U.S. professors call for academic and cultural boycott of Israel

note to mods title shortened due to space



http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1059775.html

In fact, he had booked Salman Rushdie to speak to one of our seminars the week that the fatwa came out. Rock on, David.

it has become necessary at this point in time. Also considering the Israeli governments nose thumbing at US peace making efforts and boasts that it dictates America's ME policy perhaps some politicians should take notice too.

I would have thought they were mad. But clearly what we've been doing is not working for anyone.

but it has gotten to the point of just damn what else to do?

Now that school is back in session, it may have a different outcome. Due to it being Hamas, the history of rockets, and the perception that the IDF tried to hit military targets, I don't think there will be a lot of traction for this.

:boring:

and we know how that turned out.

Sweet dreams!

South Africa has one of the highest crime rates in the world with more than 17000 murders and 136995 serious and violent assaults recorded in 2007.

Here is one Fordham Fulbright professor who is trying to bring attention to one aspect of this problem:

Professor’s Fulbright Focuses on South African Incarcerated Women

South Africa is infamous for its apartheid system of discrimination, which existed from the 1940s to the 1990s. Today, however, the issue of violent crime has taken center stage.

In fact, a recent United Nations study listed South Africa among nations with the highest rates of assault, rape and murder.

Jeanne Flavin, Ph.D., associate professor of sociology and anthropology, will travel to the African cape nation this month on a Fulbright fellowship to research the involvement of South African women in crime and the criminal justice system.

http://www.fordham.edu/campus_resources/enewsroom/inside_fordham/january_20_2009/in_focus_faculty_and/professors_fulbright_33205.asp

I see no mention of him anywhere in what I posted.

on the link I posted below. The ties between that community and the community of American academics who worked to end Apartheid are still very much in place. And I expect that David's group is similarly in communication with Israeli academics and other kinds of people who work in the arts.

I was just following up on your point.

I would hope that the American academics who worked so hard in the struggle to free the South African people from the horrors or apartheid are continuing in their work to improve the lives of the South African people.

during that time. Iirc, my university wound up with about ten scholars from South Africa when the dust settled.

Israeli policy is driven by the need to cope with those who want to kill them all.

So no, they're not the same at all.

But it hardly reflects an organizing principle of Israeli society - no more than "The only good Jap is a dead Jap", which was a wide-spread slogan in America during WWII, reflects the basic structure of our own society.

The so-called quote is fabricated.

I find a linguistic study of the phrase out of Tel Aviv University.

http://www.tau.ac.il/~giorar/files/Giora2007_accessibility_negated_concepts.pdf

It may be apocryphal but unfortunately when you dig, it turns out that the phrase was not originated by the war criminal but is in use in the culture. That's not better, is it?

"The only good y is a dead y."

To condemn based solely on this, we'd have to condemn just about every nation on Earth.

Just as all nations systematically corner a minority and refuse them humanitarian aid and bomb the hell out of them at will. Right?

Did I get that right?

and very little for personal insults.

but you have a lot of respect for accuracy. Sure.

I just get frustrated by the dissemination of these fictitious quotes. Sharon seems to be the most common target for some reason. He has said and done enough unpleasant things that you'd think folks wouldn't have to make quotes up to make him appear more unpleasant (or for whatever other reason people have for doing this).

In the Noam Chomsky/Edward Said book "Fateful Triangle", the authors claim that Israeli Chief of Staff Rafael Eitan used that phrase at around that time period (and that average right-wing Israelis used the phrase as well).

Edit to add: The Walt/Mearsheimer book on the "Israel Lobby" similarly attributes such a statement to Eitan.

My guess is that someone pulled that quote from either book and carelessly (or deliberately) attributed it to Sharon.

Can you share where you encountered the purported Sharon statement?

There are many floating on this very board. Most get struck down quickly. Good job.

which angered a lot of people, when he pulled all the settlements from Gaza.

It gave the Palestinians a real chance to govern themselves, with no Israel settlers or occupation.

They were left with infrastructure and worldwide goodwill.

And they trashed the place to pieces and created one of the worst cesspools on earth, with Hamas at the helm.

And they started a rocket terrorism campaign that didn't let up.

What a waste.

All those "I told you so"ers knew this, but Sharon did it anyway.

but to keep control of the air, the sea and the land around Gaza in order to subvert Gaza's elected government. He's a hero, all right!

And meanwhile, the illegal settlements in the West Bank continue to grow.

It must be nice to be so innocent.

