Charlotte Allen in the Weekly Standard has written an excellent survey article of the false accusations made of the Duke lacrosse players and the moonbat faculty at Duke who have piled onto the accused.
The race/gender/class/male privilege scenario also absolved its promulgators of having to consider the fact that the evidence of the players' guilt was flimsy from the outset and grew flimsier as each day passed. Indeed, [Duke Literature Profesor Wahneema] Lubiano, in her online article, dismissed the whole idea of evidence--and thus legal guilt or innocence--as just another set of socially constructed "narratives" to be deconstructed by her. The accused were apparently guilty by reason of their "dominant" social position, which made them "perfect offenders" in Lubiano's eyes.
In other words, it doesn't matter to moonbat Lubiano if the lacrosse players actually raped the woman or not! According to her, the concepts of guilt and innocence are social constructs designed by dominant white men to oppress the lower classes.
It is rare that people outside of academia get to see just how looney some professors can be. Ward Churchill was one case and the Duke non-rape incident is another. I suspect that many people, if they knew some of the things that go on in academia, would move to shut down a large number of colleges and universities.
No comments:
Post a Comment