OU letter

Would you please post the e-mail addresses of the professor and the president so that we might send similar letters of encouragement?

------------------
Gun Control: The proposition that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own panty hose, is more acceptable than allowing that same woman to defend herself with a firearm.
 
Been reading the posts at Patfinder. There has been some great stuff there. Haven't laughed out loud so hard in a long time. If you go there DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT think you can sip a coke and read these posts without endangering your keyboard.

------------------
Gun Control: The proposition that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own panty hose, is more acceptable than allowing that same woman to defend herself with a firearm.
 
She found it degrading? Well la de da. Was it less degrading to lump all gun owners in with murderers and mental deficients?
Oh, I forgot; it's not wrong if you do it to a gun nut.
 
E-mail of the OU President. dboren@ou.edu
E-mail of the instructor. ddeming@ou.edu
They are having a time with the story. :D
 
I'm sorry. I'm a professor. I'm pro-gun. I make the points at my school.

The Ohio professor's letter may make you chuckle but he was an absolute idiot to write it.

He choose to use what easily could be seen as an offensive and personal attack on his opponent to support the RKBA.

The case could have been made with strong evidence and logic.

He chose to do it this way. I have no sympathy for such a fool.
 
Glenn, I see what you mean--he could have made an effort to be less inflammatory--but let's be honest. What he basically said was, "you have an object that could be used to harm but you don't do so, therefore you should recognize that I can do the same." This can only be interpreted as a personal attack if you are determined to take it that way. What you really meant, I believe, is that he should have known that this bigot would consider it a personal attack because she was likely to consider any criticism of her position as a personal attack.

Does that really mean that he has the responsibility of anticipating her foolishness and adjusting his argument to fit it?
 
Saying that this is a case of sexual harrassment is totally incorrect. There was no ongoing pattern of unwanted advavces. There is no hostile workplace. There was no sexual interest on his part toward her. There was no sexual advance.

To call this sexual harrassment would mean that a man could never say the word "vagina" without being sued. What this comes down to is a case of hurt feelings that the offended party is willing to use her sexuality as a cudgel against the professor and the university.

What about all of the times any of you have been referred to as having short penises that you have to supplement with the ownership of a firearm? What about all of the times you have been questioned about your manhood and how you wouldn't have any at all without your little guns to play with? This is no different except that it is a woman instead of just a lowly man.

Anyone remember the story of the guy who was being interviewed on the first day of camp for boys? The interviewer wanted to know what the boys would be doing and the man answered her that one of the things was shooting. She asked if he wasn't "equipping them to be killers?" to which he responded "You're equipped to be a prostitute but you're not one are you?"

------------------
Gun Control: The proposition that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own panty hose, is more acceptable than allowing that same woman to defend herself with a firearm.
 
OK gun kids. I'm a professor and you're not
(I think). I'm chair of the Faculty Senate.

I get to talk to the VP and Personnel Director of my university. I get to talk to
folks who would be on the committee that would go for this guy on sexual harassment charges - both school and legal.

These folks know I'm RKBA but they think I'm a reasonable guy - so we can talk.

I asked them about the case. They've read it on education forums. These are the folks who would do the deed at my university.

They would go for him. Thus, I win the BTDT argument on this one. :)

You might disagree but our experts feel that Federal guidlines specify a "reasonable woman " standard and this guy would be felt by a reasonable woman to be contributing to a hostile environment.

Maybe you don't think so, but this guy is the dope that goes to court.

I've also heard that he has a history of being a little out there at his school. Dealt these types myself.

He obviously was trying what he thought was a clever version of the prostitute quip.

That was a one shot retort in a debate.

It is not the use of the word vagina alone.

I will repeat this guy did us no good and is a jerk. One wants to convince people and this is not the way to do it.

If he gets busted, fired, sued - he brought it on himself.

Being a psychologist and discussing it with others, I think he was using the sexual innuendo to be deliberately hurtful.

This really pisses me off. I spend significant time in my local university environments with antigun folk, trying to make the case for the RKBA in a rational fashion. This jerk, thinking he is soooo
clever, gets himself in the college trade newspaper and Internet forums and lots of unknowning folk will make the assumption that we are sexists, vulgar jerks. RANT!!!!

