Ever since the introduction of ‘women’s studies’, we have had a tenfold increase in rape allegations; which has led to the reduction of the ratio of convictions per claim. The feminists want more convictions.

Ever since the introduction of ‘children’s rights’ in school, we have got a tenfold (or there about) increase in claims of teacher abuse; which has led to the reduction of the ratio of convictions per claim. The feminist teachers want less convictions.

Maybe the two lady poets can write some poems about equality!?

There was a young lady from Crewe

Who said, as the Bishop withdrew

The vicar is quicker and slicker and thicker

And a much better poet than you.

Upon hearing the good news, the Padel family apportion merit:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRn5-LQCg2s&feature=related

Even if you think “they are only women, no man’s career should be affected by such actions”, you could still think that abuse of power stinks.

Padel responds to the challenge that she only won because Walcott was pissed all over:

“Women can do it just as well as men; and in most cases better.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46QbtnJmOAw&feature=channel_page

I don’t pretend to have any poetic erudition, but so far as I know, there’s no evidence that Ruth Padel had anything to do with the dossier circulated about Walcott with allegations of past sexual harassment. If the allegations are true, then as far as I am concerned justice has been served by Providence. Judging by her website, Padel appears to be genuinely a very talented person, having studied and held a number of teaching posts at very prestigious universities, succeeded as a freelance writer and commissioned by the BBC. I see no reason why she should not accept her election. Good luck to her.

Abe Rene,

She won with 0.2% of the vote!!!

That’s like congratulating somebody for finding a piece of pizza in a wheelie bin.

Oh well, that’s me out, then. I once wrote an erotic novel, ‘The Snake’ under the pseudonym, Melanie Desmoulins (not that I am ruthless self-promoter!). The book might stimulate people to desire other people, horror-of-horrors, will that count as an incitment to sexual harassment, I wonder?

To be clear, though, I am in no way minimising or condoning actual sexual harassement in academia, which has been a well-known problem over the years. It doesn’t make the alleged perpetrator any less an artist, of course, but if it’s been a proven case (which as far as I can tell does not seem to have been the case here), it might make one wary of appointing them to a senior academic post because of the power which that brings with it.

Interesting – though possibly irrelevant – that this has sprung up around the appointment of a black man.

Who will cast the first stone, I wonder?

Why do you think Padel should resign? Is there any evidence that she was involved in the plot to discredit Walcott, who, I agree, is a wonderful poet and has been badly treated?

As for Padel’s poem, as I read it, what she is describing in the lines you quote is the rivalry of two males, so it’s a male fantasy of male domination, and hardly evidence of the man-hating womanhood you ascribe to her.

*Bye bye Sam, hello Samantha*,

Read for comprehension.

There was a poet from Saint Lucia,

Caribbean and raunchy facing opponent comparatively green,

His poetry intellectually clean,

Sadly, his main rival, exceedingly mean!

Shit! ?” am I that bad at poetry? ?” think I will stick to blogging ?” bad there too ?” but not as…

PS. I recall an actual instance at my London College of this sort of thing. A senior maler lecturer ( was that lecherer?) was having it off with an undergrad. The Head of Department did not like this very popular lefty in the least, so he posted a directive that it was prohibited for members of teaching staff to have intimate relations with any student. Then, it turned out that another senior male lecturer ( was that lecherer number two?) was having it off with another undergrad. We students, understanding the “politics” of the situation deftly raised the instance of the second lecturer, in a student/staff meeting, and strongly indicated that this second lecturer was surely transgressing from the directive that had been given. Dr. ( Blank) now placed under direct fire replied to the students at the meeting that Dr. ( so and so’s ) private life was his own affair.

Footnote: The reason for the volte face was that the second senior lecturer was co-author and research assistant to Dr. ( so and so) ?” and the good Head of Department therefore took the easier way out. Got the hell out of his co-author’s life, got on with more publishing with his co-author’s assistance, and left the good man to get on with his lecherous life! There’s academic politics for you ?” or so much of it as I recall from my college days. And they all went to bed happily ever after!

