The East Carolinian has published excuses for their lapses in judgment for publishing the appalling exercise in misogyny by Ben Cochran. The editors are all utterly reprehensible.
Kelly Nurge claims it was OK to publish it, because they also published a rebuttal, and “presenting both sides to the issue was important.” She has a bright future ahead of her in he-said/she-said journalism. But you know, sometimes the two sides to an issue are bugfucking pustule-popping insane vs. rational coherent normality. Did the East Carolinian really need an article recommending that women’s reproductive health ought not to be supported by campus medical services because it gets in the way of Ben Cochran’s priority snot-blowing? Is this really an issue that anyone takes seriously anywhere on the freakin’ planet?
Kathryn Little claims that the “editing process is an in-depth one”, and is mainly peeved that an unedited version of Cochran’s piece was released — you know, the one that called a woman’s genitalia a “hatchet wound”, rather than the infinitely more genteel “lady-bits” that was in the edited version. Content, irrelevant; following the official process, essential. Then she seems quite pleased that her paper got national attention. Yeah, there’s another one on the fast-track to a journalism career…Rupert Murdoch has his eye on her, I’m sure.
And lastly, there’s Ben Cochran. This is supposedly an apology. It’s a sneering, sarcastic bit of badly written bombast pretending to be an apology.
If you were among the many who were offended by my column last week, then let me take this opportunity to offer you a heartfelt apology. I am well aware that my stance was not a popular one. As an Opinion columnist, my primary goal is to generate informed discussion. To that end, I intentionally try to be provocative. As such, sometimes my columns offend people. Please understand that my intent was not to cause people to become enraged. I simply hoped they would disagree with the expressed opinion and state reasons for that disagreement. I wanted to see a lively debate, and hopefully, learn something in the process. The position I argued for is a valid opinion by virtue of the fact that it is an opinion. Unfortunately, my word choice was not the best. I cannot believe I said “conscientious” when I really meant “conscious,” among other things. From now on, I will take greater care to exercise better judgment. As always, your responses are welcomed and encouraged.
Often, campus newspapers are almost fully independent — students are just handed the responsibility of putting a paper together with minimal faculty supervision. Sometimes, they end up wallowing so deep in juvenilia and irresponsible scribbling that it’s clear that they do need some more mature guidance, especially when they drag the reputation of a place like East Carolina University into disrepute. Have these students had any training in journalism? Or is this what passes for responsible journalism at ECU?
Offending people is fine when you’ve got a purpose and a goal behind it. I fail to see anywhere in Cochran’s whiny rant any reason or justification for regarding women with such contempt. It is true that his opinion that women are sluts, harlots, sex mongers, and sex fiends is actually an opinion, but usually in an opinion column you’re expected to defend your controversial position, not just assume it as given.
Well, this might be the most unapologetic non-apology I have seen lately.
‘Presenting both sides to the issue is important.’
In other words she wants to teach the controversy.
I’ve already railed on this(twice by accident because I thought the internet ate my first response to it).
The short version is: Ben is a real asshole, and who seems to think that a few bad word choices were what was wrong with his “valid” opinion.
Predictable. Disappointing but predictable. It seems Ben hasn’t learned much from this episode. Nor has ECU.
That’s a pretty low threshold for validity: It’s a valid opinion because it’s an opinion. At least if he had left off the word “valid” it would have had the benefit of being a tautology.
Did anyone notice the similarity to the argument of creationists who think there’s a “controversy” over evolution because they keep screaming about it? (Scientists sure have a lot of nerve discounting the opinions of the ignorant and unqualified!)
I’m sure ECU will publish opinions by the Flat Earthers and Geocentrists soon.
BTW, as I’m also sure they don’t know, there are often more than 2 sides to an issue. A lot more.
After this, I’m actually more pissed off with the editors than with dear Ben. It would have been naive to expect much from him, but I honestly expected more of an apology from the editors. As one of the commenters over there wrote:
Well, maybe not fired if that was his first offense, but at least reprimanded. Instead, they not only published the article, but stand by it offering very bad excuses.
I suppose Ms. Nurge thinks all articles about NASA should be balanced by giving a page to a loon who thinks the Earth is flat and the moon is made of cheese.
They really are despicable.
They even had a poll! Asking if birth control should be provided on campus! After seeing that like 5 people said no, you’d think they’s appreciate at least in retrospect that this was only a burning question to Cochran and a few of his misogynist chums.
Assholes.
Pretty quick contradiction here, no?
Though to be fair, there was a whole entire sentence between these two statements. Obviously Mr. Cochran lost his train of thought in the interim.
I was briefly a journalism major roughly 35 years ago. What the fuck happened?
My reasons: it was a stupid, ignorant, misogynistic diatribe. What else is there to say about it?
An apology would be in order, but don’t expect one.
The thing I was most struck by is how Christianists immediately rallied to Cochran as if he were making some principled stand against harlotry.
When I read the letter a second time, I realized what the real issue was. Ben sat there in the student health center, already angry and miserable. Oh, when he saw the girls come out, that gave his anger and sense of entitlement a focus, and he clearly harbors some vaguely religious misogyny, but the issue wasn’t birth control.
Ben was angry because he had to wait.
That’s what makes this whole thing extra hilarious to me. Go back and look – the issue isn’t that girls get birth control (he said go to an Ob-Gyn). The issue isn’t that they have rampant sex (no healthy college-age boy in the history of mankind has been against that.) It’s that they were in line in front of him.
This wasn’t the last stand of a brave cultural warrior. This was a sociopath being minorly inconvenienced by the existence of other people.
I left a comment on the page. I basically said that misogyny aside (and the misogyny is pretty heinous) his article is equivalent to a nursing student arguing to go back to teaching about the four humours or an astronomer arguing that the earth is flat and the center of the solar system. It wasn’t just hateful it was riddled with medical inaccuracies that suggest this senior nursing student is either receiving a sub par education or the institution is planning to graduate a student who doesn’t understand some basic concepts of his area of study. Either way, it reflects pretty poorly on the education offered by the school.
His misogyny and non-apology are just insult (literally) to injury.
Exactly what Marci Said. Ben was mad because his privileged behind had to sit in the waiting room instead of having his minor cold placed before the health of oh so trivial ladybits. I bet none of those girls would sleep with him either.
Teach the Controversy!!
Unlike PZ’s point, this is clearly an issue that has divisively split the public 50/50. In fact, the liberal media is probably so biased in cooperation with the professional researchers, pollsters, and “normies” that it’s probably close to 97% of the population who support Ben Cochran’s position. If we are going to have rational discussion, we MUST appreciate both sides as equally well informed, equally rational, and equally logical. Mr. Cochran is simply a patriot, willing to stand up to the injustices inherent in the ER system.
Fight the Power.
– Honestly, that was actually difficult to watch myself write :)
“Unfortunately, my word choice was not the best. I cannot believe I said “conscientious” when I really meant “conscious,” among other things.”
Dear FSM, is this guy trolling in his ‘apology’? He has GREAT BIG brass ones.
This guy is a waste of a potential person…I’m sure he could have turned out vaguely human, had he learned differently from his youth. He may still even be able to turn it around, but not if his attitude is like this.
Yes, I knew it! The “I’m sorry you were offended” apology, something the Language Log folks have been discussing for years. Usually employed whenever a politician says something offensive.
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=187
with many links to earlier incidents..
Regarding the newspaper editors: way to miss the point, head > desk
Grade:
F
In the spirit of lively debate, and with all my heartfelt sincerity, I would like to say: Go fuck yourself. You seem to be worried about cunt problems in doctors offices, but I think the only place that seems to have a problem with a festering “hatchet wound” is the one that employs you.
He referred to women’s anatomy as a “hatchet wound” but regrets misspelling “conscious”? I think I’m even more angry over the non-apology than the original article. I can kind of see the original as satire gone horribly wrong, which is pretty par for the course when it comes to student papers. Even good ones. But all this doubling down is truly disheartening.
Yes, sadly all involved have great careers at FOX awaiting them.
