|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On November 10 2015 05:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 05:23 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 04:58 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 04:25 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 03:02 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:59 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:50 farvacola wrote:
The racism needn't be "pervasive" to warrant a requisite response from the administration. This isn't a legal sufficiency argument, it's about how to best run a supposedly inclusive institution of higher learning.
For example, universities are the ones tasked with assembling investigatory commissions that are supposed to do the very thing you're doing, xDaunt, that being look into whether the incidents mentioned rise above the level of isolated occurrences. They didn't even do that much and therein lies the problem. Sure, I can understand a university forming a commission to investigate such incidents if it was clear that there might be a problem. But such commissions take resources, and I'm not seeing much to suggest that a sufficient threshold was reached to warrant such a commission. Again, are we really just talking about a shit swastika and some isolated comments? No. The students and protesters have made it clear that it is has been an ongoing issue. Those are just the recent incidents that the media has decided to cover. Any previous incidents have not been reported on by the media and may or may not have been documented by the school. Based on what? When real racist incidents occur (cross burnings, the dissemination of indisputably racist material, etc), they typically show up in the news. The absence of any kind of reporting is simply striking given the seemingly disproportionate response of the student body. On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:55 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:47 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:41 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:33 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
I hadn't been following the story at all until late last week, and now I see that the president has resigned. None of this makes any sense to me. I would think that there'd be a record of what exactly went wrong somewhere (ie what the university specifically ignored), but I haven't been able to find any information on that point. So I'm legitimately curious as to what the university did wrong and thought that y'all might have some information. So far I'm wildly unsatisfied.
The problem is that they didn't do anything. They have people driving around the campus yelling racial slurs as passing black students and that hasn't been addressed. It’s been an ongoing, escalating issue where the threats and racism increase as the black students attempt to have them addressed. And the president didn’t do anything beyond just wait until it went away, which isn’t acceptable. If there was a truly pervasive racist atmosphere at the university and the administration did nothing about it, I agree, the president should resign. I'm merely trying to understand whether there was this pervasive racist atmosphere at the university. If it existed, one would expect that there'd be a fairly detailed record of it, which I am not seeing. Drawing a swastika with shit can just as easily be ascribed to dipshit fraternity hazing as any other motive. All that I'm seeing beyond that are isolated racist remarks. How is this enough to damn an entire community as being racist? What exactly is the university supposed to do beyond circulating a meaningless CYA email to everyone telling them to be nice? Exactly how long should the students be required to put up with the racism until it is "systematic" enough to meet your standard? A year of documenting events without a response? 2? This built over the span of 2 months. Is that long enough? I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it. Well, it would appear that the school, students, and facility else is not working on the XDaunt burden of proof system and relies on what he can find in a google search. Or the simpler solution is that the media hasn't dug into the events prior to September 2015, so the information being reported on. Since when is it a good idea to simply take the word of the mob? How does an individual student prove a claim like people yelling slurs while driving by? Physical things to point to are easy, but most smoking guns are hidden behind closed frat doors and seldom recorded in video or print until they get real stupid and start doing bus chants with outside dates like OU. I could easily see something getting to the point where action is necessary even without a great amount of physical proof. Let's just presume that people are too freely yelling "nigger" around campus. Does that really warrant a special commission and investigation? The answer to that question is Yes. That should be obvious, but the way you worded it makes me unsure that you believe so. Do you not think schools should have organizations dedicated to campus safety and stemming bigotry? Because the vast majority of schools think such a thing is a great idea.
I absolutely do not believe that a special commission and investigation are warranted in those circumstances. Christ, talk about the nazification of society....
|
On November 10 2015 06:22 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 05:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 10 2015 05:23 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 04:58 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 04:25 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 03:02 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:59 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:50 farvacola wrote:
The racism needn't be "pervasive" to warrant a requisite response from the administration. This isn't a legal sufficiency argument, it's about how to best run a supposedly inclusive institution of higher learning.
For example, universities are the ones tasked with assembling investigatory commissions that are supposed to do the very thing you're doing, xDaunt, that being look into whether the incidents mentioned rise above the level of isolated occurrences. They didn't even do that much and therein lies the problem. Sure, I can understand a university forming a commission to investigate such incidents if it was clear that there might be a problem. But such commissions take resources, and I'm not seeing much to suggest that a sufficient threshold was reached to warrant such a commission. Again, are we really just talking about a shit swastika and some isolated comments? No. The students and protesters have made it clear that it is has been an ongoing issue. Those are just the recent incidents that the media has decided to cover. Any previous incidents have not been reported on by the media and may or may not have been documented by the school. Based on what? When real racist incidents occur (cross burnings, the dissemination of indisputably racist material, etc), they typically show up in the news. The absence of any kind of reporting is simply striking given the seemingly disproportionate response of the student body. On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:55 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:47 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:41 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
The problem is that they didn't do anything. They have people driving around the campus yelling racial slurs as passing black students and that hasn't been addressed. It’s been an ongoing, escalating issue where the threats and racism increase as the black students attempt to have them addressed. And the president didn’t do anything beyond just wait until it went away, which isn’t acceptable. If there was a truly pervasive racist atmosphere at the university and the administration did nothing about it, I agree, the president should resign. I'm merely trying to understand whether there was this pervasive racist atmosphere at the university. If it existed, one would expect that there'd be a fairly detailed record of it, which I am not seeing. Drawing a swastika with shit can just as easily be ascribed to dipshit fraternity hazing as any other motive. All that I'm seeing beyond that are isolated racist remarks. How is this enough to damn an entire community as being racist? What exactly is the university supposed to do beyond circulating a meaningless CYA email to everyone telling them to be nice? Exactly how long should the students be required to put up with the racism until it is "systematic" enough to meet your standard? A year of documenting events without a response? 2? This built over the span of 2 months. Is that long enough? I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it. Well, it would appear that the school, students, and facility else is not working on the XDaunt burden of proof system and relies on what he can find in a google search. Or the simpler solution is that the media hasn't dug into the events prior to September 2015, so the information being reported on. Since when is it a good idea to simply take the word of the mob? How does an individual student prove a claim like people yelling slurs while driving by? Physical things to point to are easy, but most smoking guns are hidden behind closed frat doors and seldom recorded in video or print until they get real stupid and start doing bus chants with outside dates like OU. I could easily see something getting to the point where action is necessary even without a great amount of physical proof. Let's just presume that people are too freely yelling "nigger" around campus. Does that really warrant a special commission and investigation? The answer to that question is Yes. That should be obvious, but the way you worded it makes me unsure that you believe so. Do you not think schools should have organizations dedicated to campus safety and stemming bigotry? Because the vast majority of schools think such a thing is a great idea. I absolutely do not believe that a special commission and investigation are warranted in those circumstances. Christ, talk about the nazification of society....
