Category Archives: professors and intellectuals

Professors urge abortionists to embrace “gruesomeness” of their jobs

limbs of aborted baby, April 9, 2015, Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast

An abortionist’s “most fulfilling” work…

From Campus Reform: A group of University of Michigan professors recently suggested that abortion providers should be more open about the “gruesomeness” of their jobs.

Professor Lisa A. Martin, et al. published an article in the most recent issue of Social Science and Medicine, where they explain that abortion providers “self-censor” in order to avoid discussing sensitive issues such as “multiple abortions, grief after abortion, [and] the economics of abortion.”

Martin and her colleagues go on to note that many abortion providers face severe backlash for speaking up about these issues, but argue that failing to do so “results in costs to the movement itself.”

“One consequence is that nuanced public depictions of abortion workers are rare,” Martin explains, adding that “the absence of providers’ voices has created a vacuum in which stereotypical caricatures may dominate the public discourse.”

Indeed, the four authors claims that neglecting to talk about the “difficult aspects of abortion work [could] ultimately weaken the abortion rights movement,” referencing an argument initially made by the late Norma Leah McCorvey Nelson (the “Roe” in Roe v. Wade, who eventually became an anti-abortion activist.)

The professors reviewed the testimony of 96 abortion providers collected during a 2007 research study, and found that abortion providers tend to stay silent because of fear of “affirming anti-abortion stereotypes, challenging pro-choice movement messaging, and acknowledging moral ambiguities in abortion work.”

The paper elaborates that “while participants often commented about their pride in their work, many also identified moral uncertainties about whether or not providing abortions was always a good thing.”

“I still to this day say to myself I hope I’m doing the right thing. That never goes away,” said one abortion provider. “There’s part of this where you need some validation [that] what you’re doing is right.”

Another abortion provider expressed concern that she worked in an “abortion mill,” as anti-abortion activists call it. “It’s like a slaughterhouse—it’s like—line ‘em up and kill ‘em and then go on to the next one—I feel like that sometimes.”

Worry over whether abortion is murder also caused abortion providers distress, with one admitting that “I thought I was going to go to Hell and God was going to punish me if abortion was murder—I was like ‘Is abortion murder, maybe it is murder?’ I just sat there and used to think about that constantly.

Others, however, expressed disappointment with the pro-choice movement’s perpetual defensive stance, exemplified by messaging focusing on the issue of choice rather than explicitly advocating abortion.

“Why can’t we have a pro-abortion stance?” one asked, while another wondered, “… can you say that on a bumper sticker?”

Regardless of the potential backlash that the practice could incur, Martin argues that abortion providers should nonetheless talk more about abortion because it “could strengthen the pro-choice movement” by offering “opportunities to grow, mature, and strengthen by developing new discursive messaging.”

“What kind of radical shift might we see in the nation’s polarization around abortion if some abortion providers routinely said, ‘Yes, abortion stops a beating heart and sometimes I do think of my work as killing—and yet I find it the most fulfilling work I could do’?” the authors ask near the end of the paper

Campus Reform reached out to Martin for more information, but did not receive a response.

DCG

Advertisements

College professor wears “combat gear” to protest Texas’ campus carry law

professor charles smith

Just a tad melodramatic…

From Fox News: A Texas professor is making waves on social media after protesting the state’s campus carry law by wearing protective combat gear to class.

San Antonio College geography instructor Charles K. Smith went to his class last week sporting a camouflaged bulletproof vest and helmet. He said he wore it because he doesn’t feel safe.

“It definitely makes me feel uneasy that there are more firearms on campus than there should be,” Smith told mySA.com. “[Dressing this way] was just a statement on how I felt.”

Campus Carry, which was signed into state law in 2015 and officially implemented into Texas community colleges on Aug. 1, allows individuals with a conceal license to carry a handgun on college premises. The law went into effect at 4-year institutions in 2016.

A photo of Smith wearing the combat gear was shared on Facebook, which generated a flurry of comments in favor of and against the professor.

“I realize students were carrying guns on campus illegally, but now it’s legal to do so. It increases the chances of something happening,” said Smith, who also acknowledged that no one had pulled a gun on him in his 10 years at the college.

