It all started with a photo that a future Badger posted May 31 on Twitter of himself and his friends in their high school graduation caps and gowns, smiling and forming the Wisconsin "W" with their hands.More at the link, including comparisons of Scott Walker to Hitler and the reaction of the College Republicans.
"On (to) Wisconsin!" the tweet exclaimed. It was tagged @UWMadison #FutureBadgers, and the young man included the Twitter handles of the five other students in the photo.
Six days later, [Sara Goldrick-Rab... a professor of educational policy studies and sociology] reached out to all six students on Twitter: "I hate to bring bad news but," her tweet began. She then linked to an opinion piece published in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel with the headline: "Threats to shared governance and tenure put mission of UW at risk."
"No one cares sara," one of the students replied.
"Oh good. I thought you want a degree of value. Too bad," Goldrick-Rab responded.
"Who are you lol" another student replied....
Professors are free to speak. What's the big deal here? Is "tweeting at" people some special form of speech, more threatening somehow? The actual tweeted-at students with their "No one cares sara" and "Who are you lol" show that tweets are taken very lightly.
The College Republicans issued a statement on Facebook Wednesday... asking the university to address the tenured professor's "harassment of these future Badgers on Twitter who were doing nothing but showing their excitement for attending the university."Oh, great. Now conservatives want a broad definition of harassment and demand more university investigations of free speech? Hey, College Republicans, I'm blogging that at you.
UPDATE: The University Committee issues a statement expressing "deeply dismay[]" over what it calls Goldrick-Rab's "actions."
पोस्ट्स
१५५ टिप्पण्या:
Hyphenated names are always bad news.
That said, her infraction is a bit mild to freak out about.
That name... it sounds familiar somehow...
"Professors are free to speak. What's the big deal here?"
Juvenile bad judgment. Antagonizing customers. Foolish demonstration of self-parodying Progressivism.
"The College Republicans issued a statement on Facebook Wednesday... asking the university to address the tenured professor's "harassment of these future Badgers on Twitter who were doing nothing but showing their excitement for attending the university." Oh, great. Now conservatives want a broad definition of harassment and demand more university investigations of free speech?"
Methinks CP are yanking some chains here. All in good fun.
It's all part of that "Punch back twice as hard" thingies a famous man advised.
What motivated her to contact them in the first place? Couldn't she just have tweeted her disappointment on her own account?
I was hoping this would be a positive story in which a professor merely took the time to congratulate and welcome the half-dozen incoming freshmen. Instead the tenured bitch felt compelled to begin their "indoctrination" earlier than usual.
The political operatives on the right are playing the game that the left invented.
Giving Debbie Downer a little taste is all this is.
The original, immediate response from the kid was perfect -- no one cares, sara
The kids are alright.
If Goldrick-Rab believes that a UW degree no longer has value, won't she committing fraud every time she cashes a paycheck?
From the article:
"My grandfather, a psychologist, just walked me through similarities between Walker and Hitler. There are so many-it's terrifying," Goldrick-Rab, who is Jewish, tweeted July 1.
The next day, Goldrick-Rab tweeted: "No doubt about it-Walker and many Wisconsin Legislators are fascists. Period. They proved it today. #SHAME."
A professor expressing that there is no doubt the Governor is a fascist. Because there is no room for doubt. Open-minded students beware.
I am Laslo.
"Goldrick-Rab told the newspaper she had done "a crystal ball set of predictions," expecting to be targeted for reprisal because she's a liberal activist-scholar."
Hilarious. Scholar my ass. She was schooled by high schoolers. LOL Scholar, LOL.
Oh, great. Now conservatives want a broad definition of harassment and demand more university investigations of free speech?
Actually, they want a broad and equal application of the standards that university progressives have demanded. That is a very conservative position to take. They're not being inconsistent - at all.
I LMAO at "who are you LOL".
a professor of educational policy studies and sociology
said
"I thought you want a degree of value."
How ironical.
Wow, there are a lot more professors complaining about Scott Walker than about due process rights for students. I guess academic priorities haven't changed since I graduated. This woman is a good example of why most college graduates--and from this article, most incoming freshmen--don't take their professors very seriously.
No. You don't get to kill a freedom and then demand protection under it.
The left decided this is how the game was played. In my state, we now have the NAACP demanding we destroy Stone Mountain. We had the left railroad Brandon Eich. We had Time Hunt. We had Tshirt scientist.
Full speed ahead! The only way the tyrants will stop is if they are forced to choke on their own medicine.
We no longer have the choice between minding our own business or not - that was taken away from us when the social justice warriors decided to police every f***** thing we do. Now it's just a choice between who gets to be the boot and who gets to be the face. Well I vote my team for the boot!
I would think our hostess would recognize this is completely inappropriate behavior by a professor. It has nothing to do with free speech. It is harassment pure and simple.
The kids are smart enough to tell her to take a hike.
I will be prepared to defend her if there is any evidence on her blog or Twitter or elsewhere that she defended Brendan Eich when it counted.
