do no harm:


idit dobb-weinstein: "teaching is action and thinking at once. What I try to guard against most when I teach is not speaking as if my answer were conclusive, so as to avoid (to the extent possible) any kind of dogmatic appropriation. It is understandable why students might wish to imitate their teachers, but there are different modes of imitation. I try very hard to avoid the mimetic appropriation that is immediate, passive, and occludes thinking. One other reason is that if I made clear what my views were, and my views appeared as if they were final, it would preclude the possibility of first, students challenging me and second, learning from my students. The relation between the student and teacher is, to me, a dynamic relationship . . . Teaching and learning is a movement that occurs between. In other words, we are at once both agent and patient, both teacher and learner. If we are not very careful, we can do a great deal of harm. And that, too, I have learned from my teachers, Maimonides especially.

I believe my task is to provoke students to think and to engage them in genuine dialogue and questioning. To paraphrase a rabbinic saying, 'I have learned from my teachers, and I have learned from my peers, but I have learned most from my students.' And that is a continuous process of learning."

Thursday 27 May 2010

Legal Association asks me to leave their potluck

darwin approached me and told me to leave after i wrote on the blackboard:


"what is the legal association's official position on the privacy breach and harassment of sheila dharod by ASO in the alcohol/minor/harassment scandal?"

as i wrote it darwin asked what are you doing?

i went to wash the red chalk off my hands.  when i returned i saw darwin whisper to vargas as he began to erase it.  i came in and sat down.  darwin motioned that i come to him.  i did not.  i let him come to me.  he told me that i would have to leave the meeting for being negative.  he repeated himself, that he would ask me to leave if i spoke about the matter. he asked me to leave and then told me to leave.  i said equality is not a negative concept, and the legal association could have a proactive stance against harassment or administration cover-ups.
i just patiently repeated myself.  but it is hard to talk over people.  darwin told me to be quiet.

i did not raise my voice.

he then began to pose for facebook pictures


i asked vargas.  he uncomfortably smiled saying, it's not appropriate.  vargas pretends to be so neutral, but his allegiances become so painfully clear sometimes.

disdain is perceptible in the spiritual realm.

now i hate to say what i feel about legal society, but i could mildly say that they have no courage, and that several members are extremely dominating and condescending.  they also have an affinity for silencing women and keeping the pace at a dull level.

when sheila was around, they tried to silence her.
intelligent women, and real ideas, bother them.
but that's why sheila and i belong at the lawyers guild next tuesday, with actual lawyers, who talk about important things, and who have passion for civil rights.
they aren't afraid of brilliant women over there.  in fact their are so many well spoken lawyers from every possible culture, its overwhelmingly wonderful.
betty hung, for example, who called taxis "sweatshops on wheels" or lisa jaskol, who highlighted hugo chavez's incarceration of a judge for a difference of opinion on prison release.


in censorship news,
it was drawn to my attention that LACCD counsel needs to now contact keith fink with cease and desist letters, as it should be known to the administration that i have representation.  contacting me, with knowledge of this, presuming eckford told eric kim about the little phone call, was a violation of the professional code of conduct.

but eckford probably wants to keep his rudeness to a dull roar.  i bet even bartelt would be shocked.  would bartelt tell keith fink to go jump in a pool and that he would hang up on his dumb ass?  i doubt it.  but then again they did corner me for a faux-mandatory suspension-threat/censorship meeting, in which both said they would sue me.  like i care.  take every penny i don't have.
sue rich people, dah!

and censoring my blog is simply non buena.

in anthropology news, bartelt was perceptibly gruff with the PUNK emissary who described a very simple clear punk message.  bartelt condescendingly said, "well i'm not saying i doubt your authority, but i am."  bartelt said it is a "sad state of affairs."
which if anyone said this about anyone's culture, and presentation, it just might be considered inconsiderate at least.  if the same presentation were about marijuana, like the one on tuesday, he'd be Rahrah!  which he was.  substitute alcohol and punk rock music, and then . . .

well  a nice russian woman was describing the economics of altruism, and it seemed like he tried to pick a fight with her about her feelings about capitalism.  she left in frustration, saying, "it's complex, it's complicated."  i felt like saying, give her a break, it's her perspective not yours.

i was strategically excluded from presenting and getting the extra credit, even though i was supposed to present tuesday for ten minutes.  eric hamilton kindly gave me 20 seconds to present.  it was more like seven seconds. which inasmuch islamic culture is marginalized, it illustrated many of my points, in a performance art kind of way.  i looked forward to presenting all semester and worked so hard!!!!  but it is important to punish the bloggers for their blog-crimes!!!!!

not to get astrological here, but it might be a star thing. eric told me aries rules the scene.  i see now.  eric also told me his brother says i'm ugly.  so in addition to having the marginalized culture remarginalized, and the (semi-censored) non-PHD blogger silence . . . well . . . eric says his brother says all his friends are ugly . . . so . . .
my point about . . .
http://hijabniqab.blogspot.com/ . . .

eric and i discussed how my idea bout a class blog was dismissed like the internet is satan, and that we are all so stupid we shouldn't ever publish a thing.  teacher said he would burn our papers in a bonfire in venice and that we should not blog them.  but i wondered, what if we had valable information for humanity?  what if we could offer education, enlightenment . . . in defense of the blogosphere.  sad thing is that it might go to our non-PHD community college heads . . .

in ASO news, i got the run around from earic peters on the ASO harassment alcohol/sexual harassment of a minor scandal.  i asked him why the administration protects the abusers.  i don't think he realizes i blog.  i asked him why the administration didn't have the courage to protect the victim, and protect the victim's defender, sheila dharod, from the ASO's vicious attack.

it seems like they support the attackers.

when i tried to talk equality in education with peters, he almost painted himself into the CA Edu code does not apply to the Associated Students Union corner, but then i reminded him that this is tax-funded property and a tax-funded school, so that and harassment that occurs regarding students should be administration's concern.

boy, oh boy.
then jamillah moore called.

IP law club made outstanding progress demanding a more enriched IP perspective, with a formal request for an enhanced program. It functioned as a clear indictment of the irrelevant travesty known as "media law" which might be termed "last night's late night TV with richard lewis, regarbled with the FOX twist."
we rather enjoyed the study question, should the LACCD counsel use IP pretense to censor bad press?
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)