Critical thinking is scawy!
Republicans in Georgia have announced a campaign to try and ban "racy" college courses like queer theory, and oust the professors that teach them.
"This is not considered higher education," [State Rep. Charlice] Byrd said. "If legislators are going to dole out the dollars, we should have a say-so in where they go."Byrd and her supporters, including state Rep. Calvin Hill, R-Canton, said they will team with the Christian Coalition and other religious groups to pressure fellow lawmakers and the University System Board of Regents to eliminate the jobs.
"Our job is to educate our people in sciences, business, math," said Hill, a vice chairman of the budget-writing House Appropriations Committee. He said professors aren't going to meet those needs "by teaching a class in queer theory."
Intellectualism is inappropriate, gosh darn it! Bryd and Hill are not just twisting themselves into a moral tizzy because state schools are teaching queer theory, but also because a couple of professors at Georgia State University are listed as experts in oral sex and male prostitution. Apparently they don't quite get the notion that one can be experts in a field - you know, like study it - without participating in said area of study.
As Georgia State spokeswoman Andrea Jones said, "Teaching courses in criminal justice, for example, does not mean that our students are being prepared to become criminals. Quite the opposite."
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Georgia republicans want to ban queer theory in state colleges.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/11908
Wow. You know, I hope they fail and the rest of the legislator sees through this rouse. I mean, c'mon! Let's supplant more ideology into higher education!
On the other hand, if this passes, queer theory won't be the only thing at risk. I have an inkling that gender studies might be next and maybe even human sexuality, which has only broken through in the past century. But I have faith that the rest of the Georgia Legislature will see that this only opens a can of worms.
Scroll down for my link to today's AJC article about how quickly this blew over.
Courses like Women's and Gender Studies and Queer Theory have been some of the most challenging I've taken so far. They require the student to develop rigourous critical thinking skills, become politically and socially engaged and learn how to argue effectively. It's no surprise then, that religious groups and their Republican supporters want to ban these courses; how would they benefit if people were engaged, armed with critical thinking skills and knew how to argue?
How do colleges work ? Is the course mandatory, or is it a choice for those that are interested ?
As long as the college does not get state funding the students should decide if they want to attend a college that teaches such and support it with their money.
I don't think queer theory would be a basic requirement. I could be wrong.
Most college classes are optional - you take things according to your interests and major. Some classes are basic requirements for graduation, like communication or lab science classes, but you often have a choice of required classes to take. So, chances are, no one is being forced into queer theory.
It's possible that a course in Queer Theory of Gender Studies is an option to fill a required distribution (that's what they were called at my undergrad, at least).
For example, all freshmen may be required to take a freshmen writing seminar, of which there are, say, five different choices: a writing seminar focused on the history of math, bioethics, Victorian literature, Chinese military history, or the gay rights movement. In such a case the Queer Theory course would fulfill a degree requirement but not be a required class in and of itself.
Really, there are few courses that every student at an institution absolutely has to take. Generally students are given options both to ease the logistics of it all (imaigne the class size and number of profs and aids needed pump 2,000 freshmen through one course!) and to give students the opportunity to find a class that will best suit their academic needs and interests.
The school is Georgia State, right? I highly doubt that Queer Theory is a required class. It's probably an elective for a gender studies minor or perhaps a requirement for modern philosophy. GSU IS a state school, though.
I'm a Women's Studies and English undergrad at GSU, and, yeah, Queer Theory is far from a required course for anyone.
There are actually a few different queer theory / GLBT studies courses offered (as Women's Studies, English, African-American Studies, and Film courses) - and, even with four courses being taught in four different departments, they're not *required* for a degree in any of them. They only way to put yourself in a position where taking a queer/GLBT theory course is mandatory is by going for a BA in Women's Studies with a concentration in Sexuality Studies (like I am) - and if that's your goal, queer theory is probably an interest of yours, already.
No one's being *forced* to read GLQ :)
I was just wondering, what if an pick up artist (pua) would offer a college course in puaism ? Would that be aright with you people here ?
Your comment demonstrates a basic lack of understanding of Queer Theory Studies. Queer Theory is not 'teaching people how to be queer'
Its an incredibly multilayered sociological/anthropological look at identity, sex, labels, gender, post-structuralism theory, otherness, history, media, politics, biology and a ton of stuff i am totally leaving out by accident.
