The Fora: A Higher Education Community

[waring: rant to follow. I guess that's what I do]

https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2021/04/02/recommendations-stopping-anti-asian-racism-campuses-opinion

"Recognize that language is an intimate and deeply personal form of communication. The way people speak and the language that they prefer to speak in are often crucial facets of their identity. So avoid comments that convey judgment or impute value around Asian people's fluency in English, even if said as a compliment. When you see others remarking on community members' fluency in English or their "lack of accent," inform those individuals that this not acceptable. Ask them to reflect on whether they would offer the same observation to someone who is not Asian or a person of color."

I'm a little confused by this from the get-go. Speaking English well while enrolled as a student in the USA has practical value, so giving someone credit for having done it might be information they would like to have. They probably already know it, but when did complimenting people become a faux pas? And the question 'would they (you) offer the same observation to someone who is not Asian or a person of color' is really quite a problematic question. Would I compliment a black or white American from Atlanta on his proper English? Of course not. But there's a reason which is not the case with the Asian from Korea. It's not a second language so having it down is not, presumably, a recent achievement for which one would could have earned a pat on the back. And what difference would it make that the young man from Atlanta is white or a P.O.C.? Like, can we have a discussion where race isn't mentioned in every other sentence, for no discernible reason?
Elephant in the room: I have taught Asian students who speak English very poorly, and it makes a difference.
The real fast-forward *progress in education* is where they require faculty to police each other about remarks that the two authors here identify as inappropriate (though my school has not, as yet). My religion doesn't allow for that, frankly. We are all considered flawed in the eyes of the Almightly. So developing supersonic radar to detect telltale signs of whatever somebody somewhere thinks might be related to a racially oriented world view that lurks ominously in the middle of a friendly compliment is not our job. A person's business of getting redemption is between him and our God.
Race is not even part of the story. The fact that someone learned a second language and uses that skill to increase their education options is. If anything, the American could be complaining that you're playing favorites.
And now we're even farther from the supposed impact of all of this on whether there might be another mass murder.
Any thoughts?

My thought is you need a hobby.  Have you consider latch hook or rock collecting?

Quote from: polly_mer on April 04, 2021, 06:59:57 PM
My thought is you need a hobby.  Have you consider latch hook or rock collecting?

Or maybe I need to lose one. Reading Insidehighered or chronicle.com, for example. Each one now has the latest from academics-seeing-the-world-through-white-supremacy-colored-glasses. Getting ridiculous.
I did enjoy earth science but there are no rocks in the city.

Quote from: mahagonny on April 04, 2021, 07:54:54 PM

Quote from: polly_mer on April 04, 2021, 06:59:57 PM
My thought is you need a hobby.  Have you consider latch hook or rock collecting?

Or maybe I need to lose one. Reading Insidehighered or chronicle.com, for example. Each one now has the latest from academics-seeing-the-world-through-white-supremacy-colored-glasses. Getting ridiculous.
I did enjoy earth science but there are no rocks in the city.

Field trip for rock collecting!

I have definitely scaled back my CHE and IHE reading in favor of Twitter threads discussing higher ed issues through data and research on how to better serve students with complicated lives, adjust offerings for a changing modern society, and gracefully transition graduate-degree holders to good jobs that aren't faculty jobs.

That kind of productive discussion was mostly at CHE/IHE in various forms over the years.  However, with the deletion of IHE comments and deletion of all forms of discussion at CHE as well as far less useful mixes of column topics, I've moved away from reading nearly everything in IHE/CHE most days.

The reason for not complimenting someone on their English is that it is patronizing and it implies that you didn't expect them to be competent in English.

Those are the reasons for if you really want to understand. If you just want to be offended, I think you've already achieved that, so mission accomplished.

Quote from: Hegemony on April 04, 2021, 09:42:34 PM
The reason for not complimenting someone on their English is that it is patronizing and it implies that you didn't expect them to be competent in English.

Those are the reasons for if you really want to understand. If you just want to be offended, I think you've already achieved that, so mission accomplished.

Yes. And it's even worse when you do it to someone who's actually a native speaker.

I can't even begin to count the number of times that's happened to me, all while the idiot who's "complimenting" me is busy mangling my name despite the fact that after a mandatory eleven years of language instruction they should know a little better.

(I'm white, by the way. But I pass for some non-specific other race, most often Asian.)

Quote from: mahagonny on April 04, 2021, 05:35:20 PM
.....
The real fast-forward *progress in education* is where they require faculty to police each other about remarks that the two authors here identify as inappropriate (though my school has not, as yet). My religion doesn't allow for that, frankly. We are all considered flawed in the eyes of the Almightly. So developing supersonic radar to detect telltale signs of whatever somebody somewhere thinks might be related to a racially oriented world view that lurks ominously in the middle of a friendly compliment is not our job. A person's business of getting redemption is between him and our God.
.....

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. I mean, I get you saying you wouldn't want to participate in penalizing someone for an action you perceive as completely harmless.

But what do you mean when you say your religion doesn't allow for "policing" others in the sense of reporting them to some authority? Like...for anything? Or specifically for actions you don't see as harmful?

I mean, would you report a colleague if you saw them committing theft or vandalism or some act of physical violence?

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 04, 2021, 10:09:05 PM

Quote from: Hegemony on April 04, 2021, 09:42:34 PM
The reason for not complimenting someone on their English is that it is patronizing and it implies that you didn't expect them to be competent in English.

Those are the reasons for if you really want to understand. If you just want to be offended, I think you've already achieved that, so mission accomplished.

Yes. And it's even worse when you do it to someone who's actually a native speaker.

I can't even begin to count the number of times that's happened to me, all while the idiot who's "complimenting" me is busy mangling my name despite the fact that after a mandatory eleven years of language instruction they should know a little better.

(I'm white, by the way. But I pass for some non-specific other race, most often Asian.)

'Oh, thanks--yes my English should be unaccented, given that I was born and brought up in Peoria. Good to know you think I don't look like it, though.'

'Oh, wow--I've been working on that speech impediment my entire life. I thought I had it licked, but evidently I didn't because you thought it was necessary to comment on how my pronunciation doesn't sound right.'

Quote from: polly_mer on April 04, 2021, 08:14:09 PM

I have definitely scaled back my CHE and IHE reading in favor of Twitter threads discussing higher ed issues through data and research on how to better serve students with complicated lives, adjust offerings for a changing modern society, and gracefully transition graduate-degree holders to good jobs that aren't faculty jobs.

That kind of productive discussion was mostly at CHE/IHE in various forms over the years.  However, with the deletion of IHE comments and deletion of all forms of discussion at CHE as well as far less useful mixes of column topics, I've moved away from reading nearly everything in IHE/CHE most days.

Sounds like you notice the article I linked is 100 data-free. That's becoming more common.

Quote from: Hegemony on April 04, 2021, 09:42:34 PM
The reason for not complimenting someone on their English is that it is patronizing and it implies that you didn't expect them to be competent in English.

'

The reason for being thought to expect little of members of another race is you're a white supremacist. Another one busted! In reality, actually having learned English, even poorly, could well identify one as a striver.

Quote'Oh, wow--I've been working on that speech impediment my entire life. I thought I had it licked, but evidently I didn't because you thought it was necessary to comment on how my pronunciation doesn't sound right.'

We're not talking about impediments. We're talking about endeavors.

Quote from: smallcleanrat on April 04, 2021, 10:21:53 PM

Quote from: mahagonny on April 04, 2021, 05:35:20 PM
.....
The real fast-forward *progress in education* is where they require faculty to police each other about remarks that the two authors here identify as inappropriate (though my school has not, as yet). My religion doesn't allow for that, frankly. We are all considered flawed in the eyes of the Almightly. So developing supersonic radar to detect telltale signs of whatever somebody somewhere thinks might be related to a racially oriented world view that lurks ominously in the middle of a friendly compliment is not our job. A person's business of getting redemption is between him and our God.
.....

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. I mean, I get you saying you wouldn't want to participate in penalizing someone for an action you perceive as completely harmless.

But what do you mean when you say your religion doesn't allow for "policing" others in the sense of reporting them to some authority? Like...for anything? Or specifically for actions you don't see as harmful?

I mean, would you report a colleague if you saw them committing theft or vandalism or some act of physical violence?

I would report someone for that.
The new liberal orthodoxy says all racism is evil, but only racism residing in the psyche of the white man or woman is consequential enough that we need to do something about it. Or even acknowledge that it's there. That's an original sin concept. When I go to church, we confess our sins, together, but we're not talking to each other. We're talking to Him. I should ask forgiveness of a neighbor if I say or do something wrong to him, but why on earth would I ask forgiveness from him for my inherent nature? He's got the same problem I have. It's between him and his God.
The new anti-racism training will tell you that in a private conversation if a colleague says something that shows inadequate attention to anti-racism objectives and protocol, as regards changing ourselves, you must correct him. That goes too far for me. I might not do it.

Quote from: mahagonny on April 05, 2021, 04:41:57 AM

Quote from: Hegemony on April 04, 2021, 09:42:34 PM
The reason for not complimenting someone on their English is that it is patronizing and it implies that you didn't expect them to be competent in English.

'

The reason for being thought to expect little of members of another race is you're a white supremacist. Another one busted! In reality, actually having learned English, even poorly, could well identify one as a striver.

Quote'Oh, wow--I've been working on that speech impediment my entire life. I thought I had it licked, but evidently I didn't because you thought it was necessary to comment on how my pronunciation doesn't sound right.'

