December 20, 2016

"As I recall, the law school students at the University of Minnesota conducted an annual election — the Plonsker-Baine Poll — to determine the women at the law school whom the men would most like to sleep with."

"The voting was conducted on the law school premises and the results were posted in the law school’s administrative offices. The posted results noted the top 10 women as democratically determined."

So writes Scott Johnson, in a post at Power Line called "The Persistence of 'Locker Room Talk.'" I've quoted the paragraph that jarred me — because it's not about locker room talk at all. It's one thing to say men are going to talk about sex when they are alone with other men — because what fires up male sexuality more than being with other men? — and that it's too repressive and too at war with nature to outlaw it. But it's something else altogether when that male-on-male talk breaks out into the common spaces of an educational institution. Then it's not the male bonding of the locker room, and it can be motivated by an intent to communicate that this is a male-dominated institution where women are subordinate creatures.

126 comments:

Gahrie said...

But it's something else altogether when that male-on-male talk breaks out into the common spaces of an educational institution. Then it's not the male bonding of the locker room, and it can be motivated by an intent to communicate that this is a male-dominated institution where women are subordinate creatures.

The premise of his article is that such behavior would be unthinkable today.

Today our educational institutions are clearly female-dominated institutions where men (especially White, heterosexual men) are subordinate creatures.

Ann Althouse said...

"The premise of his article is that such behavior would be unthinkable today."

I know. Something that blatant is unthinkable today. It's unthinkable because of the progress we've made away from that, so you have to credit the people who've worked on the problem for getting us as far as we've gotten. You have to remember the nature of the problem and retain your ability to analyze current situations with reference to the original problem. We are somewhere on a continuum away from that.

rhhardin said...

Think of the parallel: campus beauty contests, homecoming queen in particular.

Given the chance, the men will enter a pig or other farmyard animal.

If beauty contests are for women, women celebrating their attractiveness to men, the pig is men's response, namely that you're not that great.

So it's free speech.

iowan2 said...

Anthropologically the Human species needs manly men, and feminine females. Our offspring need to be reared with BOTH of those traits. Can single parents succeed? Sure. But we are talking optimum. Yes I have done alot of male bounding, a lot. Maybe 25% is about sex. It is interwoven thru 100% of the conversation. butthere are other manly things that get batted about, honor integrity, faith, humility, hopes, and on, and on, Boys need to be boys. They will make a gun out of anything, and there is no amount of nurture that will ever change nature (the way males think), and our species will go extinct if the academic pinheads would ever move the needle to males and females being the same. Boys will be boys. Every single one of them, and those that claim they have never participated, full on, have repressed memories.
(like every single human trait, excesses are part of the bell curve, they don't disprove the facts)

Otto said...

BS. Stop your kvetching. Bad framing.

Sally327 said...

According to the linked article, the poll was done 30 years ago. I remember 1976 and I would not be surprised if there was push back on that sort of thing back then, being the time of women's liberation as a continuing movement (and before it was completely co-opted by the political left to serve party purposes) and the sexual objectification of women was one of the main themes. Now it would probably be more about hurt feelings, a trigger for women to feel body-shamed.

Would it be okay now as long as the women agreed to participate?

FleetUSA said...

You should have noted the last 2 paragraphs. His point was even girls privately do similar things today.

campy said...

You should have noted the last 2 paragraphs. His point was even girls privately do similar things today.

But they do it to empower themselves and fight Patriarchy, so it's good.

chuck said...

Yeah, definitely uncool to make it public. But with all this talk about men's locker room talk, I'd like to hear more about women's locker room talk. Come on ladies, you know it exists. Us guys are just waiting for the salacious details.

Laslo Spatula said...

I bet a lot of chicks miss this stuff.

At least those in the Top Ten.

If I were in charge of the list I wouldn't specify the top order, only list those in the Top Ten and then have the final rankings be determined by pillow-fights in underwear and high heels.

The winner would feel empowered.

I am Laslo.

Glen Filthie said...

LOL.

I've noticed that as women get older, flabbier and fatter they become more and more offended and resentful of beautiful young women and the men that adore them.

Do try to age gracefully, Althouse. You say things that offend people too.

Original Mike said...

"because what fires up male sexuality more than being with other men? "

For some of us, just about anything else.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Ann Althouse said...

You have to remember the nature of the problem...

What problem?

rhhardin said...

My experience in men's locker rooms is that there's zero discussion of women.

Gahrie said...

What problem?

Men.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Is the problem that women think that men think women are subordinate creatures?

Did anyone ever prohibit the women from conducting a similar poll, and posting the results right next to the Plonsker-Baine Poll?

rhhardin said...

If it's actually sleeping with, you want a conversationalist. The lights are off anyway.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

So was the poll discontinued at the behest of the women in the top ten, or the women not in the top ten? I think we all know the answer to that.