It is a ‘thing’ that nursing homes won’t hire a male nurse if they can help it. Chips on their shoulders, assumption that it is “woman’s work” and therefore easy combined with a refusal to do any of the very hard work if they can pass it off on a female co-worker, and a weird assumption that their penis makes them senior to everyone else in the building.
… reminds me of a couple of women I ran into when I was in the Marine Corps, come to think of it. I’m sure there are good male nurses, and I know for a fact that there were some pretty kick-ass Marines who happened to be female. Probably more screwed up guys trying to get over and being jerks about it.
You’d think, but you’re wrong. In fact, “healthy” college age boys are entirely willing to ignore the fundamental symmetry of promiscuity.
That’s because we are supposed to ignore the unedited version. After all, if it hadn’t leaked, we would have only seen the edited article and been pissed at that. Just more proof that he feels absolutely no shame for his hateful, ignorant words (edited or not).
Dara O’Briain had this covered.
I’m sure there are good male nurses
There are. I’ve worked with several. They all had people skills, cultural competence, and understanding of biology that was orders of magnitude better than Ben’s.
Next week’s op-ed page: Should Jews be allowed in the cafeteria?
Improbably Joe @21;
Cochran is not representative of male nurses, not by a long shot. While I am sure there are plenty of assholes in the field, they are vastly outnumbered, in my experience anyway, by guys with their hearts more or less in the right place.
Don’t judge the barrel by the worst apple in it.
Oh, and for the record, Ben’s asshatery has been immortalized in the Urban Dictionary; check out the currently second definition of ‘cochran’…
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=cochran
someone who doesn’t know what the words he’s using mean shouldn’t be publicly writing anything.
no. I can’t tell whether you don’t know what the word “valid” means, or whether you actually hold the incoherent and deeply ignorant position that every opinion is relevant and justifiable by its mere existence; but either way that’s the dumbest thing I’ve heard today.
oh yeah; that particular word-choice was why people got pissed.
Ben Cochran, you’re a fucking moron.
Horse-Pheathers,
the Urban Dictionary is not really a trustworthy source regarding actual language use. Another problem is that Cochran is not a rare name, according to the 1990 census, there are 57,000 people named Cochran in the US, making it no 507, so even pushing for such an innovation (which is also not how language usually works) would be unfair on all the other Cochrans. Which is one my concerns about this incident, that due to the frequency of the name, future potential employers might not be able to identify him correctly. Though being featured on one of the most prominent science blogs in the internet surely helps.
My co-workers were shocked that I approved of the paper publishing this letter. I am in favor of giving idiots enough rope to hang themselves with.
This fills me with so much rage as to leave me speechless. That’s quite an accomplishment.
So basically, both his response and the editor’s response was “lol, we were totally trolling everyone to try and get more publicity”?
I’m actually glad that they published it, although it would have been nice to see a headline like “Asshole Student Actually Sent Us This Shit” rather than this absurd nod to equal weight. The plus side is that now potential employers know who not to hire, although maybe I’m being too optimistic.
Most university students are adults, or at least try hard to be. But I think anyone who has experienced university, particularly as staff, will tell you that a minority are just overgrown kids – and they often exhibit a tiresome desire to shock for its own sake. It may be too soon to write off this little boy, though: his sort often do some fast growing up in their twenties, when they go out into the world and are faced with the inescapable conclusion that they’re not quite the hotshot they thought.
One simple way that people look at something to see if it is such repugnant speech in a society that decent people do not want to be associated with it is to reframe with words used to defame another group.
So, would the newspaper have published this bit of hate speech if the writer had used various insults that have been applied to African-Americans over the centuries?
Imagine the worst words that have been employed by racists to describe African-Americans and try to think of a situation in which a university or college would associate itself with such speech under the guise of “presenting both sides of an issue” in their newspaper of record.
What I see is that the editors at the paper have so assimilated misogyny into their view of the world that it’s okay to give space to this puerile woman-hating ass to denigrate females for seeking health care.
If they had given equal time to a racist, organizations around the country would have organized to protest such action as irresponsible and contributing to continued racism… but if such hate is directed at females, apparently, such hate speech is a-ok… just like it is on facebook as they continue to allow pro-rape pages and don’t view this as hate speech that is part of their stated policy to disallow.
I have a suggestion for next weeks op-ed: “Should basic sex-ed be a prerequisite for entry into the nursing program?”
“The position I argued for is a valid opinion by virtue of the fact that it is an opinion.”
That’s like a morbidly obese person arguing that their weight is a valid weight by virtue of it being a weight.
I got an F, but it’s OK, that’s a valid grade by virtue of it being a grade.
What an absolute smarmy asshole. And I notice that his sister made a feeble attempt at sticking up for him. Other than that, the comments page there is mostly boffo stuff.
Interesting approach to an apology.
So his opinion is his opinion and is therefore important, valid and true in his opinion. It’s actually kinda our fault for being too stupid to understand this.
If that’s the case then my opinion that all blacks should be in jail, all homosexuals should be shot and all women should put out for me is also valid. So all of you have to shut up, listen and don’t dare be impolite to me.*
*Poe’s law, just in case,…..these aren’t really my opinions
I cannot believe I said “conscientious” when I really meant “conscious,” among other things.
Shit-for-brains thinks he’s being cute, clever and funny by emphasizing that.
Newsflash, Ben:
In my book, you’re a sociopathic scumbag who needs to die in a fire if you can’t even manage a decent fucking apology without trying to be cute.
You’re not cute. You’re a disgusting piece of shit.
I’m actually glad that they published it, although it would have been nice to see a headline like “Asshole Student Actually Sent Us This Shit”
naww.
they might have added it as an addendum to an actual, competently written debate, but NOT as the primary submission, even WITH the qualifier.
that paper should be ashamed of itself in a great many ways.
You should try using something that Ben might disagree with as your example.
i wonder if his facebook page is still public?
ah, it appears he has at least learned something:
How to hide his idiocy better.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=12618795&sk=wall
I posted what was on his wall as of yesterday on the previous thread, if anyone is interested.
it makes it pretty clear where he stood, prior to the reaction his idiocy generated.
#44:
Ichy, people at Dispatches were noticing the page coming down. Don’t know if it’s complete yet.
Not giving the scumbag any hit counts to find out.
“I simply hoped they would disagree with the expressed opinion and state reasons for that disagreement. I wanted to see a lively debate…”
This is precisely the definition of the word “troll.”
Hang on, now – when the East Carolinian printed an asinine opinion by a pathetic loser, they were creating controversial content, and it’s hard to imagine that they were promoting his opinion. What evidence do we have of their support of his line of reasoning? And as for damning them for having the temerity to run the piece, what does that say for all the blog sites like this one that also ran Cochran’s mindless drivel as content? As I recall, the initial outrage was over his statements, not the lack of wisdom in allowing him a platform. And it seems a bit disingenuous, frankly, for this blog to slam the EC for relishing its notoriety when it has been instrumental in the propagation thereof.
Sorry, PZ, I’m behind you in almost everything – I despise creationists and science-haters, Aspergers-ish misogynist mansplainers, and softeners of the scientific method. But really, this blog survives on content of the outrageous, and we can’t damn those who allow outrageous opinions to run in their opinion pages as they are bound by a society that dictates free speech. Where would the next piece of drivel come from for PZ to tilt at if not for that?
I have to say, the tone from PZ’s post is a bit weird. The editors got a fireball from an asshole, and decided to run it with an opposing opinion. That’s wrong? They are somehow evil for doing that? How so? Isn’t that what these Freethought blogs are all about? Come on, now, don’t tell me that you would deny that loser the right to speak his tiny mind…from whence would the object of our next vituperation arise?
Prove that the editors support his opinion. Give me the evidence, scientist. Allowing an opinion in a public forum should never be taken as indication of support. That is a number one rule of journalistic ethics, and one that is being actively ignored by hateful pundits right now, slamming newspapers for running opinions in support of science as being members of an elitist left-wing conspiracy. Let’s not mirror that ridiculous behavior.
WHOOSH!!!!!!!
