Campus Free Speech

George Will Was Right: Victimhood Undeniably Confers Privilege on Campuses

Unsayable heresy?

|

George Will
Keith Allison / Flickr

Syndicated conservative columnist George Will was widely condemned for an article he penned about sexual assault and victimhood on college campuses. Critics have signed petitions calling on news outlets to stop carrying his column, and yesterday, The St. Louis Post-Dispatch did just that.

What was the problem? Here is the section of the column that the Dispatch cited in its decision to axe Will:

Colleges and universities are being educated by Washington and are finding the experience excruciating. They are learning that when they say campus victimizations are ubiquitous ("micro-aggressions," often not discernible to the untutored eye, are everywhere), and that when they make victimhood a coveted status that confers privileges, victims proliferate. And academia's progressivism has rendered it intellectually defenseless now that progressivism's achievement, the regulatory state, has decided it is academia's turn to be broken to government's saddle.

The Volokh Conspiracy's David Bernstein writes that while other criticisms of Will's perspective may have merit, the above section—far from being unsayable heresy—certainly rings true:

So Will is making two points here. First, that university culture encourages students to perceive themselves as victims, and those that can credibly claim victimhood are sometimes given higher status. I don't think that's reasonably debatable, as it's exactly what the apparently common trope, "check your privilege" is about; students seen as "privileged" by dint of skin color, sex, wealth, etc., should shut up and let the more authentic and wise voices of members of societies' victim classes proliferate. And the general rule is, if you subsidize something, you get more of it, and there's no reason to think this wouldn't include self-perceptions of victimhood or self-identification as a victim. It's notable that a recent well-circulated column by a Princeton student taking exception to the "check your privilege" meme took pains to note that the author himself is the grandchild of Holocaust survivors, the quintessential victims.

Even back in my day, Yale Law School had a "student strike for diversity," at a rally for which students were encouraged to tell their individual tales of woe. I thought it striking that one student actually got up to discuss what a victim he was because he was a "first-generation professional." Thus, for example, while seemingly everyone else knew how to dress for a job interview, he did not. The horror of being on the cusp of a six-figure salary and having to ask the clerk at Brooks Brothers for assistance! (I could sympathize with the student–for my first "desk" job, I showed up, on advice of my parents, in short sleeve dress shirts and a tie, leading to subsequent teasing from co-workers–but a member of a victim class? No.)

Is it really controversial to suggest that college campuses encourage their students to see themselves as victims, given the policies many universities enact to prevent their students' delicate emotions from being shattered by unfamiliar ideas and troubling memories?

Advertisement

NEXT: Obama Declares Plans for Iraq, Supreme Court Limits Idea-Based Patents, Ron Paul to Appear in Atlas Shrugged: P.M. Links

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Heh. Victim Privilege .

    1. lulz

    2. My letter to the Post-Dispatch editor:

      In his column outlining the reasons for dropping columnist George Will in favor of Michael Gerson, [Post-Dispatch Editor] Tony Messenger says he’s received requests for new conservative voices. This raises an important question: Does “new” mean “more” or “different?” Well, I guess we now know Mr. Messenger’s interpretation. Readers hoping for “more” will have to continue to hope.

      Regarding George Will’s offense: Mr. Messenger may not like his choice of words, but Mr. Will’s points are valid. Our criminal justice system isn’t perfect, but it offers at least the hope, however small, of fair treatment for those accused of a crime. Debasing due process–under any circumstance–is a travesty. To do so in response to a non-existent “epidemic” illustrates the danger and ludicrosity of entrusting individual rights to bureaucrats.

      No one should be surprised at this development. We have a President who brought us kill lists and defends the NSA’s, shall we say, unique interpretation of the 4th Amendment, all in the name of the War on Terror. The President leads, his bureaucrats follow. Who says a lame duck President can’t accomplish anything?

  2. “college campuses encourage their students to see themselves as victims”

    Colleges ENABLE students to accurately identify and thus begin the process of healing and undoing their victimhood. Why can’t George Will see that?

    1. Microagression Triggerwarning about privilege!

      1. I think omnipresent microaggression may the solution to our troubles in the Middle East.

  3. I think this leaves out some important parts of Will’s article in terms of understanding what his critics are saying. Immediately following the section quoted here Will describes what some people see (but he pretty clearly does not) as a ‘sexual assault’ at Swathmore College, and so there’s a strong implication that he’s saying that the victim of that comes forward because of the glorification of victims on campuses.