We're not talking about impediments. We're talking about endeavors.

I think we're talking at cross purposes here. Your interpretation of the value of compliments rests on the assumption that you can always correctly identify whether some is a striver, who works hard to master a new language and deserves be praised for it.

What we're suggesting is that those identifications may not always be correct. A person may appear to you to be such language-learning striver, but is in fact just some Asian-American kid from Peoria who has a speech impediment. When you compliment them on their English, they don't hear a compliment. They hear another reminder that they don't look like someone who speaks English, and that their attempt to work past a speech impediment was not successful. Of course, that's not what you intended to say--you had no idea they had a speech impediment, and you only intended to be encouraging. But the encouragement was built on a false premise, so what they hear is: 'you don't look like you're from around here; you don't sound like you're a native English speaker; and I feel entitled to comment on it.'

It's like an earlier discussion we had about complimenting women's hair or clothes or appearance: Maybe much of the time the complimenter is correctly reading the situation, and the women's like having their efforts to look nice be noticed and praised. Maybe much of the time the non-native English speaker likes being complimented on their linguistic attainment.

But when you read the situation wrong, then you do harm. Women feel objectified; minorities feel unwelcome in their own homes. And I argue that the harm that is done by implying that the kid from Peoria with a lisp can't possibly be who they are, because they look and sound 'wrong', far outweighs the momentary pleasure that the Korean student feels at a compliment.

Possibly what's going on is that the two sides of the argument simply don't agree on this relative weighting: People on my side think that the harm that comes from speaking from flawed assumptions is greater than the benefit of a well-aimed compliment. Perhaps you think that the benefit of a well-aimed compliment is worth the harm that it causes when it is aimed poorly. If that's the case, I don't see that we can every come to an agreement. There's no conflicting information here; we agree on the facts; we just disagree on what's more important.

Quote from: ergative on April 05, 2021, 07:18:13 AM

Possibly what's going on is that the two sides of the argument simply don't agree on this relative weighting: People on my side think that the harm that comes from speaking from flawed assumptions is greater than the benefit of a well-aimed compliment. Perhaps you think that the benefit of a well-aimed compliment is worth the harm that it causes when it is aimed poorly. If that's the case, I don't see that we can every come to an agreement. There's no conflicting information here; we agree on the facts; we just disagree on what's more important.

But this raises the serious question of whether that could be the case with any compliment. If you tell a student "That was an excellent presentation!" it implies you were expecting less. In principle, any indication that someone exceeded expectations implies that it was assumed that they wouldn't do that well.

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 05, 2021, 07:45:04 AM

Quote from: ergative on April 05, 2021, 07:18:13 AM

Possibly what's going on is that the two sides of the argument simply don't agree on this relative weighting: People on my side think that the harm that comes from speaking from flawed assumptions is greater than the benefit of a well-aimed compliment. Perhaps you think that the benefit of a well-aimed compliment is worth the harm that it causes when it is aimed poorly. If that's the case, I don't see that we can every come to an agreement. There's no conflicting information here; we agree on the facts; we just disagree on what's more important.

But this raises the serious question of whether that could be the case with any compliment. If you tell a student "That was an excellent presentation!" it implies you were expecting less. In principle, any indication that someone exceeded expectations implies that it was assumed that they wouldn't do that well.

I think that in this particular case there's no problem: our role as a professional is to evaluate our students' work. By contrast, it is not our role as humans to evaluate our fellow humans' perceived fit into society.

I'm with Polly here....collect rocks.  Sketch buildings. Write a trashy novel. Learn an instrument. Take up investing and cash out your bitcoin and live high off the hog.

Quote from: mahagonny on April 04, 2021, 05:35:20 PM

https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2021/04/02/recommendations-stopping-anti-asian-racism-campuses-opinion

"Recognize that language is an intimate and deeply personal form of communication. The way people speak and the language that they prefer to speak in are often crucial facets of their identity. So avoid comments that convey judgment or impute value around Asian people's fluency in English, even if said as a compliment. When you see others remarking on community members' fluency in English or their "lack of accent," inform those individuals that this not acceptable. Ask them to reflect on whether they would offer the same observation to someone who is not Asian or a person of color."
Any thoughts?

I didn't read the article, only the quote.  The quote is humorous.  Such a simplistic attempt to generalize, it's silly.  I'll say what, when, and to whom I want, according to my values and judgments regarding appropriate conduct.

I work with many students for whom English is not their first language.  Many are insecure/embarrassed/concerned about their English communication skills and "confess" such to me directly.  In some cases, their English is quite good and easy to understand.  In other cases, I've seen students improve dramatically over a semester or two.  When I say "your English is very good, I appreciate your comments in class" or "Your English has really improved, you're doing great!" their faces light up with joy and gratitude and they express sincere thanks for the compliments.  Priceless to see the impact a few nice words can have on another person.

Disrespectful of people to call out Mahagonny for posting higher ed news items in a higher ed forum.  Looks like all are not welcome here.  Why not just scroll on by rather than snide comments?

Quote from: Ruralguy on April 05, 2021, 08:12:02 AM
I'm with Polly here....collect rocks.  Sketch buildings. Write a trashy novel. Learn an instrument. Take up investing and cash out your bitcoin and live high off the hog.

Not possible. He's decided it's psychologically safer to live the life of a poorly-paid, disgruntled part-time employee.

Oh, and please don't compliment my wife on her English. She has a Ph.D. in it and is fully bilingual, which is completely unrelated to her physical appearance and her use of a Northeastern USA accent when speaking the language within the USA. Same for my colleague in the next office, who code switches to Nigerian English depending on who she's talking to.

QuoteWhy not just scroll on by rather than snide comments?

That is what I generally do when I see a post by Mahagonny.  Im happier since I started that practice.  Unfortunately, I read the post before noting the source of this thread.

Quote from: Cheerful on April 05, 2021, 09:10:35 AM

Quote from: mahagonny on April 04, 2021, 05:35:20 PM

https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2021/04/02/recommendations-stopping-anti-asian-racism-campuses-opinion

"Recognize that language is an intimate and deeply personal form of communication. The way people speak and the language that they prefer to speak in are often crucial facets of their identity. So avoid comments that convey judgment or impute value around Asian people's fluency in English, even if said as a compliment. When you see others remarking on community members' fluency in English or their "lack of accent," inform those individuals that this not acceptable. Ask them to reflect on whether they would offer the same observation to someone who is not Asian or a person of color."
Any thoughts?

I didn't read the article, only the quote.  The quote is humorous.  Such a simplistic attempt to generalize, it's silly.  I'll say what, when, and to whom I want, according to my values and judgments regarding appropriate conduct.

I work with many students for whom English is not their first language.  Many are insecure/embarrassed/concerned about their English communication skills and "confess" such to me directly.  In some cases, their English is quite good and easy to understand.  In other cases, I've seen students improve dramatically over a semester or two.  When I say "your English is very good, I appreciate your comments in class" or "Your English has really improved, you're doing great!" their faces light up with joy and gratitude and they express sincere thanks for the compliments.  Priceless to see the impact a few nice words can have on another person.

Disrespectful of people to call out Mahagonny for posting higher ed news items in a higher ed forum.  Looks like all are not welcome here.  Why not just scroll on by rather than snide comments?

Well, as to "policing," it's more a matter of tact, context, common sense, and plain old good manners. Speaking to students who clearly want to improve their English--not much to argue about there. Faculty and other professionals about whom you're just making dumb assumptions because of appearance? I think the difference is pretty clear.

Mahagonny has something of a history, and people hit the "snide" button here pretty quickly. I've done it myself here and there; I probably shouldn't have. Sometimes I think the fora should be retitled: "The Fora: A Snide Community." There are two people who have posted whom I happily ignore (NOT Mahagonny, who I think is genuinely questing, if a bit damp behind the ears), and the fora experience for me has greatly improved. Other than that--just trying to do that whole "be the change you want to see" thing.

Quote from: Cheerful on April 05, 2021, 09:10:35 AM

Quote from: mahagonny on April 04, 2021, 05:35:20 PM

https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2021/04/02/recommendations-stopping-anti-asian-racism-campuses-opinion

"Recognize that language is an intimate and deeply personal form of communication. The way people speak and the language that they prefer to speak in are often crucial facets of their identity. So avoid comments that convey judgment or impute value around Asian people's fluency in English, even if said as a compliment. When you see others remarking on community members' fluency in English or their "lack of accent," inform those individuals that this not acceptable. Ask them to reflect on whether they would offer the same observation to someone who is not Asian or a person of color."
Any thoughts?

I didn't read the article, only the quote.  The quote is humorous.  Such a simplistic attempt to generalize, it's silly.  I'll say what, when, and to whom I want, according to my values and judgments regarding appropriate conduct.

I work with many students for whom English is not their first language.  Many are insecure/embarrassed/concerned about their English communication skills and "confess" such to me directly.  In some cases, their English is quite good and easy to understand.  In other cases, I've seen students improve dramatically over a semester or two.  When I say "your English is very good, I appreciate your comments in class" or "Your English has really improved, you're doing great!" their faces light up with joy and gratitude and they express sincere thanks for the compliments.  Priceless to see the impact a few nice words can have on another person.

Disrespectful of people to call out Mahagonny for posting higher ed news items in a higher ed forum.  Looks like all are not welcome here.  Why not just scroll on by rather than snide comments?

