[Continuation] Cancel culture IRL Part 2 - Page 8

d4m10n · 20th October 2021, 04:42 PM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

But not only is he not in serious danger of being pulled, the publicity will be good for his viewing figures.

I share the intuition that he's not in serious danger of being pulled, but I've been surprised enough (on this topic) not to trust my intuitions.

Emily's Cat · 20th October 2021, 04:42 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

Oh, I don’t expect Joe Rogan, or anyone else, to never offend anyone. It’s that when they do, they’re going to hear about it. And why shouldn’t they? Only Joe Rogan gets to have an opinion? Telling people to grow up and stop complaining because they’re offended by something you feel they shouldn’t be isnt even that dissimilar to be honest.

Well no, I don't think they should stop complaining because I don't think they should be offended by it. Sometimes I'm the one offended. I think they should grow up and stop complaining about it because everyone gets offended by stuff sometimes, and any single person's personal offense shouldn't obligate other people to take any action. It's not Joe's job to make sure that Betty is never offended. Betty can be as offended as Betty gets, but oh well. That's 90% of the time Betty's problem, not Joe's.

Originally Posted by dirtywick

But, Joe Rogan doesn’t have to accept or apologize or even listen to the criticism and complaints either. I think it’s still fair for anyone to have an opinion on Joe Rogan and say what it is

Anyway, I don’t think enduring abuse on the principal that being offended is somehow not an acceptable reason to speak up is a great approach. If it works for you, which it doesn’t sound like it is, great. I don’t think it’s a universally accepted idea, or often even a good one. If someone does something that bothers you, maybe you should tell them.

I think it's more a matter of having some perspective on when the insult is intentional and when it's not, as well as when it's material and worth raising hell about. And I think a lot of people make a habit of getting offended and then using their hurt feelings to push people around.

Do you recall that splash ad by Dove several years back? It was for a body wash for all bodies, and the splash ad showed various females taking off their shirts, and as each raised the shirt over their head, they turned into the next female. There was a hispanic female who turned into a black female who turned into a white female who turned into a hispanic female and so on forever. Someone got offended because the black female was being turned into a white female, which meant somehow that Dove thought all black females are dirty. It was frankly ludicrous that an inclusive ad showing females of many races on equal footing was taken to be offensive. It got enough attention on social media that Dove ended up pulling the ad and apologizing.

That's the kind of thing where I think people need to grow up. It's obvious that Dove wasn't being insensitive or insulting. It was a perfectly fine ad. But some few people made an effort to be offended and got enough other professionally offended folks to make a stink about it.

It was dumb. It didn't address racial disparities or negative stereotypes in any fashion at all. It was performative.

Emily's Cat · 20th October 2021, 05:16 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

Nope, what they are demanding IS commonsense and tolerance - the demand you don't see is for Dave Chappelle to be cancelled! The claim that this comedian is being cancelled is complete and utter bull-****. No such thing is happening. Those who are protesting his transphobic comments are not trying to cancel him, they are trying to address the shortcomings of a workplace that is intolerant of them.

People have no control over whether they are trans, or gay or identify as a different gender to their physiological sex at birth. Its not a disease or an ailment of any kind. They are who they are, and its something they cannot do anything about. They should not be discriminated against because of it.

They want their workplace to be the way society should be, a place where being transexual or gay or gender neutral, is simply accepted as normal, and uncontroversial, where there is nothing to see here, where being these things is not even a topic of conversation.. where it simply is what it is.

Society should give special privileges to them?

Because that's what they're asking for in their demand. The existing equity fund isn't sufficient - they demand a special fund JUST FOR trans talent. Do any other groups get special funds just for them?

They demand more trans content on Netflix. Is Netflix's current trans content lower than the population proportion that trans people represent? Do other groups get to demand increases in content featuring their identities? Or is it only trans people that get extra content?

They demand a revision of processes for commissioning or releasing "potentially harmful" content, based on whether people in the trans community think it's "harmful". Do other groups get to define what constitutes "potentially harmful" content for them, and demand policies to address that?

They want to add warnings and disclaimers to things they decide are "anti-trans", and they want Netflix to suggest "trans affirming" stuff alongside anything labeled "anti trans". Do any other groups get to label content that they alone decide is "anti" their group? Do they get to insist that Netflix include recommended "pro" their group stuff alongside it?

This isn't a request for being treated fairly and with respect. This is a demand that they get special treatment.

dirtywick · 20th October 2021, 05:22 PM

https://www.google.com/amp/s/people....ts/%3famp=true

Aaron Rodgers runs in a touchdown to seal the game and yells that he owns the Bears at some Bears fans that were none too happy about losing the game. Most non Bears fans thought this was awesome and it goes viral. Goes on bizarre word salad rant about how unfair he’s been treated and how he won’t be silenced by woke cancel culture.

Emily's Cat · 20th October 2021, 05:24 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

https://www.google.com/amp/s/people....ts/%3famp=true

Aaron Rodgers runs in a touchdown to seal the game and yells that he owns the Bears at some Bears fans that were none too happy about losing the game. Most non Bears fans thought this was awesome and it goes viral. Goes on bizarre word salad rant about how unfair he’s been treated and how he won’t be silenced by woke cancel culture.

I'm gonna go ahead and toss that into the "people need to grow up and get over it" bucket. Both for this guy and the offended bears fans.

angrysoba · 20th October 2021, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Society should give special privileges to them?

Because that's what they're asking for in their demand. The existing equity fund isn't sufficient - they demand a special fund JUST FOR trans talent. Do any other groups get special funds just for them?

They demand more trans content on Netflix. Is Netflix's current trans content lower than the population proportion that trans people represent? Do other groups get to demand increases in content featuring their identities? Or is it only trans people that get extra content?

They demand a revision of processes for commissioning or releasing "potentially harmful" content, based on whether people in the trans community think it's "harmful". Do other groups get to define what constitutes "potentially harmful" content for them, and demand policies to address that?

They want to add warnings and disclaimers to things they decide are "anti-trans", and they want Netflix to suggest "trans affirming" stuff alongside anything labeled "anti trans". Do any other groups get to label content that they alone decide is "anti" their group? Do they get to insist that Netflix include recommended "pro" their group stuff alongside it?

This isn't a request for being treated fairly and with respect. This is a demand that they get special treatment.

I don’t know about Netflix, but there are of course numerous warnings that appear on some streaming services. I saw one on Amazon Prine that warned the characters smoked. Similarly I think Disney plus mentions that the shows have ethnic stereotypes. It wouldn’t seem too outlandish to me to have warnings about sexual violence or misogyny. This is one of those things where people might instinctively think “that’s madness!” Then think about it for a bit and decide, “actually, it might be fairly reasonable after all.”