But a UW degree will have more value by far if profs like her get their walking papers.
Let's face facts- she is a no-nothing librul who is terrified that the big fat govt teat will be yanked from her mouth.
Oh, great. Now conservatives want a broad definition of harassment and demand more university investigations of free speech?
I agree with you, but I also enjoy a prog prof getting it good and hard from Rules for Radicals...MAKE THEM LIVE BY THEIR OWN STANDARDS.
And, face it, she should know better being a professor of educational policy studies and sociology (although, admittedly, those are voodoo fields of study).
Where is the red line?
Let's suppose that I was in law school at UW, and I tweeted "Althouse is an idiot", and she responded with "That'll get you an F".
That would not be good, right? Taxpayer-funded school with a teacher who threatens students?
Let's face facts- she is a no-nothing librul who is terrified that the big fat govt teat will be yanked from her mouth.
And think about it: all those PhDs who are in adjunct positions at UW and elsewhere would just love to have HER job. UW students might be able to get a better education without a political hack like her on staff.
"Hey, College Republicans, I'm blogging that at you."
Nobody cares. LOL. Who are you anyway. LOL
It's so bad at U-W for professors that they are resigning to go work in the private sector.
Best for sara to escape Wisconsin before she ends up in a concentration camp.
What a joke. Who would take a class from such a lightweight whiner with no sense of history and no judgment?
If she had any self awareness she would realize that her ridiculous tweets make sane people side with Walker on this issue.
Didn't you point out awhile back that tenure wasn't being eliminated, as the press is saying, but that it would be regulated by the board of regents rather than the state legislature? Seems this distinction is easily ignored.
Yep. In that field, it's not like she isn't easily irreplaceable. With someone much more mature and who will present as a much better academic role model.
The sooner the better, I say.
And don't think I'm inclined to stick up for law professors who couldn't be bothered to stick up for pizza shop owners, florists and bakers, either.
""Hey, College Republicans, I'm blogging that at you."
Nobody cares.
"I would think our hostess would recognize this is completely inappropriate behavior by a professor. It has nothing to do with free speech. It is harassment pure and simple."
That's what opponents of free speech always say. This thing they want to suppress is not free speech.
Poorly played by the College Republicans.
They should have enthusiastically welcomed the new students and pointed out that Goldrick-Rab's concerns about lack-of-value should only be taken at face value for her department, and that there were plenty of other valuable majors at the university.
No, that's not what opponents of free speech always say. They sometimes say "that's hate!" or "you are denigrating my [race/religion/whatever]!"
This thing they want to suppress is abuse of government-granted power.
Does anyone believe that sara presents both sides of the "white privilege" debate in her classroom?
It's a good bet that "free speech" is not very free in her classes.
These situations are always the same. The job is so bad, YET almost no one ever quits. ts not reality, what they do and get for it. "Value"?
I'll bet there's a woman-penis involved in this somehow.....
Now conservatives want a broad definition of harassment and demand more university investigations of free speech? Hey, College Republicans, I'm blogging that at you.
Do they want a broader definition? Maybe they want those who support a broad definition to have reason to fear it.
Think deeper.
I forget which commenter said it, but you don't get to divide the world into boots and faces and then complain when you suddenly find yourself a face.
It was fine when bakers were faces, but not when it's professors? Too bad, this is the world you have chosen, I hope you like your life now.
I'll bet Goldrick-Rab's boss is Professor Alice Goffman, sociologist extraordinaire, whose book On the Run: Fugitive Life in an American City was such a hit amongst Prog academia because it made inner city law enforcement look very bad (and probably racist).
She likely committed a felony participating in a conspiracy to commit a revenge murder while researching her book, lied about a Philadelphia police murder investigation (she said the police dropped the investigation, but they did not and pursued it for two years until they got a conviction), and then contradicted herself when asked about "facts" in her book that might make her vulnerable to criminal charges or expose her unethical research techniques.
Quite a staff ya got there, UW!
Goldrik-Rab is creating a hostile environment for potential students who disagree with her politically. This is highly inappropriate. It implies that students who support Walker's agenda will not be treated fairly in her class.
Goldrik-Rab could have started a dialog. Instead she told students how she expected them to think on a topic about which they knew little. She was not acting a professor, she should not be treated like a professor.
So it's inappropriate to ask that professors behave appropriately?
@Althouse, as Rocketeer points out upthread, this is sauce for the goose.
Gerry beat me to it: "Make the enemy live by their own rules."
Not the way I'd have preferred it be handled, but hard for the leftists to scream when it's what they've been doing for years.
Yep, goose-gander. Fire her ass.
I expect that Althouse knows that a UW prof who had sent an unsolicited tweet to incoming freshmen demanding that they support Walker's reforms would be out of a job.
I went high school with this professor (in her pre-hyphenated days), and I'm not surprised about either A) the hyphen or B) that she tends towards the ... virulent.
