Photo of the day

Rhinoceros and just slightly attractive landscape.  Oh, and by the way, if you don’t know much about photography, lighting is  everything.

Photo: A rhinoceros on a hillside in South Africa

Photograph by Brent Stirton, National Geographic

A rhinoceros stands on a hillside in KwaZulu­-Natal Province.

Male Privilege

Really enjoyed this Jon Scalzi take on “why I’m glad I’m male”…

Are you kidding? I’m glad to be male because no one fucking cares what I do with or to my body. And we’re not just talking about politicians and their nonsense, although they are the most obvious examples of this recently. I’m talking about everyone, in almost every circumstance. No one cares what I wear. No one cares what I weigh or what I eat. No one cares whether I brushed my hair or shaved when I came out of the house. No one cares that I’m having sex, or how much sex I’m having, or what I do with my body as a consequence of having sex. No one cares. And if they do care, they keep it to themselves because I’m a guy and it’s not their fucking business anyway.

And, you know, there’s all the other stuff too: Don’t have to deal with people sexually harassing me because I’m a guy, my chance of being raped or sexually assaulted is spectacularly low, I get paid more because I’m a guy and don’t even have to ask (and when I do ask to be paid more I’m not thought to be out of line), I get to express my opinion and not be classified as an mentally unreasonable person because of it, people default to listening to what I have to say, and so on.

I’ll just come right out and say it: being male is easy. Being male, white, educated, able-bodied, well-off and attracted to women? Shit, man. Easier still. It’s perfect for me, you know, because I’m lazy. All these unearned credits and passes and wave-offs from ridiculous shit are perfect for someone like me. Why would I want to be anything else? Anything else is work.

Seems pretty spot-on to me.  I especially endorse the laziness part.   I showed the following video today in my Campaigns & Elections class while discussing the topic of women and campaigns:

It was pretty interesting to see how upset and appalled (rightly) so many of the female students were in response.  I show this video in my Gender & Politics class all the time, but I guess in that class the students are already more aware and inured to this level of blatant sexism.  Anyway, after reading Scalzi’s post definitely had me feeling glad to be a male, which is a shame.

College doesn’t make you liberal; liberals make colleges

Came across this nice column by Chris Mooney about the relationship between college and liberalism.  Short version: it’s the selection bias, stupid.  (And for the record, I think selection bias is one of the most important social science concepts that is massively unappreciated by the general public).

It’s certainly true that college professors are overwhelmingly liberal — as are scientists. As Ireported last year in The American Prospect, the best research suggests that just 14 percent of professors are Republicans. Similarly, just 6 percent of American Association for the Advancement of Science members back the honorable elephant of the GOP.

But why? Sociologist Neil Gross of the University of British Columbia, along with his colleagues Ethan Fosse and Jeremy Freese, make a compelling case that the liberalism of academia is partly driven by “self-selection“: for liberals, pursuing an academic career is naturally appealing. So they tend to stay at universities and pursue graduate degrees and doctorates, and ultimately, come to make up most of the professoriate.

By contrast, conservatives have a different set of values, interests, and priorities. They are, for instance, more likely to want to go into the business world and make gobs of money. Such things push young conservatives away from academia, or at least from staying there very long. Thus, they leave these institutions open to being dominated by liberals.

It certainly doesn’t help that the right has been attacking colleges for decades. So liberals have learned to like them, and conservatives have learned to distrust them.

Mooney endorses this sociological view, but then argues there’s likely some self-selection on the basis of psychology going on here as well:

It’s clear that humans beings have different personalities — some more open to new and abstract ideas and more exploratory, some more closed and defensive — and these personalities have strong political implications. I discussed some of this research in my last piece here, and much more extensively in my forthcoming book The Republican Brain.

If all of this is right — and the body of evidence is extensive and compelling — then liberals just arethe kind of people who like to hang out in places like universities and try out new ideas (and substances, and music, and… use your imagination). By this analysis, universities are a lot like coffee shops and Cambridge, Massachusetts: the kind of places where liberals just feel like they belong. And Santorum is as powerless in the face of this as we all are in the face of human nature.

Conservatives, supposedly, support tradition and stability and doing things the way they’ve always been done. And they support building the institutions of society in such a way as to realistically reflect who we are, and who we always will be.

Well, perhaps the liberalism of colleges and of scientific inquiry is a core part of that picture. And if so, not only is there no point complaining about it, but there’s every reason to be happy about it — at least if you’re really “conservative.”

Perhaps we’ll always have liberals, hanging out in colleges, pushing conservatives’ buttons. And perhaps we’ll always have conservatives feeling uneasy about it, or worse — denouncing universities as liberal bastions and claiming they’re indoctrination mills.

Just call it tradition.

Not a lot to add, mostly because I’m fairly well persuaded and I would say that it largely fits with my experience of the past 18 years of graduate school and professor-dom.

%d bloggers like this: