Toronto is back! Plus: Controversy at Princeton, bad feminists, the disinformation board up in flames, and international researchers publish a paper on the consequences of vaccine mandates
Some of the commenters here seem to have missed the point. Professor Katz's firing had nothing to do with his consensual relationships with young women. That was just the excuse they used because tenured prof can't (yet) be fired for having the wrong political views. It was his principled stand against wokeness gone mad that led to his firing. He was a heretic to the new religion. If they could have burned him on the stake, I'm sure they would have. True, it is sad that they could use his relationships even as an excuse, but the silencing of dissident voices is, to me, the truly scary part of this story.
The Princeton episode is easy to explain from my perspective.
In every society we have a percentage of malcontents. Malcontents might have a valid reason to be malcontent, but often it is just their slide into a victim mentality, and then as the group forms, a way for some to be part of the group (feel a sense of importance and belonging to something bigger than self). Note that I think this later human interest explains the benefit of organized religion... but that is a topic for another day.
The most active and vocal of feminists are malcontents. They are angry about something in the gender space. And they are fully committed to seek retribution against men... all men... any man they can target. Because it isn't really about the morality of events. It is about individual and group power and a release for the toxic resentment and rage they feel... although nothing they are doing will fix their toxic resentment and rage. That is the problem with people corrupted by a victim mentality... they blame everyone else and seek retribution for what are really internal demons that need to be dealt with.
The issue here from my perspective is that women in general are not effectively punching down these malcontent feminists. I think that women in general are the most guilty here... as they seem to be clutching the feminists movement as some opportunity for their own benefit. They don't really like the #MeToo movement, but hey... anything that provides more female power is good, right?
No, it is not effing good. It is socially nihilistic. It is destroying male-female relationships and really damaging the brand of woman in general. These radical angry feminists have grabbed outsized power within academia and the media. Other women better wake up and take a stand against them, or else they will see themselves and their daughters more miserable and lonely as more men decide that a relationship is not worth the risks.
Does anyone else have a hard time digesting "back to normal." Part of me just wants to ensure that the assholes who were all about the last two year narrative NOT get my goodness back so easily? Or is this just me?
Good column on sexual relations on campus. Women my age were expected to deal with predatory men in the workplace and the classroom the way we handled traffic jams in snowstorms. It was wrong to put this responsibility solely on women because ‘boys will be boys‘ as the old saying went and I’m glad that young activists are expecting men to behave like responsible adults in both environments. However, as you say, young women and young men do have more agency then is often attributed to them in contemporary discussions about power imbalance. And no one mentions the sexual power of the young anymore, but it’s there as a tool for those who want to use it on their bosses or teachers in order to get ahead.
Re: "I get that student/faculty relationships are unwise and perhaps even unethical. And that there should probably be something in place to prevent professors, who have enormous power over students’ career prospects, from abusing that power."
Tara, do you mean relationships where the professor is actually teaching or supervising a student or any professor/student relationship? Unless it's the former, I can't see what the source of power would be, and since we don't feel entitled to interfere with relationships between adults based on their ages, it's not clear to me why all professor/student relationships should be prohibited.
I had not heard anything about this typical university madness, aka REVENGE, aka CANCEL CULTURE. But, it has nothing to do with #metoo. It is simply CANCEL CULTURE to cancel someone who refuses to toe the line, aka WAKE UP and BE WOKE.
It blows me away how Tara always hits these things half-way, while missing the underlying principles / fundamental issue.
“The tear-down-all-norms progressive culture turns out to be surprisingly Victorian when it comes to young women.”
This bugged me a lot about that story as well—that and the fact they tried to drag the former woman into the whole thing over a decade later against her will. At what point are we going to trust that women are capable of being deliberate with their decisions?
What annoyed me the most is it sounds like Princeton basically went through a judicial process that would have been unconstitutional under US law. What kind of world do we live in?
