Andrew Golis

If you’re not a sad news junkie like me, you probably only have heard little bits about RatherGate. Basically, CBS news reported uncovering documents that proved Bush has abandoned his Nat’l Guard duty, only to find out that they were obviously forged. New liberal humorist/conspiracy theorists think they know who forged them and gave them to CBS.

while most of the things on the Crimson opinion page are pure trash, today there was a column today that included some of the thoughts expressed on this blog by myself and others about the Anti-Summers campaign. From today’s Crimson:

The Coalition for an Anti-Sexist Harvard yesterday held a rally in front of the Science Center to SPEAK OUT FOR AN ANTI-SEXIST HARVARD and COMMUNITY VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE [their caps, not mine]. I confess, the almost-certainly-well-meaning Coalition lost me with the subject line—I don’t much appreciate being e-shouted at. What followed, moreover, was a ridiculous laundry list of demands that demonstrated an ill-conceived (and unfair) attempt to roll a host of campus issues into the firestorm around President Summers’ leadership.

[...]

Their final two demands, however, condemned the e-mail to my computer’s trash bin: “demanding that Harvard take steps to dismantle the final club system,” and, “the democratization of administrative decision-making.”

The Coalition’s apparent dislike of the final club system has absolutely no place in a rally about President Summers’ leadership. The final clubs have nothing to do with the University’s administration, and to leverage condemnation of President Summers as sexist and unfit for leadership on his abolition of the final club system is unfair, unreasonable, and irrational.

As for the democratization of administrative decision-making, the Coalition has to realize that Harvard is not a democracy and never should be. As students, we pay tuition, not taxes, and while we ought to be able to expect a certain level of attention to our needs as members of the college community, we should not expect a hand in the decision-making of the college itself.

I agree on both counts. As I have said before, we have a problem of strategy. Yes, these issues are connected (except maybe PetroChina). But normally, social movements focus on one thing at a time so that they can ACTUALLY WIN and build momentum toward the other things. That’s why is a MOVEMENT. Because they grow with success and build in numbers. Not by asking the world and being surprised when nothing happens.

From YahooNews:

Homosexual marriages are part of “a new ideology of evil” that is insidiously threatening society, Pope John Paul says in a new book published Tuesday.

Ok, so while I fervently disagree, I understand conservative Christian beliefs about abortion. There’s a logical train of thought in which, if you belief life begins at conception abortion does clear hard to human life. Conservative Christian beliefs about gay marriage, however, are honestly beyond me.

Part of an “ideology of evil”?! Clearly there must be some aspect of gay marriage that I simply don’t grasp. Last time I checked, it was two people who love each other pledging to live their lives together. Where does this ominous sounding evil come in? The love part? The commitment part? YO NO COMPRENDO!

Talking to various people about this whole Larry Summers thing I’ve come across two thoughts that, while they are somewhat counterintuitive (or at least not held by the main forces in this debate) seem to have some wisdom.

The first, which is not that uncommon, is that Larry being a sexist was actually one of the best things anyone has done for women in academia in a long time because it highlighted the problem, how far we have to go, and how bogus arguments made against women in academia are. While I think the left, especially here at Harvard, hasn’t done as good of a job as it could it making its case, I think its probably true that in many ways its good for the issue because, in the long-run, most media coverage and research shows that Larry is wrong. I don’t think, however, that the tone of the left’s reaction has done it any favors. In fact, the person who expressed the above belief to me was annoyed at today’s protest for exactly that reason. “He did us a favor,” she said, “why are they so upset?”

The second view I’ve heard is also interesting. This one says that, if you are an advocate for women’s equality and tenure etc., you should actually want Larry to stay at Harvard. At this point, this line of reasoning goes, if he stays he’ll have to spend every day trying to prove that this hubub was wrong and that he does care about the issue. For the rest of his tenure it will have to be on the front burner because there will be such heightened scrutiny on the issue.

I’m not sure I buy either argument in full, but they have a certain logic to them.

What do you think?

My second column was published today.

One thing you’ll notice: the column itself is the result of an evolution and dialogue that happened on this blog, with many of you in person, etc. So, hopefully you all who read this blog regularly (and there are somewhere between 60 and 70 of you who read it daily) will realize that this blog should be about a conversation, whether that means on the blog on taking things from the blog to have conversations with others.

That’s my goal. I’m not trying to indoctrinate anyone with my opinion (although I will, of course, forcefully express it). I want to learn and over the last month and a half since I’ve started writing here more regularly, I’ve learned a ton.

So thank you, and keep the conversation going!

That’s right, noble reader. The brilliant political strategists that are Harvard campus leftist leadership have added more demands to their “Anti-Sexism Rally” this afternoon. Call me crazy, but I thought the point of today’s rally was to express frustration about what Summers said with the intention of forcing his resignation. Instead, however, the list of demands is getting longer. Yesterday, there were six. Today there are TEN! Can you imagine the amazing chants and slogans that they’ll come up with? “What do we want?

* a centrally located Women’s Center with full-time staff
* free, on-site childcare for all Harvard workers; an end to employment discrimination and low pay
* more tenured women and minority faculty
* increased full-time faculty, resources for course offerings, and autonomy over hirings for Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies
* that Harvard prioritize improving and increasing resources for mental health services
* an end to gender discrimination, and the inclusion of protections against discrimination based on “gender identity and expression” in the non-discrimination code
* that Harvard take steps to reduce the power of all-male Final Clubs on campus and create gender neutral social space
* that Harvard support justice and human rights campaigns by divesting from corporations like Unocal, which supports the Burmese dictatorship, and PetroChina, which backs the Sudanese government
* the democratization of Harvard to include more student, worker, and faculty involvement in the decision-making process of the Harvard Corporation, and the end of the President’s veto over tenure decisions
* Summers’ resignation

When do we want it? NOW!”

It’s sad, because a lot of these people seem to have forgotten that a rally is supposed to be a political tool. It is not an opportunity to vent. When you ask for TEN things, any sane person walking by would have to spend 5 to 10 minutes there just to figure it all out. There’s a reason that politics has focused language: I don’t have time for you to explain your entire worldview to me at a protest rally!

As you may have already read, a friend of then Governor George W. Bush taped multiple conversations that they had over the course of some months. Those tapes have now gone public (apparently as a tactic for the friend to sell his new book). It’s some pretty interesting stuff covering subjects including: McCain, the politics of religion, drugs and much more. A good read.

on the eve of a possible “no confidence” vote from the faculty on Larry Summers, the Crimson has released a poll that suggests that while Larry will keep his job, he’s not exactly Mr. Popular:

Do you approve of Summers’ leadership of the University?
Approve: 108 (40%)
Disapprove: 140 (52%)
Don’t Know: 22 (8%)

If a confidence vote in Summers was held today, how would you vote?
Confidence: 136 (50%)
No Confidence: 105 (38%)
Don’t Know: 32 (12%)

In case you didn’t know, there’s going to be an “anti-sexism” rally at the Science Center at 3. Should be interesting to see whether or not progressives can, for once, stay on message to get something done. From their emails, it looks like that’s doubtful and instead they’re going to yell about everything they can think of:

On Tuesday, faculty continue to meet to discuss Summers’ tenure. Join students, alumnae, and workers in symbolically demonstrating our “VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE” in President Summers, and demanding:

* a centrally located Women’s Center with full-time staff
* childcare for all Harvard workers
* more tenured women and minority faculty
* that Women, Gender, and Sexuality be made a department, not a standing committee
* that Harvard take steps to dismantle the Final Club system and create gender neutral social space
* the democratization of administrative decision-making

We will cast our ballots on Summers and deliver him a huge reportcard on women’s issues.

At least they didn’t also call for our withdrawal from Iraq. They stayed in one genre, that’s good. Do they realize that when they throw the Final Club thing on there about half of the people who would come to their rally all of the sudden don’t want to? Big tent people, that’s what wins.

an interesting article in the NYTs yesterday about sororities at Harvard. It doesn’t make any overwhelmingly original points, but its interesting to read what outsiders observe about your own community:

Whatever their differences, women’s clubs at Harvard have at least one thing in common: none have clubhouses. While the men’s clubs have their own lairs – many of them wood-paneled affairs adorned with moose heads and leather club chairs – the women’s clubs rent space for events at local hotels and restaurants, sometimes even from the men’s clubs. The Isis took an apartment off campus in 2003, but it proved a financial drain, so the club decided not to renew the lease. Not having space can put a damper on secret rituals; Emily High, the president of Kappa Kappa Gamma, said she has to keep her sorority’s secret gear in a trunk in her dorm room.

As for renting space from the men, she said, “It’s unfortunate to be so dependent on them.”

Members of male clubs tend to be quietly supportive of the women’s groups, if not always for altruistic reasons. “The general attitude towards them is positive, because the males know that if this issue is raised it could result in their being forced to accept women,” said one upperclassman, who asked not to be identified for fear of dragging his club into the debate.

It’s a tough question: are female clubs/sororities part of the long-term solution to the problem of gender-exclusivity on campus, or are they a part of the problem?

Read this article. A teaser:

“It’s exciting to be in a restaurant nude,” said George Keyes, 65, a retired junior high school English teacher.

And it only gets better.