"Paul C. Smith" wrote:
> All of that nit-picking being done, I have one less nit-picky comment. As
> Mike Scoles notes, one of the evaluations did refer to a faculty member as
> "a raging homosexual". Suppose s/he is not gay.
I am somewhat disturbed by the above comment. It should make no difference whether
the individual is gay or not. This is not in the same category as accusing someone
of unethical or inappropriate behavior. Yet, the phrasing of "a raging homosexual"
implies inappropriateness. Thus, if I were gay/lesbian and someone accused me of
being a "raging heterosexual", I would feel little concern. Clearly, the opposite
has far greater implications and potential ramifications.
It is important to remember that one's sexual orientation is not a protected status
in relation to housing, employment, etc at most institutions or in almost all
states/cities. Thus, a faculty member could potentially face dismissal from
employment on the basis of a "charge" of "raging homosexual". While, I would like
to think that such concern would be a "chicken little" concern, it is quite clear
that at many institutions around the country that this is not the case. Remember
that the Supreme Court of the U.S. has declared laws constitutionally legal aimed at
prohibiting certain forms of sexual behavior between consenting adults. This can be
used as the basis for faculty dismissal.
Warm regards,
Linda
--
linda m. woolf, ph.d.
associate professor - psychology
webster university
main webpage: http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/
Holocaust and genocide studies pages:
http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/holocaust.html
womens' pages: http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/women.html
gerontology pages: http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/gero.html
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
