Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: There’s Things We Have Left To Fuck Up Previous entry: Bailed out Wall Street firm caught on tape: tells staff to deny payout is a bonus

Glad to know their priorities are straight (pun intended)

We’re in the midst of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression, so of course the Bible-thumping wingnut response is, “How can we work this to get some gay people fired?” From Feministing comes this galling show of bigotry mixed with indifference to the reality of our economic situation:

ATLANTA - Upset House Republicans are mounting a campaign to purge Georgia’s higher education system of professors with an expertise in racy sexuality topics as the state grapples with a $2.2 billion shortfall.

State Rep. Charlice Byrd, R-Woodstock, took the House well on Friday to announce a “grassroots” effort to oust professors with expertise in subjects like male prostitution, oral sex and “queer theory.”

“This is not considered higher education,” Byrd said. “If legislators are going to dole out the dollars, we should have a say-so in where they go.”

Of course, the reporting on the article indicates that the reporter seems equally confused about why anyone would want to study sexual topics or anything relating to gay life.  This, despite the fact that these crazy homophobes probably obsess about the subject more that people who get a doctorate in it ever could.  But to hear them bleating, you’d think sex was hardly a topic worth any interest at all.  But the mere fact that wingnuts devote so many of their waking hours struggling against sex, legislating against it, and worrying about it is evidence in and of itself that it’s a fascinating topic that bears studying.  Ironically, the only way I could see sex slipping into a territory where it didn’t merit this level of investigation would be in a truly egalitarian world where people weren’t punished for being queer or female, and sex was treated as a completely normal and healthy part of life.  Then there wouldn’t be so much strife and shame that drew attention, though it’s hard for me to believe there’s any such thing as a world where people don’t find sex fascinating.  But if it were to happen, it would be in a truly feminist world, i.e. the wingnut version of hell where the dishes aren’t getting done unless you do them yourself and no one will believe your cock has magical powers.

The regents, who oversee the state’s colleges and universities, has bristled at attempts by legislators to dictate who they should hire. A regents spokesman said the university system’s mission - teaching, research and service - is a broad field.

He said the state’s schools hire faculty with expertise in a range of subjects as part of “a tradition of investigating the human experience.” And he noted that they aren’t teaching “how-to” courses, but rather they are experts on the sociological trends and risks.

And yet we can believe that the wingnuts will never, ever believe this.  We’re talking about people who think boring old biology is actual a Satanic cabal out to undermine their death grip on power through Jeebus, so they’re not going to believe that these courses are anything but massive orgies of the sort they never get invited to join for free.  The situation is a hodge podge of everything that gets wingnuts upset: academics, people who don’t hate themselves, intelligence, sexuality, feminism, gays, and reading.  It’s the giant liberal elite conspiracy to make you the wingnuts feel inadequate merely because you are inadequate, due to being too consumed by hate to relax and have the good sex you hate everyone else for having.  That the things they envy and fear are actually within their grasp if they chose to chill out just makes the situation worse.  It’s easier to hate someone you could be if you just tried than someone you could never be. 

And let’s face it: From the joyless prude perspective, it’s not just sex that’s supposed to be a grim biological function with a minor amount of pleasure granted to straight men for their superiority but not to anyone else.  Reading is also supposed to be totally boring. If what you’re studying in school actually interests you and excites your imagination, then you’re probably doing something wrong.  The only officially permissible pleasures in American life are those of eating food that’s bad for you and consumerism.  Which is why Valentine’s Day is such a big deal—-it’s when people who subscribe to materialist American values can feel good about sex because they spent money on it.  But there’s never a time when reading is supposed to be fun. If you start enjoying reading, you’ll do it more, and if you do it more, then you might learn some stuff, and next thing you know you can’t vote Republican in good conscience anymore.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 07:39 PM • (61) Comments

So, their approach to the economic downturn is to fire more people.

Comment #1: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  02/11  at  07:44 PM

When I was in college (WAAAAAY back in the 80’s), we actually studied “Human Sexuality”. I also had a Sociological theory course titled “Deviant Behavior”. Which, as the spokesman stated above, was not a “how to ” course (well, the human sexuality course had a little bit of this, but still). In the deviant behavior course, we did study topics such as sexual fetishes & pornography (as well as many others, but those might be OT for this thread). It totally creeps me out how much these people think about sex and finding ways to punish people for it. I never have, & probably never will, understand that.