Lets be clear, the people would be yelling racial slurs at black students, right? Not just randomly as they are walking around for no apparent reason.
|
United States42716 Posts
On November 10 2015 05:52 ampson wrote:
They got a response from the president about the swastika incident with mandatory sensitivity training. They got multiple assurances from the president that their demands were being looked at and that actions were being taken. I've made my arguments, and I just operate on the assumption that some faculty can be wrong. Apparently you think they are infallible, but in that case why didn't all of them join in the protests? Because the majority didn't. Nor did the majority of students. But in a campus of 35000, ten percent is still enough to make a huge fuss. I'm not doing any mental gymnastics, I'm assessing the situation based off of what I know, and I know that their demands were absolutely ridiculous and that they didn't even give the president any time to act upon them before continuously calling for his resignation.
From my memory of being a student getting 10% of students at an institution to do anything at all is pretty good evidence that there is a serious issue.
|
I just think this dovetails too beautifully with the hashing out of whether "jokingly using the word n****er" was anything other than people being oblivious to their racism.
xDaunt is doing an excellent job of displaying that being American doesn't mean you suddenly "get" racism, plenty of people here (in the US)* using the same "well it's not a big deal to us" rationale to defend obviously racist behavior.
|
On November 10 2015 06:22 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 05:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 10 2015 05:23 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 04:58 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 04:25 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 03:02 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:59 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:50 farvacola wrote:
The racism needn't be "pervasive" to warrant a requisite response from the administration. This isn't a legal sufficiency argument, it's about how to best run a supposedly inclusive institution of higher learning.
For example, universities are the ones tasked with assembling investigatory commissions that are supposed to do the very thing you're doing, xDaunt, that being look into whether the incidents mentioned rise above the level of isolated occurrences. They didn't even do that much and therein lies the problem. Sure, I can understand a university forming a commission to investigate such incidents if it was clear that there might be a problem. But such commissions take resources, and I'm not seeing much to suggest that a sufficient threshold was reached to warrant such a commission. Again, are we really just talking about a shit swastika and some isolated comments? No. The students and protesters have made it clear that it is has been an ongoing issue. Those are just the recent incidents that the media has decided to cover. Any previous incidents have not been reported on by the media and may or may not have been documented by the school. Based on what? When real racist incidents occur (cross burnings, the dissemination of indisputably racist material, etc), they typically show up in the news. The absence of any kind of reporting is simply striking given the seemingly disproportionate response of the student body. On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:55 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:47 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:41 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
The problem is that they didn't do anything. They have people driving around the campus yelling racial slurs as passing black students and that hasn't been addressed. It’s been an ongoing, escalating issue where the threats and racism increase as the black students attempt to have them addressed. And the president didn’t do anything beyond just wait until it went away, which isn’t acceptable. If there was a truly pervasive racist atmosphere at the university and the administration did nothing about it, I agree, the president should resign. I'm merely trying to understand whether there was this pervasive racist atmosphere at the university. If it existed, one would expect that there'd be a fairly detailed record of it, which I am not seeing. Drawing a swastika with shit can just as easily be ascribed to dipshit fraternity hazing as any other motive. All that I'm seeing beyond that are isolated racist remarks. How is this enough to damn an entire community as being racist? What exactly is the university supposed to do beyond circulating a meaningless CYA email to everyone telling them to be nice? Exactly how long should the students be required to put up with the racism until it is "systematic" enough to meet your standard? A year of documenting events without a response? 2? This built over the span of 2 months. Is that long enough? I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it. Well, it would appear that the school, students, and facility else is not working on the XDaunt burden of proof system and relies on what he can find in a google search. Or the simpler solution is that the media hasn't dug into the events prior to September 2015, so the information being reported on. Since when is it a good idea to simply take the word of the mob? How does an individual student prove a claim like people yelling slurs while driving by? Physical things to point to are easy, but most smoking guns are hidden behind closed frat doors and seldom recorded in video or print until they get real stupid and start doing bus chants with outside dates like OU. I could easily see something getting to the point where action is necessary even without a great amount of physical proof. Let's just presume that people are too freely yelling "nigger" around campus. Does that really warrant a special commission and investigation? The answer to that question is Yes. That should be obvious, but the way you worded it makes me unsure that you believe so. Do you not think schools should have organizations dedicated to campus safety and stemming bigotry? Because the vast majority of schools think such a thing is a great idea. I absolutely do not believe that a special commission and investigation are warranted in those circumstances. Christ, talk about the nazification of society....
Surely you used that word ironically right? Nazificiation?
Schools are supposed to be safe havens for students. They are not supposed to feel oppressed or hated or violated or in danger anywhere... Especially in schools.
|
On November 10 2015 06:22 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 05:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 10 2015 05:23 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 04:58 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 04:25 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 03:02 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:59 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:50 farvacola wrote:
The racism needn't be "pervasive" to warrant a requisite response from the administration. This isn't a legal sufficiency argument, it's about how to best run a supposedly inclusive institution of higher learning.
