The Fora: A Higher Education Community

General Category => General Discussion => Archive of Lengthy Threads => Topic started by: apl68 on March 12, 2021, 09:36:21 AM

Title: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 12, 2021, 09:36:21 AM
I'm know I'm taking a real risk of stirring up the hornet's nest here.  I try for the most part  to stay out of the culture war fights.  But this one hits right where I work.

Most people by now are aware (because it blew up all over social media and the "news") that six Dr. Seuss titles have been discontinued by the publisher, for reasons of a sort commonly described as "political correctness," or, more recently, "cancel culture."  The news has resulted in a mad rush by collectors and speculators to grab all remaining copies.  The suddenly scarce works are suddenly worth a lot of money.

Public libraries in my own state have had people they've never seen before suddenly wanting to check out these titles in blatant efforts to steal them for resale.  They've also had a number of honest inquiries about purchasing them.  The State Library has advised libraries to put their copies of the titles under guard to prevent theft of what have overnight become effectively irreplaceable literary antiques.  An article about the situation made the front page of the state's leading newspaper today!  My colleagues have been reporting some truly crazy stuff.

Our own library's Facebook has blown up with questions and rumors.  I've felt it necessary to address the whole business in my weekly local newspaper column.  We're assuring patrons that we haven't purged Dr. Seuss, that most titles remain available as always, but that our copies of the suddenly scarce titles (we have three of them) will now be limited to in-library use only.  Some of the titles are among Dr. Seuss' more obscure works--but they include To Think That I Saw it On Mulberry Street, which ranks right up there with The Cat in the Hat.  I'm just glad I got a personal copy of a childhood favorite, Scrambled Eggs Super a few years ago when I happened across one.  No way I'd be able to afford one now!

A couple of years ago the American Library Association "cancelled" Laura Ingalls Wilder by removing her name from one of its leading awards.  J.K. Rowling, who for years had been an absolute darling of the "right on" crowd after misguided people challenged her Harry Potter books, has been cancelled.  Now part of the Dr. Seuss corpus (And the man was a flaming lefty in his own lifetime, too!).  Where is it going to end?

A simple decision by a publisher to discontinue a few titles shouldn't be this fraught, or lead to such an instant media and social media circus.  Or create new problems for librarians just trying to do their jobs.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 10:00:07 AM
Over the years, our public library has periodically had a display about books which were historically banned, making the point that book-banning (or burning) is, in hindsight, a really bad thing. It's sad to see those same organizations now seriously contemplating removing "inappropriate" books.

Of course, many of the historical bannings have been from conservatives, and probably most librarians have seen themselves as liberal. Now that the pressure to ban is from the left, the librarians are much less willing to stand on principle.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on March 12, 2021, 10:07:39 AM
If J.K. Rowling has been cancelled, then how come I keep hearing about her? (And from her.) She's one of the least cancelled people I can think of, precisely because she has access to a huge megaphone. She's especially privileged, in that context, because she gets to talk despite the fact that she's extremely ignorant about the subject she wants to talk about.

I mean, look. I grew up on Astérix and Tintin, and I absolutely love them, and look forward to introducing my hatchling to them when the time comes. But there's no question that there's a hefty dose of racism in there (I think it's worse in Tintin, actually, because Astérix is about national stereotypes, although I have to say that the people who've continued the series after Uderzo and Goscinny just don't get that, and have introduced some staggeringly racist material.). When we get there, we're going to have some conversations about it. Ditto Harry Potter.

But the hatchling will be allowed to read them and enjoy them. Just like we can read and enjoy things produced by bad people, or for dubious ends. It's just that we shouldn't stop up our ears and ignore these artists' moral failings. Sometimes (but not always), those moral failings are reflected in their works, or cause you to reinterpret those works. That's OK. That's why I don't read Stephen King any more: I don't trust him, and the fact that he doesn't have my trust (qua author or implied narrator) undermines my ability to enjoy his works as an adult, because those works so often deal with the very subjects on which I don't trust him.


The Geisel estate's decision is no big deal, and it's one they're totally free to make. They get to decide what they want his legacy to look like, and what they want to be associated with. Publishers make these decisions all the time. This isn't a 'cancellation'. And it seems to me that everyone who's in such a rush to stockpile these titles should reflect on their motives for doing so. I was never into Dr. Seuss, so I don't really need to do any rethinking, just like I never liked Woody Allen's movies, so I don't need to think about my relation to those, either. I have other, better things to think about, things dearer to my heart, like Astérix and Tintin.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on March 12, 2021, 10:11:02 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 10:00:07 AM
Over the years, our public library has periodically had a display about books which were historically banned, making the point that book-banning (or burning) is, in hindsight, a really bad thing. It's sad to see those same organizations now seriously contemplating removing "inappropriate" books.


You might be surprised to learn about library collection 'weeding' practices...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 10:18:26 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on March 12, 2021, 10:11:02 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 10:00:07 AM
Over the years, our public library has periodically had a display about books which were historically banned, making the point that book-banning (or burning) is, in hindsight, a really bad thing. It's sad to see those same organizations now seriously contemplating removing "inappropriate" books.


You might be surprised to learn about library collection 'weeding' practices...

I think Robin DiAngelo's "White Fragility" is stupid and racist, but I would never tell the library they shouldn't have it. I don't think it needs some kind of warning label; posterity will determine its fate.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on March 12, 2021, 10:27:06 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 10:18:26 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on March 12, 2021, 10:11:02 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 10:00:07 AM
Over the years, our public library has periodically had a display about books which were historically banned, making the point that book-banning (or burning) is, in hindsight, a really bad thing. It's sad to see those same organizations now seriously contemplating removing "inappropriate" books.


You might be surprised to learn about library collection 'weeding' practices...

I think Robin DiAngelo's "White Fragility" is stupid and racist, but I would never tell the library they shouldn't have it. I don't think it needs some kind of warning label; posterity will determine its fate.

But when posterity decides that it doesn't think it should keep White Fragility in print--or in the local library collection, where nobody has signed it out in years--that's a cancellation, right?

If it isn't, then how is this any different?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 10:38:24 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on March 12, 2021, 10:27:06 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 10:18:26 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on March 12, 2021, 10:11:02 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 10:00:07 AM
Over the years, our public library has periodically had a display about books which were historically banned, making the point that book-banning (or burning) is, in hindsight, a really bad thing. It's sad to see those same organizations now seriously contemplating removing "inappropriate" books.


You might be surprised to learn about library collection 'weeding' practices...

I think Robin DiAngelo's "White Fragility" is stupid and racist, but I would never tell the library they shouldn't have it. I don't think it needs some kind of warning label; posterity will determine its fate.

But when posterity decides that it doesn't think it should keep White Fragility in print--or in the local library collection, where nobody has signed it out in years--that's a cancellation, right?

If it isn't, then how is this any different?

If the criteria for removing books is based on things other than content; how long since it's been signed out, the physical shape the book is in, etc., then I have no problem with that. Just like I'm not too picky about how books are chosen to be added to the collection, especially if it's pretty much that books with enough requests get added. And any book that gets dropped doesn't automatically need to be replaced; if no-one has signed it out in a decade there's no need to have it. Having any sort of gatekeeping individual or committee who decides what people ought to be able to read is the scary idea.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on March 12, 2021, 10:50:31 AM
The New York Public Library is keeping its collection of Dr. Seuss books and will continue to lend them out. Yay!
https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-public-library-dr-seuss-books
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 12, 2021, 11:03:21 AM
Basically there's just a banned Dr. Seuss books bubble, right? I can't imagine these books are actually rare. They've been in print for decades without interruption and there must be tens of thousands of copies out there. I'm sure three weeks ago you could have gotten a used copy for 5 bucks on Amazon. Obviously, some of the increased demand for used copies is real, probably mostly driven by people who want copies to make an ideological point, but I'm sure there are plenty of copies out there to meet that demand. Actually, copies don't really appear to be scarce at all, just absurdly expensive.

I can't imagine there are many people out there who are going to buy some 90s printing of a Dr. Seuss book for 200 dollars just so they can express their feelings about cancel culture. To the extent that anybody is buying these things, it is presumably in the belief that they are going to go up even more in value. The problem is that there are lots of copies sitting around in boxes in people's basements and some of those people are going to hear they might be valuable, dig them up and try to sell them and the whole thing is going to crash very quickly.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Hegemony on March 12, 2021, 11:16:14 AM
If the Seuss foundation had just quietly stopped publishing them, I doubt there would have been any outcry.

The depiction in If I Ran The Zoo is indeed problematic. I think stopping publishing a book because of the line "A Chinese man who eats with sticks" (and who, if I remember correctly is wearing one of those pointed hats) is overdoing it. But whatever. Both sides have been so riled up for so long now that it's just like poking a hornet's nest to do anything in one direction or the other.

As for J. K. Rowling, the massive vitriol directed at her is indeed a change. Any time someone on the left mentions her, there is an obligatory preface of "I used to like her, before I understood that she is a monster."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 12, 2021, 11:18:09 AM
No worries. Should be available as samizdat in due course.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 12, 2021, 11:38:15 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on March 12, 2021, 10:07:39 AM
I

I mean, look. I grew up on Astérix and Tintin, and I absolutely love them, and look forward to introducing my hatchling to them when the time comes. But there's no question that there's a hefty dose of racism in there (I think it's worse in Tintin,




I loved Tintin too and still have all my books. But man, they are really, really racist. And, of course, Herge was a fascist. There's a decent amount of anti-semitism miked in to Tintin as well. I wouldn't keep my kid from reading it when he gets older, but I'm not sure I'd introduce him to it. This stuff is weird, because, on one hand, I read Tintin as a kid and understood that the depictions of subservient, simple black people with giant lips and tomahawk wielding native Americans were messed up, but still enjoyed it. But I dunno. There are plenty of great graphic novels that aren't just filled with blatant racist and anti-semitic tropes and images.

I have mixed feelings. In a way, I wonder if it was useful for me as a kid to read something that I enjoyed, but contained scenes that I knew were really messed up, and reflected ideas I found repulsive.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 11:44:34 AM
Quote from: Hegemony on March 12, 2021, 11:16:14 AM
If the Seuss foundation had just quietly stopped publishing them, I doubt there would have been any outcry.

Not likely. But that's the double-edged sword of virtue-signalling. If you want to be recognized for rightthink, you also set yourself up to be recognized for pandering. If you simply want to do what you think is right but don't try to get publicity for it, then you aren't likely to get publicly criticized for it either.

Quote from: Caracal on March 12, 2021, 11:38:15 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on March 12, 2021, 10:07:39 AM
I mean, look. I grew up on Astérix and Tintin, and I absolutely love them, and look forward to introducing my hatchling to them when the time comes. But there's no question that there's a hefty dose of racism in there (I think it's worse in Tintin,

I loved Tintin too and still have all my books. But man, they are really, really racist.

And apparently, that didn't turn either of you into flaming racists. How amazing to think that people can see inappropriate ideas and behaviour and not automatically emulate them!!!!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on March 12, 2021, 11:55:41 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 12, 2021, 11:38:15 AM

I loved Tintin too and still have all my books. But man, they are really, really racist. And, of course, Herge was a fascist. There's a decent amount of anti-semitism miked in to Tintin as well. I wouldn't keep my kid from reading it when he gets older, but I'm not sure I'd introduce him to it. This stuff is weird, because, on one hand, I read Tintin as a kid and understood that the depictions of subservient, simple black people with giant lips and tomahawk wielding native Americans were messed up, but still enjoyed it. But I dunno. There are plenty of great graphic novels that aren't just filled with blatant racist and anti-semitic tropes and images.

I have mixed feelings. In a way, I wonder if it was useful for me as a kid to read something that I enjoyed, but contained scenes that I knew were really messed up, and reflected ideas I found repulsive.

I've revisited Astérix recently, but not Tintin. That's a good reminder that I should probably have another look.

Quote from: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 11:44:34 AM


And apparently, that didn't turn either of you into flaming racists. How amazing to think that people can see inappropriate ideas and behaviour and not automatically emulate them!!!!

Straight to the heart of the periphery.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 12, 2021, 11:56:39 AM
Quote from: Hegemony on March 12, 2021, 11:16:14 AM


As for J. K. Rowling, the massive vitriol directed at her is indeed a change. Any time someone on the left mentions her, there is an obligatory preface of "I used to like her, before I understood that she is a monster."

I don't think she's been the victim of some sort of massive injustice. She's a wealthy, powerful person who wrote some stupid and harmful things on Twitter. I don't really agree that it makes it some moral imperative to boycott Harry Potter or anything.

That said, sometimes knowing too much about someone can make it hard to enjoy their work. I find Mel Gibson so detestable that I don't really want to watch movies he's in. I'm not taking a moral stand, I just can't really get into a movie when he's in it because I dislike him so much.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Liquidambar on March 12, 2021, 01:43:31 PM
Quote from: Hegemony on March 12, 2021, 11:16:14 AM
The depiction in If I Ran The Zoo is indeed problematic.

Yes, but IIRC it's only portions of 1-2 pictures out of the entire book.  I don't recall the words being problematic.  I'm perplexed why they didn't just start selling a revised version with the problematic pieces of those couple pictures cropped out.

Correspondingly, I used to have an old cassette with the soundtrack to the animated Aladdin movie.  The soundtrack they sell now has one problematic line from the first song updated.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 12, 2021, 02:34:55 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 10:18:26 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on March 12, 2021, 10:11:02 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 10:00:07 AM
Over the years, our public library has periodically had a display about books which were historically banned, making the point that book-banning (or burning) is, in hindsight, a really bad thing. It's sad to see those same organizations now seriously contemplating removing "inappropriate" books.


You might be surprised to learn about library collection 'weeding' practices...

I think Robin DiAngelo's "White Fragility" is stupid and racist, but I would never tell the library they shouldn't have it. I don't think it needs some kind of warning label; posterity will determine its fate.

If I owned a bookstore I would stock Robin d'angels's books but I would display them in the horror section.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on March 12, 2021, 04:24:55 PM
Quote from: Liquidambar on March 12, 2021, 01:43:31 PM
Quote from: Hegemony on March 12, 2021, 11:16:14 AM
The depiction in If I Ran The Zoo is indeed problematic.

Yes, but IIRC it's only portions of 1-2 pictures out of the entire book.  I don't recall the words being problematic.  I'm perplexed why they didn't just start selling a revised version with the problematic pieces of those couple pictures cropped out.

Correspondingly, I used to have an old cassette with the soundtrack to the animated Aladdin movie.  The soundtrack they sell now has one problematic line from the first song updated.

That's certainly a possibility. I imagine that the book wasn't really selling well enough on its own to justify the effort
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 12, 2021, 04:40:24 PM
Yes, it's best to take a picture or two, or a page or two, out of such books, and replace them. The Great Soviet Encyclopedia was updated in that fashion from time to time.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 04:51:52 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 12, 2021, 04:40:24 PM
Yes, it's best to take a picture or two, or a page or two, out of such books, and replace them. The Great Soviet Encyclopedia was updated in that fashion from time to time.

I think that was Winston's job in the Ministry of Truth.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 12, 2021, 05:07:32 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 12, 2021, 04:40:24 PM
Yes, it's best to take a picture or two, or a page or two, out of such books, and replace them. The Great Soviet Encyclopedia was updated in that fashion from time to time.

I mean that's sort of how all encyclopedias work...

In general this discussion is so strange. You guys know these are books for kindergarters right? There's a bit of a different standard in terms of troubling content than if we were talking about The Great Gatsby.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 12, 2021, 05:15:41 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 12, 2021, 05:07:32 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 12, 2021, 04:40:24 PM
Yes, it's best to take a picture or two, or a page or two, out of such books, and replace them. The Great Soviet Encyclopedia was updated in that fashion from time to time.

I mean that's sort of how all encyclopedias work...

In general this discussion is so strange. You guys know these are books for kindergarters right? There's a bit of a different standard in terms of troubling content than if we were talking about The Great Gatsby.

Depends what's on the page!

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 12, 2021, 05:42:15 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 12, 2021, 11:38:15 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on March 12, 2021, 10:07:39 AM
I mean, look. I grew up on Astérix and Tintin, and I absolutely love them, and look forward to introducing my hatchling to them when the time comes. But there's no question that there's a hefty dose of racism in there (I think it's worse in Tintin,

I loved Tintin too and still have all my books. But man, they are really, really racist. And, of course, Herge was a fascist. There's a decent amount of anti-semitism miked in to Tintin as well. I wouldn't keep my kid from reading it when he gets older, but I'm not sure I'd introduce him to it. This stuff is weird, because, on one hand, I read Tintin as a kid and understood that the depictions of subservient, simple black people with giant lips and tomahawk wielding native Americans were messed up, but still enjoyed it. But I dunno. There are plenty of great graphic novels that aren't just filled with blatant racist and anti-semitic tropes and images.

I just had this brief debate on another forum with a person who refused to believe that Seuss was racist.  Before that I argued with someone on this same forum who argued that because slavery was a historical reality, Gone With the Wind was not a racist movie.

The thing is, the Western World in general was very racist, and our pop-culture reflects this.  We will always find racism and sexism and Orientalism of all kinds if we look back.  We will find racism over and over and over.  People, including writers and artists and filmmakers, simply embraced racism in their works.

The question is whether we can conquer our own time's racism by pointing out what we already know over and over again.

Anybody remember the "'Mary Poppins,' and a Nanny's Shameful Flirting With Blackface" (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/28/movies/mary-poppins-returns-blackface.html)?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 12, 2021, 05:48:44 PM
QuoteThe thing is, the Western World in general was very racist ... .

The West ended slavery, at great expense to many of its members.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 12, 2021, 06:46:20 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 12, 2021, 05:48:44 PM
QuoteThe thing is, the Western World in general was very racist ... .

The West ended slavery, at great expense to many of its members.

Is this one of those cars that derails the train?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: hmaria1609 on March 12, 2021, 06:58:36 PM
During one of my annual spring conferences attendance at Pratt Library in Baltimore City, one of the library staff mentioned To Think I Saw It on Mulberry Street since the original central library was built facing Mulberry St. When I think of this book that I read as a kid, this little tidbit comes to mind!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 13, 2021, 04:17:05 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 12, 2021, 05:48:44 PM
QuoteThe thing is, the Western World in general was very racist ... .

The West ended slavery, at great expense to many of its members.

Well, yes, the west ended slavery within its borders but has no control over what goes on in Pakistan or West Africa.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 13, 2021, 04:21:43 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 12, 2021, 06:46:20 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 12, 2021, 05:48:44 PM
QuoteThe thing is, the Western World in general was very racist ... .

The West ended slavery, at great expense to many of its members.

Is this one of those cars that derails the train?

Before technology made it possible to bring large numbers of people to another continent, most of those enslaved looked just about like their masters. Racism was cultivated to justify enslaving people because of their race, and not merely because you can through force. For the vast majority of our history slavery was accepted as part of life.

random thought: In let's say the year 1800 the majority (white) did not believe racism was a sin, an idea that today most find ignorant and misguided. What are we doing or thinking today, en masse, that is ignorant and misguided, that will reveal itself in thirty, fifty, 150 years?

QuoteIf the Seuss foundation had just quietly stopped publishing them, I doubt there would have been any outcry.

Right, they don't have to give a reason but the elect (John McWhorters' term) is just getting started with its overhaul of our entertainment and teaching culture. Perhaps by announcing the reason the publisher hopes to be looked upon more favorably as we go along. Selling books being a very competitive business. The outcry is more than offset by the desired placating of the activists. During my lifetime there has been tremendous power in an accusation of racism,  but the current phase is there is that same power in the accusation of neutrality over racism.

on edit: Wahoo, you introduced slavery to the thread. I wouldn't go accusing others of derailing just because you have prompted them to share their own thoughts.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 13, 2021, 06:16:15 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 12, 2021, 05:07:32 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 12, 2021, 04:40:24 PM
Yes, it's best to take a picture or two, or a page or two, out of such books, and replace them. The Great Soviet Encyclopedia was updated in that fashion from time to time.

I mean that's sort of how all encyclopedias work...

In general this discussion is so strange. You guys know these are books for kindergarters right? There's a bit of a different standard in terms of troubling content than if we were talking about The Great Gatsby.

If a children's book had one page that described Canadians as people who play hockey and eat poutine, I wouldn't have a case of the vapours and demand its banning, even though I don't do either of those things. Many people in Canada do one or both of those things, and I don't for one microsecond believe that a kid reading that book is going to have a psychic break if they visit Canada and fail to find anyone doing either of those things.

Kindergartner's books often contain magic, talking animals, and so on. Is that "troubling content"?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 13, 2021, 06:32:54 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 12, 2021, 05:48:44 PM
QuoteThe thing is, the Western World in general was very racist ... .

The West ended slavery, at great expense to many of its members.

This is one of those things people say, which, if you know anything about the history, is just totally meaningless. It is basically akin to saying that the Irish saved civilization, or Jews created the polio vaccine, although it actually has less specificity than those incredibly broad and silly claims.

Who the heck is "the west." It like a club of white leaders who you imagine met in 1830 and decided to end slavery? Because thats....not what happened. Also does "the west" include people of African descent, because they were really crucial in movements to end slavery. And where are we taking about here? Haiti, where slavery was destroyed by a massive slave revolt? The British Empire? The United States where slavery ended during a Civil War where enslaved people basically revolted against the confederacy and played a crucial part in its destruction. Just a silly statement.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 13, 2021, 06:51:11 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2021, 06:16:15 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 12, 2021, 05:07:32 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 12, 2021, 04:40:24 PM
Yes, it's best to take a picture or two, or a page or two, out of such books, and replace them. The Great Soviet Encyclopedia was updated in that fashion from time to time.

I mean that's sort of how all encyclopedias work...

In general this discussion is so strange. You guys know these are books for kindergarters right? There's a bit of a different standard in terms of troubling content than if we were talking about The Great Gatsby.

If a children's book had one page that described Canadians as people who play hockey and eat poutine, I wouldn't have a case of the vapours and demand its banning, even though I don't do either of those things. Many people in Canada do one or both of those things, and I don't for one microsecond believe that a kid reading that book is going to have a psychic break if they visit Canada and fail to find anyone doing either of those things.

Kindergartner's books often contain magic, talking animals, and so on. Is that "troubling content"?

Is it really necessary for us to explain that stereotypes come in different shapes and the larger context around them matters? I'm Jewish. One stereotype of Jews is that we are all highly educated and work as doctors, lawyers and academics. If a children's book has one jewish character and he's a doctor, I might roll my eyes a bit. Couldn't the Jewish character be something else? But, well, I do know a lot of Jewish doctors, and I'm a Jewish academic, and if the character is a kindly doctor who helps people...there are worse stereotypes...

On the other hand if the Jewish doctor is only in it for the money and cheats all the other characters..can you see the difference? Playing hockey on ponds in the winter isn't generally associated with anything particularly negative. Nobody justified murders of Canadians on the basis that they played hockey on the backs of hard working Americans.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 13, 2021, 07:07:04 AM
QuoteThis is one of those things people say, which, if you know anything about the history, is just totally meaningless. It is basically akin to saying that the Irish saved civilization, or Jews created the polio vaccine, although it actually has less specificity than those incredibly broad and silly claims.

Who the heck is "the west." It like a club of white leaders who you imagine met in 1830 and decided to end slavery? Because thats....not what happened. Also does "the west" include people of African descent, because they were really crucial in movements to end slavery. And where are we taking about here? Haiti, where slavery was destroyed by a massive slave revolt? The British Empire? The United States where slavery ended during a Civil War where enslaved people basically revolted against the confederacy and played a crucial part in its destruction. Just a silly statement.

May I quote you?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 13, 2021, 07:08:25 AM
Quote from: hmaria1609 on March 12, 2021, 06:58:36 PM
During one of my annual spring conferences attendance at Pratt Library in Baltimore City, one of the library staff mentioned To Think I Saw It on Mulberry Street since the original central library was built facing Mulberry St. When I think of this book that I read as a kid, this little tidbit comes to mind!

I've thought the same thing when I've seen an actual Mulberry Street.  I wonder how many real-life Mulberry Streets there are?  It's a fairly common name.  We don't have one in our town, but there is one in the county seat less than half an hour from here.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 13, 2021, 07:24:09 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on March 12, 2021, 10:11:02 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 12, 2021, 10:00:07 AM
Over the years, our public library has periodically had a display about books which were historically banned, making the point that book-banning (or burning) is, in hindsight, a really bad thing. It's sad to see those same organizations now seriously contemplating removing "inappropriate" books.


You might be surprised to learn about library collection 'weeding' practices...

Just an ordinary part of doing business.  If it's not a research or archival library then it's understood that most books that come in will sooner or later outlive their usefulness and have to be removed to make way for new ones.  I prefer the analogy of "pruning" to that of "weeding."  The books removed aren't unwanted intruders in the garden.  They're no longer useful dead wood that needs to be removed for the sake of keeping the whole healthy.

Marshwiggle, there is not, to my knowledge, any movement in the library world at this time to ban certain items that are no longer welcome.  I strongly suspect that much of the ALA's leadership would dearly love to sweep away all sorts of material that they don't like.  They give the impression of being an extremely "woke" bunch of people, which is why some of us librarians out in the provinces prefer to confine our professional activity to our state organizations--we don't feel welcome at ALA.  But thus far their commitment to intellectual freedom remains firm enough and consistent enough that they don't try it.

Every librarian has had the experience of buying, cataloging, checking out, or otherwise handling items that he or she feels very strongly against.  I have books that I'd honestly rather not have in the collection cross my desk all the time on the way out to the public.  I've also often refrained from purchasing items for the collection that I'd like to have, but that I know would be unlikely to see much use by our public (The collection development budget isn't there for my personal use).  It's all a part of the job.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 13, 2021, 07:44:16 AM
Quote from: apl68 on March 13, 2021, 07:24:09 AM

Marshwiggle, there is not, to my knowledge, any movement in the library world at this time to ban certain items that are no longer welcome.  I strongly suspect that much of the ALA's leadership would dearly love to sweep away all sorts of material that they don't like.  They give the impression of being an extremely "woke" bunch of people, which is why some of us librarians out in the provinces prefer to confine our professional activity to our state organizations--we don't feel welcome at ALA.  But thus far their commitment to intellectual freedom remains firm enough and consistent enough that they don't try it.

Every librarian has had the experience of buying, cataloging, checking out, or otherwise handling items that he or she feels very strongly against.  I have books that I'd honestly rather not have in the collection cross my desk all the time on the way out to the public.  I've also often refrained from purchasing items for the collection that I'd like to have, but that I know would be unlikely to see much use by our public (The collection development budget isn't there for my personal use).  It's all a part of the job.

You have the attitude that I admire in librarians. I'm glad that you sense the comittment to intellectual freedom is still solid, since you'll obviously have a much more informed opinion than what may appear in the media. And of course, one of the reasons not to ban "offensive" material is that the ban generates more interest in it. As the legalization of cannabis has shown, making something accessible is actually a good way to make it less desirable.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 13, 2021, 07:47:43 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 12, 2021, 11:03:21 AM
Basically there's just a banned Dr. Seuss books bubble, right? I can't imagine these books are actually rare. They've been in print for decades without interruption and there must be tens of thousands of copies out there. I'm sure three weeks ago you could have gotten a used copy for 5 bucks on Amazon. Obviously, some of the increased demand for used copies is real, probably mostly driven by people who want copies to make an ideological point, but I'm sure there are plenty of copies out there to meet that demand. Actually, copies don't really appear to be scarce at all, just absurdly expensive.

I can't imagine there are many people out there who are going to buy some 90s printing of a Dr. Seuss book for 200 dollars just so they can express their feelings about cancel culture. To the extent that anybody is buying these things, it is presumably in the belief that they are going to go up even more in value. The problem is that there are lots of copies sitting around in boxes in people's basements and some of those people are going to hear they might be valuable, dig them up and try to sell them and the whole thing is going to crash very quickly.

That's probably true.  If that happens, then libraries that have pulled their copies from circulation will probably feel safe letting them go back to being normal library books. 

So, no harm done in the long run?  Probably.  In the near term, though, the hysteria and speculation that today's viral media are so effective at making more extreme than ever are creating a good deal of disruption.  And needless hurt feelings and antagonism, which will linger as part of the growing mass of such junk that pervades our society now.  A lot of people are coming out of this thing looking awfully foolish, and refusing to see or admit how foolish they've made themselves look.  Given the volatility of the cultural environment, it probably would have been best if the copyright holder had just quietly ceased production, instead of trying to use it as an opportunity for virtue signalling. 

Incidentally, we've pulled (for now) our copy of If I Ran the Circus, on the concern that it could easily be confused with the discontinued If I Ran the Zoo.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: fishbrains on March 13, 2021, 11:47:32 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2021, 06:16:15 AM

Kindergartner's books often contain magic, talking animals, and so on. Is that "troubling content"?

Hmmm . . . I'm pretty sure I can trace a direct line from my childrens' depravity now as adults back to their watching the Muppets. Frogs kissing pigs, Gonzo f*cking chickens, that pervert Elmo wanting to be "tickled" all the time. How else did I expect them to turn out?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 13, 2021, 04:37:24 PM
Quote from: fishbrains on March 13, 2021, 11:47:32 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2021, 06:16:15 AM

Kindergartner's books often contain magic, talking animals, and so on. Is that "troubling content"?

Hmmm . . . I'm pretty sure I can trace a direct line from my childrens' depravity now as adults back to their watching the Muppets. Frogs kissing pigs, Gonzo f*cking chickens, that pervert Elmo wanting to be "tickled" all the time. How else did I expect them to turn out?

Muppets, schmuppets.  I am sure I can trace my now grown child's intelligence and sanity to my prompt railing against Captain Planet, who was and remains a fool. :-)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2021, 05:26:40 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 13, 2021, 04:37:24 PM
Quote from: fishbrains on March 13, 2021, 11:47:32 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2021, 06:16:15 AM

Kindergartner's books often contain magic, talking animals, and so on. Is that "troubling content"?

Hmmm . . . I'm pretty sure I can trace a direct line from my childrens' depravity now as adults back to their watching the Muppets. Frogs kissing pigs, Gonzo f*cking chickens, that pervert Elmo wanting to be "tickled" all the time. How else did I expect them to turn out?

Muppets, schmuppets.  I am sure I can trace my now grown child's intelligence and sanity to my prompt railing against Captain Planet, who was and remains a fool. :-)

I was ruined by the Bugaloos. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: larryc on March 13, 2021, 07:19:55 PM
No one has been canceled--or at least not Dr. Seuss or Rowling.

Be smarter.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 14, 2021, 07:13:18 AM
I was gonna say, wisecracking, keep him around. If the left cancels everybody who might offend members of disenfranchised groups, they might run out of moves. They're not gonna win elections because people love teacher's unions. But TBT, the left knows the same thing as everyone else. Geisel was a treasure, whether with rhymes, themes or cartoons. If you have  minute, take a look at this link. These people might be wonderful, but we'd be amazed if any of the ten is another Geisel.
His gift, in my opinion, was he was never maudlin or preachy and he didn't talk down to you. He conveyed right-thinking stuff while making you laugh and drawing you into the characters. the moral lesson was there but it wasn't the whole show.
https://books.childrensbookassociation.com/top-10-psychologist-recommended-menu-03-10-21-cs?utm_source=CS&utm_campaign=%5BON%5D%2003.03.21%20-%20CS%20-%20Top%2010%20-%20Mental%20Health%20Interests&utm_medium=facebook&s1=CS&s3=%5BON%5D%2003.03.21%20-%20CS%20-%20Top%2010%20-%20Mental%20Health%20Interests&s4=facebook&cep=mxiAg_B_ix5pMYKs0iMMK3qmzJLRKF5AbhKwJRkBp-QtbFcsOR0G5vQuziOCVckcPlpNEonPoaT75tRh7Vmv5r0nXu_MF_91mb-_YKL8FA96dbXGndaiE439y2tDVXRAYBmONHaEN-btDL6bGgnGetq72-tYpC0p7f04azd-DLge7kYF8KyGMgR-Zvc7gBuRPGFoa0Ex0a9SKC-hBYb3FSXghS90MG2pr5Uz4MkxWSqgcZsIisqmR0FSlejDopznPw60WgCqzBhtJeLWne7JDFyj0yyhDDWXAg1gJ-om4AD0wH_X7N0adReLt9Wqm3-Cst8RPhSK3kXAqUYH2xuj1XjFE4XUkuEDDcI0bspZ-lmUqJ6Qq4UNuTUBc3Bz8XJU3m6YKCpgUv6ZmedDYvtZpX3OqYxDK_4CW7lbVID-6rlYfsUTkfZqDEKqYQXaSrTKfHAVslcG7Rw_sKboCl8Fx57nDzVf5hAZ8u9XtV9aYz_-IDl46pKqud3DUA8PuTXS&lptoken=163d1506733d26a40043&fbclid=IwAR0X_IOKhIZ3xezVOBpa7kmwHO3tPx1GqODipo4ih6x0I29dAFJgoOMP9Xc

Bill Maher:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DH4v6FnbvM
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on March 14, 2021, 09:37:58 AM
In this case there has not been any "cancelling" by the left, but rather a business decision by the estate to discontinue production of the books. This will probably be great for their brand in the long run: Conservatives are buying Dr. Seuss books in protest (apparently not understanding that this will enrich the publisher that cancelled their beloved racist children's books) and the publisher gets woke points for being so forward thinking. And in two weeks we'll be on to some other phony controversy and nobody will care about this.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 14, 2021, 12:01:28 PM
The left wants the controversy, but when it's not going over and instead backfiring they try to reel it in, i.e. 'you guys are making a big deal over nothing.'

This is mainstream higher education humanities professor, San Francisco, CNN, Cambridge thinking (with thanks to Wahoo redux):

'I just had this brief debate on another forum with a person who refused to believe that Seuss was racist.  Before that I argued with someone on this same forum who argued that because slavery was a historical reality, Gone With the Wind was not a racist movie.

The thing is, the Western World in general was very racist, and our pop-culture reflects this.  We will always find racism and sexism and Orientalism of all kinds if we look back.  We will find racism over and over and over.  People, including writers and artists and filmmakers, simply embraced racism in their works.

The question is whether we can conquer our own time's racism by pointing out what we already know over and over again.

Anybody remember the "'Mary Poppins,' and a Nanny's Shameful Flirting With Blackface"?'



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 12:46:25 PM
QuoteIn this case there has not been any "cancelling" by the left, but rather a business decision by the estate to discontinue production of the books.

And this business decision was wise because?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on March 14, 2021, 01:09:05 PM
When I saw the images I thought they probably weren't meant to be offensive at the time. At the time, similar images were seen in National Geographic, neighborhoods filled with new immigrants, photos from people who had travelled in cultures that had not been as globalized/Westernized as they have been today.

Mr. Geisel and his publishers, likely all educated white people, probably saw the world through this lens. Do these images reduce people to "other" characteristics? Yes, they do. At best, these images seem dated and condescending by people who assumed their culture was the best, the ideal, that others were striving to achieve.

Had someone Black, Asian or otherwise pointed out at the time that these images somehow stereotyping or objectifying, one can imagine the puzzled look on the faces of Geisel and his league. "But that's what they look like, isn't it?"
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on March 14, 2021, 02:06:46 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 12:46:25 PM
QuoteIn this case there has not been any "cancelling" by the left, but rather a business decision by the estate to discontinue production of the books.

And this business decision was wise because?

Because most consumers don't like racism
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 02:22:27 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on March 14, 2021, 02:06:46 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 12:46:25 PM
QuoteIn this case there has not been any "cancelling" by the left, but rather a business decision by the estate to discontinue production of the books.

And this business decision was wise because?

Because most consumers don't like racism

Nah, no mention of consumers or declining sales. Rather, a response to invited experts' opinions in the form of a virtue signal. Wise business decision to prevent potential future attacks.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2021, 06:44:31 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on March 14, 2021, 01:09:05 PM
Mr. Geisel and his publishers, likely all educated white people, probably saw the world through this lens.

Had someone Black, Asian or otherwise pointed out at the time that these images somehow stereotyping or objectifying, one can imagine the puzzled look on the faces of Geisel and his league. "But that's what they look like, isn't it?"

Dahl's original "Oompa Loompas" were an imaginary African tribe he made up. 

As a kid my family would take me to "Sambo's Restaurant," and I remember that I had the "Little Black Sambo" book in my bedroom when I was a child.

The Lone Ranger's kemosabe "Tonto" has a name derived from the Spanish slang for "fool" or "stupid" (but at least the original TV show hired a Native American actor and not Johnny Depp).

I'll say it again, our pop-culture used to reflect our "Western" (N.America, Brit Isles, and European imperialist) cultures' implicit racism.

We should know that this was simply the way we did things for many generations, but somehow we don't, and we seem to want to correct these outrages now.     
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 06:53:29 PM
QuoteThe Lone Ranger's kemosabe "Tonto" has a name derived from the Spanish slang for "fool" or "stupid" ... .

And from Western Apache kounʼnde ("wild rough people").
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 14, 2021, 07:32:48 PM
QuoteWe should know that this was simply the way we did things for many generations, but somehow we don't, and we seem to want to correct these outrages now.   

For example, by having the First Lady Michelle Obama declare that Beyonce, who sells pornography to the nation's children, is a role model for girls, because she's a successful black woman? Is this some kind of reparations gesture, or is Obama really that dishonest and shallow? Whatever the reason, it's gross, and the left and democrats think it's just dandy.

Thing is (1) we're in a culture war, (2) bigotry is far from the only ugly, mean or hurtful thing, and probably not the worst thing, that people do to each other, and (3) consequently fixating inordinately on theories and realities of oppression means some of the worst people will use the opportunity to aggrandize themselves. For example the professor who went ballistic when someone asked for the Women's Lingerie Floor on the elevator. And it's a mania.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/05/07/when-one-scholar's-lame-joke-another's-offensive-comment
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2021, 07:35:37 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 06:53:29 PM
QuoteThe Lone Ranger's kemosabe "Tonto" has a name derived from the Spanish slang for "fool" or "stupid" ... .

And from Western Apache kounʼnde ("wild rough people").

The word in Spanish is pretty specific.

My father, who came of-age in the Eisenhower era, was a very good man.  He was very intellectual.  He was also a former Army special forces officer pre-Vietnam War, and he had a very particular reaction to any criticism of American culture that was pre-Rock'n'Roll, which he hated, or tied to the military, the government, or Americana.  He was a very proud veteran and government worker who could be driven close to rage by criticisms such as those in this thread.  He once admitted to me that he saw those John Wayne films and wanted to become a war hero.  Whenever race or sexism came up his mouth went tight as a trap and I could see the steam building between his ears.

I never understood this reaction because he was very quick to denounce Southern racism or Jim Crow and considered the antebellum slave owners to be, in his own words, "the scum of the earth"...but he would get very angry if one tried to tie any of these historical facts to the United States of America.

It was a bit like the reaction of fervent religious people to criticism of their canonical beliefs.

My dad only started to question his double-think after his beloved little brother, who was a Vietnam vet, began displaying severe repressed PTSD in his 50s and 60s, and after my dad and I had had a number of superheated cultural debates, sometimes about Rock'n'Roll.

I imagine all cultures have people who feel the need to contradict anything, particularly overt evidence, that is damaging or embarrassing to the groupthink, but I don't understand it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on March 14, 2021, 09:31:14 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 02:22:27 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on March 14, 2021, 02:06:46 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 12:46:25 PM
QuoteIn this case there has not been any "cancelling" by the left, but rather a business decision by the estate to discontinue production of the books.

And this business decision was wise because?

Because most consumers don't like racism

Nah, no mention of consumers or declining sales. Rather, a response to invited experts' opinions in the form of a virtue signal. Wise business decision to prevent potential future attacks.

Got it, so they cancelled themselves.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 15, 2021, 04:30:45 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on March 14, 2021, 09:31:14 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 02:22:27 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on March 14, 2021, 02:06:46 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 12:46:25 PM
QuoteIn this case there has not been any "cancelling" by the left, but rather a business decision by the estate to discontinue production of the books.

And this business decision was wise because?

Because most consumers don't like racism

Nah, no mention of consumers or declining sales. Rather, a response to invited experts' opinions in the form of a virtue signal. Wise business decision to prevent potential future attacks.

Got it, so they cancelled themselves.

In addition to agreeing with dismalist's assessment (which I actually posted first, upthread), I'll add: it's a purging of white guilt ritual that pretty much always gets you a little bump in your bank account of bigotry-free status. Sort of like showing you've been tested for COVID before going to work. This happens regularly and is done by almost all American businesses and public figures, irrespective of whether the thing that's getting canceled has been shown to have any detrimental effect on anyone.

Re: John Wayne. We can have a field day with him over considerations for cancelling. In his day everybody smoked cigarettes in the movies. The Marlboro Man was  a Wayne knockoff. Wayne of course smoked a lot in real life and ended up with one lung. Should we cancel all the chain smokers or even just the ones who paid dearly for it: Humphrey Bogart, Nat King Cole, Arthur Godfrey, Leonard Bernstein, Johnny Carson? Or could it be that children today can watch old movies and television and simply process the experience as 'that's how we lived back then, long ago. And now things have changed.' Again, bigotry is not the only harmful thing people do and not the only thing that might influence kids in ways we don't want.

Quote
Quote from: Liquidambar on March 12, 2021, 01:43:31 PM
Quote from: Hegemony on March 12, 2021, 11:16:14 AM
The depiction in If I Ran The Zoo is indeed problematic.

Yes, but IIRC it's only portions of 1-2 pictures out of the entire book.  I don't recall the words being problematic.
QuoteI'm perplexed why they didn't just start selling a revised version with the problematic pieces of those couple pictures cropped out.

Correspondingly, I used to have an old cassette with the soundtrack to the animated Aladdin movie.  The soundtrack they sell now has one problematic line from the first song updated.

Isn't that revisionist history? How would you feel if people did that to your work after you're dead?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 15, 2021, 05:32:39 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on March 14, 2021, 09:31:14 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 02:22:27 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on March 14, 2021, 02:06:46 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 12:46:25 PM
QuoteIn this case there has not been any "cancelling" by the left, but rather a business decision by the estate to discontinue production of the books.