“Used to, when they got mad at me, they had to go home to get the gun and had time to cool off. Now they will have it with them,” he added.

Smith said he’s concerned about an argument breaking out and one of the participants having a gun. “My assumption is that you will have more people carrying guns – that will lead to problems. It always has,” he said. “There is nothing on this planet worth a human life.”

James “Hot Mustard” Velten, who posted the photo on Facebook, told Fox News on Tuesday that response on campus has been mostly positive. “Many professors admire his statement about campus carry,” he said. “Many professors don’t feel safe because of the law.”

Velten also told mySA.com that Smith was a passionate professor. “Around people like that, you tend to listen a bit more,” he said.

Smith said his protest has nothing to do with San Antonio College, as they are following the law. He said he ran his plans by local police and the administration beforehand.

“Some of them were okay and some of them weren’t, but it’s freedom of speech,” he said.

DCG

War on White People: no rights or suffrage for white men

The Left’s War Against White Men continues.

Here are the latest exhibits:

(1) Lisa Bloom

Lisa Bloom, 55, is an attorney who has her own show on truTV. The only offspring of “feminist” lawyer Gloria Allred, Bloom is the permanent legal analyst for The Today Show and a contributor to NBC Nightly News and MSNBC. Wikipedia says Bloom and her mother are Jewish.

On August 1, 2017, Bloom posted a series of vicious tweets, calling President Trump a “white supremacist” and decrying that in his administration, tax dollars are going to defend “white rights”. (Note: Some Jews do not regard themselves as “white,” but consider themselves a race of their own.)

(2) Affinity Magazine

Founded in 2013, Affinity describes itself as a “new cool” magazine “exclusively for teens by teens.”

Writing for Affinity on August 1, 2017, Malia Rolt — a regular contributor to Affinity who describes herself as a “16 year old Asian teenager who is passionate about social justice and politics. A hardcore feminist, #BLM supporter and LGBTQ+ rights advocate” — asks if “white men really deserve to vote”. She calls for reparations to be made to women for historically being denied suffrage, and proposes that white men’s right to vote should be withdrawn:

After all, women and people of colour went through times of not being allowed to vote, and the fact that white men never had to experience that is an injustice. Despite the fact that we are given the illusion of democracy today (even though in reality the electoral college decides our future for us), do oppressors of minorities and women deserve to choose to continue our oppression, or should we help them by withdrawing the right to vote from them for a while until we can truly get on the same page and connect?

Readers’ comments on Rolt’s 2-paragraph essay claim that it was originally published on Huffington Post, then taken down, and that “Malia Rolt” is an anagram for “I am a troll”.

H/t FOTM‘s CP

See also:

~Eowyn

Busted: Emails show that minimum wage advocates, academics coordinated to boost the new $15 Seattle wage

shock

From MyNorthwest.com: It’s been alleged that supporters of Seattle’s minimum wage law sought to undermine a study from the University of Washington that painted a less-than-perfect picture of what’s followed. And a paper trail leading back to city officials may have further solidified those allegations.

When the Seattle City Council passed the $15 minimum wage law it commissioned the University of Washington to study its affects on the local economy and workers. The recent UW study found that the economy absorbed the first wage increase from $9.47 an hour to $11 an hour. But after wages increased again, some businesses cut workers’ hours, meaning that despite getting a higher wage, workers didn’t earn from as many hours.

However, another study from the University of California at Berkeley’s Institute for Research on Labor and Employment found the wage law to be mostly positive.

But an email trail, which can be found at Forbes.com, led to some evidence that Forbes contributor Michael Saltsman called “not pretty.”

Among the findings, according to Saltsman, is a request from Mayor Ed Murray’s office asking the people at Berkeley to “omit any mention of the forthcoming University of Washington report from its write-up.

“Unfortunately, for them, I think they put a lot of coordination in email form that was accessible via public records request,” he told KIRO Radio’s Dori Monson. It certainly raises questions about objectivity, Dori pointed out.

The email trail also reveals that the press release for the Berkeley study was written by a PR firm that was also used by Fight for $15, strong proponents of the minimum wage law.