For example, universities are the ones tasked with assembling investigatory commissions that are supposed to do the very thing you're doing, xDaunt, that being look into whether the incidents mentioned rise above the level of isolated occurrences. They didn't even do that much and therein lies the problem. Sure, I can understand a university forming a commission to investigate such incidents if it was clear that there might be a problem. But such commissions take resources, and I'm not seeing much to suggest that a sufficient threshold was reached to warrant such a commission. Again, are we really just talking about a shit swastika and some isolated comments? No. The students and protesters have made it clear that it is has been an ongoing issue. Those are just the recent incidents that the media has decided to cover. Any previous incidents have not been reported on by the media and may or may not have been documented by the school. Based on what? When real racist incidents occur (cross burnings, the dissemination of indisputably racist material, etc), they typically show up in the news. The absence of any kind of reporting is simply striking given the seemingly disproportionate response of the student body. On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:55 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:47 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:41 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
The problem is that they didn't do anything. They have people driving around the campus yelling racial slurs as passing black students and that hasn't been addressed. It’s been an ongoing, escalating issue where the threats and racism increase as the black students attempt to have them addressed. And the president didn’t do anything beyond just wait until it went away, which isn’t acceptable. If there was a truly pervasive racist atmosphere at the university and the administration did nothing about it, I agree, the president should resign. I'm merely trying to understand whether there was this pervasive racist atmosphere at the university. If it existed, one would expect that there'd be a fairly detailed record of it, which I am not seeing. Drawing a swastika with shit can just as easily be ascribed to dipshit fraternity hazing as any other motive. All that I'm seeing beyond that are isolated racist remarks. How is this enough to damn an entire community as being racist? What exactly is the university supposed to do beyond circulating a meaningless CYA email to everyone telling them to be nice? Exactly how long should the students be required to put up with the racism until it is "systematic" enough to meet your standard? A year of documenting events without a response? 2? This built over the span of 2 months. Is that long enough? I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it. Well, it would appear that the school, students, and facility else is not working on the XDaunt burden of proof system and relies on what he can find in a google search. Or the simpler solution is that the media hasn't dug into the events prior to September 2015, so the information being reported on. Since when is it a good idea to simply take the word of the mob? How does an individual student prove a claim like people yelling slurs while driving by? Physical things to point to are easy, but most smoking guns are hidden behind closed frat doors and seldom recorded in video or print until they get real stupid and start doing bus chants with outside dates like OU. I could easily see something getting to the point where action is necessary even without a great amount of physical proof. Let's just presume that people are too freely yelling "nigger" around campus. Does that really warrant a special commission and investigation? The answer to that question is Yes. That should be obvious, but the way you worded it makes me unsure that you believe so. Do you not think schools should have organizations dedicated to campus safety and stemming bigotry? Because the vast majority of schools think such a thing is a great idea. I absolutely do not believe that a special commission and investigation are warranted in those circumstances. Christ, talk about the nazification of society....
Why not? Why should it be some acceptable thing that black students get cursed at when walking to class? Maybe this is the divide but waiting until racism gets to physical violence to start doing something about it is way too late.
|
On November 10 2015 07:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 06:22 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 05:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 10 2015 05:23 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 04:58 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 04:25 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 03:02 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:59 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:50 farvacola wrote:
The racism needn't be "pervasive" to warrant a requisite response from the administration. This isn't a legal sufficiency argument, it's about how to best run a supposedly inclusive institution of higher learning.
For example, universities are the ones tasked with assembling investigatory commissions that are supposed to do the very thing you're doing, xDaunt, that being look into whether the incidents mentioned rise above the level of isolated occurrences. They didn't even do that much and therein lies the problem. Sure, I can understand a university forming a commission to investigate such incidents if it was clear that there might be a problem. But such commissions take resources, and I'm not seeing much to suggest that a sufficient threshold was reached to warrant such a commission. Again, are we really just talking about a shit swastika and some isolated comments? No. The students and protesters have made it clear that it is has been an ongoing issue. Those are just the recent incidents that the media has decided to cover. Any previous incidents have not been reported on by the media and may or may not have been documented by the school. Based on what? When real racist incidents occur (cross burnings, the dissemination of indisputably racist material, etc), they typically show up in the news. The absence of any kind of reporting is simply striking given the seemingly disproportionate response of the student body. On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:55 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:47 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
If there was a truly pervasive racist atmosphere at the university and the administration did nothing about it, I agree, the president should resign. I'm merely trying to understand whether there was this pervasive racist atmosphere at the university. If it existed, one would expect that there'd be a fairly detailed record of it, which I am not seeing. Drawing a swastika with shit can just as easily be ascribed to dipshit fraternity hazing as any other motive. All that I'm seeing beyond that are isolated racist remarks. How is this enough to damn an entire community as being racist? What exactly is the university supposed to do beyond circulating a meaningless CYA email to everyone telling them to be nice? Exactly how long should the students be required to put up with the racism until it is "systematic" enough to meet your standard? A year of documenting events without a response? 2? This built over the span of 2 months. Is that long enough? I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it. Well, it would appear that the school, students, and facility else is not working on the XDaunt burden of proof system and relies on what he can find in a google search. Or the simpler solution is that the media hasn't dug into the events prior to September 2015, so the information being reported on. Since when is it a good idea to simply take the word of the mob? How does an individual student prove a claim like people yelling slurs while driving by? Physical things to point to are easy, but most smoking guns are hidden behind closed frat doors and seldom recorded in video or print until they get real stupid and start doing bus chants with outside dates like OU. I could easily see something getting to the point where action is necessary even without a great amount of physical proof. Let's just presume that people are too freely yelling "nigger" around campus. Does that really warrant a special commission and investigation? The answer to that question is Yes. That should be obvious, but the way you worded it makes me unsure that you believe so. Do you not think schools should have organizations dedicated to campus safety and stemming bigotry? Because the vast majority of schools think such a thing is a great idea. I absolutely do not believe that a special commission and investigation are warranted in those circumstances. Christ, talk about the nazification of society.... Surely you used that word ironically right? Nazificiation?
Being fiercely opposed to racism, the first sure sign of a national socialist! Sadly I don't think he was being ironic. It has become kind of commonplace that as soon as someone tries to establish some standard of behaviour in the public space they are considered to be intolerant. The whole world is apparently supposed to function like 4chan, a place that has produced the greatest minds of our time through freedom of expression.
|
On November 10 2015 07:02 Trumpet wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 06:22 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 05:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 10 2015 05:23 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 04:58 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 04:25 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 03:02 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:59 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:50 farvacola wrote:
The racism needn't be "pervasive" to warrant a requisite response from the administration. This isn't a legal sufficiency argument, it's about how to best run a supposedly inclusive institution of higher learning.
