administration that got booted from
Harvard. The second about a speaker at UTSA, a black speaker who a
professor who teaches Black Studies (why do we even need such a course)
who said it was inappropriate to have him speak during Black History month,
how come we don't have a White History month, because he didn't espouse
the Professors views.
Feminist Victory
By Carrie Lukas
Feb 24, 2006
Lawrence H. Summers is stepping down as president of Harvard University. His critics cite a number of missteps - from challenging the eminent African-American professor Cornell West to expressing support for the U.S. military - that contributed to his demise. But those were minor scrapes; he's leaving because he never recovered from a wound inflicted by the Harvard gender police.
At an academic conference last January, Summers made the mistake of speculating that innate differences between men and women may in part explain why more men than women reach the upper echelons of science and math. Radical feminists were aghast and called for his removal. More than a year later, they finally got their man.
It's testament to the bizarre world of academia. Leftist feminists are increasingly misfits in American politics (each election feminist groups promise that women are going to vote in mass for a liberal revolution-it has yet to happen), but they are big men on campus. In academia's ivory tower, they can instill their world view on impressionable youngsters and make or break aspiring academics.
In this bubble, a self-proclaimed feminist like MIT biology professor Nancy Hopkins can with a straight face describe nearly fainting after hearing Summers suggest there are gender differences: "I felt I was going to be sick. My heart was pounding and my breath shallow. I was extremely upset." Her over-reaction is itself evidence of gender differences (can anyone imagining a male professor reacting like that?), but it would be taboo to say so on a politically correct campus.
Conservatives have spent years trying to raise awareness that true academic inquiry has been sacrificed to political correctness. Summers ousting may mark an important turning point in this effort. After all, Summers was the Treasury Secretary under President Bill Clinton-hardly a right-wing ideologue. His failure to pass the campus liberal litmus test may convince many that the problem is real.
Summers himself seems not to have understood the power and standard operating procedure of campus leftists. When he spoke at the fateful conference that purported to consider potential explanations for the gender disparate in hard sciences, he thought attendees were actually interested in answering that question. Under this mistaken logic, he listed numerous potential causes and committed the heresy of including innate ap ude among them.
Had he been more familiar with gender studies, he would have known that there is really only one acceptable explanation to the radical left: discrimination. The gender warriors may wish to ponder what kind of discrimination - is it our discriminatory socialization process that begins when we dress our baby girls in pink or garden variety sexism in the hiring process? - but our sexist society is undoubtedly the culprit.
Everyone recognizes that discrimination is bad, which allows gender warriors to think up programs and legislation to root it out. If women's preferences and choices are responsible for the differences in outcomes between men and women, gender warriors' reason for existence begins to disappear.
It's through this lens that the good news that women aren't being discriminated against becomes bad news for feminists. Liberal women's groups seize on the statistic showing that a full-time working woman makes less than a full-time working man as evidence of systematic discrimination against women. Data showing that the wage gap is primarily caused by factors other than discrimination (such as women's preference for jobs offering greater flexibility, physical comfort, and personal fulfillment instead of higher pay) is ignored.
Feminist groups envision a "genderless" society where men and women are equally represented in all facets of life. It frustrates them that women keep thwarting this ideal by making choices that are different then men's. Their only hope is that women are making these choices under a false consciousness. Alternative explanations cannot be considered or their dream vanishes.
Summers' mistake was not recognizing the rules of the gender victimology game. Now he has paid the price, and Harvard is worse for it. Gender warriors celebrating this should be wary that their victory came with a cost: their extremism was exposed to new eyes. For the sake of the next generation of students who are passing through these ins utions, let's hope that greater awareness of just how intolerant colleges have become is impetuous for change.
Carrie Lukas is the director of policy at the Independent Women's Forum. She is also a graduate of Harvard University.
Copyright © 2006 Townhall.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Find this story at: http://www.townhall.com/opinion/colu...24/187776.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
UTSA getting schooled in politics
Web Posted: 02/25/2006 12:00 AM CST
Melissa Ludwig
Express-News Staff Writer
It may seem surprising that a black speaker would provoke an enraged reception from a student audience during Black History Month, as the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson did this week at the University of Texas at San Antonio.
That is, until you hear what Peterson had to say.
"Most blacks are incapable of thinking for themselves," the conservative commentator from Los Angeles told a racially and ethnically diverse crowd of about 200 students gathered in a campus auditorium Thursday.