Agree, and why do people assume because an author has an Asian surname that he or she has been appointed spokesperson for all Asians studying in the USA? It's like Joe Biden telling someone he's not black. Like, Jason Riley would have something to say about that.
I have complemented people on, more frequently, not the quality of their speech, but the fact that they are bilingual. I have asked people where they are from (another thing some of the wokelings forbid), how many languages they speak in total (sometimes it's even three!) and learned a lot thereby. I call it 'making friends.' I've learned a lot in the process too. I have also told students when their English is not good enough, with the result that they got much needed help. I had a student from Korea who used present tense for everything. 'I don't come to class last, week; I am sick.' Would I be doing him a favor by letting this continue without a comment?

QuoteWhat we're suggesting is that those identifications may not always be correct. A person may appear to you to be such language-learning striver, but is in fact just some Asian-American kid from Peoria who has a speech impediment. When you compliment them on their English, they don't hear a compliment. They hear another reminder that they don't look like someone who speaks English, and that their attempt to work past a speech impediment was not successful. Of course, that's not what you intended to say--you had no idea they had a speech impediment, and you only intended to be encouraging. But the encouragement was built on a false premise, so what they hear is: 'you don't look like you're from around here; you don't sound like you're a native English speaker; and I feel entitled to comment on it.'

How do you know what they hear?

Quote from: clean on April 05, 2021, 09:25:58 AM

QuoteWhy not just scroll on by rather than snide comments?

That is what I generally do when I see a post by Mahagonny.  Im happier since I started that practice.  Unfortunately, I read the post before noting the source of this thread.

Full of shit much?

QuoteFull of shit much?

No, you seem pretty full of it, most of the time.
But Party on.  there is little to keep me coming back to this thread.

Quote from: mahagonny on April 05, 2021, 10:52:03 AM

QuoteWhat we're suggesting is that those identifications may not always be correct. A person may appear to you to be such language-learning striver, but is in fact just some Asian-American kid from Peoria who has a speech impediment. When you compliment them on their English, they don't hear a compliment. They hear another reminder that they don't look like someone who speaks English, and that their attempt to work past a speech impediment was not successful. Of course, that's not what you intended to say--you had no idea they had a speech impediment, and you only intended to be encouraging. But the encouragement was built on a false premise, so what they hear is: 'you don't look like you're from around here; you don't sound like you're a native English speaker; and I feel entitled to comment on it.'

How do you know what they hear?

Because (https://twitter.com/angelika_wrona/status/1278238507618762752) they (https://twitter.com/mikesaycon/status/1327919906613047296) tell (https://twitter.com/igrullonpaz/status/1258884546667388930) us (https://twitter.com/prathyushspeaks/status/1265051430559404032) what (https://twitter.com/Grace4NY/status/1328379538531880960) they (https://twitter.com/drkebsun/status/1259078590483902464) hear (https://twitter.com/yesitshanna/status/1328142711493279746) and (https://twitter.com/nancywyuen/status/1328402707300827137) I (https://twitter.com/pkodmad/status/1328306347608215552) listen (https://twitter.com/originalspin/status/1328160019842428931)  to (https://twitter.com/helenhousandi/status/1328339622741630985) them (https://twitter.com/Ave10/status/1258922116344188928).

Perhaps some people are too sensitive and self-centered.  Lighten up, folks.  Not everyone is ignorant, malicious, racist, with bad motives.  Many are well-meaning.  Not every statement uttered by someone else must be perfectly aligned with one's preferences.

I'm actually not seeing a statement in this particular article about "turning in" anybody. Sounds like they are talking about making a quick comment to a colleague if you observe that colleague doing something racially insensitive.

Not saying that doesn't have its own issues, just pointing out it's not quite on the level of hauling the colleague in for some kind of tribunal.

And I know that the rhetoric from some people seems to split the world into only two factions: woke people and white supremacists, but I don't see that in this specific article. I'm not sure I agree with every suggestion on the list, but the emphasis does seem to be on making people aware of behaviors that can contribute to feelings of alienation. That doesn't have to assume malicious intent, just lack of awareness.

People bring up the "Where are you from?" question a lot as an example. In my experience, the issue isn't the question itself (it's a fairly common get-to-know-you query after all), but how the answer is received. If someone answers truthfully "Chicago" or "Toronto" it's irritating to hear "No, I mean where are you *really* from?" If the person could just say, "Oh, Chicago! I have family there!" or something, it's not an issue.

I've seen conversations like this lead to a chain of questions:
-"I'm *really* from Toronto. Born and raised."
-"Hmm. Ok, well where are your parents from?"
-"Dad's from Michigan, Mom's from Massachusetts."
-"*sigh* OK, but what's your background?"
-"..."
-"I mean, what type of Oriental are you?"

This can lead to some weirdly detailed probing of the person's family background (including questions about whether they were adopted, which is well beyond ice-breaker territory).

I've experienced plenty of uncomfortable moments, and I've never come away from them thinking "Wow, that person's obviously a white supremacist." My thoughts are more along the lines of "er...why are they doing this...?"

There have only been a few times in my entire life I ever thought of complaining (though ultimately I didn't):

1) when being approached by multiple male students saying, "Hey! We give you five dollah, you sucky sucky?"

2) when a therapist said "I would normally call your parents' behavior abusive, but I don't want to be insensitive, since that might be part of their culture." (It's not...)

3) when a teacher ("just making an observation") said that Asian people ("not all, just, you know, a lot of them") have no personality or imagination and thus rarely become great artists or musicians or writers ("just copycats")

I wouldn't have wanted to see any of these people get in real trouble, but if one of their peers had tapped them on the shoulder at some point to say, "Hey, that *may* have come across in ways you didn't intend." would that have been so horrible?

Quote from: smallcleanrat on April 05, 2021, 01:30:24 PM

1) when being approached by multiple male students saying, "Hey! We give you five dollah, you sucky sucky?"

2) when a therapist said "I would normally call your parents' behavior abusive, but I don't want to be insensitive, since that might be part of their culture." (It's not...)

3) when a teacher ("just making an observation") said that Asian people ("not all, just, you know, a lot of them") have no personality or imagination and thus rarely become great artists or musicians or writers ("just copycats")

I wouldn't have wanted to see any of these people get in real trouble, but if one of their peers had tapped them on the shoulder at some point to say, "Hey, that *may* have come across in ways you didn't intend." would that have been so horrible?

I think the bolded only applies to #2. #1 and 3 definitely were knowingly and willfully being offensive and I would want them to get in real trouble on your behalf! Not OK! And they have no right not to be made uncomfortable by being called out on it.

I hope to be a good enough ally to call people out on this crap as needed, and I hope if I do say something unintentionally offensive or othering that people will let me know. If some people want to call that policing than so be it.

Quote from: smallcleanrat on April 05, 2021, 01:30:24 PM


Not saying that doesn't have its own issues, just pointing out it's not quite on the level of hauling the colleague in for some kind of tribunal.

And I know that the rhetoric from some people seems to split the world into only two factions: woke people and white supremacists, but I don't see that in this specific article. I'm not sure I agree with every suggestion on the list, but the emphasis does seem to be on making people aware of behaviors that can contribute to feelings of alienation. That doesn't have to assume malicious intent, just lack of awareness.

But even assuming they are not intentionally promulgating that view their blind spot is failing to see that being told by the media and others that America is full of white supremacists is an obvious reason for non-whites to feel alienated, and it is the wokesters who are doing it. So, while they might think they are doing good, they are not doing what they think they are doing.

QuoteI'm actually not seeing a statement in this particular article about "turning in" anybody. Sounds like they are talking about making a quick comment to a colleague if you observe that colleague doing something racially insensitive.

QuoteI hope to be a good enough ally to call people out on this crap*as needed, and I hope if I do say something unintentionally offensive or othering that people will let me know. If some people want to call that policing than so be it.

Doesn't take long for the right people to show up, does it?

*complementing a student on their ability to express themselves

mistake/apology to small clean rat and puget

I didn't see the unkind comments that puget was responding to. Or maybe I'm tired. Seven hours contact time today  with students.

Strike these lines please:

"Doesn't take long for the right people to show up, does it?

*complementing a student on their ability to express themselves"

'Tomorrow is another day' entry:

Smallcleanrat, little bongo, ergative, cheerful, et al, all readers who tried to give this some sober thought or comments, I appreciate it. I don't know that I can discuss it here. There are snipers on the forum. True I do have an emotional side and sometimes the analytical mind gets pushed out of the way on the pseudonymous forum. Making things even worse, my politics don't blend here. I regard the recent self-identified 'antiracist' component of diversity staff, duties, discussion and faculty discourse with a lot of worry. My take on it is often wrongly dismissed as just a vestige of the Trump reign and not legitimate concern. Don't know if it's worth it to try any longer in this venue. Some will be glad if I give up. Fine. Let them enjoy that, and I'll enjoy what I'm doing. My energy can be put to use somewhere.
Take care.

It's unfortunate that the radical and combative rhetoric of certain elements of the anti-racist movement should be so off-putting and confrontational.  Because most of us do have times when we blunderingly say things that needlessly offend or disturb.  We need to be corrected when we do that.  That works so much better when it is done with a measure of grace, and not in the form of a scolding, accusation, or call-out.  People shouldn't be too quick to assume the worst of those who say something foolish in the course of friendly efforts to deal with members of groups that they don't have much personal experience with.  Responding to something like that in a rude or combative manner isn't going to help the cause of racial justice or mutual understanding.  It's only going to become another example of two wrongs failing to make a right.

Mahagonny, that goes both ways.  When somebody comes across as scolding or confrontational to you, try to remember not to assume the worst and lash out.  People who are trying to give needed constructive criticism can blunder too.  Sometimes it's simply a failure to come across the right way, not an effort to police, accuse, or silence.

Quote from: apl68 on April 06, 2021, 07:54:03 AM
It's unfortunate that the radical and combative rhetoric of certain elements of the anti-racist movement should be so off-putting and confrontational.  Because most of us do have times when we blunderingly say things that needlessly offend or disturb.  We need to be corrected when we do that.  That works so much better when it is done with a measure of grace, and not in the form of a scolding, accusation, or call-out.  People shouldn't be too quick to assume the worst of those who say something foolish in the course of friendly efforts to deal with members of groups that they don't have much personal experience with.  Responding to something like that in a rude or combative manner isn't going to help the cause of racial justice or mutual understanding.  It's only going to become another example of two wrongs failing to make a right.

It's also worth remembering that for some people, those interactions happen every day. You'd be crabby too if you had to deal with it that often. (And, frankly, I think it says something not altogether flattering about one's society when that's the case, even if the infraction itself, in isolation, is relatively minor.)

Quote from: Cheerful on April 05, 2021, 12:57:58 PM
Perhaps some people are too sensitive and self-centered.  Lighten up, folks.  Not everyone is ignorant, malicious, racist, with bad motives.  Many are well-meaning.  Not every statement uttered by someone else must be perfectly aligned with one's preferences.

IMO, the true test for whether someone is well-meaning is how they react when told that their statement was hurtful or damaging to someone else.

If they were well meaning, they often apologize and keep it in mind for future interactions.

When someone becomes defensive and responds by telling someone to "lighten up" or be less sensitive, then it's a lot harder to infer good intent behind the statements.

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 06, 2021, 08:39:12 AM
It's also worth remembering that for some people, those interactions happen every day. You'd be crabby too if you had to deal with it that often. (And, frankly, I think it says something not altogether flattering about one's society when that's the case, even if the infraction itself, in isolation, is relatively minor.)

I'm curious how many people deal with so many new people each day, and interact sufficiently, to experience "those interactions" every day. Many (most?) people tend to interact mostly with the same people every day, and others who deal with lots of new people every day do so on a very superficial and/or task-related level. It's hard to imagine someone getting comments on their appearance, speech, etc. every day.

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 06, 2021, 09:58:08 AM

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 06, 2021, 08:39:12 AM
It's also worth remembering that for some people, those interactions happen every day. You'd be crabby too if you had to deal with it that often. (And, frankly, I think it says something not altogether flattering about one's society when that's the case, even if the infraction itself, in isolation, is relatively minor.)

I'm curious how many people deal with so many new people each day, and interact sufficiently, to experience "those interactions" every day. Many (most?) people tend to interact mostly with the same people every day, and others who deal with lots of new people every day do so on a very superficial and/or task-related level. It's hard to imagine someone getting comments on their appearance, speech, etc. every day.

The same people over and over again, either because you don't want to seem hypersensitive by asking them to stop or they don't see any reason to change if you do ask them to stop (e.g. "oh, lighten up").

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 06, 2021, 09:58:08 AM

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 06, 2021, 08:39:12 AM
It's also worth remembering that for some people, those interactions happen every day. You'd be crabby too if you had to deal with it that often. (And, frankly, I think it says something not altogether flattering about one's society when that's the case, even if the infraction itself, in isolation, is relatively minor.)

I'm curious how many people deal with so many new people each day, and interact sufficiently, to experience "those interactions" every day. Many (most?) people tend to interact mostly with the same people every day, and others who deal with lots of new people every day do so on a very superficial and/or task-related level. It's hard to imagine someone getting comments on their appearance, speech, etc. every day.

My first name is French. It's a common French first name. Since everyone in this country gets about a decade of French language instruction, it's not a big ask for people to get it right. Or even close to right.

Pre-pandemic, it got mangled orally or in writing at least once a day (including by colleagues who have been corrected any number of times). Now, it's every two or three days.

Mostly, the mistakes reveal a confusion about my name's gendering. And it's clearly pervasive--but it shouldn't really be, given all the French you learn in school. You should be able to recognize it as a French name and accept it as such, rather than Anglicize it to a different name altogether or misgender it.

I've lived in five provinces, and it's the worst here. Even Alberta was better. I am really tired of being told that something "isn't for me" or that I'm "not the registered owner" or that I "was called (on the PA) several times" just because someone can't be bothered to figure out gendered names which aren't English. I'm also really tired of correcting people, and of having my name translated to one of several English approximations (which are completely different).

And that's my first name. You wouldn't believe the number of times I've been told my last name is Chinese, or the things I've been told on the assumption that it is Chinese.

Nobody ever means to be hurtful when they mangle my name. But they do it so often, so persistently, so pervasively, and so consistently that the cumulative effect is to make it feel like I don't belong here. Sometimes, I give a false name just to avoid the interaction altogether.

And that's just me: a totally cis white man. Others have it much worse.

Quote from: eigen on April 06, 2021, 08:53:15 AM

Quote from: Cheerful on April 05, 2021, 12:57:58 PM
Perhaps some people are too sensitive and self-centered.  Lighten up, folks.  Not everyone is ignorant, malicious, racist, with bad motives.  Many are well-meaning.  Not every statement uttered by someone else must be perfectly aligned with one's preferences.

IMO, the true test for whether someone is well-meaning is how they react when told that their statement was hurtful or damaging to someone else.

If they were well meaning, they often apologize and keep it in mind for future interactions.

When someone becomes defensive and responds by telling someone to "lighten up" or be less sensitive, then it's a lot harder to infer good intent behind the statements.

For example I could tell Robin D-Angelo that her lecture and book make me uncomfortable, and she should be compelled to knock it off? Or would she tell me to be less sensitive, and stop being silent around discussions of racism, because my silence would reinforce the status quo, and that is unacceptable? And take 192 pages to say it?

https://www.amazon.com/White-Fragility-People-About-Racism/dp/0807047414

Quote from: mahagonny on April 06, 2021, 10:47:51 AM

Quote from: eigen on April 06, 2021, 08:53:15 AM

Quote from: Cheerful on April 05, 2021, 12:57:58 PM
Perhaps some people are too sensitive and self-centered.  Lighten up, folks.  Not everyone is ignorant, malicious, racist, with bad motives.  Many are well-meaning.  Not every statement uttered by someone else must be perfectly aligned with one's preferences.

IMO, the true test for whether someone is well-meaning is how they react when told that their statement was hurtful or damaging to someone else.

If they were well meaning, they often apologize and keep it in mind for future interactions.

When someone becomes defensive and responds by telling someone to "lighten up" or be less sensitive, then it's a lot harder to infer good intent behind the statements.

For example I could tell Robin D-Angelo that her lecture and book make me uncomfortable, and she should be compelled to knock it off? Or would she tell me to be less sensitive, and stop being silent around discussions of racism, because my silence would reinforce the status quo, and that is unacceptable? And take 192 pages to say it?

https://www.amazon.com/White-Fragility-People-About-Racism/dp/0807047414

That's not quite the same context as personal interactions, I think. I mean, I do think an author should be willing to consider criticism of their work, but I never have expectations for anyone to stop writing books, even if I think their views are obnoxious.

But, if someone you interact with socially were making you uncomfortable with sweeping generalizations about white people or men or what-have-you, then yes, IMO the decent thing to do would be to knock it off (even if they think you are overreacting).

I see it as falling under a general principle in which I don't have to understand or agree with someone's discomfort in order to accommodate it (speaking still for personal interactions).

I know people who don't like nicknames, and it irritates them if someone changes "Robert" to "Rob" or "Robbie". Some people think it's silly to care about such a thing, saying the nickname is a sign of affection or friendliness, that he should lighten up. I'll stick to "Robert" anyway, because why would I deliberately call him a name he's told me he dislikes?

But that's me. People have different individual thresholds for this sort of thing.

Quote from: smallcleanrat on April 06, 2021, 11:08:42 AM

Quote from: mahagonny on April 06, 2021, 10:47:51 AM

Quote from: eigen on April 06, 2021, 08:53:15 AM

Quote from: Cheerful on April 05, 2021, 12:57:58 PM
Perhaps some people are too sensitive and self-centered.  Lighten up, folks.  Not everyone is ignorant, malicious, racist, with bad motives.  Many are well-meaning.  Not every statement uttered by someone else must be perfectly aligned with one's preferences.

IMO, the true test for whether someone is well-meaning is how they react when told that their statement was hurtful or damaging to someone else.

If they were well meaning, they often apologize and keep it in mind for future interactions.

When someone becomes defensive and responds by telling someone to "lighten up" or be less sensitive, then it's a lot harder to infer good intent behind the statements.

For example I could tell Robin D-Angelo that her lecture and book make me uncomfortable, and she should be compelled to knock it off? Or would she tell me to be less sensitive, and stop being silent around discussions of racism, because my silence would reinforce the status quo, and that is unacceptable? And take 192 pages to say it?

https://www.amazon.com/White-Fragility-People-About-Racism/dp/0807047414

That's not quite the same context as personal interactions, I think. I mean, I do think an author should be willing to consider criticism of their work, but I never have expectations for anyone to stop writing books, even if I think their views are obnoxious.

Except her book is not just a book. It's a movement (and some would say, a religious dogma requiring you to confess your whiteness regularly, and I would wholeheartedly agree) which has infiltrated my workplace and community and is gathering momentum. And whereas we work at a government maintained university, a step toward the religion-state.

Quote from: mahagonny on April 06, 2021, 11:14:17 AM

Quote from: smallcleanrat on April 06, 2021, 11:08:42 AM

Quote from: mahagonny on April 06, 2021, 10:47:51 AM

Quote from: eigen on April 06, 2021, 08:53:15 AM

Quote from: Cheerful on April 05, 2021, 12:57:58 PM
Perhaps some people are too sensitive and self-centered.  Lighten up, folks.  Not everyone is ignorant, malicious, racist, with bad motives.  Many are well-meaning.  Not every statement uttered by someone else must be perfectly aligned with one's preferences.

IMO, the true test for whether someone is well-meaning is how they react when told that their statement was hurtful or damaging to someone else.

If they were well meaning, they often apologize and keep it in mind for future interactions.

When someone becomes defensive and responds by telling someone to "lighten up" or be less sensitive, then it's a lot harder to infer good intent behind the statements.

For example I could tell Robin D-Angelo that her lecture and book make me uncomfortable, and she should be compelled to knock it off? Or would she tell me to be less sensitive, and stop being silent around discussions of racism, because my silence would reinforce the status quo, and that is unacceptable? And take 192 pages to say it?

https://www.amazon.com/White-Fragility-People-About-Racism/dp/0807047414

That's not quite the same context as personal interactions, I think. I mean, I do think an author should be willing to consider criticism of their work, but I never have expectations for anyone to stop writing books, even if I think their views are obnoxious.

Except her book is not just a book. It's a movement (and some would say, a religious dogma requiring you to confess your whiteness regularly, and I would wholeheartedly agree) which has infiltrated my workplace and community and is gathering momentum. And whereas we work at a government maintained university, a step toward the religion-state.

I get your point, but the approach to combating that isn't the same as the approach to dealing with day-to-day personal interactions (which is what a lot of this thread has focused on). That's all I was pointing out.

I mean, I wouldn't expect you to stop posting your opinions here, even if I disagree or feel upset with some of them. Or if you wrote a blog post airing your criticisms of the excesses of "anti-racism" I wouldn't expect you to shut it down just because people said they felt uncomfortable reading it.

But if someone is interacting with me face-to-face (especially on a regular basis), then I might feel justified in asking them to stop certain behaviors (e.g. "Conversation-starters" like "So did your parents beat you if you got an A-?" or "Was your mom a mail-order bride?").

Quote from: smallcleanrat on April 06, 2021, 11:35:51 AM

But if someone is interacting with me face-to-face (especially on a regular basis), then I might feel justified in asking them to stop certain behaviors (e.g. "Conversation-starters" like "So did your parents beat you if you got an A-?" or "Was your mom a mail-order bride?").

If you asked me to stop complimenting you on your fluent language skill or something else I would do it, but if you wrote an article stating that no white person may compliment a co-worker on their fluent language skills, because they don't like it, I would have questions.

Quote from: mahagonny on April 06, 2021, 11:40:48 AM

Quote from: smallcleanrat on April 06, 2021, 11:35:51 AM

But if someone is interacting with me face-to-face (especially on a regular basis), then I might feel justified in asking them to stop certain behaviors (e.g. "Conversation-starters" like "So did your parents beat you if you got an A-?" or "Was your mom a mail-order bride?").

If you asked me to stop complimenting you on your fluent language skill or something else I would do it, but if you wrote an article stating that no white person may compliment a co-worker on their fluent language skills, because they don't like it, I would have questions.

Then I think we're pretty much in agreement.

Honestly, this is the first time I've heard the argument that you shouldn't compliment someone who's learned English as a second (or third or fourth) language (about whom you *know* this to be the case) because it might make people with less proficient English skills feel bad. I guess that probably happens sometimes, but I don't see the obvious connection to racism. I'm open to the possibility I'm missing something, but that's my opinion at this moment.

I sometimes compliment students on how well-organized their notes are when they bring them to office hours. My note-taking organization leaves a lot to be desired, and I would probably feel a twinge of embarrassment thinking of that if I heard someone else's notes being praised, but I wouldn't put that at the door of whoever was paying the compliment. It's not as though a compliment to someone else is equivalent to an insult to me.

I had always heard the objection in the context of complimenting someone on their English skills *even though English is their native language*. It's the assumption that someone must be a foreigner based on how they look.

I had a teacher who consistently spoke to me in a slow, over-enunciated manner that he didn't use with the other students, even though i told him several times English is my first language and I can understand him just fine when he speaks at his regular pace. That's the sort of thing I might ask someone to stop, because it does make a person feel singled out.

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 06, 2021, 10:28:02 AM

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 06, 2021, 09:58:08 AM

I'm curious how many people deal with so many new people each day, and interact sufficiently, to experience "those interactions" every day. Many (most?) people tend to interact mostly with the same people every day, and others who deal with lots of new people every day do so on a very superficial and/or task-related level. It's hard to imagine someone getting comments on their appearance, speech, etc. every day.

Nobody ever means to be hurtful when they mangle my name. But they do it so often, so persistently, so pervasively, and so consistently that the cumulative effect is to make it feel like I don't belong here. Sometimes, I give a false name just to avoid the interaction altogether.

And what possible remedy is there for society because of your name being mispronounced? (My last name is frequently mispronounced, while some people just freeze up instead of trying.) As you say, in Canada a French first name or surname shouldn't be a problem for anyone educated here, but if education hasn't achieved that, no amount of campaigning, or legislation, or scolding is going to change it.

The one thing you can do is to give your kids names that won't be so problematic. (I made sure my kids don't have first names which are difficult to pronounce or spell.)

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 06, 2021, 11:52:47 AM

And what possible remedy is there for society because of your name being mispronounced? (My last name is frequently mispronounced, while some people just freeze up instead of trying.) As you say, in Canada a French first name or surname shouldn't be a problem for anyone educated here, but if education hasn't achieved that, no amount of campaigning, or legislation, or scolding is going to change it.

The one thing you can do is to give your kids names that won't be so problematic. (I made sure my kids don't have first names which are difficult to pronounce or spell.)

The problem is basically equivalent to calling someone whose name is 'Parminder' by the name 'Parmesan'. Or, perhaps less ludicrously, calling a 'Jean' by the name 'John' (and then insisting that the car isn't registered in his name because 'Jean' is a woman's name and his name is obviously 'John', etc.).

The 'possible remedy' is simply being more careful. When it's written in front of you, read what's written. When you're contacting me, or replying to my email, be careful to make sure your salutation matches what's written in my email address. When I tell you my name, say it like I say it, and don't add or change syllables (seriously, it's not a hard one for Anglos--there's a female equivalent in English that sounds exactly the same!). When I spell it out for you, spell it the way I tell you to. And for fuck's sake, don't tell me that something doesn't belong to me just because you think the name I gave you is a woman's name and I'm clearly a man.

These are basic courtesies we regularly extend to others. And it's every bloody day. I am so tired of it.

It also goes hand in hand with a really nasty attitude towards French and Francophones. You'd be surprised what people tell me because I don't have any detectable accent in English. That's somewhat par for the course out west, but still. The problem was nothing like this pronounced when I lived in Alberta.

Anyway, I'm not prescribing remedies. I'm explaining how awful and alienating this kind of thing can be, even if your interlocutor doesn't have bad intentions (which, in my case, they almost never do).

QuoteHonestly, this is the first time I've heard the argument that you shouldn't compliment someone who's learned English as a second (or third or fourth) language (about whom you *know* this to be the case) because it might make people with less proficient English skills feel bad. I guess that probably happens sometimes, but I don't see the obvious connection to racism. I'm open to the possibility I'm missing something, but that's my opinion at this moment.

There are an increasing number of things that are becoming forbidden to say because of where you fall on the natural-unearned-privilege scale. The white 'cisgender' heterosexual male is purported to have so many things in his favor that he is unaware of that the number of things that are acceptable for him to say is reduced and steadily shrinking. The obnoxious part of this mindset is not so much that you would never think of something like that, but more who are the people who get to make the pronouncements about what is proper for a particular group to say, and why do we trust them? Who's checking out their balls, keeping them honest? When was it established that all white 'cisgender' heterosexual males have similar lives, for one thing.

I'm old enough to remember Ann Landers and Emily Post, who said 'it is rude to correct someone on their manners.' Those days were not perfect but they were better in lots of ways.

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 06, 2021, 01:11:32 PM

Quote from: marshwiggle on April 06, 2021, 11:52:47 AM

And what possible remedy is there for society because of your name being mispronounced? (My last name is frequently mispronounced, while some people just freeze up instead of trying.) As you say, in Canada a French first name or surname shouldn't be a problem for anyone educated here, but if education hasn't achieved that, no amount of campaigning, or legislation, or scolding is going to change it.

The one thing you can do is to give your kids names that won't be so problematic. (I made sure my kids don't have first names which are difficult to pronounce or spell.)

The problem is basically equivalent to calling someone whose name is 'Parminder' by the name 'Parmesan'. Or, perhaps less ludicrously, calling a 'Jean' by the name 'John' (and then insisting that the car isn't registered in his name because 'Jean' is a woman's name and his name is obviously 'John', etc.).

