I've been listening to a mess of Uncle Dave Macon lately.
I know you guys are into politics, so here's one where Uncle Dave campaigns for Al Smith, because Prohibition.
I know you guys are into politics, so here's one where Uncle Dave campaigns for Al Smith, because Prohibition.
• I hear some people are pleased that Tracey Carver-Allbritton got suspended from her job at a Bank of America vendor company for her part in the McKinney debacle, and that Karen Fitzgibbons got fired from her job as a teacher for her racist Facebook rant on the same subject. I'm not pleased, though. Generally speaking, I don't like to see workers suspended or fired for activities outside their sphere of work (I understand the case for firing a schoolteacher a little better, but not much). Conservatives blubbered over the defenestrations of Brendan Eich, Paula Deen and Donald Sterling, but they were rich people who had been separated, not from their livelihoods, but from their voluntary associations with other rich people -- a CEO by his board of directors, an entertainer by her network, and an NBA owner by his league. Interestingly, their conservative defenders generally harrumphed that of course they believed the rich people had a right to fire one other, which shows at least that they understood the real point: they were just mad that someone got in trouble for bigotry, which turns their world upside down; they wouldn't have minded if some pauper got in trouble for, say, stealing a loaf of bread because he was hungry. Carver-Allbritton and Fitzgibbons resemble these conservative heroes in that they appear to be bigoted, but assuredly do not resemble them in their need to work for a living -- and it's significant that you are hearing them defended far less vociferously by wingnuts than the rich guys were. After all, in our neo-feudal age, nothing can be too bad that promotes employee disposability; why do you think the Bank of America factota were so quick to jump? Because they care about racism? Don't forget what it's really all about.
• Ole Perfesser Instapundit:
AS MUCH RESPECT FOR THE CONSTITUTION AS OBAMA: In my latest oped with David Rivkin, we explain why Hillary Clinton’s voter reform proposals–automatic voter registration at age 18, a 20-day early voting period, allowing felons to vote, etc.–are all likely to be unconstitutional:It is increasingly evidence that conservatives' constantly-declared love for the Constitution has mainly to do with 1.) guns and 2.) keeping citizens from voting if they're unlikely to vote Republican.
• We are finally on Part 5 of Dan McLaughlin's series at The Federalist, "Can Gays And Christians Coexist In America?" The first four parts, as much as I could stand of them, were basically all about how gays are oppressing Christians. The conclusion kind of thrashes around a bit. On the one hand, there's more modish martyrdom:
If proponents of liberty band together in these fights like the slaves at the end of Spartacus, they will do just fine (of course, the slaves got crucified together, and that is always a possible outcome -- but then, the Romans were no ordinary adversary).(Wonder what that last part means? That the Romans were different from homosexuals? Brother, have I got news for him.) On the other hand, there's an attempt at "accommodation" of these fascist gays:
One element, of course, is for Christians, conservatives, and Republicans to demonstrate a greater personal ease with gay Americans, as people. As frustrated as we may get with the flagrantly one-sided nature of the public, media debate, we need to be happy warriors, keeping our calm and our cool and showing with deeds, not just words, that our disagreements on matters of deep principle do not prevent us from treating others with the love and respect that the Gospel demands of us. That’s not always easy in an emotional political fight; we have to work at it, and we must."(Okay, remember, stay positive, can't get mad even though they're monsters...) Howdy, faggot!"
McLaughlin would allow gays their hate crimes legislation and advises moving on from the marriage issue, but the rest of what he characterizes as accommodation may not seem like such to you: For example, when it comes to anti-discrimination laws, which he opposes, McLaughlin says, "Republicans in Congress and the states, in many cases elected with the support of Christians and other religious people, have a governing majority now and should act like one." Also: "An example of a smaller issue on which there also ought to be a sensible middle ground is 'gay conversion therapy.'" (Spoiler: Let's keep it! But have better medical oversight.) The weirdest one is this:
Working together on common ground is a good first step to the two sides humanizing each other and learning the habits of compromise. But the final piece of the puzzle of armistice and coexistence is the need to demobilize the institutions that have been engaged in LGBT causes: Hollywood, the universities, media and entertainment companies like Disney/ESPN, and other big corporations. So long as those various entities are run and staffed by people who see Christians only in caricature and see LGBT causes through the prism of Jim Crow, conflict will never end.He never explains how he's planning to change this; maybe he envisions some sort of affirmative action for Jesus freaks. "You're out, Katzenberg. Make way for DreamWorks CEO Barebones Dogood!"
you are hearing them defended far less vociferously by wingnuts than the rich guys were
ReplyDeleteI'd say the "guys" part likely has as much to do with their lack of conservative support/defense as the "rich" part.
If racism causes economic hardship, you'll see a whole lot less racism. People are corporations, my friend.
ReplyDeleteI'm not pleased, though.
ReplyDeleteagree. this is not activism, nor is it justice. this is twitter.
The Constitution is a a complicated document, impressive in some ways, flawed in others, but flaws aside I can't imagine a more disrespectful way to treat it than the wingnut insistence that it's a wishlist that gives all their desires the force of law.
ReplyDeleteAs for this:
"allowing felons to vote"
Given that the Constitution is mum on the issue and we're talking about something that became a big deal only in the latter half of the 20th century, we can only conclude that Glenn Reynolds is the most rank and opportunistic judicial activist to ever sully the not particularly great name of the legal profession.
Glenn Reynolds is the most rank and opportunistic judicial activist to ever sully the not particularly great name of the legal profession.
ReplyDeleteit's a pretty high bar, actually.
(bar, get it?)
I understand the case for firing a schoolteacher a little better, but not much.
ReplyDeleteI dunno. If I was a PoC with a child in her school I would be pretty concerned about a teacher who assumes black kids at a pool in Summer must have failed out of school. If not fired, I would definitely want the school to address how they intend to make sure her bias doesn't creep into her job. Or at the very least making her read a bit on institutional racism in education.
"Republicans have been muted in their response to Mrs. Clinton and the attempt to expand federal power over elections and undermine states’ . . . election laws. Such reticence is a mistake. They would have the Constitution and legal precedent on their side in rebutting her proposals"
ReplyDeleteNobody tell this guy about Bush v. Gore, he gonna FREAK OUT! Of course, all intellectually honest conservatives would be outraged by Bush v. Gore. Unfortunately, those creatures are long extinct.
I think it's a tie between him and all other Republicans.
ReplyDeleteI see Reynolds still practices journalistic mutual masturbation with all the other jerks-in-a-circle 'round their ring of right-fisted rub-releasin'. Hovering over the links in the last para of his post you get, in order: heritage.org, national review, washington examiner, wsj, and then finally the national review again.
ReplyDeleteThese are the links Reynolds provides to bolster his contention that a President Hillary would "continue President Obama's disdain for the constitution" (which in itself is a thing because they all say so, so there.)
It makes you wonder how they all survive, given the thinness of the weiner water soup they all seem to live on.
In a similar vein, a UK Nobel prize-winning scientist was run out of a teaching position this week for some unsavory misogyny he aired at a conference.
ReplyDeleteAs I argued with some of my liberal brethren elsewhere, the issue was less his
impolitic views, as the proportionality of the response.