Banning Smoking in pubs was once in the “that’s madness!” Bucket. But now it’s completely normal to have no smoking in pubs. In fact it is weird to have smoking permitted in indoor public places at all.

d4m10n · 20th October 2021, 05:44 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

https://www.google.com/amp/s/people....ts/%3famp=true

Aaron Rodgers runs in a touchdown to seal the game and yells that he owns the Bears at some Bears fans that were none too happy about losing the game. Most non Bears fans thought this was awesome and it goes viral. Goes on bizarre word salad rant about how unfair he’s been treated and how he won’t be silenced by woke cancel culture.

As a Chicago-born lifetime Bears fan, Rodgers is talking the kind of smack every NFL fan should expect. He shouldn't be cancelled (of course) and I doubt very many people are tryna get him canceled, even in Chicago.

smartcooky · 20th October 2021, 05:56 PM

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Society should give special privileges to them?

Society should simply regard them as part of Society, as normal and stop discriminating against them. If this were to happen, there would be no need for "special privileges" because they would be treated as equals and normal.

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Because that's what they're asking for in their demand.

Nope, and if that is your takeaway, then you, and people like you, are part of the problem.

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

The existing equity fund isn't sufficient - they demand a special fund JUST FOR trans talent. Do any other groups get special funds just for them?

People who are not trans.

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

They demand more trans content on Netflix. Is Netflix's current trans content lower than the population proportion that trans people represent? Do other groups get to demand increases in content featuring their identities? Or is it only trans people that get extra content?

Zero is lower that the proportion of people who are trans, so yes

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

They demand a revision of processes for commissioning or releasing "potentially harmful" content, based on whether people in the trans community think it's "harmful". Do other groups get to define what constitutes "potentially harmful" content for them, and demand policies to address that?

Yes, they do.

Have you never seen these on a TV program

G, Y, Y7, PG, 14, MA

How about these

D, L, S, V, FV

Why do you think these content advisories came about in the first place?

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

They want to add warnings and disclaimers to things they decide are "anti-trans", and they want Netflix to suggest "trans affirming" stuff alongside anything labeled "anti trans". Do any other groups get to label content that they alone decide is "anti" their group? Do they get to insist that Netflix include recommended "pro" their group stuff alongside it?

See above

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

This isn't a request for being treated fairly and with respect. This is a demand that they get special treatment.

First the damage has to be undone, the anti-trans, anti LGBTQ, racist and bigoted attitudes of people needs to be changed. That takes treating oppressed groups more fairly and in a less discriminatory manner, and sometimes yes, that means giving them special treatment to compensate or offset the actions and attitudes of bigots, until the wrongs are righted. It also requires certain members of Society to face the harsh reality that they are bigoted ********* that need to be smacked down hard for their bigotry!
.
.

lionking · 20th October 2021, 07:30 PM

Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides

FIRE

“I hope my story can salvage some measure of integrity in higher education,” said Earnest. “Universities must give more weight to the devastating, long-term effects of their actions on hard-working career academics like myself than they do to the short-term pleasure of being perceived as ‘right’ in the eyes of a small but vocal group of students.”

The linked story is a little too complex to summarize easily. I would like to highlight one aspect of this incident, namely the outrage that the students claimed to feel. I respectfully but strongly question whether the students really were as upset by this as their words and actions suggest. That goes double for the boulder that the University of Wisconsin moved (see upthread). Some have dubbed this performance art. That's a little too kind IMO.

This is appalling. The professor did not put the names on the board, and simply expressed an opinion that the students who walked out over reacted. Yet he’s been suspended and likely fired.

I have always liked to believe that universities were bastions of freedom, tolerance, free expression and principle. Not places of censorship and cowardice. My beliefs are changing.

angrysoba · 20th October 2021, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Well no, I don't think they should stop complaining because I don't think they should be offended by it. Sometimes I'm the one offended. I think they should grow up and stop complaining about it because everyone gets offended by stuff sometimes, and any single person's personal offense shouldn't obligate other people to take any action. It's not Joe's job to make sure that Betty is never offended. Betty can be as offended as Betty gets, but oh well. That's 90% of the time Betty's problem, not Joe's.

I think it's more a matter of having some perspective on when the insult is intentional and when it's not, as well as when it's material and worth raising hell about. And I think a lot of people make a habit of getting offended and then using their hurt feelings to push people around.

Do you recall that splash ad by Dove several years back? It was for a body wash for all bodies, and the splash ad showed various females taking off their shirts, and as each raised the shirt over their head, they turned into the next female. There was a hispanic female who turned into a black female who turned into a white female who turned into a hispanic female and so on forever. Someone got offended because the black female was being turned into a white female, which meant somehow that Dove thought all black females are dirty. It was frankly ludicrous that an inclusive ad showing females of many races on equal footing was taken to be offensive. It got enough attention on social media that Dove ended up pulling the ad and apologizing.

That's the kind of thing where I think people need to grow up. It's obvious that Dove wasn't being insensitive or insulting. It was a perfectly fine ad. But some few people made an effort to be offended and got enough other professionally offended folks to make a stink about it.

It was dumb. It didn't address racial disparities or negative stereotypes in any fashion at all. It was performative.

Performative whining is pretty much how I would sum up the whole IDW thing. The Weinsteins (or should that be Whinesteins - Lol!), Dave Rubin, Peter Boghossian, James Lindsay etc…. Performatively complaining about how the world has gone made rather than just acknowledging maybe they are just bog-standard reactionaries complaining about the youth of today.

smartcooky · 20th October 2021, 08:42 PM

Originally Posted by lionking

This is appalling. The professor did not put the names on the board, and simply expressed an opinion that the students who walked out over reacted. Yet he’s been suspended and likely fired.

I have always liked to believe that universities were bastions of freedom, tolerance, free expression and principle. Not places of censorship and cowardice. My beliefs are changing.

The problem with this is there are a number of academics who use this "freedom, tolerance, free expression and principle" as a cover for their bigotry. Having some alphabet soup after their names doesn't automatically make them nice people who wouldn't call a black person a ******.

(This from someone who does have some alphabet soup after his name)

dirtywick · 20th October 2021, 09:21 PM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

As a Chicago-born lifetime Bears fan, Rodgers is talking the kind of smack every NFL fan should expect. He shouldn't be cancelled (of course) and I doubt very many people are tryna get him canceled, even in Chicago.

Well, I agree, there doesn't appear to be a mob trying to cancel him. He's talking about how unfairly he's been treated, and how he won't cave to woke PC culture, when he went viral because people thought it was cool. Most people were happy he was fired up and looking like the league MVP. That's what makes his rant so bizarre.

lionking · 20th October 2021, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

The problem with this is there are a number of academics who use this "freedom, tolerance, free expression and principle" as a cover for their bigotry. Having some alphabet soup after their names doesn't automatically make them nice people who wouldn't call a black person a ******.

