MellonBrush Makes News

You can study any obscure topic at Montclair, but when you offer classes in something that might actually help a neighbor, if it relates to homosexuality, forget it. Gay and lesbian studies are very practical. One woman had to watch her partner die because she was denied coverage for her cancer, and gay people have to pay more more in taxes than their counterparts. Helping students learn so they can dispel strange fears is what an enlightened population is all about. Some people would rather see a student study the dispersal patterns of populations running from an ancient volcano, than something that might be directly applied to help a cousin, child or pal.

The tossing out of the words "Matthew Shepard" as a reason for Montclair State's new academic minor is really something of a diversion, at least a red herring. Having been in Laramie, Wyoming, too, it in no way I can think of at all resembles Baristaville, MellonBrush. Really.

What should matter, in these days of financially hard-pressed institutions where some leading universities have even dropped Shakespeare survey courses and several languages (classical and modern alike) altogether, is whether the new minor makes real academic sense, and whether its rigors will be consistent with other courses. Brinew 2, too, attempts to cloud this issue, thus makes reference to things that likely will not at all be covered in the actual course load.

And the use of the term "obscure topic" was also a bit unfair. One person's obscurity is often another's academic delight, this is part of the very idea of a university. That "LGBT studies" might now seem of particularly urgent cultural relevance to some does not, however, necessarily mean that the topic is genuinely worthy of prolonged academic study, especially in the career-training mill that Montclair State seems to be lately. This point seems much obscured by the emotionalism of some of the postings here.

Yeah! That's my manly man Mark's push-ups they're talking about. So manly.

"I don't know any dude who would take it," he said.

Just for the record, Mark mentioned to me if this minor were around a few years ago he probably would have chosen it over women's studies.

Clayton, I think you mean you don't know any insecure 'dudes' (like yourself) who would take on the minor.

On the contrary Cathar, the "queer" studies minor is completely in keeping with the "career-training mill" that MSU "seems to be", rather than appropriate for what you would consider a true university. Brinew2 hit the nail on the head by explaining why the "studies are very practical".

Bigotry is not a study dujour, it is as old as time. It should be carefully studied in all of its expressions because anyone could find themselves in a minority, and discrimination is unamerican. Animus toward gay people is a real problem now, but when we are vigilant in studying constitutional equality, and the cultural and social issues for the purpose of promoting equality, everyone benefits. Maybe it will lead to a course of study in taxpayer rights. Why should the responsible always bear the costs and burdens of curing societies ills? Think civil rights.

I think brine2, and others, miss several points. First, the minor is described as gay, et al studies, not as prejudice, bigotry studies as it applies to gays, et al. This would be akin to black studies focusing only on racial crimes and paying no attention to the contributions blacks have made, and the unique perspective that blacks have as a minority in this country. That would be an interesting course. What many here describe is a course that will rehash Matthew Shepard and other outrages against gays -- that is not an academic discipline -- it is a harangue (however justified anger against these outrages may be). Any minor should consist of an inquiry into what it means to be gay in the world not just in terms of what kind of hatred or fear you might face, but what it really encompasses and why it is unique. That would be a study.
Second, gays do not "pay more taxes" than anyone else. This is a roundabout way of supporting a gay marriage law. While such a law may be worth enacting (I'm not convinced, but am open to persuasion) in the meantime gays pay the same taxes that other non-marrieds pay, not some special "gay tax". Such ridiculous assertions do nothing to aid dialogue.

It is good when Universities make people think. At the start of the last century woman challenged the idea that they were the property of their husbands, and suited only for tasks in their husband's houses. Few people challenge those old ideas now, but intellectuals did. They would publish books and have discussions. Today, new ideas can be discussed in universities, and are not relegated to cafes and salons. A structured course of study is excellent, in addition to Hamlet and everything else. The new courses are not a dilution of scholarship, they are its apex.

I might suggest, Brinew2, that, instead of serving as the apex of any sort of academic construction, the new courses represent, in some way, the nadir. An attempt to pander to the forces of sexual demarcation, and, of course, to be trendy as all get-out at a state institution that could probably desperately use some non-athletics-related ink. And those termed "intellectuals," either by themselves or others, are as prone to foolishness as anyone else, so don't feel you have to bring them into the equation here. (You may think of, say, Sartre and de Beauvoir here, while I prefer for their greater seriousness and value to society Sylvester and Tweety; they were even a more "liberated" couple in their odd way.)

