No Peeking

Today’s word is ‘indoctrination’.

“DeSoucey has since apologized for the handout…”

But not for having such views in the first place.

“Dr. DeSourcey reflected on her actions and realized she had crossed the line between educating and advocating”

I think there were a few more lines crossed after the advocacy one…
And the really worrying bit?:

However, some students did not find the incident too alarming.

(Twatter login still isn’t working.)

Trick question. These days I fully expect the answer is “both”.

Looks like some people haven’t got the message that Fox News is turning centrist.

Well, they chose to study sociology so that doesn’t surprise me.
The field does seem to attract a very high concentration of dogmatic incompetents and outright loons.

Basically, she is this punk girl, several years older, and still as confused.
It occurs to me that when parents shied from threatening to smack their misbehaving children, despite repeated and appalling behaviour, and defaulted instead to negotiation and appeasement, it may have had some unhappy effects. The number of such bitches now roaming the Earth being one of them.
Presumably, the overindulged bint above, like so many others we’ve seen, is choosing to act in this way – and to go on acting this way, with an expectation of impunity – because nothing in life has taught her, vividly, that boundaries exist, and that, if violated repeatedly, someone might reciprocate.

(Twatter login still isn’t working.)
For anyone having trouble logging in via Twitter, I’ve been sent the following from Anna at Typepad:

Can you have the readers that are having trouble logging in [via] Twitter reach out to us directly? We can troubleshoot with them to help resolve the issue. Have them email us at support@typepad.com. Please ask them to include this reference number and any details about what happens when they try to log in using Twitter.
Reference #: 6DPMMCVD4A2G

This is a public service announcement.

anyone who uses casual violence to make a conversational point or as a substitute for proper emotional regulation,
I recall Jordan Peterson and Camille Paglia chatting about the problem, for men, in dealing with demented and gratuitously aggressive women, and the hope that non-crazy women might somehow intervene. Of course, they were talking about civilised, bourgeois men, who generally have certain qualms and inhibitions, not Ms-13 savages or actual Muhammadan patriarchs. Who presumably favour more direct and emphatic approaches.

Fake News breathless over bombshells!!

Related — just watched this whole interview (38 minutes) but what struck me most was the body language & facial expressions of the woman of the group. You know she hasn’t really heard a thing Peterson says when she finally gets around to talking AT him about the 8 minute mark but the set-up is about at 6 minutes.

You know she hasn’t really heard a thing Peterson says when she finally gets around to talking AT him
I wonder if part of it – the not listening and the looks of something approaching a peeved bewilderment – is because the more of a middle-class lefty you are, the more pretending you tend to do, and the more likely it is that you’ll spend time sitting around with people who pretend almost exactly the same things, or fairly minor variations. The rules of this pretending, of piety, are mutually understood and perhaps a little too reflexive and habitual.
As I’ve said before, I think part of Peterson’s appeal is that he serves as a reminder that one doesn’t have to pretend.

…the goth semi-mask…
Watch again, there is noting “goth” about her, nor any discernible self-doubt. Lots of ignorance and conceit, though.
No whupping needed.
True, a beating like a Chinese gong would be more appropriate, but failing that, perhaps a trip to the slammer might help with an attitude adjustment.

But “the slammer”?! C’mon.
Why ? She was arrested for battery, she deserves a trip to central booking and a stay in a cage till mummsy and daddy throw her bail, as they undoubtedly will.
Who was joking about beatings ? The whole trouble with these asshats is there are rarely real consequences, and a hickory shampoo or two judiciously applied, pour encourager les autres, as it were, will avoid setting the conditions for another Kent State in the future when her ilk run amuck, as is their wont.

C’mon because a college student throwing chocolate milk on another college student in the course of a slanging match on the campus greensward is only “battery” in the most tightassed sense of the word. It’s rude, it’s crude, it’s college. It shouldn’t be, but it is. Her opponent was quite civil to her, before and after the incident. He didn’t deserve the treatment he got from her — but I bet he’s gotten over it (the more so because his politics are conservative, and the conservative temperament that goes with that inclines to not blowing things out of proportion). You should get over it too. We all should. She should be ashamed of her behavior, and then she should get over it. Thirty years from now, when she’s nominated for the Supreme Court, the matter won’t be worth mentioning.

If I venture a guess, she became somewhat uncomfortable with her own certainty… I’ll put it down to pride, her not wanting to show self-doubt after rushing into battle. I can almost admire her for that, foolish as it is: there’s a kinship in some kinds of folly.
You may well be right about the insecurity. I’ve known people who were aggressively dogmatic while betraying an inkling of their own difficulties with facts. I don’t see dogmatic narcissism, or what Peterson would call “ideological possession,” as being incompatible with an awareness that one is quite possibly full of shit. The two often coexist. They can dance. Generally, at some cost to others.
However, if someone presumes to bark opinions that they haven’t actually earned, but are regurgitating wholesale anyway, and to be angry and abusive for reasons they haven’t earned, and then, when politely challenged, they choose to become even more aggressive and start screeching abuse and throwing drinks on people, twice… well, this doesn’t strike me as a basis for admiration.
It’s also worth bearing in mind that the incident above isn’t some isolated aberration, but is part of a trend, almost a competition, whereby ideological bona fides and in-group status are won via aggressive, intimidating and loutish behaviour. As the campus environment and its default politics exacerbate such narcissistic theatre, even rewarding and congratulating it, prompt self-correction seems unlikely. And in the meantime, escalation is underway.
Again, conscientious parenting – imprinting the notion of reciprocation and boundaries, and what it can cost to violate them – might save a lot of bother later on.
[ Edited. ]