The issue was never that women were subordinate to men. It was that the women not in the top ten were subordinate to the women who were.

Michael said...

Feminism has made good and strong women into weak men. Contrast the women of those days with those of today.

Dad said...

"When I see the moon on the shore, or a piano leg touchin' the floor..."

damikesc said...

Women wanted to be in "all-male" things. They've eliminated most "all-male" things. What did they EXPECT?

Men are who we are.

Why not give men some spaces where they are allowed to not have to worry about not offending women? Given that said comments made in all-men teams made between men lead to women getting said teams suspended and punished, men are the one group required to be polite and nice at all times.

Women crying for the death to all men won't get punished by colleges. A man saying "nice tits" will be.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

rhhardin said...

If it's actually sleeping with, you want a conversationalist. The lights are off anyway.

If it's dating you want a conversationalist. If it's sleeping with you want someone who knows when to shut up. And if you're picking someone to sleep with based on the conversational abilities, it's no wonder you turn off the lights.

Curious George said...

"t's one thing to say men are going to talk about sex when they are alone with other men — because what fires up male sexuality more than being with other men?"

Careful, Althouse.

Wilbur said...

"... men are going to talk about sex when they are alone with other men — because what fires up male sexuality more than being with other men?"

I think you're off-base here. Many men would prefer to talk about sex and lust with the objects of their affection, but women are usually turned off by it. The ick factor, you know.

So they talk about it with their male friends.

rhhardin said...

Appearance doesn't matter up close. It's one eye anyway.

Personality matters a lot. That's why actresses tend to be interchangeable and generic.

Three or four would be nice to meet.

Tank said...

But it's something else altogether when that male-on-male talk breaks out into the common spaces of an educational institution. Then it's not the male bonding of the locker room, and it can be motivated by an intent to communicate that this is a male-dominated institution where women are subordinate creatures. WTF? Men rate women and women rate men. Technology has made it possible to do and communicate this in new ways. This is a case of overthinking a situation.

Laslo Spatula said...

"America, It's Time for 'Big Bukkake Pay Raise’!”

“Tonight our contestant was chosen by you, the viewers, from an online poll of women who entered a contest for a trip to Los Angeles and a chance on a mystery game-show to win half-a-million dollars….”

“Our new contestant works as an accountant for a large company we can't name on television on advice of our lawyers. How are you liking Los Angeles, Mary?”

"I'm enjoying myself, Sam! It’s sunnier than Ohio, that’s for sure. So what game show am I on?”

“Mary, you are on 'Big Bukkake Pay Raise’!”

“Oh God. I thought it would be, like, the ‘Wheel of Fortune’ or something…”

“No, you are with us, Mary, and you now need to kneel in the First-Round Circle of Shame.”

“I don’t know if I can do this, Sam…”

“Sure you can, Mary. America is pulling for you!”

“Okay, I’ll try…”

“Now that Mary is kneeling in the Circle of Shame we bring on the Bukkake Brigade! Oh my, the first man is ALREADY ejaculating!”

“Oh, God. That almost got in my eye, Sam…”

“Hang in there, Mary, only five more men to go!”

“I think I really want to — ewwwwww!”

“Did you see that, America? Mary just got a classic ‘pearl necklace’!”

“This is horrible, Sam…”

“Mary, remember: people at home in Ohio are rooting for you!”

“I don’t want people back home to see this! I wish I never—“

“Wow! Two men at once, right in the face! After the round we’ll HAVE to see that one again in slow-motion…”

“Sam…”

“Only two more to go, Mary — you can do it!”

“This is disgusting, Sam, this is — Ewwwwww!”

“THAT was a Big Load! One of our Brigade must have been saving up for that one!”

“What do I do to get this to stop?”

“You tap out of The Circle, Mary — but there he goes! The last of the Brigade just fired a shot to Mary’s forehead! Mary: you made it! You completed Round One! Now you have to make a Decision…”

“A decision?”

“You can quit now, and choose between two parting gifts, or you can continue to The Firehose Round…”

“I quit, Sam, I quit. What are the gifts?”

“Mary, you can either have a $100 gift-card, or you can get a towel, now.”

“Oh, God. The towel, please: the towel…”

“America, as Mary towels off let’s give her a big round of 'Big Bukkake Pay Raise’ applause! Mary, say ‘Hello’ to the folks in Ohio for us when you get home!”

“I don’t know if I CAN go home…”

“Sure you can, Mary. I know it: you’ve got spunk…”


I am Laslo.

JMS said...

Before he created Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg made a website called Facemash that allowed the men of Harvard to rate their female classmates. According to the movie Social Network, the college shut it down because its popularity overwhelmed the network, not because it was inappropriate. This was in 2003. Can we assume that if Zuckerberg was a Harvard student today, creating the same website, he would be kicked out?

