Katherine Timpf on the latest cause of campus outrage: 

According to an article in the University of California–Los Angeles publication The Rival, people who are kind of into activism but not totally into activism are guilty of “activist appropriation.”

Katie Clancy and Justin Haskins on fake education at Butler University:

In the course’s description, students are told they’ll be taught the real reason Trump won the 2016 election and they’ll be provided “strategies for resistance” to the Trump administration’s evil agenda. “Donald J. Trump won the U.S. Presidency despite perpetuating sexism, white supremacy, xenophobia, nationalism, nativism, and imperialism,” the course description reads. “This course explores why and how this happened, how Trump’s rhetoric is contrary to the foundation of the U.S. democracy, and what his win means for the future. The course will also discuss, and potentially engage in, strategies for resistance.”

Malhar Mali on the dogmatic rot of the humanities: 

Activist professors incapable of surviving in the more arduous disciplines… are the most vociferous in limiting the academic freedom of others. 

Related: The Heterodox Academy Guide to Colleges. 

And Kevin Williamson on the psychology of the feckless and chronically disorganised: 

The passivity and subjectlessness of these narratives is striking, and strikingly consistent. Domestic events happen. Cheques come or don’t come. (Mostly they don’t.) Husbands are sent to jail, children are taken away by the clipboard-toting minions of Authority, disease descends. The money isn’t there. And, in the end, they are evicted. Bad things just happen, and, today, I am the bad thing that is just happening to one of these luckless and unhappy children of God… They’d had years and years to prepare for this moment, and, of course, they hadn’t… They very much wanted to stay in the house, though not enough to offer to rent it or buy it. But certainly enough to sit tight and hope that the situation would somehow just resolve itself in their favour.

As usual, feel free to share your own links and snippets, on any subject, in the comments.

Anthony Gockowski reports from Purdue University, where a debate on abortion takes a strange turn: 

“What would you call the public display of a butt naked body of a child?” [pro-abortion speaker, Professor David] Sanders questioned. “I would call it child pornography. Do they have their permission? Do they have the permission of the foetus? Obviously not.”

The permission of the foetus. All things considered, not the happiest turn of phrase.

He went on to question whether or not [anti-abortion group] Created Equal obtains “the permission of the parents to show these images of children,” soliciting a shocked reaction from the audience, with one in attendance pointing out that Sanders had effectively admitted that “it’s a child.”

So, to recap. Showing images of terminated babies-to-have-been during a debate on abortion is apparently pornographic and indecent, a violation of the subject, unlike actually terminating said subject with forceps, suction tubes or abortifacient drugs.

Related: Just Thwarted Sperm. 

More scenes from UC Berkeley, where a group of College Republicans are having a barbecue, and a burly, ill-tempered transgender lady takes umbrage at this display of “fascism” and says she doesn’t “believe in property.” When it’s someone else’s.

Do watch to the end, when said lady discusses her busy afternoon of social engagements.

Because I know you heathens are all starved of high culture, here are edited highlights of Shannon Cochrane and Márcio Carvalho performing their colossal work Untitled at the 2013 Miami Performance International Festival. For those who may be confounded by the profundity of the piece, a handy walk-through guide is available here. Said guide points out that the performance will encourage among onlookers “a deeper level of critical thought.” Of the many ruminations that will doubtless be inspired is the following:

After seeing someone wrap their head in meat twice, does it still hold the same weight as it did the first time?

The guide notes, rather earnestly, that the first attempt, by Mr Carvalho – to envelop his head in bread, string, and assorted meat products – prompted more amusement from the tiny audience than the subsequent repetition of it by Ms Cochrane. This is presented as an invitation to “a fundamental shift in paradigm” and some allegedly profound insight into gender politics. Or, how “different actions are read on different bodies.” Our artistic deep thinkers are seemingly unaware of the concepts of novelty and diminishing returns.

“This usage of time” is, we’re told, “an interesting one.” So brace yourselves.

Yes, I know. You’ve been rendered giddy by those shifting paradigms.

Dicentra thinks you should see this. And frankly, you deserve no less.

You see, Ms Rachel Bloom is dropping knowledge. With her sex junk.