Dartmouth Students Rebel Against Feminist Professor, She Sues Her Students (Part III)
May 13th, 2008 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & FamiliesBackground: In my blog posts Dartmouth Students Rebel Against Feminist Professor's Manbashing, She Reacts by....Suing Her Students! (Part I) and Part II, I explained how a group of Dartmouth students rebelled against a feminist professor and her manbashing. The professor, rather than engaging in debate, pretended to be a victim, cancelled classes for a week, scurried off to another school to teach, and said she is going to sue her students.
Maureen O'Connor of the IvyGate blog writes:
"Few of Venkatesan's students deny disliking her; they just say it had nothing to do with race, gender, or any other federally-protected characteristic. Rather, the lecturer embodied that special brand of neurotic pedagogical tyranny that includes making rules against questions, refusing to interact with students, and, according to www.thedartmouth.com, 'cancellation of class for a week after the class applauded a student who contradicted Venkatesan’s opinions about post-modernism.'
"Spontaneous applause during a class on literary criticism? Obviously, there is something very wrong with this picture, so outrageously shocking as to shake Venkatesan to her very core: In a class at an Ivy League university, students were paying attention. Worse: They were engaged, and they cared.
"'I was horrified,' Venkatesan said. 'My responsibility is not to stifle them, but when they clapped at his comment, I thought that crossed the line ... I was facing intolerance of ideas and intolerance of freedom of expression.' ...She canceled class because the incident caused her 'intellectual and emotional distress,' she said.
"Then again, being outsmarted by a room full of eighteen-year-olds must be pretty humiliating. A kinder choice would have been emitting a spontaneous snore or two, then preoccupying themselves with a more innocuous form of disrespect, like text messaging during class or ostentatious yawning."
Let's see, the feminist professor is suing her students for questioning her views, and she has the goddamn gall to complain about being the victim of "intolerance of ideas and intolerance of freedom of expression." Wow.
O'Connor calls the professor "Litigious and Passive-Aggressive." That certainly seems apt.
"));
19 queries. 0.534 seconds.
May 13th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
Let's hope that this type of "insurrection" spreads -- like wildfire!
May 13th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Aren't college campuses supposed to be places to express divergent views, not "You believe this way or I'll sue you!!"
May 13th, 2008 at 8:00 pm
I volunteer my legal services, pro bono, to defend the students, and to file appropriate counterclaims against this person.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
@pjk
pjk Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
"Aren't college campuses supposed to be places to express divergent views"
Yes, but it doesn't happen. That is why there is FIRE!
http://www.thefire.org/
May 13th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
What are Venkatesan's views on postmodernism? The article says the class questioned them but apparently doesn't say what they are. (I assume many feminists are postmodernists, since they frequently 'deconstruct' arguments and systems they disagree with, and these feminists are sometimes ideologically driven).
May 13th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Jay R. wrote, "Let's hope that this type of "insurrection" spreads -- like wildfire!"
It's my guess that most of the discontent was on the way the particular class was being conducted. I don't know how much this event will encourage 'anti-P.C.-feminist' or 'anti-collegiate-indoctrination' protest elsewhere. There's always hope.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
I am just wondering, on what legal grounds does this woman have to sue her students for questioning her views? I am not well-versed in the law by any means and yet from the little I do know I cannot think of anything that she could argue beyond harassment and that clearly does not hold any water. Beyond that, I wonder why the university is keeping this woman there. Perhaps she is tenured and I missed that, but I think that this kind of behavior suggests that she really should not be in front of a class.
May 13th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
This story makes me sad because this just dilutes the pool of lawsuits where actual grievances exist.
May 13th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
Regarding the subject of my two comments above, I decided to look in my copy of "Legalizing Misandry" just now, for some of what its authors say about the realtionship between feminism, postmodernism, ideological thinking, and the recent attacks on scence. I feel it is pertinent to the recent discussions about Venkatesan, because, as the authors point out, "Their [feminists'] headquarters is the college classroom." (Also a couple people mentioned in other threads on the Venkatesan case, about how science itself might come to be affected by feminism.)
from page 100:
"In the first place, we do not know that sexual or ethnic diversity actual adds up to intellectual diversity. And that, presumably, is more to the point in the university than its genetic pool of students. Sexual or ethnic diversity [such as that brought about by affirmative action and entrance quotas] might lead to tolerance. On the other hand, it might lead to stronger support for sexual or ethnic ideologies. If so, the end result would be greater polarization and therefore greater intolerance than ever before. Indeed, ideological intolerance is already rampant in the university and has been during the entire period of affirmative action. In this conformist and censorious atmosphere, not many university teachers actually encourage independent thought that is based on critical analysis of fashionable political ideologies. On the contrary, many encourage students to stamp out whatever can be classified as politically correct. Some students might report teachers who create a "hostile environment", for instance, even if only questioning a feminst doctrine."