Comment #2: Mark  on  02/11  at  07:56 PM

When I was in college (WAAAAAY back in the 80’s), we actually studied “Human Sexuality”. I also had a Sociological theory course titled “Deviant Behavior”. Which, as the spokesman stated above, was not a “how to “ course (well, the human sexuality course had a little bit of this, but still). In the deviant behavior course, we did study topics such as sexual fetishes & pornography (as well as many others, but those might be OT for this thread). It totally creeps me out how much these people think about sex and finding ways to punish people for it. I never have, & probably never will, understand that.

I’m a sociologist and these are actually the areas I concentrate in. (Gender/Sexuality/Queer Theory…with a nice bit of Race and Ethnicity thrown in for good measure.) I’ve never given a “how to” lecture, but I’ve shocked more than a few people with “this is what people do” class periods.  My approach, more than anything, deals with Sexuality as a system of social organization and how identities, practices, images, institutions, and the like are all a part of it.

There was a chapter of my MA thesis that I called “Don’t talk about it or they’ll do it.”  That’s basically the right-wing approach. They adore ignorance.  It drives and reinforces their hate…of sex, of the human body, of the feminine, of the queer… I don’t know if it’s possible for me to hold them in any higher contempt. Well, Reagan and his reaction to HIV/AIDS does give them a target. (I was happy the day he died.)

Comment #3: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  02/11  at  08:09 PM

I’m still wondering how, exactly, they were planning to fire a full professor.  Do they not teach you about tenure in state legislator school?

MAJfeff:

Well, Reagan and his reaction to HIV/AIDS does give them a target. (I was happy the day he died.)

On that day, a good friend of mine composed this lovely little quatrain:

Reagan’s dead, so I’m told
Kind of like Elvis but Ron was old
People say the king hasn’t went
But we’re sure about that president

Comment #4: Alex, FCD  on  02/11  at  08:27 PM

If you start enjoying reading, you’ll do it more, and if you do it more, then you might learn some stuff, and next thing you know you can’t vote Republican in good conscience anymore
Yeah, can’t let that happen!

Comment #5: Renmiri  on  02/11  at  08:49 PM

boring old biology

I am duly offended.

I’m actually surprised they’re limiting their attack to just the gender/women’s studies group.

Comment #6: D  on  02/11  at  08:57 PM

I’m actually surprised they’re limiting their attack to just the gender/women’s studies group.

Actually, it’s also sexuality studies. Georgia State has some pretty good folks working in that area (says someone who couldn’t even get a job interview from the Soc. Dep’t there)

Comment #7: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  02/11  at  09:01 PM

The only officially permissible pleasures in American life are those of eating food that’s bad for you and consumerism

And then only if the junk food doesn’t make you fat.

If you start enjoying reading, you’ll do it more, and if you do it more, then you might learn some stuff, and next thing you know you can’t vote Republican in good conscience anymore.

This is exactly how I went from being a politically moderate Christian in high school to a very liberal atheist in college. I started reading things about politics and learned stuff. My conservative Christian father still doesn’t understand how I became an atheist. He’s asked me more than once if “something happened.” Yeah, I started thinking for myself.

Comment #8: Lauren O  on  02/11  at  09:08 PM

It’s a perfect win-win-win.  You cut funding to education institutions (hurray! ignorance!) and stick it to those Ivory Tower academic know-it-alls that probably voted Democrat anyway.  You play the “anti-gay” card with your base and convince them that a $50k grant to study prostitution patterns (and secretly spread the gay agenda) in downtown Atlanta is the only budget item between government solvency and total economic collapse.  And, when Fundies United in Christ’s Kingship Youth Orientation Uhsomethingorother put together a study saying gays and women’s libers cause syphilis next month, no one will have the research to argue with them.

The wingnut trifecta.  Everybody wins.

Comment #9: Zifnab  on  02/11  at  09:14 PM

Oh, I think you’re supposed to get really fat and then beat yourself up over it and pay money for fancy diets.  Americans invented paying more to eat less.

Comment #10: Amanda Marcotte  on  02/11  at  09:16 PM

Do they not teach you about tenure in state legislator school?

They don’t teach you to read and write in state legislator school. For the second time today, “state legislator dumb as dogshit” is, alas, not a news story.

