This is rich. A self described anti-feminist lawyer has decided to sue Columbia University for offering women's studies courses because they are discriminatory towards men.
The NYT's City Room blog reports that Roy Den Hollander (pictured) -- "a Manhattan lawyer and a self-described antifeminist" who in the past year has sued nightclubs for favoring women by offering ladies' night discounts and has sued the federal government over a law that protects women from violence -- is now setting his sights on Columbia University. Today, Den Hollander filed a suit against Columbia in the SDNY for offering women's studies courses, which he sees as discriminatory toward men. His suit accuses Columbia of using government aid to preach a "religionist belief system called feminism." A Columbia spokesman declined to comment to the NYT.In Den Hollander's suit he calls women's studies "a bastion of bigotry against men" and said its women's studies program "demonizes men and exalts women in order to justify discrimination against men based on collective guilt." He reportedly writes in the complaint: "Federal financial aid, state funds and other assistance help proselytize feminism at Columbia," in violation of equal protection safeguards of the Fifth and 14th Amendments.
If his hatred for women isn't apparent enough by his suing the federal government around VAWA, it is clear because he has sued clubs for ladies night (as Ann has covered before). As Jay Smooth just pointed out, "ladies night is for the benefit of men, you idiot! Stop getting in the way of the patriarchy!" (/sarcasm). Obviously, he has never been to a club.
For a little background on what motivates this guy, the Gothamist has some gems from the piece that Ann links about his assault on "ladies night" in the New Yorker.
Den Hollander guy sure knows how to charm the ladies; you'll recall that last summer the New Yorker spent a night out with the divorcee, who explained his life mission: "What I'm trying to do now in my later years is fight everybody who violates my rights... the Feminazis have infiltrated institutions, and there's been a transfer of rights from guys to girls." Hence the Columbia lawsuit, in which Den Hollander maintains that the university should not be using government aid to preach a "religionist belief system called feminism."
This guy might have to get a Feminist Fuck You.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Anti-feminist dumb ass of the day: "Women's studies is sexist".
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/8752
I'm sure I'm not the first person to point out that "discriminatory towards men" would only apply if Columbia wouldn't let men into the program. Is there really such a case as "this course is discriminatory because I just don't like the subject matter?"
He's totally right! Women's studies unfairly discriminates against men! And you know what else? I don't like this "organic chemistry" deal they got. I mean, what about all the *non*organic chemistry? This is totally unfair! I call on Columbia University and all universities to get rid of organic chemistry once and for all!
Who exactly is he suing on behalf of? The men of Columbia? Does he even have a complaining witness? If he's worried about the teachings of "religionist belief systems" (what does that even mean?), why doesn't he also go after Jesuit institutions?
I've always viewed women's studies as a kind of affirmative action for academia, guaranteeing these issues get taught SOMEWHERE. In a way, it does show a form of bias, but its a bias that strives to establish equality.
What a fucking idiot!!! Whenever I hear shit like this, it reminds me of when I was in elementary/middle school and the boys thought "Take Your Daughter To Work" day was "unfair" and "sexist." Ugh. This guy sounds like a reeeeeeal asshole.
As a women's studies minor, I was always conflicted about women's studies. I felt like I shouldn't have to have a separate minor to learn what should be taught within "regular" literature, history, and science, etc. Women's studies can become an underfunded academic ghetto, and I do hope that one day it will be integrated with other courses.
This guy is a total charmer, though. Men like this make me really sad, I always wonder what happened to them to make them like this.
Oh whoops, sorry for the repost. I had some more charming tidbits to add on this loser.
I guess this asshat would say nothing about how discriminatory HIStory is!!! All HIStory classes should be banned too then by his logic...I wonder how this guy gets enough oxygen with his head stuck up his ass all of the time.
I guess this asshat would say nothing about how HIStory discriminates!!! All HIStory classes should be banned too then by his logic...I wonder how this guy gets enough oxygen with his head stuck up his ass all of the time.
I hope someone with any real power doesn't take him seriously.
I hate stories like this. It's clear that he's just looking for the sensationalist coverage he gets. His motives are pretty clear. He's a lawyer. He wants to 'make a name for himself'. Let's move on to real news.
Granted, I've always wondered if "gender studies" might be a better name. I'm a graduate student in politics and I've just finished an essay on the construction of appropriate masculinities in political theory. Studying men and masculinity is equally important to studies, as it also gives insights into structure, functioning and reproduction of patriarchy.
But yeah, serious scumbag here.