Some of the commenters here seem to have missed the point. Professor Katz's firing had nothing to do with his consensual relationships with young women. That was just the excuse they used because tenured prof can't (yet) be fired for having the wrong political views. It was his principled stand against wokeness gone mad that led to his firing. He was a heretic to the new religion. If they could have burned him on the stake, I'm sure they would have. True, it is sad that they could use his relationships even as an excuse, but the silencing of dissident voices is, to me, the truly scary part of this story.
When even the Globe is fed up with carrying water for the Trudeau Liberals, you know it's bad for them.
Trudeau himself can't seem to go anywhere lately without being boo'd offstage.
The Princeton episode is easy to explain from my perspective.
In every society we have a percentage of malcontents. Malcontents might have a valid reason to be malcontent, but often it is just their slide into a victim mentality, and then as the group forms, a way for some to be part of the group (feel a sense of importance and belonging to something bigger than self). Note that I think this later human interest explains the benefit of organized religion... but that is a topic for another day.
The most active and vocal of feminists are malcontents. They are angry about something in the gender space. And they are fully committed to seek retribution against men... all men... any man they can target. Because it isn't really about the morality of events. It is about individual and group power and a release for the toxic resentment and rage they feel... although nothing they are doing will fix their toxic resentment and rage. That is the problem with people corrupted by a victim mentality... they blame everyone else and seek retribution for what are really internal demons that need to be dealt with.
The issue here from my perspective is that women in general are not effectively punching down these malcontent feminists. I think that women in general are the most guilty here... as they seem to be clutching the feminists movement as some opportunity for their own benefit. They don't really like the #MeToo movement, but hey... anything that provides more female power is good, right?
No, it is not effing good. It is socially nihilistic. It is destroying male-female relationships and really damaging the brand of woman in general. These radical angry feminists have grabbed outsized power within academia and the media. Other women better wake up and take a stand against them, or else they will see themselves and their daughters more miserable and lonely as more men decide that a relationship is not worth the risks.
Does anyone else have a hard time digesting "back to normal." Part of me just wants to ensure that the assholes who were all about the last two year narrative NOT get my goodness back so easily? Or is this just me?
Good column on sexual relations on campus. Women my age were expected to deal with predatory men in the workplace and the classroom the way we handled traffic jams in snowstorms. It was wrong to put this responsibility solely on women because ‘boys will be boys‘ as the old saying went and I’m glad that young activists are expecting men to behave like responsible adults in both environments. However, as you say, young women and young men do have more agency then is often attributed to them in contemporary discussions about power imbalance. And no one mentions the sexual power of the young anymore, but it’s there as a tool for those who want to use it on their bosses or teachers in order to get ahead.
Enjoyed your thoughtful essay about Solveig Gold and Joshua Katz.
Re: "I get that student/faculty relationships are unwise and perhaps even unethical. And that there should probably be something in place to prevent professors, who have enormous power over students’ career prospects, from abusing that power."
Tara, do you mean relationships where the professor is actually teaching or supervising a student or any professor/student relationship? Unless it's the former, I can't see what the source of power would be, and since we don't feel entitled to interfere with relationships between adults based on their ages, it's not clear to me why all professor/student relationships should be prohibited.
So much here that rings true.
Chapelle, Drake... When did the fashion in Tara's circles move from indigenous land acknowledgement epigraphs to Black men acknowledgment epigraphs?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtBUpZFWALU
I had not heard anything about this typical university madness, aka REVENGE, aka CANCEL CULTURE. But, it has nothing to do with #metoo. It is simply CANCEL CULTURE to cancel someone who refuses to toe the line, aka WAKE UP and BE WOKE.
It blows me away how Tara always hits these things half-way, while missing the underlying principles / fundamental issue.
“The tear-down-all-norms progressive culture turns out to be surprisingly Victorian when it comes to young women.”
This bugged me a lot about that story as well—that and the fact they tried to drag the former woman into the whole thing over a decade later against her will. At what point are we going to trust that women are capable of being deliberate with their decisions?
What annoyed me the most is it sounds like Princeton basically went through a judicial process that would have been unconstitutional under US law. What kind of world do we live in?