Agree with you on this one Craig. I was appalled at this story and glad that Walcott had the dignity to withdraw. These feminist harridans are awful. If Padel wasn’t behind the smear who was?

There was a young fellow called Shit

A name he disliked quite a bit

So he changed it to Shite

A step in the right

Direction one has to admit

RObert Service I believe.

Poet Laureates are notorious for being the worst of their time. Which in history has been the worst of the dismal lot is an interesting question. Southey, maybe? I don’t know Padel’s work, so can’t comment. I do know Bud Neil’s, though – isn’t this marvellous?

A snowdrop drips

a crocus croaks

and in my little window box

a yellow daffy hings its heid:

it does indeed.

oh, daffy…

could you not but heid your hing?

Nae bother would it be to rhyme

your heiding hing

with Spring.

JimmyGiro,

I think Sam let us know she was female some time ago (unless it’s a different Sam). But I don’t quite see what that’s got to do with it!

If I had the wings of a sparrow,

and if I had the arse of a cow,

I’d fly over Oxford tomorrow,

and…

Amazingly the expression ‘prestigious’ is used for this post; the winner receiving less than 300 of the 150,000 votes available.

Has Oxford university thrown away its standards of english along with its understanding of merit?

Is this some sort of cryptic question… what has gender to do with feminism, or feminist nepotism?

I’ll have to think about that one !!!

…. Ooooh, I know…. they create a market for it!

Compensation prize – a taste of Walcott:-

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article5088429.ece

Different Sam. Definitely a different Sam. This one has a beard. Do I have to be female not to assume that Ruth Padel is guilty?

The incident reminds me of an Alexander McCall-Smith Botswanan detective episode screend just a few weeks ago in the UK, in which a long-time lecherous lecturer is outed in almost identical fashion – one wonders whether the perpetrators of the epistles had watched the episode and got the idea thereof for the specific tactic employed. Life imitating art, perhaps. If this speculation wrt triggers is true, it would be so deeply, deeply ironic.

No Sam, you don’t. There are male feminists; as there were Jewish special SS commandos. If someone supports in anyway a cult or a political group, then they can be called in line with that.

If you support feminism or feminists, then you have made gender the issue, and you are a sexist; just as a Jew co-opted by the SS, can be accused of Nazism.

Oooo, that’s a bit inaccurate, Mr Giro. Also wildly off-beam using the Nazi analogy here. One can disagree with the tenets of, say, radical feminism (anyway, who said one had to be a ‘feminist’- why is this a dirty word today, like ‘socialist’? – in order to believe that no-one should suffer the pressure of a lecturer ruining your career and life ’cause you wouldn’t sleep with him!) or with the dynamics around the Walcott-Padel-et-al issue whatever without having to resort to such sloppy thinking.

I experienced a racist consultant gynaecologist at a hospital in Glasgow openly insulting me in front of patients, nurses, other students in an overtly racist manner on a daily basis when I was a Final Year medical student in the 1980s. Every day, day-in, day-out. I knew that his boss was of similar ilk, though not so openly. I felt like rendering a Glasgow Kiss to him, but was well aware that he could’ve ruined my entire life if he’d wanted and that he had me totally in his power. He wouldn’t have got away with it now. And that’s because people said: Enough! This is not right!

I don’t know what the truth of the Walcott allegations is. He’s a great poet and while in no way demeaning Ruth Padel’s talent, I’d have loved him to have got the Chair.

But let’s not use this to vent at anything progressive, just because we personally might not have been affecetd by it. You only know what it feels like when it happens to you.

Mmmm, lost me Suhayl. The only one who has been victimised that I can see is Walcott (who is, of course, black). Not sure I am on the non-progressive side by opposing persecution of heterosexuals.

Suhayl Saadi,

It is only sloppy thinking when it is not consistent; I regard feminism as an evil form of fascism; and I regard socialism as another form of fascism.

And as for: “You only know what it feels like when it happens to you.” Does that mean a Doctor has to suffer all the diseases before they can fully comprehend the malady? Clearly not, as we would have no graduate doctors.

The problem is people not seeing the consequences of these political cults, exacerbated by the moral paralysis brought on by relativism.

JimmyGiro

So I am a feminist because I don’t automatically assume Ruth Padel is guilty?

I agree with Craig: Walcott has been disgustingly treated. But that does not mean that Padel is the culprit.

And I stick to my assertion that Craig has misread or misrepresented the poem he quotes.

If she is a feminist, she is automatically guilty of feminism.

Your failure to see the feminist intend in her poem was what caused me to ask you to read for comprehension.

To help you appreciate her feminism, try reading her essay on her website “Women don’t have groupies”, or some such title.

I agree with Sam – there’s no evidence that Ruth Padel circulated the dossier. Why assume her guilt in this case an Walcott’s innocence in the previous case?

The stories about Walcott are old and well-known. I don’t know the truth of them. Clumsy attempts to seduce happen by both genders; sometimes the response will be enthusiastic, sometimes appalled. Both parties then have a responsibility to retrieve the situation – and it won’t always be easy. However the problem moves beyond social awkwardness if there’s an acute imbalance of power involved. Years ago I was shocked by academics who brought first-year students to parties as trophies – not because they had seduced them but because they plainly didn’t see the students as human beings who deserved, at least, courtesy and kindness. I should add that I’ve also known instances of entirely happy relationships between academics and students – brief and long-term.

However the serious and unproven charge against Walcott is not that he tried to seduce a student but that he threatened to fail her (which could have ruined her career) for not succumbing to his advances. I hope it’s untrue because that would be an atrocious abuse of power and one that I hope Craig, as Rector of a university, would not dream of condoning.

I agree with Craig that Walcott, whatever the truth of the allegations, is the greater poet. Omeros is the one of the most magnificent long poems of the twentieth century and it moves me to tears.

However, Craig’s jibes against Ruth Padel’s poetry are cheap. She’s a good poet who has written books about contemporary poetry which are genuinely illuminating for today’s students. I expect her lectures will also be successful. Her website is no more self-promoting than Craig’s – writers have websites in part to sell books and there’s nothing surprising about that.

I am eligible to vote for the professor of poetry. Sometimes I’ve had strong views on the matter. However the date of the election isn’t announced to the electorate and votes have to be cast in person. Sadly I’ve never been able to make the journey to cast my vote.

For the record, I have no personal knowledge of Derek Walcott or Ruth Padel – nor of Arvind Mehrotra. But I’m glad the post has gone to a practising poet rather than a literary critic.

Mr Giro, I’m not defender of any of the manifestations of thought-police to which you refer and in fact I enjoy poking fun at them! Though I can’t agree – now please don’t go off at the deep end – that socialism and feminism are forms of fascism. Yes, I know about Uncle Joe and Uncle Pol. One could discuss this all century, though, there are pro and con arguments and of course then there are libertarians of all hues who also differ on these subjects.

What I meant was that one’s own experience of being consistently and directly abused by power in this very personal way can help one understand in a visceral way how devastating it can be. This would not really apply to some kind of professional expertise – that analogy is semiotically imprecise – and also it doesn’t mean that someone who has not experienced such abuse could not comprehend its effects. The potential profundity of those effects is exactly what I’m trying to communicate, in fact, because I think it is communicable.

I don’t believe in witch-hunts or in puritanical persecutions of human nature and joy – as I stated earlier, I penned an erotic-pornographic novel, for crying out loud – I just think people ought to treat one another with the human respect they would expect to receive from another if the positions were reversed.