The bar should be high for removing a salaried employee from a job. And some things are of course worthy of a firing. Being rude on the internets is not one of those things.
Hunt was not a salaried employee but an "honorary faculty" there just so UCL could say for free that they had a Nobel scientist.
ReplyDeleteOne element, of course, is for Christians, conservatives, and Republicans to demonstrate a greater personal ease with gay Americans, as people.
ReplyDeleteYou could start by just accepting they are gay and let them be. BUT WHO ARE WE FUCKING KIDDING? You just wrote ten million words trying to figure out the most humane way to legislate against them.
It bothers me that someone who committed a felony, served x number of years in prison for it, did not get in further trouble while in prison, and then was released, is a "felon" for life. Isn't serving your sentence "paying your debt to society"? Why must that "debt" continue to be paid for the rest of your life? I admit, I don't know how you draw the line between this admittedly hypothetical character and a professional criminal who's going to keep committing crimes, but there must be some way to do it. The criminal behavior of bankers and other "elites" in this country seems to never get punished, and THEY have the right to vote -- so why not people who've already done their time?
ReplyDeleteBut the final piece of the puzzle of armistice and coexistence is the need to demobilize the institutions that have been engaged in LGBT causes: Hollywood, the universities, media and entertainment companies like Disney/ESPN, and other big corporations.
ReplyDelete"But we still love the free market!"
Shorter McLaughlin: I'm tired of being dehumanized and marginalized by those godless degenerates; if we have the majority we should oppress those subhumans as much as possible. But you know. With respect (and pity).
ReplyDeleteTim Hunt resigned.
ReplyDeleteThat guy lost his gig? Ugh. I mean, come on. His opinion was dopey. But I feel like for it to rise to a fireable offense, it would have to be taken seriously. And it was impossible to take seriously.
ReplyDeleteI also did not realize the Pool Fracas Lady got fired from a bank job. I'd assumed she got fired from Pool Administration. That seems a bit wrong. I mean it does make me feel a bit like we are all one moronic mistake away from our whole lives falling apart, here in the internet age. That doesn't seem optimal for the species.
As a white person with an almost-school-age child, her Facebook post scared the crap out of me, especially the part about how maybe segregation was pretty great.
ReplyDeleteIn other words: "I don't like rowdy pool parties, so we should go back to when black people were maimed and killed for going to public pools." She's an educator; I'd be really bothered by someone that ignorant teaching my child, much less that cruel.
There's also a part of me that's bothered by the fact that she was fired. I get the worry about someone's off-hours affecting their employment. But the lines between public and private are fuzzier with educators.
". . . demobilize the institutions that have been engaged in LGBT causes: Hollywood, the universities, media and entertainment companies like Disney/ESPN, and other big corporations."
ReplyDeleteTypical one-way thinking from the right. Let's demobilize the institutions that may give strength to liberal causes (Hollywood? Good luck with that), but no mention of changing any of the institutions that would undermine those causes: ALEC, AEI, right-wing media outlets, fundamentalist Christian churches. Et cetera. It's their idea of a level playing field.
"We'll work with you as long as you completely disarm and let us win."
Operating as I am about 48 hrs behind the rest of the cosmos**--tho not necessarily on the same timeline, but WCYD, rite?--I completely missed that ol' Chuck pretty much rendered our Seinfeld thread irrelevant even as we were participating in it, therein.
ReplyDeleteBack in the day, I was an unabashed fan of the late Sam Kinison, even though some of his routines were preposterously sexist. (This got me in some trouble once at a prominent liberal publication.
I did not feel persecuted. I hewed to Molly's rule and told the
publication, and my critics, all of whom I still respect, on this
occasion kindly to fck off.) It seemed to me that, every time Kinison's
comedy became controversial, which was always, Seinfeld popped up on the
split screen to talk about how he didn't work that side of the street.
So I'm disinclined to sympathize that the kidz are inconveniencing him
now.
He does that sometimes...
**Not really sure, in this Brave New NSA/DEA World in which we live in, if it's even legal for me to describe the reasons for this, but if you remember the stuff they gave you when you had *your* major surgery, you know what I mean nudgenudge winkwink, and this could go on for a while, so if I start playing with my toes, just pay no mind, cause, like, I got 4 bottles of this shit...
I miss the rains down in aroundthehornof Africa...
ReplyDeleteMy holy book says I'm right and you're wrong. Why are you denying the plain facts, laid out here in the New Testament?
ReplyDeleteNo, not the "judge not, lest you be judged" verse...no, not the "give everything to the poor" verse....no, not the "as you have treated the least of these" one either...look, mac, Jesus says I get things my way or there's gonna be some serious poutrage, okay?
This reminds me of the different attitudes toward the Shia or Osam bin Laden ( "Convert or Die") and Zawahiri ("Just Die").
ReplyDeleteI think it was Juan Cole.
Wonder what that last part means? That the Romans were different from homosexuals? Brother, have I got news for him.
ReplyDeleteSome men like snails, others like oysters https://youtu.be/aI-XBR6qTUI
I think the thing that has always baffled me most about those that battle against LGBT equality is this: how, exactly, does ensuring everyone is treated the same way diminish your life in any way? How does treating everyone equally lessen your life?
ReplyDeleteThis is what McLaughlin and his ilk cannot answer. They hide behind religion and tradition and I don't know what all else but it all boils down to one thing - fear of otherness. And from where I sit that's a pathetic way to live your life, and the definition of disingenuous when it comes from self-professed "Christians."
It lessens their lives because they can't treat the LGBT people as other, as outcasts, as lesser animals they can abuse.
ReplyDeleteLike so many decisions by this particular Supreme Court, Bush v. Gore was explicitly written as "only applies in this one instance!!! No stare decisis no backsies!!"
ReplyDeleteAnd Republicans do have the Constitution on their side. See, says right here: "3/5 of a White man."
Generally speaking, I don't like to see workers suspended or fired for activities outside their sphere of work (I understand the case for firing a schoolteacher a little better, but not much).
ReplyDeleteBecause, Roy, the victims just gotta' be appeased. And there's always gonna' be victims.
Generally speaking, I don't like to see workers suspended or fired for activities outside their sphere of work (I understand the case for firing a schoolteacher a little better, but not much).
ReplyDeleteYeah, I'm with Roy on this one. There's a big temptation to say, "OH, good!" But I look at how many on "our side" have suffered for speaking out--or even for voting Democrat--and I think allowing this sort of thing is too dangerous. Especially since we have established that you employer can fire you for being a Democrat, and since the plutocrats and oligarchs tend to not like Democrats very much, this is one particular tool I want locked back in the toolbox--no matter the nature of the supposed offense.
Part 5 of Dan McLaughlin's series at The Federalist, "Can Gays and Christians Coexist In America?"
ReplyDeleteIt takes FIVE essays to address the nonissue of whether people who've shared the planet since 1776 can do so?
Didn't mean to imply Hunt was salaried. The two women who lost their jobs were though.
ReplyDeleteso did Sepp Blatter, so did Brendon Eich. Let's not pretend that Hunt wasn't put under a lot of pressure to do so.
ReplyDelete" it does make me feel a bit like we are all one moronic mistake away from our whole lives falling apart, here in the internet age."