Comment #11: pseudonymous in nc  on  02/11  at  09:37 PM

Anyone willing to attribute to queer theory the properties of being “steamy” or “racy” is reading _vastly_ different books than I did.

Comment #12: FlipYrWhig  on  02/11  at  09:38 PM

In most places you can fire tenured faculty either for moral turpitude or for bona fide financial distress of the institution, which in some cases includes abolishing the department they’re in, other cases not. (You can tell my parents worked in academia, can’t you?) And moral turpitude has to be a really good one—being the perp in a sexual harassment case doesn’t come close.

This guy clearly has his self-preservation hat on—no mention of firing, say, members of the legislature who have detailed knowledge of female prostitution…

Comment #13: paul  on  02/11  at  09:43 PM

Anyone willing to attribute to queer theory the properties of being “steamy” or “racy” is reading _vastly_ different books than I did.

Amen to that. Reading Bodies that Matter made me feel more like beating Judith Butler to death with her own book than it did beating my own meat.

Comment #14: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  02/11  at  09:43 PM

Oh, I think you’re supposed to get really fat and then beat yourself up over it and pay money for fancy diets.  Americans invented paying more to eat less.

Yeah, junk food is an acceptable pleasure precisely because it makes you fat; that way, you’re properly punished for having enjoyed yourself for a minute or two.  Similarly, shopping is an acceptable pleasure because it makes you poor.  And sex is supposed to leave you with hideous diseases, unwanted pregnancy, and/or crippling social stigma, so social conservatives get pissed off when people, especially women and gays, find ways around that.

Being educated about sex is one of the best ways to have a safe, happy sex life, so above all they have to get sex out of our classrooms.

Comment #15: Shaenon  on  02/11  at  09:45 PM

There was a chapter of my MA thesis that I called “Don’t talk about it or they’ll do it.” That’s basically the right-wing approach. They adore ignorance.

I.e., security through obscurity.

Ask any IT guy how that works.

Comment #16: gwangung  on  02/11  at  09:50 PM

@ MAJeff:  A friend of mine in grad school (slightly before queer theory had become the consensus name for the field) was fond of referring to Luce Iragaray’s _The Sex Which Is Not One_ as _The Sex Which Is Not Fun_.

The wingnuts really do like to blur that line between “teaching about” and “teaching to.”  They have a very skewed view of what it takes to glamorize, endorse, or validate something cultural.

Comment #17: FlipYrWhig  on  02/11  at  09:56 PM

@ MAJeff:  A friend of mine in grad school (slightly before queer theory had become the consensus name for the field) was fond of referring to Luce Iragaray’s _The Sex Which Is Not One_ as _The Sex Which Is Not Fun_.

**giggle**

I’m teaching some Charles Lemert this semester. He’s got a segment from Bourdieu in one of the chapters for class yesterday. Upon reading it all I could think was, “damn, that’s some French writing there.”

Comment #18: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  02/11  at  10:01 PM

“Don’t talk about it or they’ll do it.”

Well, there is also the flip side of this - “don’t talk about it or they will know it when they see it” as in “Senator Craig sure is a closet case”.

Comment #19: Ms Kate  on  02/11  at  10:27 PM

Oh, and where was Deliverance set again?

Comment #20: Ms Kate  on  02/11  at  10:29 PM

There’s long been a similar battle against “multicultural studies” departments….especially with fields ending with “studies” for decades…..especially from those who insist that studying the Western canon/classics is the definitive means of becoming well-educated and/or those who believe college should be nothing more than simple vocational training.  rolleyes

Someone should ask those who believe in the latter how would they deal with vocationally trained college/school grads who come back irate when they graduate only to find their skills are woefully inadequate/obsolete for the job market they ended up in and/or the job(s) they’ve been training for have been outsourced overseas as several of my younger friends experienced in the wake of the dotcom bust of 2001. 

In most places you can fire tenured faculty either for moral turpitude or for bona fide financial distress of the institution, which in some cases includes abolishing the department they’re in, other cases not. (You can tell my parents worked in academia, can’t you?) And moral turpitude has to be a really good one—being the perp in a sexual harassment case doesn’t come close.