    If you see the scenario from Swathmore described as a sexual assault then Will seems to be complaining about a culture that encourages victims to come forward about it.

    1. “We have clearly failed to appreciate that the outrage-mongers might have found cause to be outraged by Will’s comments, and that therefore their highly reasonable and rational reaction DEMANDING HE BE BANNED is clearly not as otherwise mockworthy as it might appear.”

      (Strokes chin sagely)

      1. I’m not saying anyone has cause to demand he be banned, just that the reason why at least some found it to be controversial is that they read that scenario as a rape. But, if you are intent on just mocking them in the worst possible light, mock on. Everyone has to have a hobby.

        1. “‘the worst possible light,””

          Because there are so many redeeming characteristics of the University-Outrage-Machine that we’ve missed.

          please bo, share and explain to us the wonderful things about the extra-judicial-rape-witchunt on universities that have been overlooked.

          because you’re so non-partisan and objective and shit. You really see the merits in their cases? = take it up for them. Otherwise, take your nanny-poo-poo attitude and shove it.

        2. Who is this Bo? Did he just read Hitchens’ “Letters to a Young Contrarian” and take it to mean that he must incessantly troll libertarians to burnish his contrarian cred?

          Or does he just love the sight of his own words on screen?

          1. If you reasonable him, there are no words.

        3. “But, if you are intent on just mocking them in the worst possible light…”

          Yeah, because there’s an absolutely wonderful light to cast people who want to ban those they disagree with in.

    2. Here’s the scenario:

      They’d now decided ? mutually, she thought ? just to be friends. When he ended up falling asleep on her bed, she changed into pajamas and climbed in next to him. Soon, he was putting his arm around her and taking off her clothes. ‘I basically said, “No, I don’t want to have sex with you.” And then he said, “OK, that’s fine” and stopped. .?.?. And then he started again a few minutes later, taking off my panties, taking off his boxers. I just kind of laid there and didn’t do anything ? I had already said no. I was just tired and wanted to go to bed. I let him finish. I pulled my panties back on and went to sleep.”

      For me, it would depend entirely on how she “basically” said “No”. If she said, “I’m tired” or gave some lame excuse then I’m sorry, but that’s not a no and short of the “enthusiastic consent” standard demanded by feminists most people (certainly most husbands) would not agree that the above scenario is rape. If it is, then I’ve both been raped and been a rapist at least a couple of times in my life and so have most people.

      1. Sure, the ‘basically said no’ invites a whole lot of skepticism.

        For my part, I see situations like this all the time at my school, and I would not call them rape unless there were some other facts in play here.

      2. That’s such bullshit. “I’d already said no” sounds like something she was told to say. A woman who doesn’t want to have sex would say no, like she did, and toss the guy out if he kept it up.

        “I’m too tired to say no” isn’t really going to get you far if you want to prosecute for rape, unless he drugged you or took advantage of you when you were so exhausted that you couldn’t speak.

        1. “A woman who doesn’t want to have sex would say no, like she did, and toss the guy out if he kept it up.”

          I don’t know, women do some weird things (as do men).

          I’d rather say that we have to have a more objectively discernible standard to label someone guilty of rape than what was described here.

          1. that is not rape.

            if she cedes the point as a matter of convenience or avoiding further annoyance its consent.

            this is rape in sjw minds who believe ‘enthusiastic consent’ is a real thing. its not. consent is an animal devoid of emotion. enthusiasm is an emotion. they can overlap, but consent doesn’t require any particular emotion to be valid.

      3. So, I go to a used car lot to buy a truck but I’m lookin at a Mustang. The salesman asks me if I want to buy the Mustang and I say no. He subsequently tries to convince me that the Mustang is the vehicle for me. I change my mind and buy the Mustang…

        I was raped.

        1. Look, I don’t think this was a rape, but your ‘I change my mind’ is not clear in the Swathmore story.

          If you said no and he later, saying anything more, to the guy and he pressed the keys into your hand and handed you a bill for the car…

          1. ‘and he later, without you saying anything more to the guy, pressed…’

            1. I would not accept the key if I truly didn’t want to buy it.

              The underlying problem in all of this is a lack of individual accountability. You see it everywhere lately. The trend is to tell people that they are not responsible for their own actions. Someone else is the cause of your problems. Someone else harmed you. Someone else is to blame…

              Our society is supporting the creation of a victim class, and it’s bullshit.

