"When You're Trying Too HARD To Make Everyone "Equal"

Engineering is an interesting field ... one that has a very low percentage of females. Prejudice does not keep them out .. God-designed biology seems to be a factor .. but some schools hire some interesting folk to reverse that trend:

"Academic Rigor is Racist, Sexist, Homophobic, Bla, Bla, Bla . . ... . . . says one Donna Riley, the dean of the school of “engineering education” (as opposed to real engineering) at Purdue University.  Academic rigor has too much “hardness,” “stiffness,” and “erectness,” says the apparently sex-obsessed Ms. Riley.  It is therefore a tool of oppression by “white heterosexual males,” who she characterizes as the root of all worldly evil in keeping with the standard cultural Marxist  mantra.  She calls for the abandonment of academic rigor in the teaching of engineering education at Purdue University in order to combat white heterosexual male privilege and oppression.

You would have “engineering education” at Purdue University.  The Purdue administration apparently picked Ms. Riley from what must have been a large list of candidates for the job based on her desire to destroy academic rigor in the engineering education program.  One wonders if there was any real engineering faculty input into the hiring decision.  Probably not, from such a white heterosexual male-dominated field." Thomas DiLorenzo

Here is the article he is talking about and a clip .. make sure you get Kleenex in case you laugh to the point of crying or a puke bucket depending on how you may be "triggered" LOL:

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10257

"... “One of rigor’s purposes is, to put it bluntly, a thinly veiled assertion of white male (hetero)sexuality,” she writes, explaining that rigor “has a historical lineage of being about hardness, stiffness, and erectness; its sexual connotations—and links to masculinity in particular—are undeniable.”

Hence, Riley remarks that “My visceral reaction in many conversations where I have seen rigor asserted has been to tell parties involved (regardless of gender) to whip them out and measure them already.”

Riley also argues that academic rigor can be used to exclude women and minorities, saying, “Rigor may be a defining tool, revealing how structural forces of power and privilege operate to exclude men of color and women, students with disabilities, LGBTQ+ people, first-generation and low-income students, and non-traditionally aged students.”

She claims that rigor can “reinforce gender, race, and class hierarchies in engineering, and maintain invisibility of queer, disabled, low-income, and other marginalized engineering students,” adding that “decades of ethnographic research document a climate of microaggressions and cultures of whiteness and masculinity in engineering.”

She evens contends that “scientific knowledge itself is gendered, raced, and colonizing,” asserting that in the field of engineering, there is an “inherent masculinist, white, and global North bias...all under a guise of neutrality.” .."