ReplyDeleteIndeed.
Someone made of sterner stuff than me (a category which includes Strawberry Shortcake, Tinky Winky and the "leave Brittany alone" dude) can perhaps tell me this about McLaughlin's five (!) part series on Gays and Christians: Is he aware that there are many Christians who don't have any problem with the full participation of gays in our society or our churches?
ReplyDelete"We'll work with you as long as you completely disarm and let us win."
ReplyDeleteAKA the Mitch McConnell Doctrine.
*sigh*. Yeah. "First they came for the racist fuckwits..."
ReplyDeleteRacism isn't bad manners. It routinely deprives its victims of their property, their dignity, their freedom and their lives.
ReplyDeleteOh, come on. He's referring to true christians (who, like Scotsmen, never put sugar on their oatmeal).
ReplyDeleteIt is increasingly evident that conservatives' constantly-declared love for the Constitution has mainly to do with 1.) guns and 2.) keeping citizens from voting if they're unlikely to vote Republican.
ReplyDeleteand 3.) profit?
If proponents of liberty band together in these fights like the slaves at the end of Spartacus, they will do just fine
ReplyDeleteIt'll go down like this:
He's Fartacus!
No, HE'S Fartacus!
etc.
I don't get it.
ReplyDeleteGlenn Reynolds' approach to constitutional law only makes sense if you're drunk.
ReplyDeleteI'm with Roy too in that I think you deserve opprobrium and calling-out for comments like this woman made in a public forum, but you sure as hell don't deserve to get fired.
ReplyDeleteWhat's at play here and in many similar cases is the shitstorm that rains down on the employer if they don't take action against employees that offend in this way.
Yes, free speech means just that, and no, free speech doesn't mean you can say whatever you like without consequences, but man oh man have we ever seen that particular correcting pendulum swing too far in consequence.
It's what I was getting at in the Seinfeld thread: the cult of victimhood has us in such thrall that it's now not enough to just call someone out for dumbfuckery; all the "victims" of the dumbfuckery have to literally destroy the dumb fucker.
Dangerous times for everyone, because we're all capable of dumb fucking moments.
"Capitalist society is founded on the conviction that in the absence of beings who suffer a man cannot enjoy to the full his possessions." -- Curzio Malaparte
ReplyDeleteThese are the links Reynolds providesWow, the citations in his publications must be awesome.
ReplyDeleteSorry, if he succumbed to pressure then it's on him. If a person wants to make willfully ignorant statements and then folds at the first sign of social pressure (there was no call for a boycott of the university) then tough crap. His views and how they may have effected those in his lab were the issue, not that people were offended by them.
ReplyDelete"It's not enough that I succeed, others must fail."
ReplyDelete(Totally paraphrasing Gore Vidal who I'm certain co-opted it from someone or a number of someones from a much earlier age but I'm too lazy to look it up.)
Its not activism or justice but neither is it injustice. My withers are wholly unwrung. If people, like the teacher, publish anti student diatribes they should expect censure for it. Thats as true if it is a curmudgeonly atheist teacher ranting about how vile and stupid her evangelical students are as in this case.
ReplyDeleteShorter McLaughlin: "Want to get into the proper mindset for resisting the homosexual agenda? Think about gladiators!"
ReplyDeletewho, like Scotsmen, never put sugar on their oatmealIYKWIMAITYD.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to wrestle this comment Greco-Roman style.
ReplyDeletePear reviewed, donchya know!
ReplyDeleteAnd just skip all those repetitions in Leviticus about not doing unto others that which you find hateful. And ignore all those passages about charity, and not oppressing the widow and the orphan, and well, I just get to pick what God means and doesn't mean, okay?
ReplyDeleteHence, Ann Althouse.
ReplyDeleteDon't worry; he's still making his daily bread, twice over. The position he left was one of three titles he holds. This one was honorary, and not compensated.
ReplyDeleteBut how could he stop all that crying in the lab if he didn't go cry at home?
ReplyDeleteRacism is bad. No arguments.
ReplyDeleteThat's not the issue. The issue is what is the proper response when an employee has said or written something racist (or otherwise offensive).
For that, on its own, to be a sackable offense? That gives me pause, it certainly looks like a potentially very serious threat to workers' rights.
How does treating everyone equally lessen your life?
ReplyDeleteOther replies have covered it, but lessee what these folks say ...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/11/couple-divorce-marriage-equality-australia_n_7558506.html
"Australian couple says they'll get divorced if same-sex marriage legalized"
Oh nevermind, I'm not gonna quote them. What's interesting is that I'm not sure how this protest is supposed to work. Let's say all the fundies get divorced and/or don't get married going forward. This will burn the gays how?
I'm not a PoC, but I'd be very concerned if one of my kids teachers said something like this.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the words on their own, and absent any other racist track record, to my mind should not rise to a sackable offense.
The school has a mess to clean up, and no problem with the teacher being put on a final warning and being required to attend some remedial classes, but... I guess this is my softy liberal side which does not like the nuclear option being used as a first resort.
There's also a part of me that's bothered by the fact that she was fired. I get the worry about someone's off-hours affecting their employment. But the lines between public and private are fuzzier with educators.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. I get the concerns over free speech and ability for teachers to not have their private lives policed, and the precedent it could set resulting in a bunch of parents bombarding school admins with complaints because their poor, persecuted, Christian children etc. But considering how many studies have shown how widespread biases play a role in the differing treatment and opportunities for differing race/gender etc., this seems like the kind of incident that needs some sort of addressing if we are to ever make any progress against institutional racism/sexism etc. For public servants who have been entrusted with ensuring that education is "Equal" it seems pretty relevant if they are posting screeds about the good-old-days of "Separate But."
Link to location and I will swap your bottles with four of ChĆ¢teauneuf-du-Pape. Your four will go to Gov. Christie, who's walking a little slow these days because of a weighty backlog.
ReplyDeleteMore seriously: The very best of luck to you, Meanie, with impending medical endeavors whatever they are. You're the meanest little smart cat in the cosmic basket, so demand an Internet connection the moment you hit the recovery room to let us, and NSA, know how you are.
Uncle Dave Mason, the Dixie Dewdrop.
ReplyDelete(which oddly came unbidden to be head last week out of nowhere. Maybe's I'm on Roy's channel.)
Is publicly advocating apartheid a worker's right? If you're willing to give a pass to a public school teacher calling for illegal segregation of African Americans, would you be alright with a police chief calling for Jews to be placed in ghettos to keep them from infecting us with their lust and greed? I see no difference there, even in degree.
ReplyDeleteSee? If it weren't for stupid Martin Luther, they COULDN'T get a divorce, neener neener. So who's the real enemy of marriage, eh? The Diet of Worms guy, that's who (and his supplements are lousy, too, so just keep buying from Dr. Oz).
ReplyDeleteOh, I think he was just reading from one of Bill Buckley's tatts.
ReplyDeleteI hate to break it to Dan, but a lot of those Christians are gay. Maybe not the kind that goes to the kind of church that spends all their time hating on gays, but the kind of church that concentrates on compassion and good works. Not that I would know, I gave up on religion early in life, but I hang around with a lot of Christians who are decent people.