(This from someone who does have some alphabet soup after his name)

Not a factor in this case. Did you read the article?

smartcooky · 20th October 2021, 11:12 PM

Originally Posted by lionking

Not a factor in this case. Did you read the article?

You were generalising... "I have always liked to believe that universities were bastions of freedom, tolerance, free expression and principle" - I was also generalising, in reply.

And, no, I haven't read the article, and I have no intention of doing so.

Chris_Halkides · 21st October 2021, 04:15 AM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

And, no, I haven't read the article, and I have no intention of doing so.

Why not?

TurkeysGhost · 21st October 2021, 04:55 AM

Incoming cancellation

https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1...xpto9X1rg&s=19

angrysoba · 21st October 2021, 05:11 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Incoming cancellation

https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1...xpto9X1rg&s=19

Oh my word. That's super cringe, but honestly, I would just prefer her principal to say, "Look, could you please NOT do this in maths class. It does look pretty racist."

ponderingturtle · 21st October 2021, 05:22 AM

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Society should give special privileges to them?

Just like they gave the gays special privilege's with gay marriage.

Now I want there to be more openly racist comedians given specials on, after all why should black people be given special privilege's?

Hey I see a bright future in giving Jon Gruden comedy specials for his innovate take on race and sex. Netflix is entirely immoral to not give him a large payment for a comedy special.

ponderingturtle · 21st October 2021, 05:25 AM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

The problem with this is there are a number of academics who use this "freedom, tolerance, free expression and principle" as a cover for their bigotry. Having some alphabet soup after their names doesn't automatically make them nice people who wouldn't call a black person a ******.

Oh come on it is funny why are you trying to cancel someone for a simple joke?

ponderingturtle · 21st October 2021, 05:27 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Incoming cancellation

https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1...xpto9X1rg&s=19

Come on it is just funny. Why trying to make it out as some kind of racist act just because it was? Racist comedy is still comedy and so should always be allowed. I see a netflix special in her future.

Darat · 21st October 2021, 05:28 AM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Oh my word. That's super cringe, but honestly, I would just prefer her principal to say, "Look, could you please NOT do this in maths class. It does look pretty racist."

Not even that for me - it would be "I know you want to bring maths alive for your students and help them with trigonometry, but you look like an idiot"

ponderingturtle · 21st October 2021, 05:32 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

Not even that for me - it would be "I know you want to bring maths alive for your students and help them with trigonometry, but you look like an idiot"

What teachers have the right to harass and belittle their students for any reason they deem appropriate, though race and sexuality are of course popular favorites.

Next you will be thinking that maybe a white supremacist podcast is not an appropriate hobby for a teacher? Why who better to present both sides of the history of the holocaust?

lionking · 21st October 2021, 05:43 AM

Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides

Why not?

Because it would be uncomfortable for him

pgwenthold · 21st October 2021, 06:28 AM

How can I offend thee, let me count the ways....

Teacher uses, um, questionable methods for teaching trigonometry.

https://twitter.com/UrbanInuk/status...89276557025280

Whatever happened to "Some Old Horse Came A-Hopping Through Our Alley"?

No word on whether she has been fired yet...or "put on administrative leave" even.

angrysoba · 21st October 2021, 06:33 AM

She's definitely pretty committed to her performance by the looks of things....

https://twitter.com/CommunistsEgirl/...58863541719040

TurkeysGhost · 21st October 2021, 08:24 AM

A simply baffling level of bad judgement at work here. It's really hard to imagine why anyone would think this was appropriate, unless this was some stunt to get fired intentionally.

pgwenthold · 21st October 2021, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

A simply baffling level of bad judgement at work here. It's really hard to imagine why anyone would think this was appropriate, unless this was some stunt to get fired intentionally.

It's not like she is some 65 year old person claiming, "Well it was acceptable when I started doing it back in 1980"

Apparently she has been doing this for almost 10 years. No, it was not considered acceptable back in 2012. Protests against the Braves's and Florida St "tomahawk chop" go back to at least 1994.

Yes, it is a baffling lack of awareness. This is why I would not want her to continue teaching. Anyone so completely clueless on this is not someone I would trust.

I've seen some suggesting that "oh, the principal just needs to have a talk with her," but I don't see it. Does she really need to be told this is inappropriate?

(the sadder ones are those who are actually trying to excuse it because, hey, she's trying to teach a difficult subject. Um, no)

ponderingturtle · 21st October 2021, 08:45 AM

Originally Posted by pgwenthold

It's not like she is some 65 year old person claiming, "Well it was acceptable when I started doing it back in 1980"

Apparently she has been doing this for almost 10 years. No, it was not considered acceptable back in 2012. Protests against the Braves's and Florida St "tomahawk chop" go back to at least 1994.

Yes, it is a baffling lack of awareness. This is why I would not want her to continue teaching. Anyone so completely clueless on this is not someone I would trust.

I've seen some suggesting that "oh, the principal just needs to have a talk with her," but I don't see it. Does she really need to be told this is inappropriate?

(the sadder ones are those who are actually trying to excuse it because, hey, she's trying to teach a difficult subject. Um, no)

Is this something that is made more or less outrageous by watching the video with the sound off?

TurkeysGhost · 21st October 2021, 08:49 AM

Originally Posted by pgwenthold

It's not like she is some 65 year old person claiming, "Well it was acceptable when I started doing it back in 1980"

Apparently she has been doing this for almost 10 years. No, it was not considered acceptable back in 2012. Protests against the Braves's and Florida St "tomahawk chop" go back to at least 1994.

Yes, it is a baffling lack of awareness. This is why I would not want her to continue teaching. Anyone so completely clueless on this is not someone I would trust.

I've seen some suggesting that "oh, the principal just needs to have a talk with her," but I don't see it. Does she really need to be told this is inappropriate?

(the sadder ones are those who are actually trying to excuse it because, hey, she's trying to teach a difficult subject. Um, no)

Popehat, aka Ken White, out of LA has this to say about Riverside:

Quote:

Riverside, where this happened, is east of Los Angeles in the Inland Empire. It’s super-diverse but also has a very strong contingent of white folks like this.

https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1...416811524?s=19

So maybe this lady is living in some bubble where this very racist routine might seem normal. I'm not familiar with the area but this local isn't exactly doing them any favors for their reputation.

pgwenthold · 21st October 2021, 11:20 AM

She is now on "leave"

until it blows over? I hope not.

smartcooky · 21st October 2021, 12:12 PM

Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides

Why not?

