This professor needs a kick in the teeth

[Akasa]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...tml?ir=College

[Kheldarson]

I feel better now.



Okay. I think I'm done now.

I realize that these were "hypothetical" but equating rape to being hit with a light?? Jesus...

[Ladeeda]

One comment brought up a more rational comparison: the molestation of a one-year old--who wouldn't remember the assault-- as opposed to an older child who would.

And if that needs debating...

[Kheldarson]

That's a bit better of a comparison, but still off.

A one-year old will still remember.

A molestation at the age may not be explicitly remembered, but the child's behavior will be influenced for the rest of his life.

[Gravekeeper]

Oh right, this guy.

He looks just as punchable as he sounds.

[Nyoibo]

So I take that to mean he's happy to have "teh buttsecks" while passed out and have the footage posted online and that he won't press charges.

[Hyena Dandy]

See, at first I thought he might be an ethics professor, and I'd have kind of given him a pass on that. Ethics professors say things all the time that sound really horrible, because that's their job. It's the same as the mathematics guy who devised the proof for "1 + 1 = 2" They're making a statement that sounds horrible, because they want to be proven wrong.

But he's an economics professor.

So he's just a fuckhead.

[Rageaholic]

he also thinks the poor don't deserve life support

In my experience, econ professors are the most boring and opinionated people you'll meet, but as bad as the ones I had were, they would never stoop this low.

[HYHYBT]

Why does he still have a job?

[Jaden]

Why does he still have a job?

While I find his words appalling, he's allowed to say what he wants in his own time so long as he's not speaking for the university. After all, don't we throw a fit whenever somebody's fired over their Facebook posts and personal beliefs? I don't think he should be fired for this, but I will say that I'm glad he's an econ professor and not, say, in social sciences.

I will also say that I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt based on the original story, as in, that he was simply proposing a thought experiment and challenging people's outrage to see the reactions, and that he wasn't actually saying that rape wasn't a big deal. But based on his agreement with Rush Limbaugh on the birth control fiasco last year, and the article about him thinking the poor don't deserve life support, I will withdraw that benefit. He's a jackass.

[HYHYBT]

Sorry; for some reason I'd got the impression he *was* speaking in his capacity as a professor of that school. Much as I hate it sometimes, no, people shouldn't be fired for opinions expressed off the job.


As a thought experiment, it's interesting. As anything not clearly, explicitly, inarguably labeled as not for real-world purposes, it's horrifying.

[Nyoibo]

Sorry; for some reason I'd got the impression he *was* speaking in his capacity as a professor of that school. Much as I hate it sometimes, no, people shouldn't be fired for opinions expressed off the job.

In this case though, if he's is letting his personal views, which he is rather outspoken with, affect his teaching or encroach on his teaching then he should be fired, that being said, there's not a huge amount of room for personal feelings soley in economics.

[Rageaholic]

In this case though, if he's is letting his personal views, which he is rather outspoken with, affect his teaching or encroach on his teaching then he should be fired, that being said, there's not a huge amount of room for personal feelings soley in economics.

Ironic since the econ professors I've had were some of the most opinionated people I've ever met.

[Kheldarson]

Ironic since the econ professors I've had were some of the most opinionated people I've ever met.

You should've met the econ prof at my school. Guy was a robot.


But econ profs tend to see the whole world in terms of econ anyway. So, to an extent, his analysis is right...from a cost/benefit point of view. There's limited/no cost to the victim, and major benefits to the attacker. It's a win situation in econ.

The only major problem is, as a Slate columnist points out, he is going off the assumption that a person doesn't control their body when they are knocked out like that. He likens it to a "property dispute".

That's a definite what the hell moment for me.

[HYHYBT]

Economics... so, if I, a total stranger, stay in your house while you're on vacation, using the key you left on the windowsill rather than breaking in, not making a mess or anything, and leaving before you come back, that should be legal because you'd never know about it?