That doesnt mean PUA-ism couldn't be looked at through one of these lenses and deconstructed/analyzed. But I get the feeling you are confusing it with 'how to' instruction.
Nono, I know it talks about gayness and not how to be gay, it was not the parallel I wanted to draw.
Do you feel it would be aright if a pick up artist gets payed by a college for teaching on how to get girls, or would you feel such teachings have no place in a college unlike gay theory ?
If someone was conducting a sociological study on puaism, that would be quite fascinating. Most queer theory professors are not gay themselves. In fact, as the poster mentioned above you, queer theory has little to do with gay sex.
Your comparrison makes absolutely no sense. The ultimate, overarching intent of the majority of college courses is to teach students how to think critically about an issue--ANY issue, be it Math, English, or Gender Studies--and apply that reasoning towards analysis and problem-solving. The goal of your theoretical "pick up artist" course would be to teach students how to charm their way quickly into a sexual encounter. At best you're comparing apples to screwdrivers, at worst you're throwing out sensational strawmen.
I think I'm still sort of confused about what you're trying to ask.
Like faithless says, I think it would be interesting to have puaism analyzed as a dynamic in society etc, but I feel like you are saying 'should a PUA teach how to get girls?' Like, have a class where guys can go and be told "by her roses, buy her a drink, drop a line like 'If I could rearrange the alphabet, I'd put U and I together'?"
Because I don't really think that's academic.....and has basically nothing to do with queer theory....
"Our job is to educate our people in sciences, business, math," said Hill, a vice chairman of the budget-writing House Appropriations Committee."
Liberal Arts? What's that?
The ironic thing is, some of the fields held as a cornerstone for a traditional college education are some of the raciest in the lot. Classical Studies, anyone? If Queer Studies is up on the chopping block, then surely those pesky Ancient Greeks with their satyrs balancing goblets of wine on their erections while on the other side of the vase old men thrust happily away between the thighs of their young male students should be next in line for censor.
Exactly! I was horrified at the 'sciences, business and math' comment. And condemning Queer Theory leads right into condemning literary studies, cultural studies, history, etc. Y'know, all the things that Republicans don't like ...
Environmental science? Axed.
Oh dear. I am literally shaking my head right now.
This is like the dude who is trying to sue Columbia for teaching Women's Studies. http://gothamist.com/2008/08/19/columbia_sued_for_offering_bigoted.php
Except, pretty much worse, because instead of a lone fringe crazy who uses language like "feminazis" unironically, its a bunch of legitimatly elected representatives.
But really, how dare we try to educate and open people's minds!
While I have a problem with the language of "Women's Studies", this stuff about these courses being racy is ridiculous. But of course I forgot. The New Right has a phenomenal track record when it comes to the sciences.
You know, that was my initial thought too.
"Racy?"
I find academia sexy as the next nerd, but I've taken oodles of women/gender/queer/sexuality/gay-history -studies courses (not that they are the same, they all fulfilled the same major reqs.)...and, well...
Not to judge what turns "conservatives" on or anyting like that, but I'd have to wonder about anyone who found the content of those courses "racy".
Except for maybe Foucault's leather pants.
This.
If anyone is getting a sexual charge out of the majority of the course material, I think that says more about *them* than it does the course.
"Except for maybe Foucault's leather pants."
Amazing, will be LOLing about that all day!
Um, what happened to the first amendment? Separation of church and state? In what world is this legal?
I agree. Close-minded oppressors are alwasy trying to interfere with intellectualism. They could end up making the economic troubles even more troubling. Theyre exploiting the times to regress society. Very petty. I cant believe republicans are legal.
Gah! These people don't even know what queer theory means! It's not exactly a 101 on how to have gay and lesbian sex, you know? It's about problematizing using such hard and fast labels like "homosexual" and "heterosexual" and about discussing the performance of sexuality and how that affects and is affected by society.
Funny story: The straightest guy I know (dating a different girl every other month, father of two sons, and not interested in exploring relationships with other men [not that he saw anything wrong with it]) started teaching Sociology. He did some research into queer theory so that he could teach it to his students. He saw what it really was and made the pronouncement, "I'm queer." It was awesome.