[of coure, in the Venkatesan case, what is effectively the reverse has taken place - the teacher has complained becaue the students were "un-P.C."]
May 13th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
[above comment continued]
from "Legalizing Misandry", pp. 270-272:
"Even though many other ideologies have been discredited by history and therefore abandoned, feminist ideology has been remarkably successful because of its postmodern matrix...Postmodernism is not, per se, an ideology. In theory, it opposes all ideologies. In practice, though, nothing could be further from the truth, not only because of the intellectual dishonesty among postmodernists, who 'deconstruct' all ideologies except the ones that they like, but also because of their epistemology [theory or philosophy of knowledge]: How do we know about the world? On what intellectual authority can we discuss the world and act in it? Modernism offers one model, which is usually identified as science, but the same basic principles - they add up to the disciplined use of reason - apply to other forms of scholarship. Postmodernism offers another model. And ideological feminism offers a variation on that...
"At the beginning of this third millenium, most people in our society have come to value science, especially in connection with medicine and technology..but a growing number, so far confined mainly to ideologues or religious fundamentalists, have come to negate the value of science in general..
"For postmodernists in general, the chief problem with science - or indeed, with modern scholarhip of any kind - is its origin in one particular culture at one particular time - Western Europe in the seventeenth century. From this origin, they deduce that science is just one cultural construction among many, one that is inextricably tied to the beliefs of one particular people at one particular time and therefore worthy of no privileged position in relation to the ways of thinking of produced in other cultures in other times. That is the theory. The fact is that postmodernists almost always do privilege particular ways of thinking: marginal Western ones and non-Western ones...
"For ideological feminists, the problem is more specific. They believe that Western culture in the seventeenth century was fatally contaminated by the ultimate poison of patriarchy, which could be the result of either maleness itself or a form of masculinity so deeply embedded that it might as well be maleness. And if this claim fails to convince political adversaries, they simply "re-situate" or "re-contextualize" their point of view n some other "discourse" that will..."
May 13th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
In the post above where it says, "many [professors] encourage students to stamp out whatever can be classified as politically correct" should of course be "politically incorrect".
May 13th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
TS asks: "On what legal grounds does this woman have to sue her students for questioning her views?"
None -- at least none that are currently recognized by any jurisdiction of which I am aware. Perhaps she will establish a precedent by inventing a new tort called "Ignoring a woman's interpretation of her own experience," which, as we all know, is the worst offense one can commit against a radical feminist (it simply means "you, a member of the oppressor class, are not allowed to tell me, a woman, that I am wrong -- about anything").
I would suggest that the students might have a basis to seek damages from this woefully misguided woman for abuse of process or other bad faith litigation.
May 13th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
Show me a feminist who has any respect for men, and I'll show you a figment of your imagination. Their mission, as shown through their actions, is to emasculate every male in the world.
May 13th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
Hey Glenn, 3 posts about this wingnut - this really is shooting fish in a barrel. In fact her behavior seems to point at mental instability, to the point where she fails to realize that the reason she has a teaching position at all is due to the politically correct campus environment - in the real world she'd be escorted from the building.
She's a sad, pathetic individual. The real story is the kid gloves treatment she gets from campus administration, precisely because of her PC agenda.
May 13th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
Jay R
"Let's hope that this type of "insurrection" spreads -- like wildfire!"
MCA. my experience trying to spread the message of mens rights on college campusses tells me we need more professors to be bold, and take even the most minimal of a stand, and the students will fallow.
Most students are afraid of the feminist assault's with their banging of pots and pans and stuff in front of their dorm.
May 13th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
intellectual...distress ?!?
Nothing more than a self-fabricted ticket to victiimhood...