The real issues I see here are:
- The maturity level of Sara Goldrick-Rab's behavior
- The consequences of Sara Goldrick-Rab's behavior
- Personal responsibility in the context of free expression
- The damage done to Sara Goldrick-Rab's employer
Alinsky's rules deserve study. They are not meant to inform people about policy. They are policy-neutral. They are meant to form a lynch mob. No wonder Democrats like them, there is nothing in there like "show integrity", or "be consistent." It's pure will to power, the policy goals are immaterial and essentially arbitrary.
I thought you want a degree of value.
Yes, because the first thing a future employer - or one's self-satisfaction of getting a liberal arts education at ... UW? Okay, that's not even funny, it's too ridiculous - is gonna think of is "oh, God, they now have a tenure system that's very slightly different than before!"
Take your special tenure and your shared governance and shove it.
(I'd care a lot more about your precious tenure system if academic freedom wasn't all so deliciously one-sided there.
I'm not seeing a lot of "academic freedom" here, just vapid politicking; tweeting at incoming students that they should support your pet cause and then sniffing at them when they don't care is ... pathetic.
The argument for tenure is that it's there to protect professors from retaliation when they research, teach, or speak truths [or plausible beliefs, at least] that The Man doesn't approve of or find comforting.
At this point I don't see that it does UW any good at all. Oh, it does individual marginal professors good, with lifetime employment guarantees - but the professors aren't UW.
And it sure doesn't seem to benefit students or taxpayers at all.
"Fire them all, salt the ground." is becoming my blanket response to all such petulance from a class with real [backed by law and policy!] privilege, be they unionists or professors.
If they don't like that, they should work on making it so they're not repulsive caricatures dependent on special legal protection for their parasitism.)
@Ann "That's what opponents of free speech always say. This thing they want to suppress is not free speech."
What? Isn't that what I said. Maybe I am missing the essence because I can't (won't) link to Facebook.
I am surprised that the high schoolers were not yet hip enough to accuse her of assaulting them with micro-aggressions. They will be.
When some realize the progressive outrage that muzzles them isn't based on anything other than strategy and opportunity, "twice as hard" becomes an attractive option. That's what I see here.
There are those on either side who want to win, and everybody wants to follow a winning strategy. Forza.
"What? Isn't that what I said. Maybe I am missing the essence because I can't (won't) link to Facebook."
Yes. You are saying what opponents of free speech say.
One of the first things I was told at college orientation is to not denigrate my university in public. Lower esteem for the university = less value to my degree. It is a stupid thing to do unless absolutely necessary.
Sara is, well, stupid.
My grandfather, a psychologist, just walked me through similarities between Walker and Hitler. There are so many-it's terrifying
I had no idea Gov. Walker intended to march on the Sudetenland.
The things I learn on this forum!
It's nice to know I can say whatever I want to about my workplace and its management to customers! Free Speech!
Or is that something only "college professors" are allowed to have in Obama's America?
a professor of educational policy studies and sociology
Not a real academic then. Lie down with dogs...
Watching all of these privileged stuck up professors bleat and moan will be glorious. The best part will be watching the adjuncts, who did a better job teaching, move into those positions previously occupied by a lazy tenured jerk and do a better job. There are 10 phd's out there for every tenured position who would love those jobs even without tenure and they would be more motivated to actually do their job.
Education will be better and cheaper without manufactured government support of baby boomers who are no longer really qualified for their jobs. We need to get rid of tenure "For the children."
"My grandfather, a psychologist, just walked me through similarities between Walker and Hitler. There are so many-it's terrifying."
Says the supporter of gun control.
"I thought you want a degree of value."
No. I'd rather have a [fill-in-the-blank] Studies degree.
I am surprised how descendents Hitler has spawned. There must be hundreds, maybe thousands out there. All of them small government types of course.
Confused? Me too.
Oh, great. Now conservatives want a broad definition of harassment and demand more university investigations of free speech? Hey, College Republicans, I'm blogging that at you.
No...but if WE are going to be expected to abide by those retarded rules, then the people CHAMPIONING the damned things should be expected to as well. That "scholar" champions this bullshit and then whines when demanded to live by her claimed support.
And, yeah, a professor of Sociology criticizing somebody for not wanting a degree with value.
Do college profs frequently send out unwanted political propaganda to incoming Freshmen?
I had no idea Gov. Walker intended to march on the Sudetenland.
EVERYBODY knows that not forcing somebody to join a union is no different, morally, then shoving Jews into ovens.
Hell, it's probably WORSE since the union people wouldn't be mean to "Palestinians" decades later.
If professors don't like it, they can quit. I bet Sara will have job offers by the truckload. Many businesses need whatever the fuck Sociology professors bring to the table.
What CAN she bring to the table? Coffee?
I am surprised how descendents Hitler has spawned. There must be hundreds, maybe thousands out there. All of them small government types of course.
Don't you know that not forcing nuns to pay for birth control is identical to attempting to wipe out Poland?