Because

1. The petty bickering that goes on in academia is of little interest to me, and

2. I already know that FIRE defends speech I find unacceptable and indefensible, and

3. Any organisation that advocates allowing scumbags like Milo Yiannopoulos, Ann Coulter, Bill Ayers and Ben "Uncle Tom" Carson a platform to open their vile mouths in front of university students is not an organisation I have any interest in hearing from.

I would no more read a FIRE article than I would read an article on OAN or Newsmax.

Originally Posted by lionking

Because it would be uncomfortable for him

True. I am very uncomfortable with the idea of an organisation with a clearly Liberal bias supporting the speech of predominantly bigots and racists on the far right, and doing so under the cover of advocating "academic freedom of speech".

d4m10n · 21st October 2021, 03:03 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

Any organisation that advocates allowing scumbags like Milo Yiannopoulos, Ann Coulter, Bill Ayers and Ben "Uncle Tom" Carson a platform to open their vile mouths in front of university students is not an organisation I have any interest in hearing from.

At least you're upfront trying to censor ideas you don't like.

lionking · 21st October 2021, 03:15 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

True. I am very uncomfortable with the idea of an organisation with a clearly Liberal bias supporting the speech of predominantly bigots and racists on the far right, and doing so under the cover of advocating "academic freedom of speech".

How on earth is the professor in the linked article a bigot?

Elaedith · 21st October 2021, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by lionking

How on earth is the professor in the linked article a bigot?

He weighs the same as a duck.

Graham2001 · 21st October 2021, 03:20 PM

The New York Times on the Dorian Abbot affair at NYT...

Quote:

CHICAGO — The Massachusetts Institute of Technology invited the geophysicist Dorian Abbot to give a prestigious public lecture this autumn. He seemed a natural choice, a scientific star who studies climate change and whether planets in distant solar systems might harbor atmospheres conducive to life.

Then a swell of angry resistance arose. Some faculty members and graduate students argued that Dr. Abbot, a professor at the University of Chicago, had created harm by speaking out against aspects of affirmative action and diversity programs. In videos and opinion pieces, Dr. Abbot, who is white, has asserted that such programs treat “people as members of a group rather than as individuals, repeating the mistake that made possible the atrocities of the 20th century.” He said that he favored a diverse pool of applicants selected on merit.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/20/u...abbot-mit.html

Jerry Coyne (Who is quoted in the NYT article.) also published a comentary on his blog.

Quote:

The saga of Dorian Abbot began quietly on my campus, and when it was resolved at the University of Chicago, I thought that was the end of it. But then, because Abbot had written and made videos criticizing affirmative action and DEI initiatives, he was disinvited from the prestigious Carlson lectures at MIT, where he was supposed to speak on global warming (they later offered him a smaller technical lecture on his work). This deplatforming was picked up by several venues in the conservative media, including the conservative columnist Bret Stephens at the NYT, but I was frustrated that the non-conservative press ignored such an egregious incident of cancellation.

It was especially egregious because Abbot wasn’t going to talk at MIT about DEI or the like, but about global warming and other planets. In other words, he was being punished for saying things in other venues that offended people. More than that: there is a valid debate about the methods of DEI initiatives, though their intent is admirable. I accept the need for some affirmative action as a means of reparation, but others don’t, and none of us should be punished or cancelled for our views.

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/...g-on-its-face/

angrysoba · 21st October 2021, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by pgwenthold

It's not like she is some 65 year old person claiming, "Well it was acceptable when I started doing it back in 1980"

Apparently she has been doing this for almost 10 years. No, it was not considered acceptable back in 2012. Protests against the Braves's and Florida St "tomahawk chop" go back to at least 1994.

Yes, it is a baffling lack of awareness. This is why I would not want her to continue teaching. Anyone so completely clueless on this is not someone I would trust.

I've seen some suggesting that "oh, the principal just needs to have a talk with her," but I don't see it. Does she really need to be told this is inappropriate?

(the sadder ones are those who are actually trying to excuse it because, hey, she's trying to teach a difficult subject. Um, no)

Yeah, I get what you mean. I did say that the principal should have a word with her, but given the second video and the knowledge that she’s been doing this for some time I would think it requires a bit more than a word. I tend to be optimistic about the idea that people can be better so the school admin should look into this, probably issue a warning and some retraining. I still don’t like to support firings as a first response, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it comes to that.

angrysoba · 21st October 2021, 03:39 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

Because

1. The petty bickering that goes on in academia is of little interest to me, and

2. I already know that FIRE defends speech I find unacceptable and indefensible, and

3. Any organisation that advocates allowing scumbags like Milo Yiannopoulos, Ann Coulter, Bill Ayers and Ben "Uncle Tom" Carson a platform to open their vile mouths in front of university students is not an organisation I have any interest in hearing from.

I would no more read a FIRE article than I would read an article on OAN or Newsmax.

True. I am very uncomfortable with the idea of an organisation with a clearly Liberal bias supporting the speech of predominantly bigots and racists on the far right, and doing so under the cover of advocating "academic freedom of speech".

I think the point of having people like Fire is to protect academic freedoms. It means that the person is irrelevant. The principle is important. We shouldn’t just fire people because we don’t like their ideas or their political persuasion.

It’s like the ACLU or Amnesty International. They are not so interested in how big an ******* the person they are defending is, and I fully support organizations who can separate principle from emotions.

Also, someone who unironically used the term “Uncle Tom” would probably get fired.

d4m10n · 21st October 2021, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Also, someone who unironically used the term “Uncle Tom” would probably get fired.

It's a slur; it's only directed at black folks.

Draw your own conclusions.

angrysoba · 21st October 2021, 04:02 PM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

It's a slur; it's only directed at black folks.

Draw your own conclusions.

I know. It’s racist to use Uncle Tom in the context of a black person acting white or supporting white supremacy etc…

smartcooky · 21st October 2021, 04:40 PM

Originally Posted by lionking

How on earth is the professor in the linked article a bigot?

If you read and understood the reply to the last post you quoted me in, you would realise that...

20th October 2021, 04:42 PM	#281
d4m10n Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 10,908	Originally Posted by angrysoba But not only is he not in serious danger of being pulled, the publicity will be good for his viewing figures. I share the intuition that he's not in serious danger of being pulled, but I've been surprised enough (on this topic) not to trust my intuitions.
	__________________ Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.