And even if they abolished departments, many colleges will do their best to stick the remaining tenured profs from such departments in “related departments” to avoid any wrongful dismissal suits/arguments.  This usually works well if they are actually placed in a department whose field is closely related to their abolished department’s.  When it is not…...it is not pleasant….either for the other Profs in the department the displaced tenured prof is placed in….or more importantly….the students….

Comment #21: exholt  on  02/11  at  10:41 PM

Reading Bodies that Matter made me feel more like beating Judith Butler to death with her own book

Am I the only person on the planet (aside from Judith herself, obviously) who actually likes, understands, and agrees with Judith Butler?

Comment #22: The Opoponax  on  02/11  at  11:04 PM

Am I the only person on the planet (aside from Judith herself, obviously) who actually likes, understands, and agrees with Judith Butler?

The good ideas are there. Just horribly written.

Comment #23: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  02/11  at  11:05 PM

Well, Reagan and his reaction to HIV/AIDS does give them a target. (I was happy the day he died.)

One of my favorite political cartoons on any subject ever:
http://www.thepaincomics.com/weekly040609.htm

Comment #24: LauraB  on  02/11  at  11:06 PM

Yeah, junk food is an acceptable pleasure precisely because it makes you fat; that way, you’re properly punished for having enjoyed yourself for a minute or two.

Which, of course, is yet another reason we’re supposed to hate French people.  They eat really good “junk” in moderation, and thus get to enjoy themselves and also not get fat, to paraphrase that horrible-yet-kind-of-sensible fad diet book of a few years ago.  What’s the point of having fun in moderation?  You’ll NEVER be properly punished that way!

Comment #25: The Opoponax  on  02/11  at  11:08 PM

LauraB, that’s fantastic. I still wish I could get a copy of the image that was in Benneton’s Colours magazine showing Reagan’s face covered with Kaposi’s lesions.  It would be framed in my (eventual) office, along with my Wellston yard sign.

Comment #26: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  02/11  at  11:10 PM

And to combine both intellectual feminism/queer theory and French people into one post:

I would, in honor of my screen-name, like to throw the work of Monique Wittig out there.  For those who aren’t already familiar.

Comment #27: The Opoponax  on  02/11  at  11:10 PM

Oh, lord: Butler *and* Bordieu? That was three weeks in hell in grad school. Irigaray at least knew what panache was.

Comment #28: felagund  on  02/11  at  11:10 PM

Oh, lord: Butler *and* Bordieu? That was three weeks in hell in grad school. Irigaray at least knew what panache was.

REally, though, is there anyone worse than Baudrillard?

Comment #29: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  02/11  at  11:21 PM

“The only officially permissible pleasures in American life are those of eating food that’s bad for you and consumerism.”

What about sports and shows like American Idol?  Of course, I guess their real purpose, and other forms of entertainment as well, is to keep American consumerism on a rolling boil…

Comment #30: MikeEss  on  02/12  at  12:18 AM

Of course, I guess their real purpose, and other forms of entertainment as well, is to keep American consumerism on a rolling boil…

Hell, yes.  Take a look at the entire Bravo network. I dunno if anyone else here is a fan of Top Chef, but it’s really an orgy of product placement. Not only do we have Glad sponsoring the show and providing money for the winner—and being consistently in shot—but we also have the ongoing references to GE appliances, shopping at Whole Foods, T-Mobile devices for communicating with family, and whatever the hell vehicles they’re always in while going to various locations. Restaurant wars brings us to Pier One, and every episode has a new guest judge advertising his/her restaurant and/or cookbooks.  Food and Wine Magazine and the Aspen festival, are noted at the beginning of every episode. Swanson stocks and Diet Dr. Pepper show up on a regular basis—on both the show and the web site.

Top Design and Project Runway are exactly the same.  The old Queer Eye for the Straight Guy was little more than training heterosexual men in lifestyle consumption.

And all of them are pleasurable as hell.

Comment #31: MAJeff, the God of Biscuits  on  02/12  at  12:28 AM

There was a chapter of my MA thesis that I called “Don’t talk about it or they’ll do it.”

Y’know, once I figured that out about folks who subscribe to that line of thinking I was even more puzzled.

‘Cuz how did we know how to be gay before it was talked about like it’s talked about these days?

How did I know on my 12th birthday at my slumber party? (Not that any of us *did* anything - I just suddenly got all red in the face looking at one of them.)