And this business decision was wise because?

Because most consumers don't like racism

Nah, no mention of consumers or declining sales. Rather, a response to invited experts' opinions in the form of a virtue signal. Wise business decision to prevent potential future attacks.

Got it, so they cancelled themselves.

How do you tell the difference between people doing this because they've actually changed their thinking and their actions are changing in consequence, versus people doing it for fear of social disapproval and/or punishment even though they have no particular change of heart?

And the history of totalitarian regimes everywhere include a big emphasis on the latter. Is the fact that it's technically "voluntary" enough to decide that it's no big deal?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 07:31:59 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 15, 2021, 05:32:39 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on March 14, 2021, 09:31:14 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 02:22:27 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on March 14, 2021, 02:06:46 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 12:46:25 PM
QuoteIn this case there has not been any "cancelling" by the left, but rather a business decision by the estate to discontinue production of the books.

And this business decision was wise because?

Because most consumers don't like racism

Nah, no mention of consumers or declining sales. Rather, a response to invited experts' opinions in the form of a virtue signal. Wise business decision to prevent potential future attacks.

Got it, so they cancelled themselves.

How do you tell the difference between people doing this because they've actually changed their thinking and their actions are changing in consequence, versus people doing it for fear of social disapproval and/or punishment even though they have no particular change of heart?

And the history of totalitarian regimes everywhere include a big emphasis on the latter. Is the fact that it's technically "voluntary" enough to decide that it's no big deal?

It certainly makes the comparison to totalitarianism absurd.

Your basic argument seems to be that there's something new, alarming and worrying about people moderating their behavior and language based on how others are going to perceive it and the potential consequences of that perception. It's a bad faith argument. Nobody believes that. I could attach a giant swastika flag to my car if I wanted to. I'm guessing it would lead to a lot of social disapproval. The government couldn't punish me for it, but I'm betting if I took my Swastika flag car to school, I wouldn't have a job much longer.

Really, all of this is just a cover for people who are worried that their ideas are going to come to be seen as socially unacceptable. Its rather telling that rather than trying to defend those ideas or beliefs, all we get is a lot of whining about how terrible it is that someone could face social or professional consequences for saying things that others find repugnant.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 07:50:39 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 07:31:59 AM
Its rather telling that rather than trying to defend those ideas or beliefs, all we get is a lot of whining about how terrible it is that someone could face social or professional consequences for saying things that others find repugnant.

I love your post, but...well...we have seen a rash of people whose careers actually are threatened by saying things like "all lives matter," which many find rightly offensive, I think, but is a topical political opinion nevertheless. 

We can't pretend there is not a PC mania out there that is ALSO dangerous.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 15, 2021, 08:06:13 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 07:31:59 AM
Really, all of this is just a cover for people who are worried that their ideas are going to come to be seen as socially unacceptable. Its rather telling that rather than trying to defend those ideas or beliefs, all we get is a lot of whining about how terrible it is that someone could face social or professional consequences for saying things that others find repugnant.

To a certain extent, that's correct. History has shown that ideas that are perfectly acceptable in one place and time may be completely beyond the pale in another.  It's a safe bet that everyone will at some point in their life hold some "socially unacceptable" belief in some context. A society that discourages hostility to people purely for the views they express, rather than for their actions, is a much better place to live than one where either the government or the mob can basically scare people into silence.

There was a column in the Globe and Mail on Saturday pointing out that many people seem more unwilling to forgive someone's inappropriate tweet than they would be to forgive previous criminal activity, including some violent crime. That is insane.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on March 15, 2021, 08:22:36 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 15, 2021, 05:32:39 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on March 14, 2021, 09:31:14 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 02:22:27 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on March 14, 2021, 02:06:46 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 14, 2021, 12:46:25 PM
QuoteIn this case there has not been any "cancelling" by the left, but rather a business decision by the estate to discontinue production of the books.

And this business decision was wise because?

Because most consumers don't like racism

Nah, no mention of consumers or declining sales. Rather, a response to invited experts' opinions in the form of a virtue signal. Wise business decision to prevent potential future attacks.

Got it, so they cancelled themselves.

How do you tell the difference between people doing this because they've actually changed their thinking and their actions are changing in consequence, versus people doing it for fear of social disapproval and/or punishment even though they have no particular change of heart?

And the history of totalitarian regimes everywhere include a big emphasis on the latter. Is the fact that it's technically "voluntary" enough to decide that it's no big deal?

Totalitarianism? Lol. Get a grip man. We're talking about a publisher making a decision to stop printing new copies of racist books.

Look, the company chose to stop printing books that they decided are racially insensitive (with some advising from teachers - how scary!). They did that because they don't want to be seen as a racist company, because being seen as a racist company isn't good for sales. You can blame the left for creating an atmosphere where racism is frowned on (racism should be frowned on, of course), but none of that matters unless consumers are moved. The company thinks consumers will prefer to buy from a company that disavows racism, so they made the choice that reflects that.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 15, 2021, 08:43:57 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on March 15, 2021, 08:22:36 AM


Totalitarianism? Lol. Get a grip man. We're talking about a publisher making a decision to stop printing new copies of racist books.

Look, the company chose to stop printing books that they decided are racially insensitive (with some advising from teachers - how scary!). They did that because they don't want to be seen as a racist company, because being seen as a racist company isn't good for sales. You can blame the left for creating an atmosphere where racism is frowned on (racism should be frowned on, of course), but none of that matters unless consumers are moved. The company thinks consumers will prefer to buy from a company that disavows racism, so they made the choice that reflects that.

So if a children's book in another country has a bit about Americans, and shows them in cowboy hats riding horses, is that racist? If it shows a French person wearing a beret and eating a baguette is that racist? If it shows a Pacific islander (from any number of small nations) in a fishing boat, is that racist? If shows a Canadian playing hockey, is that racist?

Is showing a woman in a dress sexist?  Is showing domestic assault as a man attacking a woman sexist?

At what point does showing an individual exhibiting some stereotypes of a particular group to which they belong count as some sort of bigotry? What kind of disclaimer would be needed to clarify that any specific individual from that group might not, in fact, exhibit any of those characteristics?


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on March 15, 2021, 08:55:55 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 15, 2021, 08:43:57 AM

So if a children's book in another country has a bit about Americans, and shows them in cowboy hats riding horses, is that racist? If it shows a French person wearing a beret and eating a baguette is that racist? If it shows a Pacific islander (from any number of small nations) in a fishing boat, is that racist? If shows a Canadian playing hockey, is that racist?

Is showing a woman in a dress sexist?  Is showing domestic assault as a man attacking a woman sexist?

At what point does showing an individual exhibiting some stereotypes of a particular group to which they belong count as some sort of bigotry? What kind of disclaimer would be needed to clarify that any specific individual from that group might not, in fact, exhibit any of those characteristics?

When they come from a perceived place of superiority, condescending and mocking to the culture being represented.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on March 15, 2021, 09:11:15 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 15, 2021, 08:43:57 AM


So if a children's book in another country has a bit about Americans, and shows them in cowboy hats riding horses, is that racist? If it shows a French person wearing a beret and eating a baguette is that racist? If it shows a Pacific islander (from any number of small nations) in a fishing boat, is that racist? If shows a Canadian playing hockey, is that racist?

Racism is prejudice or discrimination based on race. The examples you're asking about feature national stereotypes, but they don't yet show that those stereotypes are important building blocks in prejudicial or discriminatory practices. But even if they were, that wouldn't be racism, because 'American', 'French', and 'Canadian' are not races.

Can we stop pretending this is as hard as you like to pretend it is? It really isn't.

Quote
Is showing a woman in a dress sexist?  Is showing domestic assault as a man attacking a woman sexist?

Sexism is prejudice or discrimination based on sex. These examples do not yet show that's what's going on. So, in and of themselves, no, they aren't sexist. But they could be, depending on the surrounding context. Again, it's really not that hard.

Quote
At what point does showing an individual exhibiting some stereotypes of a particular group to which they belong count as some sort of bigotry?

When it grounds or is grounded in prejudicial or discriminatory practices. One last time: it's really not that hard.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on March 15, 2021, 09:15:05 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 15, 2021, 08:43:57 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on March 15, 2021, 08:22:36 AM


Totalitarianism? Lol. Get a grip man. We're talking about a publisher making a decision to stop printing new copies of racist books.

Look, the company chose to stop printing books that they decided are racially insensitive (with some advising from teachers - how scary!). They did that because they don't want to be seen as a racist company, because being seen as a racist company isn't good for sales. You can blame the left for creating an atmosphere where racism is frowned on (racism should be frowned on, of course), but none of that matters unless consumers are moved. The company thinks consumers will prefer to buy from a company that disavows racism, so they made the choice that reflects that.

So if a children's book in another country has a bit about Americans, and shows them in cowboy hats riding horses, is that racist? If it shows a French person wearing a beret and eating a baguette is that racist? If it shows a Pacific islander (from any number of small nations) in a fishing boat, is that racist? If shows a Canadian playing hockey, is that racist?

Is showing a woman in a dress sexist?  Is showing domestic assault as a man attacking a woman sexist?

At what point does showing an individual exhibiting some stereotypes of a particular group to which they belong count as some sort of bigotry? What kind of disclaimer would be needed to clarify that any specific individual from that group might not, in fact, exhibit any of those characteristics?

In this country it is up to the company to decide what is best for their business, with reference to societal norms.

I also wasn't aware that Canadian is a race or that playing hockey has been historically used to belittle Canadians.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 15, 2021, 09:31:46 AM
Two of the six discontinued Seuss titles was among the top 20 Amazon sellers. Thus, the company is throwing away money. People don't throw away money voluntarily.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 15, 2021, 09:33:32 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on March 15, 2021, 09:15:05 AM
In this country it is up to the company to decide what is best for their business, with reference to societal norms.

As it should be. But one of the "racist" items which has gotten mentioned is about "people who eat with sticks". When I was in China a few years ago, eating with sticks was pretty common. Restaurants in other countries serving Chinese food, including expensive ones, tend to serve the food with sticks, so it's hard to see how that is somehow disparaging. (In fact, I'd say that for most people in the West, being able to eat with chopsticks is associated with being more cultured; people who aren't able to eat with chopsticks are seen as backward.)

Quote
I also wasn't aware that Canadian is a race or that playing hockey has been historically used to belittle Canadians.

As people have pointed out for decades, "race" is a term that has virtually no meaning scientifically, since external physical characteristics vary due to many different genes, and so how similar two people look is very weakly correlated with their genetic (i.e. "racial") similarity.
And it also varies across time, where groups who are considered "other" at one point in history are considered part of the "normal" community at later times.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on March 15, 2021, 09:44:19 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 15, 2021, 09:33:32 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on March 15, 2021, 09:15:05 AM
In this country it is up to the company to decide what is best for their business, with reference to societal norms.

As it should be. But one of the "racist" items which has gotten mentioned is about "people who eat with sticks". When I was in China a few years ago, eating with sticks was pretty common. Restaurants in other countries serving Chinese food, including expensive ones, tend to serve the food with sticks, so it's hard to see how that is somehow disparaging. (In fact, I'd say that for most people in the West, being able to eat with chopsticks is associated with being more cultured; people who aren't able to eat with chopsticks are seen as backward.)

Quote
I also wasn't aware that Canadian is a race or that playing hockey has been historically used to belittle Canadians.

As people have pointed out for decades, "race" is a term that has virtually no meaning scientifically, since external physical characteristics vary due to many different genes, and so how similar two people look is very weakly correlated with their genetic (i.e. "racial") similarity.
And it also varies across time, where groups who are considered "other" at one point in history are considered part of the "normal" community at later times.

You are right that race is socially constructed. But it nevertheless does have a socially constructed meaning.

And you can argue till you're blue in the face that the books aren't actually racist. But it isn't up to you or to me as individuals to decide. The company thinks that the public will be put off by these books, so they stopped printing new copies of them. It is a business decision. There was no cancelling by "the left," unless the company itself is the left or a critical mass of consumers in a capitalist economy are the left.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ergative on March 15, 2021, 09:52:20 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 15, 2021, 09:31:46 AM
Two of the six discontinued Seuss titles was among the top 20 Amazon sellers. Thus, the company is throwing away money. People don't throw away money voluntarily.

I mean,  some do (https://www.upworthy.com/penzeys-spices-looting-its-own-store-for-racial-justice).

What are we really arguing about here? Do we want to believe that the Seuss estate/company/publisher (don't know its official status) thinks outdated racial stereotypes are Bad, Actually, and no longer want to be associated with them? Or do we want to believe that they actually are A-Ok with perpetuating racism, but are somehow incapable of discovering the Fox News viewer market to continue selling them?

If we are really Seuss Estate stans, it seems that the more charitable interpretation of the events is to say that Seuss Estate is more sympathetic to wokeness than to racism.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 15, 2021, 10:07:58 AM
Quote from: ergative on March 15, 2021, 09:52:20 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 15, 2021, 09:31:46 AM
Two of the six discontinued Seuss titles was among the top 20 Amazon sellers. Thus, the company is throwing away money. People don't throw away money voluntarily.

I mean,  some do (https://www.upworthy.com/penzeys-spices-looting-its-own-store-for-racial-justice).

What are we really arguing about here? Do we want to believe that the Seuss estate/company/publisher (don't know its official status) thinks outdated racial stereotypes are Bad, Actually, and no longer want to be associated with them? Or do we want to believe that they actually are A-Ok with perpetuating racism, but are somehow incapable of discovering the Fox News viewer market to continue selling them?

If we are really Seuss Estate stans, it seems that the more charitable interpretation of the events is to say that Seuss Estate is more sympathetic to wokeness than to racism.

Ah, Mr. Penzey is being charitable. He is giving away stuff to others. [Buys advertising, too. :-)] Seuss is destroying money -- no one has it. The income from the discontinued books is gone.

Why should one interpret Seuss, or any other company, charitably, then? They just wanna make money. Seuss feels compelled to be woke.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on March 15, 2021, 10:11:46 AM
So what?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 15, 2021, 10:15:13 AM
Sorry if this has already been cited (from Cheatseat):

The Dr. Seuss books that have been pulled were not very popular. Last year, Green Eggs and Ham sold 338,000 copies, while Oh, the Places You'll Go! sold 513,000 copies, the New York Times reported. In comparison, And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street sold 5,000 copies, while lesser-known titles like McElligot's Pool and The Cat's Quizzer "haven't sold in years" through retailers BookScan tracks.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ergative on March 15, 2021, 10:21:01 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 15, 2021, 10:07:58 AM
Quote from: ergative on March 15, 2021, 09:52:20 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 15, 2021, 09:31:46 AM
Two of the six discontinued Seuss titles was among the top 20 Amazon sellers. Thus, the company is throwing away money. People don't throw away money voluntarily.

I mean,  some do (https://www.upworthy.com/penzeys-spices-looting-its-own-store-for-racial-justice).

What are we really arguing about here? Do we want to believe that the Seuss estate/company/publisher (don't know its official status) thinks outdated racial stereotypes are Bad, Actually, and no longer want to be associated with them? Or do we want to believe that they actually are A-Ok with perpetuating racism, but are somehow incapable of discovering the Fox News viewer market to continue selling them?

If we are really Seuss Estate stans, it seems that the more charitable interpretation of the events is to say that Seuss Estate is more sympathetic to wokeness than to racism.

Ah, Mr. Penzey is being charitable. He is giving away stuff to others. [Buys advertising, too. :-)] Seuss is destroying money -- no one has it. The income from the discontinued books is gone.

Why should one interpret Seuss, or any other company, charitably, then? They just wanna make money. Seuss feels compelled to be woke.

I don't fully understand your reasoning. You just said that Penzey was being charitable, but in the next line suggest that we shouldn't interpret any company's behavior as charitable. You said in a previous post that two of the six discontinued Seuss titles were among the top Amazon sellers, but then in the next post say that companies 'just wannna make money', which is inconsistent with discontinuing those top-selling titles.

I think we can all agree that companies want to make money first, sure, but since the Seuss estate's behavior is evidently not about that, then we have to look for other reasons. And that brings us back again to the question of wokeness vs. racism: Does Seuss estate feel 'compelled to be woke' because they recognize that perpetuating racism is bad, or do they feel 'compelled to be woke' because of societal pressure against the racism they'd actually prefer to perpetuate?

Since that societal pressure has evidently not been strong enough to overcome all or even most systemically racist structures, then in the event that we adopt the second interpretation, we must also admit that the Seuss estate evidently lacks the courage of its convictions, to have folded to that pressure so quickly!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 15, 2021, 10:25:33 AM
Quote from: ergative on March 15, 2021, 09:52:20 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 15, 2021, 09:31:46 AM
Two of the six discontinued Seuss titles was among the top 20 Amazon sellers. Thus, the company is throwing away money. People don't throw away money voluntarily.

I mean,  some do (https://www.upworthy.com/penzeys-spices-looting-its-own-store-for-racial-justice).

What are we really arguing about here? Do we want to believe that the Seuss estate/company/publisher (don't know its official status) thinks outdated racial stereotypes are Bad, Actually, and no longer want to be associated with them? Or do we want to believe that they actually are A-Ok with perpetuating racism, but are somehow incapable of discovering the Fox News viewer market to continue selling them?

If we are really Seuss Estate stans, it seems that the more charitable interpretation of the events is to say that Seuss Estate is more sympathetic to wokeness than to racism.

Those aren't the only two choices. There's no irrefutable evidence that the publisher thinks the images are racist or that all of the images being discussed are racist.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 15, 2021, 10:31:19 AM
Quote from: ergative on March 15, 2021, 10:21:01 AM

I think we can all agree that companies want to make money first, sure, but since the Seuss estate's behavior is evidently not about that, then we have to look for other reasons. And that brings us back again to the question of wokeness vs. racism: Does Seuss estate feel 'compelled to be woke' because they recognize that perpetuating racism is bad, or do they feel 'compelled to be woke' because of societal pressure against the racism they'd actually prefer to perpetuate?

This avoids the much more likely alternative to wokeness; not sympathy for racism, but the unwillingness to label basically any sort of depiction of any identifiable group of people as "racist". Other than a very small fringe, you'd be hard pressed to find people who "prefer to perpetuate racism", but you can find lots of people who would roll their eyes at the equivalent of calling the movie "White Men Can't Jump" racist.



Quote
Since that societal pressure has evidently not been strong enough to overcome all or even most systemically racist structures, then in the event that we adopt the second interpretation, we must also admit that the Seuss estate evidently lacks the courage of its convictions, to have folded to that pressure so quickly!

If the books weren't selling much, then it may have been shrewd business to discontinue them and then virtue signal to get woke points as well!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 15, 2021, 10:36:16 AM
Quote from: ergative on March 15, 2021, 10:21:01 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 15, 2021, 10:07:58 AM
Quote from: ergative on March 15, 2021, 09:52:20 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 15, 2021, 09:31:46 AM
Two of the six discontinued Seuss titles was among the top 20 Amazon sellers. Thus, the company is throwing away money. People don't throw away money voluntarily.

I mean,  some do (https://www.upworthy.com/penzeys-spices-looting-its-own-store-for-racial-justice).

What are we really arguing about here? Do we want to believe that the Seuss estate/company/publisher (don't know its official status) thinks outdated racial stereotypes are Bad, Actually, and no longer want to be associated with them? Or do we want to believe that they actually are A-Ok with perpetuating racism, but are somehow incapable of discovering the Fox News viewer market to continue selling them?

If we are really Seuss Estate stans, it seems that the more charitable interpretation of the events is to say that Seuss Estate is more sympathetic to wokeness than to racism.

Ah, Mr. Penzey is being charitable. He is giving away stuff to others. [Buys advertising, too. :-)] Seuss is destroying money -- no one has it. The income from the discontinued books is gone.

Why should one interpret Seuss, or any other company, charitably, then? They just wanna make money. Seuss feels compelled to be woke.

I don't fully understand your reasoning. You just said that Penzey was being charitable, but in the next line suggest that we shouldn't interpret any company's behavior as charitable. You said in a previous post that two of the six discontinued Seuss titles were among the top Amazon sellers, but then in the next post say that companies 'just wannna make money', which is inconsistent with discontinuing those top-selling titles.

I think we can all agree that companies want to make money first, sure, but since the Seuss estate's behavior is evidently not about that, then we have to look for other reasons. And that brings us back again to the question of wokeness vs. racism: Does Seuss estate feel 'compelled to be woke' because they recognize that perpetuating racism is bad, or do they feel 'compelled to be woke' because of societal pressure against the racism they'd actually prefer to perpetuate?

Since that societal pressure has evidently not been strong enough to overcome all or even most systemically racist structures, then in the event that we adopt the second interpretation, we must also admit that the Seuss estate evidently lacks the courage of its convictions, to have folded to that pressure so quickly!

-I said we shouldn't interpret any companies behavior charitably, talking about us, not about the companies.

-Yeah, Seuss stops some profitable lines to evade the sword of Damacles emanating from the woke crowd. It's the best Seuss can do under the circumstances.

This last is completely devoid of motive other than wanting to make money. Publicized motives are mere window dressing.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 15, 2021, 10:41:57 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 15, 2021, 09:31:46 AM
Two of the six discontinued Seuss titles was among the top 20 Amazon sellers. Thus, the company is throwing away money. People don't throw away money voluntarily.

Here's a link to Amazon's top selling Children's books. I'm not seeing what you are seeing. I don't think the estate is giving up much of anything in the way of profits.

https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Books-Childrens/zgbs/books/4/ref=zg_bs_nav_b_1_b
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 15, 2021, 10:42:31 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 15, 2021, 10:15:13 AM
Sorry if this has already been cited (from Cheatseat):

The Dr. Seuss books that have been pulled were not very popular. Last year, Green Eggs and Ham sold 338,000 copies, while Oh, the Places You'll Go! sold 513,000 copies, the New York Times reported. In comparison, And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street sold 5,000 copies, while lesser-known titles like McElligot's Pool and The Cat's Quizzer "haven't sold in years" through retailers BookScan tracks.

Very surprised to hear that To Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street was selling that poorly.  Relatively speaking--5,000 copies a year is not bad for a back-list title that's over 80 years old.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 15, 2021, 10:45:58 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 15, 2021, 10:41:57 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 15, 2021, 09:31:46 AM
Two of the six discontinued Seuss titles was among the top 20 Amazon sellers. Thus, the company is throwing away money. People don't throw away money voluntarily.

Here's a link to Amazon's top selling Children's books. I'm not seeing what you are seeing. I don't think the estate is giving up much of anything in the way of profits.

https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Books-Childrens/zgbs/books/4/ref=zg_bs_nav_b_1_b

Can't refind my source. It was an article. But if you are right, the story is even simpler:

By not publishing the books, Seuss gives up nothing. Free virtue signalling!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on March 15, 2021, 10:47:45 AM
Well, it is a good way of pointing out that there is no objectionable content in the books they continue to sell.

I loved the Little House series as well as Dr. Seuss, and those were my go-to when buying books for children, whether they be holiday or birthday presents, donations to gift drives, whatever. I was horrified to learn that there was objectively racist content in these... I didn't remember those aspects, but it bothers me that some child saw themselves reflected poorly because of my own cluelessness. I had meant well in wanting to share positive memories and stories, and, well, missed the boat.

So it's a good way of giving a "Seal of Approval" as it were, that those of us who aren't in the habit of rereading every children's book we fondly remember, that these are still good books to give to a variety of today's children who live in a multicultural world.



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 15, 2021, 10:47:58 AM
Quote from: apl68 on March 15, 2021, 10:42:31 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 15, 2021, 10:15:13 AM
Sorry if this has already been cited (from Cheatseat):

The Dr. Seuss books that have been pulled were not very popular. Last year, Green Eggs and Ham sold 338,000 copies, while Oh, the Places You'll Go! sold 513,000 copies, the New York Times reported. In comparison, And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street sold 5,000 copies, while lesser-known titles like McElligot's Pool and The Cat's Quizzer "haven't sold in years" through retailers BookScan tracks.

Very surprised to hear that To Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street was selling that poorly.  Relatively speaking--5,000 copies a year is not bad for a back-list title that's over 80 years old.

But it may make sense as a "strategic withdrawal". Preemptively discontinuing it may have been worth it if they feared an eventual boycott of the entire Seuss canon. Sacrificing a single* goat on the altar of wokeness may have avoided eternal damnation of the entire flock. Not to mention licensing deals, etc.


(*or a half dozen relatively small ones)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 11:38:12 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 07:50:39 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 07:31:59 AM
Its rather telling that rather than trying to defend those ideas or beliefs, all we get is a lot of whining about how terrible it is that someone could face social or professional consequences for saying things that others find repugnant.

I love your post, but...well...we have seen a rash of people whose careers actually are threatened by saying things like "all lives matter," which many find rightly offensive, I think, but is a topical political opinion nevertheless. 

We can't pretend there is not a PC mania out there that is ALSO dangerous.

I honestly see limited evidence that there is much of this happening. Mostly what you see is just being people being criticized. JK Rowling isn't in jail, nor is she ruined. Some people just don't like her anymore. For the most, the only examples you can find of people really having their careers destroyed is when they did something far beyond the pale. I thought it was telling that Andrew Cuomo tried to claim he was a victim of cancel culture. He's being accused of harassing and assaulting women.

There's also nothing that new about the idea that your employer might not appreciate being linked to ideas they don't like or they think other people won't like. Even so, it isn't like you just see lots of people getting fired from their middle management job because they tweeted "all lives mattered."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 15, 2021, 12:08:40 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 11:38:12 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 07:50:39 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 07:31:59 AM
Its rather telling that rather than trying to defend those ideas or beliefs, all we get is a lot of whining about how terrible it is that someone could face social or professional consequences for saying things that others find repugnant.

I love your post, but...well...we have seen a rash of people whose careers actually are threatened by saying things like "all lives matter," which many find rightly offensive, I think, but is a topical political opinion nevertheless. 

We can't pretend there is not a PC mania out there that is ALSO dangerous.

I honestly see limited evidence that there is much of this happening. Mostly what you see is just being people being criticized. JK Rowling isn't in jail, nor is she ruined. Some people just don't like her anymore. For the most, the only examples you can find of people really having their careers destroyed is when they did something far beyond the pale. I thought it was telling that Andrew Cuomo tried to claim he was a victim of cancel culture. He's being accused of harassing and assaulting women.

There's also nothing that new about the idea that your employer might not appreciate being linked to ideas they don't like or they think other people won't like. Even so, it isn't like you just see lots of people getting fired from their middle management job because they tweeted "all lives mattered."

Not much of anyone dares to. But for you and any other readers who seem to have been living a fallout shelter for the last ten years, off the top of my head, here's
https://meaww.com/sandra-sellers-georgetown-law-professor-racist-comments-black-students-plain-bottom
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 01:04:37 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 11:38:12 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 07:50:39 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 07:31:59 AM
Its rather telling that rather than trying to defend those ideas or beliefs, all we get is a lot of whining about how terrible it is that someone could face social or professional consequences for saying things that others find repugnant.

I love your post, but...well...we have seen a rash of people whose careers actually are threatened by saying things like "all lives matter," which many find rightly offensive, I think, but is a topical political opinion nevertheless. 

We can't pretend there is not a PC mania out there that is ALSO dangerous.

I honestly see limited evidence that there is much of this happening. Mostly what you see is just being people being criticized. JK Rowling isn't in jail, nor is she ruined. Some people just don't like her anymore. For the most, the only examples you can find of people really having their careers destroyed is when they did something far beyond the pale. I thought it was telling that Andrew Cuomo tried to claim he was a victim of cancel culture. He's being accused of harassing and assaulting women.

There's also nothing that new about the idea that your employer might not appreciate being linked to ideas they don't like or they think other people won't like. Even so, it isn't like you just see lots of people getting fired from their middle management job because they tweeted "all lives mattered."

Well, I was thinking of this which was the subject of another thread some time ago:

Principal fired for post about BLM (https://apnews.com/article/race-and-ethnicity-vermont-media-social-media-school-boards-ddb8251472b5a7bf0817faaa32010614)

Or this which was just in the news:

Professor fired for saying her worst students were black (https://www.indy100.com/news/georgetown-university-professor-fired-black-racism-b1817024)

Or this which seems perfectly preposterous to me:

Professor suspended for saying Chinese word sounds like English slur (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/09/08/professor-suspended-saying-chinese-word-sounds-english-slur)

Or this one also recently in the news:

Professor fired for racist and homophobic tweets (https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/professor-michigan-fired-racist-homophobic-tweets-76167590)

Or this one from this last summer:

Petition demands firing of NC professor for 'racist' tweets on George Floyd protesters (https://www.newsobserver.com/news/state/north-carolina/article243305001.html)

Which is (maybe) not the same as the UPS worker who want on what he thought was essentially a soliloquy, (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/ups-worker-seen-racist-rant-footage-while-delivering-latino-household-n1252858) not realizing that he was being recorded by a doorbell camera.

And is (maybe) not the same thing as this poor slob  Consultant fired after making racist comment during Vermont Senate Transportation Committee video call (https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/05/us/consultant-fired-after-racist-comment/index.html) because he said something during a break in the Zoom conference.

Or even this bombshell dumbazz (https://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/06/10/sports-reporter-fired-for-racist-remarks) who clearly has problems, but still....

And all I did was put "fired for racist" into Google.  These are only on the first couple of pages.  So with due respect, I disagree.

I totally understand that corporations do not want to be associated with people who say these sorts of things----it tarnishes their images and maybe hurts business...but we should also be aware that we are policing people's ideas, even if their ideas are really problematic and reprehensible.   
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 02:04:59 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 01:04:37 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 11:38:12 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 07:50:39 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 07:31:59 AM
Its rather telling that rather than trying to defend those ideas or beliefs, all we get is a lot of whining about how terrible it is that someone could face social or professional consequences for saying things that others find repugnant.

I love your post, but...well...we have seen a rash of people whose careers actually are threatened by saying things like "all lives matter," which many find rightly offensive, I think, but is a topical political opinion nevertheless. 

We can't pretend there is not a PC mania out there that is ALSO dangerous.

I honestly see limited evidence that there is much of this happening. Mostly what you see is just being people being criticized. JK Rowling isn't in jail, nor is she ruined. Some people just don't like her anymore. For the most, the only examples you can find of people really having their careers destroyed is when they did something far beyond the pale. I thought it was telling that Andrew Cuomo tried to claim he was a victim of cancel culture. He's being accused of harassing and assaulting women.

There's also nothing that new about the idea that your employer might not appreciate being linked to ideas they don't like or they think other people won't like. Even so, it isn't like you just see lots of people getting fired from their middle management job because they tweeted "all lives mattered."

Well, I was thinking of this which was the subject of another thread some time ago:

Principal fired for post about BLM (https://apnews.com/article/race-and-ethnicity-vermont-media-social-media-school-boards-ddb8251472b5a7bf0817faaa32010614)

Or this which was just in the news:

Professor fired for saying her worst students were black (https://www.indy100.com/news/georgetown-university-professor-fired-black-racism-b1817024)

Or this which seems perfectly preposterous to me:

Professor suspended for saying Chinese word sounds like English slur (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/09/08/professor-suspended-saying-chinese-word-sounds-english-slur)

Or this one also recently in the news:

Professor fired for racist and homophobic tweets (https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/professor-michigan-fired-racist-homophobic-tweets-76167590)

Or this one from this last summer:

Petition demands firing of NC professor for 'racist' tweets on George Floyd protesters (https://www.newsobserver.com/news/state/north-carolina/article243305001.html)

Which is (maybe) not the same as the UPS worker who want on what he thought was essentially a soliloquy, (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/ups-worker-seen-racist-rant-footage-while-delivering-latino-household-n1252858) not realizing that he was being recorded by a doorbell camera.

And is (maybe) not the same thing as this poor slob  Consultant fired after making racist comment during Vermont Senate Transportation Committee video call (https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/05/us/consultant-fired-after-racist-comment/index.html) because he said something during a break in the Zoom conference.

Or even this bombshell dumbazz (https://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/06/10/sports-reporter-fired-for-racist-remarks) who clearly has problems, but still....

And all I did was put "fired for racist" into Google.  These are only on the first couple of pages.  So with due respect, I disagree.

I totally understand that corporations do not want to be associated with people who say these sorts of things----it tarnishes their images and maybe hurts business...but we should also be aware that we are policing people's ideas, even if their ideas are really problematic and reprehensible.

I think you're making my point for me. Look at those examples.

The Michigan professor tweeted that Covid was a jewish conspiracy, talked about a "jewish mafia" and called various people the N word on twitter Its actually worse than that though. Apparently, he frequently spent his classes railing about how cell phones were some sort of evil conspiracy. The only mitigating factor is it seems quite likely he has untreated mental illness. He wouldn't even meet with the dean, however. Of course they fired him. Do you think that guy should be teaching?

The UNCW guy wasn't fired, he actually retired and got a 500,000 payment from the university to go away, before committing suicide. He was a pretty unpleasant character who clearly enjoyed going right up to the line.

The contractor used a racist slur while he was on mic on a Zoom call with the legislature for his job. I don't really know what the backstory is there, but that's the sort of thing that is just going to get you fired and there's nothing new or concerning about that. Ditto for the UPS worker. Most companies don't really want their employers insulting their customers.

The sports reporter is a media personality. She gave an interview where she said a bunch of dumb stuff. Seems like a pretty easy call. Presumably, she got fired because there are plenty of Chinese, Jewish and Mexican people who watch basketball and baseball games in Florida. I can't imagine what the important principle is supposed to be here.

Some of the other things are a little less clear cut. The thing with the principal seems like an overreaction to me. The business professor thing was a bit more complicated, and he seemed clueless, but it also seemed like a misunderstanding and then a panicked overreaction by the administration. I think he was actually reinstated. The Georgetown professor thing is a little complicated.

Basically, though, you have a bunch of people who were fired for very good reasons because companies don't want to be identified with bigots. A few might have been an overreaction. None of it amounts to some massive restriction on free speech and expression.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 02:29:43 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 02:04:59 PM

I think you're making my point for me. Look at those examples.


No.  I made my point. 

I know exactly what those examples are.  These people are entirely reprehensible, I agree.  But they were fired or forced out because they said the wrong things, no matter how truly awful they were.

That should send a chill.

Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 02:04:59 PM
Basically, though, you have a bunch of people who were fired for very good reasons because companies don't want to be identified with bigots. A few might have been an overreaction. None of it amounts to some massive restriction on free speech and expression.

I disagree.  "overreaction" is a problem.  And "massive restriction on free speech" is subjective.  Again, I don't feel the least bit sorry for these people, but we are on a slippery slope.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: financeguy on March 15, 2021, 02:38:27 PM
These are problematic, but what's chilling to me is that it doesn't matter if a statement is true or not, only if it is "offensive" to someone. The Georgetown example sums that up for me. She didn't draw the line to the "mismatch theory" with affirmative action policies in place, she just observed the outcome of it, which is those students not admitted primarily based on merit are....wait for it.... not at the top of the class. Shocking. But still "offensive." What she said is way less direct that what Amy Wax has said at Penn law, but she is tenured so they just removed her from teaching any required classes. She will thus only teach in her specialty.  She has made numerous comments about the race/iq debate and its effect on admissions, including some that got national headlines on Glen Loury's podcast. You might agree or disagree with the Charles Murray side of the argument on this issue that she supports, but most people who do don't care if the points are factually correct or even know what they are. You can bet any amount of money that if Wax were a 20 year adjunct like the Georgetown faculty member she'd have been out the door before the first tweet were typed.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 04:10:36 PM
Many of these are horrible people...but we cannot pretend there is not a lot of this going around.

Donald Trump did not come from a void.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/nyregion/nypd-james-kobel-racist-fired.html

https://www.themuse.com/advice/yes-you-can-get-fired-for-your-social-media-posts-9-times-people-learned-this-lesson-the-hard-way

https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/06/19/racism-celebrities-fired-for-their-racist-comments/3208619001/

https://www.nbcmiami.com/responds/man-gets-fired-after-private-chat-about-race-goes-public/2280929/

https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Albany-officer-fired-for-racist-comments-15868423.php

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/04/us/nypd-official-racist-posts-fired/index.html

https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2021/01/15/professor-fired-classroom-conduct-following-racist-posts

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/arizona-man-arrested-fired-job-after-racist-rant-caught-camera-n1244978

https://news.wttw.com/2021/01/19/city-worker-fired-after-making-racist-violent-facebook-comments-during-protests-watchdog

https://www.scarymommy.com/gina-carano-fired-mandalorian-racist-posts/

https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/seattle-police-officer-fired-for-racist-slur/281-e63a4d3f-e05a-4d91-b942-2f2e257db926

https://www.inman.com/2021/02/17/california-agent-fired-after-racist-verbal-attack-on-asian-woman/

https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2020/12/23/brooklyn-criminal-court-officer-is-fired-over-vile-racist-facebook-post/?slreturn=20210215190351

https://fortune.com/2020/06/04/racist-violent-social-media-firings-grant-napear-craig-gore/

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/football-coach-fired-stacey-abrams_n_5ff73b79c5b6c0ae2e73435b

https://kutv.com/news/local/woman-fired-over-pictures-she-calls-anti-racist-but-her-employer-says-promote-violence

https://kmph.com/news/local/customer-goes-on-racist-rant-after-bar-cuts-him-off

https://www.newsweek.com/man-fired-racist-rant-slavery-lynchings-black-people-1514043

https://local12.com/news/nation-world/woman-fired-after-viral-video-shows-her-screaming-racist-and-homophobic-slurs-at-rally-07-07-2020

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/three-north-carolina-police-officers-fired-racial-slurs-video/

https://www.albanyherald.com/news/tifton-nurse-practitioner-fired-for-racist-facebook-post/article_2bf1a870-b8a2-11ea-970c-fb8001dbc58b.html

https://www.goerie.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/18/pennsylvania-police-officer-fired-racist-email-erie/3219586001/

Etc...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Puget on March 15, 2021, 04:39:36 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 02:29:43 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 02:04:59 PM

I think you're making my point for me. Look at those examples.


No.  I made my point. 

I know exactly what those examples are.  These people are entirely reprehensible, I agree.  But they were fired or forced out because they said the wrong things, no matter how truly awful they were.

That should send a chill.

Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 02:04:59 PM
Basically, though, you have a bunch of people who were fired for very good reasons because companies don't want to be identified with bigots. A few might have been an overreaction. None of it amounts to some massive restriction on free speech and expression.

I disagree.  "overreaction" is a problem.  And "massive restriction on free speech" is subjective.  Again, I don't feel the least bit sorry for these people, but we are on a slippery slope.
The first amendment protects the right of free speech vis-a-vis the government-- it doesn't protect you from the consequences of your speech vis-a-vis other private citizens or entities.

People never have had free speech at work. If you say something at work your employer doesn't like there are consequences, and always have been.  Things get tricky if people are getting fired for things they say outside of work, but many of these incidents happened at work, where you absolutely always have and can be fired for saying something reprehensible, or just displeasing to your customers/clients/bosses.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 15, 2021, 05:00:42 PM
QuoteThe first amendment protects the right of free speech vis-a-vis the government-- it doesn't protect you from the consequences of your speech vis-a-vis other private citizens or entities.

People never have had free speech at work. If you say something at work your employer doesn't like there are consequences, and always have been.  Things get tricky if people are getting fired for things they say outside of work, but many of these incidents happened at work, where you absolutely always have and can be fired for saying something reprehensible, or just displeasing to your customers/clients/bosses.

The tenured are the bosses. That's why your view is as accepted in academe as anywhere else. At least among those who were invited to participate in the poll.

Who stuck up for Professor Sandra Sellers' right to due process? (crickets)

https://abcnews.go.com/US/georgetown-law-professor-terminated-remarks-black-students/story?id=76413267
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 05:12:43 PM
I could get fired for calling my dean a "crap-weasel" or saying all sorts of things having nothing to do with race, gender, orientation, social class or whatever. 

Yes, we know that about saying the wrong thing at work.  It's always been that way.

But we have a phenomenon above.  Part of my response is to the notion that there is not a lot of this going on----which is simply untrue.   

And a number of those are things that happen when people are not a work, which is very problematic.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 05:17:16 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 02:29:43 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 02:04:59 PM

I think you're making my point for me. Look at those examples.


No.  I made my point. 

I know exactly what those examples are.  These people are entirely reprehensible, I agree.  But they were fired or forced out because they said the wrong things, no matter how truly awful they were.

That should send a chill.

Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 02:04:59 PM
Basically, though, you have a bunch of people who were fired for very good reasons because companies don't want to be identified with bigots. A few might have been an overreaction. None of it amounts to some massive restriction on free speech and expression.

I disagree.  "overreaction" is a problem.  And "massive restriction on free speech" is subjective.  Again, I don't feel the least bit sorry for these people, but we are on a slippery slope.

Slippery slope to what? In a lot of these cases, the speech goes directly to ability to perform the job. Police officers who write racist social media posts should be fired. Is that even in question? These are people who carry guns and are empowered by the state use lethal force if necessary .  It seems pretty alarming if they are posting on social media about their hatred for blacks and jews, no?

In the case of the catering company employee who was screaming racial slurs at a woman in a car and making references to lynching, I would assume that any sensible employer isn't going to want that guy anywhere near their workplace. When there's a lawsuit about a hostile work environment, would you want to be the person who said, "oh, well, I saw that video where he screamed at that that women that she should be a slave, but I figured he wouldn't bring his personal beliefs to the job."

Academic freedom issues are a bit trickier. It is pretty clear that posting that phones are mind control devices and cause COVID are protected by academic freedom. If you bring that stuff up in your classes, that's a different issue. At some point it also becomes a concern about your ability to do your job. Is the Jewish kid in this guy's class going to feel comfortable telling him he won't be in class on Yom Kippur? However, none of this applies to any of these other things.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 15, 2021, 05:21:33 PM
Quote
Slippery slope to what?

To flagrantly dishonest types like you running things.





Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 05:30:44 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on March 15, 2021, 05:21:33 PM
Quote
Slippery slope to what?

To flagrantly dishonest types like you running things.

I think you're safe from that. Can we go easy on the invective?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 05:46:49 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 05:17:16 PM
Slippery slope to what?