DanH
May 13th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
I made the mistake of discussing men's issues at a campus "social justice club" and received such a tremendous backlash that me and my friends were banned from discussing masculism during meetings. They even criticized me in the campus paper, including a public statement that the club would not tolerate masculist discourse. And to think the club was actually called "students for social justice"!!
It was a bad experience to say the least. Thankfully, the group seems to have disbanded due to lack of interest.
Regarding this story, I am glad that it is making headlines. We need to shed light on the university thoughth police.
MXY
May 13th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
@Tommy Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
"Show me a feminist who has any respect for men, and I'll show you a figment of your imagination."
"Feminism is the intellectual organization of gender hatred, just as Marxism was the intellectual organization of class hatred. Feminism's business is fashioning weapons to be used against men in society, education, politics, law and divorce court. The feminist aim is to overthrow "patriarchal tyranny." In this undertaking, the male's civil rights count for no more than those of the bourgeoisie in Soviet Russia or the Jews in National Socialist Germany." -- What civil rights has wrought. Paul Craig Roberts, July 26, 2000. Townhall.com - Creators Syndicate.
May 13th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
@MasculistXY Says:
May 13th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
"I made the mistake of discussing men's issues at a campus "social justice club" and received such a tremendous backlash that me and my friends were banned from discussing masculism during meetings."
Seems like you had a case FIRE would have taken up...
http://www.thefire.org/
May 14th, 2008 at 12:56 am
This woman clearly in my mind has serious personal problems. I think the tragedy is that, with political correctness running amok on university campuses, no one seems to have had the courage to surface those problems and help her to get the help she needs. It is not possible to solve problems that political correctness refuses to acknowledge exist. And that's sad.
Dartmouth needs to take a hard look at how they screen potential teachers and how they deal with teachers whose personal problems spill over into the classroom.
May 14th, 2008 at 1:01 am
mca wrote:
"Most students are afraid of the feminist assault's with their banging of pots and pans and stuff in front of their dorm"
Do they actually do that? What if you're trying to study and need quiet? It almost sounds like a form of hazing (not necessarily fitting the legal definition, if there is one).
May 14th, 2008 at 1:02 am
Tim Murray,
Where might one find a correct, "legal" definition of 'frivolous lawsuit' or 'frivolous complaint'? I mean, is there a series of characteristics that are 'ticked off' in order to characterize an action as frivolous?
May 14th, 2008 at 1:06 am
Tim Murray said: I volunteer my legal services, pro bono, to defend the students, and to file appropriate counterclaims against this person.
If you want to make a difference then name the University in the lawsuit. If you manage to put the hurt on one Ivy league institution every college and university in North America will perk up and pay attention.
May 14th, 2008 at 1:17 am
I read through the interview with this woman earlier and couldn't help but notice that the basis for her belief that these students were out of line for questioning her was simply that she had achieved more education than they have.
Quite frankly that is silly... I've seen professors make mistakes many times before, and when it is brought to their attention, they usually have the good sense to thank the student for pointing it out (of course these errors are usually actual mistakes that they themselves recognize).
I think it is fully reasonable for a professor to be in command of the classroom and to control the general flow of the discussion. However, when in the course of an intellectual debate during lecture, or when a student asks a question which seems to contradict what the teacher is saying... it is perfectly within reason to explore what they have to say so long as they ask it respectfully.
The only way students will learn is if they are corrected on an intellectual basis and not on an authoritarian basis.
A teacher simply isn't right because they are the teacher (which seems to be her premis here)... but instead they are correct because their ideas are presumably grounded in fact, logic, or reason. As a teacher they have the responsibility to educate by showing these facts, demonstrating this logic, and expouding upon the rational basis for their claims... to show the students WHY this is what they are being taught.
Students should never be expected to just accept what they are being taught simply because the teacher has more education... that is ridiculous.
That being said... it is also perfectly reasonable for a professor to say "it would take up too much time in lecture to explain that point, but I'd be happy to meet with you after class to discuss/explain it".
May 14th, 2008 at 1:39 am
Jason:
She is a postmodernist, so the word 'fact' is probably meaningless to her.
May 14th, 2008 at 1:51 am
jason wrote,
"The only way students will learn is if they are corrected on an intellectual basis and not on an authoritarian basis"
Assuming you mean college, how many Ph.D.'s have you known? They know everthing, don't they?* If you start to correct one of them, you'd better make damn sure that they're wrong, and that you are right. Otherwise you're subjected to the wrath of God.