WOW. I don't even know what to say. I have always found that the critical disciplines - queer theory, critical race studies, gender studies, postcolonial studies, poststructuralist theory - are by far the most challenging. They force us to question and to rethink identities, frameworks and ideas that we take for granted. Which is clearly not what Representative Byrd has in mind...
Good lord Georgia, shut up or you're going to give Alabama ideas. We have it bad enough here already -- vibrators are against the law.
Seriously though, one of the best college courses I ever took was my Homosexuality & Politics course. There were 10 people in the class, and it was at 7 o'clock at night, but I looked forward to it most. Also, I guess the Georgia lawmakers don't realize that when these professors are specialists in things like oral sex or prostitution, it usually has something to do with sociology/psychology/another field of study.
But forget it, let's just get rid of all liberal arts! That'll teach those gosh darn liberals to think! Ideology for everyone!
I know! I am disappointed in my state-of-origin. :(
Oh, and I forgot to mention: how selfish is it to try to put more people out of a job during this economic crisis just because they disagree with you? Pff, they don't deserve to put food on the table! If anything's immoral in this situation, it's that.
I need one of those dumbstruck-looking cartoon faces that goes blink, blink, blink-blink, blink. Because that is exactly how I feel about this nonsense: dumbstruck.
Besides wanting to ban queer theory courses, I bristle at the insinuation that only areas of higher education that are valuable are science, math, and business. What about all those other areas of study out there--English, languages, philosophy, anthropology, art and art history? If that's the mentality that is going to govern Georgia's system of higher education, they're going to drive all of their college students out of the state.
We get the same general phenomenon in Texas: after successfully banning gay marriage 298 times (and attempting to ban certain cheerleader moves), we would need to move on to some other populace-distracting measure to cover up for our shit-poor approach to actually governing.
I'm a graduate student at Georgia State in women's studies and public administration. The university administration knows this is ridiculous, and they're simply not biting. There are few things in this world than academics being told what "counts" as scholarship.
Hmmm. By 'sciences' they mean 'creationism', by 'business', 'how to make poor people poorer' and by 'math', 'how to calculate the profits of lobbying after leaving government'. I wonder whether these GOPers ever went to a decent college in the first place...?
Ah, Georgia. How I love thee. And don't love thee. Why does my hometown newspaper have a headline for this story that conflates queer theory with "steamy sex courses"? And why are the professors that I respect at the college that I graduated from (with degrees in the controversial subjects of sociology and women's studies, thank you very much) being targeted by politicians of all people? Just want to point out that the AJC reported today that the hub-bub is largely over. Typical Southern nonsense. I can say that cuz they're my people. ;)
"Several members of the committee praised Elifson and Stombler for their work; Hill, too, spoke to the committee but given the chance, did not ask the GSU faculty any questions.
He defended his interest in the issue and said he never specifically accused GSU of anything. He also said the media had blown the subject out of proportion.
“It’s been taken sideways by people who like the titillating words,” he said."
Oh that is just too fantastic for words, "titillating" or no. :D
Well, there goes my plan to teach high school English and get the kids interested in literature through romance novels.
Sometimes I'm ashamed to be from the South.
I think there needs to be a new rule that whenever a person in government wants to get rid of a particular course, they should first be required to take said course, in good faith. I really think a lot of good could be done, because I'm betting a lot of people's minds would be changed. (That's the optimist in me speaking, who somehow got past the cynic at the front gate...) It's so obvious that most of the ones who criticize these courses (queer theory, gender theory, evolutionary biology, etc.) have no clue what is actually studied in them.
This really creeps me out. I mean, I get chills down my spine...did she really just outright say we are going to get with the religious leaders to pressure lawmakers.
Why do we even have anything that talks about the seperation of church and state? I feel like I live in a country (although I am abroad now) that has total disregard for its contitution and its laws. I mean. I really dont understand it. Someone who just outright says it.
I dont know which thing I feel uncomfortable with...the whole I am going to get them or the fact that I know whoever they are pressuring will have defend himself/herself to almighty God and not the people. All of the people.
Im a christian but this ish sickens me. It really does. We mind as well have church in the court house. ack
Yeah, this sort of thing happens all the time in GA. Luckily, we have enough representatives in the house with a modicum of common sense that these things usually just fizzle out.
