@CoolOldLady: I think he likes being destructive, actually - like the people who enjoy going around and hurting people because they're hurt, and kids who break other kids' toys.
@LadySoprano: So he says. Of course, she was issued a restraining order after he beat her and he's publicly bemoaned the fact that in Russia the cops would be on his side, so... I'm pretty much not buying what he says. (We've written about that before.)
I have a very special place in my Pet Peeve Pile for those dudes who don't support Women's Studies on the basis that there is no Men's Studies. Dude, aside from the general stupidity and ignorance of that assertion, there already is a Men's Studies: it's called HISTORY.
@KathrynwithaY loves Joan Collins: I hope he tackles feminine hygiene next. I am so tired of seeing all those ads promoting the superiority of female protection! And you know those Ladies Rooms are a hotbed of anti-male activity, and Hollander is pretty sure they violate the Constitutional directive of the separation of urinal and stall.
@rocknrollunicorn: Clearly a real person, who is not in any way joking. Yep. Last name Jazz, first name Hugh. Maybe he's been resentful since Bart's prank call. No, wait, he thought Bart was a nice boy. Hmmm...
@VictorianDoorknob: You need to get that MA, preferably at Columbia, where you can kick his sorry ass all over the quad. I'll supply the steel-toed boots.
I know I'm ignorant, not having gone to Colombia Business School and all, but how does the Women's Studies department violate the First Amendment establishment clause concerning religion?
@AbbyNormal says a vote for Obama is a vote for Pants!: He claims that Women's Study is actually a religious belief system. Of course, he would have to defy both the dictionary and the IRS (which classifies religious groups and beliefs for tax purposes) and common sense, etc. Also, Columbia is a private university. The establishment clause does not apply directly to them, at all. The university is free to offer courses in some religions, but not others. So yes, it is extremely stupid. If a judge doesn't throw out this lawsuit immediately, that judge deserves to be heckled.
@serreca: @TheFormerJuneBronson: I presume Hollander is saying that the focus of the department promotes a particular viewpoint, but as a commenter on the Ivy Gate points out, Colombia isn't a public institution, therefore not beholden to governmental monies that are contingent on neutral religiosity.
Plus, he's an ass. Who sits around thinking up legal strategies to fight imagined oppression of the ruling class by the oppressed parties, manifested in such ways as Ladies' Night and the Women's Studies Department? Way to go to the mat for the poor fellas, there, Hollander! Someone give that man an imaginary Purple Heart.
@AbbyNormal says a vote for Obama is a vote for Pants!: Word. Plus, as someone pointed out on IvyGate, private institutions/businesses/establishments aren't bound by the First Amendment anyway. It starts out with, "Congress shall make no law..." Most non-religious universities have bylaws with similar tenets, of course, but the courts wouldn't have any jurisdiction over an alleged violation of internal policy.
@Kilotwat: After perusing some links, that's what I figured, but, like that guy suing over his lost pants, I was just agog that this was even in the public periphery. Jeezum crow, yeah, courses designed to put women back into the historical and societal record must be nefarious in nature. Argh.
@Kilotwat: Plus, the fact that he's recruiting current Columbia kids suggests Columbia's motion to dismiss is at least partly premised on his lack of standing. He doesn't go there anymore, how can they be violating his First Amendment rights?
@Penny_Esq: mad as a sack of badgers: That was the same argument Dr. Laura was putting forth about her TV show being cancelled--that it was a First Amendment violation and her rights blah-de-blah blah. Which, of course, the networks have no obligation to air anyone, regardless of their politics. She just needs to be persecuted in order to have a public identity. I wonder if it would have broken her poor brain to have them tell her that it wasn't her ideas; it was that she was unprofitable. I'm sure that was the reason.
@sammyboombaladdy: I was giving him the benefit of the doubt but I bow to your apparently superior mad non-sex-having douchenozzle identification skilz.
10/30/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
The Ladies Room? Lady Schick razors? Lady and the Tramp?
10/29/08
10/29/08
This guy is a total head case.
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
(if that is an option; I'm slightly rusty on the ole Magic Eight Ball speak).
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
*sigh*
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
These poor downtrodden men.
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
Plus, he's an ass. Who sits around thinking up legal strategies to fight imagined oppression of the ruling class by the oppressed parties, manifested in such ways as Ladies' Night and the Women's Studies Department? Way to go to the mat for the poor fellas, there, Hollander! Someone give that man an imaginary Purple Heart.
10/29/08
DOUBLE FAIL, Roy.
10/29/08
Thanks for the lowdown.
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/30/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08
10/29/08