I can almost admire her for that, foolish as it is
Thing is, there is a pattern here. This isn’t about one obnoxious individual with impulse-control issues, operating in a vacuum, and who somehow happens to behave exactly like all the others, on dozens of campuses, with eerily similar assumptions and conceits.
Such vanities and behaviour are actively encouraged, and statusful, and therefore common, in her chosen environment. As we’ve seen countless times, in dozens of posts, ranging from gratuitously screaming at random strangers to breaking windows, running into traffic and actual rioting, these are the gestures that are expected of the woke. Recreational outrage is where it’s at. That’s how woke politics seduces the vain and credulous. It flatters them, relentlessly, and gives license to all manner of nasty little urges.
As I said in one the threads linked above, suppose for a moment that I were a malicious little shit and wanted to spend lots of time harassing people, vandalising their property, shoving them, scaring them, and mouthing racial abuse. In the real world, I’d run a definite risk of censure, social disapproval and possibly a good kicking. But if I were at a statusful university and invoked “social justice,” claiming that my behaviour was a reaction to some nebulous oppression and phantom “Nazis,” there’s a very good chance I’d be accommodated, even applauded. And for a certain kind of person, you can see the appeal.
But I’m not sure that’s something to be encouraged among our would-be intellectuals.

Ooh… or better yet her administrators? If all elase fails I expect their football team to get beat like a Chinese gong come November 24.

Such vanities and behaviour are actively encouraged, and statusful… these are the gestures that are expected of the woke. Recreational outrage is where it’s at. That’s how woke politics seduces the vain and credulous. It flatters them, relentlessly, and gives license to all manner of nasty little urges.
That.

Heads up, could be a Moronolanche.

And remember that a lot of the good stuff at his site is in the comments.

True, true.

True, true.
It’s one of the things about this place that still pleases me. The comment threads actually work – much better than expected when I started doing this, eleven years ago – to the extent that the threads are often much more interesting than the posts.

They must have scalps for honor at the camp fire. That’s why they go on the warpath for the most trivial of reasons.
It helps to bear in mind that the attitude we’re talking about can be summed up by this:

Fatuous, gratuitous and irretrievably narcissistic.

Expulsion and jail time come to mind.
Beatings too, don’t forget the beatings, or at least a sound thrashing, drubbing, or what for.

Beatings too, don’t forget the beatings, or at least a sound thrashing, drubbing, or what for.
It occurs to me that we see so many of these woke, SJW females engaging in these violent outbursts directed at conservative males, in which the males refuse to respond in kind. Perhaps, despite all the carping about “toxic masculinity,” “internalized misogyny,” not to mention “girrrrrl power,” “magic vagina” and “female empowerment,” they realize that conservative men are unlikely to give them the thrashing their behavior warrants, having rather internalized the mantra, “boys don’t hit girls.” (Contrast, of course, with the displays–roundhouse kicks and so forth–leftist men routinely direct at conservative women.)
So much for equality.

Me – If I venture a guess, she became somewhat uncomfortable with her own certainty; and knew it wasn’t her chosen adversaries making her uncomfortable. And if she still kept hectoring them (for the short duration of that video), I’ll put it down to pride, her not wanting to show self-doubt after rushing into battle. I can almost admire her for that, foolish as it is: there’s a kinship in some kinds of folly. 
David – You may well be right about the insecurity. I’ve known people who were aggressively dogmatic while betraying an inkling of their own difficulties with facts. I don’t see dogmatic narcissism … as being incompatible with an awareness that one is quite possibly full of shit.
Yes, that’s my point, David: plus the fact of her extreme youth; which taken together encourage me to believe there’s ample time for her internal dynamic to resolve beneficially for her and the world around her.
David – However, if someone presumes to bark opinions that they haven’t actually earned, but are regurgitating wholesale anyway, and to be angry and abusive for reasons they haven’t earned, and then, when politely challenged, they choose to become even more aggressive and start screeching abuse and throwing drinks on people, twice… well, this doesn’t strike me as a basis for admiration.
True. What I can (almost) admire is her valor, not the silly cause she spent it on, and definitely not the yowling and splashery of her impulsive “assault.” In fact I’m delighted she “chose” such ineffective tactics: perhaps fancifully, I wonder if she subconsciously prompted heself to futility of means, because deep down she saw the wrongness of her ends.
David – It’s also worth bearing in mind that the incident above isn’t some isolated aberration, but is part of a trend, almost a competition, whereby ideological bona fides and in-group status are won via aggressive, intimidating and loutish behaviour. As the campus environment and its default politics exacerbate such narcissistic theatre, even rewarding and congratulating it, prompt self-correction seems unlikely. And in the meantime, escalation is underway. 
I perfectly agree with you that it’s part of a trend — but it wouldn’t be justice to punish this girl for a widespread social phenomenon; enough that she answer for her own lesser misdeed. “Prompt self-correction seems unlikely,” as you say, but we didn’t arrive at these parlous times all at once: any improvement we can manage will probably come just as gradually. Perseverance beats speed.
David – Again, conscientious parenting – imprinting the notion of reciprocation and boundaries, and what it can cost to violate them – might [have] save[d] a lot of bother later on 
F.T.F.Y. What might have been….

While I don’t totally agree, I am sympathetic to Bacesaras’ point. Considering what makes young people who they are, I find it very difficult to heap the majority of the blame on such people themselves. As I said above only half-jokingly, it’s their parents, teachers, school administrators, and also the cesspool of our culture of the last 40-50 years, for which we are all to some degree resposible, that has created this mess. While I certainly do not wish to absolve her and her ilk of all responsibilities there is a lot of blame here.
Plus she’s a ‘Nole. Not a troupe to be taken too seriously. I keeeed, I keeeed.