              Man up, accept responsibility, denounce those who don’t or those who support a victim mentality.

              1. Fucking this.

      4. I would have more sympathy for her if she wasn’t willingly sleeping in the same bed as him. “Let’s be friends and sleep together, but you better not try to have sex with me because I won’t put up much of a fight!”

        It’s so dumb.

    3. No, he is complaining about a culture which rewards people for turning molehills into mountains.

      Regardless of the specifics of any individual case victims are celebrated for their bravery and conferred special privileges (either explicitly or implicitly) even ignoring the fact that this would encourage some to outright lie to achieve victim status it creates pressure for women who merely had a sexual encounter they disliked or regretted to inflate it as far into victimization as she reasonably can.

    4. If you see the scenario from Swathmore described as a sexual assault then Will seems to be complaining about a culture that encourages victims to come forward about it.

      Will, without stating it in the most direct fashion for the obviousness-impaired, very much implies that the Swathmore incident doesn’t rise to the level of sexual assault, and by noting that it took six weeks before the alleged victim came forward, suggests that she only began to view it through such a prism because of a campus culture that permeates with encouragement of victim status.

      I think he should have used the Occidental case reason discussed a few weeks ago instead, as that had an obvious example of a faculty member convincing the student she was assaulted. But in either event I think it a fair point, even if only implied, that the student in question in either case didn’t initially feel as though the incident was akin to sexual assault and that, at least in the Occidental case, was obviously influenced into believing it as such courtesy of this toxic campus environment.

      1. Yes to everything you wrote there, I was only saying that the controversy around Will’s piece is not based on the paragraph quoted by Soave but rather the quote that Immaculate Trouser excerpted above.

        1. The controversy is not based on any paragraph written by Will; it’s based on people looking for a reason to be outraged.

    5. “If you see the scenario from Swathmore described as a sexual assault then Will seems to be complaining about a culture that encourages victims to come forward about it.”

      And if you see it as something other than rape, you see it as a culture that “encourages victims to come forward” with false accusations of one of the most heinous of crimes.

  4. I thought it striking that one student actually got up to discuss what a victim he was because he was a “first-generation professional.

    This is why I didn’t go to Yale Law School.

    1. Yes, THAT’s the reason.

      *snicker*

  5. ” And academia’s progressivism has rendered it intellectually defenseless now that progressivism’s achievement, the regulatory state, has decided it is academia’s turn to be broken to government’s saddle.”

    The obvious response to anyone saying something like this is to BAN THEM.

    1. That Bernstein guy is NEXT.

    2. …it is academia’s turn to be broken to government’s saddle.”

      Old George certainly used the right metaphor here.

      1. And now on to pro sports nicknames. We are witnessing the revival of Robespierre politics, minus the slashy-neck fetish.

        1. Give it time.

  6. Is it really controversial to suggest that college campuses encourage their students to see themselves as victims

    Not even remotely, to anyone who isn’t fucking retarded or invested in using victim cache. They seek out, actively, any way they might possibly qualify for victim status. They mine their past for possibilities. We’ve seen countless linked stories in the PM links of someone talking about how one time a guy came on to them at a bar and it was like rape, or how being told that they weren’t strong enough to be on the sports team was like being a minority or some other nonsense.

    As said in the article, if you make victimhood have value, a lot of people are going to see if they can cash in. And to do so they have to use their Victim Privilege. It’s actually pretty hilarious.

    1. “victim cache”: for those cases where victim RAM just has too much latency.

      1. Victim Cach?, ok! H&R used to block non-English characters!

        1. I think “cachet” is the word you want there.

          1. That may be the case. I was using the French spelling. Yeah! That’s it!

        2. And as someone who occassionally uses Cyrillic text, I consider this microaggression to have victimized me.

          Where do I sumbit my request for Koch Bros. reparations payment?

      2. Check your cache privilege. I find your use of tiered cache scenarios to be microagressive and triggering when I’m hobbled by the inefficiencies of spinning disc storage.

        I’m a latency victim.

        1. If we only had cpu registers and disk to work with, I’m pretty sure every single programmer would develop PTSD within a few years.

