Dan Fogelberg, 1951-2007

Trusting that most folks observe the de mortuis nihil nisi bonum rule, let me note with sadness the passing of Dan Fogelberg. His Greatest Hits album was one I listened to constantly my sophomore year of high school. I was very much into punk at the same time, listening to mainstream bands like the Clash and more obscure artists ranging from Stiff Little Fingers to Johnny Thunders. But though I pretended to share my friends’ enthusiasm for say, Jodie Foster’s Army, I played my Fogelberg cassette in secret in my room. I wasn’t a popular kid when I was fifteen, of course; but admitting that I teared up everytime I heard “Run for the Roses” would have been the end of whatever social credibility I enjoyed.

I’ve been listening, on the verge of weepiness, to “Same Old Lang Syne” over and over again the last two days. Dear readers, think of the confidence it takes to admit to this!

Do wait for future posts paying tribute to David Gates and Bread; Seals and Crofts; and Helen Reddy.

“Find out what it means to me”: some thoughts on respect, chivalry, and campaigns against sexual violence

Vanessa posted last week about the Coaching Boys into Men program, a product of the New York Family Violence Prevention Fund. Vanessa posts one of the flyers produced by the program; it features a boy in an orange hoodie with the words “Awaiting Instructions” emblazoned across the front. And the instructions the boy receives:

1. Eat your vegetables
2. Don’t play with matches
3. Finish your homework
4. Respect women

And in the comments section at Feministing, there’s a mix of praise and criticism for the campaign, mostly revolving around the “problematic” meaning of “respect” for women. ProFeministMale writes:

…often times, when I hear the general, non-feminist public teach young boys to “respect” women, I get the impression that a lot of what they’re teaching also involves “chivalry,” to to see women as somehow being “different,” that they’re nimble and weak and need to young boys and men to serve as the “protectors.”

This is a good idea – but I can’t help but think these boys are also being indoctrinated into gender roles that so much of the world is buying into.

In the various workshops I’ve put on for young men (and not so-young-men) in church and school settings, I’ve talked a lot about the real meaning of one of my favorite words, “respect.” (And if you’re thinking of the Aretha Franklin song now, hold on, I’ll get to it.)

I often start by writing the word “respect” on a flip chart or chalkboard, and then ask the folks I’m working with to play the word association game with me. Everyone gets to throw out the first thing that comes into their head when they hear or see the word. As you might expect, I get a lot of different definitions. Some people do think of chivalry; almost always, someone will say that “opening the door for a woman” is the first thing that he thinks of when he hear the word. Others will offer a negative definition, suggesting that “respect” is more about what you don’t do than what you do: “It’s like watching your language around a girl”; “It’s about not grabbing her just ’cause you want to”; (I remember that definition vividly from one high school group), “It’s treating her as a girl and not like a guy.” I write as many of the definitions and word associations on the board as I can. Continue reading

Top Ten in 2007: the best five

Last week, I offered the posts I’ve ranked 10 to 6 of my top ten in 2007; today I offer my top five. I might well decide on another day that these belong in a different order, or another post belongs instead — but I’m ready to commit this list to posterity, whatever that may mean. The other finalists can be found here.

5. What’s in it for men? (June 21) Key excerpt:

I’m a feminist because I want to create a world where men and women alike can realize their potential; I’m a feminist because I believe that our potential is not directed or confined by our chromosomes or our secondary sex organs. My penis and my Y chromosome do not destine me to be unreliable, predatory, and emotionally inarticulate. My wife’s uterus and her estrogen do not limit the horizons of her professional or athletic ambition. Feminism is, as we’ve all heard, the radical notion that women are people. But it’s also the radical notion that men are people too, complete human beings, with the same range of emotions and the same capacity for empathy and self-control as any woman.

4. “Fat”, “Slut”, “Selfish”: a note on the three great fears (June 7) Key excerpt:

The epithets “fat” and “slut” have great power to wound. They sting young women when another person slaps them on, but they do far greater damage once they worm their way into one’s own internal conversation. But as awful as these words are when they are used to hurt another, or when they are used in relentless, ugly self-deprecation, they aren’t as debilitating as “selfish.” When it comes to what incapacitates (or at the least, handicaps) so many of the girls and women with whom I work, it’s the tremendous fear that by following their own bliss, by carving out space for themselves, by seeing their own happiness as a fundamental good, they are disappointing others and thinking too much about themselves.

3. Not just consent but enthusiasm: some notes on college sex workshops and stoplights (July 19) Key excerpt:

A dangerous line I sometimes use: “The opposite of rape is not consent. The opposite of rape is enthusiasm”. It’s dangerous because it’s shocking, and of course, it’s dangerous because it twists the purely legal meaning of the term “rape.” But from the standpoint of one who cares desperately about the well-being of young people, my goal in offering workshops like these is not merely to prevent sexual assault that meets the legal standard of a criminal act. My goal is to prevent that, of course, but to also offer shy and uncertain young people tools to prevent them from having bad sex characterized by obligation, confusion, and detached resignation. I always argue that anything short of an authentic, honest, uncoerced, aroused and sober “Hell, yes!” is, in the end, just a “no” in another form.

2. Against predatory evangelism: thinking about Chris Clarke, the life to come, and how we share our faith (February 8) Key excerpt:

Chris and I both love the rolling hills of the San Francisco Bay Area. He hikes them with what seems like reverence; I tend to attack them with hyper tenacity, measuring my fitness on their slopes. We both love animals, and we’ve both lost creatures whom we adored within the past year. And when it comes to the great questions, the ones about life and death and the possibility that our souls endure, sentient and unique, beyond this world — Chris and I have different answers.

And because I know he and I have different answers, I don’t try and comfort him in his vulnerabilty with my answers. Authentic Christian evangelism is not predatory. Authentic Christian evangelism doesn’t see the grief of those who don’t share our faith as a “special opportunity” to do some witnessin’! And far too many of my brothers and sisters in Christ make this obnoxious error.

1. Fourteen Marthas, not one Mary: a retreat report and a long meditation on girls, pressure, parents, and people-pleasing (March 12)

Key excerpt:

Thanks to the remarkable success of several waves of American feminism, the girls I work with today have more opportunities than virtually any generation before them. Though they have to confront a misogynistic backlash that has taken root in many aspects of our dominant culture, they have the chance to achieve more and do more and enjoy more than their mothers and grandmothers. But we’ve made the terrible mistake of turning opportunity into obligation. We’ve sucked the joy right out of their over-programmed, over-monitored, over-achieving little lives. True feminism and true Christian faith are absolutely congruent in their mutual opposition to the idea that young women ought to live up to an ever-more demanding set of duties and commitments.

Christmas tree up

If there’s one aspect of Christmas that I am exceptionally passionate about, it’s the tree. Growing up in a secular household, the tree was Christmas. In my family, our trees are the subject of intense discussion and considerable effort.

Going back several generations, we’ve had the custom of including a wooden snow scene/Santa’s workshop at the base of each tree. Each of these is made to look like a large redwood trunk, and the decoration thereof takes as much time as the tree. This year, at long last, my wife and I got our own tree trunk, courtesy of my wood-working cousin Dean. And though I’d seen many snow scenes done in my childhood, it is only now — at my forty-first Christmas on this planet — that I find myself with one of my very own.

Pictures of the tree, the snow scene, and the Santa shop are up here. If you look at my eyes here, you can see how happy this makes me.

GOP pundit: we want poor social conservatives, just as long as they know their place

Rich Lowry in today’s National Review Online, expressing the anxiety that the right-wing punditocracy has about Mike Huckabee, and the damage he’s doing to the conservative elite’s golden boy, Mitt Romney:

The GOP’s social conservatism inarguably has been an enormous benefit to the party throughout the past 30 years, winning over conservative Democrats and lower-income voters who otherwise might not find the Republican limited-government message appealing. That said, nominating a Southern Baptist pastor running on his religiosity would be rather overdoing it. Social conservatism has to be part of the Republican message, but it can’t be the message in its entirety.

Bold emphasis mine.

Well, that’s more candor than I expect from GOP strategists: “we like poor uneducated social conservatives, but only as long as they know their place, which is to provide votes so we can do the important stuff.” It’s a bald admission of what the left has known for a long time: the GOP uses the “God, gays, and guns” issues to bring in voters whose economic needs are utterly incongruent with the Republican message.