I sincerely doubt that anybody goes to Montclair State to focus on Shakespeare or Thomas Hardy, Horace or Pindar, Rabelais or Balzac. But to replace such interests with time spent poring over the works of, say, Edmund White? Or to search the songs of John-Taupin and the routines of Margaret Cho for deep meaning as scholars pore over Shakespeare's sonnets? Even the Matthew Shepard case, tragic as it may be, is hardly equal in resonance to such historic warhorses as Plessey vs. Ferguson and Brown vs. Board of Education. And if one maintains there are object lessons to be learned from extensive study of the case (as I think you're suggesting, as MellonBrish did), then one should perhaps also be prepared to accept the same standard of intensive examination for the much less-covered Jesse Dirkhising case of 1999. One doesn't even have to be a member of the Christian Coalition to suggest such equitability re what BOTH cases say about American society. (Though I will note the dismaying frequency with which the organizers of New York's annual Gay Pride parade allow NAMBLA to march in it, which hardly strikes me as a gesture of reassurance to any but the wildest-eyed members of the heterosexual community.)

That you use the phrase "taxpayer rights" in your brief "brief" is also as loaded a mis-usage as others of yours noted above by others. I sense a politicized agenda here. certainly at least an interest in Federal intervention and revision re a matter that remains the province of states and has very little indeed to do with the Tax Code.

Do undergrads or grads really have the time or money to spend on coursework that a.) does not meet the minimum standards for graduation, or b.) add a valuable skill whether analytical or gives one the ability to think critically?

Let's teach some economic wisdom--the value of the dollar! Don't buy crap you don't need, or adds value to your life.

As a parent (if you can believe that),I want my kid in and out of college--I'm not a bank or a slave to his education.

A coursework in GLBT studies is great if your headed down the path of Diversity Officer: otherwise, try science or math.

You might as well have a course called: Whores pandering in a candy store!

THINK about it!

Cathar wrote:

"I sincerely doubt that anybody goes to Montclair State to focus on Shakespeare or Thomas Hardy, Horace or Pindar, Rabelais or Balzac."

Well these are undegrads so they might not "focus" on these authors, but they do study them. If you look at the courses offered for next semester, they have two different Shakespeare courses offered, and one of them is offered twice. They probably wouldn't offer three Shakespeare classes unless they thouht they needed them. They have a lot of courses that might include some, if not all, of the authors you list above. I saw one course where the instructor says he/she will teach plays by Ibsen and Chekhov.

It think it is possible to study Shakespeare and take a course in Queer Theory and take more "practical" courses at Montclair and still be prepared for a job.

At my university, I studied classic authors and popular culture, and I took more "practical" courses. I've always made a decent living, and I like knowing that the things I learned in my English classes could be used in all of my reading and movie going. I liked the balance, and I would really have liked the opportunity to take a course in a Queer Theory minor. I probably wouldn't have taken it as a minor, but I would have taken one or two classes.

Isn't that what universities are for? To expose people to knowledge they otherwise might not have or even know exists? If you want to march down the vo-tech-profession path, the roadmap is clear; but that shouldn't mean that diversions are excluded. Are we all a little too hung up on growing vertically in what really is a three-dimensional world?

Do undergrads or grads really have the time or money to spend on coursework that a.) does not meet the minimum standards for graduation, or b.) add a valuable skill whether analytical or gives one the ability to think critically?

Six people have signed up for this major. Six! Chill the eff out, people.

At MSU, a minor can be four or five classes. It won't force anyone to take an extra semester or anything.

I love how the totality of the 'mixed reception' touted by the story's headline involves, uh, Baristanet comments. What a nightmare that the opinions of cathar or lasermike are being taken seriously by newspapers.

Cathar, your heartlessness is hearbreaking. Cold to the bone. And you might remember that the civil rights you enjoy as a woman came from the ideas of liberals, not conservatives. Homosexual studies won't lead to general acceptance of child abuse, Cathar, don't worry. And Margaret Cho is very funny. So was Oscar Wilde. Funny and relevant at the same time. Just listen to analysis of how she was treated as a fat woman. You will laugh till you cry. And you are also wrong about the value of gay civil rights cases. They are among the most well reasoned constitutional scholarship this country has produced.