William said...

There's will always be a few traditionalists who want to practice artisanal sex and produce organic babies, but this is not the future of humanity......Among men, the debate will not be about the relative merits of different women but rather about the varying qualities of different sex robots or whether the sex robot experience is superior to that of immersive virtual reality. My bet is on virtual reality. I think VR offers far more exciting possibilities than any single robot. In VR, you can have not just a single robot servicing your needs but an entire world whose purpose is to make you happy.

n.n said...

The traditional standard opposed normalization of denigratory orientations and behaviors. The debasement of human life went hand in hand with the sexual revolution and forcing equivalence of men and women. Unfortunately, the progress of special and peculiar interests has lead to the reconstitution of institutional racism and sexism under class diversity schemes and a pretense of civil rights.

David said...

"The premise of his article is that such behavior would be unthinkable today."

It's completely thinkable today. Young men and young women will always be ranking others by sexual appeal. We are wired to think like that. But we are also socialized not to express every thought that comes to mind in every situation. It's perfectly acceptable to tell that beautiful 1L that you think she is gorgeous and would like to go to bed with her. In the right context, which in this case is very personal and acceptable only on a narrow well prepared ground.

n.n said...

correction: because what fires up male sexuality more than competing with other men... for a woman's hand

tim in vermont said...

Those ten women had their own kind of power. It's not going away, it's just that nobody will be allowed to discuss it.

CJinPA said...

what fires up male sexuality more than being with other men?

Being in mixed company fires up male sexuality. Being with other men just makes you talk about being with some women.

This was a useful post. We spend a lot of time pointing out feminist excess, rightfully so. But it's easy to forget or never learn about the reality of male/female relations in the 20th century. It wasn't even publicly ranking women by "looks," but by sex fantasy, if Johnson is relaying the story accurately. That had to have been humiliating and intimidating.

CJinPA said...

Those ten women had their own kind of power. It's not going away, it's just that nobody will be allowed to discuss it.

Sure they can discuss it, in private.

tim in vermont said...

I always figured that actresses tend to be interchangeable was more to make it easier for women to identify with the girl who gets the alpha male. "Nobody puts Baby in the corner!"

It just works out that guys attraction isn't totally based on looks.

Laslo Spatula said...

I would not have a problem if University Gay men put out a list of the top straight male students they want to have sex with.

Just showing that I am open-minded.

I am Laslo.

tim in vermont said...

For the record, I have to agree that this was over the top. But that judgment comes from accepting a lot of premises that perhaps should not be so cut and dried. A couple centuries have shown that the Shakers got sustainability wrong. Time will tell and we won't live to see it.

Laslo Spatula said...

If women really don't want to be judged by looks they would date more blind men.

Although I bet blind men dig big tits.

I am Laslo.

Mike said...

Just so I'm clear on where Althouse draws the line on Universities allowing public displays: So it's OK for Progressive crybullies to scream at me and call me a murderer, and try to keep Jews out of the University, and for BLM "activists" to rampage through libraries assaulting white students, and for the academy en masse to slander conservatives and disallow voices they disagree with, and to wave Mexican and Palestinian flags while simultaneously forbidding Confederate flags and burning American flags, and for the majority of teachers to preach hatred by saying white people are devils and account for all the world's sins.

But guys should NOT make a list of the hottest ten co-eds and post it publicly.

Calling for murder = OK

Calling chicks hot = bad form

Got it.

There's just one little problem as I see it. Over time, the more boisterous activities described on Powerlineblog have been driven underground but the worst tendencies of the crybullies have been welcomed and encouraged and DOMINATE the campus. Only one side is ever asked to respect the rules of decorum, rules that keep shifting leftward.

Fernandinande said...

this is a male-dominated institution where women are subordinate creatures.

Well, yeah.

Men invented the legal system, men wrote the laws being taught, men designed and built the law school's buildings and infrastructure, and men probably invented the concept of voting.

Larry Nelson said...

I miss 'The Man Show'

PB said...

"The premise of his article is that such behavior would be unthinkable today." Not unthinkable, merely unpublicized or disguised.

People always make preference decisions of the other sex in the process of deciding whom to date/mate. Sometimes it's just importance of certain characteristics and sometimes it's specific individuals. They often describe their rankings/preferences to close friends and often others (Playboy, Cosmo, etc). Some turn it into a multi-billion dollar business and fortune (Facebook, Grinder, etc).

This will always happen until this particular trait is bred out of the human species.

Xmas said...

“Sure you can, Mary. America is pulling for you!”

F*ck you Laslo, f*ck you right in the ear. I'm going to be laughing about that all day.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

PB said...

People always make preference decisions of the other sex in the process of deciding whom to date/mate.

How very heteronormative of you.

tcrosse said...

