Wednesday, September 23, 2009


I have to admit that I have not seen the written word relating to this matter. I did spend two or three hours scouring newspapers this morning, obviously not the specific one that this issue emanates from.

A Chancellor of a private university is said to have waxed lyrical about how male tutors should conduct their flights of fancy and their urges in relation to the curvaceous, nubile, female student population. In brief, they should admire, fantasise, but never touch.

This man has been exceptionally naive to have got himself into a position where he can be ridiculed and taken to task for the frivolous manner in which he is said to have couched his thoughts. Universities these days, cannot afford to risk being compromised, nor can they risk their academic reputations.

On the other hand, could this very senior academic have opened up a can of worms, leading to more open discussion of taboo subject matter?

That said, one prominent married academic from one of the leading establishments in the UK, was incontrovertibly linked with a female student and lost his post. However, another university with a quite a prestigious reputation snapped up his expertise in his area of study (not in student relations) and the academic's career continues.


Vincent said...

In what manner then should he have couched his thoughts? It seems to me that his advice is exemplary and ought to be followed more often.

I do not see where the naivete lies. Would you, ZACL, censor him? Shame!

Vincent said...

Perhaps a wise man would have added something more: to advise male tutors to conduct themselves in such a way that their behaviour was in every sense beyond reproach, that is not to betray to the admired student any sign of the flight of fancy being entertained secretly.

But then, if your information was derived from the press or other media, I cannot see how they would be trusted to report accurately what the chancellor said, nor in what circumstances.

Vincent said...

There, my dear. That is your link. Another journalist trying to create a storm over nothing.

ZACL said...

Hi Vincent,

You make fair points. However, as you see from my preface, I did not read or hear this report first hand. The manner in which the feature was reported to me, by two sources, one of each gender, different age groups too, the statement came across as being misguided and poorly regulated by the unfortunate academic.

I will try to seek out the article.

ZACL said...

I was going to visit The Times. I will save (or savour) that one in due course.

So a guy, (Tutor) "...should behave as if he were in Stringfellows". Someone needs to enlighten us on what the codes of behaviour are in that hallowed hall of privilege.

I am not impressed with what I have read thus far, and if I had found the article before I posted, I may have taken to a more incisive style of posting. I may yet.

Davoh said...

male tutors should conduct their flights of fancy and their urges in relation to the curvaceous, nubile, female student population. In brief, they should admire, fantasise, but never touch.

mm, sounds like something from the Mills and Boon school of writing .. instruction 101 .. heh.

TG said...

Students phantasize about teachers and vice versa. I have nothing against true love, if it happens in these circumstances. The only problkem is credibility of the student-teacher relation.

adamantixx said...

i heard a snippet about it on the radio and thought, if correctly quoted, the man in question was at best extremely naive.

ZACL said...

HI Davo,

Nice to meet you on my blog, thanks for visiting.

Hi Ax,

I have now read The Times report. The man has had to justify his liscivious comments, needless to say, couched in literary analysis terms, deliberaely meant to befog. Student representatives who have been quoted, express dismay and offence.

As said, previously, and I agree with you, at the very least, Terence Kealey has been stupidly naive.

I did ask whether Kealey has opened up a different can of worms, that point has yet to be addressed. What was telling, Kealey saw behavioural standards and disciplinary committees as intrusive.


The discussion is beyond 'true love' situations, if indeed that is what the majority of those liaisons that have occurred, have been.

The comments made, confirm the lack of personal emotional control of men, is that all men? There lack of respect for women. The vice-chancellor, at best, has been immature in his banter and is no model for moral codes.

The man is a senior academic in Britain's first private university, this does not confer on anyone the right to be offensive, tantamount to being crude about women. If his lecture halls are equivalent to night clubs, virtual strip clubs, then he is not fit to hold the position he has.

Vincent said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ZACL said...

Vincent you, I believe, are being provocative.

I did raise the prospect in my post, that

"On the other hand, could this very senior academic have opened up a can of worms, leading to more open discussion of taboo subject matter?"

I reiterate that it is telling that Kealey chooses to describe disciplinary and behavioural committees as intrusive. It is for him to explain what he means by this description.

Kealey has already had to justify his other statements. It is up to the wider society to assess whether he has suitably acquitted himself.

So far, I am having difficulty finding wholehearted support for the sentiments and ideas expressed by Terence Kealey amongst student and academic communities. (Both genders included).

ZACL said...

I see you deleted the comment I have replied to.

Out of interest, how does one delete a comment? I haven't wanted to delete a comment yet, but it is handy to know how to.

Vincent said...

No my dear, I was not being intentionally provocative, I was angry for I identified with the man you thought should be separated from his job, and you have been playing your part in mobilizing public opinion in that direction. for a blog is public, even if only in a small way. It helps spread the virus, benign or noxious.

You know what happens to politicians these days when their greed or dishonesty has been found out. This man does not deserve that fate. He has my wholehearted support and I need to speak out on it, for those who condemn him are those who trample on the ideas and values of an earlier generation and thus condemn our society to its present barbarousness.

To delete a comment, you hit the dustbin icon beside it, which you are able to see when you have hit "post a comment". As site owner, you are able to delete anyone's comments, not just your own.

Vincent said...

Seriously, I am not wishing to be provocative. If Terence Kealey is stupidly naive then I am more so.

I really do not understand the nature of his offence, or the offence he has caused to anyone. I would be obliged if you can explain in words clear to the naive.

"Lack of personal emotional control", "lack of respect for women". I don't see where that comes into what Kealey has done, said, encouraged or implied. I cannot see what has actually provoked the fuss, in short. Was Kealey doing anything more than invoking a moral code which goes back as far as Plato?

ZACL said...

Kealey has put himself, as an academic leader into a position where he has to clarify his comments and justify them. I don't. I did not make his comments.

Because something existed virtually since time immemorial, does that make it right for every age? If you think it does, then you have that right to think so. Just as others have the option to believe differently.

ZACL said...

P.S. Thanks for the deletion tip.

Vincent said...

Well all right, but my questions have been sidestepped. If he has to clarify his comments, who is having a problem with them? If he has to justify them, who is accusing him (in the court of public opinion), and of what? Enough innuendo. Why should he add more to what he has already said?

As for Plato, I'll never volunteer to be his champion, but if you are suggesting he is not right for every age, then what in particular of his philosophy has passed its sell-by date? For at least a thousand years his ideas, transmitted through study of the classics, and through their influence on Christianity, have been a foundation of European civilisation. If he has been ditched, why?

ZACL said...

Some of the questions you raise, you will have to research for yourself; you could try Buckingham University as a first port of call.

When academics have to quote classics as a total rationale for what is done, I have to ask why? Do they not live in the present day? May be not.

Perhaps I am misinterpreting your last point, but it appears to me that you are suggesting that Christianity is the major code of ethics that should be adhered to. There will be many who would differ, ergo, they would differ with Plato too.

Not all that occurs today is golden, but then, neither was it, in days of yore.

Vincent said...

ZACL, I apologize for being such a pest on this point. You have been sweet and stuck to your position, as you have every right to do. I must behave like a guest, not a boor, or indeed a bore.

ZACL said...


You are not a bore or a boor.

You are very gracious. :)