Really? That's remarkable.

I guess putting something in quotation marks with a date after it makes an item appear to be genuine and people will assume that it's accurate without bothering to confirm whether or not it actually is.

I guess people figure that since Sharon appears to hold these particular sentiments then there is no harm in inventing a quote and disseminating it across the internet.

That's your argument that Israeli actions against the Palestinians are rooted in racism?

The mere fact that racism exists in Israel is proof enough in your eyes?

:yourock:

“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti - Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault ? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”


“We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population.”

“We must expel the Arabs and take their places.”

-- other Israeli leaders expressed the same mindset; two were former prime ministers - Golda Meir said: "There are no Palestinians" and Menachem Begin and Nobel Peace Prize recipient called Palestinians "two-legged beasts" and said Jews were the "Master Race" and "divine gods on this planet;"

-- Labor Party leader Haim Herzog was more discreet in expressing disdain for the Arabs; in 1972, he said "I am not prepared to consider (Palestinians) as partners in any respect in a land that has been consecrated in the hands of our nation for thousands of years. For the Jews of this land there cannot be any partner."

Earlier in 1969, Israeli Defense Forces Chief of Staff Moshe Dayan described the 1947 - 49 success: "Jewish villages were built in place of Arab (ones). You do not know the names of these Arab villages (because they) no longer exist....There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population." Like other leading Israelis, Dayan expressed scorn for all Palestinians and told his Labor Party colleagues that they "shall continue to live like dogs...."

The list is endless, Avigdor Lieberman, Kahane, Goldstein.....

I suggest you verify the accuracy of them.

Specifically:

"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population."

"We must expel the Arabs and take their places."

and

Jews were the "Master Race" and "divine gods on this planet

none of the quotes in it are real.

I could give you an endless list of quotes too if I was allowed to make them up, selectively remove words to change the meaning, and take certain statements out of context to alter its substance.

What's difficult is coming up with a list, (short, long or endless) that's full of true, accurate quotes, which support your belief.

One of many make-believe Sharon "quotes" that are spread around the internet.

And many, if not a majority, of settlers hold racist views about Arabs, including Israeli Arabs.

The Rise of Avigdor Lieberman By Ben Lynfield

December 14, 2006

When the Galilee town of Sakhnin's predominantly Arab soccer team was awarded the Israel Cup in 2004, Avigdor Lieberman was not in the mood to bestow congratulations. Instead, Lieberman, head of the Yisrael Beiteinu (Israel Is Our Home) party, implied in a newspaper interview that the team, Hapoel Bnei Sakhnin, would one day be expelled from Israel to the West Bank. "Sakhnin will not play in the Israeli league and will represent the other league. They may even call it Hapoel Shechem ," Lieberman joked.

Far from his nakedly anti-Arab approach disqualifying him from the political mainstream, Lieberman is today its rising star. He was welcomed into the ruling coalition in October as "minister for strategic threats" and is now the main ally and crutch of faltering Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

An immigrant from the former Soviet Union who lives in the illegal West Bank settlement of Nokdim, Lieberman is stoking anti-Arab sentiment and exploiting insecurity and disillusionment after the fiasco of last summer's Lebanon war. Top office, or at least the Defense Ministry, is a realistic goal for Lieberman, a shrewd political tactician who helped Benjamin Netanyahu gain election as Prime Minister in 1996 and served in Ariel Sharon's Cabinet. "If elections were held now, based on the polls, he could presumably be either prime minister or demand any other ministry he wanted," says Yossi Alpher, former director of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies.

If Lieberman's pronouncements are to be taken seriously--and there is no obvious reason they should not be--a Lieberman government would exclude some Arab citizens from Israel, would expel others who refuse to sign a loyalty-to-Zionism oath, would turn Gaza into Grozny and would execute Arab members of the Knesset who talk to Hamas or mark Israel Independence Day as the anniversary of the displacement of the Palestinians in 1948.

Many Israelis--and many Americans--are sleeping through the rise of Lieberman. Others are through their actions facilitating the ascendance of fascist ideas in Israel. Lieberman is more than kosher as far as Washington is concerned. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice welcomed him at the State Department on December 11, a day after he was featured at a forum, sponsored by the Brookings Institution's Saban Center, that also included Bill Clinton, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and several other members of Congress.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070101/lynfield

those outlying settlements vacated.

Those rascally lads can't kill nobody with their lil old firecrackers...

:sarcasm:

as did Nelson Mandela.

Bullshit, I do not believe that.

