Female Students a "perk of the job" for Lecherous Lecturers

17 posts / 0 new

Thu, 2009-09-24 14:17

Catchfire

Quote:
We've had a week of sex scandals in schools. Now Terence Kealey, vice-chancellor of Buckingham University, seems intent on stirring things up on the academic front.

Female students, he declares, are a perk of the job for male university lecturers – though they should look, not touch.

In an article for the Times Higher Education magazine on lust, part of a feature on the seven deadly sins of universities, Kealey wrote: "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."

Flashing a few literary allusions, he continued: "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."

Displaying a more surprising familiarity with the etiquette at lapdancing clubs, Kealey added: "As in Stringfellows, you should look but not touch."

Thu, 2009-09-24 14:35

Snert

Besides the obvious gross factor, he also seems to assume that all academics are male. He could have at least thrown a handsome, hunky sop to female professors.

On the good news side, though, it's nice to see that we can successfully thaw out cavemen now.

Thu, 2009-09-24 15:14

martin dufresne

One of the perks that ought to be mentioned is getting female law students to help you build cases, pro bono of course, against some feminist arguments, as is presently being done by Professor Young in his court challenge to Criminal Code sections on pimping and brothel-keeping.

Not to mention those which lawyers are acknowledged to get en nature from the sex industry when they are successful against the Crown...

Fri, 2009-10-02 10:16

Michelle

It's quite possible that those female law students doing pro-bono work on that case are ALSO feminists. You know, feminists who disagree with your point of view on this subject. Which actually has nothing to do with the subject of this thread.

Fri, 2009-10-02 10:22

Caissa

The perk idea is so ingrained in the academic culture that one of the first things I was told by my supervisor as a TA at Western in 1987 was not too sleep with my students.

Fri, 2009-10-02 15:28

martin dufresne

It's quite possible that those female law students doing pro-bono work on that case are ALSO feminists. You know, feminists who disagree with your point of view on this subject.

Quite possible indeed. Straw men from a mod? Wow..

Which actually has nothing to do with the subject of this thread.

I emphatically disagree.

I loved this calloius bit from Vice-Chancellor Kealey whom I hope is facing a swift divorce with prejudice for destroying Mrs. Kealey's social circle: "...she will flaunt you her curves. Which you should admire daily to spice up your sex, nightly, with the wife."

Sat, 2009-10-03 16:08

susan davis susan davis's picture

wow, one of canada's foremost law school's giving students real lived experience in charter law application are part of your pimp conspiracy? okey dokey....

as far as professor young enjoying perks......i was alone with him and he never struck as that kind of person at all. i think we should all refrain from painting all male professors as taking advantage of "perks".my father is a professor, my grand father...as in any case it's dangerous to cast any group in a narrow light in particular when that cast only really represents the few.

Sat, 2009-10-03 16:49

Ghislaine

martin dufresne wrote:

It's quite possible that those female law students doing pro-bono work on that case are ALSO feminists. You know, feminists who disagree with your point of view on this subject.

Quite possible indeed. Straw men from a mod? Wow..

Which actually has nothing to do with the subject of this thread.

I emphatically disagree.

Well, then you are blind and deaf. With Michelle, Susan and now me there are three feminists here who disagree with your position. You as a man don't get to define who is a feminist and who isn't based on your obsession with prostitution. These law students may believe strongly in what they are doing as feminists. And, as Michelle pointed out, that has absolutely nothing to do with the subject of this thread. It is a bit of a smear to lump that professor in which the those who are the subject of this thread.

Sun, 2009-10-04 15:28

Chris Borst

Well, I suppose one has to allow for the fact that the initial publication was supposed to be about "lust", not to mention in the specific context of "sin".

Regardless of the gender or sexual orientation of an instructor, there is no getting around the fact that students - undergraduate and graduate - are young adults in the peak years of their health and physical attractiveness. I have known instructors who see this as one of the trials of the job, those who at least profess to be oblivious to the fact, and those who admit that it does make for a more pleasant work environment. Of course, it can be a trial and a "perk". But I'm not really convinced that it's 'eww'-y (caveat: note that I'm saying this about the case, not about Kealey's expression of it, which does strike me as rather objectionable). If we are going to allow that human being are sexual creatures - at every age - then it doesn't seem inherently objectionable, to me, that professors admit that they do, in fact, notice their students - and take pleasure in the fact that sometimes some of their students notice them, too. Acting on that notice is, of course, something else, as even Kealey stresses.

Caissa raises the issue of TAs. This is one of the more challenging areas. Unlike most professors, most TAs differ little in age from most of their students. Their students generally fall well within the bounds of the people they'd date. Perhaps more importantly, TAs generally fall well within the bounds of the people the students are looking to date. This makes it particularly important to set out and enforce rules on what is allowed.

But I do think it's important to draw a distinction between instructors admitting that they are well aware that they are surrounded daily by the full bloom of humanity's beauty and desirability, and instructors who think - like a Berlusconi, Clinton or Jane Rule - that that fact justifies them in preying on their students.

