Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's entitled to his opinions.

His opinions are discriminatory and he's not entitled to keep his job.

If he has tenure, he is.

People are entitled to have discriminatory opinions. I discriminate against tomatoes, for example. There’s something about the texture that makes me gag.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm female and I'm centrist. I don't go for the fringe left or the fringe right.

Having said that, this is my thought: If you can't exercise freedom of speech on a college setting, where the hell can you exercise it?

All of this "fire the guy" rhetoric is intolerance in disguise.

We NEED to have a range of opinions in society, and we NEED to discuss this range of opinions. Otherwise all of us move in lock step together. That's not good for society.

How the hell do you think the Middle East ended up in a place where women are treated as chattel? First, women allowed it to happen. Second, society was not questioning itself on an ongoing basis.

I think it's healthy to have a range of opinions, to discuss them, to discard the crazier ideas. But don't discourage freedom of speech. It's a cornerstone of our democracy.

He is welcome to his opinions. But, let's be clear, he has the position of being able to affect grades. If he cannot do that fairly -and he cannot; at the very least he has poisoned the perception of his ability- he should not be in that position.

This is not a "free speech" issue, as much as you would cast it as so. It is a consequence of him running his mouth and demonstrating his own ignorance and intolerance.

And don't cast it as being "intolerant" to want him fired. I have to be -and should be- tolerant of people going on about things like this in their personal capacity. I do NOT have to be so from a professor who is in charge of grading female students and may be doing so with an explicitly stated bias.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm female and I'm centrist. I don't go for the fringe left or the fringe right.

Having said that, this is my thought: If you can't exercise freedom of speech on a college setting, where the hell can you exercise it?

All of this "fire the guy" rhetoric is intolerance in disguise.

We NEED to have a range of opinions in society, and we NEED to discuss this range of opinions. Otherwise all of us move in lock step together. That's not good for society.

How the hell do you think the Middle East ended up in a place where women are treated as chattel? First, women allowed it to happen. Second, society was not questioning itself on an ongoing basis.

I think it's healthy to have a range of opinions, to discuss them, to discard the crazier ideas. But don't discourage freedom of speech. It's a cornerstone of our democracy.

He is welcome to his opinions. But, let's be clear, he has the position of being able to affect grades. If he cannot do that fairly -and he cannot; at the very least he has poisoned the perception of his ability- he should not be in that position.

This is not a "free speech" issue, as much as you would cast it as so. It is a consequence of him running his mouth and demonstrating his own ignorance and intolerance.

And don't cast it as being "intolerant" to want him fired. I have to be -and should be- tolerant of people going on about things like this in their personal capacity. I do NOT have to be so from a professor who is in charge of grading female students and may be doing so with an explicitly stated bias.

Anonymous wrote:You left out this part: Yenor said on Twitter that "making special efforts to recruit women into fields where they don't seem to want to be" should be stopped, and he denied wanting to prevent women from obtaining those professions.

I wonder about this also. If women don't want to go into engineering why make such an effort to recruit them?

Medicine and law are different of course, women don't need to be recruited since plenty apply plenty on their own.

Anonymous wrote:I'm female and I'm centrist. I don't go for the fringe left or the fringe right.

Having said that, this is my thought: If you can't exercise freedom of speech on a college setting, where the hell can you exercise it?

All of this "fire the guy" rhetoric is intolerance in disguise.

We NEED to have a range of opinions in society, and we NEED to discuss this range of opinions. Otherwise all of us move in lock step together. That's not good for society.

How the hell do you think the Middle East ended up in a place where women are treated as chattel? First, women allowed it to happen. Second, society was not questioning itself on an ongoing basis.

I think it's healthy to have a range of opinions, to discuss them, to discard the crazier ideas. But don't discourage freedom of speech. It's a cornerstone of our democracy.

Anonymous wrote:I'm of the opinion that, barring disability, if you get a tertiary degree in a competitive field with limited admission - you should be required to work in that field for 5-7 years full-time. Otherwise you are taking the opportunity away from someone who WILL use the degree and for the better of society. (And no I don't care if you were scholarship or full pay)

Far too many 'Mrs' degrees and proud SAHM/Ds blogs who say 'Oh I have a law degree from Harvard teehee but all I do all day is knit and change diapers'.

Anonymous wrote:I'm female and I'm centrist. I don't go for the fringe left or the fringe right.

Having said that, this is my thought: If you can't exercise freedom of speech on a college setting, where the hell can you exercise it?

All of this "fire the guy" rhetoric is intolerance in disguise.

We NEED to have a range of opinions in society, and we NEED to discuss this range of opinions. Otherwise all of us move in lock step together. That's not good for society.

How the hell do you think the Middle East ended up in a place where women are treated as chattel? First, women allowed it to happen. Second, society was not questioning itself on an ongoing basis.

I think it's healthy to have a range of opinions, to discuss them, to discard the crazier ideas. But don't discourage freedom of speech. It's a cornerstone of our democracy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's entitled to his opinions.

His opinions are discriminatory and he's not entitled to keep his job.

If he has tenure, he is.

People are entitled to have discriminatory opinions. I discriminate against tomatoes, for example. There’s something about the texture that makes me gag.

Tomatoes are not a protected class. An individual's sex and gender are.

Anonymous wrote:He said a few other things too.

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/education/article256193492.html

“Our culture is steeped with feminism,” Yenor said during the conference. “It teaches young boys and girls that they are motivated by much the same things and want much the same things.”

“Thus girls are told to become as independent as boys are said to be. … They are more medicated, meddlesome and quarrelsome than women need to be.”

“Young men must be respectable and responsible to inspire young women to be secure with feminine goals of homemaking and having children,” he said, adding that male achievement in the country is not “celebrated.” “Every effort must be made not to recruit women into engineering, but rather to recruit and demand more of men who become engineers. Ditto for med school, and the law, and every trade.”

Yenor earlier this year served on Lt. Gov. Janice McGeachin’s task force that investigated so-called indoctrination in Idaho schools. The task force held four meetings over the summer, where the members heard primarily from people who supported their views and presented a set of vague recommendations at their final meeting.

Emily Walton, a current Boise State MBA student and former trustee at the College of Western Idaho, said the most offensive and salient part of his comments were when he said women shouldn’t be recruited into law, engineering and medicine. That admission, she said, leaves him and the university open to a potential Title IX complaint.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's entitled to his opinions.

His opinions are discriminatory and he's not entitled to keep his job.

Yes he is. Professors and students alike have academic freedom and the freedom to express their opinions. Boise State is a public university, so they are required to respect an individuals' free speech rights.

He obviously has discriminatory beliefs against women. He should not be in a position to issue grades to them if he cannot be objective. I would have a problem with him if he were my DD's prof and I'd be loudly letting the university know that.

And before you come back with more "free speech" blathering, he wouldn't be fired for his speech. He'd be fired for not being able to perform his job functions in a nonbiased manner. His statements clearly indicate he cannot. Speech is free. But not free from consequences.

Anonymous wrote:Idaho gonna Idaho.