Seriously, who doesn't love a dirty joke once in a while?

People laugh at me when I say we need to get rid of the Department of Education.

Still laughing?

What is really shocking is that so many university administrations have already responded positively to a clearly irresponsible directive. First step should be to fire everyone involved. Then close the Department of Education.

I agree with Brian. Really, things are getting beyond ridiculous.

I agree with Brian. Really, things are getting beyond ridiculous.

Just be thankful you're not getting all the government you're paying for. And with Obamacare coming closer and closer...you'll get more of it!

We're rapidly approaching the point where parents will have to teach their sons, from a young age, that girls and women are fragile china and you must keep your distance lest you accidentally break one. When this generation grows up, they will perceive workplaces with women as environments where they can't function.

I'm not sure what happens after that. Ambition and the desire to accomplish mean that it's unrealistic to expect an entire generation of men to spend their lives in their parents' basements playing Wii. Some of them might go abroad in search of other territories to conquer. However, if they expect to also find mates there, they won't, because selective abortion policies in China and India, plus honor killings in Islamic countries, means there will be a huge worldwide shortage of women. I'm seeing the possibility that, two generations from now, worldwide there will be up to 500 million men who will not be able to find either jobs or mates. That means that a lot of territory abroad will already be occupied by mate-less men, and they will not welcome more men invading their territory.

It's possible that in this century, this will all lead to the world being subject to wars the likes of which it has never seen, as men with nothing else to live for fight over the small bits of unconquered territory remaining on Earth. It's also possible that men, driven to create a substitute for the women that are unavailable to them, will devise robotic companionship devices that will break the final non-reproductive links between men and women. Neither of these developments bodes well for the human race.

Cousin Dave,

But isn't that exactly what we are seeing in the case of a lot of the muslim extremists. Add in the illiteracy component, and you get exactly what you are describing.

Any parents who would willingly send thier sons to college, ought to be slapped. They are setting them up for a possible lifetime of pain.

Women are their own worst enemies.

Its true what they say, decisions are not made in the board room, they're made on the golf course. And teaching women to be offended and delicate at the notion of being "checked out" or hearing a dirty joke, is like teaching them not to socialize with half the human race. The first time a man gets hit with a lawsuit because he told a blonde joke, the rest of the men learn not to trust women, not to treat them like colleagues or peers, or even trustworthy friends, and it teaches employers that it is a bad idea to hire women, let alone promote them.

College is a good way to make women virtually unemployable.

This only reinforces the profound sense of entitlement most women feel. And it's not just teenagers and college kids.

Why did God make women smarter than cows?
So that they don't shit all over the floor when you squeeze their tits!

Any woman who doesn't think that's funny is a woman I don't want to know (or work with).

Exactly how does one go about proving with the "preponderance of the evidence" that someone used elevator eyes?

First of all, one cannot prove what someone else was looking at.

Second of all, since when can it be a crime to look at other people who are in public. If you do not wish to be seen then stay inside.

This is just one of those measures to provide a system for women to punish men who they view as beneath them on the social ladder from so much as approaching them like fellow human beings.

These sorts of laws existed in the dark ages when severe punishments were issued if a serf so much as met the gaze of a lady from the nobility. They also existed during slavery to prevent slaves from looking at wealthy women.

While it seems like we are making social progress we always manage to revert to old and unacceptable customs.

Exactly how does one go about proving with the "preponderance of the evidence" that someone used elevator eyes?Women never lie about elevator eyes.

I am a big supporter of TheFire.org - mentioned in the article. They defend free speech rights on campus. If you know anyone who is on campus and is having their free speech rights violated -- whether they're liberal, conservative, atheist, a believer -- FIRE will go to bat for them, free of charge.

Oh, and Martin, that's very funny.

This "elevator eyes" thing sounds like behavior that a woman would like a man to exhibit if she was interested in dating him.

Put another way if Brad Pitt circa 2000 "elevator eyes" a gal, her reaction is likely some preening and a slight smile, hoping he strikes up conversation. If a dumpy middle-aged schmoe does it, she is nauseated. A 6'5" hulk with shaved head, tattoos and bad teeth? She feels mild terror. Same objective behavior by each, but the "crime" is based entirely on the subjective reaction of the person whose person and life is not subject to any alteration, let alone harm.

As reality noted, it sounds more like an attempt to make sure males generally lacking sexual desirability to women conduct themselves like genderless drones around women until a particular woman expressly permits otherwise.

Sounds like a bad idea.

What women who wish to have campuses free of any male "harrassment" is that they are giving up their own agency to make a decision. When you allow bureaucracy to be annoyed on your behalf, or other unrelated women to be annoyed on your behalf, you have given them power to make decisicions in your stead.

What is most often true is that a woman will gladly accept attention from the right guy where it will be seen as unwelcome from any other. In giving up that decision making to a faceless rules commitee, or to an unrelated woman who can allege abuse on her behalf, the right guy isn't ever going to bother. The only guys around will be completely boring, because they have to keep their interactions strictly neutral.

I suppose to some people that is by design, those that feel that men are beasts or whatever... the important takeaway is that the people who actually feel that way are a small number, making an outsize effect because they are allowed to, and the effect is corrosive to both genders.

If women think guys have a problem with commitment NOW, imagine the chilling effect this has? For women it takes away their individual rights and responsibility to make a DECISION about what they like and don't like, and WHO they will like.

All happening in college, which is one of the most target rich environments you will ever have, and at a time when you can chases and be chased without a lot of the externalities that come later.

But then who thinks about unintended consequence, and who INTENDS this consequence?

Spartee Says:

"Same objective behavior by each, but the "crime" is based entirely on the subjective reaction of the person whose person and life is not subject to any alteration, let alone harm."

This is perfectly worded.

Criminal behavior must be determined objectively by assessing the actions of the people involved and the objective details of the situation.

Criminal behavior cannot be determined by the subjective emotional state of the person reporting the "crime".

Colleges might as well determine by upon entrance to the campus which men are desirable enough to get the “privilege” of interacting with women and which men need to stay in their dorm rooms except when attending class.

I didn't know cows shit when you squeeze their tits. Dairy cows, or meat cows? What sounds do they make when you give them an orgasm? Like women, only deeper?

Amy, Reality and Spartee nail it. Unfortunately today, to be in the workplace/university, female, and pretty is to basically be a modern-day Russian Czar; IOW free to throw any other less-than-movie-star-attractive-and-rich male into unemployability, or campus expulsion, at any time for any reason or no reason.

I learned the hard way about this on my last job, while of course all the popular kids were free to do whatever they wanted, at work or outside of it. Fine, whatever. At my next job, all any of the women are ever going to get out of me for conversation is "yes, ma'am" and "no ma'am", and a faraway look in my eyes.

Jeez, qdpsteve, that's got to be the saddest thing I ever heard.

So, what happens if it's a woman making a joke that "makes someone uncomfortable?" I've never had a problem with dirty jokes, and I know quite a few, and have told them in appropriate settings, usually to my male friends, but what if some woman overhears and is uncomfortable? Do I get a pass because I'm female, or does that make me enough outside the norm that I would need to be punished as well?

It seems to me that these rules are mostly put in place to keep women "in power" over men, but what do those same women do when they're being offended by another woman? Or does the context a woman telling the joke make it suddenly less offensive?

This is just an expression of the DOE's desire to see more men found guilty of harassment. Because they really have no business setting the evidentiary standard for every school, especially when considering that each institution has different procedures. The DOE has no idea of whether they're correcting or damaging existing processes. They just want more bodies. Academic adjudication standards are notoriously lax to begin with, often removing basic rights of the accused, like review of evidence and cross examination. Reducing the burden of proof may leave many men with no viable defense at all.

"but what if some woman overhears and is uncomfortable? Do I get a pass because I'm female" Jazzhands

don't you get a dirty look for being a traitor to your gender and are then brought before some secret society? /joke

far as I've ever seen, you get a pass... men are pigs and girlz have power, or something. Even in college in the 80's that attitude was pretty prevalent, though they didn't have policy to back it up.

"but what if some woman overhears and is uncomfortable? Do I get a pass because I'm female" - Jazzhands

Of course you get a pass. But the male listeners to the joke probably won't.

On elevator eyes -- If the women is wearing a blouse/shirt that almost reveals her bra -- I'm going to notice. At this point, if that gets me in trouble, you can kiss my ass.

However, if they expect to also find mates there, they won't, because selective abortion policies in China and India, plus honor killings in Islamic countries, means there will be a huge worldwide shortage of women. -- Cousin Dave at June 22, 2011 8:14 AM

CD,

As I understand it many parts of China and India are already experiencing an involuntary homosexual revolution because of the lack of female partners. The dowry on the available girls is being paid, etc.