Sun, 2009-10-04 17:17

#10

martin dufresne

Ghislaine wrote (after a few predictable able-ist insults and her usual canard that I am trying to define what women aren't feminists):

"These law students may believe strongly in what they are doing as feminists."

May is the operative word here. We just don't know that; we only know that Young is in a position of absolute authority - the one acknowledged by Tealey - and that these women depend on his approval to get their degree. What is it you don't understand about a professor using pro bono work by his students on one of his pet causes? It happens to be about decriminalizing brothels, pimps and soliciting by "clients" - along with prostituted women. Were it about ending free speech, or attacking women's right to abortion, would you better see that he is abusing his position? Would you be as confident that his students are entirely free to turn down such an offer and that absolutely no male privilege is involved?

Sun, 2009-10-04 17:33

#11

Timebandit Timebandit's picture

Since university students are adults capable of consent, the issues around professors and students getting involved is somewhat greyer than high school students and teachers.

Harassment aside - I don't get the impression Kealy was suggesting harassment is okay - as long as the student is not in the professor's class, there's very little anybody can do about it.

Tue, 2009-10-06 17:00

#12

Jabberwock

It is still inappropriate, regardless of the legality of a sexual relationship.

Imagine a CEO describing lovely young interns, or female receptionists, or female assistants, as a perk of the job and advising that male executives ogle their curves to spice up sex with the wife? It would be totally unacceptable.

Tue, 2009-10-06 20:32

#13

Laura Colella

I think the point, Martin, is that you don't get to define what is a feminist issue or not. Moreover, I wonder if you don't think it's a little paternalistic of you to presume that female law students are being taken advantage of because they are working on this project. It would be fairer to presume that they, as law students, understand what they are doing.

Chris - yes, a human is inherently sexual, but that's not the issue, IMO. It's the fact that men are depicted like creatures who are incapable of being around women without turning into predators. And, it's the fact that women are depicted like sexual toys to be used by their (presumably male) professors as "perks". Its objectifying. It's degrading, to both men and women.

Tue, 2009-10-06 20:53

#14

Ghislaine

martin dufresne wrote:

Ghislaine wrote (after a few predictable able-ist insults and her usual canard that I am trying to define what women aren't feminists):

"These law students may believe strongly in what they are doing as feminists."

May is the operative word here. We just don't know that; we only know that Young is in a position of absolute authority - the one acknowledged by Tealey - and that these women depend on his approval to get their degree. What is it you don't understand about a professor using pro bono work by his students on one of his pet causes? It happens to be about decriminalizing brothels, pimps and soliciting by "clients" - along with prostituted women. Were it about ending free speech, or attacking women's right to abortion, would you better see that he is abusing his position? Would you be as confident that his students are entirely free to turn down such an offer and that absolutely no male privilege is involved?

I apologize if anyone took my comments as able-ist. when I said you were being "blind and deaf" martin, I meant that you are ignoring the feminists in this thread who are making very clear statements.

Yes, professors have a lot of power. However, students often choose courses, professors and cases to work on that they believe in - as well as choosing which area of law they wish to focus on. We don't know exactly what these female law students believe, but I would say the odds are good that they are working on a case they believe in. Either way, students who aren't in business or engineering usually do probono work. I has to do 800 hours of it in child welfare. Whether they agree with the case they are working on or not, they are learning about the legal process and how to work on a case.

If it was probono work under a male professor taking a case involving abortion rights, would you immediately think they are only working on it due to feeling "forced"? Well, this case is comparable in the minds of many feminists because it involves the right of a woman (and men) to do what they want consensually with their own bodies. I don't condone or "support" prostitution, would never do it, would probably consider leaving my husband if he engaged in it and will teach my children to have nothing to do with it. However, I firmly believe, as a feminist, that adults should have the right to practice it - under strict regulations/guidelines - if they so choose. Prohibition doesn't work. Criminalizing clients while prostitutes cannot be charged doesn't really help the prostitutes, as the clients will still want it to occur in an unsafe location.

Anyways, sorry for the thread drift, but I had to respond to this. martin, you are denying that the female law students you brought into this thread have agency. Your assumptions that they could not really believe in this court case are offensive to the women who you are continually encountering in these discussions who are feminist and believe in the case.

Tue, 2009-10-06 21:12

#15

martin dufresne

I assumed no such thing.

Wed, 2009-10-07 17:05

#16

pookie

martin dufresne wrote:

We just don't know that; we only know that Young is in a position of absolute authority - the one acknowledged by Tealey - and that these women depend on his approval to get their degree. What is it you don't understand about a professor using pro bono work by his students on one of his pet causes?

This is nothing but rank speculation. What possible basis do you have for arguing that they depend on Young's approval for their degree? Osgoode is a pretty big school - it is entirely possible that he has never taught any of them.

Many law students would jump at the chance to work on a Charter case of this magnitude. The idea that Young - or any professor - would have to intimidate people to help him is risible. I guarantee you that he has more help to choose from than he can possibly need.

Wed, 2009-10-07 17:10

#17

Stargazer

I'd help with that project if I was in law school. I greatly respect Alan Young and the work he has done.