No one talked about it with me / around me / in the media in 1977 in the Tidewater area. And I sure wasn’t “recruited.”

Oh, wait. I know: Satan!

Too bad I don’t believe in their book, eh?

Comment #32: teac  on  02/12  at  12:51 AM

REally, though, is there anyone worse than Baudrillard?

I don’t remember Deleuze and Guattari being a helluva lot of fun.  Bourdieu, though, I don’t remember having a problem with.  But this is getting close to 15 years ago for me.

Comment #33: FlipYrWhig  on  02/12  at  02:28 AM

i must scare the hell out of repTugs;
not only am i back in college, and ENJOY going to school, but my numer one hobby, the thing that i love to do the most, the thing my last shrink told me i was actually *addicted* to, is reading.

and, yeah, crack would be cheaper. but not, i think, more fun.

Comment #34: denelian  on  02/12  at  04:10 AM

denelian, libraries will just *give* you your fix. They charge you if you don’t return it on time, but there are ways to renew your book by phone or online in most systems these days.
It’s damn good to get my fix even though I’m broke. :D
I’m reading Le Carre’s first, now. And there’s some Octavia Butler in my library(sought out after reading so many Pandagonia’s recommending her), and Amanda’s book was just one town over.

Comment #35: Samantha Vimes  on  02/12  at  06:32 AM

denelian, libraries will just *give* you your fix.

Pity. Take my word for it, being the Pusher Man doesn’t pay that well with this business model.

Comment #36: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  02/12  at  06:39 AM

“[P]roblems arise when [Professors] are held accountable for the wrong things to the wrong people. When scholarship—which is not intended to produce a profit—is tossed to the market. When academic writing—which is neither conceived nor written for a wide readership—is held accountable to a general audience.”  Gideon Lewis-Kraus, In the Penthouse of the Ivory Tower, C-Theory July 04

It’s the protections provided by the tenure system that have allowed pure research to exist in our universities. Remove these protections and our best minds will be diverted to producing a growing catalog of mass-market kitsch like cheese-in-a-can and the Salad-Shooter.

Comment #37: BobbyV  on  02/12  at  08:25 AM

and I sure wasn’t “recruited.”

That’s their answer - they’d think you were recruited.  Probably by some gay elementary school teacher, daycare employee, or possibly Teh Ebul Preverted Papists.

Comment #38: The Opoponax  on  02/12  at  10:35 AM

How did I know on my 12th birthday at my slumber party? (Not that any of us *did* anything - I just suddenly got all red in the face looking at one of them.)

I remember a program - forget when and where it was - where they had a hater on blathering on and on about choosing a lifestyle blahblahblah.  The older gay guy they had in the group asked him one simple question:

“When did you decide to pursue a heterosexual life style”

(hater) What?

(gay) when did you decide that you wanted to be straight?

The hater was, of course, stumbling over himself to give an answer to that.  Then the gay guy pointed out that HE never “decided” to be gay, just like the straight guy never decided to be sraight.

Comment #39: Ms Kate  on  02/12  at  10:36 AM

and, yeah, crack would be cheaper. but not, i think, more fun.

When I was backpacking, I decided that the best way to feed my reading habit would be to buy/trade/swap/beg/borrow books as I went, and leave everything behind as I finished with it.  This didn’t pan out very well (who knew high quality English-language books were so thin on the ground in Asia? raspberry ), and I ended up just buying a lot of books, which ended up being basically disposable* because I didn’t have room to lug extraneous paperbacks around Asia.

In the end, I realized that my reading habit was exponentially more expensive than my fellow backpackers’ alcohol, tobacco, and hasish habits.  I could have doped my way across Asia for cheaper than it cost to keep myself in reading material.

* However, my status as the Johnny Appleseed of high quality English-language literature among the Asian backpacking scene is pretty romantic, as such things go.

Comment #40: The Opoponax  on  02/12  at  11:12 AM

Do all the books people read in grad school have pet names? (In my day, it was just Blindness and Insult. And I’ll see your french theorists and raise you Marxism and Domination.)

Comment #41: paul  on  02/12  at  11:37 AM

Oh, and keep in mind folks that these Georgia lawfakers hell-bent on ... um ... deliverance from Teh Geh look doubly stupid when they squeal like pigs about these areas of study when you consider this one thing:

MAJeff is a sociologist studying Queer Theory at a Catholic University.