That the sound of the point going over TheGripester’s head
Yeah… it’s a completely stupid not-pology that has actually made the original article seem even worse, in retrospect. He’s basically admitted that he was trolling for lulz.
It’s not as if he was posing any interesting or novel philosophical or moral question. His article was just an incoherent rant, and his only comprehensible purpose in writing it was to draw attention to himself by being gratuitously nasty and offensive. He might as well have just printed an article that consisted of a long string of random curse-words and graphic sexual references, accompanied by a picture of him waving his dick around in public; it would have accomplished the same effect, and would have had exactly the same amount of meaningful and interesting content.
I wouldn’t trust him as a nurse; and I certainly wouldn’t employ him as a journalist, either. He needs to grow up.
“Not intended to be a factual statement,” maybe? Fuck you, Ben Cochran. You failed at getting the reaction wanted and now you’re back-pedaling and posturing as a troll who meant to start a discussion. We can see through you. Same goes for the editors.
You know we’re watching the makings of a future (if not current) MRA member, right?
This is a guy about to graduate with a degree in a female dominated career and he has effectively blackballed himself from future jobs. When he can’t find work or if he does and he is called on his bullshit, he’ll scream about how women don’t face sexism, it’s women oppressing all the white guys.
I am getting my teeny tiny violin ready.
@47
Read his original, then read the edited version. That they took the time to clean it up as they did and publish it as if it were something worth reading is evidence enough. Case closed. Whoosh, indeed.
when the East Carolinian printed an asinine opinion by a pathetic loser, they were creating controversial content
if that was the intent, they don’t understand the word “content”.
and, in fact, looking at the editor’s “apology”, it’s clear they don’t.
and it’s hard to imagine that they were promoting his opinion
strawman. Nobody said they were. That doesn’t mean that in a debate, one publishes utter incendiary crap, either.
And as for damning them for having the temerity to run the piece, what does that say for all the blog sites like this one that also ran Cochran’s mindless drivel as content?
false equivalency. The purpose of running it HERE was to attack it for LACK OF CONTENT, not to argue as a debate point.
so, fail.
As I recall, the initial outrage was over his statements, not the lack of wisdom in allowing him a platform
it’s both, moron.
And it seems a bit disingenuous, frankly, for this blog to slam the EC for relishing its notoriety when it has been instrumental in the propagation thereof.
right, so we should never print the assholery we are critical of for being nothing but assholery.
so PZ should never have bothered to criticize “Expelled” for the entirely inane notion of Darwin->Hitler, because that’s giving the idea a stage?
you’re an idiot.
Prove that the editors support his opinion.
why? that was never the point.
nice red herring, but…
I’ve had my fill of stinky fish bait today, thanks.
Which has been debunked numerous times. It is extremely unlikely that EG’s behaviour had anything to do with social awkwardness. And, as an Aspie myself, I resent the attempted sliming. Porcupine, anus, you know the routine.
And, as for the rest of it, you missed the point even more thoroughly than the Red Sox missed September.
That reads to me like a very-nearly-verbatim reference to a Monty Python bit, from “Man’s Crisis of Identity in the Latter Half of the Twentieth Century,” the fifth episode of the original “Monty Python’s Flying Circus” BBC series. In the middle of the episode there are a short series of filmed man-on-the-street/”vox pops” quips; one of them comes from an upper-class stockbroker type (played by John Cleese) in a bowler hat, suit, and tie:
Cochran’s opinion and the stockbroker’s opinion have quite a bit in common, actually.
Jadehawk (#29)
I’m very argumentative, so I run into this a lot when people want to defend their favorite brand of bullshit. If they’re losing, all of a sudden, it’s an opinion, therefore it’s valid. And I’m a close-minded asshole for insisting that the validity of opinions is still bound by things like whether or not those opinions bear any resemblance to reality.
Yes.
Plus, they believe in two-sides “journalism”: they believe there is no such thing as a fact, so journalism consists of simply printing a claim and the counter-claim uncommented – counter-claims being like Highlanders in that there can be only one.
Seconded.
At least the Red Sox played and won a few games in September. As it is, they probably wish they’d missed September, seeing as if the playoffs had begun Aug 31, they’d have been in.
As I have explained previously, the very act of publication is an explicit acknowledgment on the part of the editors that while they may not necessarily support his opinion, their opinion is that his opinion AND the manner in which he has chosen to express it, was deserving of the forum that their paper provides.
That tells us something about these editors.
Nothing good.
I’ve never been a big fan of delighting in someone’s self destruction. However, I’ll make an exception in Ben’s case.
Porcupine, anus, you know the routine.
there’s even a how to video, with props in place of actual porcupines, though I know how much everyone around here hates
Pineapples
Ichthyic:
That is hilarious. And disturbing.
Unfortunately, Ben Cochran managed to be only one.
You know, I look forward to his valid opinion piece on how colored people are inferior and shouldn’t have the right to vote or hold property, why homosexuals need to be arrested on sight or executed, and how Jews kill Christian babies to treat horrible birth defects in their young caused by their deicide. I mean, by his logic, if someone holds these opinions, they must be perfectly valid, regardless of how reprehensible they are. Right?
In my opinion, Ben wants to be regarded as a complete moron with no ethics and put into a giant killfile forever.
As valid an opinion as his, surely?
As valid an opinion as his, surely?
moreso.
yours has evidence in support.
I mean, by his logic, if someone holds these opinions, they must be perfectly valid, regardless of how reprehensible they are. Right?
I would add that reprehensible isn’t even the real point here!
it’s relevance!
nothing he said in his “essay” was even relevant to the topic at hand!
it was just endless spewing of inane and offensive rhetoric, as if done by a child with Tourette’s Syndrome.
That’s why it should not have been submitted as a serious response to a debate topic (unless they debate topic was somehow related to “how to be an asshole”), nor should it have been ACCEPTED as a response by any journal with an ounce of integrity.
reprehensible can even be a good thing, when trying to drive home a point, but this HAD NO POINT.
and that, er, is the point.
@ Ichthyic #65
I think you are just trying to make sense now, which doesn’t seem to be a requirement for a Ben valid opinion.
Hang on, now – when the East Carolinian printed an asinine opinion by a pathetic loser, they were creating controversial content, and it’s hard to imagine that they were promoting his opinion.
OK, I see where you’re confused.
There’s a difference between “promoting” and “agreeing with”. The editors might not have agreed with his opinion, but they were clearly promoting it…that is, they presented it as a serious opinion worthy of consideration.
They did this in a couple of different ways:
1 – The rebuttal they chose to print was, “Why birth control should be available in the campus clinic”. It should have been, “Society is still plagued by misogynistic idiots”, or possibly “Jeering at misogynistic idiots is healthy fun.” (You’ll note that all the blog articles have used one of these two themes.)
2 – In their ridiculous not-pologies (which PZ linked to above), neither editor condemns the Cochran’s misogyny; in fact, most of the Kathryn Little column is just whining about how someone leaked Cochran’s early draft.
3 – The Kathryn Little column also contains the line, “In today’s edition of The East Carolinian, there is space for people’s reactions to the Opinion column that has gotten such an impetuous amount of attention.” It might be that she doesn’t know what the word “impetuous” means, but I think she’s saying that all the people condemning Cochran’s articles are just having knee-jerk reactions, and that they haven’t taken the time to think things through.
Actually, I take back what I said earlier. Most likely the editors do agree with his opinion.
This reminds me of something that happened at my alma mater a few years ago, where a hyper-conservative student op-ed writer lied about an invited speaker encouraging violence against white people. He was quickly dismissed from the student paper, but he went on local conservative talk radio shows and told the same lies, which led to the KKK showing up on campus to protest. The entire circus surrounding this went on for a good 4-5 weeks, complete with racist graffiti on campus buildings, fliers soliciting membership into the KKK, etc.
And then the student decided to form his own “conservative” student newspaper, and called it “The Patriot”. The lying little shit wasn’t even disciplined for all the trouble he caused, aside from being removed from an extracurricular group. I wish I was joking.
Dear Ben,
The appropriate response is “Jebus Christ I fucked up. I’ve read the comments, have taken them on board, and am endeavouring to correct my many mistaken ideas.”
What you offer is not an apology, merely a cack-handed lame attempt at an excuse. You’re not sorry for what you said, just worried at the damage to your reputation.
There’s a difference between “promoting” and “agreeing with”. The editors might not have agreed with his opinion, but they were clearly promoting it…that is, they presented it as a serious opinion worthy of consideration.
yes, that’s a better way of wording the issue.
Ichthyic (#66) wrote:
Are you sure? I figured his point was that women aren’t to be allowed to have sex lives without either his express consent, or the constant danger of unexpected pregnancy.
I think Fauxreal, #36, nailed it & my thoughts were similar. I am apalled this was featured in actual newspaper. It reads like a ranty blog post someone would or should have deep regrets about.
He doesn’t make any real point & the only thing that comes across is his horrible attitude towards woman. It’s just bad writing as well as utterly reprehensible.
I think I might have to bring Jonathan Swift back to life so that I can punch him in the balls for enabling every arrogant douchebag to call their hateful bullshit “satire”.
Currently funny-boy over there is apparently defending himself with a series of sock-puppets, the most vocal of which is, get this, going under the ‘nym “Jonathan Swift”.
As I understand it, these days potential employers look over applicants’ internet record. This dumbass is in for a bit of a shock when he starts looking for his first nursing job.
Observer (and some others) – part of the problem is that he doesn’t have to become a full fledged nurse to start doing harm. Reproducing my comment from the last thread here, because got there too late, and the thread had already pretty much died.
I know I’m slightly late to the party here, but I wanted to note that Ben here doesn’t necessarily have to become a nurse to start harming patients. A lot of nursing programs have stints where student nurses gain experience by going into hospitals and working with the less precarious patients under the auspices of a supervisor from their school.
I have good reason to know, since a particularly toxic combination of supervisor and student nurse managed to turn my first day as a mother into a nightmare of exhaustion and pain, with behavior ranging from the petty (leaving my first tray of food juuuust beyond fingertip reach for the woman who’d just had a C-section), to the plain mean (the first pain dose they ordered post-surgery was straight Tylenol, not even X-tra strength), to the outright dangerous (not going into this, but it did involve my only revenge when I threw up all over their shoes). It was bad enough that when my OB came back that evening, she threw a fit, lectured both of them at the top of her lungs, and proceeded to get them both banned from the hospital grounds.
I hope that if ECU has any such program, they are very, very careful about who Mr. Cochrane’s supervisor is, and how close a tab is kept on him.
I figured his point was that women aren’t to be allowed to have sex lives without either his express consent, or the constant danger of unexpected pregnancy.
sorry, I was working under the general assumption that invalid points are rhetorically the same as “no point”.
yes, I suppose if he has said: “2 is orange because I say so.” he would be trying to make a point of some kind, although just as inane and irrelevant to the topic he was SUPPOSED to be speaking to.
:)
There’s nothing “Asperger’s-ish” about misogynists. Some misogynists have Asperger’s by chance (and also, males comprise the majority of the autism spectrum), and some people with ASDs unintentionally say offensive things without realizing they are causing offense, but the difference between an Aspie who is just socially awkward and an Aspie who is socially awkward and an asshole is that the former will apologize and work to alter behavior when it is explicitly pointed out they’re causing offense, whereas the latter (as well as plain vanilla assholes who claim Asperger’s as an excuse without necessarily having it) will continue to wallow in privilege and blame you or whoever they’re maligning even after it’s blatantly pointed out.
But then, I’m just an Aspie lesbian feminist physics student. Guess I ought to call the local chapter of mansplainers to beg they let me in the club. Oh, and my dad is where I get the Asperger’s from, and he is much more aware of sex inequlity and angry about unjust double standards and the damage of rigid gender roles than most people I meet, although he lacks formal education past high school.
*The more you know*
Also, as much as the display of his hatred and ignorance disgusts me, I find Cochran’s use of “hatchet wound” almost morbidly hilarious, in a cosmic sort of way. Like, seriously, he thinks male genitalia is sooo much more appealing than women’s? Perhaps I’m biased, but as many ways as female genitalia can get nasty, just, wow, that’s a ridiculous kind of ego there, like men can’t have foul genitals. No wonder sexists like to focus on the genitals, taking the focus away from any insecurities there. And that’s just scratching the surface of the idiocy there. It’s almost like a (not-so) subtle influence of the idea woman came from man like Eve from Adam, the idea that women are “missing” something down there. Which makes for an interesting subtext about repressed homoeroticism, such men finding women inferior for not having male genitals and all meanwhile wanting women to bow to mens’ sexual whims. Or maybe I’m just reading all this stuff into a misogynistic reference to menstruation to maintain my desensitized detachment from it all (having been called pretty much similar names by bullies in my younger years), something I tend to do when confronting streams of incoherent inane ramblings somehow surpassing my own in WSF* (it began as a way to occupy myself during school lectures, but now borders on delusions of reference).
*AKA the “Word Salad Factor”
Not to mention, besides being a disgusting abusive bigot, his point is basically that he is a line/queue jumper who thinks we should approve of that socially because he has a penis. Get back in line you pathetic loser!
By the way, I’m just going to up and say it. The fact that he clearly obsesses over women’s sexuality, hates women, and has complete entitlement and control issues, and uses a word associated with murder and violence to describe a woman’s sexual organs… I’d be top money this man is a rapist or will become one soon. All the more reason to be a nurse, no? Power and control. It’s all about power and control with the sociopathic shits isn’t it?
(Yep, go wring your hands you who think saying some thing like this is the worst thing ever… you can fuck yourselves too, I have no time for you. I call it like I see it. This guy has I RAPE PEOPLE written all over him and that’s my opinion.)
@Algernon
How interested do you think the East Carolinian would be in publishing an opinion piece whereby you argue that Ben Cochran is going to rape women? They could even include an opposing opinion! After all, it’s all just opinions, right? Or do you think they would decline to do such, for all their shrieking about publishing his crap based on “free speech?”
TheGripester:
Misogynists and mansplainers are not “Aspergers-ish” you fuckwit. I’m sick to death of assholes like yourself using ableist slurs and spouting off when you don’t have the slightest idea of what you’re talking about.
Take your gripes and shove them up your rosy red rectum. Here’s a decaying porcupine to help you out. That’s if you can manage to find room next to your head.
No, sorry, guys, insulting me doesn’t make your points any stronger. I’d say, save the insults for those who have hurled them.
PZ is characterizing the editors of the magazine as being ethically challenged. However, if we are going to be free-speech advocates, we have to allow all points of opinion without massaging them to fit the interests of any group. That means not putting a header of “Opinions of an Asshole” over the opinions of an asshole. Cochran is an asshole, and it’s very plain from reading his words. No special explanations are needed.
Also, Captain Quirk, don’t mine insults where none are intended. I didn’t intend to cast any aspersions towards those who live with special conditions (I have two cousins with severe mental disability). But I do think that some of the misogyny we have seen on PZ’s boards is accompanied by long streams of over-explained detail that misses the broader point at times. Therefore it is “ish” but not truly “Aspergers” – I wouldn’t box anyone in by that. My family all has a touch of it ourselves, and we definitely have to reign in certain tendencies at times.
Captain Quirk:
It’s not so hilarious for those of us walking around with one.
Having been a traditional student, a non-traditional student, and university staff at different times in my life, I have yet to be convinced that “most” was used appropriately in this sentence. Maybe it’s a product of the local culture here. Hard to say.
That’s a scary thought. But you might be right. In any case, he definitely shouldn’t be hired as a nurse; given what we’ve seen of his character and his apparent complete contempt for other human beings, he’s not someone who should be trusted to enter a health care profession or to treat patients in any context.
(FWIW, I certainly wasn’t defending him on the last thread; I did have worries about the idea of the school taking action, since, as a general principle, I’m not keen on colleges interfering with the editorial freedom of campus newspapers or regulating students’ activities outside class. But in this case, this article is so gratuitously vicious and offensive that it seriously casts doubt on whether he would be able to fulfil the basic ethical requirements for qualifying as a nurse.* Not to mention that it reflects very poorly on his understanding of science, as several people have pointed out above.)
(*The right to free speech does not, after all, entail a “right” to practice a profession; and in health care, the protection of patients has to come first. If a medical student wrote a post on hir personal blog arguing that it was morally acceptable for surgeons to remove unconscious patients’ organs without their consent and to sell them illegally on the Internet, say, then this would be an instance of legally-protected free speech; but I certainly don’t think that the person in question should be practising medicine, and I don’t think any sane person would want to hire such a person as a physician.)
Caine, does this mean the wedding’s off? Damn! And here I was looking forward to all that porcupine-shovin’ lovin’!
Seriously, though, I know quite a bit about it. I suffer from a mild touch of it myself. Read the post above. And fuckwittedness runs both ways – those who have absolutely no compassion and sympathy for others, and those who are out to prove the lack of compassion in others at all costs. And I have such compassion for you, Caine – it’s obvious I hurt your feelings. Sorry about that. I’m sure you’ll be content to write me off and everything I’ve ever done with further vitriol, and be content to think of me as a hateful, loathesome person. That’s fine – it won’t change who either of us are.
In short: “teach the controversy.”
This journalistic pretence of balance has held back any meaningful climate change policies, to name the most obvious case, for nigh-on thirty years. There is no ‘balance’ of views regarding the treatment of women as second-class citizens. There’s equal human rights for all, or there isn’t equal human rights for all.
It depends on what you mean. Freedom of speech does not entail a right to be given a platform at someone else’s expense. I have the right to say what I want, using the means available to me, without being censored or sanctioned by the government. But this does not mean that I have the right to demand that I be given a spot in someone else’s newspaper (or on someone else’s radio station, someone else’s blog, etc.) to air my views.
Newspapers are not legally or ethically obliged to publish every single thing that someone somewhere sends them. (It would be entirely impossible for them to do so, in fact.) Rather, they exercise editorial discretion, and decide what is suitable for publication and what is not. Cochran is welcome to publish whatever he wants on his personal blog, to stand on the street corner proclaiming his opinions, or to start his own newspaper if he wants to; and I’d defend his First Amendment right to do so. But the East Carolinian newspaper had no legal or moral obligation to publish his bullshit. And in choosing to do so, they implicitly concluded that his opinions were worth reading; I think it’s fair to criticize them for that error of judgment.
No, sorry, guys, insulting me doesn’t make your points any stronger.
and not listening ain’t doin’ you no favors.
is there actually any argument you CAN characterize correctly?
PZ is characterizing the editors of the magazine as being ethically challenged.
or intellectually challenged, like yourself.
you don’t even realize you haven’t said anything on point since you can here?
nothing but an army of strawmen arguments and a school of red herrings?
no, I guess you don’t even realize it.
sucks to be you.
Read the post above
what you suffer from there isn’t aspies, it’s cluelessness.
you may indeed suffer from it, but it isn’t what makes your posts inane.
Elevatorgate aside, I actually find the freethinker community quite consistently feminist/humanist overall but I’m somewhat disheartened to see that a few of us still don’t see blatant misogyny as being on par with other sorts of overt discrimination. It’s eyeopening. Many people have offered great analogs; such as asking whether people of recent asian or african descent are deserving of medical treatment. Those sorts of questions sound laughable, I don’t think anyone would argue “free speech” or “opposing opinion” in cases of blatant racism. Heck several people have rightfully taken issue with conflating this sort of ugly thinking with Asperger syndrome.
So for any of you who argue that PZ and any of the rest of us are over-reacting, I would love to have you explain if you feel that the KKK has a reasonable opposing view that newspapers should print, or the westboro baptist church or any other group who sponsors hate. If you don’t think those view are worthy of a platform in a school newspaper then what makes that misogynist screed (both before and after editing) more worthy? What is it about disparaging half the population that is acceptable?
@#77 Tapetum
I’m not aware of a board of nursing in the US that doesn’t require a certain number of hours of experience in a clinical environment (hospital, hospice, clinic, etc.). Of course, I’m not licensed in every state, so YMMV.
Of course, he did complain on his FB page (before it was finally locked down in his first, but belated, moment of wisdom) about his clinical rotations at a nursing home and a hospital for med/surg. It is safe to assume that he has already been out there damaging both patients and university reputations.
@#81 Algernon
Could you please clarify your statement? It seems like you might be implying men go into nursing to be rapists.
@ Gripester: The thing a bout hate speech is that, sure you have the right to say it but once you have said it – or published it under your name defines you as a hater. By giving voice to Ben Cochranes misogynistic bile this student publication gave their stamp of approval to his opinions. Opinions which marginalized at least half the student population they purportedly represent!
I am so glad he realizes he was wrong to choose the word “conscientious”. I will sleep better at night knowing he has seen the error of his ways. He must be a really great human being to be able to offer such a moving, heartfelt apology. I feel great knowing Ben Cochran will be entering the nursing profession in a few years. I hope that one day I will be fortunate enough to be one of Mr. Cochran’s patients.
PZ is characterizing the editors of the magazine as being ethically challenged. However, if we are going to be free-speech advocates, we have to allow all points of opinion without massaging them to fit the interests of any group.
Where did you get the idea that this is a free speech issue? I haven’t seen anyone say that Cochran shouldn’t have been allowed to write his essay, or that people shouldn’t be allowed to read it. In fact, everybody seems to agree that the essay should be circulated as widely as possible so that he can get the recognition he so richly deserves!
The problem is that the editors didn’t just passively “allow” the essay. After they received the original manuscript, they made active decisions to accept the basic premise of the piece, to ask the author to tone down some of the swearing but preserve the overall theme, and to publish the revised manuscript in a particular context.
(Do you understand the differences in context between the original publication of the newspaper story, and the republication here on Pharyngula and elsewhere? If you don’t understand the contexts, then I think you’re going to continue to be confused about the ethical issues involved.)
It has nothing to do with “free speech” and everything to do with the East Carolinian being a hack rag.
gmc, I thought it was pretty obvious. Nursing is a field in which the practitioner has access to vulnerable people. As such it is a good source of victims for rapists and other sociopaths. Good people are attracted to work that includes the opportunity to help people; predators are attracted to easy prey. Which kind does Ben look like to you?
I fucking hate “he said/she said.” I hate process-worship. I loathe not-pologies. These vacuous fuckers—both the editorial team and Ben Cochran—do indeed have glorious careers ahead of them in the Capital P Profession of “Journalism.”
We can expect that most people, educated or not, will be conformist fuckers who parrot Orwellian corporate-speak. It’s a given. Most people are shit (really; not worth a damn).
But my god, what in the world explains an editorial staff composed of women who not only saw nothing wrong with this piece, but who weren’t so goddamned outraged that they felt compelled to launch a full-on Feminist Edition of the newspaper after it was submitted? Seriously. Seriously!
Can you imagine me publishing a guest piece describing gay men as “suck-mouthed fudgepackers” with “ass-cunt problems” if we show up at the clinic for condoms? Can you imagine me publishing a piece that called gay men (or insert any trod-upon group) “giggling gape-ass whores” with enough “spermicidal rubbers for a two-year gangbang”?
Can you imagine me doing so without tearing into the fucking bastard who’d dare write such shit? Can you imagine me writing, “We aim to respect all viewpoints, even if controversial, and we apologise if anyone was offended?”
What is wrong with people? What is wrong with these women?
@gmc #94,
How was Cochran complaining on his FB page about his clinical rotations? I know of hospitals are very wary of staff who even mention their place of employment on social sites for fear of HIPPA violations. It would do well for potential employers to know what potential lawsuits Ben Cochran may inadvertantly expose them to.
Josh:
The same thing that’s wrong with a lot of young men. They’ve been raised in a sexist society and they are acculturated to it and have bought into it as the status quo, its being normal.
This came up on the social media thread, towards the end of it.