Craig, I wasn’t saying you weren’t progressive. I think the discourse which you have initiated is a valid one. The central question, it seems to me, is not really about sexuality, which I think is a central and wondrous thing, but as so often in the nexus of human/ professional relationships, has to do with the nature of power, of which I am wary.

kathz wrote:

“I agree with Sam – there’s no evidence that Ruth Padel circulated the dossier. Why assume her guilt in this case an Walcott’s innocence in the previous case?”

Walcott’s innocence is a tenet of US and English law; innocent until proved otherwise.

Ruth Padel’s guilt is to accept an unfair victory; born of feminist spite, of which she is akin to, as witnessed by her poetry and essays. Her finger prints do not have to be on the envelope to be a party to the result; after all, she was the main beneficiary.

You could say: as the winner from a dirty tricks campaign, she created a market for feminism.

JimmyGiro – are you the Jimmy in Jimmy Riddle?

Your monumental ignorance of the meaning of the word ‘fascist’ makes everything else you say in this debate meaningless.

I find your anti-women attitudes worse than offensive – I find them utterly ridiculous.

It is not women whom you demean by these ignorant diatribes but yourself.

It is not women I demean at all, it is feminists.

Your inability to make demarcation between women and feminists is the actual insult to women; just as it is an insult to Germans to fail to distinguish them from Nazis; or Jews from Zionists.

JimmyGiro: “There are male feminists; as there were Jewish special SS commandos.”

Ha ha! Do you mind if I steal that one for my next Fathers4Justice meeting?

Jimmy Riddle -

It is you who utterly confuse feminists with nutters.

You appear to assume that all people who believe in equal rights for women are at the best nuts and at the worst (your clear preference) evil.

The defence of women against sexual monsters and predators faces a perenniel uphill struggle against male chauvinists like you.

When did you last express sympathy for a woman who had been embarassed, humiliated or otherwise sexually threatened by a man?

Are you so sexually inadequate that you have to pretend that your genitalia make you intellectually, morally and socially superior?

You’re not a man.

You’re an arsehole.

“My proposers are devastated because they have bent over backwards to run a clean campaign. On the one hand sexual harassment is horrible…”

If a person wanted to give a verbal backhander (especially after ‘winning’)then those are pretty effective weasel words.

Jimmy Giro – you’re spouting crap.

You moan about fascism, then relativism, and you do it all in this absolutist tone, convinced of your own superiority and ability to see clearly where nobody else can.

You need to pull your head out of your arse, you usually make more sense than you do here.

Fisking Gerard:

“It is you who utterly confuse feminists with nutters.”

Correct.

“You appear to assume that all people who believe in equal rights for women are at the best nuts and at the worst (your clear preference) evil.”

Have you heard of Harriet Harman? She’s the minister for women, and she has just terminated equality with her latest bill.

“The defence of women against sexual monsters and predators faces a perenniel uphill struggle against male chauvinists like you.”

The only uphill struggle here is between you and your boyfriends last meal of lentils and humus. And your delusional assessment of women’s perpetual struggle against sex monsters guarantees that you will perpetually confuse all critic by men, as chauvinism. How can a special feminist commando like you, ever develop a meaningful notion of equality with such a strident schizophrenic sexual mentality: ‘two tits good; two balls bad’? Feminists like you are not only the enemy of equality between the sexes, but promoters of heterosexual discord; vis Harriet Harman et al.

“When did you last express sympathy for a woman who had been embarassed, humiliated or otherwise sexually threatened by a man?”

Your melding of embarrassment and sexual threat, indicates a neurotic association born of repetitive propaganda from your feminist training manual; and I can only remember witnessing a few instances of male chauvinism, in contrast to the daily deluge of feminist misandry from state sponsored organs.

“Are you so sexually inadequate that you have to pretend that your genitalia make you intellectually, morally and socially superior?

You’re not a man.

You’re an arsehole.”

And presumably you’re made of ‘sugar and spice, and all things nice’?

Jason,

Welcome to the internet.

rullko,

If you’re genuine, please do brother; and the best of regards.

Ladies, please!

Derek P – that’s quite a shocking quote. I think Padel should either admit that she was behind the dossier or launch a concerted and public campaign to find out who was. Otherwise her tenure will be forever tainted. On the scale of conspiracies it is fairly small beer, but someone in Oxford knows who is responsible.

JG – why would you suspect that someone who claims to attend Fathers4Justice meetings might be taking the piss?

rullko @ 11:18,

I regard F4J as being at the front line of a very vicious struggle for truth and justice; as such, their enemies will need to use dirty tactics to oppose F4J. It is therefore not beyond feminists to deploy false witness, disguise, and other subterfuge, on the near anonymous stage of the internet.

I am not a father myself, as I cannot afford a wife; but I support F4J in my own way, and regard their cause as one of the most important struggles in our modern society.

test

Jimmy Riddle – Thankyou for your response on May 18 at 9:25 AM confirming in excruciating detail everything I wrote about you.

Boy, I really flushed you out, didn’t I?

And your crass assumptions about me further confirm that you seriously need to consult a shrink.

Seriously.

@Jimmy – we’ve discussed feminism before, and we’ve witnessed one rather overbearing male feminist here too. So I take the general point that feminism can go too far. I am male and call myself a feminist, though I am not an activist on the issue. But your regarding all feminism as a form of fascism is surely ridiculous – would that go for my ideology too?

My world-view on this topic is fairly simple, and it is based on the same premise of the existence of discrimination as anti-racism. Since women are often paid substantially less than men for the same employment, and are sometimes under-represented in elected and company positions, it is only reasonable in my view that a movement forms naturally to try to correct it.

Another feminist issue is the existence of Western culture that determines that women need to define themselves by their looks. This is not to suggest that a basic cultural definition of attractiveness is wrong, or that attraction in itself is immoral. But the hyperactive, pervasive and intrusive level of the female beauty ideal has caused a rise in eating disorders, body dysmorphia, harmful plastic surgery, premature sexualisation, depression, anxiety and other mental illnesses. Should all these issues be left unchallenged, do you think?

I don’t believe my version of feminism has anything in common with the mantra you allege: “two tits good, two balls bad”. In fact, feminists in my view should criticise women who buy media that excessively perpetuate the beauty myth. Precisely what is criticised depends on the individual, but for my money I criticise celebrity magazines because they perpetuate this ideal aggressively without otherwise providing redeeming content. I also criticise (predominantly female) purchasers of said magazines since they are burdening themselves (and other women) with the emotional insecurity the magazines pretend to solve.

I think the above ideas are fairly moderate, and they outline the existence of a set of definite problems. Is my feminism such a bad response, and if so, what would you do about them? If you would do something about them, what would you call that collection of beliefs, if not “feminism”?

I agree with you on rape convictions though (and male on female domestic abuse too). There is a worrying strand of modern thinking on both that says “the more convictions the better”, which seems to forget that convictions need to be just in order to stand for anything positive.

Jon,

Your views are fair and just in my opinion, and I agree with a lot of what you say; I think the answer was there all along within liberalism.

Feminism is about women; therefore it is the divisive nature of sexism; just as making legislation based on colour would be the divisive nature of racism.

Even though different cultures have a tendency to self segregation, racism is bad as it forces excessive segregation, and enmity. Men, however, do not have a natural propensity to segregate from women; therefore feminism which induces segregation and enmity between the sexes, is worse than racism, as it betrays the natural love that has evolved over millions of years between the sexes.

If feminism was natural, then why does it rely on misandry?

I think Jon, that you are a fair minded liberal, and not a feminist.

And as for feminists being fascists: consider the story of Erin Pizzey; she created the first women’s refuge in the 70′s.

The feminists hijacked the women’s groups and ostracised Erin, after she had discovered that women and men were equal contributors to domestic violence; which naturally contradicted the feminist agenda of single minded misandry, which would only recognise men as sole perpetrators.

The feminist insistence, which included death threats to Erin, is typical of a cult; and I regard all cults as fascist: the absolute adherence by the individual to the group; the enemy of individual liberalism.