Comment #42: Ms Kate  on  02/12  at  11:40 AM

For those interested, here’s the follow up to the original piece.

Apparently, the Georgia State profs laid a very polite smackdown on Representative Numbnuts (R-Headuptheass).  So, as one would expect he ran to the usual idiot politician cop-out in such a situation, claiming he “never specifically accused GSU of anything.”

There is a history of contention specifically between GSU and the gaggle of fools who occupy Georgia’s legislature [my own theory is that it has something to do with the school’s lack of a football team].  As a GSU alum, I am simultaneously pissed that these professors had to waste their time explaining themselves, but also proud of them for standing up for themselves, their valuable work and the institution. (Go Panthers!)

Comment #43: MissyAnne Thrope  on  02/12  at  11:46 AM

If you start enjoying reading, you’ll do it more, and if you do it more, then you might learn some stuff, and next thing you know you can’t vote Republican in good conscience anymore.

This is exactly how I went from being a politically moderate Christian in high school to a very liberal atheist in college. I started reading things about politics and learned stuff.

This fits nicely with the authoritarian mindset: The “best” (or “right”) way to get through life is to obey authority figures (the President, God, the Pope, etc). When people get too smart—-or when they figure out that they can think for themselves, and don’t necessarily need to rely on authority figures for guidance—-they tend to stop listening to the “guidance” of the (white, straight, wealthy male) authority figures. Such a reliance on one’s own rational faculties also tends to undermine the claim that we can’t be moral without religion (a lot of the conservatives I’ve encountered don’t seem to be able to even determine what’s moral/immoral, ethical/unethical, without reference to The Bible, etc, which amounts to another appeal to authority).

Comment #44: rx7ward  on  02/12  at  11:55 AM

I dunno if anyone else here is a fan of Top Chef, but it’s really an orgy of product placement.

I really can’t believe how bad it’s gotten this season. Now that Jamie’s gone, I don’t care who wins anymore and don’t pay attention, but especially in the Diet Dr. Pepper one, even the contestants couldn’t keep the disgust out of their voices when they mentioned the product, which I’m sure has to be against the rules. And it’s not like they ever use the stupid product in any of their dishes, being actual chefs and all.

Comment #45: junk science  on  02/12  at  12:04 PM

When people get too smart—-or when they figure out that they can think for themselves, and don’t necessarily need to rely on authority figures for guidance—-they tend to stop listening to the “guidance” of the (white, straight, wealthy male) authority figures.

Which is what the “forbidden Tree Of Knowledge” narrative strain in Genesis has always smacked of, to me.  Of course I’m sure that’s filtered through millennia of authoritarian bullcrap, and probably had nothing at all to do with the original intent of that particular creation myth.  But every time I hear the story of The Fall, I can’t help but interpreting it that way.

Comment #46: The Opoponax  on  02/12  at  12:26 PM

As if humanities departments were just crawling with people in gender studies. My personal impression is that they’re not. (I’d be delighted if statistics proved me wrong.) Gender is certainly established category of analysis in the humanities but is not actually all that trendy or especially well represented in publications.

But gender scholars are the people they’re going for first. As far as historical scholarship goes—which is what I know best—they won’t rest until they’ve eliminated every cultural, social, and intellectual historian (at every intellectual historian who isn’t an apologist for empire or a religious lunatic), leaving only a few military/diplomatic historians (and only the ones who celebrate great white leaders) to drone on about battles and treaties.

Comment #47: wapsie  on  02/12  at  12:35 PM

Errata: “an established category”, “at least every intellectual historian”. Sorry.

Comment #48: wapsie  on  02/12  at  12:37 PM

Gender is certainly established category of analysis in the humanities but is not actually all that trendy or especially well represented in publications.

It seemed pretty trendy at my undergrad, but then again:

1. I was a newly-out social sciences major minoring in Women’s Studies (which meant that all my friends were as obsessed about queer theory as I was),

2. I went to a very, very liberal school which was a hotbed for soc. science and humanities.

3. Said school is located in New York City, which is definitely where you want to be if you’re a social scientist doing research on gender and sexuality and ever need to get out “in the field” at all.  We have lots of trannies, prostitutes, fetishists, etc. for you to do research on.

I can’t imagine that GSU is a hotbed of queer theorists, though, you’re right.