          1. If we only had cpu registers and disk to work with

            The first computer I programmed (in ALGOL 60) was a ODRA 1204. Wasn’t that far from the setup you describe: IIRC it had 16 Kword (each word being 24 bits) core (as in ferrite rings with read-write wires) memory and 64 Kword magnetic drum main memory.

            1. Damn. Programming is definitely the one field where you get to tell the younguns just how easy they have it nowadays.

    2. Not even remotely, to anyone who isn’t fucking retarded or invested in using victim cache.

      Shhhh. I’m trying to keep my victim cache under the radar.

  7. For a journey into the asinine, visit the comment section of the Princeton article mentioned above.

    http://theprincetontory.com/ma…..privilege/

    1. No freakin’ way am I clicking on that.

      1. And miss this gem?:

        Nevertheless, simply by being a white, male, heterosexual, from an upper middle class family, you are granted privileges you are not even aware of. No one begrudges you these privileges. No one wants to take them away. But, when you speak of other groups who have not shared these privileges in a disparaging way, when you imply that their lack of success is due to some failure of “effort” on their part, you are exposing yourself to the “Check your privilege” admonition. Your life path has been greased before you; you have not had to personally struggle with basic survival issues. Your ancestors obviously had to. But learn who you are. Learn what struggles many of your peers must CURRENTLY contend with, and be a bit humbler and more compassionate.

        1. Let’s identify humans by only their gender, race, and socio-economic status. Let’s not treat people as if they have individual identities with individual experiences that transcend the obvious.

          That could end badly.

          1. I am so tired of all of this collectivist nonsense. I am not a classification; I am a free man! [Runs from Rover, a giant rolling ball drone thingee.]

            1. ARE YOU??

              Now learn to fit in like a good Villager.

        2. It’s true. When I went to my first job interview after college, the head of HR greeted me at the door and said, “We’re so glad you’re here! We’ve been expecting you. May I show you your office now, or would you care for a cold soft drink first?”

          1. So it was just like the Eddie Murphy pretending to be white skit?

            1. That was no skit. It was investigative reporting.

        3. No one begrudges you these privileges. No one wants to take them away.

          BWAHAHAHA!

        4. “No one begrudges you these privileges. No one wants to take them away.”

          Pull the other one.

          The only clarification I’d make is that they want to take away *everyone’s* “privileges” (i.e., rights), regardless of race, sex, etc., etc.

          1. Don’t be silly. To achieve social justice, some animals must always be more equal than others.

        5. Nevertheless, simply by being a chick, you are granted easy sex the likes you are not even aware of. No one begrudges you easy sex. No one wants to take easy sex away. But, when you speak of men who have not shared these privileges in a disparaging way, when you imply that any attempt to get in your pants should follow some “begging” checklist, you are exposing yourself to the “Check your privilege” admonition. Your sex life has been greased before you; you have not had to personally struggle with issues getting laid. Your male ancestors obviously had to. But learn who you are. Learn what struggles many of your male peers must CURRENTLY contend with, and be a bit humbler and more compassionate.

          1. Brilliant!

        6. No one begrudges you these privileges.

          LOL at that heaping pile of bullshit. It’s patently obvious that there’s a massive amount of fabricated resentment into the whole concept. It’s (ironically) a form of “othering” to make the person’s opinions and accomplishments seem less legitimate, envy writ large.

          Like I alluded to in a previous thread, Will’s primary sin was assuming good faith on the part of the left in practicing a little self-criticism. He really should have just copied the script from “The Four Yorkshiremen” verbatim and retitled it “The Four College Students/Professors”.

    2. I read the first comment and easily concluded it’s a white female: “The ONLY privilidges are these: being a male; money/ male with money”. The pains she goes through to keep her whiteness out of the discussion.

  8. It’s not just college campuses that give privileged status to victims–it’s everywhere. That’s because once someone is bestowed with victim status (with the exception of straight, white males, who can never be victimized by anyone) no one is allowed to challenge or criticism them in any way. If you do, you’re worse than Hitler.

    1. Fortunately, we still (barely) live in a society where what you’ve described is mostly restricted to academia and government. Out here in the less unreal world the victim card won’t get you much, aside from being given a little more leeway to suck before you’re fired.