The Berkeley study, it appears, was also rushed to meet the timeline for the anniversary of the law, Saltsman said.

Go here to listen to the Saltsman interview.

DCG

Students love socialism…but can’t define what it is

Excellent video from Campus Reform.

This is gubermint edumacajion at work.

DCG

The Guardian: Want to fight climate change? Have fewer babies!

white babies picture from the guardian stop images

The Guardian’s photo of choice/Stop Images

Notice the picture that The Guardian chose to use: it’s only white babies. What are they trying to tell us?

From The Guardian: The greatest impact individuals can have in fighting climate change is to have one fewer child, according to a new study that identifies the most effective ways people can cut their carbon emissions.

The next best actions are selling your car, avoiding long flights (paging Leo), and eating a vegetarian diet. These reduce emissions many times more than common green activities, such as recycling, using low energy light bulbs or drying washing on a line. However, the high impact actions are rarely mentioned in government advice and school textbooks, researchers found.

Carbon emissions must fall to two tonnes of CO2 per person by 2050 to avoid severe global warming, but in the US and Australia emissions are currently 16 tonnes per person and in the UK seven tonnes. “That’s obviously a really big change and we wanted to show that individuals have an opportunity to be a part of that,” said Kimberly Nicholas, at Lund University in Sweden and one of the research team.

The new study, published in Environmental Research Letters, sets out the impact of different actions on a comparable basis. By far the biggest ultimate impact is having one fewer child, which the researchers calculated equated to a reduction of 58 tonnes of CO2 for each year of a parent’s life.

The figure was calculated by totting up the emissions of the child and all their descendants, then dividing this total by the parent’s lifespan. Each parent was ascribed 50% of the child’s emissions, 25% of their grandchildren’s emissions and so on.

“We recognise these are deeply personal choices. But we can’t ignore the climate effect our lifestyle actually has,” said Nicholas. “It is our job as scientists to honestly report the data. Like a doctor who sees the patient is in poor health and might not like the message ‘smoking is bad for you’, we are forced to confront the fact that current emission levels are really bad for the planet and human society.”

“In life, there are many values on which people make decisions and carbon is only one of them,” she added. “I don’t have children, but it is a choice I am considering and discussing with my fiance. Because we care so much about climate change that will certainly be one factor we consider in the decision, but it won’t be the only one.”

Read the rest of the story here.

DCG

Bosses say graduates can’t cope with office life

einstein

From Daily Mail: A third of companies are concerned about young people’s attitude to work, a report by business leaders says today.

With many graduates and school leavers lacking the mindset and skills required to thrive in the workplace, the CBI said teachers needed to better reflect the importance of ‘attitude and aptitude for work’.

There are also worries about the literacy and numeracy skills of young employees, with firms admitting they have had to run classes for recruits.

The CBI/Pearson survey of 344 firms found that 32 per cent were dissatisfied with graduates’ ‘attitudes and behaviours of self-management and resilience’, with 40 per cent saying they lacked customer awareness.

Some 33 per cent of business leaders were unhappy with the literacy of young applicants, while 29 per cent said their numeracy wasn’t up to scratch. Faced with a skills shortage, two in five businesses (41 per cent) have been forced to do remedial training for school or college leavers.

The CBI said stretching academic standards ‘should not be the sole focus’ for schools as ‘broader personal development aspects risk being pushed to the sidelines’.

Firms believe primary schools should focus on developing literacy and numeracy (67 per cent), self-management (41 per cent) and communication skills (34 per cent).

The report said: ‘Personal attitudes, aptitude, readiness to learn, effective communication skills and a sufficient capacity to cope with numerical data are the key enablers. It is critically important that all young people are helped to develop as fully as possible in these areas.’

Josh Hardie, the CBI’s deputy director general, said: ‘Quality of teaching, learning and careers inspiration defines the life chances of young people.’

Dr. Mary Bousted, head of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, said: ‘With savage cuts to further education funding since 2009… it is unsurprising that businesses are struggling to find enough skilled staff.’ (Of course…/sarc)

See also:

DCG