ARRRGGGGHHH!

Meanwhile my research program here in TX,with two RKBA intelligent young women is going quite well. Calmer now.
 
Glenn, we know what you're saying. But I repeat--you can only bend over backward to accommodate people so far. The man should not have to abandon a perfectly good analogy because she's not good enough at reasoning to understand what he's saying. Maybe, as you suggest, people who can't tell sexual harassment from analogy are in charge, but that doesn't make him wrong. It just means that he lives in crappy times.

And no, I'm not a professor. Big friggin' deal. :D
My awe of professors has been dimmed somewhat by long association of the breed. Just like everybody else there are a few brilliant ones, a lot of competent ones and a lot of idiots, jerks, and hysterical geeks.

------------------
Don

"Its not criminals that go into schools and shoot children"
--Ann Pearston, British Gun Control apologist and moron
 
Question for ya' Glenn.
If I (just an old cowboy) had written that letter,what would have been that woman's response and would I be sued,fired,ect?
 
Glenn,

This is the first time one of your posts irritated me. (I'm breathing deeply and counting to ten ... twenty ... fifty ... there.)

The guy was ungentlemanly and crude and, yes, too clever.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>You might disagree but our experts feel that Federal guidlines specify a "reasonable woman " standard and this guy would be felt by a reasonable woman to be contributing to a hostile environment.[/quote]

Professor, I have a BIG problem with this entire premise. It is artificial and subjective. Not the "hostile environment", the "reasonable woman" standard. It has repeatedly been shown to be a "standard" without consistency, therefore not a standard, but a hunting license.

I suggest that sexist does not equal vulgar jerk. For the record, I don't approve of either and I would not have said what this critter did.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Meanwhile my research program here in TX,with two RKBA intelligent young women is going quite well. Calmer now.[/quote]

I hope you don't have a slip of the tongue or eye, or get caught accidentally brushing up against one of these young researchers and have her take it the wrong way (or the other young woman observe it and misunderstand what she saw) or you'll find out in person what the "reasonable woman" standard is all about.

I hope rancor did not spill through the keyboard. I feel strongly about this.

------------------
Sensop

"Get your mind right and the body will follow." - Shino Takazawa, sinsei, hachi dan, Keishinkan do.

[This message has been edited by sensop (edited March 01, 2000).]
 
Old cowboys can write? :)

If he isn't involved in the workplace, she
doesn't have a case against him.

Don, you are a good guy. The nature of the analogy is an issue. By using a sexually based analogy and personalizing it, he can be charged according the people who know this stuff.

Some of you will not paint me as antigun or
a wussy professor or the like. Tough. I know
this game and it was a stupid act.

The guy is an idiot. He did not do a "cool" thing.

Before one puts down professors, try to be one sometime. Face crowds of apathetic drones who are more concerned with drinking then taking advantage of the opportunities to learn.

I was delighted that I could go to school as my parents never graduate high school.
Lots of today's students are a waste of my time.
 
Glenn, your post(s) point to what an artificial, PC, unfree environment today's campuses have become. Obviously you have not read the equally "inflammatory" and vitriolic rhetoric directed toward gun owners on his campus that has gone totally unquestioned by the administration.

"Strong evidence and logic"? You've gotta be joking my friend if you think that plays on the modern campus.

You can tell us all you want about the rules, 'what works' on campus, etc, but none of that has ANY bearing on how things work in the real world among reasonable people.

I've had my dealings with academics, and I've been known to speak my mind, including telling everyone to "f*ck themselves" after being relentlessly attacked , for not toeing the PC line at a dinner given IN MY OWN HONOR.

You've done qa great job of telling us what won't fly on your campus, but don't pretend it's right. BTW, do you have tenure? If you do, then what good is it if you can't say what's on your mind? (And you better be careful, someone might be checking your hard drive...)
 