Ok, even leaving aside the ridiculous reasons that they want to do so, isn't it nigh-on impossible to fire a full professor? Is there no tenure in the United States, or have these people just never heard of it?
Oh my god. As a Women's Studies major at the University of Georgia I am horrified to hear this. The budget distributions have been affecting us since our birth. The Benson Building at the University of Georgia which houses the Institute for Women's Studies was condemned in 2001. It has remnants of asbestos, black mold, flooding, and persistent rats. We've been wrapped up in a campaign to get the institute out of the decrepit building and have been promised a move in May. I supposed that won't be necessary if our program doesn't even exist. I think they prejudice against queer theory comes from ignorance. The people making these laws have no idea what queer theory or women's studies even entails. I receive compliments from so many teachers on my critical thinking skills and analytical prowess - and these professors recognize it's because I'm a Women's Studies major as well as a Psychology major. For more information on the Benson Building, go to http://media.www.redandblack.com/media/storage/paper871/news/2008/10/21/News/Maintenance.Incomplete.In.Benson.Building-3496381.shtml
I'm a grad student at UGA getting my WMST grad certificate, and I'd just like to say how impressed I've been with all the students who've taken the initiative to help get WMST out of that horrible little building. :)
As far as UGA goes, I can't see gender studies courses getting axed in a context like this--the administration cares more about the school's reputation than about caving to the religious right. However, they care more about the current budget crunch than they do about the school's reputation, so I could see gender studies courses getting cut for financial reasons.
(As for the department's anticipated move to Gilbert Hall, I'll believe it when I see it.)
I'm also a senior majoring in Women's Studies at UGA, and I posted about the Benson issue on the community forum back in November when we were rallying and petitioning to get WMST out of Benson; thanks for bringing it up again, though.
It seems that an undergraduate level WMST course, Biology and Politics of Women's Reproduction, has been targeted as well. As a feminist interested in rhetorical theory, science studies, and reproductive health, this concerns me greatly. I took the course listed above and can honestly say that no other class has challenged or interested me more.
The old saw about the slippery-slope is probably dragged out too often, but I think it really applies here. For the sake of those fundamental principles of democracry, freedom of speech and freedom of though, authorities cannot be allowed access to or control over what we read, think and study. As Virginia Woolf said of libraries, and as I think applies to universities also:
"To admit authorities, however heavily furred and gowned, into our libraries and let them tell us how to read, what to read, what value to place upon what we read, is to destroy the spirit of freedom which is the breath of those sanctuaries."
"'Our job is to educate our people in sciences, business, math,' said Hill, a vice chairman of the budget-writing House Appropriations Committee."
It's depressing and telling, though hardly surprising, that in summing up the responsibilities of universities, Hill neglects to include anything that could be classified as a Liberal Art. Along with queer theory and women's/gender studies, where are the various minorities' studies, art history, culture studies, history, archaeology, journalism, linguistics, media and communication, philosophy, English literature etc.
Well, if they want to get right into it then, they'd better ban all classes on the Bible from colleges then as well. Ah, and perhaps not for the reason you're thinking, nothing to do with the whole, tax-payer funded, separation-of-church-and-state argument. Oh no, because you see, if anyone bothered to actually *read* the Bible, you know the whole thing, and not just some passages here and there that suit their fancy, they'd see that the Bible is one of the most violent, sex filled books on the whole bloody planet.
In fact, I had a class at a state University, a History of Women in the Bible. One of the stories that sticks out in my mind is that of Tamar, who in the culture of the time, had the right to be wed to the brother of her dead husband so that she might not be childless. When her father-in-law refuses to let his youngest son marry her, as god had struck down the last two lads for failing to live up to their duties, Tamar dresses up as a prostitute to trick her father-in-law into fathering a child with her.
And that's just one story. There's dozens of them. Sex, rape, prostitution, violence, genocide, war. And people worship this book. I don't think they've read it.
I'll simply second what Ariel said about how next will be the bans on gender studies, as they would not want anyone to become transgender" or something. what sickens me is that this sen. byrd's a woman and I'm suprised how ignorant she is. but then, come to think about things, two words " Sarah Palin"???