"That's what opponents of free speech always say. This thing they want to suppress is not free speech."
Having read the linked article, including the comments of UW-Madison College Republicans Chairman Anthony Birch, I find your portrayal of the College Republicans as suppresses of free speech to be a bit exaggerated.
I also think that if Goldrick-Rab makes good on her intentions to leave us, the campus will be better for it.
As to Ann's point, I absolutely agree that the Young Republicans response to investigate the professor for harassment undermines the principle of free speech. They should certainly make fun of her and even condemn her actions, but speech is not the sort of thing that should require a university investigation except in the most extreme circumstances. This circumstance is not extreme, just stupid.
That said, it is unclear to me if UW actually embraces those free speech principles. It is clear that many universities do not embrace free speech. From a practical view, if supposedly shared principles will always be used against you but never for you even in identical situations, the situation has escalated. For a flawed analogy, the proper course of action for a country in a tariff dispute with another country will be very different if the two countries are at peace than if the other country has invaded and occupied one of its ports. The niceties of peace get jettisoned once the bullets start flying.
So in this case, there are two tactics the Young Republicans can use. The first is to stress the principle of free speech and expect that when the situation is reversed the other side will also respect this principle. The second is to use the same tactics that the other side uses going on the assumption that they do not respect the principle and the only way to get them to respect it is through pain. In a civilized world the first option is the best one, but once the other side escalates it may be a useless one.
Of course, if it escalates further then things get really messy. Let us hope that the academy remembers what it is supposed to prize.
I did like Chancellor Blank's response:
"Any institution has its critics," UW-Madison Chancellor Rebecca Blank responded in her own statement late Wednesday, "and especially in social media, it's important to remember that the loudest voice usually isn't the most accurate."
Proglodytes invent a tactic but when it's used back against them that's always unfair.
So in this case, there are two tactics the Young Republicans can use. The first is to stress the principle of free speech and expect that when the situation is reversed the other side will also respect this principle. The second is to use the same tactics that the other side uses going on the assumption that they do not respect the principle and the only way to get them to respect it is through pain. In a civilized world the first option is the best one, but once the other side escalates it may be a useless one.
Option 1 NEVER works. There is zero risk for the Left to keep making accusations. Option 2 has a far better likelihood of success. Want to kill an idiotic system? Make the idiots who proposed it live under it.
"a professor of educational policy studies and sociology"
That pretty much tells me all I need to know.
I think Goldrick-Rabb is creating a hostile workplace environment using trigger phrases and the inherently patriarchal authority system of the current campus model. She should be investigated for possibly committing mental rape under Title IX.
Isn't tenure supposedly to protect the faculty from the administration rather than to give license for a professor to punch down into the incoming student body?
I wouldn't call it harassment, more like spam.
Oh, boo-hoo. Althouse is whining about "free speech."
But she doesn't REALLY believe in first amendment freedoms and individual liberty, or she would have been forceful in a rhetorical defense of Memories Pizza and Melissa "Sweet-Cakes" Klein, among other cases.
No. She is not an advocate of liberty at all. She is an advocate of whatever advances the interests of her tribe: Academics and, by proxy, gays.
At this point, after having pissed all over the concept of individual liberties and freedom of conscience, for her to cry "free speech" for her fellow academic is like an axe murderer who murdered her parents pleading for leniency because she's an orphan.
McCullough ... Professors are leaving UW for the private sector.
"You don't realize how good we have it here at the university! I've worked in the private sector! They expect results!"-- Ghostbusters
Did G-R actually enumerate the similarities with Hitler anywhere?
"Professors are free to speak. What's the big deal here? Is "tweeting at" people some special form of speech, more threatening somehow?"
Liberals are known to punish you for not agreeing with their speech, so it would not be unreasonable for the students to wonder if this "professor" had enough influence to revoke their admission to college.
And such bullshit from you. Liberal professors are free to speak, conservatives have to hide or be shunned and passed over.
Who was this professor anyway? She should be one of the first cut. She obviously has too much free time on her hands if she's seeking to indoctrinate students that haven't even arrived on campus yet.
Ah, Sara Goldrick-Rab. I'll pass this along to the Gov's office. Fat to be trimmed.
Sara Goldrick-Rab
Classes:
Soc 648 Sociology of Education
Professor of Educational Policy Studies and Sociology
239 Education Bldg., 1000 Bascom Mall
(608) 265-2141
srab@education.wisc.edu
Precious!! A university professor named Goldbricker-Raub.....or maybe I read that wrong.
The second is to use the same tactics that the other side uses going on the assumption that they do not respect the principle and the only way to get them to respect it is through pain.
The problem with conservatives is that Progs manipulate them by appealing to principles. "Oh, you can't do that, that would violate free speech!" But Progs do not have principles to appeal to. They are only interested in power. Power is the only Progressive principle: obtaining it, keeping it, and expanding it using any means, however bloody and repulsive. The only way to make Progressives aware of the ugliness and hypocrisy of their philosophy is to force them to live by the standards which they wish to impose upon everyone else.
