Sex Week also violates the university's own speech codes, since even the titles of the workshops--and thus any Sex Week promotional materials--are "sexually suggestive."

Not a problem; the policy only applies to things men say.

Dee has it right. I would in serious trouble if I asked a female colleague to inspect my equipment. LAB equipment, people!

I'm sure if the Aggrieved Wymen organized a slut walk, that would be OK. But if I referred to the participants as sluts I would be slut shaming and engaging a hate speech.

Of course, that goes back to your recent post about post-modern feminism. It's about controlling men, and if you can control them, to exile them to Neverland.

@dee: not ALL men... :P

Y'know, I'm starting to think that fucking and talking at universities are going to be two things which

[A.] will never be taught well, but which students are morally compelled to do master on their own, just like anyone who ever lived and

[B.] are never going to be particularly interesting for the rest of us to read about.

"universities speak in lofty terms about the importance of free speech when it is politically convenient--and then throw it under the bus when it isn't."

Same thing applies to all principles and any environment where liberals are dominant. Their actions speak louder than their words. Liberals pay lip service to all the most noble principles - freedom, democracy, civil liberties, free speech, equal rights, etc. - but by their actions it's obvious that they don't give a damn about any of that stuff.

Actions that fall short of noble ideals, wholly true.

This is not a problem that Republicans have...

> Actions that fall short of noble
> ideals, wholly true.
>
> This is not a problem that
> Republicans have...

Who says the ideals are "noble"? Leftydom is all about completed unfounded presumptions of goodwill.

Second, your first appearance in my view with an offering of not-funny sarcasm is noted. That kind of teen snark is distinctively, or at least preponderantly, lefty as well.

Lefties wanna put other people's money and consequences on the line to defend their own ideals, as they've never stepped into the world to barter and test those ideals for themselves.

What's "noble" about diminished standards of justice for a life-derailing sexual assault conviction?

"@dee: not ALL men... :P"

Our Canadian friend has a good point. A driving force, maybe the driving force, behind modern feminism is this: To render invisible all men that the feminist women don't find attractive, which is most men. The men they do find attractive are those who are of high status, in a primitive way -- famous actors, influential powerful politicians, and men who became wealthy through inheritance or political connections. It's a very primitive form of sexuality that postmodern feminism advocates, and the tribal leaders and shamen are the men who fire their dreams.

That's why I think postmodern feminism will make its peace with polygamy: because it gives more women access to high-status men, while denying mating opportunities to men of lower status. Both of those things are primary goals of postmodern feminism.

That's why I think postmodern feminism will make its peace with polygamy: because it gives more women access to high-status men, while denying mating opportunities to men of lower status. Both of those things are primary goals of postmodern feminism.

Posted by: Cousin Dave at October 3, 2014 7:26 AM

I don't think they have given it this much thought. Like a six year old throwing a tantrum, they cant get beyond *I want*....
Things to be different in a way that pleases me.

That is why it is one of the most primitive forms of sexuality Isab. There is no initial thought involved. It all starts out instinctually. Then the rationalizations come out after the fact.