ReplyDeleteI actually don't rule out that the (mostly online) ridicule heaped on him might have helped him make up his mind.
ReplyDeleteAs for the affect it could have on students, I'd rather hope that a university could tell him to stick to science and leave his boner-thoughts outside the lab. If he becomes a repeat-offender, that's another matter.
But one-off unguarded comments, and absent any particular complaints from students about him? I'd be pretty disappointed if a university felt that was grounds to part ways.
Bartlett or Bosc?
ReplyDeleteBig hit in the interior decorating business, perhaps. Otherwise, I'm not real clear on how those two splitting means anything to anyone other than them.
ReplyDeleteGiven how prone the prof is to quoting other sites, I'll go with Bartlett.
ReplyDeleteMM-TAP, here's hoping you feel better WITHOUT the chemistry set!
ReplyDeleteI'll be thinking of you as I baste some ribs this evening, sending smoke that is an savor up to the FSM while calling on the cosmos for speedy healing.
I don't know this guy, so I don't know how he aimed the tone of his remarks, how he treats his colleagues, or what he's been like to other people in general his whole life. But it does feel to me a little too sweeping to declare "If he succumbed to pressure then it's on him."
ReplyDeleteI really do sympathize. He's in his 70s, a fairly well-respected mind -- suddenly faced with an unexpected and stark choice: try to preempt disaster by walking away, even if he feels like he could explain himself -- or refuse to cave, instead hold the line against what might very well turn into a din of personal attacks, plus grief hurled at his employer? Longtime friends might feel forced to choose sides; his family will suffer embarrassment the longer it goes on; students might feel too distracted to learn from him -- and for what gain? Just the principle that he should be allowed to hold a meaningless opinion or make a bad joke? I really loved A Man For All Seasons when I saw it years ago, but oof, the smart and principled response to his situation might very well have been to cry uncle and get the hell out of the room.
"That’s not always easy in an emotional political fight; we have to work at it, and we must.
ReplyDelete"(Okay, remember, stay positive, can't get mad even though they're monsters...)
McLaughlin: "Howdy, faggot!"
Progressive listener: "Um... the least you could do out of respect is make that MISTER Faggot."
McLaughlin; "There! Ya see... there's just no PLEASING these people!!"
...because we're all capable of dumb fucking moments.
ReplyDeleteOK, I got drunk and ran down your family with my car. Can't we let bygones be bygones?
Firstly, you're equating "not sacking" with "giving a pass". Really? There are a long list of intermediate punishments, short of sacking, that might be more appropriate in the circumstances.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, you are equating a junior teacher with a police chief. There's surely a difference there.
And finally, we all say dumb things. I don't know this teacher, I have no idea if she has any past history in this regard (if yes, she probably deserved her fate), but isn't it also possible she regrets what she wrote and in fact doesn't believe it? The public shaming process sometimes has an effect of bringing you to your senses.
As I said, if the school thought what she wrote was alone grounds for her firing, I'm not sure I'd agree. Perhaps there was more to it.
One element, of course, is for Christians, conservatives, and Republicans to demonstrate a greater personal ease with gay Americans, as people.
ReplyDeleteDan...Can I call you Dan? Since we're such good friends now...Anyway, since we are trying to get a little of the ol' back and forth here, I have a few thoughts.
1.) It would be nice if you would stop using the term "Christians" and say what you really mean: Socially and politically conservative fundamentalists / evangelicals. I know it's not as punchy, and it's so much easier to make your points if you pretend that gay-affirming, ambivalent and LGTB Christians don't exist or don't count. Nevertheless, it's not terribly honest, and I feel that this is a bad way to get started with our new friendship.
2.) Using polite terminology and pretending that gay people don't repulse you probably isn't going to be very effective, because people are going to expect that you behave in accordance with your words. Softening your words while continuing to support reparative therapies that treat homosexuality as dirty and debased...not exactly a perfect disguise.
3.) "Demobilize." Maybe dial back the martial imagery a little, for starters. Now, I'm not terribly fond of the way that many works of fiction depict evangelicals, though this is a more from a "lazy and clichƩ writing" perspective than a "Hollywood is making war on us" perspective. But I might take a look at how those same works depict gays. You might see that many screenwriters still refuse to write gay men as anything but mincing, campy flamers and that the whole industry treats lesbianism as a gimmick to draw the attention of horny heterosexuals. No one comes across all that great in mainstream television or film - that would require effort, and that's way too much for the modern entertainment industry.
Oh, and 4.) Your timing for this "armistice" is rather interesting. I don't exactly remember a lot of compromise coming from your side back in 2004, but now that you are losing, suddenly you're full of ideas on what generally popular side should give up. That's interesting, isn't it, new friend?
Or the alien in "Independence Day"...
ReplyDeletePresident Thomas Whitmore:
"What do you want us to do?"
Captured Alien:
"Die!"
I like that Uncle Dave Macon song.
ReplyDeleteThe music is the same as "Crawdad Hole," as in "You get a line, I'll get a pole, and we'll go fishin' in the crawdad hole, honey..."
But all you folks probably knew that already!
Actually, I think you got drunk and decided saying something stupid is equal to vehicular manslaughter. Which, to use your analogy, just killed a bunch of innocents.
ReplyDeleteDon't drink and type, hla.
There is no evidence that the University induced him to resign. We can't now have a standard that says "Well, he may be a relentless sexist/racist/whatever, but we can't exert social pressure on him because he might resign." How is anyone's behavior going to be changed? Is there any doubt that someone like this treats his female grad students/postdocs differently than his male ones? And do we let him go on doing it unless he's dumb enough to say something stupid in public again? I'm not advocating that the university should have forced him to go, but we have to have some way of forcefully telling him this wasn't acceptable.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. I think it is problematic for left wingers to argue for market discipline of people who say dumb things.
ReplyDeleteThere never has been and never will be a shortage of people who revel in stupidity. Bog love 'em.
ReplyDeleteIs making racist statements really on the same level as running people over with a car?
ReplyDeleteThass about the shape of it...
ReplyDeleteAgree completely about "forcefully telling him this wasn't acceptable". Seeing him leave a teaching position over the incident - maybe there was other stuff, I don't know - I thought that was disappointing.
ReplyDeleteI think it's counterproductive for left wingers to be too eager to fire people, even if they are racists. It's a tactic that can blow back on us.
ReplyDeleteI feel like liberals have gotten so use to the way conservatives argue over speech that they've become far too used to just pitching out "The First Amendment doesn't apply here" and walking away. Yes, in most situations, a person has no recourse with the government if they're fired for their words. However, the practice creates a chilling effect that amounts to a de facto restriction on free speech. The funny part is that many of those same lefties argue that voicing sexism / racism / whatever else is innately harmful to society, but they just can't see that actually punishing people for their opinions does the same thing.
ReplyDeleteIt's basically a strain of progressive-friendly authoritarianism, this belief that people with wrong opinions should be punished, and it really needs to be dug out before it takes root. I am troubled by the number of liberals who have become so hostile to the concept of liberalism.
That idea was stolen from Blazing Saddles. That's the only way it makes sense.
ReplyDeleteI'm not willing to assume that he has a record of treating his female students differently, or that he behaved in a way that can be described as "relentless." There is very reasonable doubt in these areas, and he ought to be accorded some semblance of innocence until proved otherwise. As far as I know, no one came forward to say he has a rotten track record of bad behavior. We only had the one quote.