The 'possible remedy' is simply being more careful. When it's written in front of you, read what's written. When you're contacting me, or replying to my email, be careful to make sure your salutation matches what's written in my email address. When I tell you my name, say it like I say it, and don't add or change syllables (seriously, it's not a hard one for Anglos--there's a female equivalent in English that sounds exactly the same!). When I spell it out for you, spell it the way I tell you to. And for fuck's sake, don't tell me that something doesn't belong to me just because you think the name I gave you is a woman's name and I'm clearly a man.

These are basic courtesies we regularly extend to others. And it's every bloody day. I am so tired of it.

It also goes hand in hand with a really nasty attitude towards French and Francophones. You'd be surprised what people tell me because I don't have any detectable accent in English. That's somewhat par for the course out west, but still. The problem was nothing like this pronounced when I lived in Alberta.

Anyway, I'm not prescribing remedies. I'm explaining how awful and alienating this kind of thing can be, even if your interlocutor doesn't have bad intentions (which, in my case, they almost never do).

That does sound awfully annoying. 

Quote from: mahagonny on April 06, 2021, 02:56:58 PM

QuoteHonestly, this is the first time I've heard the argument that you shouldn't compliment someone who's learned English as a second (or third or fourth) language (about whom you *know* this to be the case) because it might make people with less proficient English skills feel bad. I guess that probably happens sometimes, but I don't see the obvious connection to racism. I'm open to the possibility I'm missing something, but that's my opinion at this moment.

There are an increasing number of things that are becoming forbidden to say because of where you fall on the natural-unearned-privilege scale. The white 'cisgender' heterosexual male is purported to have so many things in his favor that he is unaware of that the number of things that are acceptable for him to say is reduced and steadily shrinking. The obnoxious part of this mindset is not so much that you would never think of something like that, but more who are the people who get to make the pronouncements about what is proper for a particular group to say, and why do we trust them? Who's checking out their balls, keeping them honest? When was it established that all white 'cisgender' heterosexual males have similar lives, for one thing.

I'm old enough to remember Ann Landers and Emily Post, who said 'it is rude to correct someone on their manners.' Those days were not perfect but they were better in lots of ways.

Well, if you follow the rule of never correcting other people's manners you'd never be able to say anything when people come at you with, "Hey, mahagonny, you really need to stop complimenting people on their language skills."

I mean, is there no point at which it is ok for someone to speak up for themselves? Hasn't that question of "who gets to decide what's acceptable and why does everyone else have to either agree or shut up?" always been there?

When I was in college, a male student (who told me he preferred Asian women because "those cultures understand that a woman should be submissive to her man") pursued me for several months. He sent me copious emails and texts, learned my class schedule so he could be waiting to talk to me at the right time and place, and his requests to go out eventually turned into assertions ("You *will* go out with me, whether you know it yet or not.")

I finally told him he was making me very uncomfortable and asked him to leave me alone. His response was "All women play that game, but secretly they like a man with confidence who goes after what he wants." I ended up hiding in my dorm, staying longer in the building after class, or finding alternate round-about routes until he finally lost interest.

The male friends I confided in told me I'd been too harsh with the guy. One lamented that women "should be flattered" when someone pays them that much attention. Another said it's not fair to reject someone without going on at least *one* date, "Otherwise you haven't really given him a fair chance." They both told me to have more sympathy because dating is hard at our (majority-male) school.

I met with similar attitudes regarding guys groping me ("they were just playing around") or slipping pornography under my door ("it was just a joke"). Would it have been rude of *me* to tell them to knock it off?

Quote from: smallcleanrat on April 06, 2021, 04:42:30 PM

Quote from: mahagonny on April 06, 2021, 02:56:58 PM

QuoteHonestly, this is the first time I've heard the argument that you shouldn't compliment someone who's learned English as a second (or third or fourth) language (about whom you *know* this to be the case) because it might make people with less proficient English skills feel bad. I guess that probably happens sometimes, but I don't see the obvious connection to racism. I'm open to the possibility I'm missing something, but that's my opinion at this moment.

There are an increasing number of things that are becoming forbidden to say because of where you fall on the natural-unearned-privilege scale. The white 'cisgender' heterosexual male is purported to have so many things in his favor that he is unaware of that the number of things that are acceptable for him to say is reduced and steadily shrinking. The obnoxious part of this mindset is not so much that you would never think of something like that, but more who are the people who get to make the pronouncements about what is proper for a particular group to say, and why do we trust them? Who's checking out their balls, keeping them honest? When was it established that all white 'cisgender' heterosexual males have similar lives, for one thing.

I'm old enough to remember Ann Landers and Emily Post, who said 'it is rude to correct someone on their manners.' Those days were not perfect but they were better in lots of ways.

Well, if you follow the rule of never correcting other people's manners you'd never be able to say anything when people come at you with, "Hey, mahagonny, you really need to stop complimenting people on their language skills."

I mean, is there no point at which it is ok for someone to speak up for themselves? Hasn't that question of "who gets to decide what's acceptable and why does everyone else have to either agree or shut up?" always been there?

When I was in college, a male student (who told me he preferred Asian women because "those cultures understand that a woman should be submissive to her man") pursued me for several months. He sent me copious emails and texts, learned my class schedule so he could be waiting to talk to me at the right time and place, and his requests to go out eventually turned into assertions ("You *will* go out with me, whether you know it yet or not.")

I finally told him he was making me very uncomfortable and asked him to leave me alone. His response was "All women play that game, but secretly they like a man with confidence who goes after what he wants." I ended up hiding in my dorm, staying longer in the building after class, or finding alternate round-about routes until he finally lost interest.

The male friends I confided in told me I'd been too harsh with the guy. One lamented that women "should be flattered" when someone pays them that much attention. Another said it's not fair to reject someone without going on at least *one* date, "Otherwise you haven't really given him a fair chance." They both told me to have more sympathy because dating is hard at our (majority-male) school.

I met with similar attitudes regarding guys groping me ("they were just playing around") or slipping pornography under my door ("it was just a joke"). Would it have been rude of *me* to tell them to knock it off?

I have no experience with anything like this. I have been talking about the practice of sorting people into categories by immutable characteristics and then promoting different rules of behavior for different groups. I consider it a form of tyranny. I treat everyone the same at work and use the Golden Rule.
on edit: The most obnoxious of these are people in positions of authority, like diversity staff, who can control your access to grants or inflict 'training' sessions. The tenured people mostly mingle among themselves and can be pretty much ignored. They have a problem I don't have. What they're really doing is working out a problem of optics. The tenure track is so populated with white people, they get on the extra-sensitive-to-feelings-of POC bit to atone for their success. Whereas, being an adjunct, I'm not considered successful as an academic, so no one cares much what the racial composition of our tier is.

Quote from: mahagonny on April 06, 2021, 06:43:21 PM
I have no experience with anything like this. I have been talking about the practice of sorting people into categories by immutable characteristics and then promoting different rules of behavior for different groups. I consider it a form of tyranny. I treat everyone the same at work and use the Golden Rule.

But not everyone is doing that when they bring up issues related to race or gender.

Quote from: mahagonny on April 05, 2021, 03:40:41 PM

Quote from: smallcleanrat on April 05, 2021, 01:30:24 PM
And I know that the rhetoric from some people seems to split the world into only two factions: woke people and white supremacists, but I don't see that in this specific article. I'm not sure I agree with every suggestion on the list, but the emphasis does seem to be on making people aware of behaviors that can contribute to feelings of alienation. That doesn't have to assume malicious intent, just lack of awareness.

But even assuming they are not intentionally promulgating that view their blind spot is failing to see that being told by the media and others that America is full of white supremacists is an obvious reason for non-whites to feel alienated, and it is the wokesters who are doing it. So, while they might think they are doing good, they are not doing what they think they are doing.

I'm not clear on what you're saying here.

It sounds like you acknowledge that there are people who *don't* endorse extremist rhetoric, but because *other people* do it doesn't matter?

Or is it that you're saying pointing out ways certain behaviors can negatively affect specific groups is what's making non-white people feel alienated (not the actual behaviors themselves)? Because those feelings of alienation existed long before media coverage of the "woke" movement became dominant.

I was pointing out that the article you linked to (regardless of whether you think the individual actions mentioned within it are trivial or not) is *not* an example of the viewpoint that cis-het white males are the cause of all the world's ills. But some of your comments seem to imply you think it is (or at least that it's in the same vein).

RE: the experiences I mentioned in my previous post.
It's not uncommon to hear people complain "I'm sick and tired of all men being demonized as evil" in response to discussion of any sort of action or awareness campaign related to stopping some of these types of harassing behaviors I mentioned. It doesn't seem to matter that no one in that particular discussion espouses the view that "all men are evil"; the fact that people who promote this view exist at all is enough to dismiss all discussions as examples of tyrannical liberals run amuck.

Say you think people should speak out against an attitude that a woman "owes" a man a date just because he wants one and the response is "Oh, *everything* is considered harassment these days. Did you hear about the 7-year old who was suspended from school for 'harassment' because he kissed a classmate? The world's gone insane."

Isn't this similar to the sort of guilt-by-association you criticize "anti-racist" movements for indulging in?

Maybe I'm completely misunderstanding your point here, but that's the impression I'm getting from your posts.

Smallcleanrat, I think the kind of response you're describing and responding to here is essentially the same that we were discussing on the other thread, about conversations. The ones where people respond with catastrophizing and extremist interpretations when someone says something reasonable. "Some men are..." "Are you another one of those people demonizing all men?! It's people like you that make the world...! [etc etc]."

