Monthly Archives: October 2009

FYCL #12 – The Unprepared Podder

Dubious advice on quitting and getting fired, learning to cook, negotiating the fine line between supporting women and being uncritical of nonsense, and the gendering of Halloween costumes. As always, there are Dubious Sex Toys and our recommendations for the week.

FYCL #12, if you are still doing the old-fashioned-y downloading of each episode, rather than subscribing with our shiny new rss or via iTunes.

See alsos:

No comment on closing music; looks like it wasn’t just the knitting that was home-made this week.

Advertisements

FYCL #11 – Helium Overdose

Dubious advice on yoga balls, why feminists don’t judge, or at least why they should try to get over it; how not to introduce your significant other to your parents, the secret feminism in Monsters vs Aliens, both dubious and non-dubious sex toys, and recommendations interrupted by shocking breaking news.

FYCL #11, if you are still doing the old-fashioned-y downloading of each episode, rather than subscribing with our shiny new rss or via iTunes.

Linkucopia:

Closing music is “I Can See Clearly Now” by Holly Cole.

Leave your feedback, comments, sex flavour recipes and similar here.

FYCL #10 – Warning! May Cause Wet Panties.

Dubious advice on balancing work and motherhood and collaboration in creative endeavours and the workplace. Dubious sex toy of the week features a new segment, Ask a Dude.

FYCL #10, if you are still doing the old-fashioned-y downloading of each episode, rather than subscribing with our shiny new rss or via iTunes.

Linkipedia:

Super special thanks to our awesome guest, Rhayden.

Closing music was inspired by the photo from Encyclopedia Dramatica, entitled “a typical Fleshlight setup”: Weird Al Yankovic was clearly tapping into some deep-seated nerdly romantic fantasies with his “Yoda” song.

Yoda_fleshlight

ETA: WTF, WordPress, having a “moment” when we were trying to get the podder live.

It are snow.

Both literally and metaphorically. The weather here is crazy, dude. 2 weeks ago, we were bitching and moaning about it being 30, and now it we have snow, although not the kind that sticks or requires actual snowboots. Which is good, because my snowboots got a recurring hole.

Speaking of snowflakes, man, are they ever coming down in blizzard-like formations in class. What was the trigger? First assignments, of course.

I had a drift of them ignore my comments about how MLA had been updated. Updated, I might add by a group of guys who were apparently smoking crack, because I cannot find one person to explain the logic of the MLA updates, although dear old OWL at Purdue makes a stab at summarizing the changes. They stay the hell away from trying to explain them, though.

Srsly, MLA, WTF is up with the italics; no, underline; no, either; no, italics dance? MAKE UP YOUR FUCKING MINDS.

But I digress. Despite warnings, dire warnings, that relying on previous MLA knowledges would be utter fail, naturally about half of them tumbled into the trap for heffalumps.

In other snowflake news, the words “DO NOT EMAIL ASSIGNMENTS TO ME, ASSHOLES, I WILL SHIV YOU” have no meaning for at least 6 out of every 30 students. One of these jerks, told by return email to shape the fuck up and hand his work in in the approved manner, had the gall to approach me in the lunch line and attempt to hand in his work.

The lunch line.

Boundaries, dude. When I am about to enjoy my fries with tatziki, do I want to do it in view of your tragic scribblings? I do not.

FYCL #9 – Ordinary Sacrilege

Dubious advice on outre artistic expression, being Canadian in an American world, and the stupidity of trying to legislate the internets, plus our regularly featured Dubious Sex Toy of the week, and other recommendations.

FYCL #9, if you are still doing the old-fashioned-y downloading of each episode, rather than subscribing with our shiny new rss or via iTunes.

Linkety link links:

Oh, also, an explanatory note for those of you who don’t know that “souping” means flouncing out. To soup: to leave, in an ostentatious manner, often while commenting that you are never coming back.

The thematic sacrilege naturally made me think of Randy Newman, so I picked “God’s Song” for the closing musics.

Hope you enjoy the podcast, please to be leaving threats of hellfire, feedback and questions here.

Believing in the green light.

So, as I mentioned on the podder, I went to this 2 hour meeting at which my dear 6pt cheater plead her case, at length, to a jury of her peers and mine. The board members, as they are called, were very impressively non-partisan, and professional, and I came out of the hearing convinced that I could well trust their judgement, but I was not 100% sure of what that outcome would be.

The final report arrived a couple days ago, and, in short, it upheld the original penalty. So, after 4 months of whining, and complaining, and driving everyone concerned a little nuts with her behaviour (everyone who talked to her had meetings that went for at least an hour, every time), 6pt managed to achieve exactly nothing, except that now she has an official “cheater” tag, and has managed to irritate several people. As my Head of Department said, “that will teach her not to paste an essay on a handout for an exam, except it probably won’t.”

The written report of the hearing was very interesting; while for the most part, it was an objective summary of events, there were a couple of points at which the language went from temperate to snippy. It described 6pt as elaborating at length about how she thought what she did was okay, and going on and on and on about how she had no intention to cheat, and then there was the curt sentence “the board deemed that motivation was irrelevant”. The conclusion also betrayed some annoyance, saying that the jury members expected 6pt to appeal the decision as she showed no respect for the process, and did not seem to listen to what was said. FYCL, was my response.

So a win in this battle, but what about the war?

For my part, this experience has added another dead duckism to my course outline, which raises for me some serious issues about expectations. Should I really have to tell my students not to try to sneak prepared essays into an examination? Is it right for me to laugh at the guy who waited 6 weeks before asking what he should do about missing his exam? Ought there to be a pineapple clause, explaining appropriate behaviour when meeting with your professor? Where are these lines?

Sarcastic Bastard suggested that perhaps articulating dead duck rules might be part of the problem; that our students are so used to being told what to do and doing just what they are told that they don’t ever think about the reasons for instructions. One of the jury asked 6pt a couple questions about this, why she didn’t ask herself what my instructions¬† meant, or whether it crossed her mind, while she was standing at the photocopier, whether what she was doing was really within the spirit of the instructions, but she was adamant that it never occurred to her to think about stuff like that.

Of course, the kicker here is that she was in a class about critical reading and writing, where, you know, I was trying to teach her to read critically, and analyse documents, and understand things like what a writer might have been saying beyond the surface of a text. You know, things like “why am I being told not to write on the back of the handout?” Her failure to apply the things she was learning in the course to other situations, related to the damn course, depresses me, because it seems to be indicative of the depth to which snowflakery runs.

I could let this really get to me, or I can do what 6pt refuses to do, and accept it, and learn from it, and wade back into the fray. I choose to beat on, a boat against the current.