ReplyDeleteConservatives are just totally fucking disingenuous with the way they argue about these things.
ReplyDeleteJust once, I'd like to see them stand up and defend someone who says stuff they personally find offensive, because until they are completely full of shit.
The issue on the "liberal" side, I guess, is this thing of proportionality. Or looked at another way, some folks take a broken-windows attitude towards offensive speech.
Some people deserve to be held to a higher standard, and anyone who says offensive bigoted stuff should expect to be called out. But to have your life turned upside-down because of a single errant joke, that's messed up.
If someone builds up a track record - cf. Bill Maher, misogynist extraordinaire, Ann Coulter unashamedly racist rage-poodle - then bring down the hammer. Someone who writes something dumb on the intertubz, there are ways of clowning that idiot and getting them to change their ways without getting them fired from their job.
Do you think she's quit drinking? I haven't seen anybody mocking her lately.
ReplyDeleteOh, hell, I'm already done out and recuperating in MSICU-1 (My Sister's Intensive Care Unit, bed #1). Me and Scoot are confined (imprisoned, in his view) to a 12 x 14 bedroom with my computer rig transplanted from my house, and pretty much everything within reach. The slicing and dicing was last Thursday, and the CW seems to be that I'm doing very well, TYVM. Regular speed demon with a walker around the 7th floor.
ReplyDeleteAnd the bottles are the small yellow rattly plastic kind...
Got it to go with the motorcycle, probably...
ReplyDeleteOne element, of course, is for Christians, conservatives, and Republicans to demonstrate a greater personal ease with gay Americans, as people.
ReplyDeleteHow Do You Relax Gay People at Parties?
(With apologies to Lenny Bruce)
Straight: You know, that Paul Lynde sure was a funny guy, huh?
Gay: Yeah, you can say that again. Very funny.
Straight: What a gay funnyman, boy. Loved those fruity zingers of his...
Gay: Yeah, some great fruity zingers.
Straight: He's a credit to the homo race. Don't you ever forget that, you sonofagun.
Gay: Well, thank you very much.
Straight: Thass awright, perfectly awright. And that Modern Family show. Watch it all the time. And it sure is, whaddyacall it...
Gay: Modern?
Straight: Faggy. Listen, I'm bad on names, uhhh you know that Will feller?
Gay: No, I don't know Will. Sorry.
Straight: Too bad. Know any of the Village People?
Gay: Nope. Not a one.
Straight: What about that guy on the Brawny paper towels wrapper? Ya know him?
How does treating everyone equally lessen your life?
ReplyDeleteJust really love to hear some of these asshats get asked this over and over on TV. There's no Humanly acceptable answer, but what we get might be entertaining. Might even sound like English.
I'm looking forward to looking backward at it! And yeah, ribs...
ReplyDeleteCrap, now I got a diet and everything, and how much you wanna bet they ain't on it...
When I saw that headline I assumed it was The Onion.
ReplyDeleteI wish I had understood this earlier. It might have helped me get a better grade in constitutional law if I had gotten drunk before class.
ReplyDeleteHe wasn't tried in front of a university tribunal, he wasn't called before a governmental committee to explain. He said something really stupid and a bunch of people told him that it was stupid and then he resigned. Why are the folks that told him what he said was stupid the ones in the wrong here? He sure seems to get a lot of slack while folks working against the kind of attitudes he epitomizes don't. I feel like we're in that scene in Blazing Saddles were the sheriff pulls the gun on himself and the townfolk back down.
ReplyDeleteOh, and aren't they gonna need to make up t-shirts, or announce what they've done constantly? Might I suggest an email signature line, too?
ReplyDeleteNot on the same level, no. And, yes, I went overboard, sorry. But racism causes real, tangible injury. It's not just saying something stupid.
ReplyDeleteShe's not a "junior teacher". According to the article she's been teaching for 16 years. Teaching elementary school students. With those attitudes towards children of color. That has to rub off on them. So highly possible there was more to it . But regardless I wouldn't want that woman teaching my kids.
ReplyDeleteWhat I wanna know is, how they gonna get divorced if they unilaterally deny the government the right/ability to regulate marriage? Is this Sovereign Citizenship, Down Under style? Are they modern day Essenes? Is there a new Masada a'comin? Wake me for Act II. Or don't...
ReplyDeleteI'm down-voting this comment because the thought of life without ribs makes me haz a sad :(
ReplyDeleteI'm sure she regrets it -- it got her fired. I don't know what a "junior" teacher is (a term you just now made up?), but I'm talking about two public employees calling for rounding up and interning in ghettos members of an ethnic group they are attempting to dehumanize. I, and just about everyone I know, have done and said dumb things, but we have managed to get through life without publicly declaring that we want to see African Americans imprisoned in ghettos "so they can hurt each other and leave the innocent people alone."
ReplyDeleteTo paraphrase Al Capone, You can learn more from humiliation and the loss of your livelihood than you can from just humiliation.
I hope that the tens of thousands of other teachers who think like her get the right message, but the message they'll probably get is to be careful what you say on facebook.
ReplyDeleteBut it's a great job-creator for employment lawyers! Not just the inevitable wrongful-dismissal litigation, but also the corporate policy re-writes, developing training programs for middle managers, and redrafting of vendor contracts to cover reputational risks caused by vendors' sub-vendor's part-time temps.
ReplyDeleteOh, I agree absolutely, hla. Racism is indefensible, it's despicable and it shouldn't be tolerated. I just don't believe that firing someone for saying or writing something racist outside of their workplace should be a fire-able offense. Simply for the reason that those bodies that decide what's racist (or offensive) enough to be a fire-able offense change, and not always in ways we think are better.
ReplyDeleteAnd don't worry about going overboard. It's often a pitching deck upon which we make our moral stands.
Racist elementary school teachers do indeed cause real, tangible injury to their students. If you really believe that black kids will all grow up to be high school dropouts who cause problems how do you not convey that to children you interact with every day?
ReplyDeleteIt is not that people telling him he's wrong are actually in the wrong. What I'd like to see us resist is the tendency to make broader assumptions about people based on a single weird quote or tweet and then exert social pressure based on those assumptions. I'd like us to cut everyone a bit of slack -- at least enough to ask the person a followup question. Things like Twitter seem absolutely ideal for that -- you can end up in a direct conversation with anyone alive! But often we use it to get condemnation "trending" instead. To be honest, that surprises me.
ReplyDelete(In this case, his comments weren't an announcement of policy. They seemed rooted in personal experience of an affair and breakup that he and/or she handled poorly; I took the quote as dumb, but also less dangerous, more rueful & puzzled. It might help that I've seen brilliant scientists close up, and a lot of them are not super best at ordinary interpersonal skills.)
She didn't say it outside her workplace, she said it on Facebook, a forum which is likely easily accessible from within her workplace by every one of her students. That's the 21st century for you, the only time we have to live in.
ReplyDeleteI don't think she should be hanged at high noon in the public square, but losing her job as a public school teacher -- paid in part by taxes collected from the very people she attempted to dehumanize? That ain't no thing. That sounds fitting to me Do something despicable and indefensible can often have consequences more severe than merely feeling bad about it the next day. I wish her well in her next job.
But it's possible that a profoundly stupid statement can appear to be full-on racist when it's really just sadly ignorant. A lot of people are not up to speed, and I get a little queasy when one is subjected to figurative public stoning.
ReplyDeleteIn this economy, taking someone's job from them is one of the worst things you can do--and I say that as someone who was unemployed for three years. Fuck with somebody all you want, but don't take their income.
ReplyDelete"Oh, Timmy, the more you resist, the more the G(OP)ladiators want to recruit you... er, want your vote!"
ReplyDeleteWe've all said/done/written stupid things either out of ignorance or youth or whatever and I agree that ruining someone's career over a first offense is extreme (second or more offenses is another matter.) But I think that first mulligan should be contingent upon the person making a full, real apology illustrating that they grasp why what they did was wrong. If this teacher doesn't grok the racism of her statement, she needs to do some learning and then show that she get's it before the issue is resolved. Has this teacher (or the scientist) offered an apology? And I mean something more than "I'm sorry people were offended." If so, I would give them a pass with a probationary let's-not-have-this-happen-again warning. But I don't think that statements made in the public or on the internet (where her students and their parents can hear/see them) should be exempt from scrutiny. Especially if those statements openly disparage the people she is supposed to serve.
ReplyDeleteWhile I stay away from Facebook, I fire off at least one intemperate email a year (I work with some real fucking fools), and I have suffered consequences for this, including financial ones (that's why I only fuck up once a year now instead of once a month). This is just the way it goes in the 21st century -- we face a whole new field of potential unforced errors. I feel bad for kids who make mistakes with alcohol, Facebook or Tumblr and suffer way more consequences than they deserve or can handle. But adults? Being stupid is optional in life. Some people need more than one lesson, as Jim Gettys said. I hope the Texas schoolteacher learns something and becomes a better person for it, rather than becoming, say, the receptionist at the West Texas American Nazi Party Headquarters.
ReplyDeleteIn my basement I am working on building my Unmouthshooteroffer, an invention which will one day revolutionize human society. But until that day, we must learn to know when to shut the fuck up, or get good at dodging figurative stones.
"I heard you got divorced, Tom. Go team! Way to stick it to the queers!"
ReplyDelete"Um, that isn't why we parted ways. It was a loveless marriage."
"That's what Cindy and I thought, too, but since the protest divorce we've been going at it like schoolkids!"
"Well if you're having extra-marital sex I don't want to hear about it. You know where I stand."
[Chuckles] "Bless your heart, Tom, this is extra-gay-marital sex. It's hot AND holy! And it's no holes barred!"
"What the!?..."
"We're taking sodomy, Tommy my boy! They took "gay" and rainbows and good lord knows what else, so we're taking sodomy without so much as a pretty please! I can't wait to see the looks on their faces. Turnabout is fair play, or should I say gay!"
"Hmm ... we are divorced. I suppose I could give Tina a call, try to sell her on all this. Say, could you ask Cindy to put in a good word or two?"
i've been thinking about your response all afternoon: yeah, that's one less asshole. this isn't even ward churchill--they're not political comments per se: racism doesn't count as "politics," not in that way, and those people need to be told, shouted down even, for being gross and wrong.
ReplyDeletebut....but. i don't want to do the very thing i'm intimating goes on---using personal offense at broad social trends in lieu of analysis, to paraphrase another great educator, seymour skinner---but it seems like these efforts, and the results, reveal a kind of impotence; that because we don't have effective political solutions to things like police violence or institutional racism, we make do with chasing some idiot out of her job. i don't know how the things we care about was helped by this.
I know. It's like that time they tried to take Scott Walker's job away from him just for expressing his anti-union opinions. The people of Wisconsin should have just fucked with him instead.
ReplyDelete(They're trying to sell the horse they rode in on in 2004 to the people they rode over with it. And it's dead.)
ReplyDeleteApropos this week.
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/nw5sgek7rNw
Nothing says marriage is a sacrament, ordained by God and not to be taken lightly quite like getting divorced because other people can get married.
ReplyDeleteGlenn Reynolds is the most rank and opportunistic judicial activist to
ReplyDeleteever sully the not particularly great name of the legal profession.
Clarence Thomas would like a word.
https://youtu.be/eeNsPE5XUXA
ReplyDeleteI'm not so sure she was fired. She was "relieved of her duties". Which is likely School Administrator weasel-speak for "We're going to find something else for her to do for the duration of her contract. Because we aren't looking forward to a steady stream of angry parents demanding that their fourth-graders not be taught by a racist fuck-wit."
ReplyDeleteIt's all good but I'm really feeling #4.
ReplyDeleteThis. Do these Aussie idjits know they've entered "we had to destroy the village to save it" territory? "Our marriage is so sacred a compact between us and God that we're dissolving it because Adam and Steve are getting hitched." I had hoped Australia would somehow lack a population as stupid as that of US America, but I guess people of faith are the same the world over.
ReplyDelete"...we need to be happy warriors, keeping our calm and our cool and showing
ReplyDeletewith deeds, not just words, that our disagreements on matters of deep
principle do not prevent us from treating others with the love and
respect that the Gospel demands of us"
(Long pause)........Nah.....
Oh you'll get it, pal. Good and hard.
ReplyDeleteShe did indeed write a sincere and fulsome apology, on her second attempt anyway.
ReplyDeleteThe most impressive thing about the Constitution is that it still exists...
ReplyDeleteIt would be nice if you would stop using the term "Christians" and say
ReplyDeletewhat you really mean: Socially and politically conservative
fundamentalists / evangelicals.See, though, to him those are equivalent. If you're not socially and politically conservative, you aren't a Christian. If you don't literally say the words of the magic "born again" spell that turns you from an evil asshole into a smug, self-righteous evil asshole, you aren't a Christian. (Possible for exemptions from the latter for Catholics and Mormons, if it happens to be politically expedient.) He's not pretending that gay-affirming, ambivalent and LGTB Christians don't exist; he's explicitly written them out of his definition.
I think it's of utmost importance never to prove D'nesh D'souza nor Jonah Goldberg right. That is all.
ReplyDeleteThe quantum integrity of the universe may depend on this...
ReplyDeleteOne final thought on the hand-wringing over the teacher losing her job:
ReplyDeleteIt's Texas, for fuck's sake! The economic dynamo! She'll have a new job in no time. In fact, I wonder ... is Secretary of Education in Texas an elected or appointed office?
I concede the possibility that the integrity of a gnat's asshole might depend on either of those two simpletons.
ReplyDeleteAnd whether they are right or wrong about anything should concern no one.
Well, I admit it's nothing compared to a random 4th grade teacher in Texas.
ReplyDeleteThe bar should be high for removing a salaried employee from a job.
ReplyDeleteNo doubt it should be. However, he was not in fact "a salaried employee"; he had a purely honorary appointment, given to him to burnish the reputation of University College London. You can read all about it at P. Z. Myers's blog, if you care to.
¯\_(ć)_/¯
ReplyDeleteHunt resigned and he made those comments during a speech not on the internets. The pool lady has been suspended pending an investigation.