I know how tempting it is to engage with that kind of irrational, catastrophizing reaction. How tempting it is to think that if you just explain things a little more clearly and patiently, they will come to understand what you mean. Of course the truth is that they actively do not want to understand, and that they feel happy and energized when furious.

I have always found this saying incredibly useful: "Recovery isn't winning; it's not playing."

One component of the discourse on Discourse that I've found intriguing is the idea that, when one argues (on the internet, usually, but I think this applies in all domains), one is arguing for two audiences: (1) the actual interlocutor, who may or may not be arguing in good faith; and (2) anyone else witnessing the discussion. Especially online, it's sometimes worth engaging even people who argue in bad faith, because other people may be swayed, even if the immediate interlocutor is not open to changing their mind.

Y'know, in the same way that challenging a colleague sends a message of support to the students, even if the colleague will never be convinced they've done something wrong.

Quote from: ergative on April 07, 2021, 12:47:35 AM
One component of the discourse on Discourse that I've found intriguing is the idea that, when one argues (on the internet, usually, but I think this applies in all domains), one is arguing for two audiences: (1) the actual interlocutor, who may or may not be arguing in good faith; and (2) anyone else witnessing the discussion. Especially online, it's sometimes worth engaging even people who argue in bad faith, because other people may be swayed, even if the immediate interlocutor is not open to changing their mind.

Or just maybe, you are the one of little faith.

C'mon...we're academics. Are ever really wrong?  :)

Continuing the discussion of the article, in case anyone who has read it wants to weigh in:

"Know that racism against those of Asian descent can manifest itself in the simplest of ways. One form it takes in professional settings is the categorizing of different members of the community as the same. So when you mix up Asian community members with each other, you perpetuate harmful myths that all people of color, regardless their diverse backgrounds, are interchangeable. Such depersonalization also occurs when you take lightly what people's names mean to them. So avoid asking those whose names are unfamiliar to you to provide their "real," "American" or "English nicknames."'

So, is it OK to ask people where they are from? I regularly find out which students are from Japan, Korea, or Taiwan. They don't seem to mind. What if you ask an Asian American where they are from, and the answer is Toledo? Is this some kind of faux pas now? As though you don't believe he's from Toledo, or you 'wouldn't have asked him if he were Caucasian?' I mean, people...get used to going out in public.
It's a good idea to understand Asian students come from different places. Agreed. But the whole conversation is a minefield because, you know...the history of White Supremacy.
Actually, the discussion is not that much of minefield in real life. These writers make it seem that way.
I still say it's a silly article though, and these authors do not speak for the whole demographic group from which they come. They're self-appointed academic narrators with the standard 'how to help whitey avoid fucking up, one baby step at a time' theme.
In my experience many Asian students pick American sounding names. I have one now who likes to be called Felix. His name is Hongyi. I told him it's not difficult for me to pronounce 'Hongyi' and I enjoy learning names of people from all over the world. It's part of what makes the job stimulating. But he chooses Felix so he's Felix. I'm not aware of any trauma.
What's disappointing in the article is it's part of a very tired genre that, obviously directed at the Caucasian American academic, assumes the worst about us. But then, since it's obvious that the severely disturbed Atlanta shooter was motivated by racism and not possibly anything else, as proven by the statement about him by the policeman that he 'had a bad day' and the fact that the policeman has advertised an anti-Asian T-shirt  (these satisfy the left-leaning media), I guess the rest is not unexpected.

You refer to students by their preferred names. That's good.

You can ask where people are from. Just don't do the "oh no, what I meant was" thing, or express disbelief, etc. It's not a hard thing to do, nor is it a ludicrous prescription. It sounds like you already do (or don't do!) that, and that's good.

As for mixing up origins... does it really have to be explained why it's offensive to call a Japanese person 'Chinese' (for example)? I promise you, there are few surer ways to offend a Canadian than to call them American, and we're not alone in that kind of reaction to that sort of thing. Likewise, you have to be careful with what you infer based on names, phenotypes, etc. When people see my last name and think 'Chinese', they're wrong, and their massive ignorance is on display.

It doesn't sound to me like you do those things. And given that, it shouldn't be hard to see why doing them would be bad.

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 07, 2021, 09:59:58 PM
You refer to students by their preferred names. That's good.

You can ask where people are from. Just don't do the "oh no, what I meant was" thing, or express disbelief, etc. It's not a hard thing to do, nor is it a ludicrous prescription. It sounds like you already do (or don't do!) that, and that's good.

Thanks for permission to continue being competent by relying on my common sense and the Golden Rule.
(Yes, I get touchy with these topics.)

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 07, 2021, 09:59:58 PM

I promise you, there are few surer ways to offend a Canadian than to call them American, and we're not alone in that kind of reaction to that sort of thing. Likewise, you have to be careful with what you infer based on names, phenotypes, etc. When people see my last name and think 'Chinese', they're wrong, and their massive ignorance is on display.

It doesn't sound to me like you do those things. And given that, it shouldn't be hard to see why doing them would be bad.

Yeah, but it's not as bad as being free and easy with allegations of racism, white supremacy (Merriam Webster: 'the belief that the white race is inherently superior to other races and that white people should have control over people of other races) which the article does. Unless one wants to be perceived as into character assassination, these things should be avoided.

In a way, it's not the authors' fault. They are being swept along by the new orthodoxy and pressures same as everyone else. Since the George Floyd tragedy the BLM has been winning the victimology Olympics (Bari Weiss' term, just to give her credit, not to prop myself up). If you don't polish up your victimology resume you're falling behind.

QuoteAs for mixing up origins... does it really have to be explained why it's offensive to call a Japanese person 'Chinese' (for example)?

No. Especially not these days.

con't

QuoteIn a way, it's not the authors' fault. They are being swept along by the new orthodoxy and pressures same as everyone else.

And they are probably being asked by the diversity industrial complex at their school to provide some helpful tips for keeping the white supremacy monster at bay. Look busy, everyone!

I ask every student in a f2f class where they went to high school as part of how I get to know them. I learn something about them, and they learn something about each other.

I'll probably tap out soon, as per Hegemony's advice, but I'll make at least one more effort.

I'll start with some of the points mahagonny made that I mostly agree with (just to be clear that I am NOT trying to defend everything he finds objectionable):

1) I also took issue with how some of this article was written. The scenarios like asking "Where are you from?" just seem far too broad. Similar to the point on complimenting someone's English, it does give the impression that the authors think these things are *never* acceptable. That doesn't make sense to me. Context matters.

But, yes, as I mentioned above, sometimes people are not satisfied if your answer to "Where are you from?" is "Toledo". Some people continue with questions about parents, even grandparents, because what they really want to know is your ethnic background, even to the point of whether you're half and half, one-quarter, etc... It can get awkward. But this article doesn't talk about anything beyond the mere "Where are you from?" question, so I didn't find that advice point very useful.

2) I'm not well-versed enough on the details of the shooting in Atlanta to feel confident commenting on it, but I do agree that too many people prematurely label events like this as racially-motivated hate crimes even when only the barest facts are yet available. That it's a hate crime is one possibility out of many, but you wouldn't know that listening to some commentators. Even after more facts come to light, there's still a tendency to oversimplify causes and motivations (which is true for a lot of pet issues like blaming crimes on video games, religion, lack of religion, mental illness, etc...).

3) Of course the authors of the article don't speak for the entire demographic of Asians/Asian-Americans. But how often can *any* demographic be represented by one or two people? How representative a statement is of the majority views of a demographic seems to me a reasonable fair question. But merely pointing out that it doesn't represent the *entire* demographic doesn't seem meaningful. When is there *ever* perfect consensus on anything within a demographic comprised of millions of people?

The list they generated is still based on the collective experiences of many, many people even if it doesn't represent the views of all.

That's why an objection like "Well, I know someone from that demographic and they don't feel that way" doesn't say much on its own. Because that person doesn't speak for the entire demographic either.

Suppose a white person writes an article criticizing overzealous anti-racists and says that many people, who are not racist and just want to do their jobs in peace, are experiencing high levels of stress and fear of being eviscerated for saying the "wrong" thing as a result. Is it nonsense because that person can't possibly be speaking for all white people everywhere? How seriously would you take a comment that said "My friend Mike is white, and he says he's never felt that way. Who made you the authority on what can and can't be said to white people?"

---

A few small objections to your previous posts:
1) If you really think the article is implying that if someone says "please call me Felix" you are being racist if you call them Felix, I really don't see that as the authors' fault. I'm pretty sure they were referring to pressure or expectation from others to go by a different name.

Something else I've encountered a lot, not mentioned in the article, is someone saying, "Hi, my name is Thomas" and being asked "What's your real name?" because they see an Asian face and assume "Thomas" can't be that person's given, legal name.

2) I don't think it's common for anyone to claim that being on the receiving end of microaggressions is equivalent to "trauma". That's what the "micro-" part of the word implies. That individually, none of these are a huge deal. They may cause a little irritation, embarrassment, or self-consciousness (excepting some things like the guys who thought "You sucky-sucky?" was a hilarious joke, which cause quite a bit more discomfort). Most individuals won't say anything in the moment, precisely *because* they don't feel it's worth making a fuss over.

It's in the aggregate that little discomforts can have an impact that makes some discussion worth having.

And not everyone who says "This is a microaggression." is saying "This is an example of racism." Sometimes all that's being expressed is a desire for more awareness of how certain actions may affect certain people, while acknowledging that the vast majority of the time there is no malicious intent involved.