20th October 2021, 04:42 PM	#282
Emily's Cat Rarely prone to hissy-fits Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth Posts: 19,642	Originally Posted by dirtywick Oh, I don’t expect Joe Rogan, or anyone else, to never offend anyone. It’s that when they do, they’re going to hear about it. And why shouldn’t they? Only Joe Rogan gets to have an opinion? Telling people to grow up and stop complaining because they’re offended by something you feel they shouldn’t be isnt even that dissimilar to be honest. Well no, I don't think they should stop complaining because I don't think they should be offended by it. Sometimes I'm the one offended. I think they should grow up and stop complaining about it because everyone gets offended by stuff sometimes, and any single person's personal offense shouldn't obligate other people to take any action. It's not Joe's job to make sure that Betty is never offended. Betty can be as offended as Betty gets, but oh well. That's 90% of the time Betty's problem, not Joe's. Originally Posted by dirtywick But, Joe Rogan doesn’t have to accept or apologize or even listen to the criticism and complaints either. I think it’s still fair for anyone to have an opinion on Joe Rogan and say what it is Anyway, I don’t think enduring abuse on the principal that being offended is somehow not an acceptable reason to speak up is a great approach. If it works for you, which it doesn’t sound like it is, great. I don’t think it’s a universally accepted idea, or often even a good one. If someone does something that bothers you, maybe you should tell them. I think it's more a matter of having some perspective on when the insult is intentional and when it's not, as well as when it's material and worth raising hell about. And I think a lot of people make a habit of getting offended and then using their hurt feelings to push people around. Do you recall that splash ad by Dove several years back? It was for a body wash for all bodies, and the splash ad showed various females taking off their shirts, and as each raised the shirt over their head, they turned into the next female. There was a hispanic female who turned into a black female who turned into a white female who turned into a hispanic female and so on forever. Someone got offended because the black female was being turned into a white female, which meant somehow that Dove thought all black females are dirty. It was frankly ludicrous that an inclusive ad showing females of many races on equal footing was taken to be offensive. It got enough attention on social media that Dove ended up pulling the ad and apologizing. That's the kind of thing where I think people need to grow up. It's obvious that Dove wasn't being insensitive or insulting. It was a perfectly fine ad. But some few people made an effort to be offended and got enough other professionally offended folks to make a stink about it. It was dumb. It didn't address racial disparities or negative stereotypes in any fashion at all. It was performative.
	__________________ The distance between the linguistic dehumanization of a people and their actual suppression and extermination is not great; it is but a small step. - Haig Bosmajian

20th October 2021, 05:16 PM	#283
Emily's Cat Rarely prone to hissy-fits Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth Posts: 19,642	Originally Posted by smartcooky Nope, what they are demanding IS commonsense and tolerance - the demand you don't see is for Dave Chappelle to be cancelled! The claim that this comedian is being cancelled is complete and utter bull-**. No such thing is happening. Those who are protesting his transphobic comments are not trying to cancel him, they are trying to address the shortcomings of a workplace that is intolerant of them. People have no control over whether they are trans, or gay or identify as a different gender to their physiological sex at birth. Its not** a disease or an ailment of any kind. They are who they are, and its something they cannot do anything about. They should not be discriminated against because of it. They want their workplace to be the way society should be, a place where being transexual or gay or gender neutral, is simply accepted as normal, and uncontroversial, where there is nothing to see here, where being these things is not even a topic of conversation.. where it simply is what it is. Society should give special privileges to them? Because that's what they're asking for in their demand. The existing equity fund isn't sufficient - they demand a special fund JUST FOR trans talent. Do any other groups get special funds just for them? They demand more trans content on Netflix. Is Netflix's current trans content lower than the population proportion that trans people represent? Do other groups get to demand increases in content featuring their identities? Or is it only trans people that get extra content? They demand a revision of processes for commissioning or releasing "potentially harmful" content, based on whether people in the trans community think it's "harmful". Do other groups get to define what constitutes "potentially harmful" content for them, and demand policies to address that? They want to add warnings and disclaimers to things they decide are "anti-trans", and they want Netflix to suggest "trans affirming" stuff alongside anything labeled "anti trans". Do any other groups get to label content that they alone decide is "anti" their group? Do they get to insist that Netflix include recommended "pro" their group stuff alongside it? This isn't a request for being treated fairly and with respect. This is a demand that they get special treatment.
	__________________ The distance between the linguistic dehumanization of a people and their actual suppression and extermination is not great; it is but a small step. - Haig Bosmajian

20th October 2021, 05:22 PM	#284
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 4,374	https://www.google.com/amp/s/people....ts/%3famp=true Aaron Rodgers runs in a touchdown to seal the game and yells that he owns the Bears at some Bears fans that were none too happy about losing the game. Most non Bears fans thought this was awesome and it goes viral. Goes on bizarre word salad rant about how unfair he’s been treated and how he won’t be silenced by woke cancel culture.
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 4,374

20th October 2021, 05:24 PM	#285
Emily's Cat Rarely prone to hissy-fits Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth Posts: 19,642	Originally Posted by dirtywick https://www.google.com/amp/s/people....ts/%3famp=true Aaron Rodgers runs in a touchdown to seal the game and yells that he owns the Bears at some Bears fans that were none too happy about losing the game. Most non Bears fans thought this was awesome and it goes viral. Goes on bizarre word salad rant about how unfair he’s been treated and how he won’t be silenced by woke cancel culture. I'm gonna go ahead and toss that into the "people need to grow up and get over it" bucket. Both for this guy and the offended bears fans.
	__________________ The distance between the linguistic dehumanization of a people and their actual suppression and extermination is not great; it is but a small step. - Haig Bosmajian

20th October 2021, 05:34 PM	#286
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 34,387	Originally Posted by Emily's Cat Society should give special privileges to them? Because that's what they're asking for in their demand. The existing equity fund isn't sufficient - they demand a special fund JUST FOR trans talent. Do any other groups get special funds just for them? They demand more trans content on Netflix. Is Netflix's current trans content lower than the population proportion that trans people represent? Do other groups get to demand increases in content featuring their identities? Or is it only trans people that get extra content? They demand a revision of processes for commissioning or releasing "potentially harmful" content, based on whether people in the trans community think it's "harmful". Do other groups get to define what constitutes "potentially harmful" content for them, and demand policies to address that? They want to add warnings and disclaimers to things they decide are "anti-trans", and they want Netflix to suggest "trans affirming" stuff alongside anything labeled "anti trans". Do any other groups get to label content that they alone decide is "anti" their group? Do they get to insist that Netflix include recommended "pro" their group stuff alongside it? This isn't a request for being treated fairly and with respect. This is a demand that they get special treatment. I don’t know about Netflix, but there are of course numerous warnings that appear on some streaming services. I saw one on Amazon Prine that warned the characters smoked. Similarly I think Disney plus mentions that the shows have ethnic stereotypes. It wouldn’t seem too outlandish to me to have warnings about sexual violence or misogyny. This is one of those things where people might instinctively think “that’s madness!” Then think about it for a bit and decide, “actually, it might be fairly reasonable after all.” Banning Smoking in pubs was once in the “that’s madness!” Bucket. But now it’s completely normal to have no smoking in pubs. In fact it is weird to have smoking permitted in indoor public places at all.
	__________________ Слава Україні! **** Putin!

20th October 2021, 05:44 PM	#287
d4m10n Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 10,908	Originally Posted by dirtywick https://www.google.com/amp/s/people....ts/%3famp=true Aaron Rodgers runs in a touchdown to seal the game and yells that he owns the Bears at some Bears fans that were none too happy about losing the game. Most non Bears fans thought this was awesome and it goes viral. Goes on bizarre word salad rant about how unfair he’s been treated and how he won’t be silenced by woke cancel culture. As a Chicago-born lifetime Bears fan, Rodgers is talking the kind of smack every NFL fan should expect. He shouldn't be cancelled (of course) and I doubt very many people are tryna get him canceled, even in Chicago.
	__________________ Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it. Last edited by d4m10n; 20th October 2021 at 05:45 PM.

20th October 2021, 05:56 PM	#288
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 23,587	Originally Posted by Emily's Cat Society should give special privileges to them? Society should simply regard them as part of Society, as normal and stop discriminating against them. If this were to happen, there would be no need for "special privileges" because they would be treated as equals and normal. Originally Posted by Emily's Cat Because that's what they're asking for in their demand. Nope, and if that is your takeaway, then you, and people like you, are part of the problem. Originally Posted by Emily's Cat The existing equity fund isn't sufficient - they demand a special fund JUST FOR trans talent. Do any other groups get special funds just for them? People who are not trans. Originally Posted by Emily's Cat They demand more trans content on Netflix. Is Netflix's current trans content lower than the population proportion that trans people represent? Do other groups get to demand increases in content featuring their identities? Or is it only trans people that get extra content? Zero is lower that the proportion of people who are trans, so yes Originally Posted by Emily's Cat They demand a revision of processes for commissioning or releasing "potentially harmful" content, based on whether people in the trans community think it's "harmful". Do other groups get to define what constitutes "potentially harmful" content for them, and demand policies to address that? Yes, they do. Have you never seen these on a TV program G, Y, Y7, PG, 14, MA How about these D, L, S, V, FV G - General Audience Y - Appropriate for all children Y7 - unsuitable for children under 7 years of age. PG - Parental Guidance recommended 14 - unsuitable for children under 14 years of age MA - unsuitable for children under 17 years ofage. D –Suggestive dialogue L –Coarse or crude language S –Sexual situations V – Violence FV –Fantasy violence MA - Mature audiences These warnings are specifically for groups, like parents of young children, those who might be upset by violence, those who don't want to be surprised by sexual content that might find content disturbing or harmful. Why do you think these content advisories came about in the first place? Originally Posted by Emily's Cat They want to add warnings and disclaimers to things they decide are "anti-trans", and they want Netflix to suggest "trans affirming" stuff alongside anything labeled "anti trans". Do any other groups get to label content that they alone decide is "anti" their group? Do they get to insist that Netflix include recommended "pro" their group stuff alongside it? See above Originally Posted by Emily's Cat This isn't a request for being treated fairly and with respect. This is a demand that they get special treatment. First the damage has to be undone, the anti-trans, anti LGBTQ, racist and bigoted attitudes of people needs to be changed. That takes treating oppressed groups more fairly and in a less discriminatory manner, and sometimes yes, that means giving them special treatment to compensate or offset the actions and attitudes of bigots, until the wrongs are righted. It also requires certain members of Society to face the harsh reality that they are bigoted ********* that need to be smacked down hard for their bigotry! . .
	__________________ What is Woke? It is a term that means "awakened to the needs of others". It means to be well-informed, thoughtful, compassionate, humble and kind. Woke people are keen to make the world a better, fairer place for everyone, But, unfortunately, it has also become a pejorative used by racists, homophobes and misogynists on the political right, to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

20th October 2021, 07:30 PM	#289
lionking In the Peanut Gallery Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 53,422	Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides FIRE “I hope my story can salvage some measure of integrity in higher education,” said Earnest. “Universities must give more weight to the devastating, long-term effects of their actions on hard-working career academics like myself than they do to the short-term pleasure of being perceived as ‘right’ in the eyes of a small but vocal group of students.” The linked story is a little too complex to summarize easily. I would like to highlight one aspect of this incident, namely the outrage that the students claimed to feel. I respectfully but strongly question whether the students really were as upset by this as their words and actions suggest. That goes double for the boulder that the University of Wisconsin moved (see upthread). Some have dubbed this performance art. That's a little too kind IMO. This is appalling. The professor did not put the names on the board, and simply expressed an opinion that the students who walked out over reacted. Yet he’s been suspended and likely fired. I have always liked to believe that universities were bastions of freedom, tolerance, free expression and principle. Not places of censorship and cowardice. My beliefs are changing.
	__________________ A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill

20th October 2021, 08:20 PM	#290
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 34,387	Originally Posted by Emily's Cat Well no, I don't think they should stop complaining because I don't think they should be offended by it. Sometimes I'm the one offended. I think they should grow up and stop complaining about it because everyone gets offended by stuff sometimes, and any single person's personal offense shouldn't obligate other people to take any action. It's not Joe's job to make sure that Betty is never offended. Betty can be as offended as Betty gets, but oh well. That's 90% of the time Betty's problem, not Joe's. I think it's more a matter of having some perspective on when the insult is intentional and when it's not, as well as when it's material and worth raising hell about. And I think a lot of people make a habit of getting offended and then using their hurt feelings to push people around. Do you recall that splash ad by Dove several years back? It was for a body wash for all bodies, and the splash ad showed various females taking off their shirts, and as each raised the shirt over their head, they turned into the next female. There was a hispanic female who turned into a black female who turned into a white female who turned into a hispanic female and so on forever. Someone got offended because the black female was being turned into a white female, which meant somehow that Dove thought all black females are dirty. It was frankly ludicrous that an inclusive ad showing females of many races on equal footing was taken to be offensive. It got enough attention on social media that Dove ended up pulling the ad and apologizing. That's the kind of thing where I think people need to grow up. It's obvious that Dove wasn't being insensitive or insulting. It was a perfectly fine ad. But some few people made an effort to be offended and got enough other professionally offended folks to make a stink about it. It was dumb. It didn't address racial disparities or negative stereotypes in any fashion at all. It was performative. Performative whining is pretty much how I would sum up the whole IDW thing. The Weinsteins (or should that be Whinesteins - Lol!), Dave Rubin, Peter Boghossian, James Lindsay etc…. Performatively complaining about how the world has gone made rather than just acknowledging maybe they are just bog-standard reactionaries complaining about the youth of today.
	__________________ Слава Україні! **** Putin!

20th October 2021, 08:42 PM	#291
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 23,587	Originally Posted by lionking This is appalling. The professor did not put the names on the board, and simply expressed an opinion that the students who walked out over reacted. Yet he’s been suspended and likely fired. I have always liked to believe that universities were bastions of freedom, tolerance, free expression and principle. Not places of censorship and cowardice. My beliefs are changing. The problem with this is there are a number of academics who use this "freedom, tolerance, free expression and principle" as a cover for their bigotry. Having some alphabet soup after their names doesn't automatically make them nice people who wouldn't call a black person a ******. (This from someone who does have some alphabet soup after his name)
	__________________ What is Woke? It is a term that means "awakened to the needs of others". It means to be well-informed, thoughtful, compassionate, humble and kind. Woke people are keen to make the world a better, fairer place for everyone, But, unfortunately, it has also become a pejorative used by racists, homophobes and misogynists on the political right, to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass. Last edited by smartcooky; 20th October 2021 at 08:50 PM.

20th October 2021, 09:21 PM	#292
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 4,374	Originally Posted by d4m10n As a Chicago-born lifetime Bears fan, Rodgers is talking the kind of smack every NFL fan should expect. He shouldn't be cancelled (of course) and I doubt very many people are tryna get him canceled, even in Chicago. Well, I agree, there doesn't appear to be a mob trying to cancel him. He's talking about how unfairly he's been treated, and how he won't cave to woke PC culture, when he went viral because people thought it was cool. Most people were happy he was fired up and looking like the league MVP. That's what makes his rant so bizarre.
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 4,374

20th October 2021, 09:23 PM	#293
lionking In the Peanut Gallery Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 53,422	Originally Posted by smartcooky The problem with this is there are a number of academics who use this "freedom, tolerance, free expression and principle" as a cover for their bigotry. Having some alphabet soup after their names doesn't automatically make them nice people who wouldn't call a black person a ******. (This from someone who does have some alphabet soup after his name) Not a factor in this case. Did you read the article?
	__________________ A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill

20th October 2021, 11:12 PM	#294
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 23,587	Originally Posted by lionking Not a factor in this case. Did you read the article? You were generalising... "I have always liked to believe that universities were bastions of freedom, tolerance, free expression and principle" - I was also generalising, in reply. And, no, I haven't read the article, and I have no intention of doing so.
	__________________ What is Woke? It is a term that means "awakened to the needs of others". It means to be well-informed, thoughtful, compassionate, humble and kind. Woke people are keen to make the world a better, fairer place for everyone, But, unfortunately, it has also become a pejorative used by racists, homophobes and misogynists on the political right, to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

21st October 2021, 04:15 AM	#295
Chris_Halkides Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 11,077	It is not a long article Originally Posted by smartcooky And, no, I haven't read the article, and I have no intention of doing so. Why not?
	__________________ It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)

21st October 2021, 04:55 AM	#296
TurkeysGhost Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2018 Posts: 31,583	Incoming cancellation https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1...xpto9X1rg&s=19
	__________________ Previously known as SuburbanTurkey

21st October 2021, 05:11 AM	#297
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 34,387	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey Incoming cancellation https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1...xpto9X1rg&s=19 Oh my word. That's super cringe, but honestly, I would just prefer her principal to say, "Look, could you please NOT do this in maths class. It does look pretty racist."
	__________________ Слава Україні! **** Putin!

21st October 2021, 05:22 AM	#298
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 53,068	Originally Posted by Emily's Cat Society should give special privileges to them? Just like they gave the gays special privilege's with gay marriage. Now I want there to be more openly racist comedians given specials on, after all why should black people be given special privilege's? Hey I see a bright future in giving Jon Gruden comedy specials for his innovate take on race and sex. Netflix is entirely immoral to not give him a large payment for a comedy special.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin Last edited by ponderingturtle; 21st October 2021 at 05:23 AM.

21st October 2021, 05:25 AM	#299
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 53,068	Originally Posted by smartcooky The problem with this is there are a number of academics who use this "freedom, tolerance, free expression and principle" as a cover for their bigotry. Having some alphabet soup after their names doesn't automatically make them nice people who wouldn't call a black person a ******. Oh come on it is funny why are you trying to cancel someone for a simple joke?
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

21st October 2021, 05:27 AM	#300
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 53,068	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey Incoming cancellation https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1...xpto9X1rg&s=19 Come on it is just funny. Why trying to make it out as some kind of racist act just because it was? Racist comedy is still comedy and so should always be allowed. I see a netflix special in her future.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

21st October 2021, 05:28 AM	#301
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 109,587	Originally Posted by angrysoba Oh my word. That's super cringe, but honestly, I would just prefer her principal to say, "Look, could you please NOT do this in maths class. It does look pretty racist." Not even that for me - it would be "I know you want to bring maths alive for your students and help them with trigonometry, but you look like an idiot"
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

21st October 2021, 05:32 AM	#302
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 53,068	Originally Posted by Darat Not even that for me - it would be "I know you want to bring maths alive for your students and help them with trigonometry, but you look like an idiot" What teachers have the right to harass and belittle their students for any reason they deem appropriate, though race and sexuality are of course popular favorites. Next you will be thinking that maybe a white supremacist podcast is not an appropriate hobby for a teacher? Why who better to present both sides of the history of the holocaust?
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

21st October 2021, 05:43 AM	#303
lionking In the Peanut Gallery Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 53,422	Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides Why not? Because it would be uncomfortable for him
	__________________ A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill

21st October 2021, 06:28 AM	#304
pgwenthold Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 21,103	How can I offend thee, let me count the ways.... Teacher uses, um, questionable methods for teaching trigonometry. https://twitter.com/UrbanInuk/status...89276557025280 Whatever happened to "Some Old Horse Came A-Hopping Through Our Alley"? No word on whether she has been fired yet...or "put on administrative leave" even.
	__________________ "As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets

21st October 2021, 06:33 AM	#305
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 34,387	She's definitely pretty committed to her performance by the looks of things.... https://twitter.com/CommunistsEgirl/...58863541719040
	__________________ Слава Україні! **** Putin!