Lowry continues:

Huckabee has declared that he doesn’t believe in evolution. Even if there are many people in America who agree with him, his position would play into the image of Republicans as the anti-science party. This would tend to push away independents and upper-income Republicans. In short, Huckabee would take a strength of the GOP and, through overplaying it, make it a weakness.

In other words: social conservatism, once you scratch the surface, is embarrassing.

Right-wing evangelicals are to the GOP what African-Americans have traditionally been to the Democrats: a group that is heavily courted come election time, but whose deepest concerns are routinely dismissed by the party elite. I’m an evangelical whose views on most issues are very different from Mike Huckabee’s. But on behalf of my “fellow believers”, I’m a bit stunned by the dismissive, patronizing tone Lowry strikes in his message.

Shorter Lowry: “Conservative evangelicals to the back of the bus, because you scare folks.”

Top Ten in 2007: the bottom half

For the fourth consecutive year, I’m following a tradition, started by Bob Carlton, of putting up links to what I’ve chosen as my best (or most significant) posts of the year. Links to the 2004-2006 selections can be found here. I encourage other bloggers, particularly reasonably prolific ones, to pick a Top Ten (or a Top Five, Top Three, etc) of their own posts.

In ascending order, here are posts 10 through 6; the Top Five of 2007 will appear next week.

10. Meat, Dairy, Porn: some preliminary thoughts on women, dieting, veganism, guilt, pleasure, and exploitation (May 7). Key excerpt:

As many others have pointed out, there’s a link between patriarchal exploitation of women and human exploitation of animals. Men have used women to do unpaid work for millenia, and humans have used animals in the same fashion. The bodies of women are seen as “fair game” (a hunting reference) for predatory men, and pornography celebrates the idea that men are entitled to take delight (visual or otherwise) in the flesh of women who have little or no say in the matter. The meat industry teaches us that cows and pigs and fish exist solely to bring delight to our taste buds and satisfaction to our bellies. In patriarchal culture, the bodies of women and the bodies of animals exist to be consumed. Feminist veganism rejects the exploitation and abuse of living things; it counsels radical self-denial on the part of the consumer as a tool for liberating the consumed…

9. A very long post about Los Angeles, an Eagles song, nationalism, history, self-reinvention and the “club versus country” debate (January 30)

What makes me a Los Angeleno in my mindset is my fascination with self-reinvention. I love that I am surrounded by hundreds of thousands, even millions of people, who call somewhere else their truest home — but have nonetheless come here, to this basin with its beaches and valleys and hills — in order to start something new. They’ve come here to escape the burdens and obligations of the past, the sort that linger in the old places even after the old people have gone. They’ve come here to escape the “things are the way they are” mindset. They’ve come here to replace the fatalism and superstition of the old places with a relentless optimism about their own potential and the possibility of global transformation. They’ve come here to get away from the ghosts of Holocausts and World Wars and rigid class distinctions. They’ve come here to run on mountain trails upon which their ancestors never set foot.

8. Called to become like Christ: a long post about John Stott, following Jesus, and male transformation (August 8) Key excerpt:

Talking about the Christian duty to pursue Christ-like perfection brings us quickly to a seeming paradox. We’re called to become like Jesus — but a central part of His message is forgiveness for those (surely including ourselves) who regularly and repeatedly fall short of the mark. What we’ve got to do, it seems, is hold two things in simultaneous tension: the knowledge that we are all loved, just as we are, even if we never change — and the knowledge that we are called and required to do the achingly hard work of relentlessly changing ourselves and the world.

Sometimes, I imagine Jesus saying something like this to me: “Hugo, I love you just as you are. No matter what you’ve done, no matter what you’re doing or thinking or saying, I couldn’t love you any more than I already do. No matter what, no matter what, I adore you. But I long for you to change and grow; I’m calling you to follow me and to feed my lambs.”