“Sure you can, Mary. I know it: you’ve got spunk…”

As Lou Grant told Mary Richards....


Big Mike said...

@Sally327, did you go to Badger Rock Elementary? Try doing 2016 minus 30 on your calculator.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Back in the 1970s, the student desks at the University of Minnesota had ashtrays built into them.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

It wasn't unthinkable to the Harvard men's soccer or cross country teams.

mccullough said...

I'm guessing the male law gophers of 40 years ago got together to watch Charlie's Angels every week.

Sebastian said...

@rh: "My experience in men's locker rooms is that there's zero discussion of women." Correct.

@AA: "because what fires up male sexuality more than being with other men?" You may be trolling the commenters, but if not, this must be intended to add to the strangeness of Trump era. Have you ever had a conversation with a heterosexual man about this issue?

@AA: "it can be motivated by an intent to communicate that this is a male-dominated institution where women are subordinate creatures" It can be, but it wasn't. But now all communication at similar institutions intends to communicate that they are women-dominated where men are subordinate creatures--institutions perfectly happy to forget the "nature of the problem."

Jupiter said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
traditionalguy said...

Men are hunter gatherer bands. But living in a puritanical civil social order to a 20 year old is like holding his breath.

They exhale by discussing imaginary hunts of game...and indoor game is labeled. If you would prefer eunuchs, then exile the men from college...oh yeah that is what Title9 is doing. Faster, faster, there are men on the loose.

Skipper said...

Is it possible there is an inverse relationship between "horseplay" such as Scott describes and actual sexual assault (such as the recent alleged behavior of the Minnesota football players)?

Sally327 said...

"@Sally327, did you go to Badger Rock Elementary? Try doing 2016 minus 30 on your calculator."

Ha! I'm in denial about my age. I want it to be only 30 years ago.

Fernandinande said...

Sebastian said...
@rh: "My experience in men's locker rooms is that there's zero discussion of women." Correct.


Correct...though I've always tried to avoid locker rooms because I'm a-scared there might be someone like Laslo lurking in there.

mtrobertslaw said...

Following the logic here, if the poll was to list the 10 women that men would least like to sleep with, there would be no problem. And the women on the list should be quite satisfied they were not being objectified as sexual playthings.

Jupiter said...

Ann Althouse said...

"You have to remember the nature of the problem and retain your ability to analyze current situations with reference to the original problem. We are somewhere on a continuum away from that."

Indeed we are.

The Spartan males lived in separate housing, and mostly visited the women's housing to mate. The boys lived with the men, and intergenerational homosexual relations were common and accepted. It is not recorded whether this arrangement arose in response to some Peloponnesian form of feminism.

Michael K said...

"We are somewhere on a continuum away from that."

Yes, "we" are on a continuum to a place where "women's" sports are dominated by transexuals who used to be men.

It's already begun. Renee Richards was a harbinger but it will grow.

I see a future in which most female sports will be dominated by trannies.

Determined was a good word to describe Jillian Bearden, who won the women’s 106-mile race in 4:36.07.

Bearden, who is transgender, rode for the Southern Arizona Gender Alliance — SAGA — to promote gender inclusion within cycling. Saturday marked the 36-year-old’s first El Tour, which is Southern Arizona’s largest participatory sporting event.


I expect the lesbians who dominate rugby for women to be displaced as this trend accelerates.

The only place they won;t displace "cis-gender women" will be men's locker room talk.

buster said...

Why is the concept of human nature so hard to accept?

Big Mike said...

@Althouse, what you won't like admitting is that lists like the one in your post weren't ended by the outrage of women on the list -- they were ended by the outrage of women who weren't on the list.

Rick said...

It's interesting to note the difference between this post and the last. Apparently when fragile women are potentially effected we must design the system for the most easily wilted flower, while when men are potentially impacted we should ridicule instead of protect.

Owen said...

Laslo: threadwinner? Heck, you've retired the trophy with that riff.

Paul Zrimsek said...

Men are to Right-Thinking People what gays have traditionally been to Wrong-Thinking People. They'll generously allow you to be what you are, but you're expected to show your gratitude by being discreet instead of all in-your-face about it.

On the plus side, a locker room's a lot bigger than a closet.

Fernandinande said...

Big Mike said...
@Althouse, what you won't like admitting is that lists like the one in your post weren't ended by the outrage of women on the list -- they were ended by the outrage of women who weren't on the list.


Oh, I dunno, I can't think of any circumstances in which persons of gender voluntarily compete to be voted for and selected as the prettiest one at a county fair, in a state, in a country or even in the whole universe without some singin' 'n' dancin'. It's naughty to omit the singin' 'n' dancin'.

tcrosse said...

Women are fully capable of Locker Room conversation. At one time I had been married to a woman with a Womens' Studies degree from U of Minnesota. She and her friends would have the most graphic discussions of the men in their lives, their endowments, and their skills. I suppose it was Empowering for them.