I would just like to raise the question of when Montclair State has gotten any athletics-related ink. Have I missed something about what goes on up there?

Well said Conan!

My son is taking a course on Urban Parks this semester and is a Communications/Biz major - it has nothing to do with his area of study, but I was talking to him about it the other day and he is really enjoying it - especially since he has first hand experience with Watsesing Park and all the good/bad that goes with it.

In my opinion, it makes for a well rounded individual which is what I think that most employers are looking for (in additional to their core work skills.)

Plus, what is so wrong with just plain wanting to learn something new or different?

I couldn't agree more about the value of taking courses, and seeking knowledge, for its own sake and not just as an avenue to a job. What I am questioning is how this course will propose to do that. And I'm asking in a genuine fashion, without any preconceived notions. however, in at least two cases in this thread, the value of the minor is linked to a notorious bias crime and to repeated references to bias and discrimination faced by gays. This to my mind would better be addressed in a law course, or even in a sociology context as part of an examination of bias, etc. It cannot be the sum and total of a set of courses that purports to be gay, etc. "studies". There has to be more to it than this one aspect of gay life or experience. And maybe there is, but you wouldn't know it from the postings here.

As I learn time and again here, this is not the place for serious debate. (Nor are most posters up to it.) And better even mikey's perceptions rated as quotable, bfblahs, than your own predictable, fashionably despairing, stabs at verbal flatulence.

Brinew2, you sound convinced of the moral superiority of your stance. So much so that you call disagreement with it "heartlessness." I would suggest that there's already too much emotionalism rampant on college campuses, and has been at least since 1967. Nor is Margaret Cho, uh, "funny." Desperate, yes. Quite foul-mouthed at times. But never funny. And while OScar Wilde was quondam hunmorous, he was also consciously cruel for many, many years to his own family. So there was a terrible price to pay for all that wit.

Montclair State always gets athletics-related-ink in its fair proportion, crank. You just don't read the right college sports websites and publications. It's the lack of any citations in more erudite places like The Journal of Higher Education which probably bothers university administrators.

Amazingly, too, all of these posts have focused on Montclair State. Nor Stanford, NC State or even Austin Peay. But good ole "MSU," a place I'd bet few posters here have attended. Its institution of a new minor has, however, allowed many posters to assert their own heightened cultural sensitivity. Conveniently so, I humbly submit. (Which was perhaps the real point of the Baristas running the item in the first place.)

Cathar, you may have studied fine works of literature, but they did not elevate you. Your post evoking cartoon characters as a gay couple, a discredited organization advocating sex between men and boys, and the uselessness of gay civil rights jurisprudence were, in fact cold, and was not an attempt to discredit your thinking. And your comments about the students at Montclair are likewise unkind. I am an MSU graduate, and the things I learned there opened my mind to the power of compassion to lead responsible people to good judgment. As Romeo said, "He jests at scars that never felt a wound." Understanding human suffering is the apex of a college education, not the "nadir." Go back and read some of those dusty books, and watch Brokeback Mountain, and we will discuss a Midwesterner's loyalty to family when it conflicts with love, and we will cry for poor Romeo and a lonely farmer's son.

I graduated from MSC in 1982.

Since it was someone from 'Yellowstone' that asked 'Why?', I countered with my comment, wondering if someone from a 'park in Wyoming' would recognize the reference.

I think that education certainly won't hurt. Will it help reduce gay bias crimes? Maybe, maybe not. Personally I think it will.

Cather wrote, "As I learn time and again here, this is not the place for serious debate. (Nor are most posters up to it.)"

You made a comment about what students at MSU focus on in their studies. I offered information to counter your suggestion. You seem to have ignored the post.

Perhaps no one here seems up to a debate with you because you've made clear that you are not the slightest bit interested in actually engaging with anyone who offers information that counters your view of things.

I took the time to actually look at courses currently offered at MSU. Did you?

That "LGBT studies" might now seem of particularly urgent cultural relevance to some does not, however, necessarily mean that the topic is genuinely worthy of prolonged academic study.

