• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

The Coddling of the American Mind

Also, 1 and 1. Would probably hit it.

I mean, why not ?
 
Because they need a straw man. They're the only ones talking prevention.

This board gets real ugly when it comes to defending racism. People will contort themselves all sort of ways to defend racism without appearing racist using free speech and anti-PC arguments.
The entire document from Concerned Students 1950s is about preventing a hostile/oppressive atmosphere to minorities. The protest is that preventative measures have not been taken. How can prevention be a strawman, it's what the protest is all about.

The Black experience on Mizzou’s campus is cornered in offices and rarely attended to until it reaches media. Then, and only then, do campus administrators seek reactionary initiatives to attest to the realities of oppressed students, faculty, and staff. These temporary adjustments to the university’s behaviors are not enough to assure that future generations of marginalized students will have a safe and inclusive learning experience during their time at Mizzou.
 
Last edited:
Just throwing it out there: I would sure as hell have a problem if a public university punished students for being racists, saying racists things. The First Amendment protects all speech
 
My recent observations:

1) Click was not faculty in the (prestigious) J-School, but the School of Communication in the College of Arts & Sciences. The J-School has held a vote to officially disavow her "courtesy appointment," but the results of the vote haven't been reported. The Chair of the Department of Communication has also come out in support of the student journalists. He didn't mention Click. Dean of Arts & Sciences said her behavior was "absolutely unacceptable".

2) She is (as far as I can tell) an untenured assistant professor, having taught at the university in some capacity since 2003 (finished her PhD in 2009). We'll see what happens, since lots of people are calling for her head. I'm not sure she'll be fired.

3) The other idiot lady -- Greek Life and Leadership Assistant Director Janna Basler -- has a salary 10k higher than the assistant professor. Administrative bloat at its finest.

4) People making death threats against absolutely anybody in these cases are really fucking immature and stupid.
 
My recent observations:

1) Click was not faculty in the (prestigious) J-School, but the School of Communication in the College of Arts & Sciences. The J-School has held a vote to officially disavow her "courtesy appointment," but the results of the vote haven't been reported. The Chair of the Department of Communication has also come out in support of the student journalists. He didn't mention Click. Dean of Arts & Sciences said her behavior was "absolutely unacceptable".

2) She is (as far as I can tell) an untenured assistant professor, having taught at the university in some capacity since 2003 (finished her PhD in 2009). We'll see what happens, since lots of people are calling for her head. I'm not sure she'll be fired.

3) The other idiot lady -- Greek Life and Leadership Assistant Director Janna Basler -- has a salary 10k higher than the assistant professor. Administrative bloat at its finest.

4) People making death threats against absolutely anybody in these cases are really fucking immature and stupid.

But would you hit it ?
 
The entire document from Concerned Students 1950s is about preventing a hostile/oppressive atmosphere to minorities. The protest is that preventative measures have not been taken. How can prevention be a strawman, it's what the protest is all about.

The Black experience on Mizzou’s campus is cornered in offices and rarely attended to until it reaches media. Then, and only then, do campus administrators seek reactionary initiatives to attest to the realities of oppressed students, faculty, and staff. These temporary adjustments to the university’s behaviors are not enough to assure that future generations of marginalized students will have a safe and inclusive learning experience during their time at Mizzou.[/I]

I went back to the list.
1. Reaction
2. Reaction
3. Not sure what was presented in 1969
4. Both
5. Neither
6. Preventative
7. Both
8. Both
 
Because they need a straw man. They're the only ones talking prevention.

This board gets real ugly when it comes to defending racism. People will contort themselves all sort of ways to defend racism without appearing racist using free speech and anti-PC arguments.

Defending free speech is not defending racism. To say that defending free speech is defending racism is to misunderstand free speech. Defending free speech and opposing PC have nothing to do with racism, they are about freedom.
 
Defending free speech is not defending racism. To say that defending free speech is defending racism is to misunderstand free speech. Defending free speech and opposing PC have nothing to do with racism, they are about freedom.

I'm not sure if anyone read the blog article I posted in post #237, but it includes this helpful and relevant bit:

I wish everyone could back up a step so that the entire discussion is not about free expression vs. censorship or between safe spaces and stereotype threats. Once the discussion has locked into those terms, then the “free speech” advocates are stupidly complicit in defending people who show up at parties in blackface or are otherwise costumed or having themed parties with deliberately offensive stereotypes. Once the discussion has locked into those terms, people who want to say that such stereotypes have a real, powerful history of instrumental use in systems of racial domination are forced to understand that advocacy as censorship–and are also unable to leave space open to hear people like Erika and Nicolas Christakis as making any other kind of point.
 
Defending free speech is not defending racism. To say that defending free speech is defending racism is to misunderstand free speech. Defending free speech and opposing PC have nothing to do with racism, they are about freedom.

Free speech is inclusive, but you can tell which free speech someone is defending by figuring out which free speech they aren't criticizing.
 
Free speech is inclusive, but you can tell which free speech someone is defending by figuring out which free speech they aren't criticizing.

Wrong. You can tell which speech one is supporting by the speech one is using. The rest is speculation, in this case malicious speculation.
 
The right to free speech includes the right to make mistakes. Any speech that must conform to standards of content imposed by others is by definition not free.
 
Wrong. You can tell which speech one is supporting by the speech one is using. The rest is speculation, in this case malicious speculation.

Don't try to censor my speech, bro.
 
Defending free speech is not defending racism. To say that defending free speech is defending racism is to misunderstand free speech. Defending free speech and opposing PC have nothing to do with racism, they are about freedom.

<3
 
Defending free speech is not defending racism. To say that defending free speech is defending racism is to misunderstand free speech. Defending free speech and opposing PC have nothing to do with racism, they are about freedom.

One can do two things at once -- racists can multitask. It's pretty easy to say you're defending free speech and opposing PC culture when all you are really doing is making an excuse to defend racism. Fox News does it all the time.
 
Don't worry guys. You don't have to worry your pretty little heads about what is okay free speech. The universities and government will let you know what speech is free and which words are approved. Obviously, if you cross these lines, you are either racist or sexist, or more likely both. It is good to have these things spelled out so that there is no controversy.
 
I went back to the list.
1. Reaction
2. Reaction
3. Not sure what was presented in 1969
4. Both
5. Neither
6. Preventative
7. Both
8. Both
So by acknowledging prevention is all over the demands, are you now acknowledging that the protesters started this talk of prevention?

#2, #3, and #5 are also preventative...to prevent the campus from being dominated by "white privilege".
 
Back
Top