Now it’s normalizing incest? Anita Bryant wasn’t just right, she was a Prophet!
Exactly what job does this course prepare someone for?
There might be nothing wrong with this. Mythologies are chockablock full of incest, as is plenty of great literature. The problem is they’ll teach it just like everything else, which is to say idiotically and as a thin veneering for leftist politics.
They could teach about the “gender dynamics” of particle physics if they wanted to, and it’d be no different. “Incest” is merely something to catch the students’ interest as they scan what class to sign up for.
Another newly discovered sexual orientation to be included in the new civil rights movement, soon to be followed by bestiality and necrophilia.
The sex positive agenda munches on using public tax dollars as usual.
And the classrooms will be filled with sleaze college guys in tan trenchcoats with pockets full of candy.
I really think it’s time for the science/engineering group to break from all universities and start their own colleges.
That way, titles such “PhD and Professor” and other terms normally associated with true intellect will not be wrongly appropriated by members of the university “we wouldn’t have any jobs at all were it not for tenure” group.
And Clown Group is truly what they have all become.
not a surprise that incest and pedophilia have to be normalized so perverts can have sex with their own kids
this is another help for the homo recruitment movement
liberturdians will be on THEIR side
University of West Virginia?...................
Are they inviting victims of child abuse as guest speakers?
With liberals, it will no doubt be a How-To course.
Please ping your lists and call your state representatives. There is no reason for the taxpayer to support an endorsement of perverted behaviors that are (still) against (what passes for) “the law.”
As much as we blame the colleges for these courses, they are not the REAL problem. The real problem is the parents that PAY to send their kids to those colleges, co-sign for loans, and then look the other way when their kids tell them to “Back Off!!”.
I suspect half of the FReeper parents out there are like that. Why? Simple - they want their kids to get that college degree and NOTHING is more important. So if the kid wants to take Art History, then fine, the kid takes Art History. Is the degree productive? Of course not, but it is still better than nothing (in an academic sense), in that the kid likely can now read, which is more than can be said for today’s high school graduates.
But the bottom-line is that the ONLY reason that colleges get away with this crap (and their high tuition) is because of parents that enable it.
Now I see why they joined the SEC.
Mr. Darcy, is that really you!
Pass the smelling salts.
In case anybody is wondering, the photo in post 18 is of that freak, Angelina Jolie, and her brother.
She and her ex-husband, Billy Bob Thrornton, use to wear vials of each others blood on a chain around their necks, by the way.
I do think we need to know more before jumping to conclusions. This might be a legitimate course, but questions do need to be asked.
Prof. Engelstein’s focus appears to be German history and sociology prior to World War II. I could easily imagine an entirely appropriate course on the Bohemian collapse of basic morality that happened in that era and helped create the moral revulsion that caused support for the rise of authoritarianism. I could also imagine a course on incest from a law enforcement perspective, or a course on how, with the breakdown of the extended family unit due to urbanization, the term “incest” came to be limited to parental or sibling relationships, not cousin relationships.
We need to make sure we've got the right target before firing, but this does not look good. Let's make sure the right questions get asked.
____
Here are links to some academic websites on Dr. Engelstein:
http://lssp.missouri.edu/leadership
http://grs.missouri.edu/people/engelstein.html
http://darwindays.missouri.edu/committee.php?id=stefani_engelstein
_____
The article is off the Tribune website, but since nothing is ever **COMPLETELY** off the internet, here's the cache:
Idea behind Akin’s rape comment has ancient roots
By RUDI KELLER
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
U.S. Rep. Todd Akin’s explanation of how a woman's body prevents pregnancy during rape has been roundly condemned as false, but as the controversy has unfolded, he has revealed that his source for the idea is a doctor who also has advised Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.
The idea might have its roots in ideas that were widely held from about 300 B.C. until the Age of Enlightenment, which is dated to have begun about 1785, said Stefani Engelstein, director of the Life Sciences & Society Program at the University of Missouri.
“From at least 200 or 300 B.C. through the Enlightenment, people thought both partners needed to come to orgasm and release something that would form the offspring,” Engelstein said.
A woman would not orgasm during a rape, and that made pregnancy impossible under that set of ideas, she said. If a woman became pregnant, it was interpreted as she was probably lying, she said.
“Blaming the victim was always a component of the theory that women needed to experience pleasure to conceive,” Engelstein said. “It allowed people to claim that women were deceptive because their bodies told one story and they themselves another and that women in general were also more lascivious than they might claim to be.”
The people from Missouri need to be made aware of this. The department promoting this is half filled with homos, the genitally mutilated, and assorted sickos. It makes them all feel good to think in their mind that there are worse degenerates than themselves. The course is also designed to introduce students to the ideas. Collectively, this is a department filled with nothing more then sex offenders. Let them all be registered.