Quote from: mahagonny on April 08, 2021, 03:46:13 AM

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 07, 2021, 09:59:58 PM
As for mixing up origins... does it really have to be explained why it's offensive to call a Japanese person 'Chinese' (for example)?

No. Especially not these days.

3. How are you coming to that conclusion? Because that's not been my experience at all.

And this is one of those things that someone might actually politely interject (similar to someone calling you Vincent if your name is Victor) and say, "Oh, I'm actually Japanese." To which I've often heard some variant of "Oh, well Chinese, Japanese it's pretty much the same" or "Oh, you knew what I meant."

The most recent examples I personally know of are people who don't realize that the words "Chinese" and "Taiwanese" are not interchangeable.

---

What most disturbs me about your posts, mahagonny, is the way you make claims that the authors of articles like this are accusing all white people of being not only racist, but white supremacists. It's like you mash everyone whose ideas on these topics are different from yours into one bin. Someone who says, "Please don't do this. It's rude and can make a person feel like they don't belong." is no different from someone who makes the most extreme, unwarranted, hateful claims about every white person being some kind of oppressor or neonazi.

I wouldn't blame you one bit if you were extremely angry after hearing someone say "mahagonny asked where I was from the other day. I always *knew* he was a white supremacist. People like him don't belong in civilized society." because it's completely ridiculous and accusations like that can do serious harm.

But I'd be just as angry if I heard someone say, "smallcleanrat called me a white supremacist. She can't stand people like me who won't bow down to her tyrannical efforts to eradicate academic freedom and the First Amendment. I'll bet she's going to petition to have me fired and alert all the liberal media to drag my name through the mud." if I had mentioned to them why a Korean person might not be very happy about being called Japanese.

EDIT TO ADD: Articles like this are not exclusively aimed at white people. I receive emails from various student groups advising how to be more sensitive to issues many black students face. I never say, "Well, I'm not white so none of this applies to me! I can say and do whatever I want to whomever I want! Whoohoo!"

QuoteWhat most disturbs me about your posts, mahagonny, is the way you make claims that the authors of articles like this are accusing all white people of being not only racist, but white supremacists.

Why did they even mention 'white supremacy' then? It's potent stuff. The best thing I can say about it is it's reckless. Unless your'e talking about true white supremacists. Yes, there was colonization, but we're in a different era now, and the things we are witnessing entail many dynamics.

If I say to a student, Chiang Kim, where are you from? And he says Toledo, I'm going to stop right there. Or I might mention many of my family attended college in the fine state of Ohio. Small chatty talk. I will not follow with 'where are you really from?' I know people don't like hearing that. But I will allow for the fact that someone could ask that in response to the thought process 'persons of Asian descent do not appreciate being lumped together as though their countries are indistinguishable.' Thus, he might be thinking the person from Toledo might enjoy telling him his ancestry is this or that. He should probably know better, because he's been warned, but I'm not going to lecture him or rat him out to the diversity, equity, inclusion and eternal life staff.

QuoteAcknowledge that anti-Asian incidents can produce strong and complex emotions among community members. All those feelings for themselves and others deserve validation. So in the wake of anti-Asian violence, you should take the needed time to center community members' feelings around that violence. This can take the form of a brief statement discussing this incident's significance, a moment of silence or an offer of support -- emotional or otherwise. The key is not to act like nothing of importance has happened. At the same time, don't compel community members directly affected by the incidents to share their feelings.

By now, the white person should be asking himself 'is there any right way for me to act?'

SCR, you make some good points and I appreciate your treating the thread seriously. I don't want to get into a mode of talking past each other, so, enough for now.

I have a very unusual last name and I get "Where are you from?" all the goddamn time and I am tired of it because when I say "Southern California" it is not enough for many.

Here is something to look at. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU_htgjlMVE)

Quote from: Bbmaj7b5 on April 11, 2021, 07:32:35 PM
I have a very unusual last name and I get "Where are you from?" all the goddamn time and I am tired of it because when I say "Southern California" it is not enough for many.

Here is something to look at. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RU_htgjlMVE)

But you are a white guy aren't you? We don't get to complain, in case you haven't heard.
I have a last name that I always have to spell for people even though it is spelled exactly as it sounds. And then I also get jokes told about WASPS. 'Why don't WASPS attend orgies? Too many thank-you notes to write."
I'm sick of it too, but you don't hear me complaining, because, as you know, I am too fine a person to be unpleasant.

Once upon a time people solved these things by changing it to something easy. Lester Polfus became Les Paul. Arthur Arshawsky became Artie Shaw. Of course, he did both: solved the problem and then later had an identity crisis over it after the fact. 'I changed my name because I was ashamed of being Jewish.' Many times in life we do something, and then understand what was really going on internally much later.

on edit: I looked at the video. I get it. People interrogate others like that all the time. So glad it was explained.

con't

...so next time someone says 'why are you brown' one can answer 'I don't think that's any of your business.'

Mahagonny said, "But you are a white guy aren't you? We don't get to complain, in case you haven't heard."

Where I live

White guys complain all the time

White guys are 99% of elected officials

White guys are 95% of law enforcement

White guys own and edit the local newspaper

White guys own the majority of businesses

White guys put their hands on my shoulder, whether they know me or not

White guys call me sweetie or honey, even if I ask them not to

White guys form and join all white militias

White guys abjure masks

WHERE I LIVE, WHITE GUYS ARE HEARD, LOUDLY AND OFTEN.

Quote from: nebo113 on April 12, 2021, 07:56:14 AM
Mahagonny said, "But you are a white guy aren't you? We don't get to complain, in case you haven't heard."

Where I live

White guys complain all the time

White guys are 99% of elected officials

White guys are 95% of law enforcement

White guys own and edit the local newspaper

White guys own the majority of businesses

White guys put their hands on my shoulder, whether they know me or not

White guys call me sweetie or honey, even if I ask them not to

White guys form and join all white militias

White guys abjure masks

WHERE I LIVE, WHITE GUYS ARE HEARD, LOUDLY AND OFTEN.

Of course. Every time I look at the Internet I see white people crying and whining about how oppressed they are, even as they tell minorities to stop complaining.

I'm a white dude who grew up in an area that was 95% white. I used to less open-minded racial diversity than I am now and I will admit that I'm learning. But I now live in a racially diverse state and my most recent SO was a person of color. I realized a few years ago that I was on a path to becoming a dinosaur who couldn't connect with neighbors, colleagues, or students. I chose to  adapt to the changing culture around me and to learn new stuff about people. It really wasn't hard. 

Also, I commiserate with colleagues from various racial/ethnic backgrounds about everyday frustrations related to working in higher education, and no one's ever said to me, "Dr. Pepsi, you're white, so therefore you're not allowed to complain." Again, it it really isn't that hard to have the mindset of "some people have life experiences different than my own and maybe I should listen to them."

Quote from: pepsi_alum on April 12, 2021, 12:31:50 PM
I'm a white dude who grew up in an area that was 95% white. I used to less open-minded racial diversity than I am now and I will admit that I'm learning.

Are you aware that having been born in a community that is 95% one race is not a moral transgression?

QuoteBut I now live in a racially diverse state and my most recent SO was a person of color.

Know what I think? I think you were fine all along, but are fighting the shame of being white. which would be something you have been taught.

That's, uh, interesting, but no. I'm quite proud of my Italian-American ancestry.

As William James said in his lectures on pragmatism, " "Grant an idea or belief to be true . . . what concrete difference will its being true make in anyone's actual life? How will the truth be realized? What experiences will be different from those which would obtain if the belief were false? What, in short, is the truth's cash-value in experiential terms?"

I really don't think you're engaging with the consequences of the ideas you endorse, Mahagonny. Everything you've said in this thread assumes that the consequences of multiculturalism somehow represent an existential threat to white people. I don't think I can persuade you to change your mind. But you still have not answered a basic question: what do you have to lose by listening to other perspectives?

That's not quite it, Pepsi. The problem with multiculturalism is it says nothing that happens to any particular group of people is the consequence of the behavior of that group. It's always the fault of society at large. And this idea, being false, hurts everyone, especially the people to whom it wants to give better lives.

Re: listening. I can listen to the woke culture all I want and all I conclude is they're not so much woke as they got up on the wrong side of the bed.

QuoteThat's, uh, interesting, but no. I'm quite proud of my Italian-American ancestry.

Hmm...that would let you off the hook somewhat, as you aren't so associated with that heinous 1619 group. You do give me the impression that your thought is, coming from an almost exclusively white neighborhood gives you something to live down. I came from a community even whiter than yours, but I never felt that way. I have always relished the company of black people. The people who worry me the most today are affluent white liberals. As Shelby Steele explains, they have no more idea what multiculturalism could achieve, or how, than anyone. what they are getting out of their activism is a false perception of innocence. Innocence from America's racist past. They're not gonna get it. It's not to be had. Dr. Steele further explains, if white people today only had some moral confidence they would be saying 'dear black people: please try harder to keep your families together. Works much better. And when you do get your kid in college or start your small business, know that white people want you to succeed. We are not racist. We are you friend.'

It is true what some have written, about present day tribal America, that we don't so much disagree as we live in different worlds.

I don't think you understand the concept of multiculturalism.

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 13, 2021, 06:43:54 AM
I don't think you understand the concept of multiculturalism.

I believe you.

I think I've contributed all I can to this conversation. I'll gracefully bow out now and agree that we're on different wavelengths.