      1. Well, I live in California–which isn’t exactly representative of the rest of the country. Sometimes I forget there are still places not infested with crazy people.

    2. . That’s because once someone is bestowed with victim status (with the exception of straight, white males, who can never be victimized by anyone) no one is allowed to challenge or criticism them in any way.

      Also, Ayn Rand doesn’t get victim status even though she spent her childhood being brutalized by an oppressive Soviet government.

      She has heretical political ideas and therefore can never be a victim.

      1. That’s because she aligned herself with the enemy and lost her protected status. Same goes for the women and minorities who wander off the plantation. I actually heard a progressive once explain this was why it was OK to use racial slurs against them.

  9. I blame college essays. Every stuck-up entitled fuckwit spends months trying to come up with some bullshit “challenge” that their privileged little ass has overcome, and they come up blank. So they spend the next few years convincing themselves that they actually *are* tragic heroes, they just didn’t see it because of the false consciousness that was also victimizing them and they have gloriously overcome. I remember my classmates agonizing over those stupid things for months. MONTHS!!! I wrote mine in half an hour and don’t remember what it was about, and I think I’m a better person for it.

    1. I read something recently where a student wrote about how difficult it was to come-out to is parents. Long-story-short, he wasn’t even gay.

      1. That’s the safest tactic if you’re a white middle-class kid without a Hispanic surname and applying to colleges. Just be an oppressed gay teen.

      2. Being straight must have made it especially difficult to come out as gay.

        1. Not really. I doubt they’re going to require you to suck a cock to prove your gayness.

    2. College essays? What’s that?

  10. Microaggressions? What could the pioneers of the Oregon Trail think? …..Other than we have become the biggest fucking pussies in recorded history.

    1. It is truly remarkable. Nary a 100 years ago, the overwhelming zeitgeist of Americans was do-it-yourself, giant steel balls, conquer the world. We were widely regarded as the most tough and tenacious bunch of rabble rousers on the planet.

      By comparison, we now look like a nation of abject pussies that even the Eloi would laugh at.

      1. Same thing happened to the Brits, about 50 years sooner.

        1. It’s called “Opraficaion”

        2. Lol, think about Japan for a minute. This little sliver of land once had nearly half the globe including some very large neighbors under their boot. Now they can’t even look up from their gadgets to notice the opposite sex, much less procreate.

    2. What could the pioneers of the Oregon Trail think?

      Troy muy grande boner has died of dysentery.

      1. Troy muy grande has died attempting to caulk the river.

  11. So they spend the next few years convincing themselves that they actually *are* tragic heroes…

    You know who else thought he was a tragic hero?

    1. John Kerry?

    2. Hercules?

      1. Actually Achilles fits the bill much better.

        1. Aren’t most of the Greek hero’s tragic with the exception of Perseus?

          Where’s kibby?

          1. Some are, some aren’t. Hercules wasn’t. Theseus? Oedipus? Yes. Achilles? Double yes. Hector? Aside from being Trojan and not Greek, yes.

            1. I guess you got me there.

              1. I got interrupted by my boss and posted too soon.

                Odysseus, no. Perseus, no. Jason, no. Bellerophon, no.

                1. God! Don’t you hate it when work interferes with posting on a wankfest blog site?

                2. Heracles? YES.

                  Driven mad by Hera, he kills his own children.

                  Killed by his wife who was tricked by a centaur.

            2. Hercules is mixed. He did go insane and kill his family and he did die. He got a do-over, though.

            3. There are different types of tragic heroes. A hero who is sympathetic and virtuous but is done in by forces beyond his control (like the doomed Oedipus or Hector) are tragic figures.

              But when I hear Greek tragedy I think of heroic characters that are marred by personal flaws that lead to errors in judgment and a reversal in fortune. The fact that this reversal of misfortune is both self-induced and out of their control given their nature is what enhances the tragedy.

              1. The fact that this reversal of misfortune is both self-induced and out of their control given their nature is what enhances the tragedy.

                The misfortune of all tragic greek heroes was seen as self-induced at the time. Some of them just don’t seem that way now because of cultural values dissonance.

