[FoRK] The Great Prohibition - Title IX craziness

Stephen D. Williams sdw at lig.net
Sun May 31 11:49:30 PDT 2015


Someone who just received their bachelors could join a masters+PhD program, where they might start to TA classes fairly quickly.  I 
believe there are a lot of cases where you can teach, i.e. be the "professor", with a master's degree.  You could achieve that in 
1-2 years.  If 22 is the nominal age of someone graduating "on time", then they could be helping to teach at 23 and actually 
teaching by 23-24.  On the other hand, some people don't finish their bachelor's or advanced degree until much later.

http://study.com/articles/How_to_Become_a_College_Professor_Education_and_Career_Roadmap.html
>
>
>       Job Requirements
>
> The minimum level of education required is a master's degree, which can qualify an individual for work as a professor at a 
> community college.
>

sdw

On 5/30/15 1:12 PM, Chris Olds wrote:
> It happens. My son started teaching at Harvard Business School when he was 27.
> Of course, he's married, so ick would still apply.
>
> /cco
>
>> On May 30, 2015, at 12:36 PM, geege schuman <geege4 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Congratulations to the *27-year old* professor!
>>> On May 30, 2015 3:01 PM, "Stephen D. Williams" <sdw at lig.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Is even talking about it abusive?
>>>
>>> A 60 year old dating a 21 year old is disconcerting.  A 27 year old
>>> professor dating a 23 year old student, not so much.
>>>
>>> Can you factor out age gap ick from professor / student ick?  Are there
>>> different varieties of professor / student ick?
>>>
>>> sdw
>>>
>>>> On 5/30/15 11:47 AM, Gregory Alan Bolcer wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Professors dating their students is icky.
>>>>
>>>> Greg
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/30/2015 11:19 AM, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Way overboard.  Hopefully we'll work our way back, keeping in mind the
>>>>> extremes that we've already visited.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/05/29/laura_kipnis_title_ix_investigation_feminism_political_correctness_controversy.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Title IX Investigation Opened Against Female Northwestern Professor
>>>>>> Over Column, Tweet
>>>>>> Laura Kipnis during a 2014 interview.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In February, Northwestern film professor and liberal cultural critic
>>>>>> (and occasional Slate contributor) Laura Kipnis wrote an article for
>>>>>> the Chronicle of Higher Education called "Sexual Paranoia Strikes
>>>>>> Academe." Kipnis' piece was critical of what she called the "layers of
>>>>>> prohibition and sexual terror" that have inspired campus rules
>>>>>> prohibiting romantic relationships between professors and students.
>>>>>> Wrote Kipnis:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     It’s the fiction of the all-powerful professor embedded in the new
>>>>>> campus codes that appalls me. And the kowtowing to the
>>>>>> fiction—kowtowing wrapped in a vaguely feminist air of rectitude. If
>>>>>> this is feminism, it’s feminism hijacked by melodrama. The
>>>>>> melodramatic imagination’s obsession with helpless victims and
>>>>>> powerful predators is what’s shaping the conversation of the moment,
>>>>>> to the detriment of those whose interests are supposedly being
>>>>>> protected, namely students. The result? Students’ sense of
>>>>>> vulnerability is skyrocketing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Later in the piece, she argued that students "so committed to their
>>>>>> own vulnerability, conditioned to imagine they have no agency, and
>>>>>> protected from unequal power arrangements in romantic life" will
>>>>>> struggle to deal with the problems and conflicts of the real world.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Friday, Kipnis published another piece in the Chronicle, revealing
>>>>>> that, in a twist that's ironic on more than one level, she is now the
>>>>>> subject of an investigation into graduate student complaints that her
>>>>>> earlier column and a subsequent tweet violated Title IX, the law that
>>>>>> prohibits sex descrimination in education. Her piece, in addition to
>>>>>> pointing out the absurdity of being charged with discriminatory
>>>>>> behavior because of an essay, alleges an investigatory process that's
>>>>>> ridiculously opaque for the accused:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     I wouldn’t be informed about the substance of the complaints until
>>>>>> I met with the investigators. Apparently the idea was that they’d tell
>>>>>> me the charges, and then, while I was collecting my wits, interrogate
>>>>>> me about them. The term "kangaroo court" came to mind. I wrote to ask
>>>>>> for the charges in writing. The coordinator wrote back thanking me for
>>>>>> my thoughtful questions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One of Kipnis' accusers was alluded to, though not by name and
>>>>>> seemingly without rancor or judgment, in Kipnis' first piece. This
>>>>>> accuser apparently said Kipnis' allusion to her was "retaliatory" and
>>>>>> believes the above-linked tweet refers to her, which Kipnis says is
>>>>>> not the case. The other accuser was not mentioned at all in Kipnis'
>>>>>> essay but is said to have brought charges "on behalf" of the
>>>>>> university and two individuals who were referred to anonymously in the
>>>>>> first piece.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kipnis was not allowed to have an attorney present during her
>>>>>> interview with Title IX investigators, she writes, but she was allowed
>>>>>> to bring along another faculty member as a "support person" provided
>>>>>> that the person she brought did not speak. That support person later
>>>>>> discussed Kipnis' situation at a "Faculty Senate" meeting—and has
>>>>>> subsequently been accused of, yes, committing a Title IX violation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ben Mathis-Lilley edits the Slatest. Follow @Slatest on Twitter.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://chronicle.com/article/Sexual-Paranoia/190351/
>>>>>
>>>>>> "I don’t quite know how to characterize the willingness of my supposed
>>>>>> feminist colleagues to hand over the rights of faculty—women as well
>>>>>> as men—to administrators and attorneys in the name of protection from
>>>>>> unwanted sexual advances," he said. "I suppose the word would be
>>>>>> ‘zeal.’" His own view was that the existing sexual-harassment policy
>>>>>> already protected students from coercion and a hostile environment;
>>>>>> the new rules infantilized students and presumed the guilt of
>>>>>> professors. When I asked if I could quote him, he begged for
>>>>>> anonymity, fearing vilification from his colleagues.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These are things you’re not supposed to say on campuses now. But let’s
>>>>>> be frank. To begin with, if colleges and universities around the
>>>>>> country were in any way serious about policies to prevent sexual
>>>>>> assaults, the path is obvious: Don’t ban teacher-student romance, ban
>>>>>> fraternities. And if we want to limit the potential for sexual
>>>>>> favoritism—another rationale often proffered for the new policies—then
>>>>>> let’s include the institutionalized sexual favoritism of spousal
>>>>>> hiring, with trailing spouses getting ranks and perks based on whom
>>>>>> they’re sleeping with rather than CVs alone, and brought in at
>>>>>> salaries often dwarfing those of senior and more accomplished
>>>>>> colleagues who didn’t have the foresight to couple more advantageously.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lastly: The new codes sweeping American campuses aren’t just a
>>>>>> striking abridgment of everyone’s freedom, they’re also intellectually
>>>>>> embarrassing. Sexual paranoia reigns; students are trauma cases
>>>>>> waiting to happen. If you wanted to produce a pacified, cowering
>>>>>> citizenry, this would be the method. And in that sense, we’re all the
>>>>>> victims.
>>>>> sdw



More information about the FoRK mailing list