I thought it was apparent, but maybe not.

I happily concede your points about employers which I have already alluded to several times---so no need to dredge it up again.  I also happily concede that these are terrible people with real problems----so no need to dredge that up again.

My issue is that we have entered a period of time in which people are being punished for speech and expressed beliefs.

I would think that the problem with this is fairly obvious.

I should say that this is not a black or white issue (no play on words) and I don't know what a happy medium is.

The slope should also be fairly obvious: where does it end?  Some of these people lost their jobs for off-the-job comments; some for poorly thought-out asides; some for simply expressing an opinion; some for misspeaks or mistakes; some for poorly worded phrases; some for exercising free-speech; some for private social media posts made public; some for losing their tempers; and, sure, some for being truly nasty human beings with execrable beliefs.

This strikes me both as problematic and part and parcel of the phenomenon we are seeing that produced voters who think Donald Trump is a great guy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 15, 2021, 06:00:06 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 05:30:44 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on March 15, 2021, 05:21:33 PM
Quote
Slippery slope to what?

To flagrantly dishonest types like you running things.

I think you're safe from that. Can we go easy on the invective?

Do I actually have to explain? Read the thread again. You claimed that there is not a widespread phenomenon  of people being fired for saying things that someone states makes him or her feel uncomfortable. After a mountain of examples was provided to show that you are wrong, you don't have the sense to desist. Now your tack is 'yeah, but....even though I lied and it is in fact happening, it doesn't matter because of something else.' I hope you get fired by someone who ' might be overreacting' to something you said in a private conversation or when you're socializing away from the workplace.
We are not safe from dishonest people having wide influence. That's what the mania and denial of it are. And what the conversation is about out there in the world apart from your bubble.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 06:15:46 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on March 15, 2021, 06:00:06 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 05:30:44 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on March 15, 2021, 05:21:33 PM
Quote
Slippery slope to what?

To flagrantly dishonest types like you running things.

I think you're safe from that. Can we go easy on the invective?

Do I actually have to explain? Read the thread again. You claimed that there is not a widespread phenomenon  of people being fired for saying things that someone states makes him or her feel uncomfortable. After a mountain of examples was provided to show that you are wrong, you don't have the sense to desist. Now your tack is 'yeah, but....even though I lied and it is in fact happening, it doesn't matter because of something else.'

Believe it or not, I don't think that a bunch of random news stories turned up using google constitute compelling evidence of some widespread trend. Bear with me here, but it might reflect the things journalists and editors are interested in and what they think other people are interested in. Crazy idea, I know.

It's funny, the people on these boards who go in for the personal attacks and overheated rhetoric on here (I don't mean Wahoo, who I often disagree with but is perfectly pleasant) seem to really lose it not when people disagree with them, but when they are faced with some mild skepticism.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 06:30:17 PM
No need to wreck the train, folks.

Yes, this is a trend, Caracal, as evidenced by a very simple search on Google, and evidenced by the public interest in the story----if editors are pushing these stories it means people are excited the subject matter.  And read this thread.

Look, there is no simple answer here.  I don't want to work with any of the people I linked to, and (as I've said) I don't feel a bit sorry for them.

But come on, you have to admit there is something pretty alarming about corporate and governmental entities policing what we say and about our willingness to pillory people we disagree with, no matter how terrible their beliefs.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 07:10:04 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 06:30:17 PM
No need to wreck the train, folks.

Yes, this is a trend, Caracal, as evidenced by a very simple search on Google, and evidenced by the public interest in the story----if editors are pushing these stories it means people are excited the subject matter.  And read this thread.

Look, there is no simple answer here.  I don't want to work with any of the people I linked to, and (as I've said) I don't feel a bit sorry for them.

But come on, you have to admit there is something pretty alarming about corporate and governmental entities policing what we say and about our willingness to pillory people we disagree with, no matter how terrible their beliefs.
'
Remember the black church burnings in the late 90s? It was a whole thing, every time another church burned it was added to the list and drove the story. The problem was that churches burn down a lot. They are empty, nobody lives in them. That causes more of them to burn accidentally, and it also makes them a convenient target for arsonists of various sorts. It turned out there was no epidemic of church burnings. It was just that these were stories getting a lot of press.

So I dunno. Are more people getting fired now for speech? Maybe in some areas? Is it really some thing that has become particularly common? I'm pretty skeptical and I don't think news stories are a good metric for measuring it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 07:12:05 PM
Actually no, I don't remember the church burnings.

I'd say this is considerably more pronounced than that.

What would be a good metric in this context?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 07:34:43 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 07:12:05 PM
Actually no, I don't remember the church burnings.

I'd say this is considerably more pronounced than that.

What would be a good metric in this context?

I don't know, out of my expertise. Probably something for the social scientists. I'm a historian and I tend to think you don't want to assume that just because there's more reporting on something means it is happening more. It's like crime. Sometimes media focus on crime has been partly driven by actual increasing crime rates. However, at other times there has been lots of focus on the supposed increasing danger from crime even when it isn't actually rising. Sometimes that's because crime becomes linked to other fears and anxieties. It can also be linked to media dynamics. Often it is both.

Regardless, I also just think too many things get scrunched together in these discussions. Police officers being fired for racist statements seems like a very different issue than food service workers.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 07:50:30 PM
See, I would say that police officers being fired for saying the wrong thing and food service workers getting fired for saying the wrong thing are different in degree but not in kind. 

They are both part of a dangerous trend in our culture to overtly punish people for thinking the "wrong" thing.  Very undemocratic.

I could get fired from some of the things posted on the anonymous message board, so could Mahagony.

You would be pilloried by, say, a Tucker Carlson for your views. 

This, I would suggest, is bound up with our need to censor something like Dr. Seuss, even if I understand and even agree with the reasons I would not want my hypothetical kids to read some of the thinks Giles may have written.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 08:05:06 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 07:50:30 PM
See, I would say that police officers being fired for saying the wrong thing and food service workers getting fired for saying the wrong thing are different in degree but not in kind. 

They are both part of a dangerous trend in our culture to overtly punish people for thinking the "wrong" thing.  Very undemocratic.

I could get fired from some of the things posted on the anonymous message board, so could Mahagony.

You would be pilloried by, say, a Tucker Carlson for your views. 

This, I would suggest, is bound up with our need to censor something like Dr. Seuss, even if I understand and even agree with the reasons I would not want my hypothetical kids to read some of the thinks Giles may have written.

None of these police officers got fired because they didn't agree with the BLM movement. These were people writing overtly anti-semitic and racist statements on social media. Do you really think that those are people who should be empowered by the state to enforce laws, with violence and force if necessary? It's only possible to think this is just about speech rights if you don't imagine yourself as being the potential target of a racist or anti semitic police officer.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on March 15, 2021, 08:32:54 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 08:05:06 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 07:50:30 PM
See, I would say that police officers being fired for saying the wrong thing and food service workers getting fired for saying the wrong thing are different in degree but not in kind. 

They are both part of a dangerous trend in our culture to overtly punish people for thinking the "wrong" thing.  Very undemocratic.

I could get fired from some of the things posted on the anonymous message board, so could Mahagony.

You would be pilloried by, say, a Tucker Carlson for your views. 

This, I would suggest, is bound up with our need to censor something like Dr. Seuss, even if I understand and even agree with the reasons I would not want my hypothetical kids to read some of the thinks Giles may have written.

None of these police officers got fired because they didn't agree with the BLM movement. These were people writing overtly anti-semitic and racist statements on social media. Do you really think that those are people who should be empowered by the state to enforce laws, with violence and force if necessary? It's only possible to think this is just about speech rights if you don't imagine yourself as being the potential target of a racist or anti semitic police officer.

Conversely, at least one (https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/505592-massachusetts-detective-fired-after-post-supporting-black-lives-matter) cop has been fired for social media posts supportive of BLM.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 08:43:11 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 08:05:06 PM
Do you really think that those are people who should be empowered by the state to enforce laws, with violence and force if necessary? It's only possible to think this is just about speech rights if you don't imagine yourself as being the potential target of a racist or anti semitic police officer.

Do you really want the state to dictate what you and I can or cannot say?  It's only possible to think this if you don't imagine yourself as being the potential target of a censorious government or culture.

I understand and I acknowledge your reasoning, Caracal, but you clearly believe you know what people should be allowed to say and why.  Very, very dangerous.

Their rights to be @zz holes guarantees our rights to be @zz holes.  Don't think it is a sword with only one sharp side.  From Parasaurolophus' link:

Quote
A Massachusetts detective has been fired over a social media post last month expressing support of her niece attending a Black Lives Matter rally.

According to a report from MassLive.com, Florissa Fuentes, who had recently joined the Springfield Police Department's Special Victims Unit, was fired on June 19 after a May post she made while not on duty.

"After I posted it, I started getting calls and texts from co-workers," Florissa Fuentes told MassLive.com.


Fuentes says she removed the Instagram post on June 1 and that she received a call from the head of the Detective Bureau, who said the police commissioner was upset with her.

"I was initially confused, but then I realized they thought I was being anti-cop. I wasn't," Fuentes told the news outlet. "I was just supporting my niece's activism. I had no malicious intent, and I wouldn't put a target on my own back. I'm out there on the streets every day like everyone else."

The photo that Fuentes shared was reportedly from protests that happened after the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis on Memorial Day.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on March 15, 2021, 08:49:18 PM
To be clear, I'm with Caracal here. It's just that to the extent the problem does exist--and I think it's fairly limited--the media narrative has the wrong end of the goat here.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 15, 2021, 09:35:47 PM
Since it has been, oh, well about 45 years since I have read/ looked at a Seuss book, I am wondering if anyone has any links to the images that have been denounced as racist, and caused the Seuss estate to withdraw publication?

That said, however racist or offensive these images may be/ have been, there is something that is crossing my mind-- in the fulness of time, likely very much sooner rather than later, these titles will enter the public domain, and the Seuss estate's actions more or less guarantee that someone will reprint them.   And that someone will not likely be someone we like.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 05:43:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 08:43:11 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 15, 2021, 08:05:06 PM
Do you really think that those are people who should be empowered by the state to enforce laws, with violence and force if necessary? It's only possible to think this is just about speech rights if you don't imagine yourself as being the potential target of a racist or anti semitic police officer.

Do you really want the state to dictate what you and I can or cannot say?  It's only possible to think this if you don't imagine yourself as being the potential target of a censorious government or culture.

I understand and I acknowledge your reasoning, Caracal, but you clearly believe you know what people should be allowed to say and why.  Very, very dangerous.


Consider this scenario.

When I get class lists, I can view them with or without information about what program each student is in. For years, I have avoided looking at that information to avoid any potential unconscious bias on my part; for instance, favouring students in the major over others. Suppose that after a course is over, and grades have been submitted, I decide to view that information and it turns out that all of the students in the Spoonbending program wound up in the bottom 20% of my class. I pass this information on to the chair, and possibly our academic advisor, and possibly even the chair of the Spoonbending department so that we can figure out if there's something going on that we can improve. If this information gets out into the wild, Spoonbending students see it, and get it written up in the student newspaper about the discrimination against Spoonbending students in my Basketweaving course. They call for my apology, or preferably firing. ("Because I said Spoonbending students were stupid".)

Should I be required to apologize? Should I be fired? (If so, what was my offense?) What if Spoonbending takes in a higher percentage of some identifiable group than Basketweaving?

In our current climate, increasingly people are being fired because someone felt hurt; not because of what the people actually did.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 16, 2021, 06:57:18 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 05:43:17 AM

Consider this scenario.

When I get class lists, I can view them with or without information about what program each student is in. For years, I have avoided looking at that information to avoid any potential unconscious bias on my part; for instance, favouring students in the major over others. Suppose that after a course is over, and grades have been submitted, I decide to view that information and it turns out that all of the students in the Spoonbending program wound up in the bottom 20% of my class. I pass this information on to the chair, and possibly our academic advisor, and possibly even the chair of the Spoonbending department so that we can figure out if there's something going on that we can improve. If this information gets out into the wild, Spoonbending students see it, and get it written up in the student newspaper about the discrimination against Spoonbending students in my Basketweaving course. They call for my apology, or preferably firing. ("Because I said Spoonbending students were stupid".)

Should I be required to apologize? Should I be fired? (If so, what was my offense?) What if Spoonbending takes in a higher percentage of some identifiable group than Basketweaving?

In our current climate, increasingly people are being fired because someone felt hurt; not because of what the people actually did.

You've just given a clear example of what well-above-average scholar Writingprof observed: it is now considered bigoted to notice something going on in your midst if your speaking aloud about it is offensive (unpleasant) for someone to hear, relating to matters of race or people belonging to groups identified as marginalized. (Aside from other implications, are we going to create a world where nothing unpleasant may be experienced?)
A professor who has black students at the bottom of the class, regularly, has a problem she doesn't deserve, namely that eventually someone will notice and she'll be call racist just for doing her job. Whereas, since she's not racist, the situation drives her crazy, as she stated.* That's why the Georgetown Law school adjunct professor (adjunct) could have been defended by the tenured faculty and, instead of the stupid mess they have now, a situation could be brought to light and headed for resolution, or alternatively, understood as not great, but acceptable. And even though she apologized, they let her twist in the wind.
Why I'm not a fan of tenure; they neglect bad situations and mistreatment of  individuals that tenure is purported to protect the institution from.

QuoteI could get fired from some of the things posted on the anonymous message board, so could Mahagony.

Thanks for the compliment! If you can't step outside groupthink there doesn't need to be a forum. Probably why writing prof left though...sad.

*she doesn't give grades; she merely records the results of the students' activity (or lack thereof)

Anyway, I still say, follow the money. Academics are in the oppression analyzing business. The more oppression there is in our culture, the higher their stock price. Why I don't expect much from this discussion, frankly.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 08:31:13 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on March 15, 2021, 08:49:18 PM
To be clear, I'm with Caracal here. It's just that to the extent the problem does exist--and I think it's fairly limited--the media narrative has the wrong end of the goat here.

We always blame the media which is, yes, sensationalistic but reports on what is happening in the world.  Legitimate sources fact-check, so even if editors have the impulse to follow a certain lead, facts are facts.

There are a number of Op-eds about this subject----which is a whole different can of worms.

I don't think you can really say that this conundrum is merely a "media narrative."  The proof is only a Google search away, and, yes, I would argue that Google searches are a legitimate way to gage what is happening in the world.  And there is a lot on Google; I stopped cutting-n-pasting after the 4th page.

I looked in Ebscohost for hard numbers and did not find any immediately, and with a glut of grading and prep and writing to do, I don't think I will search very hard at the moment.  But I do find a number of academic articles about the subject, which further suggests the depth of the issue.  Perhaps someone who is more tuned to social science research can find something specific.

We all want to fight bigotry in all its forms, so we resist anything that is critical of the fight.

If we pretend this is not a dangerous zeitgeist, and this wave of firings is not a symptom, I will mention a real life scenario: Our department has a minority faculty whose tenure bid was extended because of COVID.  Everyone is very relieved because this good person simply has not done the necessary work to receive tenure.  I have been urging my wife to vote for tenure no matter what happens.  We do not need accusations of racism.  We do not need our names or department launched into cyberspace with pictures of screaming students outside our building.  I don't know that that is what would happen, but still...




Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 08:38:44 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 08:31:13 AM

If we pretend this is not a dangerous zeitgeist, and this wave of firings is not a symptom, I will mention a real life scenario: Our department has a minority faculty whose tenure bid was extended because of COVID.  Everyone is very relieved because this good person simply has not done the necessary work to receive tenure.  I have been urging my wife to vote for tenure no matter what happens.  We do not need accusations of racism.  We do not need our names or department launched into cyberspace with pictures of screaming students outside our building.  I don't know that that is what would happen, but still...

I recall hearing a potential juror for the Derek Chauvin case was worried about their family being at risk due to them serving on the jury. That's  the above scenario on steroids. When there is an outcome that can be seen before the deliberation even begins as being "unacceptable", then there's a serious problem.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ergative on March 16, 2021, 08:41:21 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 08:31:13 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on March 15, 2021, 08:49:18 PM
To be clear, I'm with Caracal here. It's just that to the extent the problem does exist--and I think it's fairly limited--the media narrative has the wrong end of the goat here.

We always blame the media which is, yes, sensationalistic but reports on what is happening in the world.  Legitimate sources fact-check, so even if editors have the impulse to follow a certain lead, facts are facts.

There are a number of Op-eds about this subject----which is a whole different can of worms.

I don't think you can really say that this conundrum is merely a "media narrative."  The proof is only a Google search away, and, yes, I would argue that Google searches are a legitimate way to gage what is happening in the world.  And there is a lot on Google; I stopped cutting-n-pasting after the 4th page.

I looked in Ebscohost for hard numbers and did not find any immediately, and with a glut of grading and prep and writing to do, I don't think I will search very hard at the moment.  But I do find a number of academic articles about the subject, which further suggests the depth of the issue.  Perhaps someone who is more tuned to social science research can find something specific.

We all want to fight bigotry in all its forms, so we resist anything that is critical of the fight.

If we pretend this is not a dangerous zeitgeist, and this wave of firings is not a symptom, I will mention a real life scenario: Our department has a minority faculty whose tenure bid was extended because of COVID.  Everyone is very relieved because this good person simply has not done the necessary work to receive tenure.  I have been urging my wife to vote for tenure no matter what happens.  We do not need accusations of racism.  We do not need our names or department launched into cyberspace with pictures of screaming students outside our building.  I don't know that that is what would happen, but still...

If we accept that this is a dangerous zeitgeist, then we must also admit that it is no different a zeitgeist from previous zeitgeists, in which people could be fired for getting married, for getting pregnant, for being gay, for supporting gay people, for accepting a boss's advances, for rejecting a boss's advances, for having AIDs, for attending union meetings, for expressing support of union meetings, for being a communisst, for being accused of being a communist, for refusing to vow not to be a communist, [on edit] for serving on juries in which black people were accused of crimes  . .  .

I will grant that firing people for transgressing arbitrary societal norms in ways that don't hurt people is bad. But I will never grant that firing people for transgressing left-leaning societal norms is new and unique and worse than all the previous times when the same thing happened w/r/t right-leaning societal norms.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: eigen on March 16, 2021, 08:44:44 AM
I just wanted to toss in here that I think it's amazingly ironic that the same people I grew up with who hosted book burnings of the Harry Potter books and boycotted the local library to have them banned when I was growing up are now the people decrying "cancel culture" attacking J.K. Rowling.

There's a current hysteria and hype surrounding "cancel culture", but I honestly can't see that it's any different than any other period in our society: it's just focusing on different things now.

Similarly, the same people who are currently upset about firings with causes they disagree with are the same people who have for years supported the idea that companies don't "owe" anyone a job and should be able to fire an employee for any reason. Again, the reality hasn't changed: what's changed is who is experiencing different parts of that reality.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 08:47:04 AM
Agreed, there was a different zeitgeist before this one which, I think, was much worst than the current one which is trying hard to dismantle the worst leftovers from the previous zeitgeist and in typical human fashion (perhaps) taking it too far.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ergative on March 16, 2021, 08:48:02 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 08:44:44 AM
I just wanted to toss in here that I think it's amazingly ironic that the same people I grew up with who hosted book burnings of the Harry Potter books and boycotted the local library to have them banned when I was growing up are now the people decrying "cancel culture" attacking J.K. Rowling.

There's a current hysteria and hype surrounding "cancel culture", but I honestly can't see that it's any different than any other period in our society: it's just focusing on different things now.

Similarly, the same people who are currently upset about firings with causes they disagree with are the same people who have for years supported the idea that companies don't "owe" anyone a job and should be able to fire an employee for any reason. Again, the reality hasn't changed: what's changed is who is experiencing different parts of that reality.

Exactly.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 09:04:56 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 08:44:44 AM
I just wanted to toss in here that I think it's amazingly ironic that the same people I grew up with who hosted book burnings of the Harry Potter books and boycotted the local library to have them banned when I was growing up are now the people decrying "cancel culture" attacking J.K. Rowling.


This is the point; the two sides have switched places. Now the people who derided the people burning Harry Potter books want to prevent people buying them, seeing the movies, etc.

The point isn't that this is worse, just that the hypocrisy is on both sides of the political spectrum. And this is why freedom speech as a principle is important, because a given person will quite likely find themselves on different sides of the issue during their lifetime.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 16, 2021, 09:11:44 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 09:04:56 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 08:44:44 AM
I just wanted to toss in here that I think it's amazingly ironic that the same people I grew up with who hosted book burnings of the Harry Potter books and boycotted the local library to have them banned when I was growing up are now the people decrying "cancel culture" attacking J.K. Rowling.


This is the point; the two sides have switched places. Now the people who derided the people burning Harry Potter books want to prevent people buying them, seeing the movies, etc.

The point isn't that this is worse, just that the hypocrisy is on both sides of the political spectrum. And this is why freedom speech as a principle is important, because a given person will quite likely find themselves on different sides of the issue during their lifetime.

The thought process though is if one has tenure one is only on the winning side, always.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: eigen on March 16, 2021, 09:14:26 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on March 16, 2021, 09:11:44 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 09:04:56 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 08:44:44 AM
I just wanted to toss in here that I think it's amazingly ironic that the same people I grew up with who hosted book burnings of the Harry Potter books and boycotted the local library to have them banned when I was growing up are now the people decrying "cancel culture" attacking J.K. Rowling.


This is the point; the two sides have switched places. Now the people who derided the people burning Harry Potter books want to prevent people buying them, seeing the movies, etc.

The point isn't that this is worse, just that the hypocrisy is on both sides of the political spectrum. And this is why freedom speech as a principle is important, because a given person will quite likely find themselves on different sides of the issue during their lifetime.

The thought process though is if one has tenure one is only on the winning side, always.

It is really tiring that you beat this horse in every. single. thread. no matter whether it's related to the topic or not.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: eigen on March 16, 2021, 09:20:05 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 09:04:56 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 08:44:44 AM
I just wanted to toss in here that I think it's amazingly ironic that the same people I grew up with who hosted book burnings of the Harry Potter books and boycotted the local library to have them banned when I was growing up are now the people decrying "cancel culture" attacking J.K. Rowling.


This is the point; the two sides have switched places. Now the people who derided the people burning Harry Potter books want to prevent people buying them, seeing the movies, etc.

The point isn't that this is worse, just that the hypocrisy is on both sides of the political spectrum. And this is why freedom speech as a principle is important, because a given person will quite likely find themselves on different sides of the issue during their lifetime.

See, that's the thing. Freedom of speech goes both ways: burning the Harry Potter books and boycotting the library for having them is, in fact, free speech. Calling out the author because you disagree with them and want to highlight to others why you think they are wrong is, in fact, free speech. Organizing boycots of something is both free speech and free association.

"cancel culture" is the work of the free market (people applying pressure by voting with their wallets), the result of people using their right to free speech, the result of employers exercising a right to freedom of association, and the right of someone to not have forced speech.

The Seuss family estate deciding it no longer wants to publish books is a decision enshrined in their right to free speech. People who would force them to keep printing the books fall on the side of forced speech, which is not free speech.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 16, 2021, 09:42:25 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 09:14:26 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on March 16, 2021, 09:11:44 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 09:04:56 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 08:44:44 AM
I just wanted to toss in here that I think it's amazingly ironic that the same people I grew up with who hosted book burnings of the Harry Potter books and boycotted the local library to have them banned when I was growing up are now the people decrying "cancel culture" attacking J.K. Rowling.


This is the point; the two sides have switched places. Now the people who derided the people burning Harry Potter books want to prevent people buying them, seeing the movies, etc.

The point isn't that this is worse, just that the hypocrisy is on both sides of the political spectrum. And this is why freedom speech as a principle is important, because a given person will quite likely find themselves on different sides of the issue during their lifetime.

The thought process though is if one has tenure one is only on the winning side, always.

It is really tiring that you beat this horse in every. single. thread. no matter whether it's related to the topic or not.

Sincere question, eigen: What do you think was the reason Professor Sellers hated to say this?

'"And you know what, I hate to say this, I end up having this angst every semester that a lot of my lower ones are Blacks. Happens almost every semester," Sellers said. "And it's like, 'Oh, come on.' You get some really good ones, but there are also usually some that are just plain at the bottom. It drives me crazy."'

link, again, for those not yet up to speed: https://abcnews.go.com/US/georgetown-law-professor-terminated-remarks-black-students/story?id=76413267
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 09:44:30 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 09:20:05 AM
"cancel culture" is the work of the free market (people applying pressure by voting with their wallets), the result of people using their right to free speech

The Seuss family estate deciding it no longer wants to publish books is a decision enshrined in their right to free speech. People who would force them to keep printing the books fall on the side of forced speech, which is not free speech.

Which are different from corporate entities telling us what we can say by threatening our livelihoods.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: eigen on March 16, 2021, 09:48:39 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 09:44:30 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 09:20:05 AM
"cancel culture" is the work of the free market (people applying pressure by voting with their wallets), the result of people using their right to free speech

The Seuss family estate deciding it no longer wants to publish books is a decision enshrined in their right to free speech. People who would force them to keep printing the books fall on the side of forced speech, which is not free speech.

Which are different from corporate entities telling us what we can say by threatening our livelihoods.

I touched on the issue with corporate entities in my post, I'm not sure why you edited that part out and then brought it up?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: eigen on March 16, 2021, 09:56:22 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on March 16, 2021, 09:42:25 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 09:14:26 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on March 16, 2021, 09:11:44 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 09:04:56 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 08:44:44 AM
I just wanted to toss in here that I think it's amazingly ironic that the same people I grew up with who hosted book burnings of the Harry Potter books and boycotted the local library to have them banned when I was growing up are now the people decrying "cancel culture" attacking J.K. Rowling.


This is the point; the two sides have switched places. Now the people who derided the people burning Harry Potter books want to prevent people buying them, seeing the movies, etc.

The point isn't that this is worse, just that the hypocrisy is on both sides of the political spectrum. And this is why freedom speech as a principle is important, because a given person will quite likely find themselves on different sides of the issue during their lifetime.

The thought process though is if one has tenure one is only on the winning side, always.

It is really tiring that you beat this horse in every. single. thread. no matter whether it's related to the topic or not.

Sincere question, eigen: What do you think was the reason Professor Sellers hated to say this?

'"And you know what, I hate to say this, I end up having this angst every semester that a lot of my lower ones are Blacks. Happens almost every semester," Sellers said. "And it's like, 'Oh, come on.' You get some really good ones, but there are also usually some that are just plain at the bottom. It drives me crazy."'

link, again, for those not yet up to speed: https://abcnews.go.com/US/georgetown-law-professor-terminated-remarks-black-students/story?id=76413267

I am unsure how your question relates to my comment. I also tend to try to avoid speculating on people's motivations for doing things.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 10:16:51 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 09:48:39 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 09:44:30 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 09:20:05 AM
"cancel culture" is the work of the free market (people applying pressure by voting with their wallets), the result of people using their right to free speech

The Seuss family estate deciding it no longer wants to publish books is a decision enshrined in their right to free speech. People who would force them to keep printing the books fall on the side of forced speech, which is not free speech.

Which are different from corporate entities telling us what we can say by threatening our livelihoods.

I touched on the issue with corporate entities in my post, I'm not sure why you edited that part out and then brought it up?

I was just focusing on voluntary restrictions (free speech commenting on free speech) and not on coerced restrictions (corporations forcing people to say or not say certain things off the clock).

I should have made that clear.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: eigen on March 16, 2021, 10:23:56 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 10:16:51 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 09:48:39 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 09:44:30 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 09:20:05 AM
"cancel culture" is the work of the free market (people applying pressure by voting with their wallets), the result of people using their right to free speech

The Seuss family estate deciding it no longer wants to publish books is a decision enshrined in their right to free speech. People who would force them to keep printing the books fall on the side of forced speech, which is not free speech.

Which are different from corporate entities telling us what we can say by threatening our livelihoods.

I touched on the issue with corporate entities in my post, I'm not sure why you edited that part out and then brought it up?

I was just focusing on voluntary restrictions (free speech commenting on free speech) and not on coerced restrictions (corporations forcing people to say or not say certain things off the clock).

I should have made that clear.

Ah, makes more sense now. Thanks for clarifying.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 16, 2021, 01:09:05 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 08:43:11 PM

Do you really want the state to dictate what you and I can or cannot say?  It's only possible to think this if you don't imagine yourself as being the potential target of a censorious government or culture.

I understand and I acknowledge your reasoning, Caracal, but you clearly believe you know what people should be allowed to say and why.  Very, very dangerous.

Their rights to be @zz holes guarantees our rights to be @zz holes.  Don't think it is a sword with only one sharp side.  From Parasaurolophus' link:



If I ruled the world, I'd prefer some version of this where people only get fired if their speech is going to either interfere with their future ability to do their job or suggests that they are unqualified for the job.

Suppose someone works for the Anti Defamation League and that person posts racist rants on facebook. They are almost certainly going to get fired, and for good reason. It isn't just that the ADL wouldn't want the bad publicity-being a bigot makes you unqualified to work at a group dedicated to exposing and combatting bigotry. The same thing is true for police officers. People who feel comfortable posting racist things on facebook are probably going to feel comfortable discriminating against people when are in uniform too.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 01:21:36 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 16, 2021, 01:09:05 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 08:43:11 PM

Do you really want the state to dictate what you and I can or cannot say?  It's only possible to think this if you don't imagine yourself as being the potential target of a censorious government or culture.

I understand and I acknowledge your reasoning, Caracal, but you clearly believe you know what people should be allowed to say and why.  Very, very dangerous.

Their rights to be @zz holes guarantees our rights to be @zz holes.  Don't think it is a sword with only one sharp side.  From Parasaurolophus' link:



If I ruled the world, I'd prefer some version of this where people only get fired if their speech is going to either interfere with their future ability to do their job or suggests that they are unqualified for the job.

Suppose someone works for the Anti Defamation League and that person posts racist rants on facebook. They are almost certainly going to get fired, and for good reason. It isn't just that the ADL wouldn't want the bad publicity-being a bigot makes you unqualified to work at a group dedicated to exposing and combatting bigotry. The same thing is true for police officers. People who feel comfortable posting racist things on facebook are probably going to feel comfortable discriminating against people when are in uniform too.

This logic could be used against any person whose job involves interacting with people, which basically means any job.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 16, 2021, 02:05:55 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 01:21:36 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 16, 2021, 01:09:05 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 08:43:11 PM

Do you really want the state to dictate what you and I can or cannot say?  It's only possible to think this if you don't imagine yourself as being the potential target of a censorious government or culture.

I understand and I acknowledge your reasoning, Caracal, but you clearly believe you know what people should be allowed to say and why.  Very, very dangerous.

Their rights to be @zz holes guarantees our rights to be @zz holes.  Don't think it is a sword with only one sharp side.  From Parasaurolophus' link:



If I ruled the world, I'd prefer some version of this where people only get fired if their speech is going to either interfere with their future ability to do their job or suggests that they are unqualified for the job.

Suppose someone works for the Anti Defamation League and that person posts racist rants on facebook. They are almost certainly going to get fired, and for good reason. It isn't just that the ADL wouldn't want the bad publicity-being a bigot makes you unqualified to work at a group dedicated to exposing and combatting bigotry. The same thing is true for police officers. People who feel comfortable posting racist things on facebook are probably going to feel comfortable discriminating against people when are in uniform too.

This logic could be used against any person whose job involves interacting with people, which basically means any job.

Well, not to mention, people who feel comfortable deciding for everyone what as a racist thing to say or write, or what is not are people to beware of.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Anselm on March 16, 2021, 02:28:15 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1mqg4C0awA

Jesse Jackson reading Green Eggs and Ham.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 04:10:13 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 16, 2021, 01:09:05 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 08:43:11 PM

Do you really want the state to dictate what you and I can or cannot say?  It's only possible to think this if you don't imagine yourself as being the potential target of a censorious government or culture.

I understand and I acknowledge your reasoning, Caracal, but you clearly believe you know what people should be allowed to say and why.  Very, very dangerous.

Their rights to be @zz holes guarantees our rights to be @zz holes.  Don't think it is a sword with only one sharp side.  From Parasaurolophus' link:



If I ruled the world, I'd prefer some version of this where people only get fired if their speech is going to either interfere with their future ability to do their job or suggests that they are unqualified for the job.

Suppose someone works for the Anti Defamation League and that person posts racist rants on facebook. They are almost certainly going to get fired, and for good reason. It isn't just that the ADL wouldn't want the bad publicity-being a bigot makes you unqualified to work at a group dedicated to exposing and combatting bigotry. The same thing is true for police officers. People who feel comfortable posting racist things on facebook are probably going to feel comfortable discriminating against people when are in uniform too.

I think we are at loggerheads.  I understand your point, I really do.  You've provided a number of similar hypotheticals that illustrate how a person's beliefs might affect their ability to do their jobs when their jobs involve public perception.  They make a very good point I, and I suspect everyone else, understands.

Fair enough, you have a good point. 

There are some issues with this, some of which I have argued, namely:

1) Allowing corporations to determine what we say off-the-clock seems like one of the most pernicious things we could do.

But there are these other issues:

2) We are not talking about being kicked out of a book club; we are talking about people's livelihoods.  Should you lose a career for saying the wrong thing, no matter how terrible?  I'll point this out again: if certain very conservative people had their way, you would now be out of a job because of the beliefs you expressed on this board.  Are you sure you want to release that particular Kraken? 

3) We already have laws that protect us from people who act on their egregious beliefs. 

4) We already have axiomatic protection from people who break their employers' protocols. 

5) If we stopped at thought-policing police officers...okay...maybe.  But that small catalog of stories included all sorts of people in all sorts of careers and scenarios.  Only a few of those included law enforcement.  Several included professors. 

6) Are we the "snowflakes" that the Trumpers allege?  The world is going to be full of these people...

7) ...and do we just expect these ideas to disappear after we boot them from their jobs?  What does policing off-the-clock opinions actually accomplish?  Do we solve anything by evicting the 'bad people' from the public sphere?

8) Are you and I and all the other forumites allowed to have a private life in which we can develop our own beliefs without fear of losing everything we have worked for because we express ourselves?

9) Are the Seuss and Mary Poppins controversies a symptom of hysterical thinking?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 04:39:26 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 04:10:13 PM

8) Are you and I and all the other forumites allowed to have a private life in which we can develop our own beliefs without fear of losing everything we have worked for because we express ourselves?


My sense is that Caracal doesn't ever see himself holding views which would be that dangerous to express.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 16, 2021, 04:48:40 PM
 
QuoteAre you and I and all the other forumites allowed to have a private life in which we can develop our own beliefs without fear of losing everything we have worked for because we express ourselves?

Yes, of course. One wit noted that in the former Soviet Union one could say whatever one liked. Just not to whomever one liked.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 16, 2021, 06:23:36 PM
QuoteThe Seuss family estate deciding it no longer wants to publish books is a decision enshrined in their right to free speech. People who would force them to keep printing the books fall on the side of forced speech, which is not free speech.

The 'anti-racism' crowd are doing forced speech now, too, have been for some time already, but someone's finally challenging them with litigation.

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/wendy-kaminer-race-bias-training

(italics are mine)

'"William charged his school with requiring him to confess the indices of his presumed privilege—to "proclaim in class and in assignments his race, color, sex, gender and religious identities for which he in turn would receive official, derogatory labels."'

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 16, 2021, 06:37:02 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 04:39:26 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 04:10:13 PM

8) Are you and I and all the other forumites allowed to have a private life in which we can develop our own beliefs without fear of losing everything we have worked for because we express ourselves?


My sense is that Caracal doesn't ever see himself holding views which would be that dangerous to express.

If I recall correctly Caracal has a spouse with tenure, so would most likely be safe from retribution. And the obvious, his views are lock-step with the far left majority in academia, so would likely only attract attention positively.
It's kind of hard to take people taking up arguments of principle when those principles one purports to have are only remotely likely to ever see any test. And meanwhile, others in their midst are paying big penalties.

Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 09:14:26 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on March 16, 2021, 09:11:44 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 09:04:56 AM
Quote from: eigen on March 16, 2021, 08:44:44 AM
I just wanted to toss in here that I think it's amazingly ironic that the same people I grew up with who hosted book burnings of the Harry Potter books and boycotted the local library to have them banned when I was growing up are now the people decrying "cancel culture" attacking J.K. Rowling.


This is the point; the two sides have switched places. Now the people who derided the people burning Harry Potter books want to prevent people buying them, seeing the movies, etc.

The point isn't that this is worse, just that the hypocrisy is on both sides of the political spectrum. And this is why freedom speech as a principle is important, because a given person will quite likely find themselves on different sides of the issue during their lifetime.

The thought process though is if one has tenure one is only on the winning side, always.

It is really tiring that you beat this horse in every. single. thread. no matter whether it's related to the topic or not.

It's related, and I'm not really worried about what you're tired of.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Ruralguy on March 16, 2021, 07:17:37 PM
Maybe this isn't worth it, but could you concisely explain how it is related?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 16, 2021, 08:28:25 PM
Quote from: Ruralguy on March 16, 2021, 07:17:37 PM
Maybe this isn't worth it, but could you concisely explain how it is related?
It's not worth it. But you could ruminate on anything else I have posted, in case you're tired of the tenure comment.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Ruralguy on March 16, 2021, 08:49:46 PM
Fair enough...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 17, 2021, 08:08:08 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on March 16, 2021, 06:37:02 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 04:39:26 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 04:10:13 PM

8) Are you and I and all the other forumites allowed to have a private life in which we can develop our own beliefs without fear of losing everything we have worked for because we express ourselves?


My sense is that Caracal doesn't ever see himself holding views which would be that dangerous to express.

If I recall correctly Caracal has a spouse with tenure, so would most likely be safe from retribution. And the obvious, his views are lock-step with the far left majority in academia, so would likely only attract attention positively.
It's kind of hard to take people taking up arguments of principle when those principles one purports to have are only remotely likely to ever see any test. And meanwhile, others in their midst are paying big penalties.



You really are oddly like Poly sometimes...

I don't work at the same institution as my spouse, for what that's worth. I don't have any protection from anything I've mentioned minor details about my life in these threads before, as others do. I don't think that makes it appropriate to bring those up and attribute my views to my supposed privileged status. (I'm the spouse of a college professor, not a billionaire, so its a little confusing)

Your inability to actually engage with the substance of the argument is rather telling. But I think I'm done engaging with you on this.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 17, 2021, 08:38:55 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 04:39:26 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 04:10:13 PM

8) Are you and I and all the other forumites allowed to have a private life in which we can develop our own beliefs without fear of losing everything we have worked for because we express ourselves?


My sense is that Caracal doesn't ever see himself holding views which would be that dangerous to express.

Like everyone else, I have lots of views that various people might disagree with. It's weird to me how the starting assumption for these discussions is that everyone should be able to say whatever they want in all kinds of public accessible spaces, without any fear of it biting them in the butt. I have a twitter account, but I don't post anything on it. I use other social media just to post pictures of children and dogs. Part of that is just that I don't think the world needs more people ranting about politics on facebook. I'm just somebody who reads a lot of stuff, but I don't think that means I'm really going to add anything to the world with my takes. However, I also don't really want to have to worry about everyone in the world is going to perceive my half formed thoughts on social media. I make occasional exceptions to this policy. For example, I have responded to misinformation about COVID vaccines. In that case, I think whatever risk is involved is worth it, but I'm trying to make a considered calculation.

Self censorship isn't some terrible leftist plot. It's an important skill for functional adults. People should think about what they write and how other people will view it, and that includes employers. The only thing that makes this new is that a lot more people are writing things in public spaces than used to. When I go on facebook or Twitter, I don't come away thinking "man, I wish everyone felt more free to just say whatever they were thinking, that would make this a much more healthy place."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 17, 2021, 08:40:06 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 17, 2021, 08:08:08 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on March 16, 2021, 06:37:02 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 04:39:26 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 04:10:13 PM

8) Are you and I and all the other forumites allowed to have a private life in which we can develop our own beliefs without fear of losing everything we have worked for because we express ourselves?


My sense is that Caracal doesn't ever see himself holding views which would be that dangerous to express.

If I recall correctly Caracal has a spouse with tenure, so would most likely be safe from retribution. And the obvious, his views are lock-step with the far left majority in academia, so would likely only attract attention positively.
It's kind of hard to take people taking up arguments of principle when those principles one purports to have are only remotely likely to ever see any test. And meanwhile, others in their midst are paying big penalties.



You really are oddly like Poly sometimes...

I don't work at the same institution as my spouse, for what that's worth. I don't have any protection from anything I've mentioned minor details about my life in these threads before, as others do. I don't think that makes it appropriate to bring those up and attribute my views to my supposed privileged status. (I'm the spouse of a college professor, not a billionaire, so its a little confusing)

Your inability to actually engage with the substance of the argument is rather telling. But I think I'm done engaging with you on this.

I have engaged in the substance herein, but I think you didn't read it. #105 and a few other places.

There's nothing in anything you have posted that shows any interest in getting to the bottom of a dispute such as the one that happened at Georgetown with Professor Sandra Sellers. I find that surprising in a research scholar. Kind of lazy. But not surprising from a person who's drinking the social justice Kool-Aid being served currently. The impression you give me is that if anyone from a 'marginalized group' says they are offended by what a professor says, they should be kicked out like a football, even after apologizing, even after a 20 year track record of success in and out of the academy. I find your lack of interest bizarre. And it's also obvious that your take on the situation is, in our current political climate, the path of least resistance.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 17, 2021, 09:01:13 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 17, 2021, 08:38:55 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2021, 04:39:26 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 04:10:13 PM

8) Are you and I and all the other forumites allowed to have a private life in which we can develop our own beliefs without fear of losing everything we have worked for because we express ourselves?


My sense is that Caracal doesn't ever see himself holding views which would be that dangerous to express.

Like everyone else, I have lots of views that various people might disagree with. It's weird to me how the starting assumption for these discussions is that everyone should be able to say whatever they want in all kinds of public accessible spaces, without any fear of it biting them in the butt.

No-one has ever made such a broad claim. The old expression of not being allowed to yell "FIRE!" in a crowded theatre comes to mind. I can't think of anyone who has advocated absolute freedom for anyone to say anything anywhere.