Kevin said...

Perhaps they were just celebrating the fact in earlier times there were not 10 women at MN Law from which to make a list?

Fernandinande said...

Gahrie said...
The premise of his article is that such behavior would be unthinkable today.


Saudi Arabia is more progressive and morally advanced than the University of Minnesota law school:

Only moral beauty counts in Saudi Arabian pageant"

Saudi morality police ban beauty pageant in holy city of Mecca, citing Sharia law

Smilin' Jack said...

I know. Something that blatant is unthinkable today. It's unthinkable because of the progress we've made away from that, so you have to credit the people who've worked on the problem for getting us as far as we've gotten.

You can't say something is unthinkable without having thought it, so obviously there is still more progress to make before we reach 1984.

eric said...

Something that blatant is unthinkable today. It's unthinkable because of the progress we've made away from that,

No matter how much "progress" is made, the fundamental nature of men isn't going to change.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Please, Ann, you're fucking animals, like we're fucking animals. I remember in high school overhearing a girl telling another girl about waking up naked bent over the hood of her car with the keys up her ass. You're animals, just like us, only smaller and weaker and with minds that are similar but not identical. An orthodox Jew is wise to thank his Maker daily to have been born a man.

Evolution and biology have dictated that you be treated with certain égards, i.e., not as prey, and that you and we fulfil complementary roles, but you don't care about evolution or roles anymore. You just want to win. You want to take. And you want us to give, to lose. You want power and never mind what you'll do with it.

There is a certain analogy to liberalism here.

Trump is the embodiment of the lesson that liberalism has gone too far.

What will be yours?

Mark said...

It's one thing to say men are going to talk about sex when they are alone with other men — because what fires up male sexuality more than being with other men?

Not really. In my experience, it is a rare thing for sex to be a real topic of conversation, except in a passing way, when men get together, especially the personal aspects of it.

Basil said...

Professor Emeritus, why are you such a prude? The left has been telling us for decades that sex is good, sexual it is liberating for women and that sex is nothing that requires emotional connections.

Now it's all Victorian England again. How is one supposed to keep up?

Are women sexually empowered adults or the weaker sex, unable to function without a man (or man substitute, like government) to protect her?

Michael K said...

She and her friends would have the most graphic discussions of the men in their lives, their endowments, and their skills.

I remember in college, back in the 1950s, we had a guy in my fraternity who was seven feet tall. He was so big that when waterskiing he could only be got up on the skis by a powerful inboard speedboat. He weighed about 290.

We were standing on a street on Balboa Island one day when two girls walked by, took a long look at him and said to each other, "Are you thinking what I'm thinking?" and giggled.

n.n said...

Female chauvinists and their male chauvinist counterparts, who judge others by the "color of their skin", as colorful clump of cells, and as life unworthy of life are comparable to other class diversitists, including racists, "="s, and amoral sanctimonious hypocrites from the Pro-Choice/abortion and Pro-Choice/diversity Church.

where "women's" sports are dominated by transexuals who used to be men

The transgender/homosexual orientation is less disruptive than the transgender/crossover orientation in that it does not gain unfair, unnatural advantage over the opposite sex in Pro-Choicer/diversity schemes.

Paul Zrimsek said...

Please, Ann, you're fucking animals, like we're fucking animals.

Too much information.

Drago said...

eric: "No matter how much "progress" is made, the fundamental nature of men isn't going to change"

It is a very very difficult concept to grapple with, but the reality is that Western women and their "progress" is due to men allowing it to occur.

And it could go back to something very different (as it existed forever) at the drop of a hat.

This is simply human nature. We'd like to think we have progressed beyond this. In the same way we thought we were in a post-history world after the Berlin wall. Or post-racial after 2008.

But those were child-like beliefs.

ISIS (and so much of the world) is showing just how close to the 7th century we still are and I refuse to accept the modern leftist lies to the contrary.

Real American said...

So men can only act like men in private? If any of that masculinity busts out into the open that oppresses the ladies?

Let's not forget one of Rush's undeniable truths of life: feminism was created to give ugly women access to the mainstream.

The objection is not about being on the list, which really just identifies the best looking ladies. It's about being left off. Being on the list is a compliment and should be taken in the spirit intended, even if it's on the immature side.

Qwinn said...

In the context of the continuous whining from the left about "Privilege" stands the indisputable fact that NO category has more privilege than a beautiful woman. Their privilege is basically infinite in Western society. Who else can basically just abandon their lives and shack up in someone else's at a moment's notice?

This obvious truth is inconvenient to the leftist narrative, and therefore privilege via feminine beauty is (as virtually everything else) under attack, as seen here.