7. Restraining the ego and leaving doors unopened: a note about crushes, flirtation, and the “desire to know” (April 10) Excerpt:

I can’t think of a more tempting — and more disastrous — reason to begin any love affair than “curiosity.” When I was younger, I cloaked neediness and compulsiveness in the language of intellectual (or at least romantic) curiosity. Time and again, I pursued someone because I was desperately curious to know certain things: Could I “have” them? Did they “want” me as I “wanted” them? What would it be like to “be” (however briefly) with someone “like that”? Firmly committed to the lie that “experience is always the best teacher”, I attempted to justify some fairly unjustifiable behavior with the explanation that I had “an insatiable desire to know.” (This is a particularly common trait, I know, among academics — many of whom are notorious for petty affairs and infidelities. We exalt the pursuit of knowledge above all other virtues, and periodically find it all too easy to confuse the gratifying of our own ego with the acquisition of genuine understanding.)

6. “A son, not a husband”: some very long thoughts about marriage in a roundabout response to Jill (June 14)

Key excerpt:

A good friend of mine, several years older than Jill, is recently divorced. She pledges never to remarry, saying: “In the end, most men expect women to take care of them once they’re married. I don’t mean financially, I mean enotionally. I’m just tired of thinking about someone else’s needs all the time, particularly an adult’s. I’m prepared to take care of a baby. But I don’t want my first-born to be my second child!”

My friend isn’t describing every American man. But she’s describing all too many. And it’s not just a reference to housework she makes. All of the research shows, of course, that even when both parties in a marriage work an equal number of hours outside the home, the woman tends to spend more time on domestic work. But the problem my friend is really focused on is less about doing the dishes and more about emotional intelligence (what’s often called “EQ”). Far too many men fail to do adequate self-care when they are in relationship with women. Far too many men becoming enormously reliant on their girlfriends or wives to urge them to see a doctor, to be the sole source of professional encouragement, to monitor their alcohol intake or the content of their diets. Far too many men unintentionally turn their girlfriends or wives into mother figures; in a sense, they outsource their emotional maintenance.

The Top Five come next week.

Ten years ago today…

… I got my tongue pierced. (I had had the nipples pierced the year earlier.) The barbell was enlarged a few times over the next six months, but after I cracked two teeth with it in the fall of 1998, I took the darn thing out for good, less than eleven months after I first put it in. It was fun while it lasted.

How long ago it seems.

Thursday Search Terms

In the past week, the following search queries have brought people here:

michael vicks excessive I’ll say he was. 23 months was 37 too few.

actor who played manly on little house on the prairie Dean, you’re loved.

how would boy attract the girl of 16 after that she don t like her
I’ve read this five times and I’m still confused.

women of color feminism mental health No, Virginia, these terms are not all mutually exclusive.

short poem about an animal dog This one?

the meaning of student crashes hugo schwyzer I would rather my students stayed out of auto accidents. Go here.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

“A B can mean many things”: lamenting the absence of the plus/minus grading option

It’s finals week, and I’ve got half a dozen stacks of blue books spread about my office. If every one of my students takes a final, I will have 339 exams to read through by next Tuesday. I will have 339 final grades to assign.

At PCC, as at most California community colleges, we aren’t permitted to use “+” and “-” modifiers on final grades. Leaving aside the tiny percentage of incompletes, and the equally tiny number of students who take a course “Credit/No-Credit”, all of my students will receive an A,B,C, D, or F. That leaves me only three real passing grades (D is technically passing, but I give few Ds) from which to choose.

What’s maddening is, of course, that students don’t fall neatly into three discrete categories. This is especially true, I note, of the B students. (I give slightly more Cs than Bs, and far fewer As.) The student who just barely missed an A gets the identical grade as a student who just barely avoided a C. Because I can’t give a “B+” and a “B-”, two students who did very different work each end up receiving the exact same mark; each receives a 3.0 on the standard American 4.0 grade scale. And the problem is true with other grades as well; the student who just barely gets an A receives the same 4.0 as the rare gem of a student who did flawless work of the “A+” variety.

Starting in the mid-1990s, the state began to permit the community colleges to assign “+” and “-” grades. The college had to decide as a whole to offer the option to all of its instructors. The University of California system has offered the modifiers for decades, and I was thrilled when we heard we would have a shot at the option. To my amazement, my colleagues in the Academic Senate here at Pasadena City College voted overwhelmingly to reject the plus/minus option. They complained — as Jessica Valenti would say, “I shit you not” –that taking on the plus/minus option would increase faculty work-loads!