In the case of Sandra Sellers, she was fired over stating an observation, which would be very easy to verify. Her colleague  was disciplined over merely listening to her and not objecting!

Do you really think that "listening in silence" ought to be a punishable offence?


Quote
Self censorship isn't some terrible leftist plot. It's an important skill for functional adults. People should think about what they write and how other people will view it, and that includes employers.

The problem is, as in the Sandra Sellers case, increasingly "what they write" includes observations of objectively verifiable facts. All it takes is for someone to not like to hear those facts expressed.

In law, the accepted ironclad defense against slander and libel charges has consisted of showing that the statement was factually correct. However, in cancel culture factual correctness is entirely irrelevant. Expressing an "inconvenient truth" is grounds for punishment.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 17, 2021, 11:42:19 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 17, 2021, 08:38:55 AM

It's weird to me how the starting assumption for these discussions is that everyone should be able to say whatever they want in all kinds of public accessible spaces, without any fear of it biting them in the butt.

Self censorship isn't some terrible leftist plot.

Never said either of those things.  Those are strawman, moving-the-goal-posts arguments.

I said...

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2021, 04:10:13 PM
3) We already have laws that protect us from people who act on their egregious beliefs. 

4) We already have axiomatic protection from people who break their employers' protocols. 

5) If we stopped at thought-policing police officers...okay...maybe.  But that small catalog of stories included all sorts of people in all sorts of careers and scenarios. 

*****

9) Are the Seuss and Mary Poppins controversies a symptom of hysterical thinking?

Which cover your objections above.

If I tweeted, "Caracal decapitates Muppets and buries them in Central Park" you can sue me for libel.    You can sue for a restraining order if I threaten you.  If I flunk a student because I do not like her or his Justin Bieber T-shirt I could and should lose my job.  If I tell my provost that his mustache makes him look like a walrus...well, I am not sure what would happen, but I would face the consequences.

If I tweet from my home that my university is running a form of reverse-discrimination and All Lives Matter, that is my right (although I believe neither of those, just to be clear) and I should not have to worry.

And YOU may exercise restraint on social media, but for a lot of people they see social media as their megaphone to the world.

And yeah, "everyone should be able to say whatever they want in all kinds of public accessible spaces" IS free speech, complete with its consequences. 

So yes, everyone should be able to say whatever they want in all kinds of public accessible spaces.  Yes.  Then they can then deal with the effects of their speech.

If parents want to exercise their free speech, they don't have to read Dr. Seuss to their kids.

If you want to clean the public space...

Oliver Twist is one of the most anti-Semitic and sexist books I have ever read.

Hemingway?  Piggy pig-pig-pig-piggy

Faulker's novels are an indictment of southern racism----but it is pretty clear Faulker was a southern racist if you read his interviews.

Lolita by Nabokov!?!?!  Oh lordy.

Catch-22 insults veterans, and uses all sorts of sexist ideologies and racist dialog, which make Heller's point.

Even listened to Never Mind the Bollocks, Here's the Sex Pistols?

Ever watched Pan's Labyrinth or Pulp Fiction

I'm sorry, man, but you are wrong.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 17, 2021, 12:50:38 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 17, 2021, 11:42:19 AM

If I tweeted, "Caracal decapitates Muppets and buries them in Central Park" you can sue me for libel

Caracal--it wasn't me who blabbed.  Honest!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 17, 2021, 12:56:15 PM
Quote from: apl68 on March 17, 2021, 12:50:38 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 17, 2021, 11:42:19 AM

If I tweeted, "Caracal decapitates Muppets and buries them in Central Park" you can sue me for libel

Caracal--it wasn't me who blabbed.  Honest!

Just so you all know, you can NEVER trust apl68 with ANYTHING!!!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Puget on March 17, 2021, 01:15:11 PM
QuoteIf parents want to exercise their free speech, they don't have to read Dr. Seuss to their kids.

And the Suess estate can exercise its free speech rights by deciding not to publish certain books any more, which is what they did.
You keep forgetting that free speech rights are vis-a-vis the government not private individuals or companies.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 17, 2021, 01:28:36 PM
Quote from: Puget on March 17, 2021, 01:15:11 PM
QuoteIf parents want to exercise their free speech, they don't have to read Dr. Seuss to their kids.

And the Suess estate can exercise its free speech rights by deciding not to publish certain books any more, which is what they did.
You keep forgetting that free speech rights are vis-a-vis the government not private individuals or companies.

I don't recall anyone suggesting that they didn't have the right to stop publishing. My criticism is for the virtue-signalling explanation, and my concern is that increasingly more organizations and individuals feel that such virtue-signalling is necessary. People expressing views they hold is good; people expressing views they pretend to hold and/or feel they are supposed to hold is a different matter. In the Seuss case, if they were concerned that even if they stopped publishing those titles, but didn't make the public statement they did that they might in future be boycotted, then it makes the point that actions matter less than perceived ideological correctness.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 17, 2021, 02:04:10 PM
QuoteIf parents want to exercise their free speech, they don't have to read Dr. Seuss to their kids.

Read them Beyonce lyrics, since they need positive role models. (As the Obamas have stated).

"Driver roll up the partition please I don't need you seeing Yonce on her knees ... Monica lewinskied all on my gown"

What comes of thinking nothing produced by American black popular culture can be anything but wonderful.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 17, 2021, 02:16:15 PM
Quote from: Puget on March 17, 2021, 01:15:11 PM
QuoteIf parents want to exercise their free speech, they don't have to read Dr. Seuss to their kids.

And the Suess estate can exercise its free speech rights by deciding not to publish certain books any more, which is what they did.
You keep forgetting that free speech rights are vis-a-vis the government not private individuals or companies.

Agreed and agreed.

My point is that once we begin to allow corporate and government entities to control free expression in the public sphere we have a dangerous scenario.

I would suggest we need laws to protect our speech off-the-clock.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Puget on March 17, 2021, 03:32:48 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 17, 2021, 02:16:15 PM
Quote from: Puget on March 17, 2021, 01:15:11 PM
QuoteIf parents want to exercise their free speech, they don't have to read Dr. Seuss to their kids.

And the Suess estate can exercise its free speech rights by deciding not to publish certain books any more, which is what they did.
You keep forgetting that free speech rights are vis-a-vis the government not private individuals or companies.

Agreed and agreed.

My point is that once we begin to allow corporate and government entities to control free expression in the public sphere we have a dangerous scenario.

I would suggest we need laws to protect our speech off-the-clock.

Since the government isn't punishing anyone* in any of these examples you've cited (that I saw), you are suggesting employment laws that would bar companies from firing or otherwise punishing an employee for off-the-clock speech? That's an interesting idea, but would be a pretty radical change from our generally at-will employment system. I think you'd also agree there would have to be some exceptions for cases where the off-the-clock speech clearly impacts the ability to do the job (including loss of public trust) or indicates lack of competence to do the job (e.g., surely you don't want your MD spouting psuedo-science?).
At any rate, it is not something covered by the 1st. Amendment and would be new legal territory in the US.

*Again, in the case of the actual topic of this thread, no one is punishing anyone- -a company made a business decision for itself, end of story.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 17, 2021, 04:48:51 PM
Quote from: Puget on March 17, 2021, 03:32:48 PM

Since the government isn't punishing anyone* in any of these examples you've cited (that I saw), you are suggesting employment laws that would bar companies from firing or otherwise punishing an employee for off-the-clock speech? That's an interesting idea, but would be a pretty radical change from our generally at-will employment system. I think you'd also agree there would have to be some exceptions for cases where the off-the-clock speech clearly impacts the ability to do the job (including loss of public trust) or indicates lack of competence to do the job (e.g., surely you don't want your MD spouting psuedo-science?).
At any rate, it is not something covered by the 1st. Amendment and would be new legal territory in the US.


*Again, in the case of the actual topic of this thread, no one is punishing anyone- -a company made a business decision for itself, end of story.

I anticipated this response.  I almost preemptively posted but my posts tend to be too long already.

We DO protect people in the employment sphere for things that are not directly job related.

If I went to Facebook and said...

I have converted to Catholicism / Buddhism / etc....
I am gay...
I am marrying an African American / Native American / etc....
I am pregnant (impossible for me but just hypothetically speaking)...
I found out my parents are immigrants...

...and I was fired I am protected, even if a pregnant-gay-Catholic-Buddhist-African / Native-American-son-of-immigrants may damage the image of my employer in some people's eyes.

I got this idea some years ago after dinner with a colleague whose wife was one of those liberal pot-smoking lawyers who, during a discussion about a school teacher who had lost her job because some parent found Facebook party-pics from her college days, said very simply, "The laws are not keeping up."

I am sure you are right that this might be "new legal territory"...but everything above was at one point new legal territory.  Social media is new territory.  Maybe we need laws for new territories.

And no, I think an employer can take action the moment a person's beliefs affect their employment , not before.  Free expression should be sacrosanct.

The link to Dr. Seuss is the zeitgeist.  We want to anneal the effects of the past, a laudable thing.  It is perfectly legitimate for the publisher to decide not the publish a book that, in their estimation, carries a damaging message.  That is free speech.  It is another thing to demand speech to be shut down.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 18, 2021, 06:01:19 AM
Wahoo's idea is brilliant. What would follow is a challenge from the woke party, the democrats, since they currently derive a good chunk of their political effect and power from that gold mine, white guilt and fear. If a white person could say at lunch to a co-worker or in the evening on FB after a couple of scotch and sodas "immigrant people from Indiristan would be more successful if they'd pick better wage earning academic careers as opposed to the silly social justice and identity politics ones they currently like" then even if it were captured on video, easily referenceable, ready for worldwide broadcast, he still has a right to keep his job as long as he does it well enough. In other words, flawed opinionated and outspoken people still have a right to work, raise children and pay taxes in the electronic dominated era, and will get a measure of legal protection specifically for that right. This would be a loss for for the woke party. How would they respond once their hand is forced would be interesting.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 18, 2021, 09:06:12 AM
Well mahagonny, before you engage too eagerly in a revenge fantasy pertaining to the "woke crowd" (what is that anyway?) I was rather thinking of someone like myself who would agree almost point-by-point with Caracal on most things, if not this one.

Not that long ago I found myself in a raucous online debate with a grandmother who lives somewhere up there in the frozen upper Midwest.  The subject was Donald Trump.  The last thing she said to me before she logged off was, and I quote, "You'll get your comeuppance." 

She was actually fantasizing (pertaining to the woke crowd) about a civil war and military tribunals, but I absolutely guarantee you that had she had found out that I was a *dreaded-socialist- academic-who-indoctrinated-the-youth-with-Marxism-or-some-such-dross* at a state university she would have looked for my head on a platter (maybe literally). 

The internet allows us all to be tattletales and expect our own peeves to result in (yes, this is the right word) punishment.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 18, 2021, 10:31:42 AM
And lest my fears of the tattletale zeitgeist seem overblown:

Open Season on the Faculty (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/02/11/open-legislative-season-faculty-iowa-and-elsewhere)

Quote
Proposed legislation in Iowa would require the state's Board of Regents to survey all employees of the three universities it oversees as to their political party affiliations, disaggregating the data by job classification but not by individual. The regents would deliver the information to state lawmakers by the end of the calendar year.

The bill doesn't provide an explanation, and Jim Carlin, the Republican state senator who introduced it, didn't respond to a request for comment. But the meaning is clear: by disaggregating employee groups, Iowa's General Assembly could measure the political beliefs of the faculty.

In Iowa and elsewhere in recent years, Republican state lawmakers have lamented what they describe as academe's lack of intellectual or ideological diversity.

In 2017, for instance, another Iowa Republican state legislator proposed an ultimately unsuccessful bill that would have prevented regents institutions from hiring professors who caused the "percentage of the faculty belonging to one political party to exceed by 10 percent" the share of the faculty belonging to the other dominant party. Under that bill, Iowa's commissioner of elections was to provide voter registration data to colleges and universities once a year. Carlin's new bill represents a new way of getting at that party affiliation data.

Quote
At the time, faculty members across Florida wondered what would happen if they refused to answer questions about their political beliefs. Would they be punished, for instance?

Quote
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education this week launched a new legal defense fund and 24-7 hotline for public college and university faculty members, citing a rise in threats of censorship and punishment for speech and research.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 18, 2021, 10:52:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 18, 2021, 10:31:42 AM
And lest my fears of the tattletale zeitgeist seem overblown:

Open Season on the Faculty (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/02/11/open-legislative-season-faculty-iowa-and-elsewhere)

Quote
Proposed legislation in Iowa would require the state's Board of Regents to survey all employees of the three universities it oversees as to their political party affiliations, disaggregating the data by job classification but not by individual. The regents would deliver the information to state lawmakers by the end of the calendar year.

The bill doesn't provide an explanation, and Jim Carlin, the Republican state senator who introduced it, didn't respond to a request for comment. But the meaning is clear: by disaggregating employee groups, Iowa's General Assembly could measure the political beliefs of the faculty.

In Iowa and elsewhere in recent years, Republican state lawmakers have lamented what they describe as academe's lack of intellectual or ideological diversity.

In 2017, for instance, another Iowa Republican state legislator proposed an ultimately unsuccessful bill that would have prevented regents institutions from hiring professors who caused the "percentage of the faculty belonging to one political party to exceed by 10 percent" the share of the faculty belonging to the other dominant party. Under that bill, Iowa's commissioner of elections was to provide voter registration data to colleges and universities once a year. Carlin's new bill represents a new way of getting at that party affiliation data.

Quote
At the time, faculty members across Florida wondered what would happen if they refused to answer questions about their political beliefs. Would they be punished, for instance?

Quote
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education this week launched a new legal defense fund and 24-7 hotline for public college and university faculty members, citing a rise in threats of censorship and punishment for speech and research.

And even though we come from different parts of the political spectrum, I find this just as problematic as you.  Policing people for ideology is a very bad idea, even if the supposed goal is to ensure diversity of thought.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 18, 2021, 11:02:48 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 18, 2021, 09:06:12 AM
Well mahagonny, before you engage too eagerly in a revenge fantasy pertaining to the "woke crowd" (what is that anyway?) I was rather thinking of someone like myself who would agree almost point-by-point with Caracal on most things, if not this one.

Not that long ago I found myself in a raucous online debate with a grandmother who lives somewhere up there in the frozen upper Midwest.  The subject was Donald Trump.  The last thing she said to me before she logged off was, and I quote, "You'll get your comeuppance." 

She was actually fantasizing (pertaining to the woke crowd) about a civil war and military tribunals, but I absolutely guarantee you that had she had found out that I was a *dreaded-socialist- academic-who-indoctrinated-the-youth-with-Marxism-or-some-such-dross* at a state university she would have looked for my head on a platter (maybe literally). 

The internet allows us all to be tattletales and expect our own peeves to result in (yes, this is the right word) punishment.

Without knowing the grandmother from the midwest, I can still speculate about her possible frame of mind. For tens of millions of voters, when you (not you, wahoo, but anyone) says they must be racist because they either
didn't vote for Obama
didn't like Obama's policies, hoped they would falter and eventually be scrapped
wondered whether he was born in the USA before hearing all the available facts
voted against Hillary with certainty
are not jumping for joy because the USA now has a "woman of color" Veep
watch Rush Limbaugh
what they hear is you mean they are racist in the worst, fullest sense of the word. That they both harbor implicit, unrecognized racism, and have conscious thought level racism that they enjoy. And when you do something like that, you're playing with dynamite. And really, I can only shake my head in astonishment at people who fail to see this, or think it's responsible citizenship. And you probably never called her a racist, but it doesn't even matter at this point.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 18, 2021, 11:40:16 AM
Well M., this grandmother insists that voter fraud won Biden the job despite extensive evidence to the contrary, and she hopes that people with guns will take over the government and put people like me out of business.  We never discussed race. 

I don't know if Trump is really a racist in the generally accept definition of the term, but she sure had no trouble playing the race-implication card.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 18, 2021, 04:55:25 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 18, 2021, 11:40:16 AM
Well M., this grandmother insists that voter fraud won Biden the job despite extensive evidence to the contrary, and she hopes that people with guns will take over the government and put people like me out of business.  We never discussed race. 

I don't know if Trump is really a racist in the generally accept definition of the term, but she sure had no trouble playing the race-implication card.

As I suspected, she's madder than a hornet for being called a racist for four years by almost everyone in the media, after being asked to vote, by the media. Common sense, man.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 18, 2021, 06:41:39 PM
Maybe she should examine her beliefs.  Common sense, you know.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: financeguy on March 19, 2021, 03:43:45 AM
Or maybe those levying that particular charge should stop expanding the use of words such that whatever is needed to score a political point becomes definitional. Remember that anyone is a racist is the definition is broadened enough. We're up to pretty much the entire white population now so at a certain point the word may cease to have any punch. It's kind of like how the F word used to shock, but now one needs to use the C word and even that's becoming commonplace. Even if your goal is to hold a race card over the head of others to score political points, the frequent and expanded use of that card is diminishing its power. Even those on the left have been saying to drop the frivolous complaints and direct that energy to real issues, but a fish is gonna swim, hatters gonna hate, and the woke will virtue signal to their own detriment.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 19, 2021, 06:57:00 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 18, 2021, 06:41:39 PM
Maybe she should examine her beliefs.  Common sense, you know.

We all should. Just ask around and people will tell you!! Cheers
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 19, 2021, 11:23:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 17, 2021, 04:48:51 PM


I anticipated this response.  I almost preemptively posted but my posts tend to be too long already.

We DO protect people in the employment sphere for things that are not directly job related.

If I went to Facebook and said...

I have converted to Catholicism / Buddhism / etc....
I am gay...
I am marrying an African American / Native American / etc....
I am pregnant (impossible for me but just hypothetically speaking)...
I found out my parents are immigrants...

...and I was fired I am protected, even if a pregnant-gay-Catholic-Buddhist-African / Native-American-son-of-immigrants may damage the image of my employer in some people's eyes.

I got this idea some years ago after dinner with a colleague whose wife was one of those liberal pot-smoking lawyers who, during a discussion about a school teacher who had lost her job because some parent found Facebook party-pics from her college days, said very simply, "The laws are not keeping up."

I am sure you are right that this might be "new legal territory"...but everything above was at one point new legal territory.  Social media is new territory.  Maybe we need laws for new territories.

And no, I think an employer can take action the moment a person's beliefs affect their employment , not before.  Free expression should be sacrosanct.


I agree with parts of this. You're right, of course, that some things are protected. That's why the legal term is protected categories. There are particular things you cannot fire people for. Everything else is allowed. You can fire someone because they pick their nose in meetings, but you can't fire them because they were a veteran.

It is really screwed up when people get fired because of some picture. I have similar feelings about the unearthing of racist tweets from when, now famous, people were seventeen. Just because we live in a world where people's casual, juvenile racism is preserved, doesn't mean we have to assume it reflects their current beliefs.

However, the problem I see with your proposal is that I can't see how you can create some clear line about what speech does affect employment and which doesn't. If we go back to the examples much earlier, I think racist speech by police officers goes directly to their suitability for their job. If I was an employer, I would certainly think that a person who screams racial abuse at strangers on the streets is probably going to not be someone you want working at your business.

I'm not sure this is a problem that can really be solved by laws-maybe some elements of it could be addressed, but I think most of this is just about the messy process of adapting to new technologies, new ideas of privacy and accessibility and chaining ideas around acceptable behavior.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 19, 2021, 11:42:18 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 19, 2021, 11:23:24 AM

However, the problem I see with your proposal is that I can't see how you can create some clear line about what speech does affect employment and which doesn't. If we go back to the examples much earlier, I think racist speech by police officers goes directly to their suitability for their job. If I was an employer, I would certainly think that a person who screams racial abuse at strangers on the streets is probably going to not be someone you want working at your business.


This kind of hyperbole makes it difficult to have a meaningful discussion. Of course someone who screams abuse at strangers isn't a good choice for an employee; the person probably has some sort of a mental illness. But in our current society, many people would equate something like wearing a MAGA hat with screaming abuse at strangers. The total unwillingness by many to judge behaviour differently from perceived intent is the problem.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 19, 2021, 12:28:53 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 19, 2021, 11:42:18 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 19, 2021, 11:23:24 AM

However, the problem I see with your proposal is that I can't see how you can create some clear line about what speech does affect employment and which doesn't. If we go back to the examples much earlier, I think racist speech by police officers goes directly to their suitability for their job. If I was an employer, I would certainly think that a person who screams racial abuse at strangers on the streets is probably going to not be someone you want working at your business.


This kind of hyperbole makes it difficult to have a meaningful discussion. Of course someone who screams abuse at strangers isn't a good choice for an employee; the person probably has some sort of a mental illness. But in our current society, many people would equate something like wearing a MAGA hat with screaming abuse at strangers. The total unwillingness by many to judge behaviour differently from perceived intent is the problem.

Re: "screaming racial abuse at strangers" (which of course can only mean while against black): If you read what the some of the most dishonest leaders of the woke, 'antiracist' community write, Charles Blow at NYT et al, you can see that their attitude is if something was happening in 1960 or before, you can describe the incident with vivid drama, then connect it with a magical, seamless segue, to how we are supposed to feel about race relations today, as though it is still happening.  Good outrage need never go to waste. Evidently they think we're dumb.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 19, 2021, 01:24:42 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 19, 2021, 11:42:18 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 19, 2021, 11:23:24 AM

However, the problem I see with your proposal is that I can't see how you can create some clear line about what speech does affect employment and which doesn't. If we go back to the examples much earlier, I think racist speech by police officers goes directly to their suitability for their job. If I was an employer, I would certainly think that a person who screams racial abuse at strangers on the streets is probably going to not be someone you want working at your business.


This kind of hyperbole makes it difficult to have a meaningful discussion. Of course someone who screams abuse at strangers isn't a good choice for an employee; the person probably has some sort of a mental illness. But in our current society, many people would equate something like wearing a MAGA hat with screaming abuse at strangers. The total unwillingness by many to judge behaviour differently from perceived intent is the problem.

That was referencing one of the actual news articles upthread presented as an example of someone fired for their beliefs. It involved an actual person screaming racial abuse at a stranger on the street who got fired as a result. I very much doubt they would have been fired for wearing a MAGA hat...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 19, 2021, 03:13:46 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 19, 2021, 11:23:24 AM
However, the problem I see with your proposal is that I can't see how you can create some clear line about what speech does affect employment and which doesn't.

This is why we need laws that protect our speech off-the-clock.  How do you determine what speech is safe for your employer?  The police officer who posted support for her niece at a BLM rally----that example could not be any better.

As I said, the line should be when behavior directly affects employment on-the-clock, not before.

Your anti-racism police officer has the right to an opinion.  Even your racist police officer has a right to an opinion, like it or not.  You see your employee screaming invective on the street?----tough noogies.  That is your employee's right.  I'll say a simple idea one more time: The minute we allow corporate entities to police our language and our beliefs we are in very dangerous territory. 

I think you have ideas about what people should say and be allowed to say. 

And the bigger problem is that, yeah, the internet allows us to unearth 20-year-old adolescent behavior or our idiotic moments, and these can badly damage us.  Zeitgeist. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 19, 2021, 05:33:29 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 19, 2021, 03:13:46 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 19, 2021, 11:23:24 AM
However, the problem I see with your proposal is that I can't see how you can create some clear line about what speech does affect employment and which doesn't.

This is why we need laws that protect our speech off-the-clock.  How do you determine what speech is safe for your employer?  The police officer who posted support for her niece at a BLM rally----that example could not be any better.

As I said, the line should be when behavior directly affects employment on-the-clock, not before.

Your anti-racism police officer has the right to an opinion.  Even your racist police officer has a right to an opinion, like it or not.  You see your employee screaming invective on the street?----tough noogies.  That is your employee's right.  I'll say a simple idea one more time: The minute we allow corporate entities to police our language and our beliefs we are in very dangerous territory. 

I think you have ideas about what people should say and be allowed to say. 

And the bigger problem is that, yeah, the internet allows us to unearth 20-year-old adolescent behavior or our idiotic moments, and these can badly damage us.  Zeitgeist.

I certainly do have ideas about what people should say. I believe in free speech, but I don't believe in consequence free speech. I'm not crazy about employers policing speech as a general principal, but there are times where it would be absurd to ignore it. The problem is that it isn't just about the employer. I'm fine with working with people I disagree with about things, but I'm not ok working with a guy who screams racial invective on the street, even if I'm not the group he's targeting. As Marshwiggle said, that's an unstable person who might be a danger.

The racist police officer does have the right to his opinion, but he doesn't have the right to openly express racist ideas and be a police officer. That's a person who is a danger to many of the people he's supposed to be protecting and who pay his salary with their taxes. Now, I think there's a need for clear regulations that define what kind of speech should be protected for police officers. Those regulations should protect someone from, for example, expressing ideas about black lives matter movements, whether positive or negative, as long as those ideas aren't something like "those protestors should all be shot."

Even Academic free speech, which gives pretty broad protections, does have its limits, as it should. A professor who writes on Twitter "jews always cheat on exams" is essentially announcing that he can't be trusted to treat students fairly.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 19, 2021, 06:04:29 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 19, 2021, 05:33:29 PM
As Marshwiggle said, that's an unstable person who might be a danger.

"might?"  Or they might NOT be "a danger." So we fire and limit people based on predictions?  Is that fair or safe? 

Again, there are many people who believe we are "a danger," maybe not in the assaultive sense (which seems to be what frightens you) but in a moral and philosophic sense.  You want to give them the power to silence us by threatening what we do for a living?

Quote from: Caracal on March 19, 2021, 05:33:29 PM
The racist police officer does have the right to his opinion, but he doesn't have the right to openly express racist ideas and be a police officer. That's a person who is a danger to many of the people he's supposed to be protecting and who pay his salary with their taxes.

So if a devout Catholic police officer expresses orthodox prolife sentiments, may we assume she or he would neglect to protect prochoice protestors?  Seems to me we cannot trust this police officer.

Quote from: Caracal on March 19, 2021, 05:33:29 PM
Now, I think there's a need for clear regulations that define what kind of speech should be protected for police officers. Those regulations should protect someone from, for example, expressing ideas about black lives matter movements, whether positive or negative, as long as those ideas aren't something like "those protestors should all be shot."

Well...specifically, that is NOT what is happening.  In fact, just exactly the opposite is happening.

Quote from: Caracal on March 19, 2021, 05:33:29 PM
Even Academic free speech, which gives pretty broad protections, does have its limits, as it should. A professor who writes on Twitter "jews always cheat on exams" is essentially announcing that he can't be trusted to treat students fairly.

Firstly, you cannot make that sort of determination, even with extreme expression as evidence.  We all say things.     

Secondly, expression is sacrosanct.  It is a cornerstone of American civilization.  It is actually more important than the possibility that someone might do something bad.  Again, we have mechanisms to rectify and combat bad people's bad actions.  Now you want to silence their ideas? 

It's interesting to think about, but did it ever occur to you that you drive these bigotries and hatreds underground.  Certainly a few crazies write something like "all jews cheat on tests," generally under a pseudonym, and some might get caught at it----but these ideas do not disappear just because you will not tolerate their expression.   

Do you think your limitations and restrictions are going to change anything for the better?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 19, 2021, 06:35:04 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 19, 2021, 06:04:29 PM

Secondly, expression is sacrosanct.  It is a cornerstone of American civilization.  It is actually more important than the possibility that someone might do something bad.  Again, we have mechanisms to rectify and combat bad people's bad actions.  Now you want to silence their ideas? 


Do you think your limitations and restrictions are going to change anything for the better?

You keep saying you know that the first amendment just applies to governments, but then you write stuff like this and I don't now if you do. Free expression doesn't mean you can't get fired for your beliefs or for things you say. It has never meant that. There never has been some principle that everyone can say anything they want and not face consequences for it. That's not what people like J.S Mill thought. its just something you've made up.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 19, 2021, 06:51:20 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2021, 01:04:37 PM

Professor fired for saying her worst students were black (https://www.indy100.com/news/georgetown-university-professor-fired-black-racism-b1817024)


Breaking news:  Alan Dershowitz weighs in, in Newsweek, no less. And validates us. Georgetown Law School was way around the bend on this one, and I hope there's more discussion and furor. And also, according to Dershowitz, stifling free speech by the politically correct mob has become an epidemic in academia. https://www.newsweek.com/georgetown-fires-professor-agonizing-over-black-students-grades-opinion-1576636

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 19, 2021, 08:49:50 PM
Quote from: Caracal on March 19, 2021, 06:35:04 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 19, 2021, 06:04:29 PM

Secondly, expression is sacrosanct.  It is a cornerstone of American civilization.  It is actually more important than the possibility that someone might do something bad.  Again, we have mechanisms to rectify and combat bad people's bad actions.  Now you want to silence their ideas? 


Do you think your limitations and restrictions are going to change anything for the better?

You keep saying you know that the first amendment just applies to governments, but then you write stuff like this and I don't now if you do. Free expression doesn't mean you can't get fired for your beliefs or for things you say. It has never meant that. There never has been some principle that everyone can say anything they want and not face consequences for it. That's not what people like J.S Mill thought. its just something you've made up.

Yeeeeesssss Caracal.  Pedantry is not a debate point.  You have no esoteric understanding.

Did I ever mention the First Amendment?  Please don't strawman.

I am saying, very simply, that once we allow corporate and governmental entities, our employers, the ability to censor us outside the workplace we are in very dangerous waters.  I simply use "free speech" as a familiar concept.  I see our lack of protections from our employers as a threat to the freedoms enshrined in our contract with the government.

I am saying we need protection from employers who would censor us.

I am also saying that universities who fire professors for complaining privately about black students is in the same territory as those who demand Dr. Seuss be shut down. 

I am further saying that one think of this issue very one-dimensionally and do not seem to comprehend that you could be on the chopping block.  I am guessing you are not a MAGA hat wearing person?  Might you have expressed yourself on social media or in a private email?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 19, 2021, 09:26:07 PM
I don't much care for Dershowitz, but read the essay:

"The chilling effect on freedom of expression and freedom of belief was perhaps best reflected by the abject apologies issued by both participants in the conversation."

"Those of us who strongly believe in academic freedom, freedom of thought and expression and true diversity of ideas must fight back against the groupthink now being imposed by university administrators, at the demand of students and others who seek to censor certain ideas. Firing professors for expressing deeply felt angst and honestly believed positions on complex matters is simply un-American. Georgetown is better than that, and must do better for the sake of all Americans who have the right to hear all points of view on divisive issues."

I think, Caracal, that Dershowitz understands the First Amendment.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 20, 2021, 08:35:41 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 19, 2021, 09:26:07 PM
I don't much care for Dershowitz, but read the essay:

"The chilling effect on freedom of expression and freedom of belief was perhaps best reflected by the abject apologies issued by both participants in the conversation."

"Those of us who strongly believe in academic freedom, freedom of thought and expression and true diversity of ideas must fight back against the groupthink now being imposed by university administrators, at the demand of students and others who seek to censor certain ideas. Firing professors for expressing deeply felt angst and honestly believed positions on complex matters is simply un-American. Georgetown is better than that, and must do better for the sake of all Americans who have the right to hear all points of view on divisive issues."

I think, Caracal, that Dershowitz understands the First Amendment.

I don't love Dershowitz either but I am thinking more 'don't look a gift horse in the mouth.' The thing was said correctly and it needed to be said by someone who gets written about when he has something to say.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 10, 2021, 08:30:26 AM
eBay takes the moral stand: https://www.businessinsider.com/discontinued-dr-seuss-books-with-racist-imagery-removed-by-ebay-2021-3

While continuing to make pornography available to children
https://community.ebay.com/t5/Archive-Bidding-Buying/why-does-ebay-allow-sellers-to-sell-pornography/td-p/20416984
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 10, 2021, 09:11:05 AM
Dershowitz is just angry that the people of Martha's Vineyard won't talk to him any more, ever since he got all Trumpy.

Why they ever bothered to be nice to a man whose first wife disappeared under suspicious circumstances and who then made it his life's work to defend men who'd definitely murdered their wives, and who was a platinum Epstein-club fanboy, I don't know.

As for campus free speech, the real threat remains the right (https://theintercept.com/2021/04/10/campus-reform-koch-young-americans-for-freedom-leadership-institute/).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on April 10, 2021, 10:27:42 AM
Remember when Dershowitz cancelled Norm Finkelstein: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#Tenure_rejection_and_resignation

Funny, I don't remember conservatives complaining about that
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 10, 2021, 03:37:43 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on April 10, 2021, 10:27:42 AM
Remember when Dershowitz cancelled Norm Finkelstein: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#Tenure_rejection_and_resignation

Funny, I don't remember conservatives complaining about that

Perfect example of why we need to protect freedom of expression on the campus.

As I posted before, people only imagine the sword cutting one way (and then all the bad people will have to shut up) but it's a double-edged weapon.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: pepsi_alum on April 10, 2021, 09:23:06 PM
I mostly don't post in culture war threads because I figure that people have spent their entire lives figuring out their own beliefs and that arguing about it probably isn't going to change minds. I did want to quickly weigh in here. According to WorldCat, And to Think that I Saw It on Mulberry Street is still available at 3,007 libraries (https://www.worldcat.org/title/and-to-think-that-i-saw-it-on-mulberry-street/oclc/1091996916&referer=brief_results) and McElligot's Pool is still available at 2,232 libraries (https://www.worldcat.org/title/mcelligots-pool/oclc/894497003&referer=brief_results), including the library of several college/universities that are supposedly at the vanguard of cancel culture.

As for the issue that W_R raises about college faculty/staff being fired over spurious allegations of discriminatory behavior that have possible freedom of speech issues associated with them, I think there is an important discussion to be had there. But it will be much more productive conversation if discussed separately from Dr. Seuss.

Just my $.02. That plus $0.50 won't get you a cup of coffee anymore, but you can still use it toward your purchase of either the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal depending on your political beliefs.



PS--Not sure if you can see the location I used in WorldCat. I'm not actually in Washington state -- I just used Olympia as my location to make the point that Evergreen State College does still have a circulating copy of at least one of the Dr. Seuss books in question.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 11, 2021, 06:26:37 AM
Quote from: pepsi_alum on April 10, 2021, 09:23:06 PM

As for the issue that W_R raises about college faculty/staff being fired over spurious allegations of discriminatory behavior that have possible freedom of speech issues associated with them, I think there is an important discussion to be had there. But it will be much more productive conversation if discussed separately from Dr. Seuss.


There's also the issue of students who are not to the left politically fearing getting ostracized and thus not feeling free express themselves in and out of the classroom.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/02/evidence-conservative-students-really-do-self-censor/606559/

'Disparaging comments about political conservatives are common.'

For the educator who worries about college faculty/staff being fired over spurious allegations of discriminatory behavior that have possible freedom of speech issues associated with them, it makes sense to focus on the student experience, since
1. Most of us don't have structural academic freedom protection anyway; the only way to cause a furor is to get the press on board, not an easy chore
2. So many faculty are largely isolated from recognition for research, promotion, etc. and are thus pointedly expendable, another mouth to feed,
3. Students, OTOH, have to be listened to because they are where the money comes from, not where it goes.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on April 11, 2021, 06:44:50 AM
Quote from: pepsi_alum on April 10, 2021, 09:23:06 PM
I mostly don't post in culture war threads because I figure that people have spent their entire lives figuring out their own beliefs and that arguing about it probably isn't going to change minds. I did want to quickly weigh in here. According to WorldCat, And to Think that I Saw It on Mulberry Street is still available at 3,007 libraries (https://www.worldcat.org/title/and-to-think-that-i-saw-it-on-mulberry-street/oclc/1091996916&referer=brief_results) and McElligot's Pool is still available at 2,232 libraries (https://www.worldcat.org/title/mcelligots-pool/oclc/894497003&referer=brief_results), including the library of several college/universities that are supposedly at the vanguard of cancel culture.

As for the issue that W_R raises about college faculty/staff being fired over spurious allegations of discriminatory behavior that have possible freedom of speech issues associated with them, I think there is an important discussion to be had there. But it will be much more productive conversation if discussed separately from Dr. Seuss.

Just my $.02. That plus $0.50 won't get you a cup of coffee anymore, but you can still use it toward your purchase of either the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal depending on your political beliefs.



PS--Not sure if you can see the location I used in WorldCat. I'm not actually in Washington state -- I just used Olympia as my location to make the point that Evergreen State College does still have a circulating copy of at least one of the Dr. Seuss books in question.

That's my issue with these discussions. Twenty different things get wound up into a big ball-you stick a label on it that says "cancel culture" and then start yelling about it.

This article
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/10/us/politics/kristine-hostetter-capitol.html?action=click&module=In%20Other%20News&pgtype=Homepage

is a good example of the problem. There's just no attempt by anybody here, including the reporter, to actually distinguish between the different threads of the problem and there are a lot of distinct issues which could be treated separately.

1. Was this person just in Washington participating in a political protest many people might find repugnant or were they involved in an illegal and violent attack on the capitol building.

2. The issue of this person's general behavior in the community. I'd be concerned about a fourth grade teacher who screams at families for wearing masks just as a basic issue of good judgement and acceptable treatment of others separate from all the politics behind it.

3. The more complicated issue of political affiliations and the free speech rights of public employees. Courts have held that these rights are extensive, but not absolute. For example, the upheld the firing of police officers for racist speech online or going to white supremacist conferences. Its hard to figure out how to apply that to a really overheated political climate with lots of radicalization going on.

4. The stuff about her husband, which seems not particularly germane. Ok, he seems like a bad dude, but what does that have to do with anything. You can't hold someone responsible for their spouse's actions.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: pepsi_alum on April 11, 2021, 08:05:13 AM
Totally agree, Caracal. I find the whole idea of "cancel culture" frustratingly imprecise. NBC can cancel a television show because of low ratings. I can cancel an Amazon.com shopping order that I made at 2am. The associate vice chancellor of Southern North Dakota State University at Hoople East River campus can cancel a planned speech to alumni donors because he tests positive for Covid. But I can't "cancel" another person or text I don't like. I can withdraw my support or choose to boycott them, but I can't compel other people to do the same against their will, nor should I be able to.

Mahagonny: if you want to start another thread about student free speech issues, go ahead. We still may not reach a meeting of the minds, but I think we'll find more points of common ground if we consider the issue on its own merits. (For the record, I am a political progressive but I don't use critical pedagogy in my own classes).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 11, 2021, 08:30:28 AM
Quote from: pepsi_alum on April 11, 2021, 08:05:13 AM
Totally agree, Caracal. I find the whole idea of "cancel culture" frustratingly imprecise. NBC can cancel a television show because of low ratings. I can cancel an Amazon.com shopping order that I made at 2am. The associate vice chancellor of Southern North Dakota State University at Hoople East River campus can cancel a planned speech to alumni donors because he tests positive for Covid. But I can't "cancel" another person or text I don't like. I can withdraw my support or choose to boycott them, but I can't compel other people to do the same against their will, nor should I be able to.

What they are really cancelling is your opportunity to think differently from the new liberal orthodoxy, unless you're going to deftly keep it to yourself. By adopting a black lives matter agenda a public school effectively becomes a religious school.
on edit: the student, Esther, recalled that her experience in the classroom with Hostetter was acceptably free of racism as Hostetter taught the kids to be racially colorblind. But she can't do that anymore because the school has signed on with BLM, or they're on the verge of it. So she's now officially a racist. So why would it surprise us if she feels like acting like one here and there? She's branded. The colorblind ethic of MLK is being scrapped.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on April 11, 2021, 08:52:46 AM
Quote from: pepsi_alum on April 11, 2021, 08:05:13 AM
Totally agree, Caracal. I find the whole idea of "cancel culture" frustratingly imprecise. NBC can cancel a television show because of low ratings. I can cancel an Amazon.com shopping order that I made at 2am. The associate vice chancellor of Southern North Dakota State University at Hoople East River campus can cancel a planned speech to alumni donors because he tests positive for Covid. But I can't "cancel" another person or text I don't like. I can withdraw my support or choose to boycott them, but I can't compel other people to do the same against their will, nor should I be able to.


Yeah, exactly. And NBC can also cancel a show with good ratings because they decide that they don't want to be associated with the star's politics. There's no right to have a tv show. Public employees have a limited right to express their views without retaliation.  People employed by private employees mostly don't. Faculty members with tenure have rights of academic freedom, which is a different thing. None of us get to be immune to what other people think of our speech.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on April 11, 2021, 10:00:47 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 10, 2021, 03:37:43 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on April 10, 2021, 10:27:42 AM
Remember when Dershowitz cancelled Norm Finkelstein: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein#Tenure_rejection_and_resignation

Funny, I don't remember conservatives complaining about that

Perfect example of why we need to protect freedom of expression on the campus.

As I posted before, people only imagine the sword cutting one way (and then all the bad people will have to shut up) but it's a double-edged weapon.

Great! I'll look forward to the threads from you and others about conservative efforts to cancel people, since we both apparently agree that this is not something that is specific to liberals or Democrats. I'd start with the efforts to cancel the 1619 project, then move on to the attacks on Colin Kirkpatrick's right to free expression (and that of other athletes). If you want something more recent, how about calls by people like Moscow Mitch and Rand Paul for boycotts on MLB or Coca Cola. All of these are more chilling of speech than Dr. Seuss deciding not to print a few of their own books, each is deeply inconsistent with conservative "values," and each was actually endorsed by conservative media and/or politicians.

Looking forward to a rousing discussion of the various conservative efforts to cancel speech!

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 11, 2021, 10:14:03 AM
QuoteNone of us get to be immune to what other people think of our speech.

Not always true anymore, by a long shot. Black rap artists and comedians are immune from what other people think about their use of 'the N-word.' If that were not true, white people would be able to say, en masse, or at least in majority, 'cut it out.' They have special identity-derived rights to passive-aggression.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: pepsi_alum on April 11, 2021, 10:14:29 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 11, 2021, 08:30:28 AM
Quote from: pepsi_alum on April 11, 2021, 08:05:13 AM
Totally agree, Caracal. I find the whole idea of "cancel culture" frustratingly imprecise. NBC can cancel a television show because of low ratings. I can cancel an Amazon.com shopping order that I made at 2am. The associate vice chancellor of Southern North Dakota State University at Hoople East River campus can cancel a planned speech to alumni donors because he tests positive for Covid. But I can't "cancel" another person or text I don't like. I can withdraw my support or choose to boycott them, but I can't compel other people to do the same against their will, nor should I be able to.