What is wrong with these women?
internalized misogyny, most likely.
yes, that’s right, they see nothing wrong, because they have lived with those attitudes for generations.
at best, someone like Ben will be slapped on the wrist for such behavior, with something like “Boys will be Boys” added as an addendum, and that will be that as far as the university and all organizational entities in NC are concerned.
One can only hope the reach of the interwebs will at least begin to educate these folks that there is a wider world out there, where acceptance of misogynist crap is waning, if slowly.
Yes, the world is BIGGER than North Carolina!
look out your fucking window.
…of course, Caine beat me to it.
I own a hatchet.
Mr, Cochran is in need of an empathy lesson.
What—I don’t know; what’s the word? It would describe a sort of grim amusement at one’s own internal processes—What does that to me most, still, is that the part of this that most completely makes my brain spin ’round on its stalk isn’t the woman part, isn’t the journalist part; it’s the nurse part.
Damn.
Auntie Ron:
You, me and a bunch of other peoples. That was expressed quite firmly in the first thread about Benny and his opinions.
@ Marci Kiser #12
I have a confession to make… I used to write for a college right-wing newspaper. This was back in the early-to-mid nineties when the the conservatives were still howling about the alleged specter of “PC” on campus that supposedly silenced any “dissent” by patriotic, Christian, free-market, Americans (i.e. young, middle class whites with a massive superiority complex) against the Marxists who ran academe and their henchpersons that made up various left-wing student organizations. Like any bunch of college-aged punks, we saw ourselves as the modern day equivalent of the Delta’s from Animal House and did our best to piss off the “establishment” (as we saw them) by being as borderline-offensive as possible.
Then, after the O.J. Simpson verdict, the Opinion Editor decided to cross the line where he said that the Juice was only acquitted “because Mark Fuhram said nigger.” He went on to write: “Oh! Did I say that? Is there going to be a riot in the Core tonight? (“The Core” referred to Milwaukee’s predominantly African-American central city.) Now you would think that the Editor-in-Chief of that period, who was actually a rather sensible young woman, would have edited that out of the paper. Well, she didn’t. Partially because she made the mistake of letting the various editors have the “freedom” to do what they want with their respective sections, but also because the opinion editor was an intimidating bully who usually got what he wanted. (Think of Bill Paxton’s character in “Weird Science” and you’ll have an idea what this fucker looked like and how he acted.)
Well, you can imagine the reaction. The Black Student Union as well as other left wing campus groups organized immediately. There were calls for the University to official censure the paper. There was a rally held in the student commons that loudly condemned us for the paper’s racism.
Advertisers pulled ads. The EiC and the offending editor were forced to resign, and a few of the more principled contributors quit. All the while, we ran opinion and editorial pieces the refused to apologize for the article and stood for the first amendment rights that the radical campus left wanted to take away from us!
I was a contributing writer then and even though I thought the article was racist the response from the outraged students fed into my right-wing paranoia. See! These liberals who wave the banner of free speech want to shut us down! Yeah, the article was over-the-top, but we have every right to print it without official punishment! Let the free market decide!
Well, the market DID decide. The paper lost too many advertisers over the contraversy to keep us going on a weekly basis. We couldn’t find new writers. Not even the local chapter of the College Republicans, who used the paper as its propaganda arm, wanted to help. Two semesters later, the paper shut down.
Now, 15 years later, after many personal ideological and religious one-eighties, I look back at that fiasco and say to myself “Good riddance.” We were assholes! Stupid, bigoted, self-important, assholes fueled by a lethal combination of hormones and moronic political beliefs. We paid the price for our arrogance and it was a fate that was well deserved. Ms. Nurge should take what she can from my late and unlamented paper’s example and take some responsibility for letting this cupcake vent his sexist spleen to the world. Until then, we should not let up on our condemnation of Cochran and the scum who support him.
And maybe, just maybe, after many years and after enough ridicule and criticism has been heaped upon him, Ben Cochran will look back on that article and realize that he was an asshole too.
But I won’t hold my breath.
I dunno – I think if I were the editor of some boring uni rag, and a well-known campus asshole sent me a diatribe, I think I’d print it just to show him up. It’s well-needed information – watch out for this guy, he’s dangerous and no one you want to trust. If he has been part of some religious activism or anti-woman trollery, I’d want my fellow students to know about it by giving him the very rope to hang himself with.
And Ichthyic, after you pull Caine’s porcupine out of it, you can kiss my mild-OCD diagnosed ass, then you can kiss the asses of my OCD brother, my OCD nephew, my autistic cousin, my Aspergers-diagnosed cousin, and the graves of my retarded cousin and my OCD grandfather.
I think much of western society is designed to expect this type of letter. Here is my hypothesis as it reminds me of my situation some 22 years ago. Raised and sheltered in a very homogeneous, small town, religious community I enrolled in a secular university ignorant of numerous topics. Homosexuality is wrong, abortion is evil – all that religious baggage. I was a product of my environment. Somehow I was able to break free. I honestly could not tell you what or how. If we coddle and protect and indoctrinate a large proportion of our ‘teens’ and continually treat them as unable to think for themselves or make ANY decisions then we create automatons. Overprotective, religious ‘save the children from themselves’ crap. Teenagers need to be confronted with the challenges of diversity – of all types [religious, cultural, racial, sexual, ]. They will make mistakes. Some will get hurt. But society as a whole will learn and grow and understand the greatest parts of humanity are our differences while simultaneously understanding our similarities. I’ve been a teacher now for 12 years in 4 different countries [North America, Middle East and Asia] in both public and private education. What astonishes me is how CAPABLE teenagers are. How LIMITED in choice and empowerment parents and society make them. How PASSIONATE they can be. How SIMILAR they are around the world. They want health, love, excitement, empowerment. They will make mistakes but don’t we all? As a parent and teacher I sometimes feel the best thing I can do is remove as many rules and guidelines as SAFELY possible [and where is this point :) ]. Allow them to fail and make mistakes to my personal [and hopefully professional] limit. They always seems to learn the most, be engaged the most, love the most when they have the control and freedom to use their passions.
I’ve diverged from my main point.
Ben Cochran may be at the point of juxtaposition between his ‘old’ life and I hope his ‘new’ life. I hope this event provides a fresh start and opens his eyes to what life CAN be not what he was indoctrinated to think it was.
Or maybe I’m a deranged lunatic who should not be need teenagers. I find it much more rewarding to find how incredibly adult teenagers can be – if given the chance – rather than limit them to indignation.
I know, I know. Internalized sexism and homophobia. I know. I get it; I’ve been around long enough to have lived in it.
But I don’t grok it. My outrage isn’t actual surprise—I know what to expect. It’s an expression of full-on anger and frustration that people are still mired in it. How can they so happily egg on their own degradation? Damn. Damn.
Don’t try to explain it to me. Don’t give me the sociology of it all. I already know that.
It won’t make me any less incredulous, angry, or shocked.
And I think we need a fuckload more shock and anger—and we need to aim it people who haven’t yet realized they have a right to say NO to this shit—and a lot less understanding.
Kruger and Dunning’s paper on incompetence (this one: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.64.2655&rep=rep1&type=pdf) quite specifically touches on grossly unfunny people who have managed to con themselves into the belief that they’re hysterically funny. Cochran could be their poster boy.
But I don’t grok it.
ah.
right.
yeah.
me neither.
And Ichthyic, after you pull Caine’s porcupine out of it, you can kiss my mild-OCD diagnosed ass, then you can kiss the asses of my OCD brother, my OCD nephew, my autistic cousin, my Aspergers-diagnosed cousin, and the graves of my retarded cousin and my OCD grandfather.
blah blah, irrelevant rambling, blah blah.
. . then you, darling, can kiss my OCD ass, and genuflect to my panic disorder, and also busy yourself worrying about my tendency toward depression. .
Bored yet? Me too.
If it is a question of free speech, the paper should print anything that anyone wants to have published, ever. Newspapers have editors and limitations for various reasons, most of which would be contrary to publishing such crap.
I’d love to see what submissions were rejected that day.
@linzel #109
I think you just described my college experience.