JennyP:
I'm pretty sure you were joking, but just in case. The word "history" has nothing at all to do with an emphasis on any gender. It derives from the Greek word "historia", "to know, to investigate, to see". Like I said, I'm sure you're aware of this, but in case someone reading what you posted wasn't and to prevent them from presenting that humorous skew on language as fact thus embarrassing themselves I thought it might be good to point that out just in case.
"I guess this asshat would say nothing about how discriminatory HIStory is!!! All HIStory classes should be banned too then by his logic...I wonder how this guy gets enough oxygen with his head stuck up his ass all of the time."
Dear goodness, that is not helping anything.
I am going to assume you took a Western Civ class and at least heard about Herodotus, who wrote the Histories, and that the word for history comes from a root meaning of inquiry.
Please don't meet stupidity with even more stupidity.
At my school, they changed it to feminist studies. I was very happy, as it makes a lot more sense than this 'woman's studies' garbage, which seems to incite random sexist drivel just on the basis of its name.
I really think this guy has an uncanny talent for taking things at their absolutely literal face value.
Yes, 'women's studies' is about women. Yes, laws pertaining to women are, surprisingly, mostly to do with women and their rights biological and civil. It's amazing what he extrapolates from the barest facts!
I was joking ladies...just a play on words is all.
Don't you just love how people who have never sat one minute in a Women's Studies (or Gender Studies, or like in my school, Gender and Women Studies) class seem to know all about what's being taught in there. Only they're nearly always wrong.
What this mans problem is that he resents any erosion to unearned male privilege. Equality between men and women means that men don;t get all all of the little advantages simply because they have been born with a penis...yeah smells like boo hoo I want the right to oppress as I see fit.
Also, I like "gender studies" because whenever I hear "women's studies," I think of the derogatory ways in which PMS is referred to as "women's troubles" and ironing as "women's work." It seems like it's saying that it's something unimportant or frivolous, over there away from the 'important' disciplines. Just a personal, gut reaction.
What this mans problem is that he resents any erosion to unearned male privilege. Equality between men and women means that men don;t get all all of the little advantages simply because they have been born with a penis...yeah smells like boo hoo I want the right to oppress as I see fit.
You MUST read his synopsis of his beef against VAWA: http://www.roydenhollander.com/documents/SynopsisVAWAComplaint.doc
In it, he says: "The Acting Manager of Kroll Associates’s Russian operation marries a Russian girl and brings her to the U.S. He discovers she’s a Russian mafia prostitute, former mistress to a Chechen warlord, and that she secretly fed him drugs in order to wheedle him into marriage. He tells the tramp to get lost, but she and her immigration lawyer refuse because they want him to commit perjury by sponsoring her for permanent residency. The guy refuses, so they apparently win or are winning her permanent residency by falsely claiming the guy “battered” her and subjected her to “extreme cruelty” or an “overall pattern of violence.”
Guess who the Acting Manager of Kroll's was...yep, the very same Den Hollander.
ElleStar: It's an essential flaw if binary thinking.
"If I am male and to be male is good as I am good in my own estimation, then to be female which is the opposite of male must be bad."
The class has the word "woman" in it, so it must be anti male. Because clearly there is only room in this world for one thing.
He's intellectually challenged.
Steven and Logrus, I was joking! My snarky mouth doesn't translate well...
JennyP: I knew you were joking, I hope that was clear.
I've just seen (and admittedly been a part of) people parroting things they have seen/heard/read which were intended to be humor as fact. For the benefit of a possible ready I thought it prudent to point out that the whole "HIStory/HERstory" thing is not historically relevant and to look at it's origins, lest they repeat it assuming a background that does not exist.
I mean this is the internet after all, people still repeat the Richard Gere/gerbil thing.
NewsCat, discrimination is more than just not letting someone in (see: hostile work environment lawsuits.)
That said, this guy is still a dickwrinkle.
This may be a good time to bring back a link to the Daily Show's coverage of his original nightclub lawsuit:
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/daily-show-oliver-sexual-stealing/1438966297/?icid=VIDURVCOM03
As a male women's studies major, I have to say this guy's a tool. I can't add anything that hasn't already been mentioned here, except to say that I have never been discriminated against in any women's studies class, which is more than I can say for the experiences of my classmates (almost exclusively women) in the various other departments.
I made the mistake of reading the Wall Street Journal blog post about this. The comments are full of support for Hollander that made my stomach turn. Seriously:
Leaving aside the whole WTF of the beginning: I doubt Whitman, Rice, or Clinton took "feminist coursework" as such, too, since they all completed their graduate educations before women's studies became common in the late 1970s.
I, for one, think it's awesome that Anonymous has taken multiple women's studies courses at "most schools" in the country to be able to proclaim with such authority on them!
