Who has been beating the carpets to chase all the roaches out from wherever they've been hiding?

Rhetorical question, obvious answer is: an uppity, shrill woman who doesn't know her place.

this reminded me of a strange incident i had y'day at the gym. winding down my workout with a short stairmaster session ... mid-20 somthing very tall girl with anorexia on the stairmaster next to me talking (on the phone i thought). i realize she is face timing with her mom (phone put in the slot where ppl usually put books) and then the girl says, "yeah high school was a hard time for me mom ... what with me cutting myself, bashing in hamsters' heads and sleeping with some of my teachers ..."



edit b/c i imagine some might be wondering about mom's response: [long pause] "yes honey ... high school is an awkward time for many people ..."

it was apparent mom already knew about all three of those activities.

or they were being witty

I'm sure this guy is totally not a rape apologist and instead is just reeeeeeaaaaaallllly nitty when it comes to the definition of testimony.

guessing this is a reply to my post. one of those you had to be theres ... not an inkling of wittiness. i'd offer a 1,000-to-1 that she did those things.

We all know only the 1st definition of a word counts. All other definitions are false!

testimony
ˈtɛstɪməni/
noun
noun: testimony; plural noun: testimonies

a formal written or spoken statement, especially one given in a court of law.
"the testimony of an eyewitness"

"Smith was in court to hear her testimony"

evidence or proof of something.
"his blackened finger was testimony to the fact that he had played in pain"

Ill put $100 on it happening for a chance to win 100k

Pretty sure the fact that these right wing morons are so terrible at even faking good faith defending of the infefensible is why we resort to sparring with each other so frequently.

Get your **** together, chjim. It’s only fun punching an inflatated clown balloon for a few turns.

like Dr. Ford's claim ... we will never know for sure will we.

I don't think so. She pretty clearly an ardent free marketer and as others have pointed out, she's notable for 1) writing a book about crushing your kids' spirits and now 2) telling law school students to dress slutty so powerful menfolk will like and appreciate you.

And in fact, that second thing is pretty close to the **** she's always been arguing for decades now, which is fundamentally a deeply conservative argument, something like: majoritarian cultural values should be respected and left wing tribalists are really upsetting the right by looking down on white culture and hectoring white people about structural racism, and it's really the same thing as right-wing tribalism, apox on both houses.

As I noted, I think she's at least *interesting* to listen to (but still largely bad) because she acknowledges that capitalism does much the same -- that a lot of frustration around changing culture that's really motivating a fascist backlash can really be laid at the feet of capitalists, not uppity liberals.

As best I can tell, she's not leftist at all but is a really rare breed: a fundamentally Burkean, small-c conservative. Like the Yale professor breed of right-winger that knows better than to browse Breitbart openly and is at least engaging in a smarter set of arguments.

I'm pretty confident her fundamental politics are still pretty ghoulish and regressive but as I noted, I think she's hard to pin down precisely because the right wing is now so sufficiently radicalized that actual old school conservatives are basically completely foreign species to us. She's a law professor at Yale, is a decent-enough writer and her arguments are coherent enough, and don't exist merely to gin up white people resentment. And since we're conditioned to recognize that all contemporary right-wingers think Ben Shapiro is some intellectual giant, and he's actually a moron, we assume any non-morons like Chua must be leftist by default. But I think it's a bit dangerous.

I dunno Dvaut, I haven’t read the book but she seems like kind of a moron:

Some of the year book posts coming out are not helping him either.
Its clear Republicans must believe its true as they will not ask Trump to do an FBI investigation and delay it a week. Also if he is the great man everyone believes him to be ask for the FBI investigation yourself and say that way there is no doubt.

1) She herself has said she exaggerated a bit and more to the point Amy Chua wasn't that much of an outlier.
2) She's a pragmatist that's not above using feminine charms to get ahead. How is this different than telling men to dress their best for interviews? While still staying within the bounds of propriety is implied. (The lesson here may be men need to battle the unconscious bias for pretty women and affirmatively hire women they find unattractive.)

If you're familiar with the literature surrounding the topics she's written on, you'd find her rather unoriginal. What she's really good at is writing in a just slightly inflammatory way to trigger people.

As I see it, she is probably just writing directly to the point instead of dancing around points that a lot of people are afraid to touch. The term "cultural capital" has been used in education research for decades. The idea that unchecked free market and democracy lead to terrible outcomes has been around since at least Plato. The tiger mom phenomenon was well known in Asian American circles. I grew up with one and sometimes it seemed the moms were competing to see who was stricter and/or had the more obedient children. There are also some crazy Chinese proverbs that I find insane to this day. Dutiful sons are made by the rod? Hitting is affection and yelling is love? Bad translations but you get the idea. You still hear those today.