As with everything internet related, I fall back on the "what if this speech were conducted in real life" standard.
Since these were prospective students who are in no way students of the professor, she's effectively just a random person showing up to harangue them about politics in an otherwise unrelated thread.
That might be free speech, but it's creepy and weird free speech, and a professor should know better.
Professors surely have the right to say whatever they please on social media, so long as it's clear they're representing only themselves and not their employer.
Nonetheless, spending extensive time trying to politic prospective students on Twitter, and the puerile "Walker=Hitler" argumentation, loudly signal her intellectual limitations.
damikesc said...
Option 1 NEVER works. There is zero risk for the Left to keep making accusations. Option 2 has a far better likelihood of success. Want to kill an idiotic system? Make the idiots who proposed it live under it.
It can work. It depends on the nature of the other side. But I tend to agree that the Radical Left is unlikely to act on good faith.
The problem with the pain option is two fold. First, sometimes it does not work because while the other side is quite happy to force you to live under their rules, they are quite capable of granting themselves immunity to same. This is the point where it becomes obvious that the game is rigged and either you accept the second class citizenship or start fighting in a more literal sense. Second, if the other side has no loyalty to its own members that step out of line and considers them quite expendable, it may do no good. So, yes, they will apply their own rules to their own people, but at that point they don't consider the heretic to be one of their own people anymore. The other side, as a group, has experienced no pain because, by definition, anyone who is punished is not part of the group. It's a delusion, but a powerful one that prevents change. To fix that requires some sort of revolution.
I think the left had a retort that would fit perfectly... what was it?
Oh right, you are free to say what you want - you are not free to escape the consequences of what you say!
Words have consequences!
As long as it's not a literal government entity suppressing your speech, then an act of censorship, direct or indirect, cannot possibly be an act against 'the freedom of speech!'
I don't particularly care which piece of rope we hang them by, but they've certainly given us a few choices.
I find it rather weird and stalker-ish that the Professor went to the trouble of singling them out, personally, with communication that seems to be geared towards warning them away from going to the University.
It all started with a photo that a future Badger posted May 31 on Twitter of himself and his friends in their high school graduation caps and gowns, smiling and forming the Wisconsin "W" with their hands.
"On (to) Wisconsin!" the tweet exclaimed. It was tagged @UWMadison #FutureBadgers, and the young man included the Twitter handles of the five other students in the photo.
Six days later, Goldrick-Rab reached out to all six students on Twitter: "I hate to bring bad news but," her tweet began. She then linked to an opinion piece published in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel with the headline: "Threats to shared governance and tenure put mission of UW at risk."
It isn't as if she was in general, to just everyone, saying how she feels about the change in the tenure system and how she feels about Walker. That is free speech and she has every right. However, She picked these particular students. She was sending unwanted communications and trying to persuade these incoming students to political views that they may or may not want to entertain, would be just creepy if I were on the receiving end.
"WHY is she singling ME out???? What if I have to take one of her classes? Will she be mad that I don't care about her tenure issue or that I don't think Walker is evil incarnate? Am I going to get a bad grade? How can I make her stop talking at me?" and so on.
Just weird behavior from an adult to students.
DBQ
Agree. I don't think that picking names out of the phone book and then calling them and telling them to fuck off is exactly in the realm of free speech activity as suggested by the Professor.
Creepy indeed.
Did G-R actually enumerate the similarities with Hitler anywhere?
* 2 syllable name ending with 'er'
* chief executive of government with jurisdiction over lots of descendants of Germanic tribes
* wants to have job with larger jurisdiction
* hated by Marxists
* no college degree
* both responsible for attempt at genocide (except Walker)
* both supportive of values embodied in America's founding documents (except Hitler)
No big deal, but it does show that self-absorbed professors are not shy about broadcasting their panicked hyperbole. Get over yourselves.
The student replies perhaps show the comments were taken lightly, as were their opinions for prestigious professors. This stuff just makes a joke of the profession.
At least it's a party school. The incoming freshman care about that more than anything.
But you know damned well Bill would tap that grotesque ass.
who are you?
Reminds me of when Howard Stern would send Stuttering John to the red carpets and he would ask first question to some of the stars would be, "who are you?"
When he pulled that question out for Madeline Kahn, she was pissed.
I see no problem with one person, on a public space, engaging the other in conversation. The second person has ways to stop the interaction if they want.
Twitter has a block feature.
Alinsky's rules say that you attack the individual, not the institution. That gives the institution a way out. "The pain will stop as soon as you cut this individual loose."
She should be concerned about targeting, because we know how often liberal, activist professors are targeted.
I too find her actions creepy/stalker behavior.
There's a certain irony to this positioning:
donald said...
She is extremely unattractive. Kinda like Margaret Sanger enthusiast Hillary Rodham Clinton.
I mean that cunt is ugly.