I know about the fake letter, it's usually that, isn't it?

It's frustrating that so many people are susceptible to believing anything that they happen to read.

And they drift off into making propaganda points in short order.

The biggest tip off is when they just sound so unbelievably callous and evil I start to wonder how any politician anywhere could have possibly made them. Then I usually realize... they didn't.

Actually the book is real, only the contents are fake.

Pro-Israel propagandists have dug up the charges used against Tutu by South African white supremacists during the anti-Apartheid struggle ("violent terrorist" etc) to use against him again because of his honorable stand against Apartheid in Palestine.

Mandela has never made that comment.

Tutu has, but not Mandela.

Mandela Memo on Palestine

MEMO
March 28, 2001

To: Thomas L. Friedman (columnist New York Times)
From: Nelson Mandela (former President South Africa)
Dear Thomas,
I know that you and I long for peace in the Middle East, but before you continue to talk about necessary conditions from an Israeli perspective, you need to know what's on my mind. Where to begin? How about 1964. Let me quote my own words during my trial. They are true today as they were then:

"I have fought against white domination and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die."

Today the world, black and white, recognise that apartheid has no future. In South Africa it has been ended by our own decisive mass action in order to build peace and security. That mass campaign of defiance and other actions could only culminate in the establishment of democracy.

Perhaps it is strange for you to observe the situation in Palestine or more specifically, the structure of political and cultural relationships between Palestinians and Israelis, as an apartheid system. This is because you incorrectly think that the problem of Palestine began in 1967. This was demonstrated in your recent column "Bush's First Memo" in the New York Times on March 27, 2001.

You seem to be surprised to hear that there are still problems of 1948 to be solved, the most important component of which is the right to return of Palestinian refugees.

The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not just an issue of military occupation and Israel is not a country that was established "normally" and happened to occupy another country in 1967. Palestinians are not struggling for a "state" but for freedom, liberation and equality, just like we were struggling for freedom in South Africa.

In the last few years, and especially during the reign of the Labour Party, Israel showed that it was not even willing to return what it occupied in 1967; that settlements remain, Jerusalem would be under exclusive Israeli sovereignty, and Palestinians would not have an independent state, but would be under Israeli economic domination with Israeli control of borders, land, air, water and sea.

Israel was not thinking of a "state" but of "separation". The valua of separation is measured in terms of the ability of Israel to keep the Jewish state Jewish, and not to have a Palestinian minority that could have the opportunity to become a majority at some time in the future. If this takes place, it would force Israel to either become a secular democratic or bi-national state, or to turn into a state of apartheid not only de facto, but also de jure.

Thomas, if you follow the polls in Israel for the last 30 or 40 years, you clearly find a vulgar racism that includes a third of the population who openly declare themselves to be racist. This racism is of the nature of "I hate Arabs" and "I wish Arabs would be dead". If you also follow the judicial system in Israel you will see there is discrimination against Palestinians, and if you further consider the 1967 occupied territories you will find there are already two judicial systems in operation that represent two different approaches to human life: one for Palestinian life and the other for Jewish life. Additionally there are two different approaches to property and to land. Palestinian property is not recognised as private property because it can be confiscated.

As to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, there is an additional factor. The so-called "Palestinian autonomous areas" are bantustans. These are restricted entities within the power structure of the Israeli apartheid system.

The Palestinian state cannot be the by-product of the Jewish state, just in order to keep the Jewish purity of Israel. Israel's racial discrimination is daily life of most Palestinians. Since Israel is a Jewish state, Israeli Jews are able to accrue special rights which non-Jews cannot do. Palestinian Arabs have no place in a "Jewish" state.

Apartheid is a crime against humanity. Israel has deprived millions of Palestinians of their liberty and property. It has perpetuated a system of gross racial discrimination and inequality. It has systematically incarcerated and tortured thousands of Palestinians, contrary to the rules of international law. It has, in particular, waged a war against a civilian population, in particular children.

The responses made by South Africa to human rights abuses emanating from the removal policies and apartheid policies respectively, shed light on what Israeli society must necessarily go through before one can speak of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East and an end to its apartheid policies.

