There’s also some of the Jewish fundamentalist thinking in there, all of the Christian “women as property” stuff comes from the old testament, and you only need to look at some of the more extreme parts of the jewish religion to see hair coverings (even full body covering, as the woman’s body was property of the husband), women not being allowed out without a male companion, separate areas for men and women, and so forth, are well-established traditions.
6 Likes
To be fair, it’s very tough to find a modern society that doesn’t have deep wells of misogyny. It’s not just of problem of the children of Abraham. There’s a reason why Engel’s argued that men oppressing women was the first form of oppression in human societies. Religion is just one tool among many that is employed to oppress people.
10 Likes
12 Likes
7 Likes
8 Likes
SMU is trying to break its ties to the United Methodist Church, primarily because its concerned that the UMC may return to discriminating against LGBTQ+ people. The UMC has sued to prevent it. Good for SMU. I’m not sure, legally, if they’re going to win this, but I hope they do.
ETA: More info
ETA Pt. 2: At first glance, I think the UMC has the stronger legal argument, unfortunately. However, there are ways to break “permanent” clauses in charters and contracts. Rice University’s original charter had a provision that it was only allowed to educate white students. The university’s own regents sued in the 1960s to overturn that provision, and won because the court said the 14th Amendment prevented it from enforcing the whites only clause. Now, that same argument won’t work with SMU, obviously, but there are ways to get out of clauses that purport to be permanent.
12 Likes
Not-unserious question: can a university pull a corporate and just dissolve and sell all its assets to a successor organization that is nominally independent but which it created, then continue on like nothing happened but with complete independence under a different brand? (I assume the regents would need to be on board with this, etc…)
8 Likes
Probably a private university, but I doubt that a public one could…
8 Likes
Yeah, I assume it would be off the table for a public university.
6 Likes
A lot of the endowment might have clauses that would prohibit the capital from being used for non-X-University expenses.
Also, probably not land grant universities.
10 Likes
I have no idea.
SMU is a private university. I assume, though, that dissolving and reforming would cause complications that would make it not worth it.
9 Likes
Cover page for a series of articles:
Here’s the calculator they put together:
14 Likes
Here in the land of “Massive Resistance” they are chomping at the bit to give public school money to private schools.
Dems still hold the legislative branch, we’ll see how much resistance they put up.
12 Likes
Alabama just did that:
This will yank funds from already underfunded public schools and funnel it to private schools, the vast majority of which are church affiliated. So it’s a double insult: defunding public school AND state funding of religious institutions.
11 Likes
12 Likes
“What did these people [voter] think was going to happen?”
They didn’t think. They emoted. Because Tromp succeeded in manipulating their emotions.
It’s especially disappointing of course when even educators act/vote like that.
15 Likes
A statement by the American Association of University Professors:
Unfortunately, troubling recent events suggest that some administrations are not only acquiescing to attacks on fundamental principles but engaging in what scholars of authoritarianism call anticipatory obedience—that is, they are acting to comply in advance of any pressure to do so. 4 One case in point is the recent review of all course content for “antisemitism or anti-Israel bias” in the Florida state university system, initiated by its chancellor at the urging of a member of the state house of representatives. Courses flagged by the review for further scrutiny included Percussion Ensemble, Global Hip Hop, General Parasitology, and Painting Workshop. 5
Similarly, the University of North Texas administration recently censored the content of more than two hundred academic courses, including by mandating the removal of words such as race, gender, class, and equity from undergraduate and graduate course titles and descriptions. 6 These actions were allegedly taken in response to state legislation banning certain diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and practices, even though the legislation specifically exempted academic course content. While university administrators and faculty members may be compelled to comply with legislation and court orders, even where these run counter to professional and constitutional principles, they remain free to register their disagreement. And under no circumstances should an institution go further than the law demands. Yet, the examples above depict an eagerness to obey on the part of administrative officers, portending a bleak future for higher education.
11 Likes