7/16/15, 1:30 PM
Blogger Peter said...
Professors surely have the right to say whatever they please on social media, so long as it's clear they're representing only themselves and not their employer.
Nonetheless, spending extensive time trying to politic prospective students on Twitter, and the puerile "Walker=Hitler" argumentation, loudly signal her intellectual limitations.
7/16/15, 1:30 PM
Blogger donald said...
As in I wouldn't Even ass fuck her with Bill Clinton's dick with a bag over that grotesque mug.
Is there a Safe Space with Teletubbies set aside for UW Professors that dare to venture in and read the comments section of this here Althouse blog? I'd imagine it would serve as a rude awakening to see what the working world thinks of the tenured intellectual elite.
It's interesting that they don't swim around in this pool. The water's warm. I think they're chicken shits when it comes to debating people that aren't bound to their self-granted tribal authority.
That's why they're tweeting teenagers. Everyone else stopped listening
"It's interesting that they don't swim around in this pool."
Some of us do.
I was going to say, "What am I, chopped liver?", but then I'd have Planned Parenthood snooping around.
Kudos to you Professor Original Mike. Hilarious comment
My last shot is to note that it took professors a long time to accept that they could no longer fuck the students, now it seems they've moved on to fucking with the students.
I'll add that I also find her actions creepy and stalker-ish. If a professor tweeted that to my Son, I'd feel like calling that professor up and asking why they're reading the twitter account of an incoming student. (If I were a Helicopter Parent, I'd actually call, but I'm not, so I'd just feel like doing it).
I actually hope my kid's twitter accounts are structures so that no one can read them unless you actually follow them. Not that they tweet anymore, of course, having moved on to the next thing.
My other reaction is that Prof. G-R doesn't really understand twitter as it is used by high school grads.
Not that they'd want my liver.
The funniest thing about this: a sociology prof sneering about "a degree of value."
There's a reason why all the jocks major in sociology, lady. And it's not because their first priority is academic rigor.
Some weeks are just better than others...
1) Walker announces run for the Presidency in Waukesha.
2) Wisconsin Supreme Court squashes John Doe II.
3) UW College Republicans shame Liberal UW professor in the Milwaukee Journal
4) And Pabst announces it will once again brew beer in Milwaukee.
Why does our esteemed hostess worry about a UW GOP request that will never be acted on by the administration to the point that she thinks a threat of action actually exists?
There's a certain irony to this positioning:
donald said...
She is extremely unattractive. Kinda like Margaret Sanger enthusiast Hillary Rodham Clinton.
I mean that cunt is ugly.
7/16/15, 1:30 PM
Blogger Peter said...
Professors surely have the right to say whatever they please on social media, so long as it's clear they're representing only themselves and not their employer.
Nonetheless, spending extensive time trying to politic prospective students on Twitter, and the puerile "Walker=Hitler" argumentation, loudly signal her intellectual limitations.
7/16/15, 1:30 PM
Blogger donald said...
As in I wouldn't Even ass fuck her with Bill Clinton's dick with a bag over that grotesque mug.
Not at all. Look at a picture. She's a fucking pig. In body, mind and spirit.
Me? I got it going on.
I may be out of line here but I think the hostility in the comments stems from some pretty obvious hypocrisy. Althouse is defending the free-speech rights of a woman, professor Sara Goldrick-Rab, who gleefully defends stomping on other people's free speech rights. (Remember the Roger Clegg press conference?)
Okay, fine; even the free speech rights of those who don't believe in free speech should be defended. So why is Sara Goldrick-Rab being defended and not the College Republicans as well? All they are doing is exercising their free speech to ask that administrators criticize a professor that is acting unprofessional.
Aren't the college republicans like the Lesbians in the wedding ring case?
They can't make anyone do anything (punish the professor, give them their money back), all they can do is ask. And that's how it's supposed to work!!!!
RIght?
"Threats to shared governance and tenure put mission of UW at risk."
That mission would be the endless promotion of socialism, until we arrive a perfect communism. Then, and only then, can the UW relax.
What nonsense the UW produces!!
Peter wrote:
"Professors surely have the right to say whatever they please on social media, so long as it's clear they're representing only themselves and not their employer."
Why? What makes them so special? Most employees have a social media use policy that forbids them from commenting on anything the employer does. What makes professors so special? This is the 21st century. Universities are just employers of people.
It actually is hilarious to me that a University that worries about microagressions actually has, as one of its most vocal activists, a creepy creepy student stalker.
Will Collier, the self regard of sociology majors can not be over stated. They think that they are in the business of changing the world for the better. They believe the other disciplines, especially those that lead to good jobs, are in the business of promoting and strengthening the current corrupt and oppressive system. Read R&B's comments. Workers are useless, replaceable schlubs. Only revolutionaries lead meaningful lives.
Peter,and a cop has exactly the same privilege. But if you got pulled over by a cop whose name tag was the same as the twitter handle of a cop with very definite notions, shall we say, of you ethnicity or gender choices, would you not feel threatened? R-G is in the same position with regard to those students.