For example, universities are the ones tasked with assembling investigatory commissions that are supposed to do the very thing you're doing, xDaunt, that being look into whether the incidents mentioned rise above the level of isolated occurrences. They didn't even do that much and therein lies the problem. Sure, I can understand a university forming a commission to investigate such incidents if it was clear that there might be a problem. But such commissions take resources, and I'm not seeing much to suggest that a sufficient threshold was reached to warrant such a commission. Again, are we really just talking about a shit swastika and some isolated comments? No. The students and protesters have made it clear that it is has been an ongoing issue. Those are just the recent incidents that the media has decided to cover. Any previous incidents have not been reported on by the media and may or may not have been documented by the school. Based on what? When real racist incidents occur (cross burnings, the dissemination of indisputably racist material, etc), they typically show up in the news. The absence of any kind of reporting is simply striking given the seemingly disproportionate response of the student body. On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:55 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:47 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
If there was a truly pervasive racist atmosphere at the university and the administration did nothing about it, I agree, the president should resign. I'm merely trying to understand whether there was this pervasive racist atmosphere at the university. If it existed, one would expect that there'd be a fairly detailed record of it, which I am not seeing. Drawing a swastika with shit can just as easily be ascribed to dipshit fraternity hazing as any other motive. All that I'm seeing beyond that are isolated racist remarks. How is this enough to damn an entire community as being racist? What exactly is the university supposed to do beyond circulating a meaningless CYA email to everyone telling them to be nice? Exactly how long should the students be required to put up with the racism until it is "systematic" enough to meet your standard? A year of documenting events without a response? 2? This built over the span of 2 months. Is that long enough? I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it. Well, it would appear that the school, students, and facility else is not working on the XDaunt burden of proof system and relies on what he can find in a google search. Or the simpler solution is that the media hasn't dug into the events prior to September 2015, so the information being reported on. Since when is it a good idea to simply take the word of the mob? How does an individual student prove a claim like people yelling slurs while driving by? Physical things to point to are easy, but most smoking guns are hidden behind closed frat doors and seldom recorded in video or print until they get real stupid and start doing bus chants with outside dates like OU. I could easily see something getting to the point where action is necessary even without a great amount of physical proof. Let's just presume that people are too freely yelling "nigger" around campus. Does that really warrant a special commission and investigation? The answer to that question is Yes. That should be obvious, but the way you worded it makes me unsure that you believe so. Do you not think schools should have organizations dedicated to campus safety and stemming bigotry? Because the vast majority of schools think such a thing is a great idea. I absolutely do not believe that a special commission and investigation are warranted in those circumstances. Christ, talk about the nazification of society.... Why not? Why should it be some acceptable thing that black students get cursed at when walking to class? Maybe this is the divide but waiting until racism gets to physical violence to start doing something about it is way too late.
I don't think that it is socially acceptable to say nigger. And for all of the politically incorrect/offensive words that I do use, I have never used that one. However, I am not in favor of getting administrative and governmental entities involved in policing matters like this. Such action is inconsistent with our civil liberties.
|
On November 10 2015 07:02 Trumpet wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 06:22 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 05:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 10 2015 05:23 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 04:58 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 04:25 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 03:02 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:59 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:50 farvacola wrote:
The racism needn't be "pervasive" to warrant a requisite response from the administration. This isn't a legal sufficiency argument, it's about how to best run a supposedly inclusive institution of higher learning.
For example, universities are the ones tasked with assembling investigatory commissions that are supposed to do the very thing you're doing, xDaunt, that being look into whether the incidents mentioned rise above the level of isolated occurrences. They didn't even do that much and therein lies the problem. Sure, I can understand a university forming a commission to investigate such incidents if it was clear that there might be a problem. But such commissions take resources, and I'm not seeing much to suggest that a sufficient threshold was reached to warrant such a commission. Again, are we really just talking about a shit swastika and some isolated comments? No. The students and protesters have made it clear that it is has been an ongoing issue. Those are just the recent incidents that the media has decided to cover. Any previous incidents have not been reported on by the media and may or may not have been documented by the school. Based on what? When real racist incidents occur (cross burnings, the dissemination of indisputably racist material, etc), they typically show up in the news. The absence of any kind of reporting is simply striking given the seemingly disproportionate response of the student body. On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:55 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:47 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
If there was a truly pervasive racist atmosphere at the university and the administration did nothing about it, I agree, the president should resign. I'm merely trying to understand whether there was this pervasive racist atmosphere at the university. If it existed, one would expect that there'd be a fairly detailed record of it, which I am not seeing. Drawing a swastika with shit can just as easily be ascribed to dipshit fraternity hazing as any other motive. All that I'm seeing beyond that are isolated racist remarks. How is this enough to damn an entire community as being racist? What exactly is the university supposed to do beyond circulating a meaningless CYA email to everyone telling them to be nice? Exactly how long should the students be required to put up with the racism until it is "systematic" enough to meet your standard? A year of documenting events without a response? 2? This built over the span of 2 months. Is that long enough? I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it. Well, it would appear that the school, students, and facility else is not working on the XDaunt burden of proof system and relies on what he can find in a google search. Or the simpler solution is that the media hasn't dug into the events prior to September 2015, so the information being reported on. Since when is it a good idea to simply take the word of the mob? How does an individual student prove a claim like people yelling slurs while driving by? Physical things to point to are easy, but most smoking guns are hidden behind closed frat doors and seldom recorded in video or print until they get real stupid and start doing bus chants with outside dates like OU. I could easily see something getting to the point where action is necessary even without a great amount of physical proof. Let's just presume that people are too freely yelling "nigger" around campus. Does that really warrant a special commission and investigation? The answer to that question is Yes. That should be obvious, but the way you worded it makes me unsure that you believe so. Do you not think schools should have organizations dedicated to campus safety and stemming bigotry? Because the vast majority of schools think such a thing is a great idea. I absolutely do not believe that a special commission and investigation are warranted in those circumstances. Christ, talk about the nazification of society.... Why not? Why should it be some acceptable thing that black students get cursed at when walking to class? Maybe this is the divide but waiting until racism gets to physical violence to start doing something about it is way too late.
And then we need a commission and investigation to prove the violence was motivated by racism and not some other reason. Then we need a further commission to prove that the racism is systematic and not just that one person. And then we need a study into the best way to present this to make sure the no white people think they caused the problem or are being called racist.
|
On November 10 2015 07:20 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 07:02 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 06:22 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 05:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 10 2015 05:23 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 04:58 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 04:25 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 03:02 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:59 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:50 farvacola wrote:
The racism needn't be "pervasive" to warrant a requisite response from the administration. This isn't a legal sufficiency argument, it's about how to best run a supposedly inclusive institution of higher learning.