          2. How are you defining tragic? Perseus did kill his grandfather. And his wedding was a bloodbath.

            1. You know who else’s wedding was a bloodbath?

              1. Every wedding where the bride is actually a virgin?

                1. So not a single wedding in the West over the last two generations…

              1. This Godwin is appropriately nested in an underground bunker that was the site of the bloodbath wedding.

    3. Willy Loman?

    4. John Walters?

    5. Obama.

      1. Oops. I meant Osama.

        1. Both of em?

          Wookie weddings can be brutal.

    6. Damn, I had one. It was a guy in a red shirt, just can’t remember his name at the moment.

    7. Charles Guiteau?

    8. Mayor Bloomberg?

    9. Elliot Roger?

    10. Clark Kent?

  12. That expression “check your privilege” – is this check as in check your coat at the door or does it mean “be conscious of your privilege”?

    1. It means “pick up the check, white heterosexual males.”

      1. It means “your opinion is wrong because of what you are”.

    2. I think it means “be conscious of.”

    3. I translate it as “please punch me in the face”.

    4. It simply means “shut up,” which when you boil it down, is all that leftists know how to say.

  13. White Male Privilege: The privilege of constantly having to defend your achievements as anything other than merely handed to you on account of your racial/gender identity and socioeconomic status. The privilege of being assumed a racist/sexist/classist if you do suggest that you had to actuall expend an effort to achieve something instead of merely dithering about “poor me, how the world is against me.”

      1. I may add this one to the urban dictionary. I also have a new entry for sapiosexual: a blatant lie. Women who claim it actually only want money and douchiness and men that claim it only want a fertile vagina between 18-24 that doesn’t subject them to celeb gossip or shitty reality TV.

        1. I like all vagina’s but there is definitely something about a smart chick I find very sexy.

          1. I like all vagina’s but there is definitely something about a smart chick I find very sexy.

            The reason such things are called “fantasies” is because they do not exist.*

            *TWTANLW

        2. I didn’t even know that was a thing, wow.
          To me it just sounds like a new way of advertising that you’re an arrogant jerk. Implicit in the term is that most people aren’t smart enough for you.

  14. Anyone who has ever read or heard George Will and calls for a ban on his speech is a completely ludicrous person. If anything, Will is rather anodyne in the way that he chooses to express himself; we’re not talking about the kind of guy who goes around screaming “FUCK RAPE VICTIMS” or burning Andrea Dworkin in effigy. Even outside of the principle of free speech, there is nothing about George Will as a commenter which provokes offense to anyone outside the easily offended.

    1. And how do you think that makes the easily offended feel? Do they not count in your radical-individualist libertarian slave-world hell?

      1. FUCK THE EASILY OFFENDED!

        Grow a sac.

        1. See, if everyone just grew a bulging sack of WASPy balls, there’d be no need for all this discussion of microagressions because we’d all have white male privilege.

          1. Good advice Sudden, but FdA said to grow a sac, not a sack. All white males are known to have residual DNA from the daemon sex orgies where the white race was originally concieved, which produces a vestigial sac above their left buttcheeks. Emotions are regulated through this sac and distilled into pure cold-hearted greed, thus allowing the rapacious white man to eliminate all feelings of envy and offense and replace them with the means to produce cold, hard cash, all the better for them to buy handguns and non-hybrid SUVs to compensate for their small penises.

            1. So a non-hybrid luxury SUV is compensating for a small but decorative penis?

  15. The Duke Lacrosse rape case and the Oberlin hoax apparently never happened for the lefties. No, there’s no case in which the alleged victim received all sorts of benefit of the doubt even without evidence.

    Watch how subtly the victimhood status shifts if race and gender roles were reversed. If a white college girl accused a black student of rape, every progressive on campus will immediately suspect the woman of being racist. “It’s just like the old days in the south” or some other tired narrative will rise.

    A bunch of black kids pursued a Australian baseball player and shot him on the back because they were “bored”, and it received 1/100 of the media attention the Zimmerman case got.

    Can the NSA collect metadata from even known radicals? No, no, that’s gross abuse of power, we’re with the center right on that one. Should colleges use kangaroo courts in which the defendant is already at a disadvantage? Why, yes we can, because we need to stop rape in all its form and empower women!

    Chew on that logic for a minute.

    1. Tawana Brawley says “go fuck yourself”.

      1. Only so she can wipe up your seed, smear it on her dress, and proceed to actually get a rape allegation to stick finally.

  16. Again – the non-white, non-male, non-cis, etc. activist people may applaud attacks against straight white males, but they’ll soon see it turned against them.

