...due to interactions with one who was editing a higher ed activism piece of mine, and seemed oblivious to my concerns how certain editing choices to streamline the main argument would increase my risk of workplace retaliation:
1) People in tenured professors just don't get the financial instability that other people face.
2) Tenure makes people stupid activists, since they never suffer for making bad political choices (i.e., personal risk increases savviness, the "having skin in the game" phenomenon).
3) They're very full of themselves, since they think that any solutions to what's wrong in higher ed will involve or go through them.
Overall, I don't think that tenured people realize just how irrelevant they're becoming, outside of their little gatekeeping fiefdoms where they practice their hobbies and pretend that it matters.
What really gets me, too, is that tenured people (esp. from older generations) think they're somehow irreplaceable, when their fat salaries at some places make them sitting ducks for a labor devaluation.
You're telling people you deserve high salary for your hobby? Is your hobby really that important?
Too, there's hundreds of people behind you who'd fill your job - many of them your students, or people from your program's graduating cohort.
You can't tell me that you're all that better than them, or even any better.
What better example of lucky people attributing successes to talent.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment