The Week In Woke

A Fordham professor wants people who reject fake "birthright citizenship" actually punished for wrongthink.

'They exploit norms of collegiality and presumptions of integrity to advance trash'

Law professors who support limits on birthright citizenship should be shunned in academia, according to a Fordham University scholar.

"There MUST be repercussions for the lawprofs who advanced such untenable arguments. Their behavior is -- and I mean this literally, not dehumanizingly -- parasitic," John Pfaff (pictured) wrote in a since-deleted post on BlueSky.

"They exploit norms of collegiality and presumptions of integrity to advance trash. Which undermines the work of ALL of us," he said. He later wrote, "I stand by the idea, but I should have phrased it better. Academic freedom is the right to say what you want, without INSTITUTIONAL repercussions (generally). But it's not the right to speak w NO repercussions."

40% of academics won't hire Trump voters.

Black professors outnumber their Republican colleagues at 11 elite higher education institutions including Harvard, Princeton, and Yale.

Roughly 40 percent of college faculty would "oppose hiring a Trump supporter."

A quarter of faculty in social sciences and humanities departments would "support a campaign" to remove colleagues for expressing conservative views "in at least one of four topic areas."

These are just some of the issues flagged in a new report from the America First Policy Institute published this month, painting a picture on how higher education is more polarized than ever.

"When you have institutions that are being captured and co-opted by this kind of woke, DEI, critical theory mentality, this is the result," America First Policy Institute Vice Chair of Education Opportunity Michael Shires told The College Fix. "You chase out people who have even mainstream perspectives."

"If you think about it," he added, "half the electorate voted for President Trump, yet on a university campus, you know, 40% of the faculty wouldn't hire them."

The report weaves together dozens of studies, research, surveys and other findings to argue government intervention is needed to correct course, as institutional reform is not coming from within, and demands for "academic freedom" ring hollow given the bias against the right.

I'm just going to say it: I am now ready, willing, and eager to begin inflicting punishments on communists for what I consider wrongthink. If they want to criminalize my thoughts, I am now ready to use state power to criminalize theirs.

Mike Lee wants to defund schools that insanely continue to force students to get vaccinated in contradiction of their religious beliefs.

A bill that would block federal tax dollars from schools that refuse to allow religious exemptions for vaccinations has been introduced by Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), who argued that educational institutions "need to learn we don't all worship Fauci."

The proposed legislation, dubbed the Guaranteeing Religious Accommodation in Childhood Education (GRACE) Act, is cosponsored by Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) and was introduced in the House by Rep. Greg Steube (R-FL). It is endorsed by over fifty organizations, including Children's Health Defense, Moms for Liberty, and the Autism Action Network.

Not only would the bill defund schools that do not allow religious vaccine exemptions, but it would also prevent institutions from requiring documentation from students or parents in order to justify receiving such an exemption.

The Democrat-led states of California and New York both removed their religious freedom exemptions in recent years, impacting thousands of families who are now blocked from attending the schools their tax dollars pay for.

"Schools are discriminating against religious kids and targeting their families over vaccine exemptions," Lee said in a statement to Breitbart News. "Keeping a kindergartner out of class over a vaccine is cruel -- and it's unconstitutional when the reason is their family's religion."

So important you guys: Oregon's public health schools tackle the one remaining bigotry.

The Oregon Health & Science University and Portland State University School of Public Health hosts an initiative to combat "anti-fat bias."

"The purpose of the Fat Justice Working Group is to engage students, faculty and staff of the OHSU-PSU School of Public Health (SPH) in learning, activities and advocacy to reduce weight stigma and anti-fat bias in ourselves, our School and society at large," the initiative's webpage states.

The group was formed by Dawn Richardson, associate dean for academic affairs, as a social justice project to oppose the "oppression" of overweight people, rejecting the notion that excessive weight correlates with poorer health.

In an open letter addressed to the SPH, part of the working group, called the Fat Justice Journal Club, expressed its concerns with the research and healthcare at the school. The letter rejects the "obesity paradigm," requests the expansion of "Fat Studies," and demands the release of public statements that fight "weight stigma and structural anti-fatness."

It includes references to works such as "Health(ism) At Every Size: The Duties of the Good Fatty," "Thick Sistahs and Heavy Disprivileged: Black Women, Intersectionality, and Weight Stigma," and "Fearing the Black Body: The Racial Origins of Fat Phobia."

The Boyscast discusses Reddit's r/straightpegging subreddit, where "straight" guys brag about being pegged by their "girlfriends." Content warning: It's about pegging.

Ice T has some news for guys in the r/straightpegging subreddit.

Manhattan Institute @ManhattanInst

WATCH: Fmr. Clinton aide Keith Boykin refuses to answer whether or not he believes that objectivity is a "tool of white supremacy"

@Jesse_Leg: "The Smithsonian was promoting a document [that]...suggested that objectivity was a tool of white supremacy. I think we can all agree that that is facially ridiculous."

BOYKIN: "No we can't."

ARM: "You think objectivity is a tool of white supremacy?"

B: "I just want to say you presume things that are not true."

A: "Do you believe that objectivity is a tool of white supremacy?"

B: "Well, you said we can all agree on something. I'm just saying we don't."

A: "Can we all agree that objectivity isn't a tool of white supremacy?"

B: "No we can't. It requires a longer discussion."

posted by Disinformation Expert Ace at 06:10 PM

| Access Comments