Once again, this is a minor (6 classes, 18 credits), not prolonged academic study -- but given the discussion that this subject is generating here, I think the topic is probably worthy of a doctoral program.

Nor is Margaret Cho, uh, "funny." Desperate, yes. Quite foul-mouthed at times. But never funny.

This statement speaks volumes about you cathar. Margaret Cho is freakin' hysterical.

Nor are most posters up to it.

Anyone ever tell you that you're totally lubbable -- like a teddy bear or a golden retriever puppy?

The New York Public Library's guide to Gay and Lesbian studies includes this:
" Gay and Lesbian Studies is the examination, analysis, and interpretation of the phenomenon characterized by romantic and affectional preference by individuals for others of the same sex. It is by nature cross-disciplinary, covering a wide range of intellectual bases: literature, history, religion, psychology, sociology, philosophy, anthropology, medicine, law, fine arts and others."
If the MSU program goes down this road, great. But if it is an endless revisiting of bias directed towards gays, as has been the focus of the defenses mounted here on this thread, then it is not a serious academic exercise.

I am more simple. I just thought the LGBT minor was a complete waste of time. The exact same way I would have felt about a similar heterosexual minor. I see almost no real application for these studies in the post college business world. If one of my kids were to select this minor I would make them pay for it themselves.

I dunno, it seems worthwhile to me -- and interesting too. If heterosexuals were treated the same way as homosexuals have been throughout history, perhaps they would have a minor of their own. But until nearly every aspect of society isn't geared toward being straight, it isn't even remotely necessary.

From the MSU website:

GLBTQ Studies Minor

Gender and Sexuality make a difference.

With the new minor in GLBTQ Studies you will:

? Explore GLBTQ representations, cultures, and histories

? Think critically about identities, current issues, institutions, and activism

? Enhance your educational and professional opportunities.

18 Credit Hours (6 courses total)

1 Required Course: GLQS200 Introduction to Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, & Queer Studies

(Spring 2008)

5 Electives from approved courses

Electives you can choose from include:

HLTH 290 Human Sexuality

HLTH 295 Sexuality Education in the Schools

JUST 319 Hate Crimes

PSYC 227 Psychological Aspects of Human Sexuality

SOCI 413 Sociology of Gender

SOCI 426 Sociology of Sexuality

SPAN 473 Sexual Subversion in Contemporary Hispanic Litaerature & Film

WMST 301 Feminist Theory

CosmicKid,
You hit one of the problems I have with this minor and many other college programs right on the head. College is an institution of learning. It is not designed nor meant to be a place where young adults should receive a political agenda. Your post smacks of that.

"If heterosexuals were treated the same way as homosexuals have been throughout history, perhaps they would have a minor of their own."

So any group that has been treated poorly by society should have it's own minor? That makes perfect sense...

I wasn't trying to make anything about the program political -- my comment was in response to your statement: I would have felt about a similar heterosexual minor. And like it or not, students have, do, and will continue to study groups who have been oppressed (women, blacks, jews, etc.) I think that's a very good thing.

Take a look at the courses listed above. Or better yet, go to the MSU site and look at the course descriptions.

“College is an institution of learning.”

I’d have more respect for your opinion that college is for learning, Cheese, if you knew how to use an apostrophe correctly. How about you go re-learn elementary school grammar before you knock MSU’s choice of minors, k?

The notion of an academic institution studying a group because it is oppessed, in addition to being prima facie stupid, is clearly not the main criterion at work here. The main reason seems to be pandering to the marketplace. There are plenty of oppressed people that potential Montclair students have no interest in minoring in, and they're not reflected in the curriculum. Should we have minors on the people of North Korea? Untouchables in India? Muslim women? Environmentalists in China? Textile workers in Thailand?

There is definite hostility to gay people. When it involves study of something unpopular, all of a sudden there is a relevancy-to-your-education problem. I am not fooled, these people have no other issues with what courses their kids take. Their kids can learn about Kennedy, but not Harvey Milk, about Cancer, but not AIDS. Look how much contempt they would have for their kids who would come home wanting to study something so important and relevant, "Pay for that yourself."

Argument dismissed! That pretty much sums up your response, eh Brinew2? (Assuming you're responding to my post which immediately precedes yours; if you're not, then never mind!) Do you realize that your approach is completely political, and irrational?

It's pretty easy for anyone with an open mind to see the validity of this minor. It's six measly classes that explore explore the issues of a relatively segment of society, that exists in all cultures, that has been forced into the closet, oppressed, and denied human rights for centuries - mainly due to religious morals. It's a fascinating study if you ask me. In addition, it can enhace a student's future occupation. Business/Marketing students can better understand the extremely lucrative gay market. Teachers, counselers, managers will better understand the issues of gay individuals. Students may choose other minors (or no minor at all), but I fail to see how anyone could or should be bothered by an institution offering this cirriculum, or a student taking advantage of it.

No one is forcing anyone to take the minor or any of the courses that comprise it. It boils down to demand. If the students don't seek out these courses, they (and the minor) will cease to exist.

Yo Missygooch, blow it out your backend. Never claimed to be the resident punctuation expert and never will. If your argument for this minor is to attempt to discredit mine because my punctuation sucks, then you have already lost. 32 posts and you drop in with a punctuation slam? Try again. Perhaps you could actually give this topic some thought, put on some big girls panties and come back and see us when you have an intelligent thought to post. I look forward to reading your future efforts...

"Should we have minors on the people of North Korea? Untouchables in India? Muslim women? Environmentalists in China? Textile workers in Thailand?"

My university didn't offer minors in about these subjects, but I do know that classes in the larger grouping the might fit under were offered, and I went to many, many lectures about topics similar to these.

I imagine that "Muslim Women" would be taught in an anthropology course, a women's study course, a sociology course, a film course, or maybe a literature course. As the topic became more pertinent to American students, it could evolve into a minor.

The idea that academic curriculums were apolitical until minority studies came along doesn't really make sense. Scholars choose their subjects for reasons that are political as well as personal. History books are written and published based primarily on politics. Universities are usually guided by politics, ideology, and economics in the curricular choices they make.

I could certainly see specific minors such as gay studies, Muslim women, Untouchables in India, etc. being offered at the graduate level, as specialized areas of study in the fields of sociology, history or anthropology. I just question the offerings at the undergrad level. They can be a good thing but I think one needs to have a basis for the specialized course of study. That is, they would need to understand the nuts and bolts overview of sociology first before branching off into specializations. Just my 2 cents.

Geez...if MSU had simply offered the courses that comprise the requirements and elective for the minor instead of actually offering the 'minor,' would anyone have a problem with this?

Silly -- it seems like people are okay with taking the 'gay' classes - as long as one doesn't take so many of them that they can actually can they achieved something. And don't dare think it was worthwhile or a productive use of your time!

can actually can they achieved something>/i>

= can actually SAY they achieved something.

I can see the usefulness of this minor for fields like anthropology, psychology, communications, family and child studies, history, justice studies, religious studies, and health education, all of which are MSU majors. As others have pointed out, it shouldn't just focus on the bias crime incidents, but if it is a well rounded program that teaches about society and LBGTQ interactions throughout time and how their experience has different from that of heterosexuals, then I think it has value in a university setting.

Dear MSU student:

I want you to succeed in your chosen field, and am so proud of you. I am pulling for your success. It is great that your university has your back, not just in providing you with a smattering of coursework, but in a planned course of study, rounded out and comprehensive. They tried to make sure nothing was left out.

If you want to counsel at-risk teens, you are going to be well-prepared. You are an expert on the number one at-risk group, and it could prevent a suicide or get someone sober. Someone you are treating as a doctor or other health care professional has the best. Your University and professors cared about you and the people you would be treating. They had meetings about your curriculum, and chose courses to inform and elevate you.

You have fellow students you can rely upon after college, with a question or a referral. You have a community of caring professionals as a student, and you have a community as alumni.

Your education was not second to anyone in your chosen field. When you apply at Lambda Legal or the ACLU you have authority. Educated people will listen you, and respect your degree. Do not listen to the others, you do not need them, and they care nothing for significance of your work.

With your work, and the work of others, life in the US will continue to improve. As homosexuality becomes more understood and gay people lose the need to hide in the closet, less people, straight and gay, will be trapped in unhappy marriages. Gay people will form more marriages, and unwanted children will find homes. Alcoholism will decrease, and productivity will increase.