Birkel said...

https://mobile.twitter.com/MTVNews/status/810960588973035520

Men keeping lists of women 40 years ago: awful.
Celebrities condemning people based on race and gender today: no biggie.

ebartley said...

On the one hand, I appreciate the distinction between what men say among other men and what men say among women. On the other hand, it's only fair to make the distinction if you allow men to have some spaces from which women are excluded, and the fight against those has gone back as far as I can remember. If we won't let men have their time alone, we have to accept a certain coarsening of the public discourse as some of what would be said in private seeps out into the public. Perhaps that is the correct trade-off -- certainly it's plausible that literally not being admitted into whatever physical edifice the old boys' club had would be a disadvantage when competing with a member. But let us admit it is a trade-off.

glenn said...

I like what my grandmother said. "I was 16 when I married your grandfather, you aren't doing anything we didn't do, we just spent more time doing it and a lot less time talking about it."

Lewis Wetzel said...

Men talking the way they talk when women are present: good.
Men talking the way they talk when no women are present: bad.
Now change the sexes in the two sentences above, and you will see how toxic and bigoted feminists's attitude towards men has become.

rcocean said...

Good God, what a bunch of crass pigs. So, it wasn't "the Most beautiful girls", but "the girls I most want to fuck" and it was posted "in the Admin area".

Just confirms my low opinion of lawyers.

Of course, most young men like to rate young women on their attractiveness but they aren't so vulgar. If that's what the "old days" were about then I'm glad they're gone. But somehow I feel that Law school was an outlier in many ways.

BudBrown said...

I'm not a denier, just skeptical. 40 year memory? Any other corroboration?
Maybe there was some list and some vote but I doubt the one as recalled passed muster with profs and deans. Well, it's Minnesota, Swedish babe country
so maybe ...but I thought up there, September to May, you'd be lucky to see a
woman's nose outside the winter gear. Maybe it was a hottest chapped lip contest.
Ruth B. Ginsburg spoke at their 1976 commencement. Ushered in by the Prince of
Denamrk's March. Sounds pretty four square.

kentuckyliz said...

tcrosse said: "At one time I had been married to a woman with a Womens' Studies degree from U of Minnesota."

1. Are you crazy?!
2. No wonder that's past tense.

rcocean said...

Nothing wrong with locker room talk - just keep it in the locker room.

Of course, if you're a Howard Stern fan, this must all seem normal.

tcrosse said...

1. Are you crazy?!
2. No wonder that's past tense.


1. When I was young and foolish, I was young and foolish.
2. Decades past, thank you very mucn.

rcocean said...

Good God, what a bunch of crass pigs. So, it wasn't "the Most beautiful girls", but "the girls I most want to fuck" and it was posted "in the Admin area".

Just confirms my low opinion of lawyers.

Of course, most young men like to rate young women on their attractiveness but they aren't so vulgar. If that's what the "old days" were about then I'm glad they're gone. But somehow I feel that Law school was an outlier in many ways.

rcocean said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
HoodlumDoodlum said...

Brikel said...Men keeping lists of women 40 years ago: awful.
Celebrities condemning people based on race and gender today: no biggie.


Now that you mention it, a bunch of guys voting on the most bang-able babes in class when almost none of those guys voting will every bang any of those babes...that's pretty beta behavior, right? Maybe even mild & beta?


Ann Althouse said...You have to remember the nature of the problem and retain your ability to analyze current situations with reference to the original problem. We are somewhere on a continuum away from that.

I'm trying to get up on this idea of "whataboutism" that's apparently a big problem I'm supposed to avoid now, so I'm trying to fit your idea here into that framework...I guess it's not whataboutism to point out the history of a problem/analyze current situations while referencing the original problem because, ah, since every problem and situation exists somewhere on a continuum one must always acknowledge where the current situation is on that continuum w/r/t other places on the continuum...ah...I lost it.
Tell you what: I'll let the smart people determine what is and isn't whataboutism--they won't steer me wrong. Professor Althouse says this isn't so I'm WithHer.

campy said...

... the Plonsker-Baine Poll ...

Plonsker? I barely even know her!

Michael K said...

"But somehow I feel that Law school was an outlier in many ways. "

Medical students were probably as crude at times. There was an occasion of a practical exam in gross anatomy. We had three female students in the class. Of course the cadaver's penis was reenforced with a stick so it stood up.

A UC medical student was punished because he had a cadaver hand held in the sleeve of his coat and, when the Golden Gate toll bridge attendant took the toll, he left the hand in the attendant's hand.

I didn't do either of those things but I did laugh at them.

Michael K said...

"Plonsker? I barely even know her!"

My favorite quote from Zsa Zsa was when she was asked, "how many husbands have you had?"

She answered, "You mean in addition to mine ?"

Birkel said...

HoodlumDoodlum:

Yes. And what of the behavior of MTV?

