A recent article in the UK's Times Higher Education magazine has caused a bit of an uproar, and understandably. In the feature about the "seven deadly sins of universities," the vice chancellor of Buckingham University claims that female students are a "perk" of the job and should be enjoyed.
Funnily enough, Terence Kealey insists the piece was "highly moral," probably because he encourages his fellow professors to look but not touch. Instead, just use her "curves" to fantasize about during sex with your wife. No joke.
Normal girls - more interested in abs than in labs, more interested in pecs than specs, more interested in triceps than tripos - will abjure their lecturers for the company of their peers, but nonetheless, most male lecturers know that, most years, there will be a girl in class who flashes her admiration and who asks for advice on her essays. What to do?Enjoy her! She's a perk. She doesn't yet know that you are only Casaubon to her Dorothea, Howard Kirk to her Felicity Phee, and she will flaunt you her curves. Which you should admire daily to spice up your sex, nightly, with the wife.
He also says that in terms of sexual relationships among faculty and students, "the fault lies with the females" and seems to complain about the "intrusive" agencies that outlawed students bartering sex for good grades: "[T]he days are gone when a scholar could trade sex for upgrades."
Now this guy is a keeper.
The F Word has more.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Holy Gross of the Day .
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/16253
The look on his face is hilarious. What a silly, stupid man.
CREEP!
A STUDENT asks her PROFESSOR for advice on her essays?
SHE TOTALLY WANTS YOU DUDE.
Eeew, such a creepy man! Vomit-tastic.
Eeew, such a creepy man! Vomit-tastic.
Eeew, such a creepy man! Vomit-tastic.
Eeew, what a creepy man! Vomit-tastic.
That photo couldn't be more perfect.
He better hope this next wave of graduating "normal girls" can't read, and don't have any friends who can read, 'cause if I were them, I'd seriously reconsider applying to this university. If this is the kind of stuff he thinks it's appropriate to SAY in a national(?) magazine, then who knows what he thinks it's appropriate to DO behind closed doors. Creepy.
From the original article:
"But girls fantasise. This was encapsulated by Beverly in Tom Wolfe's novel I Am Charlotte Simmons, who forces herself on to JoJo, the campus sports star, with the explanation that 'all girls want sex with heroes'. On an English campus, academics can be heroes."
Yes, OK. All women get ladyboners for power. We know this is true because a dude said so, in a fiction book. Solid proof, wheee!
I loved that quote about women's fantasies. As an academic, the only source he can use to support his declaration that women fantasize is a Tom Wolfe novel? Because, you know, no one knows more about how women fantasize then male authors.
Incidently, why are academics heroes on English campuses? What's wrong with the cricket players or rowers?
I wish this sentiment was new but I remember something very similar when I was in university in the early 90s. A professor wrote a whole article about how it was part of a prof's job to 'initiate' pretty young co-eds into sex (as if we hadn't had sex before university). The response was pretty much the same as here - You wish!
You know, I haven't read or heard of the books he mentioned.
But I have heard/watched "Lolita."
However, I don't see him promoting sex with 12 year olds with that novel! LOL
"more interested in abs than in labs, more interested in pecs than specs, more interested in triceps than tripos"
more interested in biceps than bifocals, more interested in quadriceps than quadrangles, more interested in deltoids than delta x over delta y, more interested in hamstrings than string theory.
i don't get it, what is he suggesting?
He's saying most undergraduate women will actually give a flying fuck what their romantic interests/sex partners look like and will therefore not be interested in his crusty old self.
I'd also like to note that biceps and bifocals are not mutually exclusive ;)
And, for what it's worth, on a purely superficial level, I think I'd take the bifocals over the biceps, if (artificially) forced to choose.
It seems like this "problem" should go both ways, although I'm blanking on what the equivalent terms would be. More interested in... mammarians than grammarians? (T&A than Q&A)? Eek. Someone wittier than me should chime in here :P
I thought "T&A/Q&A" was pretty good.
How does this guy have a job...especially at a university...?
It's a private university - the UK's only one, so unfortunately he's not bound by the laws which are stricter on promoting gender equality for public services than private. He got the job after writing a book about how the state should have no involvement/funding in science research. So basically I guess he's the hero of anti-publicly-funded services people. BLEURGH.
Thank you for the background info eleanargh but my question was really more or less rhetorical. I mean, universities are supposed to be places of higher learning and fostering critical thinking and this guy...well he clearly has no place in any sort of school system.
"[T]he days are gone when a scholar could trade sex for upgrades."
How will higher education recover from this injustice? Free Polanski!
"The fault lies with the females. The myth is that an affair between a student and her academic lover represents an abuse of his power. What power? Thanks to the accountability imposed by the Quality Assurance Agency and other intrusive bodies, the days are gone when a scholar could trade sex for upgrades. I know of two girls who, in 1982, got firsts in biochemistry from a south-coast university in exchange for favours to a professor, but I know of no later scandals."
What power? The power to give those students who are willing to have sex with them better grades. Heaven forbid she or he would just have sex with you cuz you're cute!
He wouldn't pass logic 101, would he?
So creepy! "What to do" if an attractive student asks for advice on her paper? Um, you give her advice on the paper...duh. Being a creeper=not necessary.
I get that heterosexual men are going to notice attractive women, just like heterosexual women are going to notice attractive men. But that doesn't mean that it's acceptable to objectify people or treat serious scholars like mere eye candy.
""What to do" if an attractive student asks for advice on her paper? Um, you give her advice on the paper...duh."
I know! How is this even a question?!?! How are you allowed to become the vice chancellor of a university when it's clear that you haven't even finished elementary school?
Seriously where do they find guys like this...What a jerk...Crazy...
dude. i feel like i got herpes just from *reading* that.
get the skank off me! it burns!
