Search the Lounge


« Hope Lewis Memorial Service | Main | Michael Rich Memorial Service »

December 12, 2016


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Doug Richmond

How is any of this discussion relevant to, or appropriate for, the vast majority of law school classrooms? I can think of all sorts of courses where there is no logical opportunity or reason to "integrat[e] reading and other material that crosses social, cultural and political boundaries." Do you really think it is necessary to help law students understand that racial hostility and violence are unacceptable on college campuses (or anywhere, for that matter)? Heck, don't you think that the overhwleming majority of undergraduate students know that without being told by a faculty member? As for your statement, "Support means resisting the desire to assure them that 'everything will be OK' or that we will 'get through this together'; [w]e do not know if this will be the case, and we must not lie." Get through what? What might not be OK? You mean the election of, and governance by, a president and administrative team whose possible policies you personally dislike?

I am no Trump fan. Indeed, I disagree with all of his stated views and find his behavior dismal. I am dismayed by almost all of his cabinet and other senior administrative choices. But this sort of infantilization of students is absurd. To the extent individual students with personal concerns may approach individual professors whom they consider mentors or friends or role models outside of class, those professors should of course be appropriately empathetic and supportive. But the broad approach you seem to advance--and which comes across as mostly if not exclusively one-sided--seems to me to be beyond the scope of most expected faculty-student interactions.


This is just a partisan screed wrapped up in the language of "reasonableness." This screed would not have been written had the outcome been reversed.

Doug is entirely correct. Although any course in "law" can be spun to accommodate the radical views of some (e.g., an insensitive and bigoted comment like: "Those of us who are white, male or non-Muslim must not tell our students who are people of color, Muslim or female ..." which presupposes that only some groups feel pain or must overcome obstacles), most cannot be plausibly seen as platforms for this sort of race baiting and divisive presentation. In fact, this entire screed can be seen as invitation to preach at students by implication and invite disharmony and antagonism among groups of student in entirely inappropriate ways and contexts.

Alarming students with hyperbolic bs is not the answer here. If you have been assigned to teach "The Evilness of Being White, Male and Old" then, fine, go for it. Otherwise, pause to reflect about whether it is exactly this sort of bigoted approach that is the reason for the outcome of the election.

And remember, the election would not have been the same had not those 200 counties that voted twice for Obama flipped (all ignorant bigots, right?), and if not for the 30-40% of one of the labeled groups of persons you seem to believe are cowering in fear right now who apparently do not agree that the end of days has come.

We are in for tough times, it seems. Mainly, because of attitudes like the one expressed by the post above. Look at yourself: examine your irrational hatreds (which are thinly veiled). Ask yourself how you judge and label and slice and dice us based on you preconceived notions about superficially defined groups. Ask yourself how your attitudes affect those who believe your approach to be demeaning and disrespectful of the values you purport to advance. Teach yourself a bit about tolerance and acceptance and stop assuming that all people who don't belong to your favorite gender and race are badly motivated.

And keep your petty prejudices out of the classroom!

You've been telling others to do this. Try it yourself. You might like it.


BTW, while we are speaking of "fake news" consider this:

"(Had only millennials, America’s largest generation, voted, Clinton would have received 473 electoral votes and Trump would have received 32.)"


How Millennials Voted in the 2016 Presidential Election (with Lesson Plan), based on a Tufts study ("About half the number of eligible voters between the ages of 18 and 29 ... cast ballots in this election. That rate falls well below the estimated general voter turnout rate of roughly 58 percent. About 55 percent of those millennial voters supported Clinton, as compared to the 60 percent who supported Obama in 2012 ... .");

The Atlantic ("Though voters ages 18-to-29 skewed liberal, more than a third did not: Fifty-five percent of young voters chose Clinton, down from the 60 percent that backed Obama in 2012, while 37 percent chose President-Elect Donald Trump.");

Bloomberg ("Had only millennials voted, Clinton would've won in a landslide ... Among the younger portion of the millennial generation, 18 to 29 year olds, Trump earned 37 percent of the vote to Clinton's 55 percent.")

The bold claim about the electoral college comes from the last cited article. I could find no support for it. It appears bogus, but, it is of no moment.

The fact is that the writer above is recommending subjecting at least 40% of her students to offensive agitprop, which, in the apparent (but misguided view) of the writer, will shame the tiny minority of persons who do not agree with her lopsided view of reality.


