Campus Conservative Group Attempts to Piss Off Campus Liberals, Succeeds

Comments

101
@100: Except that you can't even seem to find evidence to support your side. If we accept your notion that studies will tend to be biased to some degree, I can present my evidence, you can present yours, and we can conclude that the evidence is inconclusive, given that different studies suggest different things entirely.
If there are NO studies supporting your assertions, what does that say about the validity of your points?
102
79: "Intellectually dishonest"? How?
103
Actually 79, forget I asked. I stopped being interested a while ago.
104
@97 - k.
105
Ah - the Sarah Harding defence of, "I can get you any numbers you like." It certainly appealed to Francis Urquhart.
106
Professor Lewin's response was understandable, but unprofessional. However, the CRs really don't have much standing to ask that she respond in a respectful and tasteful manner after having sent out that original email. (And I won't even begin to address the spelling or grammar...)

As far as how to properly address a professor, it is traditional to refer to them as "Doctor" or "Professor" So-and-so. However, as social mores have changed among people my age (early twenties), and I've been in college, my rule of thumb is to address them however they introduce themselves. I've had professors say, "Hi, my name is [Whatever-His/Her-First-Name-Is]," in which case I refer to them as "[First Name]". Some say "My name is Dr [So-and-so]", in which case I refer to them as "Doctor". Same goes for email. If they sign it by their first name, I address them by that. It saves a lot of time and embarrassment. Further, I have no problem calling those with Doctorates in academic professions "Doctor". To me, if you spent all that time becoming an expert in your field, you've earned the right to be addressed by your title, if you prefer.
107
@97- So I just spent a few minutes surfing your comment history. I looked at what you said, not what what thread you were on. Why would that matter?

Yup, my impression was right, you're a neo-con.
108
107 - don't you understand, he's a fierce independent fighting against the intolerance of [lefty!] partisans. He says so, so it must be true!
109
@97 Just as I said. You're one of those morons who denounces anyone who even slightly deviates from the liberal party line as the worst possible name you can come up with (in liberal circles it's "neo-con" for some reason).
110
Seattleblues@96, when you say, "I prefer trusting what I know to the knowledge of unknown strangers whose motives are obscure to me", how is that different from relying on studies that collect data?

Questioning your integrity, or the soundness of your opinions, doesn't make me feel better. If anything I remain curious as to how you've reached your conclusions, and why you're unwilling to say anything more about your sources than that they're "unknown strangers".

If I may ask, though, do using sarcasm and insults make you feel better?
111
Does this constitute trouble in River City?

And, fuck, this is the last straw. I'm writing to Wells Fargo and demanding they discontinue wagon stops in Iowa.

But, most importantly, clearly this woman doesn't belong on any committee. She probably advocates dirty books.
112
Seriously? No one just wants to thank Professor Lewin for saying what so many of us feel but don't have the tenure to state?
113
@100: I am still waiting for an answer Seattleblues. Will you come to the next Slog Happy in May or no? Don't be timid now! If it eases your trepidation any, Venomlash lives in Chicago, so that, at least, will be one keen intellect dodged. Come and meet your foes. No longer will they be "unknown strangers whose motives are obscure to [you]". And, if all you seek is "light entertainment", I remind you that there will be both food and drink, and most likely some sort of sporting event on a large television. Come look me in the eye Seattleblues, remembering that my over active empathy gland will ensure that I allow no harm to come to you. Come prove my assessment of you wrong.
114
@109- You have yet to state an opinion that varies from the neo-con party line so I'm just holding up a mirror. It's a description, not a pejorative.

You are a unique and precious flower Luke, and no one can take that away from you. However your political views aren't unique.
115
For what it's worth, I'm a professor and I do not expect or even like to be called Doctor, but I also find it somewhat rude to be called by my first name, especially by students with whom I have no lengthy acquaintance. It's not because they're students and I'm the professor; I would find the same thing rude if any relative stranger immediately began addressing me that way. It's such a simple matter to use the polite term, and then let the other person invite you to be informal. This isn't about patriarchy and bad tradition; it's about showing your basic respect for other people. If you weren't raised to do it, honest tip: learn to do it. You can only benefit from this practice.
116
Yes, the "fuck you" was unprofessional, and Dr. Lewin would probably have been better off keeping the moral high ground by sending a well-reasoned but blistering critique of "Conservative Coming Out Day." Still, if I'd been in her place I would have been tempted to do the same thing. For a person who's actually well-informed and thoughtful about the issues, and has studied the oppression that prevents actual queer people from coming out, reading this garbage must be immensely frustrating.

Particularly when it's sent out as an official university e-mail, granting legitimacy to the idea that conservatives are somehow oppressed by having people criticize their "ideas." The student e-mail was immature, callow, smug, self-righteous, insensitive and unfunny. Dr. Lewin's e-mail was at least succinct, and satisfying to read.
117
@99 I disagree that asking to be addressed by your title is out of line with the spirit of Gender Studies departments. First, these departments hire many women and queer people, groups who have historically been denied credit and respect for their work. For them to demand formal respect for their expertise seems fine. They're asking recognition of the work they've put in to mastering their fields (esp. relative to undergrad students), not for their gender, race or status at birth.

Not all gender studies professors want to dismantle ALL "hierarchies of power." They might feel that some power structures are based on merit and are defensible, at least in our present imperfect world. You have no way of knowing that this woman's decision to use the title she earned was "un-self-critical." And for privileged young male undergrads to be reminded that they're not on a first-name basis with every woman in the world is no bad thing.
118
You know, if you guys talked about minorities the way you talk about Republicans, you'd be right at home in the KKK.

Especially #39.
119
@118, Intolerance of intolerance is the only acceptable form of intolerance.
120
It looks to me as though they violated the University of Iowa's Mass E-mail policy. http://cio.uiowa.edu/policy/MassMail.sht…
121
aoeustnh @36, that's an amazing idea. I can see the fake ads now. They could put various formerly disgraced Republican officials on there, like Trent Lott and David Vitter.

As a side note to the Dr./Professor/firstname debate, profs on the east coast often get cranky if you call them "Dr." They expect to be called "Professor." In their view, everyone has or is working on a doctorate, and the real difference is whether you have a tenure-track job.
122
"You're one of those morons who denounces anyone who even slightly deviates from the liberal party line as the worst possible name you can come up with (in liberal circles it's "neo-con" for some reason)."

I know! "Dumb fucking dipshit" works so much better. They should be using that instead.