He added that black men are also lazy and irresponsible and that whites have done enough to help blacks.
The speech was met with shouts and protests — an uproar that is being repeated more and more on college campuses experiencing a growing trend of political polarization.
Conservatives, who have for years felt outnumbered by liberals in higher education, are hiring speakers guaranteed to create controversy — and generate new audiences. Debates over whether professors should express their political views in the classroom are raging.
Researchers at the University of California at Los Angeles say an ongoing survey of college freshmen, begun in 1966, indicates a growing trend toward polarization and increased student conservatism.
Peterson spoke at the invitation of a campus conservative group called Movement for the Future. He was paid $3,500, and the appearance was sponsored, in part, by the Young America's Foundation , a national conservative outreach program.
Peterson, a television talk show host and frequent visitor to conservative talk shows, runs a Los Angeles organization called Brotherhood Organization of a New Destiny that is dedicated to teaching young men to "stop being so angry and blaming others."
In 2002, he made headlines when he sued Jesse Jackson and his son, Jonathan, claiming he was hit and verbally abused during an encounter with the two men. A jury dismissed most of his claims last month.
Frederick Williams, a professor of African-American studies at UTSA, said he was offended by the timing of Peterson's appearance.
"None of us oppose him coming in March or April, bring him any other time, but not during (Black History Month), said Williams, who gave his students extra credit for attending the speech and handed out buttons to audience members that said: "We support legitimate black leadership."
Matthew Gates, the 23-year-old president of Movement for the Future, defended the timing.
"We were told, 'How dare we bring a black speaker during black history month as white people,'" Gates said.
"But the point was to bring in a different perspective than was offered on campus," he said. "Before we came here, there wasn't much going on, the occasional protest but nothing on a broader scale. We have raised the level of discourse on campus."
Rosalie Ambrosino , interim provost for student affairs, said the kind of heated political debate that broke out this week is new for UTSA, which is booming with enrollment.
"We are getting a lot more students with diversity of thought and ideas," she said. "It's part of the growth."
Since Movement began in August 2005, group members have brought conservative thinkers such as Dinesh D'Souza, a former analyst in the Reagan administration, to campus and have spurred back-and-forth editorials in the student newspaper with liberal groups such as the Progressive Student Organization.
In December, a new student club, Atheist Agenda, set up a booth on campus and invited passers-by to trade Bibles for pornography — a stunt designed to spark debate over organized religion.
Campus conservatives also are using shock tactics, said Scott Jaschik, co-founder of the online publication Inside Higher Ed, who has noticed a trend among conservative groups bringing firebrands such as conservative commentator Ann Coulter to campus.
"If someone gave a conservative critique of black society in a low-key, polite way, no one would show up," Jaschik said. "There is spectacle with this."
Though many conservatives, Gates included, feel dwarfed by liberals on college campuses, a national freshman survey conducted by the Higher Education Research Ins ute at UCLA showed that the number of conservatives on college campuses has significantly increased since 1970.
Last year, about 23 percent of students on college campuses said they were conservative, compared with 17 percent in 1970. Liberals made up 27 percent of students in 2005, compared with 36 percent in 1970.
About 45 percent said they were middle-of-the-road, the study said.
The percentages of students who identified themselves as politically extreme — 3.4 percent far left and 1.9 percent far right — are small but have increased over the years, the study showed.
Diane Abdo, who teaches writing at UTSA and serves as adviser for the student newspaper, the Paisano, said over the years she has noticed students employ less critical thinking in their essays and more hardened political rhetoric.
"I require that my students listen to really good news reporting and give a report on a controversial issue," Abdo said. "I want them to sharpen their listening skills. Generally people don't listen."
After Peterson spoke, students lingered and debated in groups with a mix of races and politics.
"I thought that the guy was a shock jock," said 18-year Amarro Nelson, who is black.
"He didn't really bring any intellectualism to the table. I may agree with some of his views, but I don't agree with the way he brought it upon the audience."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[email protected]
I see Xray has been listening to Hannity lately. Hannity's been all about the liberal atmosphere in higher eduction on his show recently.
Are you serious? Blacks get one month a year (the shortest month) to celebrate Black history and you want to about that.
As to the Black Studies course, are you also opposed to Feminist Studies or Latin-American studies? These are merely courses that allow people to study segments of the population that are traditionally underrepresented your run-of-the-mill courses.
Last edited by Mr. Peabody; 02-25-2006 at 03:14 PM.