At least herpes is an equal opportunity virus, not a predatory misogynist reveling in his lechery.
I sort of feel like comparing this guy to herpes is... not fair to herpes.
See, stuff like this is what discourages me from going further in academia.
At least once per semester a male professor says something that makes me feel like Peggy Olsen.
I usually don't like to make fun of people based on their appearence but he DOES look like a creep.
it was just a joke and you wonder why we don't want you making important decision
Which important decision? The one regarding where to place the punctuation marks? Because you might want to hand that one off to someone else, good sir.
No, he's a joke. Big difference.
Not only is Kealey a misogynist, he's a hypocrite. He characterizes young women who eye attractive men as shallow, but thinks it's perfectly okay for men to view attractive women as toys. This would be bad enough in a creepy next-door neighbour, but it's far worse in a teacher, whose professional duty is to consider his students' academic needs first.
Ok, this guy is a total jerk. Nothing about what he said is good.
However the line 'more interested in abs than labs' did remind me of something though. And I thought I'd share it since it shows just how insidious beauty culture is.
I demonstrated in university science labs for a number of years. The safety policy in physics and chemistry labs at that time said you had to wear closed in shoes and it said you couldn't have an exposed mid-rift.
There were good reasons for this policy. There was a danger of acid splashes, chemical or electrical burns in some of the labs. Yet there were a minority of students, largely female, who ignored the safety instruction. Some, when I pointed it out, and told them that formally I wasn't supposed to let them do the lab if they didn't comply, suggested I was just a guy abusing his power. And that I was 'trying to make [them] look ridiculous.' A few even turned up to the following week's lab dressed the same way.
I never stopped anyone doing a lab, simply insisted that they borrow a jumper from a friend if they didn't have a lab coat. But I did get the distinct impression that to some of those girls showing off their abs was more important than being safe in the labs.
Don't get me wrong, I don't claim this is a biological female trait. Obviously it's a result of girls being told repeatedly in the media that their worth is wrapped up in how they look. Still, it was rather disturbing to encounter this type of attitude amongst a group who had so much else going for them.
Please ignore the next 3 posts. It was a computer error and they are all the same.
Ok, this guy is a total jerk. Nothing about what he said is good.
However the line 'more interested in abs than labs' did remind me of something though. And I thought I'd share it since it shows just how insidious beauty culture is.
I demonstrated in university science labs for a number of years. The safety policy in physics and chemistry labs at that time said you had to wear closed in shoes and it said you couldn't have an exposed mid-rift.
There were good reasons for this policy. There was a danger of acid splashes, chemical or electrical burns in some of the labs. Yet there were a minority of students, largely female, who ignored the safety instruction. Some, when I pointed it out, and told them that formally I wasn't supposed to let them do the lab if they didn't comply, suggested I was just a guy abusing his power. And that I was 'trying to make [them] look ridiculous.' A few even turned up to the following week's lab dressed the same way.
I never stopped anyone doing a lab, simply insisted that they borrow a jumper from a friend if they didn't have a lab coat. But I did get the distinct impression that to some of those girls showing off their abs was more important than being safe in the labs.
Don't get me wrong, I don't claim this is a biological female trait. Obviously it's a result of girls being told repeatedly in the media that their worth is wrapped up in how they look. Still, it was rather disturbing to encounter this type of attitude amongst a group who had so much else going for them.
Ok, this guy is a total jerk. Nothing about what he said is good.
However the line 'more interested in abs than labs' did remind me of something though. And I thought I'd share it since it shows just how insidious beauty culture is.
I demonstrated in university science labs for a number of years. The safety policy in physics and chemistry labs at that time said you had to wear closed in shoes and it said you couldn't have an exposed mid-rift.
There were good reasons for this policy. There was a danger of acid splashes, chemical or electrical burns in some of the labs. Yet there were a minority of students, largely female, who ignored the safety instruction. Some, when I pointed it out, and told them that formally I wasn't supposed to let them do the lab if they didn't comply, suggested I was just a guy abusing his power. And that I was 'trying to make [them] look ridiculous.' A few even turned up to the following week's lab dressed the same way.
I never stopped anyone doing a lab, simply insisted that they borrow a jumper from a friend if they didn't have a lab coat. But I did get the distinct impression that to some of those girls showing off their abs was more important than being safe in the labs.
Don't get me wrong, I don't claim this is a biological female trait. Obviously it's a result of girls being told repeatedly in the media that their worth is wrapped up in how they look. Still, it was rather disturbing to encounter this type of attitude amongst a group who had so much else going for them.
Ok, this guy is a total jerk. Nothing about what he said is good.
However the line 'more interested in abs than labs' did remind me of something though. And I thought I'd share it since it shows just how insidious beauty culture is.
I demonstrated in university science labs for a number of years. The safety policy in physics and chemistry labs at that time said you had to wear closed in shoes and it said you couldn't have an exposed mid-rift.
There were good reasons for this policy. There was a danger of acid splashes, chemical or electrical burns in some of the labs. Yet there were a minority of students, largely female, who ignored the safety instruction. Some, when I pointed it out, and told them that formally I wasn't supposed to let them do the lab if they didn't comply, suggested I was just a guy abusing his power. And that I was 'trying to make [them] look ridiculous.' A few even turned up to the following week's lab dressed the same way.
I never stopped anyone doing a lab, simply insisted that they borrow a jumper from a friend if they didn't have a lab coat. But I did get the distinct impression that to some of those girls showing off their abs was more important than being safe in the labs.
Don't get me wrong, I don't claim this is a biological female trait. Obviously it's a result of girls being told repeatedly in the media that their worth is wrapped up in how they look. Still, it was rather disturbing to encounter this type of attitude amongst a group who had so much else going for them.