November 13, 2010

I'm shocked, shocked to learn that semi-clad models are writhing in the law library!

"... Brooklyn Law School officials rented Diesel its library expecting a tasteful photo shoot for a jeans ad -- but what they got was a steamy display of writhing young models in skimpy lingerie grinding against books and computers."

Wait. Why did they expect a tasteful photo shoot?
"It's gross. I work on those computers every day!" fumed a female student, referring to a shot showing two bra- and panty-clad women climbing over the machines toward an open-mouthed man....

The frisky photos, shot last spring, show off the hot bodies of male and female models as they prowl around the library's floors, tables and bookshelves -- while wearing tight-fitting panties bearing various seductive messages.
If the law school — I emphasize law school — did not impose restrictions when it took Diesel's money then it has nothing to complain about.
"We are as shocked and mortified as you must be by these photographs," interim dean Michael Gerber wrote in an e-mail yesterday to students, faculty and staff.
"When the school gave its permission to do the shoot, the school was assured that the photos would be in good taste. They are not."
"Assured" "good taste" — that's not specific enough to make me believe Diesel violated a contractual term. The school took Diesel's money and had to know that any advertising for clothing for young adults is likely to involve some display of sexuality. Especially if the scene is a library. That's what I'd expect.

What exactly was the school assured of? The models aren't naked. They've got on underwear. And what is even so gross and shocking about this? Man, Diesel is getting way more great publicity than its stupid underpants deserve. Where did this controversy really start? I'm inclined to suspect that the administration is only shocked* after the fact and only because some students have managed to create the impression that the school might be accused of contributing to a "hostile environment" form of sexual harassment.

As for the young woman who is grossed out that a model in panties writhed in the vicinity of a computer she uses... do you realize how many people type on those things with hands they didn't wash after they went to the bathroom?

----------------------------------------------

*Shocked!

40 comments:

traditionalguy said...

Sex sells. Still the decorum of Judges Courts that Law Schools live off of demands a little more respect than this. Fire the weak minded Administrators!

shoutingthomas said...

Clearly the most interesting thing that has happened at Brooklyn Law in ages.

A few students probably even woke up from their naps.

The legal issues don't interest me, because legal issues (almost without exception) are boring as hell.

When are you going to get around to talking about the godawful boredom of law school and practicing law?

You're bored. That's why you put your energy into this blog.

edutcher said...

I take it Diesel makes ladies' undies. If so, given the competition by Victoria's Secret and Frederick's, it wasn't going to be women in hoop skirts and bustles.

I think, however, Ann forgets that it was probably administrators - business types - not lawyers who inked the deal; thus, budding Althouses, holding their feminist dudgeon appropriately high can harrumph to each other that they never did anything like that in the stacks.

EDH said...

Issue presented: whether those Diesel briefs were indeed legal briefs.

Alex said...

I think, however, Ann forgets that it was probably administrators - business types - not lawyers who inked the deal; thus, budding Althouses, holding their feminist dudgeon appropriately high can harrumph to each other that they never did anything like that in the stacks.

Yes the frumpy types never have to worry about being hot, sexy or anything like that.

William said...

I have always wondered why libraries were so redolent of sex. A coed in a sweater reaching for a book can inspire more fantasies than a courtesan in a corset asking you to go upstairs. The sensual world is most intrusive when we seek to seperate ourselves from it. They shouldn't stop with banning photo shoots. They should ban coed libraries. Perhaps they should ban libraries altogether.

Kirby Olson said...

How much did they get for allowing the shoot? How much would they lose if they are now sued by feminists for allowing the shoot? That's the calculus.

They wanted the money, but now they don't want to part with any of it.

It might make certain very dumb men think the library is a brothel with everyone in it fair game, but how many sexual crimes actually occur in libraries anyway? If the rate climbs, I'd think the administration is responsible for allowing the shoot, but that still doesn't mean they are responsible. Each person is responsible for following the law.

You can create a climate of no limits, I suppose, but on the other hand, that doesn't mean that each person isn't still responsible for their behavior, and for remaining within the guidelines of the school.

Promiscuous behavior is highlighted by pushing against a restrictive atmosphere, and by breaking of taboos. Doing something like this in a law library is similar to doing this in a church -- for the liberals, this is the ultimate -- an orgy on an altar, or an orgy on top of a law book. This is why they love to have discos and orgies inside of abandoned churches.

Liberals love to mock and offend in the name of showing their enlightened lack of respect for others. At the same time there is another wing of liberalism that wants a total cessation of heterosexual sex. So it's a scuffle within wings of the liberal attitude.

campy said...

What are you doing blogging while the Badgers are playing!

Jason (the commenter) said...

"It's gross. I work on those computers every day!" fumed a female student...

"I can't have sex on that table now that I know models have been all over it!

edutcher said...

Alex said...

I think, however, Ann forgets that it was probably administrators - business types - not lawyers who inked the deal; thus, budding Althouses, holding their feminist dudgeon appropriately high can harrumph to each other that they never did anything like that in the stacks.

Yes the frumpy types never have to worry about being hot, sexy or anything like that.


Which is why they choose to be frumps.

PatHMV said...

I work as an attorney in a university system office that has to review contracts proposed to be entered by our law school. I'm astounded, at times, by the exceedingly poor quality of the contracts sent over by some of my former law professors.

They're undoubtedly outstanding at contract theory, but when it comes to preparing decent content for actual contracts, they leave a lot to be desired. They fail to consider issues like ownership of intellectual property, insurance requirements, potential violations of ethics rules, you name it.