Althouse will studiously avoid mention. You?

Ken B said...

"subordinate creatures"

The logic is iffy. This is an *extra* accolade to win. Say that students vote on which prof is the most entertaining lecturer. Or which is the best juggler in the annual faculty juggling competition. Or which has the coolest car. Does that reduce profs to subordinate creatures? But it's the same idea.

Adults are sex objects. That is not all they are, but they are.

Now if this was how you decided tenure or promotion that would be one thing. Then it wouln't be an *extra* it would be s *substitute* criterion. But that's not the case here, is it?

Owen said...

Amazing comments. The Professor hit a (ahem) gusher of opinion.

The discussion does not distinguish between hormone-crazed 18-year-olds and those of us who survived to create families or just gain something like wisdom. I think locker-room talk as I knew it was never racy --much more focused on who was an a**hole today or could we beat the opposing team-- and while it is impossible to know, it would be interesting to try to survey the locker rooms of the Real World to get, you know, some DATA?

My comment is influenced by having just watched "Kinsey" with Liam Neeson and Laura Linney. Surprise! As far back as the 1950's, people were having sex!

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Birkel said...Yes. And what of the behavior of MTV?
Althouse will studiously avoid mention. You?


Whatabout MTV? I think you'll find, Birkel, that my comment impishly suggesting that the list-posting was "mild & beta" is directly related to the MTV post; Prof Althouse used those terms to describe the MTV video in response to a poster who characterized the video as offensive/calling on "young white boys" to submit. So.

Fred Drinkwater said...

@Sebastian, @fernandinande, @rh: "My experience in men's locker rooms is that there's zero discussion of women."
None in High School, none at UC, none at the Masters Swim gym, none at the Health Club.
In fact, the ONLY instance of anything approaching such was one time only, when the guy I was doing the Masters Swim thing with pointed out to me a comely young woman in a bright red suit a couple lanes over. And all he said was "She looks great in that. And she's fast. You should go talk to her."

Birkel said...

I see that now, in the comments, Althouse used those words. I had not read the comments.

Apologies.

TWW said...

What is really outrageous is that women law students were not allowed to vote on the ten men (or women) they would like to sleep with.

Fred Drinkwater said...

In 1982 a couple of SW engineers, at a company which was the Google of its day, pulled a prank where they held up score cards (6.4, 7.9, ...) as women walked past a long window in the morning.
They were censured immediately (i.e. that day) by their own management. (HR? What's that?) But they kept their jobs.
Well, one was ejected a couple years later for something...
One was of Japanese ancestry and the other Chinese.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Sally327 said...Would it be okay now as long as the women agreed to participate?

Well, since you (sorta) asked: Duke University Woman's Fuck List Presentation Goes Viral

Ooh, the incident in question has a Wikipedia article: Wiki: 2010 Duke Univ. Faux Thesis Sex Controversy

But anyway, the point is only men engage in "locker room talk" about sex & partners & potential partners & other crude stuff. Women are just better, ok?

Birkel said...

Apology accepted?

Owen said...

Michael K: your comments about med school students made me laugh.

I guess it would be hard for prudes to survive the anatomy class. And a good thing too. Imagine that you took your car in for service and the mechanic starts blushing and excusing xirself. They're in the wrong job.

buwaya puti said...

Is it something about law school and the sort of fellow attracted to the legal profession?
No such things among engineers that I know of.

TWW said...

"Is it something about law school and the sort of fellow attracted to the legal profession? No such things among engineers that I know of."

No, it's because engineers only want to drive their trains.

Static Ping said...

I know. Something that blatant is unthinkable today. It's unthinkable because of the progress we've made away from that...

I would not refer to it as "progress." It is "different." Progress implies that there is an end goal that is achievable and desirable. Given the current status of feminism, it is not clear that there is a true goal to achieve that has anything to do with women in general, and given the ills it has put upon society it can hardly be described as desirable except to ideologues.

Also, note that it would also be "progress" if the poll still existed in its current form and women were not offended having outgrown the need to be offended. Alas, we have moved well in the other direction.

Joe said...

My experience in men's locker rooms is that there's zero discussion of women.

The most vivid "locker room" conversation I remember in high school was whether a girl I happen to have a crush on was an alcoholic. The consensus was that she was and it was annoying as hell.

A few weeks later I discovered how to get over a crush: watch the object of your affection puking all over someone's lawn.

Kirk Parker said...


Ken B.,

"Adults are sex objects. That is not all they are, but they are."

Ding ding ding! We have a thread winner!

Kirk Parker said...

rcocean,

"So, it wasn't 'the Most beautiful girls', but 'the girls I most want to fuck'"

You know those are two separate lists, right? And not necessarily identical, either?

JAORE said...

Is it something about law school and the sort of fellow attracted to the legal profession?
No such things among engineers that I know of.