  17. If you ask me (not that you did), what we need are a couple things –

    -an end to the residential model, which is too expensive and wasteful and PC-riffic, and its replacement with stripped-down colleges which do as much education as possible online, so you don’t have to shell out a bunch of money to live on campus, and

    -for those who still attend residential colleges, restoring the parietal rules.

    1. Agree with #1, but how do you even enforce #2 outside of curfews? I say sell/privatize the dorm space and consolidate the rest; campus life doesn’t correspond to the social and intellectual function of education. Keep the classical liberal arts + sciences and ditch the rest; anything with -Studies at the end can be scrapped. Perhaps then college would be affordable again and the education system could afford German-style trade schools.

      1. Sure seems like there’s an opportunity for a new, better kind of university. The existing system is becoming worse and worse, and the costs are insane. I mean that literally.

      2. “how do you even enforce #2 outside of curfews?”

        Good point, curfews would be great.

        It would be better than the old days because of the Internet. Back in the old days, after curfew you just sat around in the dorm sleeping, doing homework, reading, or (if you were a coed) having pillow-fights with each other.

    2. Let’s play that game: What if Republicans had balls? They should do everything in their power to decentralize, defund, and open up higher education, making real competition possible.

      Obama has put restraints on internet education, subjecting online colleges to onerous fees and regulations (they must get permission from each state’s Dept of Edu to operate there, etc.)

      Give people alternatives to handing a hundred grand to a university and subjecting your child to this shit.

      I’m about five years away from sending my oldest daughter to college. The horror!

  18. I think this really misses the bigger argument.

    The real beneficiaries of victim manufacturing are the bureaucrats in whose name they operate. Rape crisis centers, the erosion of due process to men accused of rape, and the whole, duplicative bureaucracy that pretends to justice but is in practice a star chamber — all these things could not exist without the hysterical, unempirical “rape culture” nonsense. Feminist dogma demands that rape charges are axiomatically true. But when actual victim groups present anything countering the feminist party line, they, too, must be shouted down.

  19. If you aren’t sickened enough already, try this.

    1. If you and your female partner decide that the institution of marriage is something you want to be involved with, be willing to both keep your existing surnames. If having a common surname with your spouse is important to you, be willing to change your surname and treat this as a preferable option to your spouse changing hers.

      I would slap any man I met who did this.

      1. Straight couples, now arbitrarily acting more like gay couples.

        There are two conditions that would make me change my name. The new surname is cooler or easier to spell/pronounce (highly unlikely). Other than that we’re keeping our own names or he’s taking mine.

    2. Well, xojane.com. Between that site and New Statesman, they form the outer limits of conventional gender feminism, whose principle tenet seems to be that men are irredeemable, which see:

      What we don’t say is: of course not all men hate women. But culture hates women, so men who grow up in a sexist culture have a tendency to do and say sexist things, often without meaning to. We aren’t judging you for who you are but that doesn’t mean we’re not asking you to change your behaviour. What you feel about women in your heart is of less immediate importance than how you treat them on a daily basis.

      You can be the gentlest, sweetest man in the world yet still benefit from sexism. That’s how oppression works.

      At its core, feminism is a pile of justifications for misandry. It simply doesn’t matter what you personally have done, it doesn’t matter what you personally believe in, what matters is your penis. Because some other jackhole is a sexist — because even one sexist man still exists — you are guilty, guilty, guilty.

      And there is simply no arguing with this. At its heart, “privilege” is an unsubstantiated charge of theft, of theft from women of things rightfully belonging to them, leveled universally at all men. It is odious in exactly the same way that racism is odious, save this one thing: it is socially acceptable.

      1. At its core, feminism is a pile of justifications for misandry. It simply doesn’t matter what you personally have done, it doesn’t matter what you personally believe in, what matters is your penis. Because some other jackhole is a sexist — because even one sexist man still exists — you are guilty, guilty, guilty.

        Not entirely true. The passage you quoted seems to indicate that even if there were not a single sexist man remaining on Mother Gaea, the very fact that you have a penis means you benefit from massive institutional societal PRIVILEGEZ!1!1!!!!

        Examples of Male Privilege:

        1)being non-consentually drugged up on speed from your pre-adolescence well through college because you demonstrated typical boyish behavior and hormones.