Though actually, the problem is broader. Public employees tend to have this weird mythology that businesses never negotiate hard details. They want their institutions to be seen as "business friendly," and so they are willing to just give away the farm in order to get the deal done.

former law student said...

Did the professor spend any time in the law library when she taught there? I wonder if there was any student writhing going on.

In my day study groups resulted in some pairing off, but 1L-2L couples were common, too. I don't recall any PDA in the library.

former law student said...

Yes the frumpy types never have to worry about being hot, sexy or anything like that.

Which is why they choose to be frumps.


Don't rush to judgment. Most of my female classmates frumped it up during the day, undergoing startling transformations for the evening social events, or for OCI. Compare iconic Althouse -- while pleasant looking she certainly is not vamping it up in that picture.

Fred4Pres said...

This is more about political correctness run amok...

and dare I say a few female co-eds who probably couldn't make the cut for the photoshoot? Jealous.

chuck b. said...

"tasteful photo shoot" = no anal.

Mary Beth said...

I watched the video with the article. All of the students that were interviewed on that were black. One had an African (?) accent. This made me wonder if there was some misdirection going on here. Is the administration giving the impression that feminists were complaining while it was Muslims who were offended?

None of the students on the video seemed outraged by this.

Skyler said...

I think the complaining women are really just jealous that their law degree won't earn them as much money as those models make.

Bob_R said...

I'm offended by how ugly the underwear is.

Ann Althouse said...

What the hell are "budding Althouses"?

Ann Althouse said...

"I watched the video with the article. All of the students that were interviewed on that were black. One had an African (?) accent. This made me wonder if there was some misdirection going on here. Is the administration giving the impression that feminists were complaining while it was Muslims who were offended?"

I was reacting to the quotes in the article and hadn't looked at the video. It does seem odd that only black students -- are they all students? -- are interviewed, but they don't seem to mind the photos anyway. That video seemed to be mainly maximizing showing pretty people in their underpants.

Anyway, I don't know who complained and why it got such a defensive response from the administration.

Bob Ellison said...

@Ann Althouse, I didn't know you reproduced that way.

RE: the original subject, I find the subject of "ownership" of colleges and graduate schools. By that I mean the notion held dear by students, faculty, administrators, and alumni that they "own" the institutions to some extent. Each of those groups tends to think it owns more than it does. When I was in college, I thought the faculty was probably #1 and students #2 in de facto ownership of the school, in terms of dignity, culture, and perceived missions. As a non-contributing alumnus, I think I own none of it. I "own" a 250-year-old house, and I don't really think I own it, either.

So when students express shock, shock when something like this Diesel deal happens, I think: kids, soon it won't matter to you. Life goes on; you should, too.

Bob Ellison said...

*find the subject...schools interesting. [left out a word]

jeff said...

I got bookshelves in my house, and a computer or two. If Diesel wants to shoot hot girls in underwear, I am willing to make the sacrifice and allow it in my home. I'm a giver.

Michael Haz said...

So...the Brooklyn Law School can't write a contract that includes its expectations of decorum?

Pathetic.

Nora said...

The underwear is so not sexy that stylists had to create some lewd images with it to actually associate it with sex.

Chase said...

do you realize how many people type on those things with hands they didn't wash after they went to the bathroom

do you realize how many people use the salad bar at your local restaurant with hands they didn't wash after they went to the bathroom?

Fred4Pres said...

"budding Althouses"?


I missed that in my first review of this thread. I am also unsure what it means, even after seeing it in context!

MadisonMan said...

Anyway, I don't know who complained and why it got such a defensive response from the administration.

Maybe it was the administrators' Moms who were complaining.

Re: Germs on keyboards. I've a High School friend who went to eat at a restaurant, but before being seated, used the bathroom, at the same time as some other woman who left without washing hands. Seated by the hostess, my friend came face-to-face with her waitress, the non-handwasher.

High school friend (and husband) left without eating.

traditionalguy said...

I believe that "Budding Althouses" must be those once overbearing purple trees that gardener Meade took on, pruned, and properly fertilized so that they now bloom year round.

Meade said...

campy said...
What are you doing blogging while the Badgers are playing!

Halftime. Badgers in control.

The Crack Emcee said...

The school took Diesel's money and had to know that any advertising for clothing for young adults is likely to involve some display of sexuality.

Because,....?

Oh yea, it's the world the Boomers made!

Of course, there's going to be sex. And you can also expect drug use. Maybe even subversion, right? (Couldn't this be considered subversion of a kind?) Anything else that you - a Boomer - "had to know" that any normal person would never suspect? Like if your grandma goes outside, she'll be robbed?

What a maroon!

Trooper York said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Robin said...

So I figure ... what, a two ranking jump in the US News rankings for Brooklyn?

edutcher said...

Ann Althouse said...

What the hell are "budding Althouses"?

Why budding Althouses are those female law students who dream of dazzling the nation with brilliant Constitutional analysis by day and vamping the night away with travels, photographic masterpieces, and romantic adventures, recounting it all with flair and style on their blogs for their admiring readership.

Trooper York said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Trooper York said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Trooper York said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Joe said...

The school administrators shock and horror is in direct proportion of their worry of being perceived as insensitive. In reality, they don't give a rat's ass.

Compared to what actual students are doing, this was mild.

Goju said...

Better a budding Althouse than a blooming idiot.

ironrailsironweights said...

Guaranteed, every one of the underwear models was shaved.

That goes for the men as well as for the women.

Peter