I see a lot of opinion and little facts or supporting evidence for this thesis.Feminist Victory ARTICLE AS A WHOLE
I don't mind opinion peices when they are well constructed or supported, but this one was neither.
If you want to convince me of the fact that the "gender police" forced Summers out, you will have to give me SOME supporting evidence other than a few paragraphs of one-sided, loaded language-laden opinion.
Otherwise, I will simply assume that bit to simply be part of the "ourage-athon" that conservatives seem to like indulging in, and take the whole thing with a grain of salt as simply being more of an example of ty journalism rather than some broader social trend I should be worried about.
That said, were it to be true, it would be silly, but I get the feeling that there is more to this than what the op-ed's author suggests, and simply another case of conservatives getting 1/2 the truth and thinking that is all there is.
Diane Abdo, who teaches writing at UTSA and serves as adviser for the student newspaper, the Paisano, said over the years she has noticed students employ less critical thinking in their essays and more hardened political rhetoric.
SEE ABOVE POST.....
the fact that you dont understand why those remarks are horribly gendered and wrong just reaffirms the extent to which you are a biggot xray... why so much hate?
Hey Mr. Peabody, I just wanted to say one thing in response to your post. You said "Are you serious? Blacks get one month a year (the shortest month) to celebrate Black history and you want to about that." Well, I do not have a problem with black history month because I am a racist fool, I do not dislike this tradition because I am a conservative, I do not argue against this practice because it is racist against white people; in fact, I would argue counter to those points on many occasions. However, my problem with things like Black History month, and, for the sake of the argument, affirmative action, because they are racist against black people.
Now, before you take that the wrong way, I mean that because what causes racism? Two things. A). People are afraid of the other races B). People are raised seeing differences and divisions, so then it is so simple to let that dominate your sub-conscious. Now, if either theory on racism is correct then creating a division in society is not a solution, rather it is a fuel. When you create these rifts, and build and us-vs.-them mentality, you are furthering the problem of racism. By having a black history month, a Bet, or an ebony magazine, you say that we are different, and we must be treated as such. When you say that no whites can be in these black markets, but then cry racism in white markets that allow black people, you only cause further problems.
The only way this country can ever become equal is to make our children, and our childrens children, think that there is no innate differences in whites and blacks, and as long as they can turn on the tv and see Black Entertainment Television, go to the bookstore and see Ebony Magazine, or go to school and celebrate Black History Month, this will never be possible, and the ignorance of our society will only perpetuate the racist delema we are currently facing.
eh, isn't it 2006?
Anyways, Peterson's selection as a speaker was obviously made for nothing more than sensationalist media coverage, much like a Coulter, O'Reilly, JJackson or Sheehan would have drawn. Well, they'd have drawn more since most people would have at least have a vague idea as to who they were. It's good to see that ins utions of higher learning are mirroring the level of discourse often found in this forum. We wouldn't want the nation's young to think that sane rational discussion devoid of namecalling, insults, generalizations, guilt by association, and closemindedness was ideal.
I'd also like to endorse the post immediately prior to mine. That is indeed the implication and as long as people want to act like it's 1966, it will be.
This is a terribly misguided remark. It's alright to celebrate your heritage. Hispanics do it during Fiesta, Germans do it during Wurstfest, and even the Irish get their own day. Perhaps no other race has done more of the 'hands on' work to make this countr what it is today than African-Americans.The only way this country can ever become equal is to make our children, and our childrens children, think that there is no innate differences in whites and blacks, and as long as they can turn on the tv and see Black Entertainment Television, go to the bookstore and see Ebony Magazine, or go to school and celebrate Black History Month, this will never be possible, and the ignorance of our society will only perpetuate the racist delema we are currently facing.
We all like to sit around and pretend that racism doesn't exist anymore, but all you have to do is look at the job-less rate among Black teenagers and the disproportionate amount of young African American men in prisons to prove that this contention isn't true.
Government doesn't do many things right, but one thing it does do right is make laws that prohibit discrimination based on race, and helps brings 'racial balance' to ins utions that would otherwise be dominated by the children of the elite. I don't hear many blacks or hispanics complaining that they are being favored over any other race based solely on affirmative action. Then again, before Robin-hood, I never heard any caucasions complaining about the unfair funding formula used in Texas for public schools.
He, he, and here you thought the whole time that it was just this forum.It's good to see that ins utions of higher learning are mirroring the level of discourse often found in this forum
So should we have a month for the Irish, Germans, Italians, Greeks,
Russians? How about a White American beauth contest. Do we have
studies about White American History? Why not? All the former are
minorities while in some parts of the United States whites (as they are
called) are a minority I live in such a city.