Thomas, I'm not abandoning Mideast diplomacy. But I'm not going to indulge you the way your supporters do. If you want peace and democracy, I will support you. If you want formal apartheid, we will not support you. If you want to support racial discrimination and ethnic cleansing, we will oppose you. When you figure out what you're about, give me a call.

http://progressiveaustin.org/mandelap.htm

It was written by Arjan El Fassed, a co-founder of The Electronic Intifada


http://arjansweblog.blogspirit.com/mandela_memo /
...
On 27 March 2001, after reading Friedman's 'mock memo' I wrote a letter entitled Mandela's first memo to Thomas Friedman to the op-ed editor of The New York Times and I posted the memo on the Thomas Friedman Discussion Board of the New York Times, hoping that Thomas Friedman would read it and that the New York Times would publish it. However, after two days, I came to the conclusion that the New York Times would not dare publishing this piece and I sent it on March 30, 2001 to Media Monitors, "a Platform for Serious Media Contributors", an online daily, which regularly published my contributions.

Soon, however, I found the 'mock memo' I wrote and which clearly indicated that I wrote it, on various listservers and websites. For example, I found my 'mock memo' on the website of Houston Peace and Justice Center, Progressive Activism in Austin, TX, and listservers such as soc.culture and Indymedia and in different languages, for example German (in which it was claimed that the author is from South Africa) or Spanish. Later, I even found it on the website of the Palestinian Authority's Ministry of Information. Again, without mentioning the original author.

The main purpose of the Mandela-memo was to respond in a satirical way to Thomas Friedman using the exact same style and even phrases he uses in his columns. Obviously, the 'mock memo' had been forwarded to several e-mail lists containing the memo, which originally included the title "Mandela's First Memo to Thomas Friedman" and a byline "by Arjan El Fassed", but eventually was forwarded without my name and sometimes without title.

nt

in his bunker -- !!

"As educators of conscience, we have been unable to stand by and watch in silence Israel's indiscriminate assault on the Gaza Strip and its educational institutions," the U.S. Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel stated in its inaugural press release last Thursday. Speaking in its mission statement of the "censorship and silencing of the Palestine question in U.S. universities, as well as U.S. society at large," the group follows the usual pattern of such boycotts, calling for "non-violent punitive measures" against Israel, such as the implementation of divestment initiatives, "similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era."

Anyone of conscience recognizes how wrong Israel has been ---

Look for Hebrew University, Tel Aviv University, Ben Gurion University, Yeshiva University (close enough), Levy, Cohen, Goldstein, Goldberg, Silverman, Rosenberg.

were indiscriminately assaulting the Gaza strip?

What an absolutely appallingly stupid idea.

Boycott university professors, the very people who are on the SIDE of the Palestinians, for the most part!

DUMB!!!!!

Boycott both Arab and Jewish Israelis? How about Arab Israeli academics or performers who are outspoken, harsh critics of Israeli policy?

Pretty dumb boycott, huh?

Or haven't they bothered to mention that?

;)

Nothing the boycott does notb support Hamas but instead the Palestinian people even though from reading your posts you do not differentiate

and that's a damn good thing. The exchange of ideas in academic and cultural circles is not something that should be boycotted. I support an economic boycott, but an academic one? Stupid and counter-productive.

Btw, cali, academic and cultural workers exist in an economy, not on a cloud.

https://usacbi.wordpress.com/

They are insisting that the boycott continue until Israel allows full right of return for all Palestinian refugees.

In other words, they are saying that the terms of a negotiated peace should no longer be left up to the two parties involved but should be dictated to Israel. This is mostly interesting because of the ROR demand, which most Israelis see as an impossible request to fulfill as it would put their country's entire reason for existing at severe risk.

Demanding ROR for all refugees is just not a demand that Israel could afford to yield to, for so many reasons. The idea that any country of less than 6 million could absorb another several million citizens at once is ridiculous. The economic impact that the Russian immigrants had on Israel was profound and that was only 1 million people. It is just not a realistic request to make of any country.

The real effect that this would have on the conflict would be to create two states with majority Palestinian Arab citizenship. Israel's ability to exist as a Jewish state would be severely jeopardized, if not compromised outright. As demands like these are viewed by Israel's citizens as just another attempt at dismantling their state it will have very little effectiveness as a boycott. Boycotts work if the potential harm from the demands being met is less than the threat posed by the boycott itself. Since the cost of compliance with the boycott could very well be their economy, their state's identity, their own self-determination and possibly their safety, there is just no way that Israel would ever comply. And since the unreasonable cost to Israel would be recognizable by anyone considering joining the boycott, the organizers have guaranteed themselves a very low participation rate amongst those who do not actually wish Israel harm.

The other two demands say much about this campaign as well. The first one, to leave all Arab lands is interesting because it is so open to interpretation. I also find it telling that they insist on the wall being dismantled, not just moved so that it is on the green line. But I suppose that opening up Israel's citizenship rolls to just about every Palestinian in the world would nullify the wall's effectiveness anyway.

The second demand is confusing to me. Giving Arab-Israelis full rights. What's that about? They already have that. What do you suppose that demand is really about?

It doesn't matter anyway. This boycott won't go anywhere. Even if it took off, and it won't, Israel has faced pretty severe boycotts in the past. Even if they wanted to settle, and they won't, Israel can't comply with the terms.

The real effect of a boycott like this one will be to convince Israelis that they really are alone in the world, that the world really would like to see them destroyed. And by taking control of the settlement terms itself, the boycott hampers any real movements towards negotiating a settlement between the two warring sides. A certain peace settlement might be acceptable to the Palestinians, but now it isn't just the Palestinians who Israel has to satisfy. It actually runs completely counter to the spirit of negotiating for a peaceful settlement and does much to disenfranchise not only Israel, but the Palestinians too, by effectively taking the ability to negotiate with Israel away from them.

No one who is a proponent of a peaceful settlement will support this boycott. It is a boycott designed to punish Israel, not solve the conflict. It is all stick and no carrot.

Both Hamas and Fatah are morally reprehensible and both play politics with the lives of the Palestinian people. Edward Said was right that neither of these groups are fit to represent that Palestinians.

What is really needed is to educate ourselves about the I/P issue so that we don't sound like propagandists for the Israeli government. As American citizens, we should demand that our government have an even handed attitude with Israel and Palestine but realize that the Palestinians are currently under occupation by the Israeli government and that occupation is apartheid in nature.

it will go exactly no where. They should concentrate on an economic boycott.

Whoopee. I'm a tenured professor. I can do whatever I want and you can't do a thing about it. Nyah nyah nyah. I'm so superior.

How about refusing to teach Israeli students too? How about Jewish students? But then how about Black students and Women?

Should doctors start refusing to treat Israelis (or Jews, or Black patients or Women)?

Love it! Let's go, America!

South Africa too? Go apartheid!!!!!!
Actually you can boycott what ever you like even if you're not a professor

Not buying gas at that Shell station anymore. No more humous and grape leaves at that restaurant I like. And I refuse to serve women in burkas.


ps. not really.

what course was she teaching was she forced to retire were there any law suits?

Feminist author Mary Daly's stormy 33-year career in the theology department at Boston College may be coming to an end. Her nemesis is a single male student who has demanded entrance to one of her women-only classes, challenging her 20-year policy of teaching men separately.

The student, Duane Naquin, is a pro bono client of the Center for Individual Rights, an aggressive, conservative, Washington-based public-interest law firm that has warned Boston College of a possible lawsuit on Naquin's behalf.

Rather than admit the student, Daly asked the university to cancel her spring semester classes. She is on paid leave and, saying she is effectively being forced to retire, is negotiating terms with the university. Daly said she is being "deprived of her right to teach freely."

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_18_35/ai_54117563

She refused to accept male students in her classes, claiming she would teach them separately. Title IX and other issues kicked in. Eventually BC was sued over it by a student with RW pro bono backing. Daly agreed to retire, backed out and tried to sue of tenure right. Eventually a closed settlement was reached and she retired. Issues included how far does tenure go and the limits of academic freedom and remain unsettled. She was quite radical and at times had factual issues.

Some results from a google search

http://www.academia.org/campus_reports/1999/april_1999_1.html
http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/rvp/pubaf/chronicle/v9/f15/daly.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_18_35/ai_54117563
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Daly

and apparently a Lesbian as I understand it was quite a victory for conservative forces

Her actions threatened the integrity of tenure and basic principles of fairness critical to an academic environment. Other feminists declined to support her due to her actions.

Like I said, this was a big deal in academic circles a decade ago when it was going on.

about Mary Daly's "lack" of support and the law firm or think tank that forced her resignation and BTW she did not refuse to teach male students as you try to claim she taught male students the same subject in separate classes perhaps for the comfort of some of her female students

The students wrote, "Throughout her 33-year career at Boston College, Professor Daly has provided insight, inspiration and mentoring as a world-renowned philosopher/ theologian and radical lesbian feminist. In refusing to support Professor Daly against the potential lawsuit threatened by the Center for Individual Rights, the administration is silencing Mary Daly and negating the very ideals that it proclaims invaluable."