Besides, it depends on the subject matter. I guess in the social "sciences" there's a fair amount of room for subjectivity and opinion. Apparently this was the case with Ms. V. , and her outlook was right by definition.
*I had a friend who was a Ph.D. and he was an okay guy, but then again he was not a prof. He was tutoring part-time and was a "mister mom" at home.
May 14th, 2008 at 6:48 am
CW asks: "Where might one find a correct, "legal" definition of 'frivolous lawsuit' or 'frivolous complaint'? I mean, is there a series of characteristics that are 'ticked off' in order to characterize an action as frivolous?"
There are innumerable judicial precedents of court cases where judges have written opinions explaining this. A frivolous law suit is generally one that is filed without evidentiary support (i.e., the facts, in reality, don't match the claims asserted) or without legal basis (i.e., there is no precedent for the "claims" asserted, and no reaonable basis to conclude that the state would extend existing law to provide a cause of action for the alleged wrong) for the pleading, or it is filed for an improper purpose (i.e. harassment).
May 14th, 2008 at 7:19 am
Hey maybe I can sue the entire state of Wisconsin for cheering the Packers and booing the Bears...
May 14th, 2008 at 7:22 am
"Intellectual distress?" Don't you have to have some intelligence to have this?
May 14th, 2008 at 8:42 am
Jorge posts a quote by Paul Craig Roberts- "Feminism is the intellectual organization of gender hatred, just as Marxism was the intellectual organization of class hatred. Feminism's business is fashioning weapons to be used against men in society, education, politics, law and divorce court. The feminist aim is to overthrow ‘patriarchal tyranny’."
Akhi says, - What do you suppose they are attempting to will replace patriarchy with? And it aint some equal shmeakmal shtuff, its matriarchy (which they perceive to be utopian).
May 14th, 2008 at 9:41 am
Dammit, now I'm going to have to google/wiki "postmodernism" and "deconstruction". I had hoped to make it through my life without wasting processor cycles and memory on post-graduate-smugness vocabulary.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:10 am
Norman Says:
"Assuming you mean college, how many Ph.D.'s have you known? They know everthing, don't they?* If you start to correct one of them, you'd better make damn sure that they're wrong, and that you are right. Otherwise you're subjected to the wrath of God."
I think that really depends on the ego that the person has.
Most people don't like to be corrected in their area of expertise by a lay person... and it doesn't take a PhD to get someone to feel that way.
What do you think would happen if you just walked up to a plumber or an electrician and told them how they should do their job?
They probably wouldn't respond to kindly to it.
The same goes with "correcting" an expert on something that is within their field... of course you should be sure they are wrong, because technically the odds are greater that the lay person correcting them is incorrect.
It's all about how the issue is approached, what the topic is, and the personality of the individual.
Even people with PhD's won't generally go around correcting other PhD's in their area of expertise unless they are "damn sure" that they are wrong.
As for how many PhD's have I known?... well I've "known" as in been friends with or had a constant interaction with less than 50... but I've met hundreds. They come in all flavors and varieties just like the rest of society.
May 14th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
What would happen is there was a "Men's Studies" class on the curriculum at a major university? Why isn't there a Men's Health month? Why aren't there a bunch of V.A.M.A laws to protect men from violent women? Why are there male feminists still? Why am I asking questions I already know the answer to?
May 14th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
"I made the mistake of discussing men's issues at a campus 'social justice club' and received such a tremendous backlash that me and my friends were banned from discussing masculism during meetings."
They can't do that.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:05 am
--Why are there male feminists still?----
Good Question. Most of these men are ambivalent about their sex. That is the mildest appreciation I can bestow upon these "intellectuals".
They refuse to see the darker side of feminism, unless they are on the wrong side of its implications.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
I am very much of the belief that things of this nature would occur less frequently if men were organized effectivly. My pet thought lately is that men need to have their own Men's Studies departments. Run by men, for men.
Had Dartmouth had such a department I think several things would have been different. First, it would be much harder for feminists to basically "say anything" without reprocusions. By not having a counter weight to organized feminism the most extreme elements within feminism not only survive but eventually find their way to the top.