21st October 2021, 08:24 AM	#306
TurkeysGhost Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2018 Posts: 31,583	A simply baffling level of bad judgement at work here. It's really hard to imagine why anyone would think this was appropriate, unless this was some stunt to get fired intentionally.
	__________________ Previously known as SuburbanTurkey

21st October 2021, 08:42 AM	#307
pgwenthold Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 21,103	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey A simply baffling level of bad judgement at work here. It's really hard to imagine why anyone would think this was appropriate, unless this was some stunt to get fired intentionally. It's not like she is some 65 year old person claiming, "Well it was acceptable when I started doing it back in 1980" Apparently she has been doing this for almost 10 years. No, it was not considered acceptable back in 2012. Protests against the Braves's and Florida St "tomahawk chop" go back to at least 1994. Yes, it is a baffling lack of awareness. This is why I would not want her to continue teaching. Anyone so completely clueless on this is not someone I would trust. I've seen some suggesting that "oh, the principal just needs to have a talk with her," but I don't see it. Does she really need to be told this is inappropriate? (the sadder ones are those who are actually trying to excuse it because, hey, she's trying to teach a difficult subject. Um, no)
	__________________ "As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets

21st October 2021, 08:45 AM	#308
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 53,068	Originally Posted by pgwenthold It's not like she is some 65 year old person claiming, "Well it was acceptable when I started doing it back in 1980" Apparently she has been doing this for almost 10 years. No, it was not considered acceptable back in 2012. Protests against the Braves's and Florida St "tomahawk chop" go back to at least 1994. Yes, it is a baffling lack of awareness. This is why I would not want her to continue teaching. Anyone so completely clueless on this is not someone I would trust. I've seen some suggesting that "oh, the principal just needs to have a talk with her," but I don't see it. Does she really need to be told this is inappropriate? (the sadder ones are those who are actually trying to excuse it because, hey, she's trying to teach a difficult subject. Um, no) Is this something that is made more or less outrageous by watching the video with the sound off?
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

21st October 2021, 08:49 AM	#309
TurkeysGhost Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2018 Posts: 31,583	Originally Posted by pgwenthold It's not like she is some 65 year old person claiming, "Well it was acceptable when I started doing it back in 1980" Apparently she has been doing this for almost 10 years. No, it was not considered acceptable back in 2012. Protests against the Braves's and Florida St "tomahawk chop" go back to at least 1994. Yes, it is a baffling lack of awareness. This is why I would not want her to continue teaching. Anyone so completely clueless on this is not someone I would trust. I've seen some suggesting that "oh, the principal just needs to have a talk with her," but I don't see it. Does she really need to be told this is inappropriate? (the sadder ones are those who are actually trying to excuse it because, hey, she's trying to teach a difficult subject. Um, no) Popehat, aka Ken White, out of LA has this to say about Riverside: Quote: Riverside, where this happened, is east of Los Angeles in the Inland Empire. It’s super-diverse but also has a very strong contingent of white folks like this. https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1...416811524?s=19 So maybe this lady is living in some bubble where this very racist routine might seem normal. I'm not familiar with the area but this local isn't exactly doing them any favors for their reputation.
	__________________ Previously known as SuburbanTurkey Last edited by TurkeysGhost; 21st October 2021 at 08:57 AM.

21st October 2021, 11:20 AM	#310
pgwenthold Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 21,103	She is now on "leave" until it blows over? I hope not.
	__________________ "As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets

21st October 2021, 12:12 PM	#311
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 23,587	Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides Why not? Because 1. The petty bickering that goes on in academia is of little interest to me, and 2. I already know that FIRE defends speech I find unacceptable and indefensible, and 3. Any organisation that advocates allowing scumbags like Milo Yiannopoulos, Ann Coulter, Bill Ayers and Ben "Uncle Tom" Carson a platform to open their vile mouths in front of university students is not an organisation I have any interest in hearing from. I would no more read a FIRE article than I would read an article on OAN or Newsmax. Originally Posted by lionking Because it would be uncomfortable for him True. I am very uncomfortable with the idea of an organisation with a clearly Liberal bias supporting the speech of predominantly bigots and racists on the far right, and doing so under the cover of advocating "academic freedom of speech".
	__________________ What is Woke? It is a term that means "awakened to the needs of others". It means to be well-informed, thoughtful, compassionate, humble and kind. Woke people are keen to make the world a better, fairer place for everyone, But, unfortunately, it has also become a pejorative used by racists, homophobes and misogynists on the political right, to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

21st October 2021, 03:03 PM	#312
d4m10n Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 10,908	Originally Posted by smartcooky Any organisation that advocates allowing scumbags like Milo Yiannopoulos, Ann Coulter, Bill Ayers and Ben "Uncle Tom" Carson a platform to open their vile mouths in front of university students is not an organisation I have any interest in hearing from. At least you're upfront trying to censor ideas you don't like.
	__________________ Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.

21st October 2021, 03:15 PM	#313
lionking In the Peanut Gallery Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 53,422	Originally Posted by smartcooky True. I am very uncomfortable with the idea of an organisation with a clearly Liberal bias supporting the speech of predominantly bigots and racists on the far right, and doing so under the cover of advocating "academic freedom of speech". How on earth is the professor in the linked article a bigot?
	__________________ A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill

21st October 2021, 03:17 PM	#314
Elaedith Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,486	Originally Posted by lionking How on earth is the professor in the linked article a bigot? He weighs the same as a duck.
Elaedith Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,486	__________________ "The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." - Salman Rushdie.

21st October 2021, 03:20 PM	#315
Graham2001 Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 1,663	The New York Times on the Dorian Abbot affair at NYT... Quote: CHICAGO — The Massachusetts Institute of Technology invited the geophysicist Dorian Abbot to give a prestigious public lecture this autumn. He seemed a natural choice, a scientific star who studies climate change and whether planets in distant solar systems might harbor atmospheres conducive to life. Then a swell of angry resistance arose. Some faculty members and graduate students argued that Dr. Abbot, a professor at the University of Chicago, had created harm by speaking out against aspects of affirmative action and diversity programs. In videos and opinion pieces, Dr. Abbot, who is white, has asserted that such programs treat “people as members of a group rather than as individuals, repeating the mistake that made possible the atrocities of the 20th century.” He said that he favored a diverse pool of applicants selected on merit. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/20/u...abbot-mit.html Jerry Coyne (Who is quoted in the NYT article.) also published a comentary on his blog. Quote: The saga of Dorian Abbot began quietly on my campus, and when it was resolved at the University of Chicago, I thought that was the end of it. But then, because Abbot had written and made videos criticizing affirmative action and DEI initiatives, he was disinvited from the prestigious Carlson lectures at MIT, where he was supposed to speak on global warming (they later offered him a smaller technical lecture on his work). This deplatforming was picked up by several venues in the conservative media, including the conservative columnist Bret Stephens at the NYT, but I was frustrated that the non-conservative press ignored such an egregious incident of cancellation. It was especially egregious because Abbot wasn’t going to talk at MIT about DEI or the like, but about global warming and other planets. In other words, he was being punished for saying things in other venues that offended people. More than that: there is a valid debate about the methods of DEI initiatives, though their intent is admirable. I accept the need for some affirmative action as a means of reparation, but others don’t, and none of us should be punished or cancelled for our views. https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/...g-on-its-face/
	__________________ "I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!" 'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail Everybody gets it wrong sometimes...