        2) Lower rate of collegiate admissions because of an educational structure designed by and for GRLPWR!

        3) Having no choice on the fate of a fertilized egg but having to bear significant financial costs should the woman decide its a keeper.

      2. And there is simply no arguing with this.

        Don’t argue with it. Simply reject it out of hand as the ridiculous nonsense that it is.


    3. – Do 50% (or more) of emotional support work in your intimate relationships and friendships.

      Recognize that women are disproportionately responsible for emotional labour and that *being responsible for this takes away time and energy from things they find fulfilling*.”

      What?

      what does ‘responsible’ really mean in this sentence?

      (even @#*(& forgetting *everything else* for the time being, which are an endless stream of words that beg for definitions)

      If ‘women’ are ‘responsible’ for ’emotional labor’, then what’s the deal with their asking men to do ‘more than half’ of …”it”?

      what’s the “responsible” part, in context?

      They think *they’re* doing all the ‘Un-fulfilling heavy emotional labor’? and that men need to kick in so they can…. what? Be less ’emotional’? is that what they *want*? And who is setting the quota for “Daily Emotional Workload” anyway?

      sorry, i realize now i’m making the fundamental error (second only to starting a land war in Asia) of ever thinking that a ‘woman wants what she says she wants when she really wants something else and why didn’t we anticipate that’?

      I am reminded of the utter truth of Jack Nicholson’s comment in ‘as good as it gets’ =


      Receptionist: How do you write women so well?

      Melvin Udall: I think of a man, and I take away reason and accountability.”

  20. Related?

    “POCATELLO ? Idaho State University Public Safety Officers will be armed with Glock pistols in the near future. Campus officers will also begin strict enforcement of a total firearms ban in certain areas of campus beginning July 1….

    “Beginning next month, students, staff and visitors will be allowed to bring concealed firearms onto college and university campuses in Idaho as long as they have a valid enhanced concealed carry permit or are retired law enforcement officers….

    “The new state law also allowed college and university campuses to ban any weapons from certain venues. [list of no-gun areas of the Idaho campus omitted]…

    “”As the seventh safest campus in the United States, we are committed to providing a secure environment conducive to teaching and learning,” ISU President Arthur Vailas said. “We will take every precaution necessary to ensure the continued safety of our Bengal community.””

    http://www.idahostatejournal.c…..963f4.html

  21. “And academia’s progressivism has rendered it intellectually defenseless now that progressivism’s achievement, the regulatory state, has decided it is academia’s turn to be broken to government’s saddle.”

    What George fails to understand is that they *want* to be broken by the regulatory state – that’s the dream of Progressives, to have us *all* broken by the regulatory state.

    A Progressive loves Big Brother. Hi and wants to be enslaved by Him, with all his heart, and and his mind, and with all his strength.

    A Progressive loves Big Brother with all his heart, with all his soul, with all his mind, and with all his strength. His first great desire is to be enslaved by Big Brother. His second great desire is to enslave his neighbor as he enslaves himself.
    On these two desires hang all of Progressivism.

  22. DAMMIT!

    Puppy just pissed on the floor. First time in 4 days.

    1. I’m on puppy watch duty tonight. It’s my wife’s new “purse” dog. The other dog mostly ignores the new dog and occasionally gives me a WTF? look when the puppy annoys the shit out of him. All I’ve got is a Gallic shrug.

    2. That sucks. How old is your puppy? We got a 7 mo old rescue in feb and it probably took at least a month to housebreak her.

  23. JIngle Jangles is not going to like that at all man.

    http://www.WentAnon.tk

  24. Old white males buy the daily paper more often than young white females. I guess we can count on the Post-Dispatch to whine for newspaper subsidies because of their stupid business decisions.

  25. Oh, how far we have devolved from Romeo and Juliet, Tristan and Isolde, Princess Turandot and Princess Calaf, Cosette and Marius and the like. To be a teenager and young person in his or her twenties at a University or College today is to be ceaselessly bombarded with the sex police day and night ad nauseam. Not only are men and women of passion relegated to the realm of pathology, but they are under the utmost tyrannical “patriarchal” control in the form of Feminism on a power-trip that makes old fashioned chauvinism by contrast seem like the epitome of enlightenment and liberation. The 19th century at its worst was never this prudish.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.