Deal with it.

"Feminism and the Environment"

lul wat. take it for the lulz

Liberal indoctrination courses are usually just bullshit easy A classes, as long as you don't take them seriously you'll be fine. Usually taught by goofy old stoners who don't realize it's not the 70s any more.

>>2109978
yeah seriously. take the class and bang all the dumb broads and stop complaining

>>2109978
take the class, take advantage of the participants

"Human Rights" it's probably a Law course...

Feminism and the Environment, however...really? A Whole class?

>>2109998

Human Rights is under the religion department for some fucking reason. I looked up the prof's website, it's taught by some weird creepy old fuck that looks like the rat shape-changer dude from Harry Potter.

I never understood why there isnt any "Male studies" courses.

Or "White history".

>>2110018

Ever heard of European History courses?

>>2109998
it's not that much of a stretch, really

if you know the bible that's where much anglo land policy and gender norms have their roots

>>2110021
Oh, i forgot. Europe land is all white and male.

>>2110018

>Doesn't realize American Studies and European Studies are college majors that essentially = White History

>>2110018

>Wlhy there aren't any Male studies courses

Because there's no need for them. Male achievements are the default topic of academic discourse. The achievements of women are typically marginalized, ignored or given brief lip service rather than discussed in full.

>>2109964
They're just more transparent about their indoctrination horseshit. (inb4 human trafficking statistics that have no basis in reality)
It's more annoying when you take something you expect to be serious and then they expect you to recite word by word what either comes down to outdated information or propaganda.

>>2110018
The overwhelming majority of written history available is either about whites or is written by whites, it just isn't called "White history" explicitly. Same goes for "male studies". Anthropology has had a bias towards holding the magnifying glass over men since its inception that scholars felt the need to correct for this tendency. It isn't called "Anthropology of women", but that's what the courses really are.

If you really think this is a problem, the academy is always looking to expand the scope of its inquiry and you are welcome to become the first professor of "White Male Studies". I would actually love for this to become a reality, as I think there is a huge gap in scholarship with respect to wealthy white males. Anthropologists and sociologists need to begin studying the rich. Because so far all they've studied are poor people and people of color, and to some degree I think this is a kind of objectification. I'm fine with objectification as long as everyone can become subject to academic scrutiny.