Mr Giro clearly is obsessed with the most extreme people in those organisations and movements against which he has set himself. One can pick anything from anywhere and make it align with your view of thr world. ‘Fascist’ has become a term of abuse akin to ‘fatso’; call anything you don’t like, ‘fascist’ and that makes you 100% politically correct. And if someone tries to make reasonable comments, well then they simply cannot be one of thesoe nasty ‘fascists’, they must be… something else, ’cause everyone knows, don’t they, that everyone one doesn’t like must be a fascist! What a wonderful world in which to exist. One can never be wrong! Not even half-wrong. Not even 1% worng.

Suhayl Saadi,

Have you ever argued with a feminist, without them accusing you of being a misogynist?

Calling feminists fascist is only fair and right.

I know lots of women – and men – who ARE feminist even if they don’t claim to be, partly because of the negative reaction of people with views similar to your own; commonly, they’ll say, “I’m not a feminist, but…” Yet these people, most of whom do not live in monosexual communes – it really is no longer 1972, you know – don’t at all match the caricature you’ve drawn of them. Yeah, I know some that do reinforce the stereotype and who act like the thought-police, it’s comical, dumb, predictable and irritating (the ‘herstory’ bunch of etymologically-challenged chorus-singers), just as one gets guys who painfully reinforce the chauvinist male stereotype – but you know, that’s true of any population sample, you’ll get a range, it’s not a static monolith.

You do sound most illiberal in your argumentation this respect, the tone and attitude – and it’s important you realise this – is much more redolent of the proletarian vanguard of the Spartacist League, or the Revolutionary Communist Group, spitting !Fascist! at all and sundry.

But Suhayl,

You are down playing the feminist threat to society by saying there are only a few minority extremists.

You could say that Hitler’s Germany had only a minority of extremists; but it was the ‘moderates’ that implemented the fascist machine.

I would also add that feminist legislation is no myth; there are lots more ways to throw a man in prison now that ‘women’s ministers’ have been given power. And surely Harriet Harman’s latest bill has exploded the myth of feminist equality.

Sadly, we are more preoccupied with social pleasantries and correctness than providing the best people in the right positions to allow things to thrive.

Chalk up another one for the minority movement. Best to have the minority heard than do the right thing.

With respect, women are the majority in this country and in the world. While there are people of both genders who will abuse the system and work the system and as is the case with ethnicity, there is reverse discimination, too, but most of the progress over the past 40 years has been a consequence of the women’s movement in its various forms. Yet it remains the case that women continue to be discriminated against, in pay, domestic violence and a whole raft of other areas. Yes, there are men who get beaten-up at home and who are reluctant to come forward about it, but the vast majority of domestic violence is directed at women. This is the fact on the ground as anyone who has worked in the community will know. These are the bare realities, we are not dealing with politesse or pleasantries here. This is not even to mention the various patriarchies at play in some minority ethnic communities. I would have that anyone who claims to be liberal would be railing against such things, rather than calling all those involved in addressing such endemic and often structural issues, ‘fascists’.

Suhayl,

Read up on Erin Pizzey; she is the authority on domestic violence; and feminists hate her.

And as for the ‘progress’ of the last 40 years, what planet are you on? We have an education system that has become dominated by feminists; and it is the worst education system in Europe.

Feminists, and their ‘male’ sonderkommandos, have made marriage and Fathers a rare thing for children to witness, with all the associated social decay that has brought.

And thanks to anti-patriarch feminism, we have child support agencies like the NSPCC, spouting all their vile selected statistics to dupe the public that fathers are the biggest threat to children. But if these British agencies were to publish all the statistics on child abuse, they would show that mothers kill their offspring more than twice as much as fathers; and a similar proportion of non-fatal abuse:

http://www.breakingthescience.org/SimplifiedDataFromDHHS.php

The link shows the score for America, which I have to use because this country allows the feminists to hide the truth!