"Had only millennials, America’s largest generation, voted, Clinton would have received 473 electoral votes and Trump would have received 32."

Had only HRC voted, HRC would have received 538 electoral votes. #Amazing!

Captain Hruska Carswell, Continuance King

I can offer something pithy: This will all become moot when the Russians take over because our Supreme Leader is the smartest guy in the room. Seriously, the best antidote for a law professor is to teach to the Constitution and emphasize the role and Rule of Law. Our SHARED history is inspirational and law students are the next generation to carry that forward. That carried me through the darkest years of GW and his Patriot Act.

Captain Hruska Carswell, Continuance King

Further, tell students to take a trip to Philadelphia, Topeka (Sumner Elementary School National Park), Memphis, Little Rock (Central High School--A Republican enforced the law) and DC. That should recharge batteries and show students that the LAW is bigger and more enduring than any president, especially the smartest guy in the room. Believe me.


Yes! We will take the children on a field trip!

(Just so long as they get a note from their mothers giving permission.)

And, after their field trip, we'll feed them some ice cream and talk about how evil white, male Christian people have hereditary ice cream privileges!

Perhaps the children could then draw in their coloring books the evil old white male Christian people with horns and tails.

Oh wait, I forgot, the horns are reserved for the evil "Zionists." Well, tails, anyway, and ugly monster eyes.


an on

"Those of us who are white, male or non-Muslim must not tell our students who are people of color, Muslim or female, “I know exactly how you feel.”"

So sayeth the Boss.

The more I think about this sentence, the more concerned I become about the author having access to students.

First, who is the author to dictate whether "white people" are allowed to say to "people of color" "I know how you feel."? This is almost a textbook example of judgment based solely on race, i.e., racism. It should be called out for it is: disgusting and unacceptable. "White people" should not be judged by the some overly broad dictate by a law professor based on race. That she does this is more than a bit troubling.

Second, she seems to consider religion to be a separate basis for her bigotry. Although to be sure it isn't clear, she seems to suggest that "non Muslims" are to be judged by a different standard as well (unless, of course, she is only slamming white male Christians, which is of course possible).

Third, her intolerance and bigotry is tossed off in the common and casual way that legal academics do. They simply assume that everyone agrees with their prejudices and hatreds. This suggests that she regularly intimidates and subjects her students who do not belong to a favored group in her prejudiced view of things to humiliation and embarrassment without any empathy or concern.

For one, and I am quite sure their are many, I have had quite enough of remaining silent while the race, religion and gender of some are regularly slimed: while they are accused, demeaned and subjected to a "different set of rules" by self righteous ideologues, many of whom have lived lives of privileges that few will every enjoy.

Preach this bigoted clap trap somewhere other than in the public square, where racism, sexism, gender discrimination and ageism are not only attitudes to be deterred, but usually result in acts inconsistent with the law, such as telling students what they may or may not say in class based on race.

EVERY TIME someone slams a group of persons in this invidious way, students and the academy need to stand up and say, STOP!


More fake news:

"we cannot ignore that campus climates are in a state of unrest."

This is pure bunk. The author is just inventing facts. Wishful thinking.

(If there have been some isolated demonstrations, there has been no appreciable difference in the last thirty days. At most, there have been a few of the usual demonstrations, which are mostly peaceful and mainly meaningless, as they continue unabated for a whole variety of reasons about which the general public is uninformed. The general public pays little or no attention, and these demonstrations are not making a whole lot of news, because the general public expects but does not care that college kids protest incessantly in any event. To characterize the state of American campuses as "in a state of unrest" is blatantly false - just like so much of the agitprop that is going around now. These fake news stories are propounded by those who cannot accept that their team lost an election and so they need to pretend the world is ending because of it and do everything possible to undermine the election and legitimacy of the result. It is pitiful to see these hypocrites now, after they whined for weeks about how devastating questioning the election results would be.)


Thanks you to all those who commented here. This sort of BS has to be called out for what it is and you folks have done a good job of it.


Thank God Trump won. Lets give Trump a chance and lets stop the insanity. With all due redpect to the author, her comments are an absurd and as a White Man I am pissed.

Captain Hruska Carswell, Continuance King


I had you pegged as a Millionaire Republican, Last of a Dying Breed.

Your friend,

Captain Carswell, Hottie-American

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad