Last Saturday was the first time I had ever heard Greg Newbold's name. I was at the district court volunteering to be a juror so some young lawyers could work on their courtroom skills.
I learned that he was a professor at my school and had done time in prison for being part of a drug ring.
One former student recounted how she had visited his office when he was wearing short shorts with nothing underneath. She discovered this when he put his leg up and she could see his bits. She laughed about it but it sounded like something that would be hard to do "by accident."
One of his current students who was also in my jury group recounted how the professor told his class about a inmate who he thought was a really great guy before ending his story with a nonchalant mention that he had brutally murdered his wife.
After hearing these stories I made a mental note to avoid this man and his classes at all costs.
But it was not to be.
The very next day Nick sent me a news article about the same professor.
He had recently given a talk to promote his new book at the uni and several complaints had been lodged about sexist commentary he made during the event.
This gave rise to several more sexist and misguided comments in the press about "PC culture," "silencing freedom of speech" and "people's rights to have an opinion."
I will address these issues in a moment but first to his comments.
When speaking of a woman who was a champion of feminism Newbold instead focused on how attractive she was.
He also claimed that ladies wouldn't buy underwear modeled by fat women, sex will sell for biological reasons, women are attracted to strong men, men only want nubile women and women sometimes falsely report rape.
He then followed up with a statement to the press saying, "I wasn't there to make women feel good about themselves; I wasn't there to mollify feminists."
No, apparently he was there to start off with solid facts based on research and personal experience before derailing into psych evo and gender essentialist bullshit.
What does a woman's appearance have to do with her authority and understanding of subject matter?
Here, let me make my point a little clearer.
This is a photo of professor Newbold:
Because I think he resembles Mr Potato Head I can't be bothered to take anything he says seriously. No matter how many insights into prison conditions he may have gained through personal experience, he just isn't sexy enough for me to listen to.
Does this make any sense?
And yet, some men in two thousand and mother flippin' sixteen still feel the need to comment on a woman's appearance as if it has any relevance to what she has done with her academic career.
It's an insidious way of demeaning women and their accomplishments.
When a man does this he is attempting to confer importance onto his own opinion when there is none.
Whenever I hear of someone doing this I will automatically assume they are feeling threatened in some way.
The problem with a university giving a platform to someone like Newbold is that it gives his words an air of legitimacy.
While most universities wouldn't host a speaker claiming that some races are inferior to others or that the world is flat, many still seem to tolerate learned men passing off their misogyny as scientific fact.
The problem with claiming that everyone is entitled to their opinion is that Newbold's talk wasn't supposed to be about his opinions. It was supposed to be about facts, research and lived experience.
Opinions and facts are not the same thing.
Newbold wasn't in a debate. His was a solo performance in which his opinions were the only ones being heard.
Freedom of speech means the government doesn't interfere with private citizens rights to express themselves, It does not obligate universities have to give speaking time to every man with a crackpot theory about women and how they work.
If anything the administration should be embarrassed for having an employee who actually blurts out this sort of retrograde shit in public.
As for the term "PC," the people who deride it the most seem to yearn for the old days when you could openly demean others who you thought were beneath you.
When it comes to underwear purchases, I personally do not base my decision on the slimness of any model. I base my decision on whether or not something is likely to fit me and be comfortable.
From what I've seen of the world with my own two eyes, women take men in all shapes and sizes and men who only want nubile women are usually trying to compensate for something.
As for the false rape statistics, it seems that statistics from several international sources estimate between 2% and 8% of cases qualify. But the research is problematic because in several cases "false" was confused with cases declared "unfounded" and some of those cases weren't taken any further due to the personal bias of the investigating police officers.
To say the data is flawed is an understatement.
As for Newbold's right to speak his mind, I don't think it's under any threat.
He was able to blather out a whole bunch of ignorant nonsense, be an unapologetic a-hole about it in the press and keep the day job where he will likely tell more students about the great wife murderers he's known and befriended.
I learned that he was a professor at my school and had done time in prison for being part of a drug ring.
One former student recounted how she had visited his office when he was wearing short shorts with nothing underneath. She discovered this when he put his leg up and she could see his bits. She laughed about it but it sounded like something that would be hard to do "by accident."
One of his current students who was also in my jury group recounted how the professor told his class about a inmate who he thought was a really great guy before ending his story with a nonchalant mention that he had brutally murdered his wife.
After hearing these stories I made a mental note to avoid this man and his classes at all costs.
But it was not to be.
The very next day Nick sent me a news article about the same professor.
He had recently given a talk to promote his new book at the uni and several complaints had been lodged about sexist commentary he made during the event.
This gave rise to several more sexist and misguided comments in the press about "PC culture," "silencing freedom of speech" and "people's rights to have an opinion."
I will address these issues in a moment but first to his comments.
When speaking of a woman who was a champion of feminism Newbold instead focused on how attractive she was.
He also claimed that ladies wouldn't buy underwear modeled by fat women, sex will sell for biological reasons, women are attracted to strong men, men only want nubile women and women sometimes falsely report rape.
He then followed up with a statement to the press saying, "I wasn't there to make women feel good about themselves; I wasn't there to mollify feminists."
No, apparently he was there to start off with solid facts based on research and personal experience before derailing into psych evo and gender essentialist bullshit.
What does a woman's appearance have to do with her authority and understanding of subject matter?
Here, let me make my point a little clearer.
This is a photo of professor Newbold:
Because I think he resembles Mr Potato Head I can't be bothered to take anything he says seriously. No matter how many insights into prison conditions he may have gained through personal experience, he just isn't sexy enough for me to listen to.
Does this make any sense?
And yet, some men in two thousand and mother flippin' sixteen still feel the need to comment on a woman's appearance as if it has any relevance to what she has done with her academic career.
It's an insidious way of demeaning women and their accomplishments.
When a man does this he is attempting to confer importance onto his own opinion when there is none.
Whenever I hear of someone doing this I will automatically assume they are feeling threatened in some way.
The problem with a university giving a platform to someone like Newbold is that it gives his words an air of legitimacy.
While most universities wouldn't host a speaker claiming that some races are inferior to others or that the world is flat, many still seem to tolerate learned men passing off their misogyny as scientific fact.
The problem with claiming that everyone is entitled to their opinion is that Newbold's talk wasn't supposed to be about his opinions. It was supposed to be about facts, research and lived experience.
Opinions and facts are not the same thing.
Newbold wasn't in a debate. His was a solo performance in which his opinions were the only ones being heard.
Freedom of speech means the government doesn't interfere with private citizens rights to express themselves, It does not obligate universities have to give speaking time to every man with a crackpot theory about women and how they work.
If anything the administration should be embarrassed for having an employee who actually blurts out this sort of retrograde shit in public.
As for the term "PC," the people who deride it the most seem to yearn for the old days when you could openly demean others who you thought were beneath you.
When it comes to underwear purchases, I personally do not base my decision on the slimness of any model. I base my decision on whether or not something is likely to fit me and be comfortable.
From what I've seen of the world with my own two eyes, women take men in all shapes and sizes and men who only want nubile women are usually trying to compensate for something.
As for the false rape statistics, it seems that statistics from several international sources estimate between 2% and 8% of cases qualify. But the research is problematic because in several cases "false" was confused with cases declared "unfounded" and some of those cases weren't taken any further due to the personal bias of the investigating police officers.
To say the data is flawed is an understatement.
As for Newbold's right to speak his mind, I don't think it's under any threat.
He was able to blather out a whole bunch of ignorant nonsense, be an unapologetic a-hole about it in the press and keep the day job where he will likely tell more students about the great wife murderers he's known and befriended.