Thanks, I’ll check out the links.

On another, perhaps not entirely unrelated note, I do think that it is sad that in this country over the past few years it has become impossible for adult (even female) primary school teachers and other similar workers to reciprocate hugs from young children. Instead, the kids are gently but firmly pushed away and thereby learn that such human communication is to be frowned upon. This behaviour – I don’t blame the teachers – seems quite specific to ‘northern countries’, one doesn’t find the same level of engineered paranoia (because teachers are afraid of being accused of abuse) in southern Continental Europe, the Middle East, South Asia, etc. I know there are pre-existing cultural differences, etc. However, the authorities, obsessed with risk aversion and danger, and some very silly parents don’t seem to understand the universe of difference between abuse and displaying appropriate affection in the context of young children. As a guy on his own, unless one is with a female or a child, one cannot even smile at a young child now without immediately being regarded as suspicious. This latter observation was not always the case. It certainly was not the case when I was growing up in England/ Scotland. Sad.

Interestingly, Esther Rantzen, founder of ChildLine, fell foul of cuddling or kissing on the forehead, a distressed child, and has since developed reservations as to the direction of child protection.

An update:

“It has now emerged, however, that Padel sent e-mails to at least two newspapers, drawing attention to Walcott’s past. He was her strongest challenger for the 300-year-old post. Days later, the harassment allegations appeared in the press and Walcott withdrew.”

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/poetry/article6350589.ece

And a brief true story:

Several months ago as I was on my way to get lunch I was approached by a young girl, who could have been anywhere from 11 to 15 years old, asking for change to use the nearby public ‘phone as she needed to contact her mother. She appeared to me to be somewhat distressed but holding herself together and not crying or pleading. Anyway, I gave her the one 20p piece I had but dropped it into her hand, didn’t say anything to her and quickly moved on, fighting an inclination to make sure she was ok. The reason for being so remote and uncaring? Well, just seconds before being asked I had seen her approach a well-dressed middle-aged woman who had been brusquely dismissive, yet was still ‘interested’ enough that she decided to watch my interaction with the young girl.

Despite how I was raised I no longer blindly expect good from women; now that they have some of the power they were once denied they simply enact their true natures though they still try to maintain the sugar-n-spice image. Judge people by the good and the bad they actually do, not their gender.

[Sigh]

Let’s see if I can control my fingers enough to correctly post the link this time:

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/poetry/article6350589.ece

Good news – fingers ok.

Split url:

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk

/tol/arts_and_entertainment

/books/poetry/article6350589.ece

I don’t understand your point of view.

If D. Walcott did what it is alleged that

he did then he is a base kind of fellow and not a person I think should be hired

to represent any university in a prominent position. Your argument that other artists may have slept with their models is baseless, I think. First maybe the models were willing, Walcott’s students allege they were not and in any case the standards of hundreds of years back are not today’s standards. Finally if i’m competing ,fairly, for a positionI would never drop out of competition because one of my competitors had dropped out of the race. Do marathon runners stop because one of the race competitors cannot continue? I don’t understand your views or your mindset about normal competitiveness

Now it has become clear that in essence Craig was quite correct on this one. Walcott should have got the position. He didn’t get it basically because he is black and was therefore an easy target for a smear campaign undertaken by a power-group of white women. This is reminiscent of the spin which has infected politics over recent years – let us call it, the Alastair Campbell Syndrome, a rapidly denegerative disease which simultaneously attacks all areas of the brain. Nonetheless, I think that Yasmin Alibhai-Brown also has a point – almost a corollary – in her recent Independent piece on the matter.

http://jezebel.com/5270004/ruth-padel–derek-walcott-the-clinton-vs-obama-of-poetry

Now, perhaps an Indian poet will get the position. Unless, of course, he’s done something wrong, anything wrong in fact, sometime in his life (or in any one of his previous lives). Unlike the rest of us, of course, who have never, ever done anything wrong and have never even thought a wrong thought. Perish the thought.