What they are really cancelling is your opportunity to think differently from the new liberal orthodoxy, unless you're going to deftly keep it to yourself. By adopting a black lives matter agenda a public school effectively becomes a religious school.
on edit: the student, Esther, recalled that her experience in the classroom with Hostetter was acceptably free of racism as Hostetter taught the kids to be racially colorblind. But she can't do that anymore because the school has signed on with BLM, or they're on the verge of it. So she's now officially a racist. So why would it surprise us if she feels like acting like one here and there? She's branded. The colorblind ethic of MLK is being scrapped.

Mahagonny: it's clear we're not going to reach agreement in this thread, and that's fine with me. I don't have any desire to pick a personal fight with you over deeply-held personal beliefs. I have just three quick points that I would make in response. Feel free to interpret them as you will:

1) On the point about freedom of thought, I agree in principle that we can't actively force people to believe things they don't. As a social scientist who self-identifies as politically progressive, I don't identify with a critical pedagogy approach to teaching, and when I mention things like critical race theory, I'm always careful to present it as one possible academic perspective rather than absolute truth. No one has ever accused me of being ideologically biased in my teaching evaluations.

2) I think the crux of our disagreement is about whether it's epistemically possible to cancel someone in the first place. You say in your reply that "what they are really canceling is your opportunity to think differently from the new liberal orthodoxy." I would maintain that I cannot forcibly compel anyone to change their own political beliefs against their will. But if Person 1 chooses to say "I am no longer associating with Person 2 because I find their beliefs abhorrent," I don't see that as canceling. I see that as the marketplace of ideas in action. Other people are still free to form their beliefs about whether or not Person 1's reactions are justified. 

3) Finally—and I realize I'm getting into the weeds here—I would not characterize MLK Jr.'s vision of race relations as color-blind. Sections of "I Have a Dream" sound color-blind, but that notion isn't there in later speeches like "A Time to Break Silence" or "I've Been to the Mountaintop." I'm not aware of any serious work claiming that King personally endorsed color-blindness. (The two of white biographers who wrote the most detailed accounts of his life—Taylor Branch and David Garrow—certainly didn't believe he was, and Branch isn't even an academic).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on April 11, 2021, 11:38:56 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 11, 2021, 10:14:03 AM
QuoteNone of us get to be immune to what other people think of our speech.

Not always true anymore, by a long shot. Black rap artists and comedians are immune from what other people think about their use of 'the N-word.' If that were not true, white people would be able to say, en masse, or at least in majority, 'cut it out.' They have special identity-derived rights to passive-aggression.

This is what I mean about the incoherence.

There's nothing unusual about groups using terms to refer to themselves that are derogatory when used by other people. Its so common as to be almost universal. You seem to oddly view it as about fairness, as if using the N word is some great privilege that's being denied to you even though others get to use it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 11, 2021, 11:53:22 AM
Quote from: Caracal on April 11, 2021, 11:38:56 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 11, 2021, 10:14:03 AM
QuoteNone of us get to be immune to what other people think of our speech.

Not always true anymore, by a long shot. Black rap artists and comedians are immune from what other people think about their use of 'the N-word.' If that were not true, white people would be able to say, en masse, or at least in majority, 'cut it out.' They have special identity-derived rights to passive-aggression.

This is what I mean about the incoherence.

There's nothing unusual about groups using terms to refer to themselves that are derogatory when used by other people. Its so common as to be almost universal. You seem to oddly view it as about fairness, as if using the N word is some great privilege that's being denied to you even though others get to use it.

The big problem with this in in classes. If a class is studying a text, piece of music, etc., which contains those kinds of words written by someone within one of those groups, the current cultural trend is that even in that context anyone not from that group* can't use the word, even in discussing the work. And yet, those same people who would criticize anyone else using the word would be offended if the work were removed from discussion in the first place.


*Including the instructor.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 11, 2021, 01:13:21 PM
Quote from: Caracal on April 11, 2021, 11:38:56 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 11, 2021, 10:14:03 AM
QuoteNone of us get to be immune to what other people think of our speech.

Not always true anymore, by a long shot. Black rap artists and comedians are immune from what other people think about their use of 'the N-word.' If that were not true, white people would be able to say, en masse, or at least in majority, 'cut it out.' They have special identity-derived rights to passive-aggression.

This is what I mean about the incoherence.

There's nothing unusual about groups using terms to refer to themselves that are derogatory when used by other people. Its so common as to be almost universal. You seem to oddly view it as about fairness, as if using the N word is some great privilege that's being denied to you even though others get to use it.

Sorry; wrong.
I don't want to say it. I want everyone to stop saying it.
'The N-word' is considered the worst word in the English language. Look at all the words I can type: Lymey. Kike. Faggot. Polak. Cunt. etc. Can't do that one though. And that's why certain people love to use it. It's a white guilt inducer. Taunting.
This all ties in with the common practice of denying black animosity towards whites. And whites being too cowed to make living space for ourselves.
I don't use those words. But I don't have to listen to them either. Not very often. Whereas 'the N-word' is as common in some genres of sonic recorded entertainment (I won't say 'music') as 'love' is in an old-fashioned musical play.
John Mulaney explains....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mg0UWxhJkfk
It's unhealthy for POC to be saying the word too. It's not good for them. Richard Pryor talked about that candidly, later in his career.

on edit: If I can get fired for uttering a certain word, even once, and then apologizing, I don't want to hear anyone using that word. I don't want it on the airwaves. As a courtesy. I don't want it on my brain. It's a fair request, I believe. Of course, I am crazy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 08, 2021, 08:54:20 PM
Cypress College Professor suspended for comments regarding police (https://ktla.com/news/local-news/cypress-college-professor-on-leave-following-viral-video-of-heated-exchange-with-student-who-called-police-heroes-during-online-class/)

Faculty union defends her (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2021/05/06/cypress-college-criticized-faculty-union-not-defending-teacher/4971840001/)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on May 09, 2021, 05:03:44 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 08, 2021, 08:54:20 PM
Cypress College Professor suspended for comments regarding police (https://ktla.com/news/local-news/cypress-college-professor-on-leave-following-viral-video-of-heated-exchange-with-student-who-called-police-heroes-during-online-class/)

Faculty union defends her (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2021/05/06/cypress-college-criticized-faculty-union-not-defending-teacher/4971840001/)

Unless I'm missing something here, it isn't a thing that should get anyone in trouble. I can't say I really understand what she's doing. Interrupting students in the middle of presentations could be fine if its about teaching them to respond to questions on their feet, but if you're going to do it with some students, you'd better do it with all of them, not just ones whose projects you disagree with.

The whole thing seems to be doing a poor job of modeling academic discourse. When students say something I think is wrong, poorly thought out and offensive, I focus on the poorly thought out part. Who cares what my opinions are, and what I'm offended by? My role in class is to insist that we need to back up assertions with evidence and clear arguments.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 09, 2021, 06:50:25 AM
Quote from: Caracal on May 09, 2021, 05:03:44 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 08, 2021, 08:54:20 PM
Cypress College Professor suspended for comments regarding police (https://ktla.com/news/local-news/cypress-college-professor-on-leave-following-viral-video-of-heated-exchange-with-student-who-called-police-heroes-during-online-class/)

Faculty union defends her (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2021/05/06/cypress-college-criticized-faculty-union-not-defending-teacher/4971840001/)

Unless I'm missing something here, it isn't a thing that should get anyone in trouble. I can't say I really understand what she's doing. Interrupting students in the middle of presentations could be fine if its about teaching them to respond to questions on their feet, but if you're going to do it with some students, you'd better do it with all of them, not just ones whose projects you disagree with.


That's right. If instead it were a student talking in favour of BLM, and a prof kept interrupting to talk about riots, financial concerns, and so on, I doubt that the people supporting this prof would be equally supportive.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on May 09, 2021, 07:09:46 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 09, 2021, 06:50:25 AM
Quote from: Caracal on May 09, 2021, 05:03:44 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 08, 2021, 08:54:20 PM
Cypress College Professor suspended for comments regarding police (https://ktla.com/news/local-news/cypress-college-professor-on-leave-following-viral-video-of-heated-exchange-with-student-who-called-police-heroes-during-online-class/)

Faculty union defends her (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2021/05/06/cypress-college-criticized-faculty-union-not-defending-teacher/4971840001/)

Unless I'm missing something here, it isn't a thing that should get anyone in trouble. I can't say I really understand what she's doing. Interrupting students in the middle of presentations could be fine if its about teaching them to respond to questions on their feet, but if you're going to do it with some students, you'd better do it with all of them, not just ones whose projects you disagree with.


That's right. If instead it were a student talking in favour of BLM, and a prof kept interrupting to talk about riots, financial concerns, and so on, I doubt that the people supporting this prof would be equally supportive.

They're getting shown the door for asking people to think practically and avoid danger, even in red states.  https://nypost.com/2021/05/06/alaska-teacher-on-leave-after-racially-insensitive-george-floyd-comments/

A lot of it now is not what is being said but who as doing the talking. If a white teacher says 'don't go out dressing a certain way. Dress neatly and grown-up. Don't walk around looking like heap of laundry. You arouse suspicion.' She's considered racist. If a black teacher said 'what a pathetic country this is! Police pick on people just because of the way they're dressed but only when they are POC.' She's speaking 'truth to power.'
Whereas they are almost saying the same thing, for the standpoint of practical decision making and looking out for the students' safety.

Quote from: Caracal on May 09, 2021, 05:03:44 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 08, 2021, 08:54:20 PM
Cypress College Professor suspended for comments regarding police (https://ktla.com/news/local-news/cypress-college-professor-on-leave-following-viral-video-of-heated-exchange-with-student-who-called-police-heroes-during-online-class/)

Faculty union defends her (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2021/05/06/cypress-college-criticized-faculty-union-not-defending-teacher/4971840001/)

Unless I'm missing something here, it isn't a thing that should get anyone in trouble. I can't say I really understand what she's doing. Interrupting students in the middle of presentations could be fine if its about teaching them to respond to questions on their feet, but if you're going to do it with some students, you'd better do it with all of them, not just ones whose projects you disagree with.

The whole thing seems to be doing a poor job of modeling academic discourse. When students say something I think is wrong, poorly thought out and offensive, I focus on the poorly thought out part. Who cares what my opinions are, and what I'm offended by? My role in class is to insist that we need to back up assertions with evidence and clear arguments.

As an aside, the question 'who cares what Professor Caracal's opinions are?' is already answered. They are the acceptable ones. They don't need reinforcing.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on May 09, 2021, 04:52:43 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on May 09, 2021, 07:09:46 AM

As an aside, the question 'who cares what Professor Caracal's opinions are?' is already answered. They are the acceptable ones. They don't need reinforcing.

What a strange thing to write.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 09, 2021, 05:17:46 PM
Quote from: Caracal on May 09, 2021, 04:52:43 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on May 09, 2021, 07:09:46 AM

As an aside, the question 'who cares what Professor Caracal's opinions are?' is already answered. They are the acceptable ones. They don't need reinforcing.

What a strange thing to write.

I think he just means that your views are standard for us "liberals" and so will not be challenged, and only be reinforced, in the academe. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on May 09, 2021, 06:47:34 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 09, 2021, 05:17:46 PM
Quote from: Caracal on May 09, 2021, 04:52:43 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on May 09, 2021, 07:09:46 AM

As an aside, the question 'who cares what Professor Caracal's opinions are?' is already answered. They are the acceptable ones. They don't need reinforcing.

What a strange thing to write.

I think he just means that your views are standard for us "liberals" and so will not be challenged, and only be reinforced, in the academe.

Thank you.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on May 10, 2021, 04:40:19 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on May 09, 2021, 06:47:34 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 09, 2021, 05:17:46 PM
Quote from: Caracal on May 09, 2021, 04:52:43 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on May 09, 2021, 07:09:46 AM

As an aside, the question 'who cares what Professor Caracal's opinions are?' is already answered. They are the acceptable ones. They don't need reinforcing.

What a strange thing to write.

I think he just means that your views are standard for us "liberals" and so will not be challenged, and only be reinforced, in the academe.

Thank you.

Except we were talking about something totally different, and whatever he thinks about my views, the larger point is that they aren't particularly interesting or important to students. When I teach, I'm trying to show students how they can think with more context, perspective and rigor. I'm not sure why weird remarks about my supposedly conventional political views are appropriate...Seems like that kind of thing violates rules...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on May 10, 2021, 06:05:08 AM
More...https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/05/10/cypress-college-faces-threats-and-allegations-failing-be-antiracist

This confrontation and fallout are heating up. Perhaps this warrants its own thread, but I won't start one, because then it will dead in the water.  Trust your instincts, forumites.

The adjunct union is faulting the administration for not being sufficiently anti-racist. Also not protecting the most vulnerable, which is (three guesses)

"District faculty members of color or those belonging to other minority groups have been disproportionately affected, the union said, as they are "more likely to become targets of white supremacist organizations, news outlets, and individuals." Ultimately, "the failure to issue a clear and strong statement of support for faculty under the existing circumstances is a failure to be anti-racist. It is a failure to protect our most vulnerable faculty."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 10, 2021, 06:59:39 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on May 10, 2021, 06:05:08 AM
More...https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/05/10/cypress-college-faces-threats-and-allegations-failing-be-antiracist


The prof's claim is that this exchange was during the Q and A after the student's presentation. I hope someone can confirm or deny that. Also, I'd like to see how the prof responded to other presentations, to see whether that degree of confrontation was unique to this student.

If the prof's actions were consistent with how all other students were treated, then it's different than if this one was singled out.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on May 10, 2021, 07:10:54 AM
My classes are full of moments that, taken out of context, would give the Fox News crowd several news cycles worth of entertainment.

It's about positing alternative points of view, whether or not the instructor agrees with these points of view.

It was a debate class. It's all about putting up counterarguments no matter what the student says.

SMDH.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on May 10, 2021, 07:29:13 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 10, 2021, 07:10:54 AM
My classes are full of moments that, taken out of context, would give the Fox News crowd several news cycles worth of entertainment.

It's about positing alternative points of view, whether or not the instructor agrees with these points of view.

It was a debate class. It's all about putting up counterarguments no matter what the student says.

SMDH.

Sure, that's how it ought to work. But do you intentionally put up shitty counterarguments to 'challenge' the student, like these ones? Or do you make sure there is something to them? Honestly curious.

'Salim says, "Yet, a lot of police officers have committed an atrocious crime and have gotten away with it and have never been convicted of any of it."
Ellis says, "This is what I believe. I do support our police. We have bad people, and the people that do bad things should be brought to justice. I agree with that."
The exchange continues, with Salim saying she has family members who are police officers, and asking if police officers belong on TV shows for children, alongside other kind of heroes. She also argues that modern policing has its roots in groups who tracked down runaway enslaved persons in South.
'
Many people have relatives who are police officers, and many academics have relatives that they can barely stand to hang out with a whole afternoon on Mothers' Day. So that's nothing.
As for the 'roots' argument I could use the same argument to claim that you should never listen to your doctor when he talks about tobacco use, since in decades past some physicians endorsed cigarette brands in commercials. Essentially a guilt by association smear. Which, BTW, describes a lot of what the 'antiracists' are doing.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on May 11, 2021, 10:13:21 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 10, 2021, 06:59:39 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on May 10, 2021, 06:05:08 AM
More...https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/05/10/cypress-college-faces-threats-and-allegations-failing-be-antiracist


The prof's claim is that this exchange was during the Q and A after the student's presentation. I hope someone can confirm or deny that. Also, I'd like to see how the prof responded to other presentations, to see whether that degree of confrontation was unique to this student.

If the prof's actions were consistent with how all other students were treated, then it's different than if this one was singled out.

The prof should still be terminated for suggesting that you can't trust the police to protect you in the event of an intruder in your home or other threat. This endangers students.
Perhaps ironically, she's only an adjunct; whereas the loopy ideas she's espousing come mostly from the liberal tenured culture who would be solidly protected in her situation. 'So it goes' as Vonnegut might have said.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on May 11, 2021, 11:37:24 AM
con't, example:

https://www.mediaite.com/news/msnbcs-eddie-glaude-says-to-prepare-for-the-reaction-of-the-police-after-chauvin-guilty-verdict/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 30, 2021, 07:33:16 AM
UNC Professor with "Incendiary" Social Media Post (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/06/30/trustee-says-unc-wilmington-isnt-doing-enough-about-professors-facebook-post)

Lawyers trolling for business? (https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/don-t-let-an-employee-s-incendiary-2749546/)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on June 30, 2021, 07:18:45 PM
Interesting hypothetical:

Professor I. M. Whiteguy has a date to begin antiracism training beginning around Fall 2021. He attends through all the sessions, reporting his self-identified white man status (cisgender, heterosexual, if it involves these) and passes with flying colors. Meanwhile he goes on social media in the evening ridiculing the whole affair, play by play, without naming the school. Protected speech or not?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: waterboy on July 01, 2021, 02:26:24 PM
Certainly should be. Obnoxious speech is supposed to be protected.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on July 01, 2021, 02:56:02 PM
Quote from: waterboy on July 01, 2021, 02:26:24 PM
Certainly should be. Obnoxious speech is supposed to be protected.

Of course. How else will the terminally offended keep themselves in condition?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on August 10, 2021, 09:04:10 AM
Faculty, we have met the enemy and it is us (https://www.chronicle.com/article/faculty-we-have-met-the-enemy-and-it-is-us) from the CHE magazine.

Another academic freedom issue.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on August 11, 2021, 03:41:19 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 10, 2021, 09:04:10 AM
Faculty, we have met the enemy and it is us (https://www.chronicle.com/article/faculty-we-have-met-the-enemy-and-it-is-us) from the CHE magazine.

Another academic freedom issue.

Even though the chronicle takes his side, they don't even bother to dispute that he was terminated legally? I thought tenure was hard to get because there are a lot of hoops to jump through. Keeping proper contact with your department chair during research leave is one of those hoops. So why should he get special allowances? All the chronicle argument alleges is that the university might have have had an ulterior motive in getting rid of him. Even if they did, that doesn't excuse him from doing his job.
He's even brazen enough to shake them down for a settlement to avoid publicity. Well, what should you expect from an 'antiracism work' scholar. One of the cool people.
https://www.oxfordeagle.com/2021/07/29/university-of-mississippi-reaches-settlement-agreement-with-former-history-professor/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on August 16, 2021, 09:29:30 AM
I have no profound thoughts on the matter...but I did point out that censorship, government or otherwise, works both ways.  We always imagine that we will shut down the bad people with their bad ideas by, essentially, frightening them into silence----and it can happen to us to.

This is paywalled I think.  From the CHE:

'Be Paranoid': Professors Who Teach About Race Approach the Fall With Anxiety
Will administrators stand behind faculty members told not to discuss 'divisive' topics? (https://www.chronicle.com/article/be-paranoid-professors-who-teach-about-race-approach-the-fall-with-anxiety%5B/url)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on August 16, 2021, 12:43:40 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 16, 2021, 09:29:30 AM
I have no profound thoughts on the matter...but I did point out that censorship, government or otherwise, works both ways.  We always imagine that we will shut down the bad people with their bad ideas by, essentially, frightening them into silence----and it can happen to us to.

This is paywalled I think.  From the CHE:

'Be Paranoid': Professors Who Teach About Race Approach the Fall With Anxiety
Will administrators stand behind faculty members told not to discuss 'divisive' topics? (https://www.chronicle.com/article/be-paranoid-professors-who-teach-about-race-approach-the-fall-with-anxiety%5B/url)

In the current climate around race, is there any topic that isn't 'divisive'?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on August 16, 2021, 03:04:33 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 16, 2021, 09:29:30 AM
I have no profound thoughts on the matter...but I did point out that censorship, government or otherwise, works both ways.  We always imagine that we will shut down the bad people with their bad ideas by, essentially, frightening them into silence----and it can happen to us to.

This is paywalled I think.  From the CHE:

'Be Paranoid': Professors Who Teach About Race Approach the Fall With Anxiety
Will administrators stand behind faculty members told not to discuss 'divisive' topics? (https://www.chronicle.com/article/be-paranoid-professors-who-teach-about-race-approach-the-fall-with-anxiety%5B/url)

But he's now at Yale. And being 'shut down' by a 'lesser' institution is a feather in his, and Yale's, hats, despite that he fucked up on following the simplest of rules, perhaps intentionally. And the fact that he picked up a nice booty by threatening a lawsuit (who's paying for that settlement? - let me take wild guess: parents and students who borrow money) will be seen as striking a blow for the cause of freedom, truth, and human progress. Such is the tenure track dynasty and its inability to see itself as anything other than eminently holy.
And BTW, higher ed already loves to shut down unpopular ideas. It's called 'dump the adjunct. He didn't kiss my ass properly.' That ship has sailed.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on August 17, 2021, 12:09:40 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on August 16, 2021, 12:43:40 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 16, 2021, 09:29:30 AM
I have no profound thoughts on the matter...but I did point out that censorship, government or otherwise, works both ways.  We always imagine that we will shut down the bad people with their bad ideas by, essentially, frightening them into silence----and it can happen to us to.

This is paywalled I think.  From the CHE:

'Be Paranoid': Professors Who Teach About Race Approach the Fall With Anxiety
Will administrators stand behind faculty members told not to discuss 'divisive' topics? (https://www.chronicle.com/article/be-paranoid-professors-who-teach-about-race-approach-the-fall-with-anxiety%5B/url)

In the current climate around race, is there any topic that isn't 'divisive'?

see PM

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 08, 2021, 01:40:53 PM
Another professor quits in protest to intolerant academia. Or maybe just to keep his own sanity.

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/my-university-sacrificed-ideas-for
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 08, 2021, 06:35:48 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 08, 2021, 01:40:53 PM
Another professor quits in protest to intolerant academia. Or maybe just to keep his own sanity.

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/my-university-sacrificed-ideas-for

On the one hand, this guy has performed some absolutely brilliant and hilarious stings in academic publishing----the humanities do not come across well.  Nor in these instances should they.  Instead of celebrating his brilliance, he is censured. 

On the other hand, he brings pure irrational, hatemongering nutjobs like Carl Benjamin to campus and then bemoans the irrational responses he foments.  So I dunno...

This is certainly bad press for Portland State.

I just keep posting these types of articles to push back against the notion that this sort of doesn't happen much in academia.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 08, 2021, 07:07:05 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 08, 2021, 06:35:48 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 08, 2021, 01:40:53 PM
Another professor quits in protest to intolerant academia. Or maybe just to keep his own sanity.

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/my-university-sacrificed-ideas-for

On the one hand, this guy has performed some absolutely brilliant and hilarious stings in academic publishing----the humanities do not come across well.  Nor in these instances should they.  Instead of celebrating his brilliance, he is censured. 

On the other hand, he brings pure irrational, hatemongering nutjobs like Carl Benjamin to campus and then bemoans the irrational responses he foments.  So I dunno...

This is certainly bad press for Portland State.

I just keep posting these types of articles to push back against the notion that this sort of doesn't happen much in academia.

The thing about academia's role in the cancel culture of the left today is not to talk to it in order to get it to change, but to talk about it with the right people, so that hopefully something can be done. Academia itself is probably at the point of no return.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on September 08, 2021, 07:44:17 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 08, 2021, 07:07:05 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 08, 2021, 06:35:48 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 08, 2021, 01:40:53 PM
Another professor quits in protest to intolerant academia. Or maybe just to keep his own sanity.

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/my-university-sacrificed-ideas-for

On the one hand, this guy has performed some absolutely brilliant and hilarious stings in academic publishing----the humanities do not come across well.  Nor in these instances should they.  Instead of celebrating his brilliance, he is censured. 

On the other hand, he brings pure irrational, hatemongering nutjobs like Carl Benjamin to campus and then bemoans the irrational responses he foments.  So I dunno...

This is certainly bad press for Portland State.

I just keep posting these types of articles to push back against the notion that this sort of doesn't happen much in academia.

The thing about academia's role in the cancel culture of the left today is not to talk to it in order to get it to change, but to talk about it with the right people, so that hopefully something can be done. Academia itself is probably at the point of no return.

Does this guy do any real research or just troll clownish journals with fake papers?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 09, 2021, 04:29:09 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 08, 2021, 06:35:48 PM

On the other hand, he brings pure irrational, hatemongering nutjobs like Carl Benjamin to campus and then bemoans the irrational responses he foments.  So I dunno...

This is certainly bad press for Portland State.

I just keep posting these types of articles to push back against the notion that this sort of doesn't happen much in academia.

Can you give an example of Carl Benjamin's hate speech?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 09, 2021, 06:09:03 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 09, 2021, 04:29:09 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 08, 2021, 06:35:48 PM

On the other hand, he brings pure irrational, hatemongering nutjobs like Carl Benjamin to campus and then bemoans the irrational responses he foments.  So I dunno...

This is certainly bad press for Portland State.

I just keep posting these types of articles to push back against the notion that this sort of doesn't happen much in academia.

Can you give an example of Carl Benjamin's hate speech?

I'm curious about that one as well. Carl Benjamin criticizes a lot of wokeness, but I'm not sure what he says that is either "irrational" or "hatemongering". (In fact, many of his criticisms of wokeness tend to be about the inconsistent, (i.e. "irrational"), nature of many statements or actions taken by the woke.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 10, 2021, 10:43:14 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 09, 2021, 06:09:03 AM

Can you give an example of Carl Benjamin's hate speech?

I'm curious about that one as well. Carl Benjamin criticizes a lot of wokeness, but I'm not sure what he says that is either "irrational" or "hatemongering". (In fact, many of his criticisms of wokeness tend to be about the inconsistent, (i.e. "irrational"), nature of many statements or actions taken by the woke.)
[/quote]

[crickets]

QuoteThis is certainly bad press for Portland State.

The thing is, bad press for Portland State is good news for whomever competes with Portland State for desirable student enrollment. The endgame is always the same: some institutions may appear to be doing a poor job of upholding academic freedom here and there, but it's never a story with any traction, because the people who dominate the discussion all want the same thing, that being that tenure just ends up getting fortified. Whereas what ought to happen is people ought to realize that the tenure system, nationwide, is doing the opposite of what it advertises. It's squelching freedom of expression and consolidating an illiberal (intolerant) 'liberal' orthodoxy. It's a de facto branch of the democratic party. It intends to win the current culture war by passive aggressively casting the moderate conservative middle-right as the instigators and playing the victim.
There will be some who challenge academia to stand up and defend this professor Boghossian, but they will more often be people with no standing among the liberal elite to lose or to influence. People they've already vilified. It will be an in-crowd thing to dismiss anything they write.
https://texasnewstoday.com/piers-morgan-the-woke-destruction-of-a-great-educator-should-terrify-every-one-of-us/451938/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on September 11, 2021, 03:20:20 PM
As far as I can tell the Portland State guy has never produced any notable scholarship and if he is tenure track (the article says he has been an assistant for ten years) would struggle to get tenure, even putting aside his research misconduct investigation. Making a big show of stepping down is a better career move than being denied tenure, I suppose. Maybe he'll get a book deal or something off his diva resignation.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on September 11, 2021, 03:28:48 PM
Since I'm in his discipline, I'm comfortable observing that he has no publications in any real outlets. The closest he comes are two pedagogical pubs in legitimate but very lower-tier journals. If research counts at all in tenure at PSU, then he had zero chance of getting it.

Factor in the disciplinary process against him five years ago, the fact that he's a colossal asshole, and the fact that his pedagogy is clearly irresponsible, and his file has mo redeeming features. He's a clear liability for the department.

He's a nobody who's pissed that the national news media hasn't promoted his quitlit and who hasn't yet realized that Bari Weiss is not the droid he's looking for.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 11, 2021, 03:31:49 PM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 11, 2021, 03:28:48 PM
Since I'm in his discipline, I'm comfortable observing that he has no publications in any real outlets. The closest he comes are two pedagogical pubs in legitimate but very lower-tier journals. If research counts at all in tenure at PSU, then he had zero chance of getting it.

Factor in the disciplinary process against him five years ago, the fact that he's a colossal asshole, and the fact that his pedagogy is clearly irresponsible, and his file has mo redeeming features. He's a clear liability for the department.

He's a nobody who's pissed that the national news media hasn't promoted his quitlit and who hasn't yet realized that Bari Weiss is not the droid he's looking for.

Would get you a reprimand from the forum if you addressed anyone here that way, if they followed their own rules.

ETA: I suppose the professor's heart wasn't in being a lifer academic once he saw what the lay of the land was, politically.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on September 11, 2021, 05:59:32 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 11, 2021, 03:31:49 PM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 11, 2021, 03:28:48 PM
Since I'm in his discipline, I'm comfortable observing that he has no publications in any real outlets. The closest he comes are two pedagogical pubs in legitimate but very lower-tier journals. If research counts at all in tenure at PSU, then he had zero chance of getting it.

Factor in the disciplinary process against him five years ago, the fact that he's a colossal asshole, and the fact that his pedagogy is clearly irresponsible, and his file has mo redeeming features. He's a clear liability for the department.

He's a nobody who's pissed that the national news media hasn't promoted his quitlit and who hasn't yet realized that Bari Weiss is not the droid he's looking for.

Would get you a reprimand from the forum if you addressed anyone here that way, if they followed their own rules.

ETA: I suppose the professor's heart wasn't in being a lifer academic once he saw what the lay of the land was, politically.

It's true, I missed a trick: I should have called him a conceptual asshole.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 11, 2021, 06:51:34 PM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 11, 2021, 05:59:32 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 11, 2021, 03:31:49 PM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 11, 2021, 03:28:48 PM
Since I'm in his discipline, I'm comfortable observing that he has no publications in any real outlets. The closest he comes are two pedagogical pubs in legitimate but very lower-tier journals. If research counts at all in tenure at PSU, then he had zero chance of getting it.

Factor in the disciplinary process against him five years ago, the fact that he's a colossal asshole, and the fact that his pedagogy is clearly irresponsible, and his file has mo redeeming features. He's a clear liability for the department.

He's a nobody who's pissed that the national news media hasn't promoted his quitlit and who hasn't yet realized that Bari Weiss is not the droid he's looking for.

Would get you a reprimand from the forum if you addressed anyone here that way, if they followed their own rules.

ETA: I suppose the professor's heart wasn't in being a lifer academic once he saw what the lay of the land was, politically.

It's true, I missed a trick: I should have called him a conceptual asshole.

Those of us who were paying attention during the Trump years noticed that if an asshole prevents crazy people from carrying out their plans, it's still a good thing done.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on September 11, 2021, 06:59:03 PM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 11, 2021, 03:28:48 PM
Since I'm in his discipline, I'm comfortable observing that he has no publications in any real outlets. The closest he comes are two pedagogical pubs in legitimate but very lower-tier journals. If research counts at all in tenure at PSU, then he had zero chance of getting it.

Factor in the disciplinary process against him five years ago, the fact that he's a colossal asshole, and the fact that his pedagogy is clearly irresponsible, and his file has mo redeeming features. He's a clear liability for the department.

He's a nobody who's pissed that the national news media hasn't promoted his quitlit and who hasn't yet realized that Bari Weiss is not the droid he's looking for.

It is a good career move if you can't cut it as an academic: Quit your job before tenure denial, publicly, of course - be sure to cry about cancel culture and the radical left on your way out the door. And then get a bunch of attention from the conservative "news" ecosystem. From there it is a book deal and speaking engagements.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 11, 2021, 07:30:19 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on September 11, 2021, 06:59:03 PM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 11, 2021, 03:28:48 PM
Since I'm in his discipline, I'm comfortable observing that he has no publications in any real outlets. The closest he comes are two pedagogical pubs in legitimate but very lower-tier journals. If research counts at all in tenure at PSU, then he had zero chance of getting it.

Factor in the disciplinary process against him five years ago, the fact that he's a colossal asshole, and the fact that his pedagogy is clearly irresponsible, and his file has mo redeeming features. He's a clear liability for the department.

He's a nobody who's pissed that the national news media hasn't promoted his quitlit and who hasn't yet realized that Bari Weiss is not the droid he's looking for.

It is a good career move if you can't cut it as an academic: Quit your job before tenure denial, publicly, of course - be sure to cry about cancel culture and the radical left on your way out the door. And then get a bunch of attention from the conservative "news" ecosystem. From there it is a book deal and speaking engagements.

Oh yeah, that conservative news dynasty really has us by the short ones, doesn't it? LOL

The book deals and speaking engagements happen because listeners are drawn to the message. But you don't have to be interested in them if it's not worth your time.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on September 11, 2021, 08:45:27 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 11, 2021, 07:30:19 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on September 11, 2021, 06:59:03 PM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 11, 2021, 03:28:48 PM
Since I'm in his discipline, I'm comfortable observing that he has no publications in any real outlets. The closest he comes are two pedagogical pubs in legitimate but very lower-tier journals. If research counts at all in tenure at PSU, then he had zero chance of getting it.

Factor in the disciplinary process against him five years ago, the fact that he's a colossal asshole, and the fact that his pedagogy is clearly irresponsible, and his file has mo redeeming features. He's a clear liability for the department.

He's a nobody who's pissed that the national news media hasn't promoted his quitlit and who hasn't yet realized that Bari Weiss is not the droid he's looking for.

It is a good career move if you can't cut it as an academic: Quit your job before tenure denial, publicly, of course - be sure to cry about cancel culture and the radical left on your way out the door. And then get a bunch of attention from the conservative "news" ecosystem. From there it is a book deal and speaking engagements.

Oh yeah, that conservative news dynasty really has us by the short ones, doesn't it? LOL


The book deals and speaking engagements happen because listeners are drawn to the message. But you don't have to be interested in them if it's not worth your time.

You don't think there is a conservative news ecosystem (including the Murdoch owned outlets, which are as close to a dynasty as we have in American media) that pumps up the cancel culture and "college is brainwashing our kids with scary ideas" narratives?

And look, if you like this guy from Portland State then good for you. I'm just pointing out that he is not a serious academic.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 11, 2021, 08:54:46 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 09, 2021, 04:29:09 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 08, 2021, 06:35:48 PM

On the other hand, he brings pure irrational, hatemongering nutjobs like Carl Benjamin to campus and then bemoans the irrational responses he foments.  So I dunno...

This is certainly bad press for Portland State.

I just keep posting these types of articles to push back against the notion that this sort of doesn't happen much in academia.

Can you give an example of Carl Benjamin's hate speech?

"I can be quoted as saying you can **** young boys. It's actually not as controversial as you think."

In two videos (https://www.buzzfeed.com/markdistefano/benjamin-akkad-racial-statements) — one of which has since been deleted by YouTube — Benjamin repeatedly used the n-word. He said a YouTuber and the alt-right were "*******" and "acting like [N-word] in showing him disrespect because "white people are supposed to be polite".

"And it drives me crazy, because – I mean, I really like, one of my favorite things is conspiracy documentaries on YouTube. I think they're ****ing brilliant. I mean, don't get me wrong, I am absolutely persuaded that the world is about to ****ing end in a firestorm of death caused by the lizard-man Obama, not really, I'm just, you know--"

"And terrorists did not bring down 3 buildings with 2 ****ing planes man. I don't know who did, but it wasn't some Arabs with boxcutters man."

"I don't want to discuss only feminism on my channel because, frankly, it can get depressing"

"Just to jump in on the car thing. As I understand it, I thought Heather Hays[sic] or Heyer, or whatever her name was, I thought she died of a heart attack."

What would be the point of inviting this guy to a campus forum?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 12, 2021, 04:17:33 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper link=topic=2202.msg84184#msg84184
b]Oh yeah, that conservative news dynasty really has us by the short ones, doesn't it? LOL
[/b]

The book deals and speaking engagements happen because listeners are drawn to the message. But you don't have to be interested in them if it's not worth your time.

You don't think there is a conservative news ecosystem (including the Murdoch owned outlets, which are as close to a dynasty as we have in American media) that pumps up the cancel culture and "college is brainwashing our kids with scary ideas" narratives?

[/quote]

Endangered species, more like, but Murdoch and company can keep going as long as it's still a free country. But it's left center biased NPR that gets our tax money, and the shifting-further-and-further left liberals by and large own not only the news outlets but professional sports, Hollywood, teachers' unions and now public school administration, of course our beloved academia, where most of the stupidest woke ideas began, and upper echelons of the military. The reason 'conservative' opinion pieces get published is mostly not Murdoch but the fact that people like to read them because they have the ring of truth to these readers, and they appreciate reading what they believe they may not say aloud for fear of being called a bigot.
Left center biased Newsweek are not dumb. they know how to sell magazines:
https://www.newsweek.com/winning-cold-civil-war-opinion-1625148

If I say 'show me the evidence that there is systemic racism or white supremacy and then I'll believe there is' then am I a conservative? I thought asking for evidence was what critical thinkers do. Academia is its own problem.

QuoteIn two videos — one of which has since been deleted by YouTube — Benjamin repeatedly used the n-word. He said a YouTuber and the alt-right were "*******" and "acting like [N-word] in showing him disrespect because "white people are supposed to be polite".

I don't use the word, don't like it. Haven't watched these videos. However, for a little perspective, let's consider: there has been no campaign to eliminate the 'n' word from currency in American English. What there has been is a popular sonic entertainment genre that increases the frequency of use by individuals self-identified as black. This entertainment is then sold to people who identify as whites who accept that they may not use the word, while hearing it passive aggressively attributes racism to them.

QuoteSince I'm in his discipline, I'm comfortable observing that he has no publications in any real outlets. The closest he comes are two pedagogical pubs in legitimate but very lower-tier journals. If research counts at all in tenure at PSU, then he had zero chance of getting it.

Hannah-Jones doesn't measure up by these criteria either and gets hired not as a promising up-and-comer but at full tenured professor with her own program. Publishing a book that has been pointedly debunked by esteemed historians should be a red flag.



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on September 12, 2021, 09:21:01 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 12, 2021, 04:17:33 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 12, 2021, 04:17:33 AM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper link=topic=2202.msg84184#msg84184
b]Oh yeah, that conservative news dynasty really has us by the short ones, doesn't it? LOL
[/b]

The book deals and speaking engagements happen because listeners are drawn to the message. But you don't have to be interested in them if it's not worth your time.

You don't think there is a conservative news ecosystem (including the Murdoch owned outlets, which are as close to a dynasty as we have in American media) that pumps up the cancel culture and "college is brainwashing our kids with scary ideas" narratives?


Endangered species, more like, but Murdoch and company can keep going as long as it's still a free country. But it's left center biased NPR that gets our tax money, and the shifting-further-and-further left liberals by and large own not only the news outlets but professional sports, Hollywood, teachers' unions and now public school administration, of course our beloved academia, where most of the stupidest woke ideas began, and upper echelons of the military. The reason 'conservative' opinion pieces get published is mostly not Murdoch but the fact that people like to read them because they have the ring of truth to these readers, and they appreciate reading what they believe they may not say aloud for fear of being called a bigot.
Left center biased Newsweek are not dumb. they know how to sell magazines:
https://www.newsweek.com/winning-cold-civil-war-opinion-1625148

If I say 'show me the evidence that there is systemic racism or white supremacy and then I'll believe there is' then am I a conservative? I thought asking for evidence was what critical thinkers do. Academia is its own problem.

Great so we agree that there is a right wing ecosystem (and also apparently that the Portland State guy is a clown).

And the bolded must be a response to someone else, since it is not remotely related to my post that you quoted. But sure, asking for evidence is good. Of course, if you are actually curious about the evidence for systemic racism you could explore the vast empirical literature on this topic.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on September 12, 2021, 11:20:19 AM
You asked Wahoo for evidence of Benjamin's hate speech, and Wahoo did. The fact that you don't use the epithet is irrelevant. And, Benjamin is definitely not a part of the "a little perspective" you supplied.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on September 12, 2021, 11:57:25 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on September 12, 2021, 11:20:19 AM
You asked Wahoo for evidence of Benjamin's hate speech, and Wahoo did. The fact that you don't use the epithet is irrelevant. And, Benjamin is definitely not a part of the "a little perspective" you supplied.

He doesn't care about evidence and wouldn't know what to do with it anyway, just regurgitates right wing talking points.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 12, 2021, 02:06:18 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 12, 2021, 04:17:33 AM

Hannah-Jones doesn't measure up by these criteria either and gets hired not as a promising up-and-comer but at full tenured professor with her own program.

Except for that piddling little Pulitzer and years at the top of the journalism game.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on September 12, 2021, 02:25:49 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 12, 2021, 02:06:18 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 12, 2021, 04:17:33 AM

Hannah-Jones doesn't measure up by these criteria either and gets hired not as a promising up-and-comer but at full tenured professor with her own program.

Except for that piddling little Pulitzer and years at the top of the journalism game.

We need more diversity -- in colleges! Hire who one likes. See if students pay. :-)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: FishProf on September 13, 2021, 03:53:45 AM
Just because YOU don't understand why something was done, or why someone thinks differently from YOU, that doesn't mean (necessarily) that they are stupid.

People have reasons for what they do.  Imagining the most nefarious reasons doesn't bring you closer to understanding them, or them you.  Well, maybe we do understand you (and it isn't good).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: FishProf on September 13, 2021, 04:17:53 AM
Damn.  That was supposed to be an aside.

Oh well, now I'll be linked to this thread forever.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 13, 2021, 04:28:47 AM
Quote from: FishProf on September 13, 2021, 03:53:45 AM
Just because YOU don't understand why something was done, or why someone thinks differently from YOU, that doesn't mean (necessarily) that they are stupid.

People have reasons for what they do.  Imagining the most nefarious reasons doesn't bring you closer to understanding them, or them you.  Well, maybe we do understand you (and it isn't good).

How does one get to be a spokesman for the fora?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 13, 2021, 05:12:48 AM
Quote from: FishProf on September 13, 2021, 03:53:45 AM
Just because YOU don't understand why something was done, or why someone thinks differently from YOU, that doesn't mean (necessarily) that they are stupid.