For example, universities are the ones tasked with assembling investigatory commissions that are supposed to do the very thing you're doing, xDaunt, that being look into whether the incidents mentioned rise above the level of isolated occurrences. They didn't even do that much and therein lies the problem. Sure, I can understand a university forming a commission to investigate such incidents if it was clear that there might be a problem. But such commissions take resources, and I'm not seeing much to suggest that a sufficient threshold was reached to warrant such a commission. Again, are we really just talking about a shit swastika and some isolated comments? No. The students and protesters have made it clear that it is has been an ongoing issue. Those are just the recent incidents that the media has decided to cover. Any previous incidents have not been reported on by the media and may or may not have been documented by the school. Based on what? When real racist incidents occur (cross burnings, the dissemination of indisputably racist material, etc), they typically show up in the news. The absence of any kind of reporting is simply striking given the seemingly disproportionate response of the student body. On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:55 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Exactly how long should the students be required to put up with the racism until it is "systematic" enough to meet your standard? A year of documenting events without a response? 2? This built over the span of 2 months. Is that long enough? I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it. Well, it would appear that the school, students, and facility else is not working on the XDaunt burden of proof system and relies on what he can find in a google search. Or the simpler solution is that the media hasn't dug into the events prior to September 2015, so the information being reported on. Since when is it a good idea to simply take the word of the mob? How does an individual student prove a claim like people yelling slurs while driving by? Physical things to point to are easy, but most smoking guns are hidden behind closed frat doors and seldom recorded in video or print until they get real stupid and start doing bus chants with outside dates like OU. I could easily see something getting to the point where action is necessary even without a great amount of physical proof. Let's just presume that people are too freely yelling "nigger" around campus. Does that really warrant a special commission and investigation? The answer to that question is Yes. That should be obvious, but the way you worded it makes me unsure that you believe so. Do you not think schools should have organizations dedicated to campus safety and stemming bigotry? Because the vast majority of schools think such a thing is a great idea. I absolutely do not believe that a special commission and investigation are warranted in those circumstances. Christ, talk about the nazification of society.... Why not? Why should it be some acceptable thing that black students get cursed at when walking to class? Maybe this is the divide but waiting until racism gets to physical violence to start doing something about it is way too late. I don't think that it is socially acceptable to say nigger. And for all of the politically incorrect/offensive words that I do use, I have never used that one. However, I am not in favor of getting administrative and governmental entities involved in policing matters like this. Such action is inconsistent with our civil liberties.
How is this any different than a bunch of men driving around yelling at female students and sexually harassing them? And why would any University be required to put up with that?
|
On November 10 2015 05:23 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 04:58 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 04:25 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 03:02 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:59 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:50 farvacola wrote:
The racism needn't be "pervasive" to warrant a requisite response from the administration. This isn't a legal sufficiency argument, it's about how to best run a supposedly inclusive institution of higher learning.
For example, universities are the ones tasked with assembling investigatory commissions that are supposed to do the very thing you're doing, xDaunt, that being look into whether the incidents mentioned rise above the level of isolated occurrences. They didn't even do that much and therein lies the problem. Sure, I can understand a university forming a commission to investigate such incidents if it was clear that there might be a problem. But such commissions take resources, and I'm not seeing much to suggest that a sufficient threshold was reached to warrant such a commission. Again, are we really just talking about a shit swastika and some isolated comments? No. The students and protesters have made it clear that it is has been an ongoing issue. Those are just the recent incidents that the media has decided to cover. Any previous incidents have not been reported on by the media and may or may not have been documented by the school. Based on what? When real racist incidents occur (cross burnings, the dissemination of indisputably racist material, etc), they typically show up in the news. The absence of any kind of reporting is simply striking given the seemingly disproportionate response of the student body. On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:55 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:47 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:41 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:33 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:28 GreenHorizons wrote:
It's appropriate you would think so. I hadn't been following the story at all until late last week, and now I see that the president has resigned. None of this makes any sense to me. I would think that there'd be a record of what exactly went wrong somewhere (ie what the university specifically ignored), but I haven't been able to find any information on that point. So I'm legitimately curious as to what the university did wrong and thought that y'all might have some information. So far I'm wildly unsatisfied. The problem is that they didn't do anything. They have people driving around the campus yelling racial slurs as passing black students and that hasn't been addressed. It’s been an ongoing, escalating issue where the threats and racism increase as the black students attempt to have them addressed. And the president didn’t do anything beyond just wait until it went away, which isn’t acceptable. If there was a truly pervasive racist atmosphere at the university and the administration did nothing about it, I agree, the president should resign. I'm merely trying to understand whether there was this pervasive racist atmosphere at the university. If it existed, one would expect that there'd be a fairly detailed record of it, which I am not seeing. Drawing a swastika with shit can just as easily be ascribed to dipshit fraternity hazing as any other motive. All that I'm seeing beyond that are isolated racist remarks. How is this enough to damn an entire community as being racist? What exactly is the university supposed to do beyond circulating a meaningless CYA email to everyone telling them to be nice? Exactly how long should the students be required to put up with the racism until it is "systematic" enough to meet your standard? A year of documenting events without a response? 2? This built over the span of 2 months. Is that long enough? I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it. Well, it would appear that the school, students, and facility else is not working on the XDaunt burden of proof system and relies on what he can find in a google search. Or the simpler solution is that the media hasn't dug into the events prior to September 2015, so the information being reported on. Since when is it a good idea to simply take the word of the mob? How does an individual student prove a claim like people yelling slurs while driving by? Physical things to point to are easy, but most smoking guns are hidden behind closed frat doors and seldom recorded in video or print until they get real stupid and start doing bus chants with outside dates like OU. I could easily see something getting to the point where action is necessary even without a great amount of physical proof. Let's just presume that people are too freely yelling "nigger" around campus. Does that really warrant a special commission and investigation?
Are you suggesting that "verbal racism" is completely fine?
edit: or even a "civil liberty"?
|
On November 10 2015 07:20 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 07:02 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 06:22 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 05:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 10 2015 05:23 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 04:58 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 04:25 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 03:02 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:59 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:50 farvacola wrote:
The racism needn't be "pervasive" to warrant a requisite response from the administration. This isn't a legal sufficiency argument, it's about how to best run a supposedly inclusive institution of higher learning.
For example, universities are the ones tasked with assembling investigatory commissions that are supposed to do the very thing you're doing, xDaunt, that being look into whether the incidents mentioned rise above the level of isolated occurrences. They didn't even do that much and therein lies the problem. Sure, I can understand a university forming a commission to investigate such incidents if it was clear that there might be a problem. But such commissions take resources, and I'm not seeing much to suggest that a sufficient threshold was reached to warrant such a commission. Again, are we really just talking about a shit swastika and some isolated comments? No. The students and protesters have made it clear that it is has been an ongoing issue. Those are just the recent incidents that the media has decided to cover. Any previous incidents have not been reported on by the media and may or may not have been documented by the school. Based on what? When real racist incidents occur (cross burnings, the dissemination of indisputably racist material, etc), they typically show up in the news. The absence of any kind of reporting is simply striking given the seemingly disproportionate response of the student body. On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:55 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Exactly how long should the students be required to put up with the racism until it is "systematic" enough to meet your standard? A year of documenting events without a response? 2? This built over the span of 2 months. Is that long enough? I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it. Well, it would appear that the school, students, and facility else is not working on the XDaunt burden of proof system and relies on what he can find in a google search. Or the simpler solution is that the media hasn't dug into the events prior to September 2015, so the information being reported on. Since when is it a good idea to simply take the word of the mob? How does an individual student prove a claim like people yelling slurs while driving by? Physical things to point to are easy, but most smoking guns are hidden behind closed frat doors and seldom recorded in video or print until they get real stupid and start doing bus chants with outside dates like OU. I could easily see something getting to the point where action is necessary even without a great amount of physical proof. Let's just presume that people are too freely yelling "nigger" around campus. Does that really warrant a special commission and investigation? The answer to that question is Yes. That should be obvious, but the way you worded it makes me unsure that you believe so. Do you not think schools should have organizations dedicated to campus safety and stemming bigotry? Because the vast majority of schools think such a thing is a great idea. I absolutely do not believe that a special commission and investigation are warranted in those circumstances. Christ, talk about the nazification of society.... Why not? Why should it be some acceptable thing that black students get cursed at when walking to class? Maybe this is the divide but waiting until racism gets to physical violence to start doing something about it is way too late. And then we need a commission and investigation to prove the violence was motivated by racism and not some other reason. Then we need a further commission to prove that the racism is systematic and not just that one person. And then we need a study into the best way to present this to make sure the no white people think they caused the problem or are being called racist.
Right? The whole thing is clearly wrapped up in white fragility from my perspective. It's never "holy shit that was happening!?" It's always "are we sure they aren't overreacting/making it up?" But then presented with an argument that presents predominately white (male) folks as the victim (PC Culture for example) the bar to consider it a real problem becomes much lower. As if we don't have a comparatively well documented history of systemic racism from the founders to today complimented by less nuanced presentations of the same "but what about how this makes (bigoted) white people feel!?".
|
On November 10 2015 07:26 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 05:23 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 04:58 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 04:25 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 03:02 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:59 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:50 farvacola wrote:
The racism needn't be "pervasive" to warrant a requisite response from the administration. This isn't a legal sufficiency argument, it's about how to best run a supposedly inclusive institution of higher learning.
For example, universities are the ones tasked with assembling investigatory commissions that are supposed to do the very thing you're doing, xDaunt, that being look into whether the incidents mentioned rise above the level of isolated occurrences. They didn't even do that much and therein lies the problem. Sure, I can understand a university forming a commission to investigate such incidents if it was clear that there might be a problem. But such commissions take resources, and I'm not seeing much to suggest that a sufficient threshold was reached to warrant such a commission. Again, are we really just talking about a shit swastika and some isolated comments? No. The students and protesters have made it clear that it is has been an ongoing issue. Those are just the recent incidents that the media has decided to cover. Any previous incidents have not been reported on by the media and may or may not have been documented by the school. Based on what? When real racist incidents occur (cross burnings, the dissemination of indisputably racist material, etc), they typically show up in the news. The absence of any kind of reporting is simply striking given the seemingly disproportionate response of the student body. On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:55 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:47 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:41 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:33 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
I hadn't been following the story at all until late last week, and now I see that the president has resigned. None of this makes any sense to me. I would think that there'd be a record of what exactly went wrong somewhere (ie what the university specifically ignored), but I haven't been able to find any information on that point. So I'm legitimately curious as to what the university did wrong and thought that y'all might have some information. So far I'm wildly unsatisfied.
The problem is that they didn't do anything. They have people driving around the campus yelling racial slurs as passing black students and that hasn't been addressed. It’s been an ongoing, escalating issue where the threats and racism increase as the black students attempt to have them addressed. And the president didn’t do anything beyond just wait until it went away, which isn’t acceptable. If there was a truly pervasive racist atmosphere at the university and the administration did nothing about it, I agree, the president should resign. I'm merely trying to understand whether there was this pervasive racist atmosphere at the university. If it existed, one would expect that there'd be a fairly detailed record of it, which I am not seeing. Drawing a swastika with shit can just as easily be ascribed to dipshit fraternity hazing as any other motive. All that I'm seeing beyond that are isolated racist remarks. How is this enough to damn an entire community as being racist? What exactly is the university supposed to do beyond circulating a meaningless CYA email to everyone telling them to be nice? Exactly how long should the students be required to put up with the racism until it is "systematic" enough to meet your standard? A year of documenting events without a response? 2? This built over the span of 2 months. Is that long enough? I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it. Well, it would appear that the school, students, and facility else is not working on the XDaunt burden of proof system and relies on what he can find in a google search. Or the simpler solution is that the media hasn't dug into the events prior to September 2015, so the information being reported on. Since when is it a good idea to simply take the word of the mob? How does an individual student prove a claim like people yelling slurs while driving by? Physical things to point to are easy, but most smoking guns are hidden behind closed frat doors and seldom recorded in video or print until they get real stupid and start doing bus chants with outside dates like OU. I could easily see something getting to the point where action is necessary even without a great amount of physical proof. Let's just presume that people are too freely yelling "nigger" around campus. Does that really warrant a special commission and investigation? Are you suggesting that "verbal racism" is completely fine? edit: or even a "civil liberty"?
We are clearly allowed to drop the N-bomb any time we want and not be arrested for it. Being an idiot with free speech is a right. But the question here is if people yelling the n-word at black students(we assume, as Xdaunt as to if the racial slurs are directed) is a issue the university should address. And if those black students have a reasonable fear of harm by the people yelling that slur at them.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On November 10 2015 07:20 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 07:02 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 06:22 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 05:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 10 2015 05:23 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 04:58 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 04:25 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 03:02 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:59 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:50 farvacola wrote:
The racism needn't be "pervasive" to warrant a requisite response from the administration. This isn't a legal sufficiency argument, it's about how to best run a supposedly inclusive institution of higher learning.
For example, universities are the ones tasked with assembling investigatory commissions that are supposed to do the very thing you're doing, xDaunt, that being look into whether the incidents mentioned rise above the level of isolated occurrences. They didn't even do that much and therein lies the problem. Sure, I can understand a university forming a commission to investigate such incidents if it was clear that there might be a problem. But such commissions take resources, and I'm not seeing much to suggest that a sufficient threshold was reached to warrant such a commission. Again, are we really just talking about a shit swastika and some isolated comments? No. The students and protesters have made it clear that it is has been an ongoing issue. Those are just the recent incidents that the media has decided to cover. Any previous incidents have not been reported on by the media and may or may not have been documented by the school. Based on what? When real racist incidents occur (cross burnings, the dissemination of indisputably racist material, etc), they typically show up in the news. The absence of any kind of reporting is simply striking given the seemingly disproportionate response of the student body. On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 02:55 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Exactly how long should the students be required to put up with the racism until it is "systematic" enough to meet your standard? A year of documenting events without a response? 2? This built over the span of 2 months. Is that long enough? I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it. Well, it would appear that the school, students, and facility else is not working on the XDaunt burden of proof system and relies on what he can find in a google search. Or the simpler solution is that the media hasn't dug into the events prior to September 2015, so the information being reported on. Since when is it a good idea to simply take the word of the mob? How does an individual student prove a claim like people yelling slurs while driving by? Physical things to point to are easy, but most smoking guns are hidden behind closed frat doors and seldom recorded in video or print until they get real stupid and start doing bus chants with outside dates like OU. I could easily see something getting to the point where action is necessary even without a great amount of physical proof. Let's just presume that people are too freely yelling "nigger" around campus. Does that really warrant a special commission and investigation? The answer to that question is Yes. That should be obvious, but the way you worded it makes me unsure that you believe so. Do you not think schools should have organizations dedicated to campus safety and stemming bigotry? Because the vast majority of schools think such a thing is a great idea. I absolutely do not believe that a special commission and investigation are warranted in those circumstances. Christ, talk about the nazification of society.... Why not? Why should it be some acceptable thing that black students get cursed at when walking to class? Maybe this is the divide but waiting until racism gets to physical violence to start doing something about it is way too late. I don't think that it is socially acceptable to say nigger. And for all of the politically incorrect/offensive words that I do use, I have never used that one. However, I am not in favor of getting administrative and governmental entities involved in policing matters like this. Such action is inconsistent with our civil liberties.
granted the inevstigation might be to satisfy a swelling mob desire for punishment, and dem frat bros will be ruined for life if found.
to summarize arguments against investigation,
1. it is not purely motivated as a solution to the incident itself
2. disproportionate consequence to students etc discovered by investigation
3. diminishing sphere of private culture in which racism can be flaunted and enjoyed
for 1, i would agree that purely from the harm of the incident alone the administration would not have done anything, and it is probably not worth it for a single isolated incident. it is also motivated mostly by a desire to repair school's image, (unless it values the racist student crowd highly or something.) the protest itself is, leaving legitimacy aside, very real, so the school is forced to do something.
in this process the school is probably blameless, what is to be blamed is
4. the hypersensitive protest crowd that actually bullies poor school and frat bros.
i would suggest the emotional energy of the argument is actually in 3 and 4. argument 2 is actually a legitimate concern, but most of the harm will be from having their acts known and famous. you don't want to be a famous racist on your resume, unless you are donald.
argument 1 is, in light of the above analysis, actually not directed at any particular institution in this scenario. in this scenario the school is faced with a protest and an existential threat to its reputation, so its actions are rationalized on business grounds. the stuff about foreboding government or institutional censorship is misplaced insofar as said censorship is actually the suggested or optimal solution to the racist problem in society.
it is quite clear that we don't really need cultural polcing from state or institutions to stamp out racism. simply make them more known to society at large. in this very incieent the shield of the frat bros is the anonymity of the car as it races into the night, and in some places the anonymity is provided by a community of racists covering for each other. the latter is, perhaps the true target of this mob, but that this may be, such a subculture is also a more serious and systematic problem that probably does deserve some investigation. although publishing the names of students involved is another matter.
this brings us to 3, the true pain of some of the people longing for the good ole days, but quite frankly, shouting nigger at passerby goes far beyond the long tolerated but still economically and socially harmful indoor racism. all things considered it is a failure of society to not expose all this stuff totally. so any little exposure to put the bros back in their place is welcomed really.
|
I agree wth xdaunt that it does seem weird the president would resign after protests about a shit swastika and some reports of isolated racism. It's unclear to me at this point how many incidents there were, whether the racism is coming from students/alumni/townies/rabblerousers, or whether there's other stuff we aren't aware of. It is Missouri, and Ferguson is still fresh in people's minds so maybe that has amplified tensions on both sides.
But still, it is odd. I am truly surprised he felt the need to resign. Unless it's pervasive racism among certain members of the student body or something, it seems weird the president is stepping down unless he's just being pressured by other officials to resolve this as quickly and quietly as possible. Or maybe his resignation is a sign of something bigger still to come that hasn't been mentioned in the reporting so far. It just seems like there has to be more to the story.
|
On November 10 2015 07:23 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 07:20 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 07:02 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 06:22 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 05:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 10 2015 05:23 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 04:58 Trumpet wrote:On November 10 2015 04:25 xDaunt wrote:On November 10 2015 03:02 Plansix wrote:On November 10 2015 02:59 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
Sure, I can understand a university forming a commission to investigate such incidents if it was clear that there might be a problem. But such commissions take resources, and I'm not seeing much to suggest that a sufficient threshold was reached to warrant such a commission. Again, are we really just talking about a shit swastika and some isolated comments? No. The students and protesters have made it clear that it is has been an ongoing issue. Those are just the recent incidents that the media has decided to cover. Any previous incidents have not been reported on by the media and may or may not have been documented by the school. Based on what? When real racist incidents occur (cross burnings, the dissemination of indisputably racist material, etc), they typically show up in the news. The absence of any kind of reporting is simply striking given the seemingly disproportionate response of the student body. On November 10 2015 03:00 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
I dunno, I'd have to think about it. It's like Judge Stewart said regarding obscenity: "I'll know it when I see it." Right now I don't see it. Well, it would appear that the school, students, and facility else is not working on the XDaunt burden of proof system and relies on what he can find in a google search. Or the simpler solution is that the media hasn't dug into the events prior to September 2015, so the information being reported on. Since when is it a good idea to simply take the word of the mob? How does an individual student prove a claim like people yelling slurs while driving by? Physical things to point to are easy, but most smoking guns are hidden behind closed frat doors and seldom recorded in video or print until they get real stupid and start doing bus chants with outside dates like OU. I could easily see something getting to the point where action is necessary even without a great amount of physical proof. Let's just presume that people are too freely yelling "nigger" around campus. Does that really warrant a special commission and investigation? The answer to that question is Yes. That should be obvious, but the way you worded it makes me unsure that you believe so. Do you not think schools should have organizations dedicated to campus safety and stemming bigotry? Because the vast majority of schools think such a thing is a great idea. I absolutely do not believe that a special commission and investigation are warranted in those circumstances. Christ, talk about the nazification of society.... Why not? Why should it be some acceptable thing that black students get cursed at when walking to class? Maybe this is the divide but waiting until racism gets to physical violence to start doing something about it is way too late. I don't think that it is socially acceptable to say nigger. And for all of the politically incorrect/offensive words that I do use, I have never used that one. However, I am not in favor of getting administrative and governmental entities involved in policing matters like this. Such action is inconsistent with our civil liberties. How is this any different than a bunch of men driving around yelling at female students and sexually harassing them? And why would any University be required to put up with that?
Once again the problem here is the "A bunch of," in your statement. It has been reported that a drunken student said the n-word to a group (which is shitty), and that a man in a confederate flag truck (who was not a student mind you) yelled it while passing by. The protesters are arguing that this constitutes institutionalized racism, despite them being few isolated instances on a campus of once again, 35,000 students. I'm not willing to make the extrapolation that the actions of a few racists apply to a campus-wide community and I absolutely wouldn't fire a man for harboring an environment in which these were the best people could come up with as evidence.
|
On November 10 2015 07:43 IgnE wrote:
I agree wth xdaunt that it does seem weird the president would resign after protests about a shit swastika and some reports of isolated racism. It's unclear to me at this point how many incidents there were, whether the racism is coming from students/alumni/townies/rabblerousers, or whether there's other stuff we aren't aware of. It is Missouri, and Ferguson is still fresh in people's minds so maybe that has amplified tensions on both sides.
But still, it is odd. I am truly surprised he felt the need to resign. Unless it's pervasive racism among certain members of the student body or something, it seems weird the president is stepping down unless he's just being pressured by other officials to resolve this as quickly and quietly as possible. Or maybe his resignation is a sign of something bigger still to come that hasn't been mentioned in the reporting so far. It just seems like there has to be more to the story.
He was absolutely strong armed into resigning because of the football team's threat to boycott. They would lose more money on that game than they lose in his entire salary plus a severance. Schools rely on football money.
|
On November 10 2015 06:51 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 05:52 ampson wrote:
They got a response from the president about the swastika incident with mandatory sensitivity training. They got multiple assurances from the president that their demands were being looked at and that actions were being taken. I've made my arguments, and I just operate on the assumption that some faculty can be wrong. Apparently you think they are infallible, but in that case why didn't all of them join in the protests? Because the majority didn't. Nor did the majority of students. But in a campus of 35000, ten percent is still enough to make a huge fuss. I'm not doing any mental gymnastics, I'm assessing the situation based off of what I know, and I know that their demands were absolutely ridiculous and that they didn't even give the president any time to act upon them before continuously calling for his resignation. From my memory of being a student getting 10% of students at an institution to do anything at all is pretty good evidence that there is a serious issue.
In my experience, minority groups have extremely high participation rates regarding anything that is a.. "minority issue".
At colleges I mean.
|
I think it helps to look at the local politics and what is going on at other univerities as well.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/11/09/mizzou-faculty-walks-out-student-association-calls-presidents-removal/75448392/
The situation at Missouri, the oldest public university west of the Mississippi River, unfolded as other campuses, including Yale University and Ithaca College, have faced protests in recent weeks over racially tinged episodes on those campuses.
At Ithaca, students are circulating a petition asking for a vote of "confidence" or "no confidence" of President Tom Rochon, who critics say has given inadequate response to several allegedly racist incidents at the Upstate New York college. At Yale, protests erupted after the university sent an email to students urging them not to wear racially insensitive Halloween costumes. The email prompted a professor to complain that Yale and other universities were becoming "places of censure and prohibition."
Once again, the censorship term is thrown out when students reminded to think about their fellow class mates before picking provocative costumes. And this time by a professor, who decided the hill he was going to die on was racially insensitive Halloween costumes.
That doesn't seem like a big deal. But to a black student, it says to the school won't take them seriously if they report racism. And this is likely reinforced by their previous experiences with reporting racism in their life.
On November 10 2015 07:55 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2015 06:51 KwarK wrote:On November 10 2015 05:52 ampson wrote:
They got a response from the president about the swastika incident with mandatory sensitivity training. They got multiple assurances from the president that their demands were being looked at and that actions were being taken. I've made my arguments, and I just operate on the assumption that some faculty can be wrong. Apparently you think they are infallible, but in that case why didn't all of them join in the protests? Because the majority didn't. Nor did the majority of students. But in a campus of 35000, ten percent is still enough to make a huge fuss. I'm not doing any mental gymnastics, I'm assessing the situation based off of what I know, and I know that their demands were absolutely ridiculous and that they didn't even give the president any time to act upon them before continuously calling for his resignation. From my memory of being a student getting 10% of students at an institution to do anything at all is pretty good evidence that there is a serious issue. In my experience, minority groups have extremely high participation rates regarding anything that is a.. "minority issue". At colleges I mean.
Weird how an issue they get behind an issue that effects all of them and they all have similar shared experiences.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
the president is a goner because of the quite public insinuation that the school has abided the existence of a subculture of racists on campus. it's not good for your reputation lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