Amy Chua probably just wants to sell books and probably vent a bit for the same reasons a lot of us post in these forums.

Griz, I assure you we aren’t as dumb as you imagine we are.

Sounds cynical but I disagree with you and bobman that she advised her students poorly. Kavanaugh seems like a pasty old white guy perv type, I guess if you want to clerk for him, you gotta make him horny. Obviously it's genuflecting to patriarchal norms and I think we can all look down on that as regressive but I don't think Chua is precisely denying that either.

Yeah, but the idea that her daughter is somehow now going to be harrased or assaulted is absurd. She either doesn’t think the leopards will eat her daughter’s face or she thinks that price is worth it to gain entree to the Good Old Boys’ Club.

Ivanka’s “cut bait” suggestion is the best move in terms of advancing conservative policy, but it’s clear that the Kavanaugh nomination isn’t about that. This has become a rally to defend the system of white male patronage that lets privileged scions rape your daughters, and these guys are gonna defend that even if it means putting a possibly impeachable justice on the SCOTUS.

Chua's writing over her career is glibly something like that: she thinks the price is worth it to gain entry to the Good Ole Boys Club. Her political writing is more or less that that dominant social mores are entrenched, those norms provide a level of social cohesion and national unity and it's too polarizing and divisive to upset them too much. As I said, I think her politics are bad but I think we shouldn't discount that it's effectively just a pedestrian, unoriginal conservative social outlook. In that way, and I agree, she shares a lot with garbage right wingers but I also think her writing has a lot more strains of genuine small-c conservatism, that global American hegemony and exporting capitalism in the middle and last half of the 20th century was deeply problematic for the developing world and exacerbated exploitation of the global poor, exacerbated local ethnic tensions, basically destroyed local traditions and cultures. In that way I do think she's nuanced so much so that people do honestly argue she's a left-winger. But I think even then, at the core, her arguments are pretty conservative and that capitalism's (and American foreign policy) biggest failures are challenging and upsetting traditional authority and dominant local ethnic groups.

I don't share her values but I don't think the arguments are prima facie dumb either. It's pretty classic Burkean style conservatism. She's sort of just parroting the same stuff William Buckley used to sell or whatever, the kind of conservatism that played at Ivy League dinner parties that we should respect traditional authority and not embrace radical political solutions which upset the majority, in the era before the entirety of the right became subsumed by white grievance and crushing the poor.

Let's put it this way: I disagree with the mentality and her politics but there's a far deeper intellectual underpinning to Chua style right-wingerism than utter dog**** Shapiro/Fox News white nationalism/troll/resentment ideology which seems mostly driven by trying to manufacture liberal tears. As I said, for some it's a distinction without a difference, but I think there are large enough differences there to point them out. Also, it seems like some people who cherish The Discourse are despondent over how the right has come to embrace fascism, anti-empiricism, and anti-intellectualism and how it makes our collective political and social lives less fun and interesting, but I think Chua remains the like the sort of right-winger liberals desperately want to argue with and pretend exists, like the unicorn right winger that's saying stuff worth debating. I mean not the parts about wearing revealing clothing to get Kavanaugh hard, that's pretty crass.

There is a lot of truth to that. She is definitely an Oakeshott style conservative with a strong disposition to work within the system and improve only on the margins unless absolutely necessary.

The "work within the system" is basically the prevailing school of thought in organizations like APALSA (basically the professional organization for Asian lawyers) where they talk a lot about building their own networks and help others move up. There are equivalent organizations in business schools and medical schools.

I am reluctant to call that disposition as the defining characteristic of "conservative" in today's political climate though. Hilary Clinton and Joe Biden probably also fit and I don't think anyone think they are actually conservative or right wing, except the Berniebros types almost all the way to the left.

The Oakeshott type of conservatism, in today's America, pretty much makes you a centrist.

Some of these liberal media types urging her to testify on Monday might be well-meaning people, but they are hopelessly stupid and need to **** off.

Blacks law dictionary:

Evidence of a witness; evidence given by a witness, under oath or affirmation; as distinguished from evidence derived from writings, and other sources. Testimony is not synonymous with evidence. It is but a species, a class, or kind of TESTIMONY 1151

You would think chezlaw would have heard of it.

If a Yale law prof thinks it's normal for her kid to have to suck dick to get a job then her opinions about what the rest of us deserve are probably pretty wild

Wow man, mind ****ing blown. We all had no idea that "testimony" sometimes refers to sworn statements made in a court of law.

There’s obviously shades of gray between full-on sucking dick for a job and the kinds of normal brown-nosing behaviors that are standard indignities in the modern office space. What’s going on here def crosses the line in my book and she’s an ******* for being complicit in the system.