The other is that they are coming out with female robots that have voice and facial recognition feature's similar to the AIBO dog. (Why are flashes of Muffit and Cherry 2000 running through my head? ;-)

This only adds to my already negative feelings about educational institutions. Between this, "College Conspiracy" and my own experience with university, I'm so disillusioned, that I look forward to an Internet revolution in education.

There's no reason to have to go to a brick-and-mortar school to stand in front of a mediocre lecturer. We'll all end up buying lectures from the iTunes store and going to iUniversity. Or the lectures will be free and the money will come from exam fees required to earn the credential. Education as it exists today is obsolete.

Flynne: gee, thanks. ;-)

Don't mean for folks like Amy to break out the violin for me. I'll be okay. I'm just sick of being abused, thrown away, taken for granted, and bullied. I had one boss who fired me for having the unmitigated gall to attend a job interview at another company (this *after* being shown several times that she and her coworker/girlfriends had absolutely *no* respect for me inside and outside of the workplace), one who all but forced me to pick up his lunches at Wendy's for him (and pay for them about half the time), and one who literally screamed at me for finding a HUGE mistake-- which was his own fault-- in my paycheck. (It had resulted in me getting paid $0 that Friday.) This on top of having an emotionally abusive father, plus being constantly bullied in grade school for 12 years, at a time when the official teachers' and administrators' official stance on bullying was "we don't get paid enough to help you with your damn stupid problems."

I'm literally to the point when I'm willing to be a test case. The next time a supervisor so much as raises his or her voice to me, I'm going to see something done about it. I believe in hierarchy in the workplace, but I'm sick of it being an excuse for bullying, demeaning jerks to treat others (such as myself) like dogshit. I don't really care what coworkers or supervisors think of me as a human being anymore, or whether they like me, are scared of me, or whatever. I'm just going to defend and stand up for myself as often as possible, and if I have to hire attorneys and make a few assholes' lives a living hell in the process, that's tough shit.

I will say that I am someone that is not a big fan of dirty jokes, and yes once or twice I have felt uncomfortable with the looks men gave me (though mostly I tend to be flattered). You know what I did about it? The same thing my male counterparts do when women start discussing PMS/Breastfeeding/Pelvic Exams and a million other things men might find uncomfortable and/or disgusting to overhear. I sucked it up and acted like an adult. I said something if I felt it was warranted but mostly I either ignored it or left the room. I will continue to do so because we live in a society that gives others the right to say what they want without being unduly censored. There are real reasons to be upset, stupid jokes and ogling don't qualify.

What sounds do they make when you give them an orgasm?

BOTU - they go "mooooooan"

qdpsteve, I know where you're at. I'm currently unemployed because my ex-supervisor was having a badly concealed affair with my team lead, and he thought (incorrectly) that I was the person who reported him to Ethics. I went for an interview two weeks ago and the interviewer told me that they are getting 20-30 well qualified applicants for each job opening.

The Democrats are not getting sufficient credit for their tremendous accomplishments, efficiency, and attention to detail. They act, they implement, they sign secret orders, and they interpret whatever they want to support their actions. This is in the grand tradition of FDR in the 1930's. The public respects action, especially when they don't understand what is going on.

Obamacare vs the Rule of Law
10/07/10 - Heritage by Conn Carroll

[edited] The Founders of the United States understood that there are two fundamental ways in which government can exercise its authority.

(1) Arbitrary Rule. The government decides how to act on an ad hoc basis, leaving decisions up to the whim of whatever officials happen to be in charge.

(2) The Rule of Law. Legal rules are made and published in advance, binding both government and citizens. The citizens know exactly what they have to do or not to do in order to avoid the coercive authority of the Government.

The Obama administration is elevating bureaucrats over the rule of law, exactly what our Founding Fathers were trying to prevent.

- -
AMG: Vague laws or 2,500 page laws allow for any and all interpretations, delivering us into arbitrary rule by bureaucrats appointed by a tyrannical government.

There are millions of beautiful women who would climb up the edges of the crab bucket to get an American man. They live in the Philippines, Indonesia, and Russia. Don't put up with crap. Remember comparative advantage.

I give this idiotic feminist nonsense another 15 years before somebody starts taking out people like Jessica Valenti and Amanda Marcotte with a 7.62.

And no, I'm not kidding. 15 years at the most.