Some be:
- academically underprepared
- reading but not understanding
What she decided was she was only gonna "teach" those who were already prepared and motivated. And she got paid well to do it. Smh.
You're assigning dense and fraught English and feminist scholars' texts that titillate you but that require a different reading skill than what students are taught and then consider them apathetic when they give up on doing something you never taught them to do?
I'm very glad I taught high school before going to grad school and that I did a full teacher preparation program while in undergrad because teaching is an art form that requires planning, staging, practice, marketing, and performance for an audience of diverse learners.
Their apathy toward reading your brand of scholarship might reflect your apathy toward reading pedagogy.
We can talk about sexual harassers in the academy all day. But this kind of attitude towards students yields a whole bunch of harm inside and outside of the classroom and is a lot more common.
Not Feminist Pedagogy (journal) putting out a Call for Papers for a special issue when hooks failed to practice what she preached (she wrote about feminist failures to teach literacy but left the classroom because she didn't want to teach literacy??🙃). I--
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"Misandry doesn't exist."
- Because feminism has taught you that "woman" is an ontological category.
- Even tho "black feminism" emerged because "woman" was not an ontological category.
- But you still believe the former in your heart even though you deny it with your words.
- So because "woman" is an ontological category to you, defined by a universally oppressed status relative to "men," "man" is also an ontological category to you.
- And because "woman" is defined as that which is oppressed by "man," "men" can't experience oppression.
- All of that fails to explain why 1 in 15 BM are incarcerated (compared to 1 in 100 BW); why BM unemployment is higher than BW unemployment virtually every year since 1980; why BM have the highest risk (1 in 1000) of being killed by police; why BM die more than BW after surgery.
Okay, I guess it’s time for me, a historian, to address this. I’m going to keep this thread short and sweet because I gotta get back to work. But this tweet (and several others like it) is an example of a lack of literacy.
The first image is from Cleaver’s Soul on Ice. It is a memoir—Cleaver’s reflection on who he *was.* If you read the whole book, you’ll see he’s not proud of any of this. At the end of the book, he dedicates a chapter to black women and notice his contrition.
But let’s move on, because anyone who knows anything about Eldridge Cleaver knows that Soul on Ice isn’t meant to be a rape-praising book or one where he justifies his actions. He’s explaining how he became who he was, not absolving himself for his evil deeds.
"Overall, our results contradict the popular belief that black men prefer white women over black women and white men prefer Asian women over white women. Black men in fact demonstrate the strongest homophily tendency among male daters."
"[A]n implicit suggestion of gendered racial formation theory is that Asian men's marginalization is equivalent to that of black women. Our results, however, make a strong case that the discrimination against black women is the single largest marginalization of note."
"Simply stated, white women prefer white men over nonwhite men while white men prefer nonblack women over black women."
I keep seeing this everywhere, but it doesn't make intuitive sense. Why would black men come out of college with less debt than black women?
I'm thinking out loud...
According to the report, black women graduate college with an average of $38,000. Black men graduate with an average of $35,000. That doesn't seem to be a big enough difference to say that black women are *uniquely* burdened. It seems black *people* are especially burdened.
Collectively, black people are graduating with an average of $11-14k more debt than white people.
Moreover, black *families* collectively carry these burdens. Why frame this as an issue that uniquely effects BW? (In subtle and explicit ways, white women show up as victims.)
It's no secret that I completed my undergraduate degree at an Ivy League school--Princeton. I only bring this up because of Marjorie Taylor-Greene's dog whistle that loan forgiveness will pay for fancy ivy league degrees.
Just before I begin my freshman year at princeton, the University switched to a need-based financial aid program. So financially wouldn't be based on your grades, your test scores, or your extracurriculars--just the university's calculation of what your family could afford.
This need-based financial aid program was also grants-only. So whatever the university determined was your need they were covering that cost in grants. If there was a leftover balance and you couldn't afford to pay that then you would be responsible for finding the money somehow.