In the aftermath of some
posts of the past
week and related discussion at the place where political scientists engage in anonymous discussions, folks have questioned my motives. Of course. I do not need to defend myself, but I do like to myth-bust when I can, so here are some alleged motivations and then my real motivation.
- "Saideman hates people who are pro-Palestinian." No. I am not a fan of the BDS effort, but I am neither pro or anti Palestinian or pro or anti-Israel. This conflict, like many others, is intractable for a variety of reasons, with people on both sides doing good and bad things. I have already written elsewhere about the choice Israel is facing is to be Jewish or democratic but not both....
- "Saideman is bitter about McGill." No, not really. I actually really enjoyed my first seven years there, and then the last three or so were problematic. But my problems were focused on the Chair and the Full professors, and that old chair is no longer in a leadership position, and the barriers to Full-ness have been overcome by the forces of reason (the Associate professors). Oh, and the tricky thing: RB was one of the few Fulls who took my side in the Promotion fiascoes, so this argument does not fly. Also, as distance grows between my time at McGill and the present, I have grown to focus more on all of the good stuff and not so much on the negative stuff with this one key exception.
- Saideman is white-knighting. This is the classic misogynist accusation whenever a man stands up for women--that he is doing it to impress women and/or to get laid.
- Saideman is seeking attention since no one reads/cites his stuff. While I am an admitted narcissist and attention seeker, this is not my intent. If I wanted to get heaps of hits on my blog, I would simply attack the same two political scientists over and over again (I try to restrict those posts to once or twice a year). While the anonymous folks might not believe it, I am pretty happy where I am--there are always bigger fish a not-so-wise Jedi once said. So, I could be cited more or less.
The obvious reason is, of course, I am outraged. Why? Because I believe in equality of people regardless of gender, sexuality, race, etc. Where did this belief come from?
- Mostly because it is simply right.
- Partly because my mother instilled that belief in me and then my wife and daughter remind me.
- Partly because I went to Oberlin which made me confront my sexism and my homophobia.
- Partly because I am a scholar of ethnic conflict and, as a result, know the destruction that comes with discrimination.
- Partly because I have supervised many students and worry about how the world will treat them.
- Partly because I have seen plenty of sexism over the course of my career.
- And, like dodging in dodgeball, it is worth mentioning twice: equality is simply right. We are deserving of equal treatment. That discrimination exists is, well, basic to social psychology (thanks Donald Horowitz), but we don't have to tolerate it nor should we.