People have reasons for what they do.  Imagining the most nefarious reasons doesn't bring you closer to understanding them, or them you.  Well, maybe we do understand you (and it isn't good).

This is absolutely correct, and applies to everyone on any side of any debate.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 12, 2021, 02:06:18 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 12, 2021, 04:17:33 AM

Hannah-Jones doesn't measure up by these criteria either and gets hired not as a promising up-and-comer but at full tenured professor with her own program.

Except for that piddling little Pulitzer and years at the top of the journalism game.

So should the same rules apply for Olympic medallists, Oscar (Emmy, Tony, Grammy, etc.) winners as well? What about billionaires? In other words, should non-academic achievements basically make academic requirements unnecessary? In all fields?


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 13, 2021, 07:34:17 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 13, 2021, 05:12:48 AM
So should the same rules apply for Olympic medallists, Oscar (Emmy, Tony, Grammy, etc.) winners as well? What about billionaires? In other words, should non-academic achievements basically make academic requirements unnecessary? In all fields?

Olympic medalists are routinely top college coaches.

If you can get an Emmy, Oscar, Tony or Grammy winning artist on your faculty, by all means do!

If you can get a billionaire to teach entrepreneurship, yes, yes, yes!!!

Hanna-Jones taught journalism.  She was a top journalist.

Honestly Marshy, THINK.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 13, 2021, 07:52:03 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 13, 2021, 07:34:17 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 13, 2021, 05:12:48 AM
So should the same rules apply for Olympic medallists, Oscar (Emmy, Tony, Grammy, etc.) winners as well? What about billionaires? In other words, should non-academic achievements basically make academic requirements unnecessary? In all fields?

Olympic medalists are routinely top college coaches.

If you can get an Emmy, Oscar, Tony or Grammy winning artist on your faculty, by all means do!

If you can get a billionaire to teach entrepreneurship, yes, yes, yes!!!

Hanna-Jones taught journalism.  She was a top journalist.

Honestly Marshy, THINK.

I understand Marshy's question, and have a little bit to add. Why would a person who considers herself a shoe-in for tenure track appointment avoid publishing in top peer reviewed publications? One would think the Pulitzer award is another feather in one's hat when it is acquired in addition to jumping through the usual hoops.
Alternatively, publishing in top peer reviewed journals may come to be considered overrated.
If the only criterion is how many students can you draw, then that opens all kinds of doors for all kinds of people.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 13, 2021, 08:04:44 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 13, 2021, 07:34:17 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 13, 2021, 05:12:48 AM
So should the same rules apply for Olympic medallists, Oscar (Emmy, Tony, Grammy, etc.) winners as well? What about billionaires? In other words, should non-academic achievements basically make academic requirements unnecessary? In all fields?

Olympic medalists are routinely top college coaches.

If you can get an Emmy, Oscar, Tony or Grammy winning artist on your faculty, by all means do!

If you can get a billionaire to teach entrepreneurship, yes, yes, yes!!!

Hanna-Jones taught journalism.  She was a top journalist.

Honestly Marshy, THINK.

It's not about getting someone to teach a course; it's about giving a person who has not qualified academically a professional position which requires that qualification.

There are several ways that universities can recognize people:

(There's also naming a building in their honour, but given what's lately been the trend with statues and named buildings, maybe not such a good idea...)

The point is that to make a person  a tenured professor is to make them responsible for academic functions within a university. Someone who raises millions of dollars for hospitals in a developing country may be honoured, but not with a license to practice medicine. Someone who gives advice on personal finances which helps many people will not be granted a professional accountant certification.

And from another angle, if a conservative institution made Jeff Bezos (or whatever billionaire you like) a tenured professor of finance, people on the left would claim that is is unwarranted on academic grounds. (And I would agree.)

Professional license to practice in a field should not be granted for ideological reasons to people who have not completed the required professional certification process. If you want to argue the process is entirely bogus, then that's a different discussion......

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 13, 2021, 09:23:31 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 13, 2021, 08:04:44 AM

Professional license to practice in a field should not be granted for ideological reasons to people who have not completed the required professional certification process. If you want to argue the process is entirely bogus, then that's a different discussion......

It obviously is, because we have more tenured professors in the USA than ever before, and we have a culture war that the left, whose intolerant views are not held by the majority of citizens but are nonetheless buttressed everywhere you look, does not want to replace with peace, but to win. but that's another story from the Hannah-Jones travesty.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on September 13, 2021, 09:42:21 AM
I don't think "but Black folks use the n-word in their rappings and hip-hoppings" is an answer to any hate speech question. (I'm also pretty sure that's common knowledge.) As for awards, it's not much of a puzzle:
a) awards are splashy, rock-star things that many people look upon favorably, however:
b) are the awards a recognition of the kind of work you would want a teacher in that field to excel in?

That's it. I mean, if the answer to "b" is yes, and if everyone's amenable, then it's a win all around.

(I had to extrapolate some of the argument, as I ignore one of the participants.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 13, 2021, 10:45:01 AM
Quote from: little bongo on September 13, 2021, 09:42:21 AM
I don't think "but Black folks use the n-word in their rappings and hip-hoppings" is an answer to any hate speech question. (I'm also pretty sure that's common knowledge.) As for awards, it's not much of a puzzle:
a) awards are splashy, rock-star things that many people look upon favorably, however:
b) are the awards a recognition of the kind of work you would want a teacher in that field to excel in?

That's it. I mean, if the answer to "b" is yes, and if everyone's amenable, then it's a win all around.

(I had to extrapolate some of the argument, as I ignore one of the participants.)

Is tenure purely an "award"? Presumably, a tenured professor is expected to engage in the academic life of an institution. If someone who has not risen through the ranks in academia is expected to fulfil the duties of a tenured professor,

This list could go on and on. Are all of those trivial things that someone can pick up on the fly? I recall lots of times on here people have complained about people from business being appointed as university presidents, the argument being that running a business is no preparation for running an academic institution. Why then is success in some non-academic endeavour sufficient to grant someone status as fully qualified professor?

Hiring non-academics to academic positions is marketing; it has nothing to do with academic excellence.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on September 13, 2021, 10:50:13 AM
Perhaps we should look around at journalism programs and see who teaches there and what their outputs and qualifications are like.

If we do that for Boghossian, we get the result that he was a shoo-in for tenure denial (and that it's hard to see how he got hired in the first place, but whatever).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 13, 2021, 11:04:57 AM
Quote from: little bongo on September 13, 2021, 09:42:21 AM
I don't think "but Black folks use the n-word in their rappings and hip-hoppings" is an answer to any hate speech question. (I'm also pretty sure that's common knowledge.) As for awards, it's not much of a puzzle:
a) awards are splashy, rock-star things that many people look upon favorably, however:
b) are the awards a recognition of the kind of work you would want a teacher in that field to excel in?

That's it. I mean, if the answer to "b" is yes, and if everyone's amenable, then it's a win all around.

(I had to extrapolate some of the argument, as I ignore one of the participants.)

There wasn't an argument as far as that part of the discussion goes. I never claimed Carl Benjamin wasn't doing hate speech. i simply asked Wahoo for example of the speech, because I didn't know anything about him yet. Thanks for the reply, Wahoo.
The fact remains, the glorification of black American criminal sub-culture has not done black Americans any good and has done them plenty of harm, but for that matter it was never clear to me that white Americans who assisted in that glorification had in mind to benefit black people, or maybe had just not thought about the situation seriously.
Even Richard Prior said late in his career, very seriously, that he would never use the word again in performance, because it's bad for us. There are of course still plenty of people who don't get it yet, and probably more than a few making a darn good living not getting it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 13, 2021, 03:44:50 PM
con't

Liberals have kept the word in circulation by elevating trash and criminal culture to the level of mainstream culture and even creative art. Thus George Floyd, dead beat dad and serial armed home invader, became the gentle giant family man. It's magic!
I don't know anything about Carl Benjamin, don't care a lot. If he's promoting hate, he would be on my bad side, but I'm not part of the reason people like him are saying what they are saying.
What does this mean about Boghossian? Whatever. I'm less bothered by anything about him than I am about Boston University promoting totalitarian government rule and the end of democracy and other nifty stuff liberal academia's been coming up with.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on September 15, 2021, 07:51:27 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 13, 2021, 03:44:50 PM
con't

Liberals have kept the word in circulation by elevating trash and criminal culture to the level of mainstream culture and even creative art. Thus George Floyd, dead beat dad and serial armed home invader, became the gentle giant family man. It's magic!
I don't know anything about Carl Benjamin, don't care a lot. If he's promoting hate, he would be on my bad side, but I'm not part of the reason people like him are saying what they are saying.
What does this mean about Boghossian? Whatever. I'm less bothered by anything about him than I am about Boston University promoting totalitarian government rule and the end of democracy and other nifty stuff liberal academia's been coming up with.

As one of my favorite professors never said, there's a lot to unpack here. You're blaming liberals for... making a genre of music popular that you don't care for very much? And then connecting that to the George Floyd case? That just doesn't fly. For something to become popular as creative art, well, it has to be... popular. That's not something liberals or conservatives cause by virtue of being liberals or conservatives. I mean, we can go into a whole music theory dive about how R&B now pretty much means hip-hop, but if you like the music, find some earbuds and go to town. You don't like it, find a station that replays Prairie Home Companion or something. (I was always a little sad that I couldn't share my Dad's great love of Prairie Home Companion.)

As for somehow linking that with Floyd, well, it's sometimes true that we overlook or blip past elements of guilt when we're looking at the big picture--either Sacco or Vanzetti probably killed that paymaster; there really were some communists in D.C. irrespective of McCarthy's bogus list. But whether that's a liberal tendency or not, there really is a big picture to keep in mind--Sacco and Vanzetti were railroaded; McCarthy was a demagogue; Floyd didn't deserve death. If there are hints of the end of democracy as we know it in the wind, such hints weren't born in "liberal academia."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on September 15, 2021, 08:05:25 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 13, 2021, 10:50:13 AM
If we do that for Boghossian, we get the result that he was a shoo-in for tenure denial (and that it's hard to see how he got hired in the first place, but whatever).

Turns out he wasn't in a tenure track line and would have probably been renewed indefnitely if he had not resigned. And he has an EdD, not a PhD. It's on Leiter blog. Seems like there were no research expectations for him.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 15, 2021, 09:27:13 AM
Quote from: little bongo on September 15, 2021, 07:51:27 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 13, 2021, 03:44:50 PM
con't

Liberals have kept the word in circulation by elevating trash and criminal culture to the level of mainstream culture and even creative art. Thus George Floyd, dead beat dad and serial armed home invader, became the gentle giant family man. It's magic!
I don't know anything about Carl Benjamin, don't care a lot. If he's promoting hate, he would be on my bad side, but I'm not part of the reason people like him are saying what they are saying.
What does this mean about Boghossian? Whatever. I'm less bothered by anything about him than I am about Boston University promoting totalitarian government rule and the end of democracy and other nifty stuff liberal academia's been coming up with.

As one of my favorite professors never said, there's a lot to unpack here. You're blaming liberals for... making a genre of music popular that you don't care for very much?

Nope. I am blaming them for having so much white guilt they don't even have even a modicum of moral confidence left to say 'I'm not going to consume to a type of entertainment that is full of the n-word, misogyny, glorification of crime, violence against cops, free-floating hostility, mindless obscenity, infantile narcissism and pretend that somehow it has to be considered acceptable rather than deeply unhealthy, merely because it comes from some other group's 'lived experience.' And I'm certainly not going to make college courses about how cool it is."  Sowell talks about the Americans who believe that the dregs of black American culture, as opposed to the middle America of black America, is the 'real' black culture and it mustn't be tampered with. It's called 'White liberals and black rednecks.' Quite interesting. Much of it came from Southern white culture and its European roots that held them back as well.
Floyd is another example of a menace becoming a hero for that very reason.
There is absolutely no conclusive evidence that racial animus played a role in Derek Chauvin's performance that day, BTW. You don't need racism to explain police brutality, either. There's plenty of police brutality and in order to assess whether racism is at play one would certainly have to do more than look at the skin color of the two parties. Critical thinking, remember?
Floyd is on T-shirts worn by white people because he is black and they feel guilty being white. It's really not hard to understand.
QuoteIf there are hints of the end of democracy as we know it in the wind, such hints weren't born in "liberal academia."

They absolutely do. Your friend Henry Rogers, I mean Ibram X. Kendi will explain it to you:

Quotehttps://www.politico.com/interactives/2019/how-to-fix-politics-in-america/inequality/pass-an-anti-racist-constitutional-amendment/

This is literal takeover of the government by non-elected, hired for life bureaucrats who can control everything according to an ideological dogma that will have then become the state religion. Uhm, freedom of speech issue? I think so. Not to mention the man is obviously a sinister character who needs to be stopped.

Quote from: downer on September 15, 2021, 08:05:25 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 13, 2021, 10:50:13 AM
If we do that for Boghossian, we get the result that he was a shoo-in for tenure denial (and that it's hard to see how he got hired in the first place, but whatever).

Turns out he wasn't in a tenure track line and would have probably been renewed indefnitely if he had not resigned. And he has an EdD, not a PhD. It's on Leiter blog. Seems like there were no research expectations for him.


OOPS!!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on September 15, 2021, 10:43:33 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 15, 2021, 09:27:13 AM

Quote from: downer on September 15, 2021, 08:05:25 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 13, 2021, 10:50:13 AM
If we do that for Boghossian, we get the result that he was a shoo-in for tenure denial (and that it's hard to see how he got hired in the first place, but whatever).

Turns out he wasn't in a tenure track line and would have probably been renewed indefnitely if he had not resigned. And he has an EdD, not a PhD. It's on Leiter blog. Seems like there were no research expectations for him.


OOPS!!

Actually, it looks much for him. From Leiter (https://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2021/09/peter-boghossians-resignation-from-portland-state-university.html#more):

QuoteUPDATE (9/14/21):  A faculty member at Portland State writes with some useful context and perspective:

Peter was not a tenure-line faculty at PSU. PSU has an unusual status for non- t-t faculty that they can apply for the same titles as tenure-line faculty. I believe it was 2014 that he got that title (after having been an Instructor for I believe six years before that), but because he is not on the tenure track, he could have kept it indefinitely. In fact, he did decide to apply for promotion to "Associate Professor" last year, but was denied.

The level of the University's mistreatment of him as reported in his letter might be weighed against the fact that he was re-hired every year for the past dozen years, and that he was promoted as far as he was. (It might be noted that Peter does not have a Ph.D. in philosophy; his Ed.D. is in education from PSU itself.) In the words of a colleague of mine, he had long been hoping that the University would fire him so that he could make a martyr of himself, but seeing that that was not going to happen, he had to fire himself.

Peter was in fact harassed by one particular student who filed a Title IX complaint, but I am not in a position to evaluate whether the University's response was reasonable. (As you can probably tell, I am skeptical of Peter's own interpretations of these situations.) My own overall sense is that the free-speech situation at PSU is not much different than that at most other universities. But because we are Portland, FoxNews loves to amplify any whiff of impropriety, and Peter is aware that his letter would be an effective form of self-promotion

So: he's blatantly unqualified to teach the subject and in that department (and clearly does a bad job of it, given what he describes of his own pedagogy); despite that, his contract kept getting renewed every year and he was promoted. He just quit because his university was so committed to employing him that it wouldn't fire him. What a whiner.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 15, 2021, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 15, 2021, 10:43:33 AM

So: he's blatantly unqualified to teach the subject and in that department (and clearly does a bad job of it, given what he describes of his own pedagogy); despite that, his contract kept getting renewed every year and he was promoted. He just quit because his university was so committed to employing him that it wouldn't fire him. What a whiner.

How do his qualifications compare to Nikole Hannah-Jones?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on September 15, 2021, 11:13:36 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 15, 2021, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 15, 2021, 10:43:33 AM

So: he's blatantly unqualified to teach the subject and in that department (and clearly does a bad job of it, given what he describes of his own pedagogy); despite that, his contract kept getting renewed every year and he was promoted. He just quit because his university was so committed to employing him that it wouldn't fire him. What a whiner.

How do his qualifications compare to Nikole Hannah-Jones?

Unfavourably, I would imagine, since it turns out he has basically no qualifications whatsoever to be teaching in a philosophy department.

But I don't know what's normal in journalism programs. Which is why I suggested, upthread, that perhaps we ought to inform ourselves about that before rushing to judgement.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 15, 2021, 11:48:32 AM
QuoteMy own overall sense is that the free-speech situation at PSU is not much different than that at most other universities.

In other words, 29 out of 30 academics in these kinds of departments are politically left, so teaching there when you are not politically left feels weird.

QuoteIn the words of a colleague of mine, he had long been hoping that the University would fire him so that he could make a martyr of himself, but seeing that that was not going to happen, he had to fire himself.

So what.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on September 16, 2021, 06:21:25 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 15, 2021, 09:27:13 AM
Quote from: little bongo on September 15, 2021, 07:51:27 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 13, 2021, 03:44:50 PM
con't

Liberals have kept the word in circulation by elevating trash and criminal culture to the level of mainstream culture and even creative art. Thus George Floyd, dead beat dad and serial armed home invader, became the gentle giant family man. It's magic!
I don't know anything about Carl Benjamin, don't care a lot. If he's promoting hate, he would be on my bad side, but I'm not part of the reason people like him are saying what they are saying.
What does this mean about Boghossian? Whatever. I'm less bothered by anything about him than I am about Boston University promoting totalitarian government rule and the end of democracy and other nifty stuff liberal academia's been coming up with.

As one of my favorite professors never said, there's a lot to unpack here. You're blaming liberals for... making a genre of music popular that you don't care for very much?

Nope. I am blaming them for having so much white guilt they don't even have even a modicum of moral confidence left to say 'I'm not going to consume to a type of entertainment that is full of the n-word, misogyny, glorification of crime, violence against cops, free-floating hostility, mindless obscenity, infantile narcissism and pretend that somehow it has to be considered acceptable rather than deeply unhealthy, merely because it comes from some other group's 'lived experience.' And I'm certainly not going to make college courses about how cool it is."  Sowell talks about the Americans who believe that the dregs of black American culture, as opposed to the middle America of black America, is the 'real' black culture and it mustn't be tampered with. It's called 'White liberals and black rednecks.' Quite interesting. Much of it came from Southern white culture and its European roots that held them back as well.
Floyd is another example of a menace becoming a hero for that very reason.
There is absolutely no conclusive evidence that racial animus played a role in Derek Chauvin's performance that day, BTW. You don't need racism to explain police brutality, either. There's plenty of police brutality and in order to assess whether racism is at play one would certainly have to do more than look at the skin color of the two parties. Critical thinking, remember?
Floyd is on T-shirts worn by white people because he is black and they feel guilty being white. It's really not hard to understand.
QuoteIf there are hints of the end of democracy as we know it in the wind, such hints weren't born in "liberal academia."

They absolutely do. Your friend Henry Rogers, I mean Ibram X. Kendi will explain it to you:

Quotehttps://www.politico.com/interactives/2019/how-to-fix-politics-in-america/inequality/pass-an-anti-racist-constitutional-amendment/

This is literal takeover of the government by non-elected, hired for life bureaucrats who can control everything according to an ideological dogma that will have then become the state religion. Uhm, freedom of speech issue? I think so. Not to mention the man is obviously a sinister character who needs to be stopped.

Well, no. He's proposing a watchdog organization--pretty standard, anodyne stuff. Not my friend, but he seems a good fellow. I do disagree strongly with him in one crucial area, though. Clearly, the Department of Anti-Racism should be called DOAR.

As for liberals and consuming entertainment due to while guilt, well, bushwa. Again, you're talking about personal preferences and individual taste. Unless you really do feel pressured to like or dislike something because you're "supposed" to. That makes you neither a liberal nor a conservative, it makes you a ninnyhammer.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on September 16, 2021, 10:59:19 AM
"As for liberals and consuming entertainment due to while guilt"

I'm sorry--obviously, that should be "As for liberals and consuming entertainment due to white guilt."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 16, 2021, 12:06:28 PM
It's not whether you're pressured to like something so much as that it is taboo to called it what it is, trash and criminal culture glorified. Although there are many whites, again, predominantly liberal, who think everything that ever came from any part of black culture, excepting maybe Bill Cosby or Clarence Thomas, is by definition divine and must be regarded with the highest praise. This is no doubt quite embarrassing to many black Americans.

QuoteWell, no. He's proposing a watchdog organization--pretty standard, anodyne stuff.

Almost standard among boneheads who look to the government to legislate on how Americans should love and respect each other., or something that works under a pretense like that.

Oh well, maybe his cancer will come back.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2021, 12:21:01 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 15, 2021, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 15, 2021, 10:43:33 AM

So: he's blatantly unqualified to teach the subject and in that department (and clearly does a bad job of it, given what he describes of his own pedagogy); despite that, his contract kept getting renewed every year and he was promoted. He just quit because his university was so committed to employing him that it wouldn't fire him. What a whiner.

How do his qualifications compare to Nikole Hannah-Jones?

Marshy, you understand that Hannah-Jones is a practitioner who teaches what she practices, right?

I honestly can't remember the name of the novelist (Katherine Anne-Porter or Doris Lessing maybe?) who found academics funny because we are so concerned with credentialism over achievement. 

Someone like Hannah-Jones (a fav target of the reactionary Rightwing right now) works in the field at the top of the game.  Do we not think she is competent to stand in a classroom because she lacks a doctorate or some other credential?

Reading your posts I often feel like you are comparing your discipline and your experience in academia to other disciplines not your own, and things are not the same in every field.  What might be true in the sciences is not necessarily true in other academic spheres.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on September 16, 2021, 12:52:31 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 16, 2021, 12:06:28 PM
It's not whether you're pressured to like something so much as that it is taboo to called it what it is, trash and criminal culture glorified.

Oh, you mean country, pop, and classic rock. Got it!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 16, 2021, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2021, 12:21:01 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 15, 2021, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 15, 2021, 10:43:33 AM

So: he's blatantly unqualified to teach the subject and in that department (and clearly does a bad job of it, given what he describes of his own pedagogy); despite that, his contract kept getting renewed every year and he was promoted. He just quit because his university was so committed to employing him that it wouldn't fire him. What a whiner.

How do his qualifications compare to Nikole Hannah-Jones?

Marshy, you understand that Hannah-Jones is a practitioner who teaches what she practices, right?


So should this apply to every discipline?

Should someone with a Master's degree in any subject (as I believe Hannah-Jones has in journalism) be able to get tenure in their filed as long as they've done something "notable"?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on September 16, 2021, 01:32:07 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 16, 2021, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2021, 12:21:01 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 15, 2021, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 15, 2021, 10:43:33 AM

So: he's blatantly unqualified to teach the subject and in that department (and clearly does a bad job of it, given what he describes of his own pedagogy); despite that, his contract kept getting renewed every year and he was promoted. He just quit because his university was so committed to employing him that it wouldn't fire him. What a whiner.

How do his qualifications compare to Nikole Hannah-Jones?

Marshy, you understand that Hannah-Jones is a practitioner who teaches what she practices, right?


So should this apply to every discipline?

Should someone with a Master's degree in any subject (as I believe Hannah-Jones has in journalism) be able to get tenure in their filed as long as they've done something "notable"?

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. We will never agree and we do not have to agree. Let each institution do what it pleases and see if it works.  À fortiori as most of college is not of substance vital to anything.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 16, 2021, 05:19:14 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2021, 12:21:01 PM

Marshy, you understand that Hannah-Jones is a practitioner who teaches what she practices, right?


that's what the problem is. she has one endgame in mind, apart from distorting America's history. That is 'reparations for slavery.' I suspect she is smart enough to know that black America will derive zero benefit for this if it ever happens, (though it means a gold mine for herself) one reason is that is already has happened, and has brought little but the substitution of government for a permanent husband and father in the home. and the other reason, obviously, prosperity is not something you can pass around like pieces of pumpkin pie at Thanksgiving. It's a process in which the health, attitude and effort of the worker are by far the strongest factor for success and sustainability.

Of course, if one likes communism, just look at the grand life in the Soviet Union in decades past.

QuoteI honestly can't remember the name of the novelist (Katherine Anne-Porter or Doris Lessing maybe?) who found academics funny because we are so concerned with credentialism over achievement. 

What they're really concerned with is winning, conformity, and the influence and wealth that aggrandizement through the tenure track brings. That's what this whole situation illustrates. When someone needs to be put in his place because he challenges the establishment, they pile on to say he was an undercredentialled, uncollegial companion in the workplace (Boghossian). When someone is a winner because they promise to bring visibility to a department and consolidation of the liberal fortress of academia, the ideas about what meaningful credentials are need to be adjusted to recognize the worth of that person, and instead of being uncollegial (here's a photo of me getting drunk; kiss my ass, UNC trustees) they are 'proudly defiant'. (Hannah-Jones)

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 16, 2021, 12:52:31 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 16, 2021, 12:06:28 PM
It's not whether you're pressured to like something so much as that it is taboo to called it what it is, trash and criminal culture glorified.

Oh, you mean country, pop, and classic rock. Got it!

You have a point there. The debauchery that was a defining feature (no not all of it, certainly, but much) of the rock 'n' roll culture of the 1970's and 80's didn't do Americans any good and led to significant amount of wayward living and premature death. Liberals can take credit for that too. But hip hop culture brought the decline of values to a new level. It may have been black America's attempt to get parity with white America. See? We've got our own mindless noisy debauchery that repudiates America's greatest gift to the arts, jazz music, a crowning achievement of our race. On a par with the mayhem and nihilism of people like Led Zeppelin, only more powerful, because the performers don't just denigrate women (minors) in their spare time, they do it in their 'song' lyrics.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on September 16, 2021, 05:25:36 PM
If I don't like the music, then I don't listen to it. If I don't like the college, then I don't send my kids there.

Less meddling and more ignoring would be healthy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 16, 2021, 05:37:08 PM
Quote from: dismalist on September 16, 2021, 05:25:36 PM
If I don't like the music, then I don't listen to it. If I don't like the college, then I don't send my kids there.

Less meddling and more ignoring would be healthy.

Jes' sayin'

Do you get to ignore your school's diversity czar?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on September 16, 2021, 05:51:32 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 16, 2021, 05:37:08 PM
Quote from: dismalist on September 16, 2021, 05:25:36 PM
If I don't like the music, then I don't listen to it. If I don't like the college, then I don't send my kids there.

Less meddling and more ignoring would be healthy.

Jes' sayin'

Do you get to ignore your school's diversity czar?

It's not about the employees, it's about the customers. One can send one's kids to places where the diversity czar is irrelevant.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on September 16, 2021, 09:18:43 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 16, 2021, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2021, 12:21:01 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 15, 2021, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 15, 2021, 10:43:33 AM

So: he's blatantly unqualified to teach the subject and in that department (and clearly does a bad job of it, given what he describes of his own pedagogy); despite that, his contract kept getting renewed every year and he was promoted. He just quit because his university was so committed to employing him that it wouldn't fire him. What a whiner.

How do his qualifications compare to Nikole Hannah-Jones?

Marshy, you understand that Hannah-Jones is a practitioner who teaches what she practices, right?


So should this apply to every discipline?

Should someone with a Master's degree in any subject (as I believe Hannah-Jones has in journalism) be able to get tenure in their filed as long as they've done something "notable"?

If you look up the faculty in Colimbia's journalism program, you won't find a lot of PhDs.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 17, 2021, 02:48:40 AM
Quote from: dismalist on September 16, 2021, 05:51:32 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 16, 2021, 05:37:08 PM
Quote from: dismalist on September 16, 2021, 05:25:36 PM
If I don't like the music, then I don't listen to it. If I don't like the college, then I don't send my kids there.

Less meddling and more ignoring would be healthy.

Jes' sayin'

Do you get to ignore your school's diversity czar?

It's not about the employees, it's about the customers. One can send one's kids to places where the diversity czar is irrelevant.

How about state universities? They have to fund them with their taxes even if they find the diversity czar is out of control. Also I think it's about the employees when the employees must pay those same taxes. You have an interesting idea though. We could begin to see colleges with no diversity staff whatsoever, like the college my brother attended in the 1960's. Yet somehow he had a good career and a productive life of working, family, paying taxes. (Although he's a racist because he skips 'difficult conversations.')

Quote
Well, no. He's proposing a watchdog organization--pretty standard, anodyne stuff. Not my friend, but he seems a good fellow. I do disagree strongly with him in one crucial area, though. Clearly, the Department of Anti-Racism should be called DOAR.

What would your DOAR do about the disproportionate rate at which white Americans are murdered by black Americans? It fits the definition of something that needs to be addressed. Homicide is equally illegal for all races, but the result that statistically any random black individual (most likely male) is more likely to kill a white person than any random white individual is to kill a black person, is a 'racist' outcome for which 'the system' is responsible. Who gets to decide what the remedy is? "Black Lives Matter"? A committee appointed by Kendi? Why not Richard Spencer, since what the 'Black Lives Matter' movement, whom the government will by then have officially endorsed, is actually promoting is tribalism. What would be a reasonable timetable for resolution of the problem?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: lightning on September 17, 2021, 03:35:26 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 16, 2021, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2021, 12:21:01 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 15, 2021, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 15, 2021, 10:43:33 AM

So: he's blatantly unqualified to teach the subject and in that department (and clearly does a bad job of it, given what he describes of his own pedagogy); despite that, his contract kept getting renewed every year and he was promoted. He just quit because his university was so committed to employing him that it wouldn't fire him. What a whiner.

How do his qualifications compare to Nikole Hannah-Jones?

Marshy, you understand that Hannah-Jones is a practitioner who teaches what she practices, right?


So should this apply to every discipline?

Should someone with a Master's degree in any subject (as I believe Hannah-Jones has in journalism) be able to get tenure in their filed as long as they've done something "notable"?

Not for every discipline, but for some disciplines, yes.

There are some disciplines where traditional measures of research simply do not apply, and instead one can (and should) look to measures of truly outstanding practice as real professionals in their fields. Journalism is one. Fine Arts, Music, Dance, Theater/Film, & Creative Writing are others.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 17, 2021, 04:06:00 AM
Quote from: lightning on September 17, 2021, 03:35:26 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 16, 2021, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2021, 12:21:01 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 15, 2021, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 15, 2021, 10:43:33 AM

So: he's blatantly unqualified to teach the subject and in that department (and clearly does a bad job of it, given what he describes of his own pedagogy); despite that, his contract kept getting renewed every year and he was promoted. He just quit because his university was so committed to employing him that it wouldn't fire him. What a whiner.

How do his qualifications compare to Nikole Hannah-Jones?

Marshy, you understand that Hannah-Jones is a practitioner who teaches what she practices, right?


So should this apply to every discipline?

Should someone with a Master's degree in any subject (as I believe Hannah-Jones has in journalism) be able to get tenure in their filed as long as they've done something "notable"?

Not for every discipline, but for some disciplines, yes.

There are some disciplines where traditional measures of research simply do not apply, and instead one can (and should) look to measures of truly outstanding practice as real professionals in their fields. Journalism is one. Fine Arts, Music, Dance, Theater/Film, & Creative Writing are others.

The only way you'd get a job on the tenure track without PhD though would usually be because you are a celebrity. Phylicia Rashad, for example. So as far as being in the running simply because you are great at what you do, forget it. Adjunctsville for you.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on September 17, 2021, 07:32:02 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 17, 2021, 04:06:00 AM
Quote from: lightning on September 17, 2021, 03:35:26 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 16, 2021, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2021, 12:21:01 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 15, 2021, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 15, 2021, 10:43:33 AM

So: he's blatantly unqualified to teach the subject and in that department (and clearly does a bad job of it, given what he describes of his own pedagogy); despite that, his contract kept getting renewed every year and he was promoted. He just quit because his university was so committed to employing him that it wouldn't fire him. What a whiner.

How do his qualifications compare to Nikole Hannah-Jones?

Marshy, you understand that Hannah-Jones is a practitioner who teaches what she practices, right?


So should this apply to every discipline?

Should someone with a Master's degree in any subject (as I believe Hannah-Jones has in journalism) be able to get tenure in their filed as long as they've done something "notable"?

Not for every discipline, but for some disciplines, yes.

There are some disciplines where traditional measures of research simply do not apply, and instead one can (and should) look to measures of truly outstanding practice as real professionals in their fields. Journalism is one. Fine Arts, Music, Dance, Theater/Film, & Creative Writing are others.

The only way you'd get a job on the tenure track without PhD though would usually be because you are a celebrity. Phylicia Rashad, for example. So as far as being in the running simply because you are great at what you do, forget it. Adjunctsville for you.

As lightning explained, this simply isn't true in creative fields (for many of which the doctoral credential basically doesn't exist).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on September 17, 2021, 10:16:05 AM

Quote
Well, no. He's proposing a watchdog organization--pretty standard, anodyne stuff. Not my friend, but he seems a good fellow. I do disagree strongly with him in one crucial area, though. Clearly, the Department of Anti-Racism should be called DOAR.

What would your DOAR do about the disproportionate rate at which white Americans are murdered by black Americans? It fits the definition of something that needs to be addressed. Homicide is equally illegal for all races, but the result that statistically any random black individual (most likely male) is more likely to kill a white person than any random white individual is to kill a black person, is a 'racist' outcome for which 'the system' is responsible. Who gets to decide what the remedy is? "Black Lives Matter"? A committee appointed by Kendi? Why not Richard Spencer, since what the 'Black Lives Matter' movement, whom the government will by then have officially endorsed, is actually promoting is tribalism. What would be a reasonable timetable for resolution of the problem?
[/quote]

You have an interesting (troubling?) habit of assigning ownership and intimacy to those with whom you are in disagreement ("your" DOAR; "your" friend, etc.). Might want to look into that.

If a person or an agency effectively combats racism, everyone benefits. A happier society is probably less violent, yeah? I don't know if the problem can be RESOLVED, exactly, especially since we're probably talking about something as old as Ogg punching Krodak in a cave somewhere because Krodak's skin was darker or something. But the overall arc is toward improvement, I think. Dr. Kendi's plan is potentially as good (or as ineffective) as any I've encountered--might be worth trying.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 17, 2021, 11:18:24 AM
Quote from: little bongo on September 17, 2021, 10:16:05 AM

If a person or an agency effectively combats racism, everyone benefits.

Absolutely. However, the devil is in the details.

Ministry of Truth
Ministry of Love
etc.

Be careful what you wish for.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Diogenes on September 17, 2021, 11:19:22 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 16, 2021, 05:19:14 PM


You have a point there. The debauchery that was a defining feature (no not all of it, certainly, but much) of the rock 'n' roll culture of the 1970's and 80's didn't do Americans any good and led to significant amount of wayward living and premature death. Liberals can take credit for that too. But hip hop culture brought the decline of values to a new level. It may have been black America's attempt to get parity with white America. See? We've got our own mindless noisy debauchery that repudiates America's greatest gift to the arts, jazz music, a crowning achievement of our race. On a par with the mayhem and nihilism of people like Led Zeppelin, only more powerful, because the performers don't just denigrate women (minors) in their spare time, they do it in their 'song' lyrics.

Tired old argument with no evidence to back it. Before that it was Elvis, then R&B, then jazz, and then even ragtime getting the grumpy old man moralistic rant. Go walk up a hill. Both ways. In the snow.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on September 17, 2021, 11:36:49 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 17, 2021, 07:32:02 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 17, 2021, 04:06:00 AM
Quote from: lightning on September 17, 2021, 03:35:26 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 16, 2021, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2021, 12:21:01 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 15, 2021, 11:08:41 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on September 15, 2021, 10:43:33 AM

So: he's blatantly unqualified to teach the subject and in that department (and clearly does a bad job of it, given what he describes of his own pedagogy); despite that, his contract kept getting renewed every year and he was promoted. He just quit because his university was so committed to employing him that it wouldn't fire him. What a whiner.

How do his qualifications compare to Nikole Hannah-Jones?

Marshy, you understand that Hannah-Jones is a practitioner who teaches what she practices, right?


So should this apply to every discipline?

Should someone with a Master's degree in any subject (as I believe Hannah-Jones has in journalism) be able to get tenure in their filed as long as they've done something "notable"?

Not for every discipline, but for some disciplines, yes.

There are some disciplines where traditional measures of research simply do not apply, and instead one can (and should) look to measures of truly outstanding practice as real professionals in their fields. Journalism is one. Fine Arts, Music, Dance, Theater/Film, & Creative Writing are others.

The only way you'd get a job on the tenure track without PhD though would usually be because you are a celebrity. Phylicia Rashad, for example. So as far as being in the running simply because you are great at what you do, forget it. Adjunctsville for you.

As lightning explained, this simply isn't true in creative fields (for many of which the doctoral credential basically doesn't exist).

This link takes you to the Howard Department of Media, Journalism and Film. There are four full time faculty listed, three with an MA. None is a celebrity.

https://communications.howard.edu/index.php/mjfc/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 17, 2021, 12:40:12 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 16, 2021, 01:13:28 PM

So should this apply to every discipline?

Should someone with a Master's degree in any subject (as I believe Hannah-Jones has in journalism) be able to get tenure in their filed as long as they've done something "notable"?

Why not?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on September 17, 2021, 12:44:24 PM
QuoteThere are some disciplines where traditional measures of research simply do not apply, and instead one can (and should) look to measures of truly outstanding practice as real professionals in their fields. Journalism is one. Fine Arts, Music, Dance, Theater/Film, & Creative Writing are others.

Such as Hospitality Management.

Why in god's name are these subjects even part of universities?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 17, 2021, 12:46:05 PM
Quote from: dismalist on September 17, 2021, 12:44:24 PM
QuoteThere are some disciplines where traditional measures of research simply do not apply, and instead one can (and should) look to measures of truly outstanding practice as real professionals in their fields. Journalism is one. Fine Arts, Music, Dance, Theater/Film, & Creative Writing are others.

Such as Hospitality Management.

Why in god'$ name are the$e $ubject$ even part of univer$itie$?

Fixed that.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 17, 2021, 04:15:41 PM
Quote from: little bongo on September 17, 2021, 10:16:05 AM

Quote
Well, no. He's proposing a watchdog organization--pretty standard, anodyne stuff. Not my friend, but he seems a good fellow. I do disagree strongly with him in one crucial area, though. Clearly, the Department of Anti-Racism should be called DOAR.

What would your DOAR do about the disproportionate rate at which white Americans are murdered by black Americans? It fits the definition of something that needs to be addressed. Homicide is equally illegal for all races, but the result that statistically any random black individual (most likely male) is more likely to kill a white person than any random white individual is to kill a black person, is a 'racist' outcome for which 'the system' is responsible. Who gets to decide what the remedy is? "Black Lives Matter"? A committee appointed by Kendi? Why not Richard Spencer, since what the 'Black Lives Matter' movement, whom the government will by then have officially endorsed, is actually promoting is tribalism. What would be a reasonable timetable for resolution of the problem?

You have an interesting (troubling?) habit of assigning ownership and intimacy to those with whom you are in disagreement ("your" DOAR; "your" friend, etc.). Might want to look into that.

If a person or an agency effectively combats racism, everyone benefits. A happier society is probably less violent, yeah? I don't know if the problem can be RESOLVED, exactly, especially since we're probably talking about something as old as Ogg punching Krodak in a cave somewhere because Krodak's skin was darker or something. But the overall arc is toward improvement, I think. Dr. Kendi's plan is potentially as good (or as ineffective) as any I've encountered--might be worth trying.
[/quote]

OK, let's do that then.
I do recall a recent incident of blatant mass racism in which the mostly non-black voters of California voted to keep a beleaguered and clueless governor, because the alternative would have been Larry Elder, who is black. There couldn't possibly be any other reason to vote that way. If we don't get a government DOAR agency we should riot.
ETA: The black people who voted to keep Gavin Newsom were a bunch of Uncle Toms.
Point being, although a democrat-appointed DOAR would never consider such a position seriously,  anyone can decide anything is racist. There's no meeting of the minds. Only a power struggle.
ETA: The real problem that never gets resolved, but only worked on incrementally, is how can we ever get enough government bloat that favors our party?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on September 17, 2021, 04:19:58 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 17, 2021, 12:46:05 PM
Quote from: dismalist on September 17, 2021, 12:44:24 PM
QuoteThere are some disciplines where traditional measures of research simply do not apply, and instead one can (and should) look to measures of truly outstanding practice as real professionals in their fields. Journalism is one. Fine Arts, Music, Dance, Theater/Film, & Creative Writing are others.

Such as Hospitality Management.

Why in god'$ name are the$e $ubject$ even part of univer$itie$?

Fixed that.

The Indiana University Department of Journalism was established in 1911, so not exactly a recent phenomenon.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on September 17, 2021, 04:48:30 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on September 17, 2021, 04:19:58 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 17, 2021, 12:46:05 PM
Quote from: dismalist on September 17, 2021, 12:44:24 PM
QuoteThere are some disciplines where traditional measures of research simply do not apply, and instead one can (and should) look to measures of truly outstanding practice as real professionals in their fields. Journalism is one. Fine Arts, Music, Dance, Theater/Film, & Creative Writing are others.

Such as Hospitality Management.

Why in god'$ name are the$e $ubject$ even part of univer$itie$?


Fixed that.

The Indiana University Department of Journalism was established in 1911, so not exactly a recent phenomenon.

Moronicity can begin earlier. I just took their admissions advice quiz. Says I'd be good for game design. They're doing a wonderful job, as a research university.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 18, 2021, 12:04:47 AM
more in response to little bongo's liberal wisdom that he reads way too much of, written by a  handful of puny academic (and other) minds:

QuoteIf a person or an agency effectively combats racism, everyone benefits. A happier society is probably less violent, yeah? I don't know if the problem can be RESOLVED, exactly, especially since we're probably talking about something as old as Ogg punching Krodak in a cave somewhere because Krodak's skin was darker or something.

We don't know why Ogg punched Krodak. Maybe they need to be left alone to work out their differences or to decide punching each other isn't helping. What they don't need is a government agency that purports to love everyone while actually hating many, that steps in to regulate their behavior and thoughts by siding with the one belonging to their tribe.
QuoteBut the overall arc is toward improvement, I think. Dr. Kendi's plan is potentially as good (or as ineffective) as any I've encountered--might be worth trying.

That improvement is ending largely because of demagogues like Kendi, although it starting to get momentum from the time it became de riguer to call any republican a racist. Ask anyone of either party or race. Race relations are worse than they've been in years.



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 18, 2021, 04:35:21 AM
I meant 'de rigueur.'

BTW, Dr. Kendi  was born around the same year as one of my children. I have been antiracist longer than he has been living. But in the ensuing years the definition of racism has been expanded to the point of meaninglessness. This is intentional, as the concept of racism is weaponized for political power of the far left. As inevitably became necessary to consolidate that political agenda and the myriad allegations of racism that bolster its calls to action, certain things that  literally are racism had to be deleted from the umbrella of what racism is. They now maintain there is no such thing as black-against-white racism. You can't get a more obvious refusal to tell the truth about one's world than that. Orwellian? Yes, to a T.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on September 18, 2021, 05:58:12 AM
Quote from: dismalist on September 17, 2021, 04:48:30 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on September 17, 2021, 04:19:58 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 17, 2021, 12:46:05 PM
Quote from: dismalist on September 17, 2021, 12:44:24 PM
QuoteThere are some disciplines where traditional measures of research simply do not apply, and instead one can (and should) look to measures of truly outstanding practice as real professionals in their fields. Journalism is one. Fine Arts, Music, Dance, Theater/Film, & Creative Writing are others.

Such as Hospitality Management.

Why in god'$ name are the$e $ubject$ even part of univer$itie$?


Fixed that.

The Indiana University Department of Journalism was established in 1911, so not exactly a recent phenomenon.

Moronicity can begin earlier. I just took their admissions advice quiz. Says I'd be good for game design. They're doing a wonderful job, as a research university.

Heh. I date moronity in US academia to 1897, when Harvard established a Department of Economics.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 18, 2021, 08:05:35 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on September 18, 2021, 05:58:12 AM
Quote from: dismalist on September 17, 2021, 04:48:30 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on September 17, 2021, 04:19:58 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 17, 2021, 12:46:05 PM
Quote from: dismalist on September 17, 2021, 12:44:24 PM
QuoteThere are some disciplines where traditional measures of research simply do not apply, and instead one can (and should) look to measures of truly outstanding practice as real professionals in their fields. Journalism is one. Fine Arts, Music, Dance, Theater/Film, & Creative Writing are others.

Such as Hospitality Management.

Why in god'$ name are the$e $ubject$ even part of univer$itie$?


Fixed that.

The Indiana University Department of Journalism was established in 1911, so not exactly a recent phenomenon.

Moronicity can begin earlier. I just took their admissions advice quiz. Says I'd be good for game design. They're doing a wonderful job, as a research university.

Heh. I date moronity in US academia to 1897, when Harvard established a Department of Economics.

My point above was that the main reason institutions add programs is that they think they can get enough students in them to make money. Whether the subject "belongs" at a university is less important the greater the potential financial payoff of big enrollment.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on September 18, 2021, 10:16:20 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 18, 2021, 08:05:35 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on September 18, 2021, 05:58:12 AM
Quote from: dismalist on September 17, 2021, 04:48:30 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on September 17, 2021, 04:19:58 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 17, 2021, 12:46:05 PM
Quote from: dismalist on September 17, 2021, 12:44:24 PM
QuoteThere are some disciplines where traditional measures of research simply do not apply, and instead one can (and should) look to measures of truly outstanding practice as real professionals in their fields. Journalism is one. Fine Arts, Music, Dance, Theater/Film, & Creative Writing are others.

Such as Hospitality Management.

Why in god'$ name are the$e $ubject$ even part of univer$itie$?


Fixed that.

The Indiana University Department of Journalism was established in 1911, so not exactly a recent phenomenon.

Moronicity can begin earlier. I just took their admissions advice quiz. Says I'd be good for game design. They're doing a wonderful job, as a research university.

Heh. I date moronity in US academia to 1897, when Harvard established a Department of Economics.

My point above was that the main reason institutions add programs is that they think they can get enough students in them to make money. Whether the subject "belongs" at a university is less important the greater the potential financial payoff of big enrollment.

Oh, I completely agree! I was just trying to make a joke at dismalist's expense.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on September 18, 2021, 10:50:27 AM
"The amendment would make unconstitutional racial inequity over a certain threshold, as well as racist ideas by public officials (with "racist ideas" and "public official" clearly defined). It would establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees. The DOA would be responsible for preclearing all local, state and federal public policies to ensure they won't yield racial inequity, monitor those policies, investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces, and monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas. The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas."

Plenty of room there for Ogg and Krodak to settle their disputes as individuals.

I've been to protests and I've been to anti-racism workshops. Some of the woke-speak is pretty doggone silly. And yes, I turn off my camera and do an eye-roll or two when the workshop leader goes into great detail as to which indigenous tribe first occupied where we're sitting right now. And sometimes I would love to tell someone, "Hi, I'm Dr. Bongo, and do you need me to yank my pants down so you can ascertain my pronouns?" But from 2017 till early 2021, I've seen what unchecked conservative id causes to happen, and I'm not impressed. I'll stick with the wokesters and the liberal wisdom created by puny minds, thanks.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 18, 2021, 12:01:09 PM
Quote from: little bongo on September 18, 2021, 10:50:27 AM
"The amendment would make unconstitutional racial inequity over a certain threshold, as well as racist ideas by public officials (with "racist ideas" and "public official" clearly defined). It would establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees. The DOA would be responsible for preclearing all local, state and federal public policies to ensure they won't yield racial inequity, monitor those policies, investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces, and monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas. The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas."


That is about the most Orwellian thing I've heard in ages. God help us.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 18, 2021, 01:13:07 PM
Quote from: little bongo on September 18, 2021, 10:50:27 AM
"The amendment would make unconstitutional racial inequity over a certain threshold, as well as racist ideas by public officials (with "racist ideas" and "public official" clearly defined). It would establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees. The DOA would be responsible for preclearing all local, state and federal public policies to ensure they won't yield racial inequity, monitor those policies, investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces, and monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas. The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas."

Plenty of room there for Ogg and Krodak to settle their disputes as individuals.

I've been to protests and I've been to anti-racism workshops. Some of the woke-speak is pretty doggone silly. And yes, I turn off my camera and do an eye-roll or two when the workshop leader goes into great detail as to which indigenous tribe first occupied where we're sitting right now. And sometimes I would love to tell someone, "Hi, I'm Dr. Bongo, and do you need me to yank my pants down so you can ascertain my pronouns?" But from 2017 till early 2021, I've seen what unchecked conservative id causes to happen, and I'm not impressed. I'll stick with the wokesters and the liberal wisdom created by puny minds, thanks.

I don't believe you. I find it frankly astonishing that you could be that worried about what the republicans might do, given the alternative of wokeism as federal policy.
The thing that's disappointing about Dr. Kendi is he is obviously not interested in human progress. If we were to tell him students with green skin spend, on the average, 14 hours per week high on cannabis, and spend on average three hours a day on social media, and read at a third grade level, while people with purple skin spend four hours a month high on cannabis, use social media 20 minutes per day, and read at high school senior level, and therefore, high school seniors should put down the hash pipe and cell phone and study, his only response would be you are picking on green-skinned kids. He has no interest in anything other than race as the sole arbiter. It's impossible for me to believe anyone with enough work ethic to earn a PhD, even in my field, which has a lot of fakers, does not understand he's a snake oil salesman.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on September 18, 2021, 03:02:36 PM
QuoteHeh. I date moronity in US academia to 1897, when Harvard established a Department of Economics.

Agreed! U Chicago established the first Economics Dept in the US in 1892. For five years, everything was fine, and then Harvard established its Economics Department in 1897. Downhill ever since. :-)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on September 18, 2021, 10:19:14 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 18, 2021, 01:13:07 PM
Quote from: little bongo on September 18, 2021, 10:50:27 AM

I don't believe you.

Now I know I have a heart. I can feel it breaking.

[/quote] I find it frankly astonishing that you could be that worried about what the republicans might do, given the alternative of wokeism as federal policy.
[/quote]

Now see, i would tell you the exact opposite: "... that you could be that worried about wokeism as federal policy, give the alternative of what the republicans might do." Some people are different than you, studhoss.

[/quote]If we were to tell him students with green skin spend, on the average, 14 hours per week high on cannabis, and spend on average three hours a day on social media, and read at a third grade level, while people with purple skin spend four hours a month high on cannabis, use social media 20 minutes per day, and read at high school senior level, and therefore, high school seniors should put down the hash pipe and cell phone and study, his only response would be you are picking on green-skinned kids.[/quote]

Wow, you took the long way around the garden path to make that (rather dubious) point.

[/quote]It's impossible for me to believe anyone with enough work ethic to earn a PhD, even in my field, which has a lot of fakers, does not understand he's a snake oil salesman.[/quote]

Look, Skeezix, I lived through the time period I mentioned, read a butt-load of presidential tweets, listened to and watched a lot of press conferences, read other related materials along the way, made some decisions and came to some conclusions. And so did you. We came to different ones. Maybe I'm wrong, and maybe you're wrong. Given what I've read of your posts over the past... pretty long time, I won't say I'm "frankly astonished" by the conclusions you've come to. But given your recent rants about rap music and garbage culture, and wishing cancer upon a controversial influential academic, I will say you've got a pair of brass ones to lecture me about what snake-oil salesman I choose to buy from, if indeed the term "snake-oil salesman" applies.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 19, 2021, 03:56:06 AM
OK, we are worlds apart. I can stop there at this time. We both accept that neither will persuade the other.

ETA: for what it's worth, something you don't know about me: I am scared to death of what is happening in our country.

I have only become aware of Peter Boghossian recently. This brief interview sounds like a sane, experienced person identifying real problems.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/09/17/universities-are-turning-into-ideology-mills/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on October 23, 2021, 08:13:51 PM
NY Times:

M.I.T.'s Choice of Lecturer Ignited Criticism. So Did Its Decision to Cancel. (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/20/us/dorian-abbot-mit.html)

Quote
Dorian Abbot is a scientist who has opposed aspects of affirmative action. He is now at the center of an argument over free speech and acceptable discourse.

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

Quote
Ever more fraught arguments over speech and academic freedom on American campuses have moved as a flood tide into the sciences. Biology, physics, math: All have seen fierce debates over courses, hiring and objectivity, and some on the academic left have moved to silence those who disagree on certain questions.

Quote
Dr. Abbot, for his part, said he had tenure at a grand university that valued free speech and, with luck, 30 years of teaching and research ahead of him. And yet the canceled speech carries a sting.

"There is no question that these controversies will have a negative impact on my scientific career," he said. "But I don't want to live in a country where instead of discussing something difficult we go and silence debate."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on October 23, 2021, 08:54:15 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 23, 2021, 08:13:51 PM
NY Times:

M.I.T.'s Choice of Lecturer Ignited Criticism. So Did Its Decision to Cancel. (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/20/us/dorian-abbot-mit.html)

Quote
Dorian Abbot is a scientist who has opposed aspects of affirmative action. He is now at the center of an argument over free speech and acceptable discourse.

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

Quote
Ever more fraught arguments over speech and academic freedom on American campuses have moved as a flood tide into the sciences. Biology, physics, math: All have seen fierce debates over courses, hiring and objectivity, and some on the academic left have moved to silence those who disagree on certain questions.

Quote
Dr. Abbot, for his part, said he had tenure at a grand university that valued free speech and, with luck, 30 years of teaching and research ahead of him. And yet the canceled speech carries a sting.

"There is no question that these controversies will have a negative impact on my scientific career," he said. "But I don't want to live in a country where instead of discussing something difficult we go and silence debate."

The important and valuable aspect of all this nonsense is that Abbot can speak elsewhere, in this case at Princeton, about the subject he was originally invited to speak upon.

Competition is a necessary institution to discover truths. As long as we have it, fine. When we don't, it'll be all over.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 24, 2021, 04:51:41 PM
Quote from: dismalist on October 23, 2021, 08:54:15 PM

The important and valuable aspect of all this nonsense is that Abbot can speak elsewhere, in this case at Princeton, about the subject he was originally invited to speak upon.

Competition is a necessary institution to discover truths. As long as we have it, fine. When we don't, it'll be all over.

Under the 'Department of Antiracism' that Boston University is promoting, Abbot would not be allowed to speak anywhere, except maybe to his cellmate.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on October 24, 2021, 04:59:51 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 24, 2021, 04:51:41 PM
Quote from: dismalist on October 23, 2021, 08:54:15 PM

The important and valuable aspect of all this nonsense is that Abbot can speak elsewhere, in this case at Princeton, about the subject he was originally invited to speak upon.

Competition is a necessary institution to discover truths. As long as we have it, fine. When we don't, it'll be all over.

Under the 'Department of Antiracism' that Boston University is promoting, Abbot would not be allowed to speak anywhere, except maybe to his cellmate.

He's speaking at Princeton. No problem, so far.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 25, 2021, 03:41:39 AM
Quote from: dismalist on October 24, 2021, 04:59:51 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 24, 2021, 04:51:41 PM
Quote from: dismalist on October 23, 2021, 08:54:15 PM

The important and valuable aspect of all this nonsense is that Abbot can speak elsewhere, in this case at Princeton, about the subject he was originally invited to speak upon.

Competition is a necessary institution to discover truths. As long as we have it, fine. When we don't, it'll be all over.

Under the 'Department of Antiracism' that Boston University is promoting, Abbot would not be allowed to speak anywhere, except maybe to his cellmate.

He's speaking at Princeton. No problem, so far.

I agree, but the conundrum I see here is, does freedom of speech mean that someone can campaign against allowing freedom of speech? How about a university doing it?

ETA: just to postulate one bone-chiller: Someone in government somewhere says 'let's make August 25 Leonard Bernstein Day in the city of Lawrence, MA in recognition of his contribution to the arts.' And someone from the anti-racism think tank, who is now a salaried government staffer, says "Bernstein spent his whole career promoting white supremacy." And his crowd, thinking the fight against racism needs to be, each day, more vigorous than it was yesterday, says 'gosh darn it, I didn't think of that. You're right. This must be stopped.'
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on October 26, 2021, 07:05:54 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 25, 2021, 03:41:39 AM
Quote from: dismalist on October 24, 2021, 04:59:51 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 24, 2021, 04:51:41 PM
Quote from: dismalist on October 23, 2021, 08:54:15 PM

The important and valuable aspect of all this nonsense is that Abbot can speak elsewhere, in this case at Princeton, about the subject he was originally invited to speak upon.

Competition is a necessary institution to discover truths. As long as we have it, fine. When we don't, it'll be all over.

Under the 'Department of Antiracism' that Boston University is promoting, Abbot would not be allowed to speak anywhere, except maybe to his cellmate.

He's speaking at Princeton. No problem, so far.

I agree, but the conundrum I see here is, does freedom of speech mean that someone can campaign against allowing freedom of speech? How about a university doing it?

ETA: just to postulate one bone-chiller: Someone in government somewhere says 'let's make August 25 Leonard Bernstein Day in the city of Lawrence, MA in recognition of his contribution to the arts.' And someone from the anti-racism think tank, who is now a salaried government staffer, says "Bernstein spent his whole career promoting white supremacy." And his crowd, thinking the fight against racism needs to be, each day, more vigorous than it was yesterday, says 'gosh darn it, I didn't think of that. You're right. This must be stopped.'

I really am having a hard time figuring out what the argument is supposed to be here. Like a lot of cancel culture angst, it seems to rest on a fundamental misunderstanding of what free speech is. Free speech protects against government restrictions. That's it. The supposed conundrum doesn't exist because there is no right to give a lecture at a university. If the institution is public, you are welcome to go out to one of those free speech areas and say whatever you want to whoever will listen, but you don't have some right to an auditorium. In some cases public schools may be obligated to allow student groups to invite speakers of their choice, and private schools often choose to have the same rules.

However, you seem to believe that somehow criticism of the choice of speakers and pressure on a group to disinvite a speaker is a violation of free speech. John Stuart Mill would be pretty confused by this argument. He specifically argued that free speech didn't need to be regulated by the government because it could be regulated by popular opinion and fringe ideas could be marginalized.

When people whine about cancel culture, they mostly seem to want to regulate and control the criticism of speech. Take your supposed "bone chilling" example. Towns aren't required to have a day celebrating anybody. Obviously to do so is to celebrate the person. It seems strange to argue that debate about whether someone's life and career is worthy of celebration is inappropriate, wrong and dangerous. In this example, some people are arguing that Leonard Bernstein promoted white supremacy. You're welcome to argue that this doesn't make much sense. What you really want to do is to say that it shouldn't be allowed to question whether the town should celebrate some person.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on October 26, 2021, 07:16:33 AM
Quote from: Caracal on October 26, 2021, 07:05:54 AM

I really am having a hard time figuring out what the argument is supposed to be here. Like a lot of cancel culture angst, it seems to rest on a fundamental misunderstanding of what free speech is. Free speech protects against government restrictions. That's it. The supposed conundrum doesn't exist because there is no right to give a lecture at a university. If the institution is public, you are welcome to go out to one of those free speech areas and say whatever you want to whoever will listen, but you don't have some right to an auditorium. In some cases public schools may be obligated to allow student groups to invite speakers of their choice, and private schools often choose to have the same rules.


Perhaps it helps to frame the question in this way: If a group affiliated with an institution invites someone to the institution to speak, does the institution owe a duty of civility to actually allow the person to speak?

This does not preclude the institution having to approve any invitations before they are given. This seems like a reasonable expectation for an institution whose mission involves the investigation of ideas and the search for truth.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on October 26, 2021, 08:50:30 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on October 26, 2021, 07:16:33 AM
Quote from: Caracal on October 26, 2021, 07:05:54 AM

I really am having a hard time figuring out what the argument is supposed to be here. Like a lot of cancel culture angst, it seems to rest on a fundamental misunderstanding of what free speech is. Free speech protects against government restrictions. That's it. The supposed conundrum doesn't exist because there is no right to give a lecture at a university. If the institution is public, you are welcome to go out to one of those free speech areas and say whatever you want to whoever will listen, but you don't have some right to an auditorium. In some cases public schools may be obligated to allow student groups to invite speakers of their choice, and private schools often choose to have the same rules.


Perhaps it helps to frame the question in this way: If a group affiliated with an institution invites someone to the institution to speak, does the institution owe a duty of civility to actually allow the person to speak?

This does not preclude the institution having to approve any invitations before they are given. This seems like a reasonable expectation for an institution whose mission involves the investigation of ideas and the search for truth.

Well, in this case, the guy was invited by a department to give a talk. There was criticism of the speaker and the department decided to rescind their invitation. You can argue about whether they should have done that, or what beliefs and ideas should be considered when deciding to invite or disinvite a speaker, but I don't really understand saying that there's something wrong because the choice was criticized and that criticism caused the department to cancel the lecture. If a department invited someone and then learned they were a holocaust denier, would you argue they shouldn't cancel the invitation?

The issue is that you don't believe criticizing affirmative action should result in someone's lecture being canceled. That's fine. Make that argument. However, you don't get to decide for everyone else. The department is allowed to decide they don't want to bring someone to campus who has ideas they don't support, or that they don't want to deal with being criticized. The center at Princeton is then allowed to decide they don't like that decision and want to invite the guy to give the talk there to make a point.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on October 26, 2021, 09:56:20 AM
Quote from: Caracal on October 26, 2021, 08:50:30 AM

Well, in this case, the guy was invited by a department to give a talk. There was criticism of the speaker and the department decided to rescind their invitation. You can argue about whether they should have done that, or what beliefs and ideas should be considered when deciding to invite or disinvite a speaker, but I don't really understand saying that there's something wrong because the choice was criticized and that criticism caused the department to cancel the lecture. If a department invited someone and then learned they were a holocaust denier, would you argue they shouldn't cancel the invitation?


If the department invited the person to speak about the Holocaust, they presumably would have known his views before inviting him. If he wasn't invited to speak about the Holocaust, it's totally irrelevant. I don't care if my plumber is a flat-earther or a climate-change denier; I care that s/he can fix my plumbing. Should I care about the plumber's position on the Israel-Palestine conflict? Team Edward or Team Jacob? Ginger or Mary Anne? Griffindor, Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw, or Slytherin? How many dimensions of ideological purity are necessary that have nothing to do with what the person is being invited for?


Quote
The department is allowed to decide they don't want to bring someone to campus who has ideas they don't support, or that they don't want to deal with being criticized. T

That cowardliness reflects badly on the institution. As Al Gore indicated, whether the truth is convenient or not, (or whether some people may be uncomfortable hearing it or not), doesn't determine whether it needs to be discussed. That would extend to whether the person presenting the truth is in some unrelated ways unpopular or unlikable.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on October 26, 2021, 10:32:23 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on October 26, 2021, 09:56:20 AM
Quote from: Caracal on October 26, 2021, 08:50:30 AM

Well, in this case, the guy was invited by a department to give a talk. There was criticism of the speaker and the department decided to rescind their invitation. You can argue about whether they should have done that, or what beliefs and ideas should be considered when deciding to invite or disinvite a speaker, but I don't really understand saying that there's something wrong because the choice was criticized and that criticism caused the department to cancel the lecture. If a department invited someone and then learned they were a holocaust denier, would you argue they shouldn't cancel the invitation?


If the department invited the person to speak about the Holocaust, they presumably would have known his views before inviting him. If he wasn't invited to speak about the Holocaust, it's totally irrelevant. I don't care if my plumber is a flat-earther or a climate-change denier; I care that s/he can fix my plumbing. Should I care about the plumber's position on the Israel-Palestine conflict? Team Edward or Team Jacob? Ginger or Mary Anne? Griffindor, Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw, or Slytherin? How many dimensions of ideological purity are necessary that have nothing to do with what the person is being invited for?




Again, you are trying to insist that there are universal rules. I don't scour Facebook to see what sort of views a plumber might have before seeing if he can fix the drain. However, if I learned that the plumber I'd hired before was in a Neo nazi group, I'd hire a different plumber next time. You can have nazis in your house if you want, but I'd sooner not. There's no rule that says you can't choose to not invite people to give talks if you don't like things they have said about issues unrelated to the talk.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on October 26, 2021, 10:42:21 AM
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education [FIRE], to which I donate money every year, makes the point that public college must allow free speech on account the government may not prohibit speech, but that private colleges often promise they will allow free speech. It is such private colleges that FIRE goes after.

Publicizing which colleges do what concerning speech lets people sort themselves into colleges. It worries me not too much as long as there are free speech colleges left, but it worries me just enough to donate to FIRE. :-)

My impression is that speech is restricted most in trendy private colleges, but I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on October 26, 2021, 10:48:13 AM
Quote from: Caracal on October 26, 2021, 10:32:23 AM
I don't scour Facebook to see what sort of views a plumber might have before seeing if he can fix the drain. However, if I learned that the plumber I'd hired before was in a Neo nazi group, I'd hire a different plumber next time. You can have nazis in your house if you want, but I'd sooner not. There's no rule that says you can't choose to not invite people to give talks if you don't like things they have said about issues unrelated to the talk.

It's rescinding the invitation that they already gave that was cowardly. They're free to invite or not whoever they like. But once they invite someone, "uninviting" the personal is unprofessional and childish when it has nothing to do with the purpose for the invitation. (If they invited someone to speak on their research, and then evidence arose that their research was wrong, based on falsified data, or something of that sort, then rescinding the invitation based on the questions about the person' actual expertise on the subject at hand would be entirely reasonable.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 26, 2021, 11:43:21 AM
Quote from: Caracal on October 26, 2021, 10:32:23 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on October 26, 2021, 09:56:20 AM
Quote from: Caracal on October 26, 2021, 08:50:30 AM

Well, in this case, the guy was invited by a department to give a talk. There was criticism of the speaker and the department decided to rescind their invitation. You can argue about whether they should have done that, or what beliefs and ideas should be considered when deciding to invite or disinvite a speaker, but I don't really understand saying that there's something wrong because the choice was criticized and that criticism caused the department to cancel the lecture. If a department invited someone and then learned they were a holocaust denier, would you argue they shouldn't cancel the invitation?


If the department invited the person to speak about the Holocaust, they presumably would have known his views before inviting him. If he wasn't invited to speak about the Holocaust, it's totally irrelevant. I don't care if my plumber is a flat-earther or a climate-change denier; I care that s/he can fix my plumbing. Should I care about the plumber's position on the Israel-Palestine conflict? Team Edward or Team Jacob? Ginger or Mary Anne? Griffindor, Hufflepuff, Ravenclaw, or Slytherin? How many dimensions of ideological purity are necessary that have nothing to do with what the person is being invited for?




Again, you are trying to insist that there are universal rules. I don't scour Facebook to see what sort of views a plumber might have before seeing if he can fix the drain. However, if I learned that the plumber I'd hired before was in a Neo nazi group, I'd hire a different plumber next time. You can have nazis in your house if you want, but I'd sooner not. There's no rule that says you can't choose to not invite people to give talks if you don't like things they have said about issues unrelated to the talk.

Nobody in the scenario is a Nazi.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on October 28, 2021, 10:09:05 AM
IHE:

Many Liberal Arts Students Need a Lesson in Free Speech (https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2021/10/28/are-liberal-arts-students-less-supportive-free-speech-opinion)

Quote
When asked about the acceptability of shouting down and protesting a speaker, three-quarters of students at liberal arts colleges (75 percent) said they believed such behavior is acceptable on certain occasions, based on my analysis. At teaching universities, that number dropped to 62 percent. Almost half (44 percent) of liberal arts students maintained that shouting down a speaker is always or sometimes acceptable, compared to about a third (32 percent) of those at large research universities.

A similar and more troubling pattern emerges on the issue of preventing one's peers from hearing a speaker's potentially controversial ideas. In the case of liberal arts colleges, over half (52 percent) of students sampled found a reason to justify blocking their peers from hearing a speaker talk, compared to roughly a third of students at large teaching (37 percent) and research (41 percent) universities.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on October 28, 2021, 10:17:24 AM
Boston Globe:

MIT to discuss academic freedom after canceling prestigious lecture over professor's views (https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/10/27/business/mit-discuss-academic-freedom-after-canceling-prestigious-lecture-over-professors-views/)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on October 28, 2021, 10:34:15 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 28, 2021, 10:09:05 AM
IHE:

Many Liberal Arts Students Need a Lesson in Free Speech (https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2021/10/28/are-liberal-arts-students-less-supportive-free-speech-opinion)

Quote
When asked about the acceptability of shouting down and protesting a speaker, three-quarters of students at liberal arts colleges (75 percent) said they believed such behavior is acceptable on certain occasions, based on my analysis. At teaching universities, that number dropped to 62 percent. Almost half (44 percent) of liberal arts students maintained that shouting down a speaker is always or sometimes acceptable, compared to about a third (32 percent) of those at large research universities.

A similar and more troubling pattern emerges on the issue of preventing one's peers from hearing a speaker's potentially controversial ideas. In the case of liberal arts colleges, over half (52 percent) of students sampled found a reason to justify blocking their peers from hearing a speaker talk, compared to roughly a third of students at large teaching (37 percent) and research (41 percent) universities.

So for the people who argue that cancel culture on campus is much less an issue than people claim, do these results confirm your position?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on October 30, 2021, 07:56:15 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on October 28, 2021, 10:34:15 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 28, 2021, 10:09:05 AM
IHE:

Many Liberal Arts Students Need a Lesson in Free Speech (https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2021/10/28/are-liberal-arts-students-less-supportive-free-speech-opinion)

Quote
When asked about the acceptability of shouting down and protesting a speaker, three-quarters of students at liberal arts colleges (75 percent) said they believed such behavior is acceptable on certain occasions, based on my analysis. At teaching universities, that number dropped to 62 percent. Almost half (44 percent) of liberal arts students maintained that shouting down a speaker is always or sometimes acceptable, compared to about a third (32 percent) of those at large research universities.

A similar and more troubling pattern emerges on the issue of preventing one's peers from hearing a speaker's potentially controversial ideas. In the case of liberal arts colleges, over half (52 percent) of students sampled found a reason to justify blocking their peers from hearing a speaker talk, compared to roughly a third of students at large teaching (37 percent) and research (41 percent) universities.

So for the people who argue that cancel culture on campus is much less an issue than people claim, do these results confirm your position?

They don't confirm either that cancel culture is a major problem or that it is a trivial one. Among other things: (1) The phrasing of the question leaves a lot of ambiguity ("on certain occasions"), (2) beliefs don't necessarily translate into actions, (3) details on the polling methods matter and one poll can't be looked at in isolation (that's why outlets like 538 do a poll of polls).

If you want to prove this is a serious problem and not a handful of incidents that get a lot of media coverage, then tell us how how frequently people are actually cancelled (e.g. how many speakers were canceled as a share of total invitees). My guess is that it is a very tiny percentage in only a handful of universities.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 30, 2021, 08:07:42 PM
you don't have to cancel people that no one dares to invite in the first place. Or others who won't draw a crowd because their politics don't align with the far left diversity staff who have their fingers in all the pots, therefore won't get the promotion.
it would impossible, absolutely impossible to get a speaker like Coleman Hughes or John McWhorter anywhere near my school.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on October 30, 2021, 08:12:43 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on October 30, 2021, 07:56:15 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on October 28, 2021, 10:34:15 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 28, 2021, 10:09:05 AM
IHE:

Many Liberal Arts Students Need a Lesson in Free Speech (https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2021/10/28/are-liberal-arts-students-less-supportive-free-speech-opinion)

Quote
When asked about the acceptability of shouting down and protesting a speaker, three-quarters of students at liberal arts colleges (75 percent) said they believed such behavior is acceptable on certain occasions, based on my analysis. At teaching universities, that number dropped to 62 percent. Almost half (44 percent) of liberal arts students maintained that shouting down a speaker is always or sometimes acceptable, compared to about a third (32 percent) of those at large research universities.

A similar and more troubling pattern emerges on the issue of preventing one's peers from hearing a speaker's potentially controversial ideas. In the case of liberal arts colleges, over half (52 percent) of students sampled found a reason to justify blocking their peers from hearing a speaker talk, compared to roughly a third of students at large teaching (37 percent) and research (41 percent) universities.

So for the people who argue that cancel culture on campus is much less an issue than people claim, do these results confirm your position?

They don't confirm either that cancel culture is a major problem or that it is a trivial one. Among other things: (1) The phrasing of the question leaves a lot of ambiguity ("on certain occasions"), (2) beliefs don't necessarily translate into actions, (3) details on the polling methods matter and one poll can't be looked at in isolation (that's why outlets like 538 do a poll of polls).

If you want to prove this is a serious problem and not a handful of incidents that get a lot of media coverage, then tell us how how frequently people are actually cancelled (e.g. how many speakers were canceled as a share of total invitees). My guess is that it is a very tiny percentage in only a handful of universities.

Well, not tiny or handful, but virtually all the trendies, and some non-trendies. Fortunately, there are many non-trendies. I wouldn't have wanted my kid go anywhere near a cancel culture place, and she wouldn't have wanted to go!

Let the the trendies try to survive in competition. Not all will succeed. I hope to see some of them mentioned on the Colleges in Dire Financial Straits thread in the near future. The more the better.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on October 30, 2021, 08:45:59 PM
BBC:

Kathleen Stock: University of Sussex free speech row professor quits (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-sussex-59084446)

Quote
A professor accused of transphobia for her views on gender identity is quitting her post at the University of Sussex.

Philosophy professor Kathleen Stock, who rejects the claim, said she would be leaving after "a horrible time" and "difficult few years".

Earlier this month an anonymous group launched a campaign to get her sacked.

The university had defended Prof Stock, saying its staff have the right "to say and believe what they think".

The academic said on Twitter: "This has been an absolutely horrible time for me and my family. I'm putting it behind me now."

She also said she was glad to see the university upholding that bullying and harassment in the workplace was unacceptable.

Prof Stock, who recently published a book questioning the idea that gender identity is more "socially significant" than biological sex, rejects the claim that she or her work is transphobic.

Posters calling for her to be fired were reportedly put up near the campus, and an image emerged on social media of a campaigner holding a banner saying "Stock Out".

Quote
Higher and further education minister Michelle Donelan said: "It is absolutely appalling that the toxic environment at the University of Sussex has made it untenable for Professor Kathleen Stock to continue in her position there. No academic should ever have to fear for their personal safety.

"The sustained campaign of harassment and intimidation she has faced is deplorable and the situation should never have got this far."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on October 30, 2021, 08:51:07 PM
Quote from: dismalist on October 30, 2021, 08:12:43 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on October 30, 2021, 07:56:15 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on October 28, 2021, 10:34:15 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 28, 2021, 10:09:05 AM
IHE:

Many Liberal Arts Students Need a Lesson in Free Speech (https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2021/10/28/are-liberal-arts-students-less-supportive-free-speech-opinion)

Quote
When asked about the acceptability of shouting down and protesting a speaker, three-quarters of students at liberal arts colleges (75 percent) said they believed such behavior is acceptable on certain occasions, based on my analysis. At teaching universities, that number dropped to 62 percent. Almost half (44 percent) of liberal arts students maintained that shouting down a speaker is always or sometimes acceptable, compared to about a third (32 percent) of those at large research universities.

A similar and more troubling pattern emerges on the issue of preventing one's peers from hearing a speaker's potentially controversial ideas. In the case of liberal arts colleges, over half (52 percent) of students sampled found a reason to justify blocking their peers from hearing a speaker talk, compared to roughly a third of students at large teaching (37 percent) and research (41 percent) universities.

So for the people who argue that cancel culture on campus is much less an issue than people claim, do these results confirm your position?

They don't confirm either that cancel culture is a major problem or that it is a trivial one. Among other things: (1) The phrasing of the question leaves a lot of ambiguity ("on certain occasions"), (2) beliefs don't necessarily translate into actions, (3) details on the polling methods matter and one poll can't be looked at in isolation (that's why outlets like 538 do a poll of polls).

If you want to prove this is a serious problem and not a handful of incidents that get a lot of media coverage, then tell us how how frequently people are actually cancelled (e.g. how many speakers were canceled as a share of total invitees). My guess is that it is a very tiny percentage in only a handful of universities.

Well, not tiny or handful, but virtually all the trendies, and some non-trendies. Fortunately, there are many non-trendies. I wouldn't have wanted my kid go anywhere near a cancel culture place, and she wouldn't have wanted to go!

Let the the trendies try to survive in competition. Not all will succeed. I hope to see some of them mentioned on the Colleges in Dire Financial Straits thread in the near future. The more the better.

Feel free to show evidence that the underlined is true. Otherwise it is just a meaningless claim that will not convince anyone who isn't already wound up about this issue.

Quote from: mahagonny on October 30, 2021, 08:07:42 PM
you don't have to cancel people that no one dares to invite in the first place. Or others who won't draw a crowd because their politics don't align with the far left diversity staff who have their fingers in all the pots, therefore won't get the promotion.
it would impossible, absolutely impossible to get a speaker like Coleman Hughes or John McWhorter anywhere near my school.

So conservative speakers that don't draw a crowd are being cancelled? Talk about moving the goal posts.

And the people you mention speak at universities all the time, so clearly they have not been cancelled. Maybe they don't get to visit your university, but your university seems like a weird place, where diversity staff pick the speakers and let all the adjuncts know who is not allowed to come and why. At my place (public R1) speakers are brought in by student groups, professors, centers, and deans, and we have all sorts of people who say politically incorrect things. I've never seen or heard from a diversity staff person.

But all that said, you are right that there could be a selection bias, so to speak. However, you once again need to show evidence that this is happening if you want your claims to be taken seriously.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on October 30, 2021, 09:33:41 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on October 30, 2021, 08:51:07 PM
Quote from: dismalist on October 30, 2021, 08:12:43 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on October 30, 2021, 07:56:15 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on October 28, 2021, 10:34:15 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 28, 2021, 10:09:05 AM
IHE:

Many Liberal Arts Students Need a Lesson in Free Speech (https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2021/10/28/are-liberal-arts-students-less-supportive-free-speech-opinion)

Quote
When asked about the acceptability of shouting down and protesting a speaker, three-quarters of students at liberal arts colleges (75 percent) said they believed such behavior is acceptable on certain occasions, based on my analysis. At teaching universities, that number dropped to 62 percent. Almost half (44 percent) of liberal arts students maintained that shouting down a speaker is always or sometimes acceptable, compared to about a third (32 percent) of those at large research universities.

A similar and more troubling pattern emerges on the issue of preventing one's peers from hearing a speaker's potentially controversial ideas. In the case of liberal arts colleges, over half (52 percent) of students sampled found a reason to justify blocking their peers from hearing a speaker talk, compared to roughly a third of students at large teaching (37 percent) and research (41 percent) universities.

So for the people who argue that cancel culture on campus is much less an issue than people claim, do these results confirm your position?

They don't confirm either that cancel culture is a major problem or that it is a trivial one. Among other things: (1) The phrasing of the question leaves a lot of ambiguity ("on certain occasions"), (2) beliefs don't necessarily translate into actions, (3) details on the polling methods matter and one poll can't be looked at in isolation (that's why outlets like 538 do a poll of polls).

If you want to prove this is a serious problem and not a handful of incidents that get a lot of media coverage, then tell us how how frequently people are actually cancelled (e.g. how many speakers were canceled as a share of total invitees). My guess is that it is a very tiny percentage in only a handful of universities.

Well, not tiny or handful, but virtually all the trendies, and some non-trendies. Fortunately, there are many non-trendies. I wouldn't have wanted my kid go anywhere near a cancel culture place, and she wouldn't have wanted to go!

Let the the trendies try to survive in competition. Not all will succeed. I hope to see some of them mentioned on the Colleges in Dire Financial Straits thread in the near future. The more the better.

Feel free to show evidence that the underlined is true. Otherwise it is just a meaningless claim that will not convince anyone who isn't already wound up about this issue.

Quote from: mahagonny on October 30, 2021, 08:07:42 PM
you don't have to cancel people that no one dares to invite in the first place. Or others who won't draw a crowd because their politics don't align with the far left diversity staff who have their fingers in all the pots, therefore won't get the promotion.
it would impossible, absolutely impossible to get a speaker like Coleman Hughes or John McWhorter anywhere near my school.

So conservative speakers that don't draw a crowd are being cancelled? Talk about moving the goal posts.

And the people you mention speak at universities all the time, so clearly they have not been cancelled. Maybe they don't get to visit your university, but your university seems like a weird place, where diversity staff pick the speakers and let all the adjuncts know who is not allowed to come and why. At my place (public R1) speakers are brought in by student groups, professors, centers, and deans, and we have all sorts of people who say politically incorrect things. I've never seen or heard from a diversity staff person.

But all that said, you are right that there could be a selection bias, so to speak. However, you once again need to show evidence that this is happening if you want your claims to be taken seriously.

Look, I said I was not too worried about this stuff. A perusal of the FIRE document got me believing the trendies are up to this. A perusal. I could be wrong. I don't care. But no kid of mine would go to such a place, private or public.

I don't need to show evidence to anyone except myself. I needed to choose a specific institution for my kid, and not have anyone else choose for me.

Those I don't like may whither away, or they may not. I hope they whither.

No worries, mate. :-)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 30, 2021, 09:39:09 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on October 30, 2021, 08:51:07 PM
Quote from: dismalist on October 30, 2021, 08:12:43 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on October 30, 2021, 07:56:15 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on October 28, 2021, 10:34:15 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 28, 2021, 10:09:05 AM
IHE:

Many Liberal Arts Students Need a Lesson in Free Speech (https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2021/10/28/are-liberal-arts-students-less-supportive-free-speech-opinion)

Quote
When asked about the acceptability of shouting down and protesting a speaker, three-quarters of students at liberal arts colleges (75 percent) said they believed such behavior is acceptable on certain occasions, based on my analysis. At teaching universities, that number dropped to 62 percent. Almost half (44 percent) of liberal arts students maintained that shouting down a speaker is always or sometimes acceptable, compared to about a third (32 percent) of those at large research universities.

A similar and more troubling pattern emerges on the issue of preventing one's peers from hearing a speaker's potentially controversial ideas. In the case of liberal arts colleges, over half (52 percent) of students sampled found a reason to justify blocking their peers from hearing a speaker talk, compared to roughly a third of students at large teaching (37 percent) and research (41 percent) universities.

So for the people who argue that cancel culture on campus is much less an issue than people claim, do these results confirm your position?

They don't confirm either that cancel culture is a major problem or that it is a trivial one. Among other things: (1) The phrasing of the question leaves a lot of ambiguity ("on certain occasions"), (2) beliefs don't necessarily translate into actions, (3) details on the polling methods matter and one poll can't be looked at in isolation (that's why outlets like 538 do a poll of polls).

If you want to prove this is a serious problem and not a handful of incidents that get a lot of media coverage, then tell us how how frequently people are actually cancelled (e.g. how many speakers were canceled as a share of total invitees). My guess is that it is a very tiny percentage in only a handful of universities.

Well, not tiny or handful, but virtually all the trendies, and some non-trendies. Fortunately, there are many non-trendies. I wouldn't have wanted my kid go anywhere near a cancel culture place, and she wouldn't have wanted to go!

Let the the trendies try to survive in competition. Not all will succeed. I hope to see some of them mentioned on the Colleges in Dire Financial Straits thread in the near future. The more the better.

Feel free to show evidence that the underlined is true. Otherwise it is just a meaningless claim that will not convince anyone who isn't already wound up about this issue.

Quote from: mahagonny on October 30, 2021, 08:07:42 PM
you don't have to cancel people that no one dares to invite in the first place. Or others who won't draw a crowd because their politics don't align with the far left diversity staff who have their fingers in all the pots, therefore won't get the promotion.
it would impossible, absolutely impossible to get a speaker like Coleman Hughes or John McWhorter anywhere near my school.

So conservative speakers that don't draw a crowd are being cancelled? Talk about moving the goal posts.

And the people you mention speak at universities all the time, so clearly they have not been cancelled. Maybe they don't get to visit your university, but your university seems like a weird place, where diversity staff pick the speakers and let all the adjuncts know who is not allowed to come and why. At my place (public R1) speakers are brought in by student groups, professors, centers, and deans, and we have all sorts of people who say politically incorrect things. I've never seen or heard from a diversity staff person.

