Republicans wants Iowa universities to explain ‘compulsory heterosexuality’ and other concepts being taught ‘It's not a witch hunt. It's just simply,

[joelbc1]

jesus ****ing christ...again

"again" and...............forever!

 

[sober_teacher]

Appropriate response to gaslighting

If it is gaslighting to point out that you leapt to a lot of assumptions in your earlier post, then guilty.

 

[hawkedoff]

If it is gaslighting to point out that you leapt to a lot of assumptions in your earlier post, then guilty.

Not really.

There easily could be gaps fine. But putting the blessing of catholicism into a class description to train teachers would likely have you hyperventilating. The professor put those things in their class description online in a college of education. Those things do not belong in teacher training

 

[globalhawk]

I can't be sure, but I would bet a course like compulsory heterosexuality is an elective not a requirement for a business degree.

Don't tell her facts. She taught high school econ 75 years ago. She's the wife on King of the Hill.

 

[sober_teacher]

Not really.

There easily could be gaps fine. But putting the blessing of catholicism into a class description to train teachers would likely have you hyperventilating. The professor put those things in their class description online in a college of education. Those things do not belong in teacher training

And? There’s a ton about that we don’t know. Were these the sole focus of the class, or one portion? Were these courses electives or required courses? What was the intended purpose?

Taking specific phrases from a course description is meaningless to me without seeing the syllabus and not something I’m going to get outraged about on its own; especially when I’ve never heard of most of those in the article.

 

[JRHawk2003]

Why can't I push that religion on people since leftist ideas are being pushed on people in higher ed?

Why isn't Andrew Tate a professor at a college teaching everyone about his shitty ideas? I mean other than the fact that he stands accused of human trafficking. But I'm sure one of his cronies can teach "The (shitty) philosophy of Andrew Tate" at the University of Iowa. You know where they can tell all the women in class are the property of men.

You get religion and leftists.

You are trying way way way too hard to worry about a problem that doesn't exist.

 

[JRHawk2003]

That is an assumption you made unprovoked. You attacked my motivations. That meets the standard definition.

As I mentioned earlier, your rhetoric in this thread is validating that there is a clear need for more core education and less nonsense taught in our schools of higher education.

What are you talking about? You have to have hours in different fields for a BS or BA. Social Sciences was one small part and the part most people take are basic psych or poly sci or sociology classes. The debates on those sort of concepts are in upper level undergrad and grad classes.

Again...trying to create a problem that does not exist.

 

[LuciousBDragon]

What are you talking about? You have to have hours in different fields for a BS or BA. Social Sciences was one small part and the part most people take are basic psych or poly sci or sociology classes. The debates on those sort of concepts are in upper level undergrad and grad classes.

Again...trying to create a problem that does not exist.

You are missing a lot of context. You should probably go back to the thread you started about the likelihood of kicking Iowa out of the B1G because it’s a “red state.”

 

[JRHawk2003]

You are missing a lot of context. You should probably go back to the thread you started about the likelihood of kicking Iowa out of the B1G because it’s a “red state.”

You should probably stop spewing nonsense.

 

[hawkedoff]

And? There’s a ton about that we don’t know. Were these the sole focus of the class, or one portion? Were these courses electives or required courses? What was the intended purpose?

Taking specific phrases from a course description is meaningless to me without seeing the syllabus and not something I’m going to get outraged about on its own; especially when I’ve never heard of most of those in the article.

No it really isn't meaningless. Those professors put exactly those things in there and they have a meaning. The meaning is fairly easy to ascertain and it is also easy to deduct the rationale for the Professor to include those things. You wanting to deflect and run interference to muddy the water and gaslight the hell out if people is agenda driven. Play your games but people know exactly what is going on there.

 

[hawkedoff]

What are you talking about? You have to have hours in different fields for a BS or BA. Social Sciences was one small part and the part most people take are basic psych or poly sci or sociology classes. The debates on those sort of concepts are in upper level undergrad and grad classes.

Again...trying to create a problem that does not exist.

Or identifying a problem that is right out in the open.

 

[globalhawk]

Or identifying a problem that is right out in the open.

 

[JRHawk2003]

No it really isn't meaningless. Those professors put exactly those things in there and they have a meaning. The meaning is fairly easy to ascertain and it is also easy to deduct the rationale for the Professor to include those things. You wanting to deflect and run interference to muddy the water and gaslight the hell out if people is agenda driven. Play your games but people know exactly what is going on there.

Everyone has bias. If we are going to attack anything that is a theory it becomes a little absurd. It's fair game then to critique Adam Smith and Hume. It's not F_in gospel.