Comment #49: The Opoponax  on  02/12  at  12:59 PM

Somewhat off-topic, but I thought Pandagonians would love this.

Comment #50: MissPrism  on  02/12  at  01:57 PM

As if humanities departments were just crawling with people in gender studies. My personal impression is that they’re not. (I’d be delighted if statistics proved me wrong.) Gender is certainly established category of analysis in the humanities but is not actually all that trendy or especially well represented in publications.

Would you say that’s because fields such as Gender Studies have been marginalized in the “Academic Ghetto” alongside other fields with names ending in “Studies”?

Despite having attended a private liberal arts college with a progressive radical-left politically activist student body and a third-party rating as one of the most GBLT friendly campuses in the US….I recalled plenty of on-campus demonstrations decrying the lack of a Queer Studies major/department by GBLT students and their allies. 

Also, there were only a handful of Gender Studies faculty when I attended and I recalled they received a lot of flak not only from your typical narrow-minded conservatives, but also from many classmates because the curricula at the time was perceived as too Ameri-centric and too centered on the experienced of upper/middle-class White women and thus…perpetuating White privilege.

Comment #51: exholt  on  02/12  at  03:50 PM

I can’t imagine that GSU is a hotbed of queer theorists, though, you’re right.

The Opoponax,

Then again, there were many people I’ve met who heard a little about my undergrad were shocked to find that it was located in Northeast Ohio*...not exactly known as an hotbed of American liberal politics, especially considering it is not too far from where “Joe The Plumber/Pundit/Wannabe Journalist/Political Advisor” is based. 


* Most people of the type mentioned above assumed it was “another Northeast private liberal arts college”.

Comment #52: exholt  on  02/12  at  03:59 PM

I recalled plenty of on-campus demonstrations decrying the lack of a Queer Studies major/department by GBLT students and their allies.

Our queer studies type professors usually were in the more “traditional” department that their area came under.  LGBT lit professors were in the English department, for instance.  I was in anthropology, and there was a pretty overwhelming queer theory presence in our department, with similar numbers in the sociology department. 

However, we did have quite a few other “studies” departments - Women’s Studies, African-American and Caribbean Studies, Latin-American Studies.  Most of the professors in those departments also taught classes in more traditional departments, and “studies” oriented courses were often cross-listed between the “studies” departments and the more traditional disciplines.  Which is how I became a Women’s Studies minor, actually.

To me, looking back at how my alma mater did it, it seems like a much better idea to make room for research on non-male/white/heterosexual/etc. subjects within the traditional academic department structure than to have multiple special departments for the “studies” and keep the other humanities departments focusing on the dominant white/male/hetero “canon” type stuff. 

Another thing that worked well at my undergrad college was General Education requirements that put a heavy focus on humanities coursework pertaining to “minorities”.  Which supplied a constant demand of students to the “studies” courses, thus putting pressure on the departments to make room in their faculties for tenured professors who concentrated in those areas.

But, again, I went to a lefty school in NYC.  I doubt GSU and other heartland land grant schools are doing this sort of thing.

Comment #53: The Opoponax  on  02/12  at  04:08 PM

Exholt, you went to Oberlin.  There are left-leaning private liberal arts colleges all over the US, including quite a few in traditionally conservative areas.

Comment #54: The Opoponax  on  02/12  at  04:10 PM

Exholt, you went to Oberlin.

I deduced that when she said her school had a conservatory. Frankly, I had always pegged her as a Swarthmoreite. (also explains a lot of her bad experiences with the private-school kids: Oberlin gave up need-blind admissions years ago).

At my school, the humanities were not front-and-center. As a consequence, the department was allowed to give a wide berth to professors with different interests without attracting too much bad attention it…. people were able to pursue their “XYZ Studies” interests under the umbrella of more traditional departments or within interdisciplinary departments that tended to fall under the “we don’t know what to do with you, but your work is interesting” section for professors.

Comment #55: Tyro  on  02/12  at  04:52 PM

The Opoponax,

My point was that one shouldn’t assume that because a given school…public or private is located in a traditionally conservative area….that there are practically no chances of there being Queer/Gender or any other “studies” fields being taught/discussed or that schools located in more liberal areas such as the Northeast are necessarily better in this regard….especially considering how such fields are often marginalized even in many elite private institutions in the Northeast.

