Martin van Creveld and Academic Freedom in Germany

Evidently the Rector of the University of Trier didn't know what he was in for when he invited the Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld as a "visiting scholar".  In his very first lecture he managed to stir up a firestorm of controversy: 

Für drei Monate hätte der israelische Kriegshistoriker Martin van Creveld eigentlich an der Universität Trier forschen und lehren sollen, am interdisziplinären Historisch-Kulturwissenschaftlichen Forschungszentrum (HKFZ). Nun hat die Hochschule den 65-jährigen Gastwissenschaftler vorzeitig entlassen - auf Druck von Studenten.

Nachdem Details über seinen Antrittsvortrag zum Thema "Männer, Frauen, Kriegsspiele und Kultur" bekannt wurden, formierte sich Widerstand gegen van Creveld. In dem Vortrag hatte er unter anderem die These vertreten, dass "viele Frauen es genießen, wie Männer sich gegenseitig abschlachten". Und weiter: "Ohne Frauen, die sich verführen lassen, hätte es weder Kriege noch Kriegsspiele gegeben."

("Actually the military historian Martin van Creveld was supposed to spend three months conducting research and lecturing at the University's Interdisciplinary Research Center for History and Culture.  But now the university has dismissed the scholar - under pressure from the students.

After details surface about his introductory lecture on the topic of "Men, Women, War Games and Culture" Creveld came under increased criticism.  In his lecture Creveld put forward the thesis that "many women liked it when men slaughtered each other."  And also:"Without women, who let themselves be seduced, there would be no wars or war games.")

Now I'm not a fan of van Creveld, mostly because he often appears in the neo-Fascist weekly Junge Freiheit.  But I support unconditional academic freedom: the students should peacefully protest and debate van Creveld - but not silence him.  And the university is also at fault here, for how could they not know that Martin van Creveld is the "Thilo Sarrazin of Gender Studies."  Van Creveld knows a great deal about war and military history, but when it comes to women he uses Sarrazin-style pseudo-scientific arguments to make his points.

Van Creveld's views on women were outlined in his 2003 book Das bevorzugte Geschlecht  ("The Privileged Sex")  wherein he argues that men have to do all the hard and dirty work - such as wage war - while women have it relatively easy:

"In fast jeder Hinsicht sind Frauen seit eh und je das privilegierte Geschlecht. Als Kinder werden sie sanfter angefaßt und mehr behütet. Als Studentinnen wird ihnen schon seit langem nachgesehen, dass sie sich von Fächern fernhalten, die als die schwierigsten gelten. Als Erwachsene sind sie unter weniger Konkurrenz- und Leidensdruck. Was ihren Lebensunterhalt betrifft, sind sie oft in der beneidenswerten Lage, konsumieren zu können ohne produzieren zu müssen. Als Kriminelle und Prozessführende werden sie vom Gesetz und von den Gerichten wesentlich nachsichtiger behandelt. Als Staatsbürgerinnen sind sie nicht nur von der Pflicht befreit, an den schrecklichsten aller menschlichen Aktivitäten, d.h. dem Krieg, teilzunehmen, sondern werden auch besser vor ihm geschützt. Von Männern auf den Schultern getragen - manchmal, wenn es darum geht, Naturkatastrophen und ähnlichem zu entkommen, im wörtlichen Sinne - haben Frauen stets den Löwenanteil der Annehmlichkeiten genossen, die eine Gesellschaft, egal wann und wo, zu bieten hatte. Frauen, deren Leben als wertvoller gilt als das von Männern, sind seltener Opfer von Gewaltverbrechen"

("Women have always been the privileged sex in every sense. As children they are treated more gently and protected more.  As students they are permitted to stay away from subjects that are perceived as the most difficult.  As adults they are not under the same pressure to compete and experience less stress. And with respect to support they are often lucky enough to consume without having to produce. As criminals they are treated by the courts with more compassion. As citizens they are relieved from having to perform the most terrible duty of all: waging war.  And are protected from the ravages of war. Men literally carry them on their shoulders to escape from natural catastrophes,  Women are always the beneficiaries of all the best that society offers. Women, whose lives are seen as more valuable than men's, are less frequently the victims of violent crimes.")

 And when it comes to violent crimes, the female students at the University of Trier must have been surprised to learn that Martin van Creveld doesn't see rape as such a bad thing; in fact, for sexually experienced women it has no lasting impact.  No wonder the editors of Junge Freiheit champion van Creveld. 

Comments

[Hattie]

I can think of lots of ways in which it's better to be a man than a woman. Could I get a lecture engagement at some German university and talk about that?
You know what really bugs me? Men run the world and then complain about how rough they have it! And blame women to boot!

[David]

Hattie,

I would pay to watch a debate between you and Herman Cain!

[rfs]

typical feminist, half-witted young women, those students who made him go away. northern europe is full of women like that.

[Luiz Antônio]

I support entirely Martin Van Creveld and others, like Warren Farrel.
Creveld was attacked because he told the truth. The force of women is evident when hetero males trie to reveal inconvenient facts about female manipulation. They (women) react violently and show absolutely no respect with men who show his arguments (contrary to hers).
Of course, men are not perfect, but this is not the point. The point is that women were favoured in the past and continue to be in the present. They retire younger than men, they do not have to go to war, they have specific laws to guarantee his (own) rights, they guard the children in case of divorce... and so on, so on... And the worst of all: several hetero men believe in her fallacies and defend their causes against the rest of men's groups...