A week ago we issued our first report on the Kukla Klan Kontroversy. Since then the story has continued to gain attention, from pieces in major national media, (one of which quotes extensively from TGA), to a great deal of chatter on Facebook, lots of which appear on Professor Kukla’s own page where she gives the lamest possible justification for why she told Christians and others she disagrees with to “suck my giant queer cock.”
Incidentally, her statement is made on the very same thread where her boyfriend made a joke about raping people (Quote: “Fist those guys!”). A source within the philosophy department informed us of that little piece of information.
Since that time, we’ve suggested Professor Kukla apologize and that if she chose not to walk back her comments because she was too embarrassed or ashamed or recalcitrant, then we would appreciate an official statement from Professor Blattner, Chair of the Philosophy Department, reaffirming his department’s commitment to what is said in the Faculty Handbook about the importance of treating others with respect. We also called upon him to endorse the University’s polices against sexually demeaning rhetoric, which for all intents and purposes is no different from sexual harassment, which is prohibited at Georgetown because it leads to a hostile workplace, psychologically harms people, and contributes to rape culture.
A few hours after our email Professor Kukla posted a mealy-mouthed and weak justification for her actions on Facebook in which she also took a moment to lie about us, saying we were attacking and harassing her when all we did was report on her comments and post a screenshot of her words. She also deleted the offensive comments. We’re quite sure she did the latter because she knows they constitute sexual harassment which is inappropriate and beneath what is expected of a University employee.
Professor Blattner chose not to make a statement, though as a sign of leadership we think he should have (and still should), if only to reaffirm that the philosophy department is committed to respectful and responsible discourse and verbal abuse towards those with different opinions is unacceptable at Georgetown.
That he decided not to do so is unfortunate and indicates the philosophy department here is not dedicated to being a place free from sexual harassment for those who are not liberal or radical leftists. After all, if Professor Blattner, (and Dean of the College Chester Gillis, and Georgetown President John DeGioia, who have also remained silent), thinks it’s okay for one of his professors to tell others to “suck [her] giant queer cock,” then it gives permission for his other professors to use similar language in the future.
It is for this reason we cannot recommend anyone but submissives, cuckservatives, College Dems, people who when they graduate Georgetown want to spend the rest of their lives poor, or the most die-hard leftists, take courses within the philosophy department, much less choose philosophy as a major. Sure, there is the requirement to take two courses to graduate, but aside from these, anyone with half a brain won’t don’t take any additional and will boycott the program.
Let the department be what it obviously wants to be: a haven for radical leftists and feminists who feel not just free, but actually empowered, to sexually harass religious people and anyone else who holds libertarian or conservative opinions. Let the department become even more of an echo chamber for their views.
Clearly, Professors Blattner and Kukla want the philosophy department to be a liberal ghetto which is unwelcome to anyone who is not ideologically-aligned with their own thinking.
So let’s give them what they want . . .
Take only the courses necessary to meet graduation requirements. And then boycott the philosophy department. Do you have extra room in your schedule and are you interested in one of the bridge classes? Don’t bother. Get a syllabus and just do the readings on your own. Then go online or to the library and read what other commentators say about it. Discuss it with others or join the Philodemic on Thursdays in Healy or the Tocqueville Forum reading group on Fridays in ICC for open-minded people who won’t insult you for thinking differently. Who knows, you might even see one of us there. ;) And unless you want to be a barista your whole life, don’t even bother choosing philosophy as a major. You’ll be unhappy and unemployable.
Let the classes have nothing but leftist voices in them. If you’re not a leftist, don’t bother speaking up. It's not safe for you anyways. Keep your head down, otherwise you might be verbally abused by Professor Kukla and her friends. We suspect you will have your grades marked down for holding heterodox opinions too. People like Kukla are the sorts who don’t think what you have to say should be allowed and they will insult and punish you for having the wrong opinions. So don’t let them. Just let each class consist of liberals repeating the same things to each other. Help it be the echo chamber they desire. If you need to fulfill a course participation requirement by making comments, then just say something anodyne. Don’t actually contribute meaningfully to the conversation.
In other news, we think it’s worth mention that in addition to contacting various administrators we also asked professors and PhD students in the philosophy department their thoughts. To their credit, no one was willing to defend her words. Not. A. Single. One. Though there was one, who obviously angry at our reporting, told us to “go fuck yourselves.” We could name him, but since we have a policy not to name names unless they first appear in national media or The Hoya or The Voice, we’re going to let it slide.
One professor emailed in to tell us Kukla’s comments were covered under the concept of academic freedom, which doesn’t make sense for anyone with a grade school understanding of academic freedom. We discuss the concept here on our "Arguments & Ideas" page, and are at a loss as to how a professor can justify sexually harassing people or making bigoted statements as being protected under academic freedom.
For the record, the concept of academic freedom has everything to do with research and teaching and absolutely nothing (nothing!) to do with telling other people to give you blow jobs. Calling out Kukla, or even formally reprimanding her by telling her to be less of a jerk next time, is not a violation of academic freedom. By that logic, a professor can drop racial epithets and call black people the n-word or call women the c-word, and that would be covered, and therefore, allowed at Georgetown. We don’t believe that and are pretty sure this professor doesn’t either and is just being hypocritical because Kukla is his friend.
But perhaps a social experiment is in order to test the hypothesis?
If it’s no problem, according to Professor Blattner and Professor Kukla, for professors at Georgetown to invite others to give them blow jobs just for disagreeing with them, is it also cool for students to inquire of philosophy professors whether they would like to do something similar when the professor disagrees with them about some topic? Should someone should try it and go up to one of the professors in the philosophy department and invite them to start performing blow jobs? Would academic freedom policies allow that?
Our guess is no, which is why no one should try it. There’s no point in lowering yourself to the likes of Kukla and others who engage in such hate speech and sexually demeaning language towards others. Along with being wrong for doing so, you would be punished severely. GUPD would probably be called on you. Fact is, we just have to deal with the reality that in the philosophy department one standard concerning hate speech exists for radical queer feminist liberals like Professor Kukla, and another for everyone else.
At any rate, Johnny 3 Tears isn’t going to like editing all this, so we’ll end with Kukla’s justification for telling people to give her blow jobs.
Here it is:
For a great analysis of Kukla’s statement, one which shows how hypocritical and hollow and false it is, visit Rod Dreher’s blog. Then go to Rightly Considered, the blog which broke the story, for additional examples of Kukla behaving badly. It’s actually quite a good read because it also discusses the argument that her comments were private when they weren’t and the problem with Christianophobes like Kukla.
Here’s a taste:
Whether or not our leftist opponents want to admit it, Christianophobia is a real phenomenon, especially in academia. We can apply the above reasoning to the actual case: just as black or female or Muslim students and academics have a right to know whether their professors or colleagues are racists or sexists or Islamophobes, so Christian students and academics have a right to know whether their professors or colleagues are Christianophobes or hostile to (the expression of) their religious views. We see nothing whatever wrong with publicly exposing the hate and bigotry of people who are in positions of power. And some of the comments from both private and public fora that we published are Christianophobic and hateful, a fact that Cogburn disgracefully failed to mention. He’s happy to publicly admonish us for exposing hate but doesn’t publicly admonish any of the haters. Note the title of his post, “A plea to the authors of Rightly Considered to be a little kinder…” This is truly rich. Cogburn means to stir us to put our hearts in the right place so that it oozes graciousness and lovingkindness. We appreciate his concern. Our question is: why was he MIA when Stanley was writing “Fuck those assholes” and Rebecca Kukla was telling us to “suck [her] giant queer cock”? Why no mothering lecture for them? Because they are his friends, or on his side. More hypocrisy, double standards, and nepotism from the left.
To be frank, Cogburn’s response is odd. For our part, we reported the vile and hateful things philosophers were saying about traditional Christians. We did not respond to them in kind. However, in Cogburn’s mind, we need to be lectured on “kindness,” not those who told us to perform oral sex on their queer genitalia. This sort of hateful, vindictive, borderline psychotic behavior is par for the course for leftists. Consider this screenshot from Rebecca Kukla’s public Facebook post.
To quote Rightly Considered again:
Here, Kukla revels in the hope that President Newman follows social media so that he can see that “no one likes [him].” She continues, presumably speaking for “the guild,” saying that “We just think you are disgusting and incompetent and hope that you lie awake at night in bed feeling inadequate and hating yourself as much as we hate you.” This is because Newman expressed views Kukla disagreed with. Perhaps Cogburn and Barnes ought to spend more time cleaning up their own backyard.
You know, when you put together the calls for people to suck her non-existent cock whenever they disagree with her, the hypocrisy and obvious untruths she spills in her comments trying to excuse her actions, the fact her boyfriend makes a rape joke that she later participates in, and the hate she shows for a University president she's never met but whose policies she doesn't like, it's almost as if Kukla is unstable and has some emotional problems. Either that or she's a damaged human being and extremely unhappy.
Or perhaps she's just the Donald Trump of Georgetown.
Yeah, we sure did pick a real winner in hiring old Rebecca. Good thing she’s charged with molding young minds and edits our school's prestigious ethics journal. Hopefully she becomes Chair of the Philosophy Department soon, and eventually Dean of the College.
One day, if we're lucky enough, she might even be made President of Georgetown.
UPDATE #1: Many wonderful people are asking what they can do to help. The only thing I can think of right now is, please signal boost this article by reposting it. The last thing I or anyone at GU wants is for less right-wingers to get wind of the whole thing. Who knows, they might even stop donating. Thanks and love to all of you xoxo.
UPDATE #2: It has been suggested to us that Professor Kukla was an affirmative action hire and isn't at Georgetown because of the quality of her scholarship or teaching ability. We do not know the veracity of this claim, but considering the lack of professionalism she shows and the difficulties she has with controlling her emotions, and because she clearly lacks the temperament to be teaching students (since some will undoubtedly think differently than her on things), we suspect the claim is not inaccurate. Which is yet another reason to only hire the best people. When you hire professors just because they can check the diversity box, then you degrade the quality of scholarship and teaching and lower the prestige of the institution, not to mention having to constantly clean up after them. SAD!