Secondly, it is critical that men begin to develop their own agenda rather than simply reacting to what women do. There is a lot of research that is not being done because of the lack of demand for it. (notice I did not say need). Women are allowed to present themselves as the angels because we are stuck in a rut with one wheel firmly in the 1890s and the other in the 1970s.
The net effect of having academic studies devoted to men's issues would be earth shattering. My guess is that any attempt to set up such a department would be fought bitterly by organized feminists who have grown intelectually fat by the lack of competition.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
John Boy,
So instead of one department for idiocy we have two?
What nonsensical courses are they going to teach?
Secondly it will go down the same route simply because the **right** men are not going to get outside funding. There is an outside agenda to this; one only needs to look at the UN to see this.
Really education has really gone down the drain. You pay tens of thousands of dollars so you can do a course on The Phallus and learn skewed and narrow history on how women had it hard, and we should bitch about the white man. And at the same time lump all men as one cohesive evil empire, including them "coloured men". And they can all feel superior and holier than thou because they were born without any balls (pun intended). And may I add grew up without any rational intellect, because rational and logic are patriarchal.
What does this get you? Priya Venkatesan:
"I am not at all bitter about poor teaching evaluations. I am a currently a Fellow at one of the most reputed research (emphasize research) institutions in the country and I am the product of the educational system of the finest research (emphasize research) academic institutions in the country. I am very confident in my ability to teach as well and know that I will perform well where I am right now (which is undisclosed) because basically it offers a healthy environment for academic discussion, debate and personal and professional growth…"
People should read what she wrote and said. See seems to think by mentioning the word lab, research, education over and over again makes her intelligent. I admit her writing did confuse the living daylight out of me, because simply she makes no sense. She writes for the sake of sounding clever.
"Molecular Biology in Narrative Form: A Study of the Experimental Trajectory of Science" by Priya Venkatesan.
Should have given alarm bells that this women doesn’t actually know her profession.
May 15th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
Why are there male feminists?
I believe it is mainly a form of neo-chivalry posing as avant garde social elitism. But by the end of the day, putting womens needs before those of men defines the very term chivalry. Also, I think male guilt has a lot to do with it.................and perhaps getting laid.
MXY
May 15th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
MXY
"Why are there male feminists?
I believe it is mainly a form of neo-chivalry posing as avant garde social elitism."
MCA says " very refined articulation, and I would add that the current form of neo-chivalry, Is very much misguided chivalry, because letting women lie in a court of law, at the end of the day, is really not protecting women at all. "
May 20th, 2008 at 11:37 am
She was upset that students disagreed with "her opinions".
Hilarious! This is why the mantra at leading technology companies is "bring data, everybody has opinions"....
May 20th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
She certainly does not project herself as an "empowered" woman. How cowardly of her to do what she has done and what she intends to do. Evidently, she has had her way all thru her schooling and her adult life. One can only imagine
her social circle of misandrists constantly supporting her. Divergent points of view, let alone logic is too threatening to her fragile ego. This woman is not accustomed to opposition. It shocks her. Feminism indeed.
May 20th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
The Dartmouth feminist's hash can be settled forthwith, with a complaint to the university that the woman is engaging in hostile environment sexual harassment. From what the story indicates, there should be no trouble in finding testimony to the fact that she creates a hostile environment in her lectures against heterosexual males, which is, quite simply, illegal according to the federal agency with the duty to investigate discrimination against students on the basis of sex or gender (don't ask. . . there's a logic, but I proceed). All schools in the U. S. that receive federal funding must abide by Title IX of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which Title forbids creation of a a hostile environment on the basis of sex which interferes with equal access to education. This agency is the Office for Civil Rights of the Dept. of Education, which publishes online a "Sexual Harassment Guidance" which contains stipulated behavior that this teacher's classroom behavior fulfills. A student complaint to the appropriate school administrator, with an added threat to go to the OCR if the teacher is not forthwith called down for her behavior should do the trick.
BTW, every feminist teacher in the country who teaches at a school that receives federal funding is vulnerable to such a complaint and to the appropriate discipline.
I myself am engaged in a massive complaint against a large public university on this subject, but I can't share the details at this time. You've got to know the law on this subject, and SH jurisprudence is hell on wheels, but one thing is clear: all complaints that women make against men are the same complaints that men can make against women when it comes to federally-interdicted discrimination on the basis of sex. When feminists begin to feel the sting, we will begin to see serious changes on the gender war front.