ReplyDeleteWhat? Not enough Tom Waits? Okay.
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/rcA2_g04pMU
Thank you.
ReplyDeleteBut, hey, the scientist was only horribly sexist. No big deal.
Yep. Letting the bigots run rampant because the economy is down is an excellent solution. I can't see anything that could go wrong with that.
ReplyDeleteI mean sure, black kids would probably feel better if they didn't have teachers (or principals) who are blatant racists, but the grown ups have to pay the bills so maybe if they sit at the back of the class and don't move, they'll be OK.
IMO, you can't be effective as a teacher and have it out in public that you believe in segregated schools. She went all the way out there. The idea that she thought that "I'm not racist" fixed an open call for segregated schools suggests to me that's she's also too stupid to teach anyone anything.
ReplyDeleteBURN HER.
ReplyDeleteYou mean fire her. And that happened. She's fired. As in her employment is terminated. Not burned.
ReplyDeleteTalking about rights in absolutists terms is a conservative gag. The 1st Am might apply in the case of Fitzgibbons (and the principal in Florida) since they both worked for state orgs.
ReplyDeleteHowever, both instances are an excellent time to discuss the limits of free speech and the constant balancing act a sane society does to weigh - for example - Fitzgibbons' right to say racist things against the potential harm someone with those beliefs might do to black students.
Or the school might have looked at its ability to say it is following anti-discrimination laws if it continued to employ Ftizgibbons and decided it couldn't.
The comments of the principal in Florida were so much milder, I am surprised he was fired.
ReplyDeleteSo when someone says something stupid, people shouldn't comment on it because it might make them feel bad.
ReplyDeleteThe scientist was only horribly sexist
ReplyDeleteClearly the best way to make him see the wrongness of his sexist statements is for everyone to say nothing about them. Especially the women who have to work with him.
My guess? 99% of the parents were alarmed by a principal who approved of a police officer knocking around and kneeling on a girl who looked like their daughters and pulling a gun on boys who looked like their sons.
ReplyDeleteThis incident reminds me of what my teacher said when I was in sixth grade. She repeatedly called MLK Jr a "troublemaker" [anyone who grew up in the south in the late 60s heard comments like that]. Our community was FINALLY desegregating the public pool, and she told us one day that the pool would now be dirty, and asked if we understood why. The entire class sat silently, and finally one boy offered up tentatively that the skin color would come off in the pool. The teacher looked irritated, said no, that's not it, and changed the subject.
ReplyDeleteFree speech demands that everyone shut up!
ReplyDeleteTrue. I just mean that it was couched in that "I support the police" bullshit that usually gets a pass.
ReplyDeleteThe teacher lost her job, shouty hitty pool woman has been suspended.
ReplyDeleteI can tell you right now, he has a research assistant or librarian to worry about that for him.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was young(er) and clueless(er) I made the mistake of telling an off-color to a co-worker because I was edgy and free-speech and just-a-joke and no-biggie and I'm not really racist/sexist etc., and was swiftly reported to HR where I had to endure a most embarrassing lecture. I only got a warning but it sure as hell made me much more careful about what I said in or out of work. Eventually, I even did some introspective shit (ie-read just these types of discussions on the internet) and saw the light as to why just-a-joke is no excuse and why punching down is not cool etc. And why it's of the utmost importance that people call out racism/sexism/homophobia etc. when they see it, when they can, especially with groups who may actually listen to you (or at least the audience might) and even more especially when they honestly are unaware or don't understand why what they said was offensive. So yeah, sometimes these little spankings we get for running our mouths actually have some benefits.
ReplyDeleteHe had no actual teaching duties.
ReplyDeleteAh, true. I wonder if that's what Fitzgibbons was trying to do? She started by decrying the fact Casebolt resigned and then did a cannonball right into the deep end.
ReplyDeleteWell, he started off his talk -- at a lunch sponsored by female Korean scientists and engineers -- by admitting he had a reputation as a chauvinist, and then it all went downhill from there.
ReplyDeleteThis tells me a few things: 1) that he has no sense of audience; 2) that he seems to think he's irresistible/his chauvinism is adorable; 3) that he has completely failed to notice that the recruiting and retention of women in STEM fields is rather a large problem, one that is not helped by telling women who have managed to succeed in those fields cute little anecdotes about how it's just best to have segregated labs because the ladies can't keep their hands off his Sex Panther self and they cry when you criticize them.
The position he resigned from is an honorary one, and the kind you hold only because it's to the institution's benefit to be associated with you. I daresay the benefit to the institution dropped markedly after his little talk. He did not, however, either resign from or get kicked out of the Royal Society.
OK, he didn't lose a job and he wasn't a teacher and he wasn't asked to resign from the position he didn't have.
ReplyDeleteBut the fact is he was made to feel some sort of discomfort for making sexist comments and that's just WRONG.
in that they appear to be bigoted
ReplyDeleteAppear?
why do you think the Bank of America factota were so quick to jump? Because they care about racism?
Maybe they care about assault and battery? There video of her hitting that young lady.
Also, CoreLogic is a vendor that has a contract with BofA. I don't think BoA is relevant here.
I bet it's a reallly big contract. Follow the Money is always good advice.
ReplyDeleteI don't see the connection between money and someone being placed on administrative leave after they're caught on film hitting a kid.
ReplyDeleteThe NAACP College Draft was today.
ReplyDeletehttps://vimeo.com/61499874
But the final piece of the puzzle of armistice and coexistence is the
ReplyDeleteneed to demobilize the institutions that have been engaged in LGBT
causes: Hollywood, the universities, media and entertainment companies
like Disney/ESPN, and other big corporations.
They're only talking about "armistice and coexistence" because they lost the Culture War badly. Funny, the Culture War that they started just might be the thing which breaks the whole structure, judging by the rate at which younger individuals are abandoning religion.
So long as those various entities are run and staffed by people who see
Christians only in caricature and see LGBT causes through the prism of
Jim Crow, conflict will never end.
Ya know, the caricature exists because these "Christians" elevate freaks like the Duggars to positions of prominence.
That leaves only 78,479 to go before we rid our school systems of dumb 4th grade teachers.
ReplyDeleteAustralia gave us Ken Ham, expect this couple to emigrate to the U.S., where the "martyr" grift is much more profitable.
ReplyDeleteWe are unable to change other people's minds save through argument and persuasion, two tactics that are notably ineffective against items of faith: religion, sexism, and bigotry. ("But I know I'm right!") And I wouldn't trust any human with the power to change others' minds on that level. ("You know, I was just going to make you less racist, but I've decided I'd like to be SupremeHank53, Eternal President of the World. Please deposit your cash in the green bin and any particularly attractive and nubile offspring in the blue bin. Have a nice day!")
ReplyDeleteSo we're stuck with wrongthink, of whatever flavor you care to object to. What we can do, with the tools at our disposal, is encourage people to mind their damn manners, and think twice before opening their fool mouths. If the next time someone types the phrase "I'm not a racist, but--" they stop and think that someone got canned for finishing the sentence, they might think twice. At that's as much as we can hope for.
If proponents of liberty band together in these fights like the slaves at the end of Spartacus, they will do just fine.
ReplyDeleteYep! Hey, does anyone know of a good cross maker?