Comment #56: exholt  on  02/12  at  04:54 PM

My point was that one shouldn’t assume that because a given school…public or private is located in a traditionally conservative area….that there are practically no chances of there being Queer/Gender or any other “studies” fields being taught/discussed or that schools located in more liberal areas such as the Northeast are necessarily better in this regard.

My point wasn’t to assume that there couldn’t possibly be any “studies” professors at GSU.  I was replying to someone else who said queer theory “isn’t exactly trendy” within academia these days.  I said that at my school it was trendy, but then my school is in a lot of ways a special case that isn’t comparable to GSU. 

It has nothing to do with the prevalence of queer theorists in red states.  The bottom line is that Hunter (my college) is kind of a hotbed of that for a variety of very specific reasons, and I had a lot of exposure to it there for additional specific reasons.  So I might see queer theory as “trendy” within academia, whereas someone getting a PhD from Idaho State probably wouldn’t.

Comment #57: The Opoponax  on  02/12  at  05:42 PM

f what you’re studying in school actually interests you and excites your imagination, then you’re probably doing something wrong.

Reminds me of the signs on the walls of Trunchbull Academy in the movie version of Matilda: IF YOU ARE HAVING FUN YOU ARE NOT LEARNING!

Comment #58: kristin  on  02/12  at  06:27 PM

(also explains a lot of her bad experiences with the private-school kids: Oberlin gave up need-blind admissions years ago).

The doing away with need-blind admissions happened a few years after I was admitted.  Though I encountered plenty of overconfident socio-economically privileged private school grads who couldn’t cope with the work when the rubber hit the road….at least many of them were those who were seen as good/excellent admits not only by my undergrad, but also the admission offices of “harder admit” schools like Yale, Brown, Columbia, etc who made a conscious decision to attend my undergrad.

Most of the impact from the eradication of need-blind admissions was felt by younger classmates after I graduated.  Many of them, especially the scholarship students complained about Profs being forced to actively dumb-down intermediate and even some advanced courses because the wealthier, but more academically mediocre students admitted as a result were “too stupid”* to learn the basics from the introductory courses and felt entitled to have their inability to learn the basics the first time catered to in the higher courses. 

* Quoted verbatim from their recounted experiences with most of the wealthy students admitted after elimination of need-blinds admissions.

Comment #59: exholt  on  02/13  at  02:07 AM

Samantha:
Columbus Ohio has the BEST library in the country. i love it, i am there all the time, i almost always have the max books checked, i can “order” books online (and if they, for whatever reason, don’t own a book if i reccomend it they almost always BUY it within a month), i can renew them online for up to 3 months…
in short, the Columbus main Library is almost Heaven. but… this is a VERY big but for me. authors are writing to make money. those whom i enjoy deserve to have their job paid for. this is how i think of buying books (i was raised on Heinlein, who was very frank about the fact he was writing books for MONEY, and that the best way to praise a book was to BUY it, the height of flattery, etc). and, i am sometimes embarrased to admit, its the one place where i allow myself to be a collector and pack-rat; i am VERY proud of my library, and i love adding new books, new loves, so i can look at them whenever i want, i can re-read them, i don’t have to wait or return it. i love knowing that i am helping a person whose writing inspires me to continue in her/his chosen career, that my buy a book is helping to further and extend an art. if i were rich i would quickly become broke as i bought every book i ever liked, and then bought every book i think i MIGHT like…
but, oh yes, the Library is my Friend smile

Oppo: i am so jealous! this is now a life goal of mine, to do what you did although probably not in Asia, i have a fascination with the Axum Empire (Etheopia today) and can now see my self wandering through ruins by day, leaving a trail of Sci-Fi by night. !!! thank you for the inspiration!

Comment #60: denelian  on  02/13  at  05:06 AM

I took Human Sexuality in college at Pomona College, was a very progressive course.  I guess that’s because it was a private school and they can do whatever they want.  I can’t wrap my mind around how biased an education the right wing seems to want to deliver.  I read a great idea in the new book Thinking Big about improving the reputation of community colleges and increasing the programs that link between high schools and public secondary education.  I think this is a great way to get people more educated - but reading the above I wonder if that wouldn’t put the curriculum further into the hands of lawmakers rather than educators?  What do you think?

Comment #61: KoKo  on  02/13  at  05:03 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.