What a dumb statement. You disagree so I am a bigot. How bout
you explaining why that is. No one is allowed to disagree with liberals? Kinda as described in the two articles.
So are you saying set asides, job quotas and diviersity quotas are good
things. Are should things really be equal and people judged on their
merits and abilities is the correct thing to do? Or does the Cons ution
really mean what it says. All men are created equal.
The largest single predicting factor on the liklihood of incarceration is not race but economic status.
Blacks have traditionally lagged behind whites in terms of economics, so it simply makes sense that increased percentages of incarceration would be present in the black population.
BUT
I do think that there are a good number of prisoners who ARE there simply because they are black. Just because I think economic status is a better indicator of liklihood of jail time for any particular person, doesn't mean that race doesn't contribute somewhat to that, i.e. there is some racism inherent in the system. Not as much as some believe, but it exists.
I think if you really want to do something about that, the better way is to concentrate on education (education=economic status) for racial minorities. It is easier to fix young kids who still have a chance than career criminals who know nothing else.
Yes, we do. The history classes that we all sat through in junior high and high school. We all mostly learned about Western (white) culture.
I guess the libs have the low down on why larry summers got fired.
What gives you the idea that "we all...pretend that racism doesn't exist"?
It does exist, I don't know of anyone who thinks that it doesn't and it affects all races.
The disproportionate amount of Blacks in prison parallels the the disproportionate amount of crime commited by those of that race, if that's not the case prove it!
Brainwashed?...like so many conservative republicans?
That is bull .
Those facts, alone, prove absolutely nothing. They are simply statistics.
Flat Earth society, anyone?
I would say, that if you stanadardize your employment statistics, without regard to race, to single family, assistance dependent households, you would find a much more coherent explanation for the figures you cite.
And liberals like to claim conservatives are close-minded!
Your simplistic and pedestrian views of societal's ills would be humorous if they weren't so ubiquitous.
From the Economic Report of the President from the Government Printing Offices website
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/eop/
Blacks represented 43 percent of arrests, 54 percent of convictions, and 59 percent of prison admissions for violent crimes in 1994. Thus, compared with whites, blacks were more likely to be convicted if arrested and are more likely to be imprisoned if convicted.
Why?
You could assume a prejudice in the system (which you undoubtedly do)...or you could assume they leave more evidence, or there is a greater likelihood of someone testifying against them. Without a controlled environment, stats is just stats.
Please read the post I was responding to and try to understand the context of my response before putting words in my mouth. jochhejaam was alleging that elevated number of Blacks in prison corresponds directly to the percentage of crimes committed by them.
My quote was showing that they are more likely to be charged and convicted, hence a possible explanation for the elevated numbers. I did not assume, or even allege, prejudice in the system. That is a different issue.
And your post still does not dispute his quote.
He said, "More are in prison because more commit crimes".
You said, "No, less are charged, more are convicted".
Non-Sequitor, unless you don't presume innocense.
But that's the point. Of all arrests, less than half are of blacks. Of all convictions, more than half are blacks. Of all incarcerations, almost 60% are blacks. There are more blacks in prison because more blacks are convicted and incarcerated, relative to the numbers from other races who are arrested in the first place.
Unless you're bringing forward some statistical proof to show that there are more erroneous arrests of people of other races, the statistics present a serious question about the criminal justice system -- is the number of incarcerations of blacks higher than other races because there's more evidence? or because they're treated differently by prosecutors? or because they aren't as well represented in court? or because juries and judges are predisposed to find guilt and impose punishment? or is it just some coincidence?
I don't know exactly what that has to do with liberal professors on college campuses, but I guess some won't be satisfied until there is a conservative geneity among those who teach at all levels to ensure that the indoctrination is going as planned.
There is (near) absolute geneity at these parties, trust me. Conventional wisdom is accurate, in this case.
These are high-minded, sheltered, never had a job out of academia, utopian, liberal idealogues, who have never met, much less debated, a conservative.
I know, because they simply don't know what the he!! to make of me at these shindigs. My knuckles don't drag the floor, I have no visible swastikas, or a white hood, or ANYTHING. I'm even conversive, and somewhat witty.
Literally, at the party, 200-250 people, I am the ONLY conservative (to make her job easier my old lady stays in the closet).
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