The Senate was also lobbied by our student government, who worried that the modifiers would be more likely to reduce student GPAs than to raise them. Our student body president at the time said, with extraordinary chutzpah, “A lot of my As were barely As. If I had A- grades instead of straight A grades, I’d have a lower GPA.” (On the 4.0 system, an A- would be a 3.7, a B+ a 3.3, a B a 3.0, a B- a 2.7, a C+ a 2.3, etcetera.) I protested that I might consider giving an A- to a student to whom I would otherwise give a B, largely because I didn’t think they’d done A level work, but might be deserving of a modified A. And the number of B+ grades given would also help balance out student GPAs. In practice, student GPAs wouldn’t change at all — they would simply be more reliable indicators of achievement, as faculty would have greater precision.

Alas, faculty laziness and resistance to change — combined with intense lobbying from a small group of students worried about the spectre of the A-minus grade — served to block the implementation of the modifier option at PCC. It’s made my job much harder, and my final grades much less fair. Because I have so few final grade options, and because my students turn in such a wide range of work, A “B” from me, frankly, means a wide range of things and describes a range of abilities. And that’s not right.

Thursday Short Poem: Milne’s “King John’s Christmas”

The traditional pre-Christmas poem is always this AA Milne classic. I’ll be on a short holiday hiatus from December 19-26, and the Thursday Short Poem will return December 27.

King John’s Christmas


King John was not a good man –
He had his little ways.
And sometimes no one spoke to him
For days and days and days.
And men who came across him,
When walking in the town,
Gave him a supercilious stare,
Or passed with noses in the air –
And bad King John stood dumbly there,
Blushing beneath his crown.

King John was not a good man,
And no good friends had he.
He stayed in every afternoon…
But no one came to tea.
And, round about December,
The cards upon his shelf
Which wished him lots of Christmas cheer,
And fortune in the coming year,
Were never from his near and dear,
But only from himself.

King John was not a good man,
Yet had his hopes and fears.
They’d given him no present now
For years and years and years.
But every year at Christmas,
While minstrels stood about,
Collecting tribute from the young
For all the songs they might have sung,
He stole away upstairs and hung
A hopeful stocking out.

King John was not a good man,
He lived his live aloof;
Alone he thought a message out
While climbing up the roof.
He wrote it down and propped it
Against the chimney stack:
“TO ALL AND SUNDRY – NEAR AND FAR -
F. Christmas in particular.”
And signed it not “Johannes R.”
But very humbly, “Jack.”

“I want some crackers,
And I want some candy;
I think a box of chocolates
Would come in handy;
I don’t mind oranges,
I do like nuts!
And I SHOULD like a pocket-knife
That really cuts.
And, oh! Father Christmas, if you love me at all,
Bring me a big, red, india-rubber ball!”

King John was not a good man –
He wrote this message out,
And gat him to this room again,
Descending by the spout.
And all that night he lay there,
A prey to hopes and fears.
“I think that’s him a-coming now!”
(Anxiety bedewed his brow.)
“He’ll bring one present, anyhow –
The first I had for years.”

“Forget about the crackers,
And forget the candy;
I’m sure a box of chocolates
Would never come in handy;
I don’t like oranges,
I don’t want nuts,
And I HAVE got a pocket-knife
That almost cuts.
But, oh! Father christmas, if you love me at all,
Bring me a big, red, india-rubber ball!”

King John was not a good man,
Next morning when the sun
Rose up to tell a waiting world
That Christmas had begun,
And people seized their stockings,
And opened them with glee,
And crackers, toys and games appeared,
And lips with sticky sweets were smeared,
King John said grimly: “As I feared,
Nothing again for me!”

“I did want crackers,
And I did want candy;
I know a box of chocolates
Would come in handy;
I do love oranges,
I did want nuts!
I haven’t got a pocket-knife —
Not one that cuts.
And, oh! if Father Christmas, had loved me at all,
He would have brought a big, red,
india-rubber ball!”

King John stood by the window,
And frowned to see below
The happy bands of boys and girls
All playing in the snow.
A while he stood there watching,
And envying them all …
When through the window big and red
There hurtled by his royal head,
And bounced and fell upon the bed,
An india-rubber ball!

And oh Father Christmas,
My blessings on you fall
For bringing him a big, red,
India-rubber ball!

It’s very fine.