Ok, but the real question that Heated Rivalry raises is this: do all hockey players have bodies like that??
13.01.2026 20:09
👍 0
🔁 0
💬 1
📌 0
Ok, but the real question that Heated Rivalry raises is this: do all hockey players have bodies like that??
Just read this. So good and informative!
Literally just said the same thing to my husband 🤦🏻
Guess the UC doesn't care about the promises it made to current and former fellows that we would be able to use this incentive throughout our entire careers. Very disappointing.
www.insidehighered.com/news/faculty...
By all means, let's have a cishet, white, conservative man tell us about how women ruined the workplace. How novel. The @nytimes.com is such trash.
How about we make police carry liability insurance so the city doesn't have to cover the millions a year ($100 million in 2024, I believe) in lawsuits against the CPD? Nah, let's just raise property taxes again.
Really, @ezrakleinbot.bsky.social? The guy who said gays should be stoned to death and Black women don't have the brain power of white men was practicing politics the right way? You're trash, Ezra. Be quiet. We don't have to respect a guy's bigotry just because he's dead.
Congratulations, Lauren!!
Def my favorite one yet!
So tired of being told that sexualities work is “better suited” for speciality journals. Do better, editors.
Show me any billionaire, and I'll show you a policy failure.
The existence of billionaires is a policy failure.
New newest article "Toward a Queer Pathways Framework: Understanding the Disproportionate Incarceration of LGBTQ People" is now available open access in Critical Criminology. Check it out!
link.springer.com/article/10.1...
New piece from #PolicingTheRainbow out now in Criminology! We show that LGBTQ people have a much bigger appetite for police reform than non-LGBTQ people. Check it out (it's short!)
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...
Article acceptance to brighten up this dreary Wednesday!
Very excited to finally get to announce that next spring I will be a Fellow with the Center for Advanced Study at Uni of Illinois where I will start writing for my second book based on #PolicingtheRainbow. So grateful to those who helped me in this endeavor and excited to get started!
One of my students just wrote me the best note a teacher can get, and I'm bawling. Amidst all the ChatGPT generated papers, sometimes students remind you exactly why you love teaching, so I couldn't resist sharing a little piece of what they wrote ❤️
Actually did have a student who I caught (and admitted to) using AI ask if I could come up with an alternative assignment for them to do to make up the points they lost for cheating on the first one 🙄
Woohoo!
But yes, I also know that's not what everyone means when they say "defund." That's another part of the issue: there was no widespread agreement on what activists meant when they said "defund," and it was therefore portrayed as a radical stance rather than a reasonable one.
While I don't disagree, I also have a new paper coming out soon that shows that when you tell people what "defund the police" actually means (i.e., move money from police to social services), there is much higher support for it.
I'm convinced some editors don't even read papers before sending them out for review. Some I get are so bad that there's no legitimate way they should have been sent for review. A big reason for reviewer burnout rn, I think.
Agreed, though I did think the finale was a little underwhelming.
Oops, I misinterpreted the chart! It shows that conservatives don't trust sociology. But my point still stands about conservatives within sociology (and conservative "scientists" outside of it, for that matter).
Oops! Read it wrong. My bad!
The thing is, the reason we don't trust conservatives in sociology is because the empirical evidence rarely supports conservative viewpoints. The reason many sociologists are "liberal" is not because we are ideologues; it is because we follow the evidence.