It makes me wonder what people think is taught in women's studies departments. I mean, if we sat them down and asked them to list the courses that they thought would probably be required for a women's studies major, they'd probably get 101 (which MAYBE a few of them took, MAYBE), and then they'd make shit up because they seriously have NO IDEA and have never bothered to learn. But then straw (wo)men are so much easier to set on fire...
Lorgus, I have to say that I find your explanation of JennyP's post condescending. People are responsible for themselves and their own reading comprehension--are you going to qualify every last pun, play on words, or snarky comment? Insult intelligence much? C'mon.
Also, I agree with JennyP--it's not the origin of the word, it's the fact that the recording of history has, in large part, omitted women's contributions, lives and stories. The focus is overwhelmingly on men. At least, that's my view.
This guy is real cock. Sheesh--seems like his penis is blocking his vision. I agree with the commenter that said he's also trying to sensationalize himself and "make a name for himself."
*Logrus, sorry, didn't mean to misspell your sn.
I propose that any use of the term "feminazi" becomes applicable under Godwin's Law for an instant fail. Who's with me?
*a real cock. Commenting at work: bad idea!
Note: at Columbia the major is called "Women's and Gender Studies." I know because I'll be starting at Columbia in the fall (next week, actually) and I already plan to either major or minor in the subject. FUCK YOU, Den Hollander.
AngryYoungFemme: Well your nickname is certainly appropriate.
Like I said, I've seen people repeat some words/phrases/ideas, which were originally intended to be in jest, as fact and thus embarrass themselves. I've done it several times because I either didn't pick up on the humor of the original statement or because the person I was reading/listening to had picked up some misinformation along the way and passed it on to me. Thus my comments, which were in no way snarky or condescending to the JennyP were meant to prevent someone from doing something which I've done and been embarrassed for doing in the past.
As to history presenting an unfair and biased view of women and their contributions, no argument. Does the same thing to ethnic and cultural minorities. Nevertheless creating a word predicated on the false assumption of the etymology of the originating word and it's associated bias does more to expose linguistic ignorance in anyone using that neologism in a serious tone (as JennyP was not doing) and cause that individual grief than it does to advance any cause. For the few uneducated people who misuse that word it takes the argument against bias in education way off point. It's a distraction.
We're better off learning actual history, and challenging bias in specific case-by-case examples, than chucking aspersions on the entirety of convention. So goes the baby along with the bath water.
katemoore: I second the motion.
I find AngryYoungFemme's condescention of Logrus' condescention incredibly condescending. And offensive.
(do I win?)
for the record, I am also offended by my own abysmal spelling skills ;)
"AngryYoungFemme: Well your nickname is certainly appropriate."
Okay, Logrus...now THAT's condescending.
Back on topic: Roy Den Hollander is an ass. Wow, talk about a man being confronted with his own privilege and not getting it at all.
Oh Em Gee. "Religionist belief system"... LMAO. If ONLY we had that kind of influence!
Xana: Well yeah. I thought it would be helpful to show what it looks like when I'm actually being condescending.
To all who are concerned/dismayed/angry about this lawsuit, consider this:
Some have suggested that Title IX be used to do for women in math and science classes what it has done for women in college athletics.
This VAWA lawsuit is just a preview of what could be coming. Title IX could really be used to eviscerate gender studies.
-Jut
Wow- just read JPlum's post. I'm not surprise this guy went the Russian 'bride' route (what with American women being fat cows with no respect for men and all,) but I'm somewhat amused to see it tuned out for him the way it did.
"Xana: Well yeah. I thought it would be helpful to show what it looks like when I'm actually being condescending."
Not really helpful.
Jut Gory,
The problem is there's a HUGE difference between using Title IX to ensure women get equal opportunity in existing disciplines, and trying to piece together some bizarre patchwork quilt of law to dismantle an entire discipline in the first place. The former is MUCH easier to do than the latter, and for good reason: this pesky little thing we have called the First Amendment.
That's why this loser is trying to call feminism a "religion." That way he can try to lump feminism in with ACTUALLY radical dogmas that also get passed off as "religion" and try to whine that the government is funding the teaching of the feminist "religion." Which is absurd, but it's the only legal option he has. Otherwise the First Amendment is a solid iron bar.
He did admit he's opening frivolous suits he doesn't plan on winning.
Apparently his plan is to open up as many frivolous lawsuits as possible to "demonstrate to feminists how feminist frivolous lawsuits look like"
I have no opinion either way, but its interesting to throw that tidbit in, as I see some people are taking his lawsuits seriously.