Pretty easy call in my engineering class of many decades ago. The top rated female would have been selected by unanamous consent had we done such a thing. Of course she was the only female so the bar was low.

Fred Drinkwater said...

buwaya,
Most engineer humor does not involve grossness or body parts. We tend toward stuff involving Maxwell's equations. Magnets, electricity, lasers, math ...
Or ooblick. Never forget the ooblick.

Fred Drinkwater said...

JAORE:
How many decades ago?
In 1980 we had a couple dozen women, at least, in EE and CS at Cal. Some very attractive, too.
I even married a EE from (of all places) Johns Hopkins.

Mac McConnell said...

In the early 1970s, every month I would receive Playboy and if the centerfold looked like a sorority girl I would send a frat pledge to get an her autograph and a pair of panties. Every girl complied, at least twenty, they got the joke. Women once had a sense of humor, they did the same kind of things for fun.

Michael K said...

"No, it's because engineers only want to drive their trains."

There was a very funny cartoon a few weeks ago that made me laugh at engineer humor.

It was a girl saying "All you care about is your fucking truck !"

He responded, "No there's beer and guns, too."

I was interviewing a female military applicant who was an engineer and we were laughing telling engineer jokes.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

If I were in the place of Mr. Johnson's female law students, I'd've launched a parallel list of the top ten male law students I and my female colleagues would like to sleep with, and post it alongside the male list.

Really, there is nothing more to be done about this. Just shoot back in kind. No one could possibly object to that.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

TWW, posted first, read comments later. But wherever did you get the idea that women weren't allowed to do as the men had?

Drago said...

Owen: "My comment is influenced by having just watched "Kinsey" with Liam Neeson and Laura Linney. Surprise! As far back as the 1950's, people were having sex!"

That's not what Kinsey was all about.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/kinsey-as-he-really-was-what-you-won-t-see-in-the-movie-6172/

snip: "The most troubling aspect of Kinsey's research is the data he collected on the sexual response of children--especially young boys. Chapter Five of Sexual Behavior in the Human Male considered the sexual experience of boys, including infants. Kinsey wanted to prove that children are sexual beings who should be understood to have and to deserve sexual experiences. In this chapter, Kinsey is largely dependent upon the data contributed by "Mr. X," a man who had molested hundreds of boys ranging from infants to adolescents. As Jones explains: "Viewed from any angle, his relationship with Mr. X was a cautionary tale. Whatever the putative valued as science of Mr. X's experience, the fact remains that he was a predator pedophile." Over decades, this man abused hundreds of young boys, tortured infants, and, as Jones explains, "performed a variety of other sexual acts on preadolescent boys and girls alike."

Kinsey did not condemn this man, but instead eagerly solicited his "data." As a matter of fact, Kinsey went so far as to attempt to pay Mr. X for further research and once wrote to him, "I wish I knew how to give credit to you in the forthcoming volume for your material. It seems a shame not even to name you."

Those words betray a moral monster of the most horrible depravity and assured criminality. Alfred Kinsey celebrated the fact that this man had sexually tortured children and, as Kinsey's own published work documents, had sexually abused two-month-old infants."

Michael K said...

Kinsey was another Rachel Carson. Both propagated myths in the pursuit of leftist ideology,

There is an awful lot of leftist mythology in anthropology,

Matthew Blaine said...

Women are permitted to exist in public spheres only to the extent that men allow.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Birkel - sure, of course, no big deal; no beef with Birkel!

Jupiter said...

"But it's something else altogether when that male-on-male talk breaks out into the common spaces of an educational institution."

Yes, it would seem that it is one thing for a group of male students to rate the female students, and another thing entirely for the school to publish the results. That would seem to place the institution's blessing on attitudes and practices that may have been intended somewhat humorously, but are still potentially deeply upsetting to all of the women involved.

Which is part, a small part, of what is wrong with Women's Studies classes. And all this white privilege bullshit. And pretty much everything else modern universities do.

Richard Fagin said...

MIT was 40 years ahead of the game. The campus student newspaper published an article, "...guide to MIT men" in 1977, and named names, no less. The publication was controversial to say the least, but no one was expelled or suspended because of it.

Would that today's campus mores were the same.

Paolo said...

"it can be motivated by an intent to communicate that this is a male-dominated institution where women are subordinate creatures"

Why should that be necessarily the case? As far as I know, women are perfectly free to do the same.

If you don't believe that it's a good idea to express public evaluation about ANYBODY's physical look, absent HER or HIS explicit consent - then wouldn't it be better to say just so, without implying toxic sociological theories?

Is it not high time to tone down all this silliness?

John said...

Blogger Dad said...

"When I see the moon on the shore, or a piano leg touchin' the floor..."

Stop it, Dad. You're making me horny!



John Henry