This one is a bit personal, so you might want to pretend you didn't read it (and, therefore, couldn't have answered it). You could say it was too sloppy, so you moved on to the next post.
Teresa Sullivan ---> triumph.
(sleeps with a man who has a big brain and his wits about him)
Jerry Sandusky ---> prisoner.
(sleeps with married to a woman who seems to be a coward or an idiot)
Q. Ever notice anything about the connection between a proffie/dean/coach/student and hir spouse? Cause and effect? Ever not hire an incredibly awesome proffie because you were horribly unimpressed with hir spouse? Ever wish you had a better better half yourself--for the sake of your career? Perhaps the Sullivans thrive because they've got good husbands? Perhaps Sandusky-like crimes could have been prevented if more wives had had spines and hadn't turned a blind eye to fucked-up crimes? Was your partner the inspiration for your most creative ideas? Ever think you were a good proffie in spite of your spouse?
A. _____________________________________________
[Concoct crazy theories. Become outraged. Fall asleep. But be honest, dammit.]
I've had a lot to drink.
ReplyDeleteThen raise a glass to Sophia Tolstaya for copying the entirety of "War and Peace" seven times!
DeleteAsaph Hall discovered both moons of Mars, Phobos and Deimos, in 1877. He'd carried out a long search and come up with nothing, but was encouraged not to give up by his wife, Mary Stickney. He found both moons that night.
ReplyDeleteI always wondered about that story. What, was she having an affair or something?!? Astronomers' significant others almost always want us to -stop- observing, and come back inside, and get to bed at a reasonable hour. They think what we do is cute, at first, until they find out what it's -really- like.
My girlfriend is a musician, and thinks "The Big Bang Theory" is the funniest show on TV, because she thinks that's my physics department. She may be right, although our field theorist isn't nearly as bad as Sheldon.
Astronomers should never date other astronomers. It leads to inbreeding, idiot children, and more astronomers, as if the world needed them.
DeleteRemember Astrolabe, the child of Heloise and Peter Abellard? That was quite a union.
DeleteFrod, perhaps you should have a child named "Telescope."
They think what we do is cute, at first, until they find out what it's -really- like.
DeleteYep. History's similar.
Year 1: "Oh, cute, he knows all these languages and writes big, fat books."
Year 5: "Oh no, he's got to go away again for several months for archival research. He should just find another job." (But at least it isn't, "Can't you just do your research online?")
"Frod, perhaps you should have a child named 'Telescope.'"
DeleteYes, he'd be very popular with the girls!
Putting on my serious hat: I once saw an article in the NYT about high-ranking female execs. Of the three named in the article, two had "wives" (husbands who were retired and fulfilled the stereotypical "executive wife" functions, including hosting the wives of other executives on outings at conferences and running other business-related social events). The third acknowledged that she had advanced with difficulty and despite of the lack of anyone who could take that role; having a "wife" would have made things much easier for her.
ReplyDeleteMy unserious hat: having a good spouse hasn't helped me; I've got too many calluses on my ass from her kicking it to get me jump-started.
Found it.
DeleteWell, that's a newer one. The one I saw was in the 1990's.
DeleteAs far as hiring, I've never known a candidate's spouse before making the decision. The spouse would have to be actively and painfully abusive to a student for me to even care what they were like.
ReplyDeleteAs far as having a spouse, I'm lucky to have a spouse who is extroverted where I am introverted, attractive and cultured where I am dumpy and weird, and intelligent and witty without being an academic. Moreover, while my spouse isn't an academic, their job is similar enough to academia that they understand that I'm working when I'm staring at a wall muttering. I don't think I'd be as successful or as sane as I am without the spouse I've got.
My OH has been very supportive emotionally through the last 12 years we've been together--6 of which I spent on the TT. OH is also supportive of my decision to leave academia if something better-paying in the private sector comes along, which it may well given the very positive interview I had on Monday.
ReplyDeleteWe do some socializing with my colleagues, and my friends like my OH. But there's no correlation between advancement and my OH.
I've been drinking too.
Congratulations on the positive interview, BC. It must be frustrating in some ways to consider leaving academia *after* earning tenure, but it may, in some circumstances, be the better part of wisdom.
DeleteHuh. I have a wife, technically, but not a doormat. Apparently a few of my male colleagues have doormats, which seems to help.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't call the "executive wife" model a doormat; "partner" is more like it. There's a lot of socializing expected in upper-level management, and one person is going to have a serious problem doing it all herself.
DeleteI thought this whole thing was a straight line for that joke about Bill and Hillary Clinton, and the garbage man she used to date. "If I had married him, he would have been president".
ReplyDeleteNo spouse, and not entirely sure whether having one would make life easier or not. It's more of a gamble for the average heterosexual woman than the average heterosexual man, I think. I'd probably take the chance given the opportunity, though; there's something to be said for companionship, and I'm pretty good at avoiding doormat-hood (though I've been known to feel bad about standing up for myself and my needs; yes, there's still some traditional female conditioning at work there).
ReplyDeleteI've been impressed by how Douglas Laycock (Teresa Sullivan's husband) has handled himself: he's been visibly present, and visibly supportive (not least by wearing ties in the school colors), at appropriate times, but he has also stayed firmly in the background, and, as far as I can tell, absolutely silent. I assume he has served as a sounding board, and probably a source of legal advice (or, more likely, referrals), and of emotional support, but he's done an admirable job of not injecting himself into the proceedings. He's there, but he allows his wife to appear as the strong woman she is. Of course, since he's a law professor, he can be confident that everyone knows that he, like his wife, is smart and capable; women who play a similar role don't always have that sort of validation available to them.
I'm unwilling to blame Jerry Sandusky's wife for her husband's crimes, but it is, indeed, very hard to fathom how she couldn't have had some sense that something was wrong. Admittedly, she's hardly the only person he fooled, but she was one of the closest ones (and it's not as if he only committed his crimes outside their home).
Which comes first? It's possible that the ones with wonderful spouses have wonderful spouses because they are the sort of people to whom wonderful spouses are naturally attracted, i.e. are wonderful themselves, and so would have risen to positions of responsibility and influence with or without the spouse.
ReplyDeletere: Sandusky's wife, denial is a very powerful force.
I'm glad I married another academic, and most of the time I am even more glad that he is not in my discipline. But this has the disadvantage of making what might be mutual help rather one-sided. I proofread all of his technical papers -- never mind that it's not my subject, at least it's my language (or so I'm told) -- but he glazes over in utter incomprehension after about 2 pages of my writing (or, say, Hemingway, so it's not just me). Still, he gets to travel to meetings far more regularly and in cooler places than I do, and he happily arranges for me to tag along whenever possible. So maybe it is 50/50 in the long run.
ReplyDelete