Kate Heekin, one of the signers, said one class with Daly "absolutely changed my life." She added: "I consider it a tragedy that she's not teaching here anymore. I really do," Heekin said.<.i>

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_18_35/ai... ;col1


The Center for Individual Rights claims it opposes discrimination but its agenda is to oppose affirmative action and other programs that attempt to restore racial/gender/sexual equality by favoring those who have been traditionally discriminated against.

They supported the Boy Scouts in their effort to exclude homosexuals.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_I...

I pointed out in #68 that she claimed she would teach males in a separate classes. I also acknowledged that the legal push came from a right wing group.

The student testimonial you quoted also said: Heekin acknowledged, though, the difficulty of mobilizing broad support for Daly in the current academic environment. "I can't tell you how difficult is to get even 20 women who have taken Mary Daly's classes and consider themselves pretty radical to mobilize," she said..."

BC rebuked Daly for years until someone pushed it. They claim they would have forced the issue with her regardless of the outside legal intervention, though I doubt it. Administrators almost always take the past of least resistance. (http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/rvp/pubaf/chronicle/v9/f15/daly.html).

There really was a major row in academia over this. She was discriminating against some students and there were serious questions about some of her factual claims. However her claim of extreme feminism gave many pause. Eventually the feminists abandoned her as she got more shrill and was unwilling to follow both the university code and Title IX not to mention professional academic standards. Its not clear what her settlement from BC, despite the rumors from both sides at the time.

Reverse her position and see if you find it palatable. Male prof refusing to teach women in a coed class. How long would that have lasted regardless of justification? Discrimination is wrong no matter who does it and what cause is claimed.

would depend entirely on the subject matter involved and yes there is some subect matter that a coed class may well inhibit frank discussion of. It would have been discrimination if she had refused to teach the subject matter to males at all but she only requested that the classes be separate

I thought that was illegal.

When writing the post you replied to I was thinking about a class say on the psychology male sexuality I think that frank and honest discussions in such a class might be inhibited by the presence of females now at some point the two sections could be brought together but the 101's if you would most likely be most comfortable for the males in the class if they were not coed.

At least if it was at a public college or university.

Remember, she taught in the theology department not sexology so example he used is not on point

Even the other feminists and her own students did not support her in the end. That's telling in academia.

but you do tend to ignore such things

at the end.

Mid career, there was a lot of support for Daly. She lost that later as she went off the deep end.

the law suit threats, she hd been teaching the classes in classes that were not coed for her entire career it was not until one student engaged a right wing apparently antigay law firm and even then not until legal action was threatened that the school did anything.

Awesome that this originated in the USA.

Too many people will die before this movement becomes effective but, it will.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1059775.html


In the wake of Operation Cast Lead, a group of American university professors has for the first time launched a national campaign calling for an academic and cultural boycott of Israel.

While Israeli academics have grown used to such news from Great Britain, where anti-Israel groups several times attempted to establish academic boycotts, the formation of the United States movement marks the first time that a national academic boycott movement has come out of America. Israeli professors are not sure yet how big of an impact the one-week-old movement will have, but started discussing the significance of and possible counteractions against the campaign.

"As educators of conscience, we have been unable to stand by and watch in silence Israel's indiscriminate assault on the Gaza Strip and its educational institutions," the U.S. Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel stated in its inaugural press release last Thursday. Speaking in its mission statement of the "censorship and silencing of the Palestine question in U.S. universities, as well as U.S. society at large," the group follows the usual pattern of such boycotts, calling for "non-violent punitive measures" against Israel, such as the implementation of divestment initiatives, "similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era."

The campaign was founded by a group of 15 academics, mostly from California, but is, "currently expanding to create a network that embraces the United States as a whole," according to David Lloyd, a professor of English at the University of Southern California who responded on behalf of the group to a Haaretz query. "The initiative was in the first place impelled by Israel's latest brutal assault on Gaza and by our determination to say enough is enough."

-long snip-

"The usual anti-Israel suspects in U.S. universities may sign on to the petition, but it won't amount to much," predicted Mitchell Bard, executive director at the American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise, which seeks to strengthen the pro-Israel camp at American colleges. "If it becomes a widespread effort, I'm sure some effort will be given to countering it, but it is out of touch with the mood in the country," he said. "Israel has near record high support, Obama has just taken office with a positive message and the focus will be on moving the peace process forward, not sideshows by anti-Semites and cranks among American pseudo-academics."
-----------------


cranks?

pseudo-academics?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.