I’m all for jumping all over the ignorant aspie comment but how come the stupid comparison of the valdidity of cochran’s opinion to an obese person’s weight’s validity gets a pass?
Does Greg_P think there are no obese skepticks? No obese feminists? Or do they just not matter because they have the nerve to be obese?
@ #94 Autumn
I can’t pull the page up anymore, but if you go to wall posts back a few pages, you see him talking about clinicals. He never mentions names or facilities, but it was there. Not anymore. Maybe I should have screencapped it…
Oh yeah. Nice one, Socrates.
[meta]
sheryliversen @117, because Greg_P wasn’t being pejorative towards obese people.
(It was a pretty poor analogy, I grant)
sherryliverson:
I didn’t see it, I had a busy day and haven’t caught up with everything. I don’t give Greg_P a pass, I’m sure if he thought before he typed, he could have easily come up with a much better and less offensive analogy. As John Morales notes, however, Greg_P was not intending to be offensive, but struggling for a comparison. If he comes back to the thread and reads this, perhaps he’ll be more aware and choose his analogies more wisely in the future.
I…so wanna choke this motherfucker right now.
Seriously, you act like a fucking ass, spout enough sexist bullshit to make the Taliban proud and instead of apologizing you decide to fucking taunt the people rightfully pissed at you.
Fuck you, your editors and any other fuck who’s back you.
Sorry PZ, going to have to disagree. I think it’s great that they published Ben’s diatribe. His “issues” may not have been discovered until the was working in the medical field, where someone could have been hurt physically.
ps pustule popping is rad.
#101 Caine, Fleur du Mal
“They’ve been raised in a sexist society and they are acculturated to it and have bought into it as the status quo, its being normal.”
My opinion, cos ‘opinions’ are apparently sacrosanct whatever, is that there is a vile and ignorantly dishonest nest of little jeebus’ warriors running a student rag and accepting contributions of ‘opinion’ to the op/ed column from other little soldiers for dumbfuckery.
Every issue xian clones contaminate and that gets their knickers bunched always boils down to ..’Teach and promote the controversy and respect my free speech… so nah nah de nah nah!’
This allows them to disseminate and proclaim the most disgusting, revolting and sadisticly sickest ideas that they consider righteous.
Because they interpret sexual dysfunction as not their fault but always the woman’s.
As for the women that end up going along with the insanity…well fear of ostracism is not just hypothetical.
I have no evidence for this, but I do have ‘faith’ so that view can be taken as fact….apparently!
Caek Noms, I get you’re being jocular, but I can’t agree with your claim that, since this outcome might prevent a greater future problem, it makes his publication in the East Carolinian “great”.
(Unless you think having a TIA is great, because then your medical problem might not have been discovered until you had a stroke)
Caek Noms:
You don’t seem to know anything about getting a nursing degree. Clinical experience is required throughout the education process, which means working in hospitals and with patients. What makes you think he hasn’t already harmed someone, either physically, mentally, emotionally or given subpar care to people?
#126 Caine, Fleur du Mal
“What makes you think he hasn’t already harmed someone, either physically, mentally, emotionally or given subpar care to people?”
It is a good point, which raises my concerns about the Nursing College and how it monitors its students!
Indeed what it ignores in their students shenanigans.
This attitude of matey’s is part and parcel of his character, that is so obvious any psychiatric evaluation is not required.
That screed was not to rattle bars or encourage debate…that was a whiny self pitying rant cos he had to wait and he targeted women as the reason and, possibly xian fundamental training took over and he had the perfect reason why!
That ‘trait’ is flashing neon in the original screed and his non-apology.
It takes years of dedicated practice in public as well as private to perfect that ‘attitude’…I do not believe that no one has ever seen that side of him before.
That includes teachers, educators, lecturers and mentor’s, parents you cannot hide such bullshite, it stinks to much!
He might well be academically capable in Nursing theory, i.e. got sufficient grades elsewhere to allow entry to the college course, no one has said otherwise, although he does lack some basic knowledge of female medical issues and reproduction…but suited to nursing duty is another kettle of rotting fish guts….nope I cannot buy it.
Put it all together the dude has been getting a free pass for quite a while.
The College must be aware of personalities of their students, I would say that was a prime measurement/assessment.
So something is not quite right here.
He is unsuitable as a student of Nursing… Why is he in such a course then?
What is also concerning is the student rag seems to be echoing that attitude, not in so many words of course but there does seem to be a tacit encouragement to the attitude.
If that is so, and I have no doubt there is an attitude that seems to pervade the space, then the only explanation is xian fundamentalist toxicity poisoning the atmosphere in the college and the rag…..weird maybe….disturbing certainly….explanation maybe…excuse…NEVER!
Who are these “sluts” shaming themselves with, one wonders? See, since they were seeking birth control, I tend to think that there may have been some males involved. I would simply love to hear Ben Cochrane’s opinion about them. Perhaps the poor innocent darlings can’t control their sexual urges in the face of such sluttery, or maybe he held his ire in reserve since they weren’t in the queue that day seeking treament for chlamydia and herpes, etc. I can’t work out whether Mr. Cochrane is merely anti-women, or whether he is anti-sex as well. And ironically, he clearly, desperately needs to get laid. Pity no self-respecting woman will ever sleep with him again after reading his article.
Because being a misogynistic asshole is a consequence of not having enough sex. *eye roll*
What??? So he can increase is sense of entitlement, that women exist to give him pleasure and otherwise should be subservient to his every whim?
Based on experience with that type, he’d probably say something like ‘Dude, why would you stick your dick in that?!’
Cross-posted from blaghag:
Well, it’s all out there now. This guy is a twit who should never have been given a soap box, but now that the damage is done, it’s up to the head of nursing to address the multiple issues involved, including ensuring that students understand that misogyny and other group hatreds are incompatible with nursing. It’s also up to the school administration to educate students that vilification of any group is not acceptable.
It will be interesting to see how the administration views damage control. There are three main approaches: do nothing, make an example of the kid by expelling him or similar, or by addressing the obvious flaws in the environment.
I personally would have Ben Cochrane write a series of educational articles, to be approved by the head of nursing, outlining the various problems with his original article, the published article and the apology, and why such views are unacceptable. If he can wrap his head around why people view his articles and apology as toxic, there may be hope for him. If the school is incapable of taking one of their seniors and educating him to be functional in a civilised society, then the school has an even bigger problem on their hands.
Out of curiosity, where does this expression come from? I see it used constantly when your general point is ‘You’re very frustrated’ or ‘You need to be more like the general populace.’ Usually I don’t see how sex would help. (like in this case)
Meh
Sex for a lot of people has nothing to do with the morning after or building a relationship. A woman (or man) might fuck him cause he’s got nice bone structure or something.
And I’ve never felt comfortable speculating on why someone is with someone. Who knows maybe he has some redeeming feature, or maybe his partner just doesn’t care. Really can’t define the parameters of someone’s relationship and, I feel, it’s wrong to comment unless we see some kind of abuse.
—————–
Side note, does telling someone a woman (or man when directed a woman) sleep with them sound like a way of putting them down because they aren’t masculine or feminine enough to attract a mate?
No, indeed. But sex is a good way of relieving stress, and Mr. Cochrane seems partularly uptight for some reason. That’s kind of the nice reason. Also, I’ve noticed how certain men who develop a particular enthusiasm for slut-shaming seem to be most upset about it when the said “slut” is not sleeping with *them*. That’s kind of the nasty reason.
Wrong, he doesn’t need to get laid. I opine that sex would just reinforce his misogynism. What he needs to do is realize that women are humans and their needs might sometimes supersede his. He hasn’t made those realizations yet.
Sort of like the ‘I know x and he doesn’t mind slur y, therefore you are wrong’ crowd. Here it would be ‘Women love my dick. REAL women that is.’
Another question to those in the know, if Mr. Cochran can be shown to have a history of this kind of behavior and attitude towards women, can he be booted off the program or flagged or something that’ll limit his contact with actual patients?