I like ice cream!
ReplyDeleteYour #1 --yes, for sure. #2 is certainly a fair guess. #3... "Let me tell you about my trouble with girls … three things happen when
ReplyDeletethey are in the lab … You fall in love with them, they fall in love with
you and when you criticise them, they cry." I dunno, I hear less of a Sex Panther brag and more of a failed Maurice Chevalier. He might also have been depending on stuff like his audience being aware that he's married to a scientist and has two daughters (according to wikipedia). But who knows.
That said, some of the tweets in this case are pretty damn funny. And resigning from the honorary society under whose aegis he made the comment is potentially reasonable. (Earlier I had understood him to be teaching there.) I remain, however, wary of public shaming. It doesn't wait for evidence, and ultimately it's dehumanizing.
Maurice Chevalier is still inappropriate in a professional environment. What more evidence do you need than his own words?
ReplyDeleteLook, he advocated for segregated labs because he can't figure out how to act around women. This is exactly the kind of thing that the women he was addressing have had to fight against their entire lives, this idea that women don't belong in the sciences. Women are told in thousands of different ways, many of them subtle, many of them overt, that they aren't good enough, that they don't belong, that their ladybrains are just different from men's, that they can't handle the workload, that their papers would be taken more seriously if they added a man to the list of authors, that they should just let their postdoc lab supervisor have a look down their blouses. Or, if they're black or Latina, they must be from housekeeping.
Would it seem more like an injustice to you if he'd advocated for racially segregated labs? Because a lot of men seem to have a problem accepting evidence of bias against women in science.
BTW, plenty of men with smart wives and daughters are still sexist. Shocking!
Reynolds wants Americans to stand together for freedom! Um, the freedom of boards of election to discriminate against would-be voters. I'd love to think no one will fall for this, but you know what Barnum said about suckers.
ReplyDeleteNo one very far into America's past could have foreseen that so many Americans would be classed as felons in the first place. Granted--and this is a pretty big grant--the Founding Fathers perpetuated a system where large numbers of Americans didn't have voting rights or any rights for other reasons. But the circumstance whereby such a large portion of the populace is imprisoned and if they ever get out are still political nonbeings? That's new and hazardous.
ReplyDeleteTimmy, have you ever seen the conservative agenda naked?
ReplyDeleteI would like to sit in an alley with this comment passing a 40 proof bottle of wood glue back and forth.
ReplyDeleteThe shoe was on the other foot back during the first leg of the Iraq War. Some day it will be on the other foot again. So yes, there are clear pragmatic reasons for maintaining the principle of free speech.
ReplyDeleteIn truth it's entirely possible that Fitzgibbons was a shitty teacher, either out of lack of skill or active contempt for her students. If that's the case I have no problem taking her out of the classroom. The timing could be better, though.
ReplyDeleteIt sounded like he was making bad policy recommendations (e.g. segregating female scientists from male ones) based on some incident from his steamy soap opera life. He and the institution might not have been a good fit.
ReplyDeleteIf it comes to light that he was making an actual policy recommendation, I'll revise my reaction, big time. I Googled around but didn't find his actual speech, except the one line. If anyone sees a link so we're not just reacting to a single line, that'd be great.
ReplyDeleteIt's not just a blog post or a massive jolt of stupidity, although it is both of those things. It's also an open-ended job application.
ReplyDeleteYou can hardly turn on ESPN without seeing Christians in caricature. That whole sportsball thing is just a clever facade.
ReplyDeleteCan someone remind me of the Disney movies that ridiculed Christians and showed the LGBT struggle through the prism of Jim Crow? I must have missed those six decades.
ReplyDeleteSo they're protesting sin by living in sin? Well, okay then.
ReplyDeleteYeah, it's the old white guy that needs all the slack. Sorry, he resigned without any attempt to explain or apologize just a few days after the initial reporting. The only penalty he had suffered was a lot of folks making fun of him online. No one had called for his resignation, instead they posted a bunch of rather amusing responses. That he overreacted is on him.
ReplyDeleteShe was fired by her employer for attitudes and stated beliefs that actively harmed her/their clients. Nothing random about it.
ReplyDeleteSometimes lawyers eat the bar, and sometimes the bar, why, it eats the lawyers.
ReplyDeleteIt's a bit telling that she couldn't even make a coherent argument, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteBefore I feel sorry for Pool Fracas Lady, I need to know how she stands on strong labor unions.
ReplyDeletePoint taken.
ReplyDeleteIs a teacher really the same as a Governor? Come on.
ReplyDeleteHow is it that you're not seeing the difference between mocking people and firing people? (Of course, Mr. Hunt wasn't actually employed by the university in question so it wasn't actual firing.)
ReplyDeleteLOL, OK. But in this case, it's a dumb, racist teacher. The firing was for the blatant racism that makes it very unlikely that she can cope with an integrated classroom [and they're all integrated these days]. Not cause she's dumb. That's a bonus.
ReplyDeleteEew.
ReplyDeleteSure, that's possible. But this statement is both full on racist and sadly ignorant. Every statement was about her belief in the natural inferiority of black people. They drop out of school, they have bad parents, they go where they are not wanted, and they are categorically "not innocent", even the children/teenagers, and therefore need to be put in a separate part of town so that they cannot harm "innocent" people-the white people being the "innocent". When you believe that black people are by their nature not innocent, that is not "sadly ignorant". That is racist. A classroom teacher in elementary school is with her students about 6 hours a day. Their teacher is effectively their parent during that time. She makes constant decisions about grades and discipline, and the administration has to trust her to make good decisions. Look at the dynamic of the situation and realize that she can't possibly have the authority to run her classroom after these statements because even if the kids trust her, the parents cannot. This is not public stoning. This is removing someone from a job at which they can't be effective.
ReplyDeleteHow is it that you're not seeing the difference between mocking people
ReplyDeleteand firing people?
As several people have pointed out, Sir Hunt wasn't fired, he wasn't employed by the university, he resigned from an honorary position without being asked.
(Of course, Mr. Hunt wasn't actually employed by the
university in question so it wasn't actual firing.)
So the difference I'm supposed to see is between people being mocked and people being not fired.
Got it.
I agree with bighank. I also think of it as analagous to the open carry people. Someone who is broadcasting their racial animus is, in one sense, merely excercising their constitutional rights. But they are also, at the ssme time, infringing on, dominating, and destroying our dhared common space. A loaded racist is dangerous to our pic fellow citizens. And dangerous to comity and sociality. This woman's argument was literally that black people should be resegregated and stripped of political rights. How can we ask black families to tolerate this level of hatred and political attack? How can you ask the rest of us to strp back? Public spaces where bigots rule will be the norm if we dont push back hard, just as creeping gun nut crap is making formerly safe public spaces no go land for those who arent carrying?
ReplyDeleteOne only hopes they'll further highlight the sanctity of marriage by getting their divorce from an Elvis impersonator in a drive-thru chapel in Vegas.
ReplyDeleteWell, everybody knows Disney has been pushing the Gay Agenda for decades!
ReplyDeleteAnd what's with Robin Hood and those tights?
http://blogs.whatsontv.co.uk/movietalk/files/2010/11/Fantasia_Dance_of_the_Hours.jpg