George Mason University professor Bethany Letiecq blames marriage for a societal culture of 'White heteropatriarchal supremacy' and called for its disruption.
One professor is not the teachings of a university. Has the university put out a statement agreeing with her? Has the department head said anything? All I see is a statement from one teacher.
If I went and used my position as a federal employee to sling this type of political shit, I’d be out a job. It’s not exactly like the university is in the dark about what this teacher is doing.
She’s free to say whatever she likes, and the university is free to keep slime like her on. And similarly, I’m free to judge them based on their own speech.
Read he study. The best solution to her complaints is end social programs. That would solve her complaints. End tanf, social security, etc and get complaints go away.
Fucking as if. Her type will always find new shit to cry about. Just because she accidentally stumbled into a good idea once it doesn’t mean she deserves respect
she appears to be for expanding the programs which is stupid since it would increase cost and still wouldn’t produce the results she wants.
Social Security is a Ponzai scam. She wants to allow you to give it to anyone. That way it’s not tied to marriage. Imagine handing down social security benefits from generation to generation or to strangers. The program is meant to stop when you die, or your spouse dies. That is one control on cost.
TANF is a cash program. The government shouldn’t be taking cash from me to give to anyone else. That is just a failed system right there.
We know that traditional nuclear families produce the best outcomes. We should only support families in that mode.
Some of her rant is unironically racist but I doubt anyone read the study or would pick up on it.
Sorry, I misread your earlier comment as you saying she supported ending those programs. As such, I retract my acknowledgement that she’s right about anything, and return to my original stance of full condemnation.
So it should just be ignored that leftists are using universities to push their garbage?
One professor is not the teachings of a university. Has the university put out a statement agreeing with her? Has the department head said anything? All I see is a statement from one teacher.
If I went and used my position as a federal employee to sling this type of political shit, I’d be out a job. It’s not exactly like the university is in the dark about what this teacher is doing.
You are against free speech? Or just speech you don’t like? She isn’t tenured but this is why tenure is important.
Did you read her research or just form an opinion based on the headline ?
She’s free to say whatever she likes, and the university is free to keep slime like her on. And similarly, I’m free to judge them based on their own speech.
Read he study. The best solution to her complaints is end social programs. That would solve her complaints. End tanf, social security, etc and get complaints go away.
Fucking as if. Her type will always find new shit to cry about. Just because she accidentally stumbled into a good idea once it doesn’t mean she deserves respect
she appears to be for expanding the programs which is stupid since it would increase cost and still wouldn’t produce the results she wants.
Social Security is a Ponzai scam. She wants to allow you to give it to anyone. That way it’s not tied to marriage. Imagine handing down social security benefits from generation to generation or to strangers. The program is meant to stop when you die, or your spouse dies. That is one control on cost.
TANF is a cash program. The government shouldn’t be taking cash from me to give to anyone else. That is just a failed system right there.
We know that traditional nuclear families produce the best outcomes. We should only support families in that mode.
Some of her rant is unironically racist but I doubt anyone read the study or would pick up on it.
Sorry, I misread your earlier comment as you saying she supported ending those programs. As such, I retract my acknowledgement that she’s right about anything, and return to my original stance of full condemnation.
You make a good point. Its why Im hesistant. Its clearly about CRT and CRT-adjacent thinking, so Im thinking it should stay up.