G-R, not R-G
Professors are free to speak. What's the big deal here? Is "tweeting at" people some special form of speech, more threatening somehow?
Classic example of the double standard that "professors" are allowed to say things that denigrate their own employer, that the rest of us would (rightly) be fired for. But on Planet Academe reality is only an abstract concept.
The actual tweeted-at students with their "No one cares sara" and "Who are you lol" show that tweets are taken very lightly.
If I'm working for, let's say, an insurance company, and I sent an email to prospective customers that says something like "our rates are too high - shop at XYZ company instead", and those customers decided to be customers of my employer anyway, I'd STILL be fired. In other words, the kids' reaction is not the point, nor should it be.
I think our hostess ought to make more of an attempt to look at things from a more real-world perspective, as difficult as that may be for her, working on Planet Academe and all...
bgates 1:53 PM
but cottdam that made me giggle
"Who are you lol" was the perfect response. Leave it at that.
With some truth serum in her, here's what she would have said: "Great news, guys, you're going to get a much better education than anyone's gotten around here in a long time! That's because now we can finally get rid of the dead wood in the faculty, the crappy teachers who up to now couldn't be fired." (I know that's too long for twitter, but you get my point.)
When teachers have to prove themselves worthy to stay on the faculty year after year, it becomes like a real job and the students benefit. So she had no time to waste in getting them to think the opposite, for her sake.
I Callahan wrote:
Classic example of the double standard that "professors" are allowed to say things that denigrate their own employer, that the rest of us would (rightly) be fired for.
"Employers" includes taxpayers. Go to the Chronicle of Higher Ed. website sometime and check out the comments from adjuncts in the humanities. They really believe that they are special snow flakes. Their advanced degree allows them to criticize virtually any aspect of society, and they are immune from the criticism of others.
"who are you LOL"
It would have saved time and been better to retweet this than to act like fascist progressives and claim harassment.
The prof should at least be hauled in to the president's office, if UW has a real president, a nd lectured about doing her job instead of spouting her politics to new students. She can brainwash them in class.
It would have saved time and been better to retweet this than to act like fascist progressives and claim harassment.
Perhaps. But snark doesn't teach people lessons.
bgates, do they both like strudel?
If so, it just got creepier. ;)
I was also just thinking, to the professor's mind Walker is (supposedly) like Hitler but how does she explain the Democrats using pre-dawn Gestapo raids on Republicans to intimidate them ("nope, you can't call your lawyer") and drive them from public life?
@kcom, just remember that Nazi is short for National Socialist German Workers Party.
I imagine that the prospective UW students are as capable as anybody of either engaging or ignoring the Goldrick-Rab woman, including her tweets about the putative imperiled status of the University, Hitler and Mr Walker etc. Pedagogical methods are endlessly debatable, but there's nothing to discuss with someone whose mental world is so warped, God bless her heart, that she imagines Mr Walker to be a peer of the Nazis. But if she is still teaching in August, then were I one of those six kids I'd make sure to take someone else's class.
Lefties will only learn (and maybe not) when confronted with their own medicine.
G-R appears to be the type that relishes being seen as the victim of "oppression" and "fighting" the power. Such people tend to create their own drama. She was probably always trolling for a job, but now gets to create political blame and set herself as a victim imprisioned onThe UW prison farm. The college GOP used the right tactic towards the administration but the wrong one with regard to G-R. They are young, though, and still learning. Unfortunately, she is not a minority in young PhDs. My connections in that area may not have liked her Hitler reference but they normally like her commentary.
It actually is hilarious to me that a University that worries about microagressions actually has, as one of its most vocal activists, a creepy creepy student stalker.
7/16/15, 3:21 PM
Speaking of irony and all.
Goldrick-Rab is a serious scholar, actually. Very good on policy and methods, which is a rare combination.
lol.
She's a sociology dipshit boy.
Tell ya what, I'll keep this gender neutral just for shits and giggles.
It's a sociology dipshit boy.
You know for the political correctness and all.
Sarah's tweet looked like macro aggression to me. What's sauce for the male gander is also sauce for the liberal academic goose. Of course the appropriate response to blue stocking drones like that (even if she is "very good on policy and methods" is to laugh in her sneering, snarling face.
Come back to me when Sarah develops some expertise in a serious subject--say English, or History, or Chemistry or Math. Social policy and social justice warriors are a dime a dozen--and overpriced at that.
George:
"Goldrick-Rab is a serious scholar, actually. Very good on policy and methods, which is a rare combination."
Top ranked on policy and methods! Just what we need. And rare it is to find a serious scholar who can combine those two tricky topics and be good at both. Both. Actually very good, better than plain good.
Policy and Methods.
You can't make this up, George. Priceless.
"I imagine that the prospective UW students are as capable as anybody of either engaging or ignoring the Goldrick-Rab woman, ..."
I don't know. Remember, these are the same students that the administration is concerned aren't capable of traveling four miles down the road to get a photo ID.
Jeebus, the UW-Madison faculty can't even troll incoming freshmen without looking like tenured twits. FACEPALM.
Sauce for the goose, Ann. I hope conservatives in general turn more fascist to keep up with the lefties.
I had no idea Scott Walker was an aspiring artist.
If you calling your bathroom the Eagle's Nest makes you like Hitler, well, I guess we are all guilty.
Aren't we?
I agree with her comparison between early Nazi Party politics and the potential fascism germinating within today's far rightwing politics. However, as for her tweeting out to new students, that was inappropriate and showed bad tactical judgment. Regardless of political persuasion, left, right or radicalized anarchism, a tenured professor of sociology is not the university welcoming committee and vice versa.
Yes, Original Mike, it's entirely possible I overestimate the new students' readiness for a university education.
I know a priori that G.-R. is not worth bothering about, because of the Walker/Nazis nonsense; don't care how many other academics respect her 'policy and methods' expertise.
The big mistake she made was assuming that people attending her school were smart or interested enough to be informed about issues affecting the institution.
They're American. They're not interested.
After a while it becomes stupid to assume most Americans aren't too stupid for their own good.
Marc, my comment was directed at the administration who, in another matter, treated their students as children.
Another lefty sociopath with tenure. I hope she leaves the school, but who would take her?
"I agree with her comparison between early Nazi Party politics and the potential fascism germinating within today's far rightwing politics"
Do tell.
"I agree with her comparison between early Nazi Party politics and the potential fascism germinating within today's far rightwing politics."
Lary9, perhaps you should reflect upon the events and participants of the Wisconsin John Doe investigations in the news today.
Ann's defense of this creepy stalker is an classic example of the academic hive protecting its own. That said, I surprised that UW's college Republicans dared come out of the closet long enough to squawk.
Ah, for the comparisons of German and the US, here's Mark Steyn who knows a thing or two of history.
The National Socialist German Workers Party is the largest party in parliament and thus President von Hindenburg has appointed its leader, Herr Hitler, as Chancellor - not der Führer, just Chancellor, the same position Frau Merkel holds today. And the National Socialist German Workers Party starts enacting its legislative programme, and so a few weeks later the Civil Service Restoration Law is introduced. Under this law, Jews would no longer be allowed to serve as civil servants, teachers or lawyers, the last two being professions in which Jews are very well represented.
But that wily old fox Hindenburg knows a thing or two. So as president he refuses to sign the bill into law unless certain exemptions are made - for those who've been in the civil service since August 1st 1914 (ie, the start of the Great War), and for those who served during the Great War, or had a father or son who died in action. And the practical effect of these amendments is that hardly any Jew in the public service has to lose his job.
Paul von Hindenburg died the following year, and his amendments were scrapped.
That's Germany's civil service in 1933. What of America's civil service in 2015?
The logic of the 1933 Civil Service Restoration Act is that the German public service will be judenrein. The logic of the 2015 Supreme Court decision is that much of the American public service will be christenrein - at least for those who take their Scripture seriously. That doesn't strike me as a small thing - even if one thought it were likely to stop there.
People are so ignorant.
Precursor nazi party politics consisted of the Freikorps -- Ex WWI officers (not enlisted men) murdering communists with impunity.
Some people seem to have gotten their knowledge of history by watching bad television miniseries.
Lary9 thinks the Nazis were "right wing". Such historical ignorance is funny, but for how dangerous it has proven to be.
Fascists are collectivists. Collectivism in all its stripes is left wing.
Lary9 is an idiot.
The good professor should be given exactly the same protections offered to the accused in "sexual" "assault" allegations.
After all, it would not be a criminal case and, as universities have taught us all, only criminal defendants deserve constitutional protections such as the confrontation of witnesses....
Ann's defense of this creepy stalker
For fuck's sake.
Here's Wisconsin's criminal stalking statute.
But don't worry, I'll defend you from the charge of slander!
I find it rather weird and stalker-ish
Interesting to watch the mob shift from screaming "Pinko! Pinko!" ("stalker-ish") at 1:44 to yelling "Red! Red!" ("stalker") at 8:41.
This simply confirms Twitter should die.
Also, using "LOL" makes anyone seem like a half-wit, especially as it seems more and more to be thrown indiscriminately into texts and tweets and other digital communications without regard for meaning. "LOL" seems to have become the typed "like" or "you know," pure rhetorical noise.
True, but in this instance its more than all that, it turns their response into a dismissive statement: who the fuck do you think you are?
True, perfect, drop mic.
But now I know why Althouse defends her. Go to the link, look at the pic.
Elder sister of Lena Dunham, or what?
As for you and your Freikorps, Terry: you say that like it's a bad thing. ?
I dunno... I think the College Republicans' response was too subtle. They should have added a line encouraging "a broader dialogue on the value of the tenure system, in light of recent activities by certain tenured faculty."
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा