When ridiculous liberal political correctness attacks!

[thehefner]

So I had class with Prof. Day today... now this man, well, imagine being taught by an alcoholic pagan Jimmy Stewart, a slice of Smallville Americana on acid, and you might understand why I've decided to take two of his courses this semester. Well, he read an article from the major college professors' publication in which a professor writes a list of the expected "proper" behavior for college professors, the rules these people must follow or else be liable for lawsuit. Among the list I can recall:

-No teacher must ever be alone with a student (Day said, and imagine this being said by Jimmy Stewart: "I was just alone with a student a half hour ago, this lovely young lady here came by to give me her cookies!")

-Teachers must record and make copies of every single comment and grade they make for every paper.

-Teachers must adhere strictly to the syllabus as if it were a legal document and to never introduce material that was not explicitly covered in the description of the course (every day he talks with pride about how he's learned more about "Jen-Low" and "Whitney Spears," in his quest to learn about our culture, and these discussions can go on for ten minutes or more)

-Teachers must never use fowl language and must adhere to the guidelines set out in a book called the "Language Police" (the first day of class, Prof. Day asked us what word we should use for fucking, saying that he can't say fucking or he's get in trouble. Based on his suggestions, we settled on "boinking" and "porking.")

-And my favorite, this teacher said that he always removed his wedding ring in class, so as not to create (and I swear this is true) a "hetero-centric environment."

Is it any wonder why I sometimes hate liberals, even though I am one?

Comments

[reazik.livejournal.com]

Is "porking" "fowl" language?

Or would it be "chickening?"

Inquiring minds want to know.... ;)

Re:

[jayel4192.livejournal.com]

cluck you!!!

:)

[tompurdue.livejournal.com]

There are idiotic liberals, and there are idiotic conservatives. I'd rather lump the idiots into their own ideology so that the intelligent liberals and intelligent conservatives can have a useful discussion.

Re:

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it'd be nice, wouldn't it? It's people like this who've scared me away from politics altogether on more than one occasion.

[lariel.livejournal.com]

Why is a wedding ring necessarily hetero-centric? Couldn't you wear a ring if you were gay and got married (if it were legal, that is)? I thought that the liberal idea is that gay marriage *doesn't* attack the institution of marriage.

[jcsbimp.livejournal.com]

This smacks of stuff I was reading in the opening chapters of "The Templars and the Assassins", where the author complained that many MODERN secret societies (which he defines as loosely corresponding with "special-interest groups" in an attempt to match up closely with the historical meaning of the term) of a political nature) seek worldly power and a world government in which the interests of the individual are mandated as secondary to the interests of the State. Progressivism split from liberalism, at least partially I think, because true individualists still think the repetitions of "Congress shall make no law" in our Constitution mean that it's a good thing for the State to prohibit itself from picking on individuals so much.