Glenn, I'm glad you think I'm a good guy. I think you're a pretty good guy too. Wrong, but a good guy. ;)

You keep telling me what the issue is as if I were asking--as if I didn't know what it is. I heard you the first time and I know you're talking about reality as it exists on both our campuses--but what I'm saying is that that reality is a problem and should be changed. The analogy was a good one. And I don't know about your campus, but on mine, using an analogy related to sex would not be a big deal--IF the administration agreed with you. If not, you'd get crucified just like this guy. I recognize that as reality but it is wrong and should be changed, and I don't see anybody else stepping up so I guess it's on us. I know this--I've been on the recieving end of several comments that referred to a tiny penis which made me "overcompensate" by lifting weights and shooting guns. Do you really believe that the administration would come out snarling like a junkyard dog on MY behalf, on your campus or mine? Of course not, but those comments had about as much sexual basis as the professor's remarks.

I know professors don't always have an easy job. I'm not a professor but I finished 4 semesters of teacher aiding and 1 of student teaching in sixth-grade classes. BUT I talk to professors, I know what they're like, and if you're trying to tell me that the toughness of their jobs excuses some of the ones I've known, I don't buy it. I know several who still show up for fraternity parties, at least one who had an affair with a friend of a friend last year, and all the profs I know except one are so far left they can read Stalin's watch. If you read the post, I didn't put down professors. I put 'em squarely on a level with everyone else, which is exactly where they belong. Professors are mere mortals. Some are here because they're brilliant and they love the place and teaching (his name is Dr. Suda on this campus) and some are dingbats riding coattails and throwing out tired catchphrases to wow the freshmen. Don't take offense, Glenn, because I'm not lumping you in with the also-rans, but can you really say you don't see this on your campus?
 
Don:

Maybe I am putting on my robes and leaping
on a dead horse here. There is a distribution of talents and abilities at any job - police, doctors and professors.

Maybe I am extraordinary but I think I can do a good job in getting students and colleagues to listen to a reasoned sell job for the RKBA. At one school, I worked at - at the end of the semester, half my advanced stat class went to the range with me. More would have but had conflicts. We actually got a great right up in the school paper.

Here at Trinity, I've convinced several faculty to get active, become CHL holders,
etc. I've had three groups of students work with me on firearms related research.

I have even had two "feminist" professors who teach Psych. of Gender ask me to teach them how to shoot. I can have impact as I make the arguments in a logical and reasoned matter.
Are there some I can't convince? Sure.

I can rationally try to get the Risk Management VP to examine our firearms policy.

I am angry because this guy's letter which
is going through the education nets is very counterproductive. Do I overreact, maybe.

I have to be honest, I find his analogy
offensive. The quip was one thing but
the extended use of the sexual analogy bothers me a lot.

Call me PC if you want, but I wasn't raised to talk like that.

Anyway, going off into the boonies next week
with some professors who like things that go boom.

Go to stop reading this. OK - I'm correct
and the rest of you are wrong, how about that!
:) :)

That's my beef.
 
The funny part is that both people are right. The legaleze currently used by our beurocrats supports that this guy was guilty of sexual harrasment. The common sense that most of real humans use supports that this guy was crass and obnoxiuos, maybe even offensive, but that is all. He has every right to express his opinion, just as Hustler and every porn producer does. By the legalese interpretation and perversion of these laws we all have a right to sue anybody who uses a sexual innuendo, joke, analogy we find offensive. If I over hear two women discussing their partners sexual short comings should I sue cause they made me feel uncomfortable??? A beurocrat would say sure. Common sense sais who cares. Should I sue the next person who compares the size of my penis to the kind of car I drive??

The crux of the matter is the guy ha every right to express his opinions in any way shape or form that does not violate the rights of others. I can remember anything in the BoR that sais you have a right not to be insulted. Till then the legaleze is wrong.

------------------
If stupidity hurt, liberals would be walking around in agony.
 
Glenn, I think you're WAAAAAY off base here. This gun is pro-gun and should be supported despite his lack of perfect tact. He told it like it is. The public doesn't draw such fine distinctions. You're either pro-gun or you're anti-gun. Those in the latter camp should go spread their PC gospel over at the HCI website.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top