And remember you are doing God's work, too. Righteous to the core, you have courage and passion to help the least liked among us. You are a patriot, and beloved to history.

Geez...if MSU had simply offered the courses that comprise the requirements and elective for the minor instead of actually offering the 'minor,' would anyone have a problem with this?

Most if not all of the classes were probably already part of MSU's course offerings -- they would not have created all those classes knowing only 6 people would enroll.

As for Cheese, I guess I struck a nerve, huh? Let me know how those grammar classes go. When you're done those, we can go sign up to be Queer Studies minors together -- although -- you do have a high school diploma, don't you? You may need one of those first.

I fully support the minor program Brinew2, but I think you're grossly overestimating the impact it will have on anyone's career opportunities there. :-)

It makes for a much more well-rounded individual in a lot of caes, but it is only six undergraduate courses afterall.

Most if not all of the classes were probably already part of MSU's course offerings -- they would not have created all those classes knowing only 6 people would enroll.

You mean they would not have created the minor if they knew only six students would register?

That's kind of my point. A lot of students might be interested in taking a class or two in this cirriculum. Relatively few are likely to be interested in declaring the program as a minor. It's all a matter of demand really - but who really cares if a student wants to take 6 classes to achieve this minor? More power to them. Kudos to MSU for offering it. Sympathy to those who criticize what they can't understand -- "you ain't gonna learn what you don't wanna know."

New Jersey is better than other states. It offers more, and the people are good, better, kinder, better educated. http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/decisions/supreme/a-68-05.doc.html

"It offers more, and the people are good, better, kinder, better educated."

Would those be the same people who cut me off in traffic, pass me on the right, and flip me the bird?

If NJ was enlightened as you think it is Brinew2, they would have had the cajones to decide for full MARRIAGE equality and not this civil union crap, which is a huge 'separate-and-not-completely-equal-in-all-cases-either-and-freakin'-fuggedabout-tax-equality-at-the-federal-level' failure.

No. I believe in my state. It was always there, and at times most needed. Silent and secret, it is the glue of the nation. When the Nation in the revolutionary war was almost at defeat, Washinton and his troops hid in New Jersey, passionate about liberation. 1780, after years of stalemate, like Iraq, Washington used New Jersey for hiding and refuge. The glorious woods, the woods of a fledgling nation. The French arrived, and we were free when Britain gave up. Those protective, glorious woods are gone, but it is still the best state, a state of GET OUT OF MY WAY, I am free.

GET OUT OF MY WAY, I am free.

Nice oration, Brinew2. You certainly have passion, I'll grant you that much, and the slogan gives me pause. I'll be thinking about it the next time I'm driving down route 46 on a Saturday afternoon

I wonder if in the Queer Studies classes they spend more time discussing the "oppression" in the US or, say, Saudi Arabia or Iran.

(I think I can guess the answer)

Those kids are good Americans who love an appreciate the gifts of their country. It is a slur to them to suggest their studies will tend toward the unpatriotic. Wanting to uphold the constitutional guarantee of equality is the highest calling of an American. It benefits everyone.

It is a peculiar feature of our society, ROC, that we give shelter and protect the least powerful and most maligned among us, even though they may malign the commonwealth in return. Perhaps as these outcasts begin to feel a little less outcast, they'll start to return the gesture. However, I seriously doubt that the depth of patriotic feeling Brinew2 refers to is very common in that group, as much as I respect her (his?) depth of feeling and eloquence.

I've been misunderstood.

I was reading today about a judge in Saudi Arabia who sentenced the victim of a gang rape to 200 lashes of the whip because, just before the rape, she rode in the car of a man not of her family. It was "her fault" you see - according to a Saudi judge.

And I'll bet that doesn't even make it into discussions in Women's studies classes much. Or at least there seems to be precious little attention among feminists at such things in our public sphere.

Likewise, I'll bet Gay Studies classes don't spend much time addressing cultures in which just having a gay studies class would bring a state-sponsored death sentence.

So no slight on the patriotism of Gay Americans was meant by me. Just, perhaps, an allegation of some myopia.

Liberals do get myopia in that they seem not to show an overall appreciation of ordinary middle class people. I can't put my finger on it, but liberals should say something positive about America and Americans more often to show they are not governed by anger. It is frustrating to see the middle class ignored by either the right or the left.