I sent a warm, fuzzy and cheerful letter to the editor, asking whether they’d have published the letter if it had contained the words “nigger” and “kyke” instead of “cunt” and “hatchet wound”.
This is the response I received:
————————————————
Hello,
The article you speak of, including words such as “cunt” and “hatchet wound”, is not the article we published. I will only speak of the version we approved, which was the one that ran in our newspaper and is on our website. Because TEC did not run the article you speak of in your email, that is not something TEC is affiliated with.
Thank you,
Caitlin
————————————————-
There you have it: the hate-speech comparison doesn’t count because they edited the letter!
I’m less worried about Cochran specifically-although he does represent a danger to the public if he gets a license-than about the program in general. Any program in medicine, nursing, or other health care profession can make a mistake and take someone who isn’t suited by temper or belief system to work in health care. There’s no great shame in that. And most students can figure out that they need to hide their prejudices while in class and/or on formal tests, so maybe they didn’t realize just how deep Cochran’s misogyny went. However, now that it’s been brought to their attention, the administration really needs to step up and give him some remedial training and not graduate him if he doesn’t demonstrate improvement. The fact that they don’t seem to be making these moves is concerning. So I’m still leery of hiring graduates from their program. Not because I think they’re all going to be a bunch of misogynists, but because I doubt that they’ve received good training in nursing. It’s unfair, but my first duty is to make sure my patients get good care, not to be fair to job candidates. The two rarely conflict-generally being fair produces the best care-but if they do then the patients have to “win”. Again, I wouldn’t outright reject a candidate just because s/he graduated from ECU, but it would make me more cautious about them.
I’m normally in favour of people being allowed to hold whatever beliefs they choose so long as it doesn’t interfere with them actually doing their jobs, but in this case I’m not so sure. This guy is training to be a nurse, and as such he will be expected to deal with other people quite intimately in a compassionate and professional manner. It’s not just that he will be expected to treat women, although that’s the main issue, but I myself wouldn’t like to think that if I were in hospital I might be treated by such a person. It seems a bit like being treated by a member of the KKK. Kinda makes my skin crawl.
There is some good news in all of this, as it seems going by the comments at the East Carolinian there are not many students who are fooled by the so-called apologies.
So, I have a productive suggestion to make.
Those of you with real (not fictional) children who are in the college-finding process should very specifically talk to their guidance counselors about the fact that under no circumstances will you consider ECU to be an appropriate school for your child.
Put it in writing.
Then copy the Dean of Nursing at ECU. And the President.
Any ECU grads here? Write a letter stating that you have serious doubts about supporting your alma mater with your hard-earned cash.
If the university does not understand the seriousness of the matter in its official capacity, make them understand.
Please note that I am not suggesting that anyone bombard the university with crackpot letters or made-up children. Reality please, from the reality-based community.
Though you obviously didn’t intend to do so, this ultimately puts the blame for Cochran and his ilk on women.
If they’re stressed because they’re not getting laid and that turned them into hate-mongering assberets, then if women would sleep with them, the problem would resolve.
No. They are not owed sex with another person just because they want it, or because they’ve turned themselves into hate-mongering bigots because they’re not getting it.
The problem, as ‘Tis Himself already stated, is with THEM and is not our job to fix for them.
There you have it: the hate-speech comparison doesn’t count because they edited the letter!
yeah, it’s pretty clear that little paper needs a new editor.
It will be interesting to see how the administration views damage control. There are three main approaches: do nothing, make an example of the kid by expelling him or similar, or by addressing the obvious flaws in the environment.
right.
this being North Carolina, I’ll vote (a): do nothing.
oh, they might give a slap on the wrist, but that will be followed by chuckle and a “Boys will be boys” tut-tutting towards all those who expressed any concern.
I’ll be very surprised if there is a different response.
…oh, and there is just as much a problem with the editor of that paper as there is with Ben.
Like so many others, I think the editors are a big part of the problem. They exercised no judgment (and very little editing!) and seem to think that standing pat on their mistake is the same thing as standing firm on their principles. Kelly Nurge even tweeted that she may be the worst feminist but she’s the best editor… not for anything she actually did in bringing this piece to press, but in refusing to do anything in the aftermath of that decision.
They fucked up and now they think their decision to sit on their hands makes this some kind of David-and-Goliath Free Press story.
No.
Don’t do that. Seriously, shut up.
Majority of the diagnosed autism spectrum.
That … that is beauty. I bow before you.
Aww, see? You didn’t give them enough credit! They totally would have edited it to say “colored person” instead!
Aww, see? You didn’t give them enough credit! They totally would have edited it to say “colored person” instead!
exactly.
the editor is just as clueless as Benji is.
No, Illuminata, not only did I not intend to do so, I *didn’t* do so. Next time you have a point to make (even if it is, as it is in this case, one I agree with) please do not drag me into it unless you have actually read my quote – you know, the one you put into blockquotes – and have some reason you can cite for interpreting it so uncharitably. I am not amused.
BTW, if you can’t work it out for yourselves, the guy called Invincible *Irony* Man occasionally makes throwaway, facetious comments. However, if you pick out and quote half of them at a time, you may may be able to make them say what you want them to say instead of what they actually say. It’s called “quote mining”. I’m sure you’ll all be on the lookout for that since you’re all engaged in completely rational exercises in formal logic. Of course you are, since commenting on someone’s blog is the epitome of peer-reviewed scientific discourse.
ECU student here. Sometimes frequenter of your blog.
Ben does not represent all of us. In fact many students and faculty are outrages that such a thing appeared in the paper. Twice. And with the original having a horrible misogynistic draft. And the edited version not being much better.
Andrew Gorman
http://www.appeal-to-reason.info/
andrewgorman:
We know that. It was also brought up in the first thread about Benny and his misogyny. What matters is whether or not there are going to be appropriate consequences when it comes to Benny and the editor of the paper.
InvisibleIronyMan.
Just as Ben Cochran’s “I didn’t mean it!” doesn’t erase the misogyny from his article, your “I was being ironic!” doesn’t erase the misogyny from your comment. In jest or seriously, it doesn’t matter. You were still reinforcing, without subverting, the patriarchy’s sexist trope that women create misogynist assholes by not fucking them enough. If you were trying to subvert it, you failed, and the effect was misogynist. If you were just presenting it, without subverting it, thinking that your ‘nym would excyse you, well, that is misogynist too. And dumb.
Check out his latest post on FB:
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=12618795&sk=wall
Apparently he loves the idea of being a meme. He share a link called ‘Ben Cochran: The Chauvinist meme generator’. Here’s what he says:
“if this thing gets created or becomes a real meme (i just learned what that was yesterday), then i’m totally buying a huge one of these, getting it framed, and hanging it in the newsroom of the east carolinian. you’re welcome.”
He’s obviously not taking any of this seriously. I took a screenshot and sent it to the Dean of Nursing. She replied that “We are addressing this issue with Mr. Cochran.” It’s been over a week now and no one with any authority has spoken out on this issue. While I believed this when she said it on Sunday it has lost any credibility in the interim.
“Offending people is fine when you’ve got a purpose and a goal behind it” – and when you don’t, it’s called trolling
I like how the paper goes on to taut how much attention they got from this article. Looks like they learned how to bring readers to their little rag.
I like how the paper goes on to taut how much attention they got from this article.
In the finest tradition of yellow journalism.
kinderspiele kostenlos
kinderspiele kostenlos
Seems Ben escaped any real consequences for his article. This was on his FB page.
Ben Cochran
good news! i’m merely a “mortal embarrassment to the college of nursing.” for a second there i thought i was going to be kicked out. instead i was just chewed out. i can handle that. i’ve been chewed out before. now that that’s done…on to graduation!!!!!
Like · Share · October 19 at 6:36pm
I have been exploring for a little for any high-quality articles or weblog posts in this sort of area . Exploring in Yahoo I ultimately stumbled upon this site. Studying this info So i am satisfied to convey that I’ve an incredibly good uncanny feeling I found out just what I needed. I so much indubitably will make sure to do not put out of your mind this site and provides it a glance on a constant basis.