But all that said, you are right that there could be a selection bias, so to speak. However, you once again need to show evidence that this is happening if you want your claims to be taken seriously.

No shit/.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on October 31, 2021, 06:43:14 AM
And on the other hand: https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/579260-alabama-university-reneges-on-historians-speaking-invitation-after-anti
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Sun_Worshiper on October 31, 2021, 09:21:20 AM
Quote from: dismalist on October 30, 2021, 09:33:41 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on October 30, 2021, 08:51:07 PM
Quote from: dismalist on October 30, 2021, 08:12:43 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on October 30, 2021, 07:56:15 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on October 28, 2021, 10:34:15 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 28, 2021, 10:09:05 AM
IHE:

Many Liberal Arts Students Need a Lesson in Free Speech (https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2021/10/28/are-liberal-arts-students-less-supportive-free-speech-opinion)

Quote
When asked about the acceptability of shouting down and protesting a speaker, three-quarters of students at liberal arts colleges (75 percent) said they believed such behavior is acceptable on certain occasions, based on my analysis. At teaching universities, that number dropped to 62 percent. Almost half (44 percent) of liberal arts students maintained that shouting down a speaker is always or sometimes acceptable, compared to about a third (32 percent) of those at large research universities.

A similar and more troubling pattern emerges on the issue of preventing one's peers from hearing a speaker's potentially controversial ideas. In the case of liberal arts colleges, over half (52 percent) of students sampled found a reason to justify blocking their peers from hearing a speaker talk, compared to roughly a third of students at large teaching (37 percent) and research (41 percent) universities.

So for the people who argue that cancel culture on campus is much less an issue than people claim, do these results confirm your position?

They don't confirm either that cancel culture is a major problem or that it is a trivial one. Among other things: (1) The phrasing of the question leaves a lot of ambiguity ("on certain occasions"), (2) beliefs don't necessarily translate into actions, (3) details on the polling methods matter and one poll can't be looked at in isolation (that's why outlets like 538 do a poll of polls).

If you want to prove this is a serious problem and not a handful of incidents that get a lot of media coverage, then tell us how how frequently people are actually cancelled (e.g. how many speakers were canceled as a share of total invitees). My guess is that it is a very tiny percentage in only a handful of universities.

Well, not tiny or handful, but virtually all the trendies, and some non-trendies. Fortunately, there are many non-trendies. I wouldn't have wanted my kid go anywhere near a cancel culture place, and she wouldn't have wanted to go!

Let the the trendies try to survive in competition. Not all will succeed. I hope to see some of them mentioned on the Colleges in Dire Financial Straits thread in the near future. The more the better.

Feel free to show evidence that the underlined is true. Otherwise it is just a meaningless claim that will not convince anyone who isn't already wound up about this issue.

Quote from: mahagonny on October 30, 2021, 08:07:42 PM
you don't have to cancel people that no one dares to invite in the first place. Or others who won't draw a crowd because their politics don't align with the far left diversity staff who have their fingers in all the pots, therefore won't get the promotion.
it would impossible, absolutely impossible to get a speaker like Coleman Hughes or John McWhorter anywhere near my school.

So conservative speakers that don't draw a crowd are being cancelled? Talk about moving the goal posts.

And the people you mention speak at universities all the time, so clearly they have not been cancelled. Maybe they don't get to visit your university, but your university seems like a weird place, where diversity staff pick the speakers and let all the adjuncts know who is not allowed to come and why. At my place (public R1) speakers are brought in by student groups, professors, centers, and deans, and we have all sorts of people who say politically incorrect things. I've never seen or heard from a diversity staff person.

But all that said, you are right that there could be a selection bias, so to speak. However, you once again need to show evidence that this is happening if you want your claims to be taken seriously.

Look, I said I was not too worried about this stuff. A perusal of the FIRE document got me believing the trendies are up to this. A perusal. I could be wrong. I don't care. But no kid of mine would go to such a place, private or public.

I don't need to show evidence to anyone except myself. I needed to choose a specific institution for my kid, and not have anyone else choose for me.

Those I don't like may whither away, or they may not. I hope they whither.

No worries, mate. :-)

Cool mate, send your kid wherever you want, none of us care.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on October 31, 2021, 09:35:47 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on October 31, 2021, 06:43:14 AM
And on the other hand: https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/579260-alabama-university-reneges-on-historians-speaking-invitation-after-anti

In a fascinating irony:
Quote
Samford University, which is a Christian institution, invited Meacham to give a lecture on the current state of civility and discourse in the U.S. as part of a series of events leading up to the inauguration of the school's president Beck Taylor.

I don't care which end of the spectrum it comes from; it's equally sad.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on December 23, 2021, 09:13:40 PM
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/campus-democrats-are-less-tolerant-than-republicans
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: larryc on December 27, 2021, 10:08:03 PM
I saw this in a tweet the other day:

Conservatives: My views are being censored!

Me: Wait, your views in favor of lower taxes are being censored?

Conservatives: No, not those views.

Me: So is it your views in favor of less government regulation?

Conservatives: No, not those views either.

Me: So what view are being censored?

Conservatives (laugh nervously): Oh....you know.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on December 28, 2021, 06:49:42 AM
Quote from: larryc on December 27, 2021, 10:08:03 PM
I saw this in a tweet the other day:

Conservatives: My views are being censored!

Me: Wait, your views in favor of lower taxes are being censored?

Conservatives: No, not those views.

Me: So is it your views in favor of less government regulation?

Conservatives: No, not those views either.

Me: So what view are being censored?

Conservatives (laugh nervously): Oh....you know.

What's far more common than actually being 100% censored for your views that are politically center or right-of-center is the likelihood that you censor yourself in order to remain popular enough in the academic world. I'm beginning to think it's a bad trade. People who have different views from the far left should speak out more. Here's an example of where it carried a price, but the price ended up being worth it.

From the link I posted just before LarryC:

'Last fall, Katherine Lauer at the University of Kansas was placed on probation by her sorority Kappa Alpha Theta for showing "unbecoming" conduct because she shared her conservative views on social media. The sorority ordered her to "keep track of your individual social media posts" and "assess their alignment with the Kappa Alpha Theta online social media contract" and required her to watch a video selected by the sorority's Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Committee. She brought her story to Fox News: "I still don't know exactly what I've done, and to me, I feel like they're really trying to suppress me and silence me."
'Lauer added that many of her sorority sisters thanked her for speaking out: "I've had actually a lot of Thetas reach out to me and thank me for my post and say that they really appreciated my bravery because a lot of the conservative friends that I have do not feel comfortable speaking their opinion." She quit the sorority and started a NeW chapter at her school.'

Italics and bolding are mine.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on December 28, 2021, 09:22:32 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on December 28, 2021, 06:49:42 AM
Quote from: larryc on December 27, 2021, 10:08:03 PM
I saw this in a tweet the other day:

Conservatives: My views are being censored!

Me: Wait, your views in favor of lower taxes are being censored?

Conservatives: No, not those views.

Me: So is it your views in favor of less government regulation?

Conservatives: No, not those views either.

Me: So what view are being censored?

Conservatives (laugh nervously): Oh....you know.

What's far more common than actually being 100% censored for your views that are politically center or right-of-center is the likelihood that you censor yourself in order to remain popular enough in the academic world. I'm beginning to think it's a bad trade. People who have different views from the far left should speak out more. Here's an example of where it carried a price, but the price ended up being worth it.

From the link I posted just before LarryC:

'Last fall, Katherine Lauer at the University of Kansas was placed on probation by her sorority Kappa Alpha Theta for showing "unbecoming" conduct because she shared her conservative views on social media. The sorority ordered her to "keep track of your individual social media posts" and "assess their alignment with the Kappa Alpha Theta online social media contract" and required her to watch a video selected by the sorority's Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Committee. She brought her story to Fox News: "I still don't know exactly what I've done, and to me, I feel like they're really trying to suppress me and silence me."
'Lauer added that many of her sorority sisters thanked her for speaking out: "I've had actually a lot of Thetas reach out to me and thank me for my post and say that they really appreciated my bravery because a lot of the conservative friends that I have do not feel comfortable speaking their opinion." She quit the sorority and started a NeW chapter at her school.'

Italics and bolding are mine.

She didn't "share conservative views." She retweeted a virulent racist anti-vaxxer accusing the BLM movement of fraud with no evidence.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on December 28, 2021, 10:51:52 AM
I have not seen what she posted. Can you show us?

ETA:  Does retweeting someone else's tweet mean you agree with 100% of it? and...

I don't do twitter, but it's not an academic forum. It's just people sounding off and making conversation. My experience is on social media people get called frauds and phonies all the time. Doesn't make it libelous.

Did she purport to speak on behalf of the sorority?

My opinion, BLM has poor priorities, is pretentious and is not doing good for their community, although they are sincere. So it would be easy for me to agree that they are vastly overrated and it's well past time to hear from others, Rob Smith or Kandall Qualls, for example.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 11:37:26 AM
These things are easy to find:

https://fox4kc.com/news/ku-sorority-member-punished-says-anti-blm-social-media-post-was-misinterpreted/

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on December 28, 2021, 12:17:18 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 11:37:26 AM
These things are easy to find:

https://fox4kc.com/news/ku-sorority-member-punished-says-anti-blm-social-media-post-was-misinterpreted/

Yes, I saw that in the interim, but because there is nothing racist in Owen's statement I thought there had to be something that I missed... Owens believes that BLM leaders have been exploiting the bleeding heart public for their own material gain, which is true.*
Of course one could choose to believe that not declaring one's wholehearted support for BLM and its activities shows that you are a racist, and one can have a sorority full of people who think that way. But then getting kicked out would be a favor to one like Lauer, more than punishment, on balance. Come out of the closet, folks!

ETA: *...and doing so while declaring you are a trained Marxist is asking for an accusation of fraud, maybe not legally, but in terms of plausibility (though I don't see the word 'fraud' in the post.)

The sorority is absolutely intolerant of these particular (popular) conservative views, which is their right I guess. True, Candace can a get a little shrill, but hey, it's show business after all.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on December 28, 2021, 01:00:14 PM
What she re-tweeted is an egregiously foolish post, but suspending somebody from a sorority for it seems excessive--and does somewhat open them to a charge of treating support for BLM as something of a shibboleth.  This is one of those cases where it's hard to say that either side comes out looking very good.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 01:18:25 PM
Well mahagonny, as I've posted before what worries me is when institutions, particularly employers, dictate what we say off the job or, in this case, when not participating in a social event for a social organization.

As you point out, this young woman was not specifically representing her sorority.  So what business is it of theirs what she does on her own time?

At the same time, part of free speech (acknowledging that we aren't always talking about the legal definition) is not being forced to say or agree with something we don't want to say or agree with.

It is a conundrum.

Since Kappa Alpha Theta is a social entity, and not an employer, the social interaction of their members is important, kind of like a church which has a member invoking satanic rituals.

And conservatives such as yourself would find more support if you did not distort and minimize claims such as Democrats "using the faces of dead black people" to elect white politicians and calling BLM the "most flagrantly racist organization" in America.

As long as conservatives propagandize in this manner they deserve whatever drubbing they get.  Spew hate, get hate back-----something you need to either learn to live with or stop whining about.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on December 28, 2021, 01:37:22 PM
People tend to forget that free speech is a right that only the government can't abridge. Private institutions do so with reckless abandon. A club is an even better example than a firm. I sure as hell wouldn't want lefties in my country club, e.g. Membership in a club is voluntary, and is much, much less costly to leave than a job.

If I were Katherine, I would have resigned, having learned that this club has rules or enforcement mechanisms that I don't like.

There is likely sufficient variety among existing clubs to make this a very small deal. And if not, found a new club!

This is a wonderful example of being able to live peacefully with each other even though we disagree strongly.

I am not Katherine. My actual attitude is the same as G. Marx's:

I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member. :-)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on December 28, 2021, 02:17:44 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 01:18:25 PM
Well mahagonny, as I've posted before what worries me is when institutions, particularly employers, dictate what we say off the job or, in this case, when not participating in a social event for a social organization.

As you point out, this young woman was not specifically representing her sorority.  So what business is it of theirs what she does on her own time?

At the same time, part of free speech (acknowledging that we aren't always talking about the legal definition) is not being forced to say or agree with something we don't want to say or agree with.

It is a conundrum.

Since Kappa Alpha Theta is a social entity, and not an employer, the social interaction of their members is important, kind of like a church which has a member invoking satanic rituals.

And conservatives such as yourself would find more support if you did not distort and minimize claims such as Democrats "using the faces of dead black people" to elect white politicians and calling BLM the "most flagrantly racist organization" in America.


How did I distort this claim? I posted the question whether retweeting someone else's tweet means you agree with all of it, or maybe only some of it. No answer yet. I don't know the context of the exchanges in the twitter conversation. I maintain that even the shrill Candace Owens is much better grounded than most of the BLM activists. When she jumps on you she jumps with both feet. So what?
Support for BLM is on the wane. 'Defund the police' was their most noticeable blunder.

Quote from: dismalist on December 28, 2021, 01:37:22 PM
People tend to forget that free speech is a right that only the government can't abridge. Private institutions do so with reckless abandon. A club is an even better example than a firm. I sure as hell wouldn't want lefties in my country club, e.g. Membership in a club is voluntary, and is much, much less costly to leave than a job.

If I were Katherine, I would have resigned, having learned that this club has rules or enforcement mechanisms that I don't like.


I believe she did, and started a social organization of her own in the college community.

ETA: When Owens says BLM is racist, I'm pretty sure she means not that it espouses white-people hatred (though I'm sure notices that some of them do have the type of racism, but that is not primarily what she's concerned with) but that it promotes the view that black Americans are powerless to improve their lives until the mighty white man changes what he is doing. Which is crippling, insulting and false. Black Americans can put their faith in the nuclear family, stay away from drugs and crime, finish school etc. They've done it before as we know. that's what she's talking about. If you need the nuanced, genteel type of writing, check out Coleman Hughes, John McWhorter, Loury, et al.
Her expression may be antagonistic, but her spirit is optimism.
Con't
Going forward, the democrats will have to get used to fewer votes from the Hispanic community. More and more of them don't need to be "POC" victims of the system, want lower taxes and smaller government (small business entrepreneurs) and aren't in favor of uncontrolled 'immigration.' They did it the legal way and that was fine for them.
'Latinx' was the crowning achievement of botched pandering for votes. Keep 'em coming, democrats.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on December 28, 2021, 02:35:42 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on December 28, 2021, 02:17:44 PM
...
Quote from: dismalist on December 28, 2021, 01:37:22 PM
People tend to forget that free speech is a right that only the government can't abridge. Private institutions do so with reckless abandon. A club is an even better example than a firm. I sure as hell wouldn't want lefties in my country club, e.g. Membership in a club is voluntary, and is much, much less costly to leave than a job.

If I were Katherine, I would have resigned, having learned that this club has rules or enforcement mechanisms that I don't like.


I believe she did, and started a social organization of her own in the college community.

Excellent! There is no problem if one respects the right of association.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 02:58:57 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on December 28, 2021, 02:17:44 PM
How did I distort this claim? I posted the question whether retweeting someone else's tweet means you agree with all of it, or maybe only some of it. No answer yet.

Fair enough. 

I was referring to the distortion in the original tweet.  This is one of those things that antagonistic, partisan people do not see and more objective people do see.  I am not about to spend any time explaining this.  BLM is a legit organization with a legit purpose that does not have good control over its members.  Calling BLM "racist" or accusing them of electing white politicians are gross distortions.

Yes, retweeting without context or comment is tacit agreement in the world of social media.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on December 28, 2021, 03:03:49 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 02:58:57 PM

Yes, retweeting without context or comment is tacit agreement in the world of social media.

Well OK thanks for giving an answer at least. I am a little surprised. I would have thought it more like showing the quotations for one's perusal. But you'd know better than I.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 03:11:46 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on December 28, 2021, 03:03:49 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 02:58:57 PM

Yes, retweeting without context or comment is tacit agreement in the world of social media.

Well OK thanks for giving an answer at least. I am a little surprised. I would have thought it more like showing the quotations for one's perusal. But you'd know better than I.

I don't necessarily know anything.  This is simply based on observation.  The scenario under discussion is a perfect example.

Why would one retweet a statement unless one were amused by it, offended by it, or in agreement with it?

I have never had a Twitter account myself.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on December 28, 2021, 03:17:38 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 03:11:46 PM

Why would one retweet a statement unless one were amused by it, offended by it, or in agreement with it?


Or drinking.

We need to approach each other with more tolerance.



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on December 28, 2021, 03:36:15 PM
Tweets? The medium is the message.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 29, 2021, 10:48:57 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 03:11:46 PM

Why would one retweet a statement unless one were amused by it, offended by it, or in agreement with it?

Given these different possibilities, is there some moral imperative that someone indicate which purpose one has for each retweet?

Quote
I have never had a Twitter account myself.

Me either. Twitter kinds of seems like the cesspit of social media, which gets the most immediate and unfiltered garbage of human rantings. It is the antithesis of rational, respectful discussion.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on December 29, 2021, 11:20:15 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 29, 2021, 10:48:57 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 03:11:46 PM

Why would one retweet a statement unless one were amused by it, offended by it, or in agreement with it?

Given these different possibilities, is there some moral imperative that someone indicate which purpose one has for each retweet?


Seems reasonable.

I posted something on FB. My husband's friend's wife (HFW) replied that she disagreed with it and posted a link to an article from a respected publication that she claimed would explain her position.

I read the article and responded that the article did not say what she claimed it said - in fact, it was the opposite. She got extremely huffy with me and all my friends on the thread. Said that we were attacking her and not letting her share her point of view. I (and we) said um, the responses are open - just say what you want to say instead of going on blast.

Tried to drag our husbands into it, the whole 9 yards.

Good thing I never liked them much in the first place.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 29, 2021, 01:05:41 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 29, 2021, 10:48:57 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 03:11:46 PM

Why would one retweet a statement unless one were amused by it, offended by it, or in agreement with it?

Given these different possibilities, is there some moral imperative that someone indicate which purpose one has for each retweet?

Only if you want your purpose to be clear.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 29, 2021, 01:38:25 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 29, 2021, 01:05:41 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 29, 2021, 10:48:57 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 03:11:46 PM

Why would one retweet a statement unless one were amused by it, offended by it, or in agreement with it?

Given these different possibilities, is there some moral imperative that someone indicate which purpose one has for each retweet?

Only if you want your purpose to be clear.

This is what's so destructive about social media; it's all about how popular an idea or position is, rather than how well-supported it is. The concept of someone potentially playing Devil's advocate, or presenting an idea with which they may not totally agree but which raises some important issues is blasphemy.

Visceral responses and gut reactions are all that matters. And the more instantaneous the response the better.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on December 29, 2021, 02:16:26 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 29, 2021, 01:38:25 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 29, 2021, 01:05:41 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 29, 2021, 10:48:57 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 03:11:46 PM

Why would one retweet a statement unless one were amused by it, offended by it, or in agreement with it?

Given these different possibilities, is there some moral imperative that someone indicate which purpose one has for each retweet?

Only if you want your purpose to be clear.

This is what's so destructive about social media; it's all about how popular an idea or position is, rather than how well-supported it is. The concept of someone potentially playing Devil's advocate, or presenting an idea with which they may not totally agree but which raises some important issues is blasphemy.

Visceral responses and gut reactions are all that matters. And the more instantaneous the response the better.

I don't know what online crowds you run with. Most posts function as echo chambers. Posters are generally assumed to agree with Tweets, Reposts, etc that they share within their own circles unless they clearly say why not up front.

If someone wants to post an alternative perspective, they are welcome to do so but should be prepared to support their positions with facts and nuance. 

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 29, 2021, 02:54:40 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 29, 2021, 01:38:25 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 29, 2021, 01:05:41 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 29, 2021, 10:48:57 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 03:11:46 PM

Why would one retweet a statement unless one were amused by it, offended by it, or in agreement with it?

Given these different possibilities, is there some moral imperative that someone indicate which purpose one has for each retweet?

Only if you want your purpose to be clear.

This is what's so destructive about social media; it's all about how popular an idea or position is, rather than how well-supported it is. The concept of someone potentially playing Devil's advocate, or presenting an idea with which they may not totally agree but which raises some important issues is blasphemy.

Visceral responses and gut reactions are all that matters. And the more instantaneous the response the better.

You are kind of a guy who free associates with ethical considerations a lot, (accidentally) creating strawman statements.

I simply meant that if one retweets a controversial statement without some sort of explanation or context, most people will assume that one supports the original tweet whether or not one actually does.

You have a wild brain, Marshy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on December 29, 2021, 08:00:23 PM
Quote from: apl68 on December 28, 2021, 01:00:14 PM
What she re-tweeted is an egregiously foolish post, but suspending somebody from a sorority for it seems excessive--and does somewhat open them to a charge of treating support for BLM as something of a shibboleth.  This is one of those cases where it's hard to say that either side comes out looking very good.

Respectfully disagree. Despite Candace Owens' shrill style of communications, she raises excellent points:

What has BLM done to actually help the black community? They've raised a lot of money, and so far their only goals are to get democrats elected, again, though they have solved nothing in the cities they run, and make their executives rich. one of whom has already retired comfortably. She claims her work has been done. What work?

Does BLM actually even know what they want other than that? Abolishing the police is a fantasy. No one's going to do that, and it was only a matter of time before the phrase would become a forgotten failed slogan.

Black Americans are feeling pain. We get that. But the question is still what to do about it. So BLM is pretty much a weak emulation of the civil rights movements of the 60's which had specific goals. It's mimicry. You almost feel sorry for them. they're fixated on how 'whiteness' is ruining their lives, while seemingly oblivious of what they might do for each other, together. Years ago 'black lives matter' was an idea that was missing. Not so today.

As Joe Biden has admitted, people who want to vote are absolutely free to. 'Voter suppression' is more of a rallying cry from people like Stacey Abrams to get people motivated to vote. And probably works. Well, she's not stupid.

Apropos of all this: requiring people to say the phrase 'Black Lives Matter' is a pretentious power grab.
It has been a shibboleth. If you don't like Trump's combative style there's a video on youtube where the genteel Mike Pence foils the ultimatum in calm reasonable language. If they want to bait you into endorsing their ideas (no more 'nuclear family requirement, etc)  by requiring you to say the phrase 'black lives matter' the are prompting the response they get, including repudiation.
Owens has had a black lives matter leader on her show. She gives everyone a turn. Kendi refused Larry Elder's invitation, calling it a 'minstrel show.' Among other invitations. Why does one get away with being a lauded academic with striking new ideas who's afraid to defend them in a debate? That's not dissemination of knowledge. It's politics, special privilege.

I do agree with you that suspending someone from a sorority for this seems excessive. And I guess Lauer solved the problem for herself by finding like minded classmates to associate with.

Summary: the left today doesn't so much censor ideas they don't like as it intentionally drowns them out.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on December 29, 2021, 09:05:27 PM
Quote from: larryc on December 27, 2021, 10:08:03 PM
I saw this in a tweet the other day:

Conservatives: My views are being censored!

Me: Wait, your views in favor of lower taxes are being censored?

Conservatives: No, not those views.

Me: So is it your views in favor of less government regulation?

Conservatives: No, not those views either.

Me: So what view are being censored?


Conservatives (laugh nervously): Oh....you know.

If we substitute 'punish, harass and ostracize' people for holding views that oppose popular new lefty ones for 'censor' same then this would have been a good answer:  https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2021/12/29/in_scotland_theyll_take_the_woke_road_809363.html
So I'm puzzled at what your post is meant to convey. Yes, you can express your centrist, non-leftist views if you're willing to submit to abuse and detrimental consequences in your career.

Now it's time for lawsuits.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 29, 2021, 10:30:18 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on December 29, 2021, 09:05:27 PM

If we substitute 'punish, harass and ostracize' people for holding views that oppose popular new lefty ones for 'censor' same then this would have been a good answer: 

Now it's time for lawsuits.

As long as you also acknowledge that this is righty de facto policy too.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on December 30, 2021, 03:15:12 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 29, 2021, 10:30:18 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on December 29, 2021, 09:05:27 PM

If we substitute 'punish, harass and ostracize' people for holding views that oppose popular new lefty ones for 'censor' same then this would have been a good answer: 

Now it's time for lawsuits.

As long as you also acknowledge that this is righty de facto policy too.

If someone shows examples. Nobody among those on the right that I admire is doing anything like that. And there are plenty. McWhorter, Loury, Coleman Hughes, Owens, Kendall Qualls, Jason Whitlock, Jason Reilly, Shelby Steele, Carol Swain, Tim Scott.

As I posted, Owens' response to the controversy was to have a BLM leader on her program for what she termed 'a very important conversation.'

Bill Maher claims to be a liberal (it sounds more and more like a confession) but gives the most radical left ideas in circulation today a good healthy scrutiny, which they tend not to survive. Then he invites people on his show who promote them, AOC, for example. Where'd she go?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 30, 2021, 05:26:45 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 29, 2021, 02:54:40 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 29, 2021, 01:38:25 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 29, 2021, 01:05:41 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 29, 2021, 10:48:57 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 03:11:46 PM

Why would one retweet a statement unless one were amused by it, offended by it, or in agreement with it?

Given these different possibilities, is there some moral imperative that someone indicate which purpose one has for each retweet?

Only if you want your purpose to be clear.

This is what's so destructive about social media; it's all about how popular an idea or position is, rather than how well-supported it is. The concept of someone potentially playing Devil's advocate, or presenting an idea with which they may not totally agree but which raises some important issues is blasphemy.

Visceral responses and gut reactions are all that matters. And the more instantaneous the response the better.

You are kind of a guy who free associates with ethical considerations a lot, (accidentally) creating strawman statements.


I've always assumed that in any kind of academic forum, the "free association" with "ethical considerations", (a.k.a looking at the big picture and wider implications), would be kind of normal.

And if "strawman statements" means creating sample scenarios of where certain ideas, procedures, etc. might lead, again that's pretty standard acedemic debate.

Quote
I simply meant that if one retweets a controversial statement without some sort of explanation or context, most people will assume that one supports the original tweet whether or not one actually does.

And my point is that the whole idea of feeling compelled to "comment" on something by simply indicating agreement or disagreement with an idea without adding any original perspective suggests that public discourse has largely been replaced by opinion polling.
Even among academics and journalists, who used to be relied upon to make some effort at objectivity and nuance rather than simply adopting the slogans and talking points of one ideology or another.


Quote
You have a wild brain, Marshy.

Admit it. If this were an echo chamber of progressives, without any dissenting views, you'd find it boring.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on December 30, 2021, 07:27:37 AM
Pulling back from the narrow liberal vs. conservative divide, I can't help noticing that "cancel culture" seems to have engulfed some unexpected subjects.  J.K. Rowling for one, who is nobody's definition of a cultural or political conservative apologist, has undergone a striking reversal of fortune at the hands of people who were once her admirers over one specific issue.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on December 30, 2021, 07:01:33 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 29, 2021, 01:38:25 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 29, 2021, 01:05:41 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 29, 2021, 10:48:57 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 03:11:46 PM

Why would one retweet a statement unless one were amused by it, offended by it, or in agreement with it?

Given these different possibilities, is there some moral imperative that someone indicate which purpose one has for each retweet?

Only if you want your purpose to be clear.

This is what's so destructive about social media; it's all about how popular an idea or position is, rather than how well-supported it is. The concept of someone potentially playing Devil's advocate, or presenting an idea with which they may not totally agree but which raises some important issues is blasphemy.

Visceral responses and gut reactions are all that matters. And the more instantaneous the response the better.

Invoking Brandolini's Law "The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude larger than to produce it." That's a big understatement, by the way.

Twitter is great for the first part -- broadcasting bullshit,  and terrible for the second part -- refuting it.

Hell, even this discussion board is better than Twitter, on average! :-)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 30, 2021, 10:30:58 PM
Sorry if this has been posted already.

CHE: When Professors Offend Students (https://www.chronicle.com/article/when-professors-offend-students)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on December 31, 2021, 07:35:23 AM
I haven't seen the CHE article. I stopped subscribing a year ago. I did see this though: https://uswallpost.com/education/when-professors-offend-students/

It's perfectly reasonable to be sick of hearing "black lives matter," one of the reasons being  people protest that you shouldn't say 'all lives matter.' If you can say one you ought to be able to say both. And if you were to say 'white lives matter' which you are already prompted to say since the media mostly ignores killing of white people by police, consistently a higher number than blacks, some of the students and academic culture would be comparing you to Hitler. And Americans, even conservatives, vastly overestimate the number of black individuals killed by police (although liberals overestimate it much more), so 'white lives matter' would be, apparently, information that is missing, while 'black lives matter' is not by any stretch of the imagination information that is missing. It's already a matter of broad, constantly reiterated consensus.

If Professor Cope is up to having lively discussions about currents events in class (I'm grateful that I can teach without doing it; I couldn't do it) a better choice might have been to start with 'I'm sick of not being able to say "all lives matter."' But she's still have to duck.

ETA: Another aspect I find interesting: when a group of students start calling for the professor to be fired, they probably envy the person standing in front of the class, who gets called 'professor,' figuring that person has good stable job with good pay and benefits. And if they do think that, the odds are that they're wrong, and that's fine with the college.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 31, 2021, 09:00:28 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on December 31, 2021, 07:35:23 AM
I haven't seen the CHE article. I stopped subscribing a year ago. I did see this though: https://uswallpost.com/education/when-professors-offend-students/


Thanks for the non-paywalled link.

I think I'm starting to see why lots of people on the left are getting cancelled. From the article:
Quote
So she decided to spur her class into contributing. The day's lesson was about "cancel culture." Students had read a few articles on the topic beforehand. Cope wanted to present them with an opinion that, at first blush, they'd object to but that would actually be more nuanced than it appeared.

The naive idea that students want nuance, rather than crystal clear ideology shows an incredible degree of cluelessness. I think some on the left really think that as long as they're coming from the "right side", they will be able to speak freely. No wonder they get destroyed.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on December 31, 2021, 01:32:20 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 31, 2021, 09:00:28 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on December 31, 2021, 07:35:23 AM
I haven't seen the CHE article. I stopped subscribing a year ago. I did see this though: https://uswallpost.com/education/when-professors-offend-students/


Thanks for the non-paywalled link.

I think I'm starting to see why lots of people on the left are getting cancelled. From the article:
Quote
So she decided to spur her class into contributing. The day's lesson was about "cancel culture." Students had read a few articles on the topic beforehand. Cope wanted to present them with an opinion that, at first blush, they'd object to but that would actually be more nuanced than it appeared.

The naive idea that students want nuance, rather than crystal clear ideology shows an incredible degree of cluelessness. I think some on the left really think that as long as they're coming from the "right side", they will be able to speak freely. No wonder they get destroyed.

While students may lack the analytical habits and skill that they hopefully will acquire in a few years, it's not really their fault. Especially when one considers the current environment around discussions of race.
The narrative, assiduously maintained by the left media, pro sports, Hollywood, most of academia is that our nation is hopelessly racist. Whereas to say something like 'I'm tired of saying "black lives matter"' could normally arouse curiosity, as in 'I wonder why exactly the Professors says this?' instead it just pushes the students' buttons. They hastily decide 'OMG! I've just met another wolf in sheep's clothing! A white person who hates us!" And the white students' buttons have been pushed too: "It's our job to call out racism.Silence is violence."

Notice, in the article, the diversity staff attributes the whole thing to a mere shift in the racial composition in the student body. Which is bullshit. Anything to feather their nest and make themselves important. In reality, they are more the problem.

From the article:

"Debates over what's suitable to bring up in the classroom, and how much latitude professors should be given to instruct how they wish, are nothing new. "We might be in a moment of slightly more accelerated social change," says Jennifer Ruth, a professor of film studies at Portland State University who writes regularly about academic-freedom issues, but there "has always been discussion around what's appropriate pedagogy."

"That accelerated social change stems in part from higher ed's shifting student demographics.
Over the last two decades, the share of undergraduates who identify as a race other than white has increased to about 45 percent from 30 percent. That rate of racial diversification has not been matched among the faculty. "Many of us in academia have come to learn by quote-unquote common sense what might be, like, good to say that stirs up critical thinking but doesn't offend people," says Hendry Ton, associate vice chancellor for health equity, diversity, and inclusion at UC Davis Health. But "we've learned that on a fairly homogeneous group of people ... the traditional group of students that we've seen highly represented in our universities," he says. As the student body changes, there's a need to "update our sensibilities."'



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 04, 2022, 05:22:26 PM
Penn Law Rebukes Professor Who Said U.S. Would Be Better Off With Fewer Asians (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/penn-law-rebukes-professor-said-us-better-fewer-asians-rcna10905)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on January 04, 2022, 09:17:33 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 04, 2022, 05:22:26 PM
Penn Law Rebukes Professor Who Said U.S. Would Be Better Off With Fewer Asians (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/penn-law-rebukes-professor-said-us-better-fewer-asians-rcna10905)

What's the specific action here that makes this a 'cancel culture' story?

The primary event in this article is the dean releasing a statement criticizing Wax's views while emphasizing that she has the right to voice them.

One linked article talks about students petitioning for the prof to be fired, but the university's statement gives no indication that they will pursue this action. They state Wax has the right to make her claims and voice her opinions, and the students have the right to petition and protest.

This article and the linked articles report on previous controversies regarding this professor's claims. They mention other faculty voicing objections and making counterclaims, but no disciplinary action. The earliest incident mentioned goes back to 2006 and yet she's still teaching at the same university so it doesn't seem she was canceled.

The closest thing to a university response going beyond criticism is the mention of Wax being barred from teaching mandatory first year classes in 2017 (you can read the dean's reasoning for that decision here: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/03/15/penn-says-amy-wax-will-no-longer-teach-required-first-year-law-courses-after-more). I don't know if this counts as disciplinary or not, and I don't know whether it goes out of bounds for the kinds of decisions deans are supposed to make.

But for this current story, it just looks like the dean felt compelled to offer some kind of commentary separating the university's policies from the opinions of a specific professor. Was that overstepping?

He does use what could be called strongly judgmental language ("anti-intellectual" "racist"). Is that the issue?

I honestly don't know enough about what a dean's role and responsibilities are to know if this is going too far. Is it atypical (or considered unethical) for a dean to publicly criticize the (publicly-stated) opinions of individual faculty?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on January 05, 2022, 06:38:44 AM
There are good reasons for being concerned about high rates of immigration, given that societies have practical limits to how many immigrants they can absorb without running into significant economic and social issues.  But anybody who wants to voice such concerns needs to be very, very careful in phrasing them.  When somebody's as careless about this as Prof. Wax, it's entirely understandable that she would be rebuked for it.

I'm curious about a particular statistic mentioned in the article.  A commentator spoke of FBI data that shows that 19% of anti-Asian hate crimes involve black offenders, and 52% involve white.  So who commits the other 29%?  It sounds like proportionately the highest rates of anti-Asian hate crimes may be from some grouping other than black or white.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 05, 2022, 07:17:16 AM
Quote from: apl68 on January 05, 2022, 06:38:44 AM
I'm curious about a particular statistic mentioned in the article.  A commentator spoke of FBI data that shows that 19% of anti-Asian hate crimes involve black offenders, and 52% involve white.  So who commits the other 29%?  It sounds like proportionately the highest rates of anti-Asian hate crimes may be from some grouping other than black or white.

Can something be identified as a hate crime without any known suspect? If so, then those could be cases where the ethnicity of the perpetrator is unknown. (Such as racist graffiti or property crime.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on January 05, 2022, 08:29:02 AM
Quote from: apl68 on January 05, 2022, 06:38:44 AM
There are good reasons for being concerned about high rates of immigration, given that societies have practical limits to how many immigrants they can absorb without running into significant economic and social issues.  But anybody who wants to voice such concerns needs to be very, very careful in phrasing them.  When somebody's as careless about this as Prof. Wax, it's entirely understandable that she would be rebuked for it.


Based on her follow up statements, I don't think "careless wording" is what makes her statements worth criticizing. I think what she said is what she meant, and it wasn't concern about practical limits.

I know there are stories in which the people saying, "Wow, that's racist." are basing their judgment on exaggerations, misinterpretations, or misrepresentations of what was actually said. But I don't think this story is one of them.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on January 05, 2022, 10:07:03 AM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on January 05, 2022, 08:29:02 AM
Quote from: apl68 on January 05, 2022, 06:38:44 AM
There are good reasons for being concerned about high rates of immigration, given that societies have practical limits to how many immigrants they can absorb without running into significant economic and social issues.  But anybody who wants to voice such concerns needs to be very, very careful in phrasing them.  When somebody's as careless about this as Prof. Wax, it's entirely understandable that she would be rebuked for it.


Based on her follow up statements, I don't think "careless wording" is what makes her statements worth criticizing. I think what she said is what she meant, and it wasn't concern about practical limits.

I know there are stories in which the people saying, "Wow, that's racist." are basing their judgment on exaggerations, misinterpretations, or misrepresentations of what was actually said. But I don't think this story is one of them.

She made the remarks on The Glenn Loury show. She has a history of making incendiary statements, and does so for headlines.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on January 05, 2022, 10:14:24 AM
Dr. Wax is concerned about the Asian population growing in the USA because, she claims they vote overwhelmingly democratic, and the democratic party lately has ideas that are bad for America. She's expressing a political belief. If she perceived that Asians were voting republican and also were more grateful for the opportunity to emigrate and had nicer things to say about our country, she would, presumably, be saying bring them in. It's a provocative way to word her point, but the point is fair. Maybe intentionally provocative.
Whenever someone complains about the attacks against them for what they say, I ask myself, did they want the attacks so they could complain?

Quote from: marshwiggle on January 05, 2022, 07:17:16 AM
Quote from: apl68 on January 05, 2022, 06:38:44 AM
I'm curious about a particular statistic mentioned in the article.  A commentator spoke of FBI data that shows that 19% of anti-Asian hate crimes involve black offenders, and 52% involve white.  So who commits the other 29%?  It sounds like proportionately the highest rates of anti-Asian hate crimes may be from some grouping other than black or white.

Can something be identified as a hate crime without any known suspect? If so, then those could be cases where the ethnicity of the perpetrator is unknown. (Such as racist graffiti or property crime.)


Sure they can. I hear about it in the news. Vandalism with graffiti particularly. Blacks are proportionally the biggest contributors to crime in the USA. Of course, most black people are not criminals and understandably hate being victimized when it happens.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on January 06, 2022, 08:09:49 AM
https://www.city-journal.org/black-lives-matter-reuters-and-the-price-of-dissent?skip=1

https://abigailshrier.substack.com/p/the-chronicle-cries-for-activist
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 07, 2022, 06:13:46 PM
ABC on Amy Wax (https://abcnews.go.com/US/students-demand-action-penn-professors-racist-comments-asians/story?id=82142091)

Quote
Penn students created a petition demanding the school take action against Wax, a tenured professor.

"I think that the university needs to suspend her from all teaching duties," said Apratim Vidyarthi, a third-year law student. "She shouldn't be allowed to come on campus, she shouldn't be allowed to interact with students while this investigation is ongoing."

The initial article I posted may not have been specifically "cancel culture," but come on, who didn't see this sort of thing coming?  Who thinks it will end here?

It is clear, BTW, that whatever her reasons, Wax is a frothing bigot and a disturbed person.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on January 07, 2022, 08:47:53 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 07, 2022, 06:13:46 PM
ABC on Amy Wax (https://abcnews.go.com/US/students-demand-action-penn-professors-racist-comments-asians/story?id=82142091)

Quote
Penn students created a petition demanding the school take action against Wax, a tenured professor.

"I think that the university needs to suspend her from all teaching duties," said Apratim Vidyarthi, a third-year law student. "She shouldn't be allowed to come on campus, she shouldn't be allowed to interact with students while this investigation is ongoing."

The initial article I posted may not have been specifically "cancel culture," but come on, who didn't see this sort of thing coming?  Who thinks it will end here?

It is clear, BTW, that whatever her reasons, Wax is a frothing bigot and a disturbed person.

She may indeed be bigoted and if so I make no excuses for her. At the same time I speculate from afar that, regarding her claim that Asians living in the USA should be more grateful to the country they have emigrated to, there would be a range of attitudes towards the USA among people living here who were born and raised in, say India, Nigeria, the Caribbean, South Korea, and these attitudes are not necessarily identical, at all. If one were to do a study by compiling data about those attitudes they should then be able to publish that data.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on January 07, 2022, 10:06:28 PM
Yeah, students are complaining and making demands, but Wax has a decades-long history of making provocative statements and the university has a history of emphasizing that she has the right to say those things.

Wax herself is asserting there should be fewer non-whites in the country and in universities. If Wax says she doesn't want Asians in the medical schools or that most of the black students at her own university shouldn't be there, are the students doing so much worse by saying they don't want Wax there?

The university has a history of not caving in to such demands. What's different about this time? Are you expecting them to give in this time because of the relatively recent increase in 'cancel culture' fervor? Maybe they will. If so, that would be a shame.




A lot of what she says does come across as more ranting than academic argument. She talks like white vs. nonwhite is exactly the same as European vs. non-European. Then she says its not about race, its about
"culture". And then there's that armchair psychologizing she does when she "speculates" as to why an Asian-American might vote Democrat...egad. And using what party someone votes for as a proxy measure of 'objective gratitude'?

She reminds me a lot of the city council lady in Michigan who stated she wanted a "white community as much as possible." An interviewer asked her why, and she made this same its-about-culture (but-not-really) argument. When she said she wouldn't want immigrants because she wants an American community, the interviewer asked how she would feel about someone who moved to the country from Germany. She said that person would be welcome because they would be white. The interviewer tries to point out that she's contradicting herself and its like she blue screens because she can't understand what he's getting at.




A more general question:

Does there ever come a point when someone's academic work goes so far off the rails it can't be taken seriously by the rest of the field?

Like a historian who makes claims based on private interviews he swears he's conducted with long-dead historical figures who visited him in his dreams. Maybe not quite that far out, but some case in which basic principles or standards of evidence go out the window.

Is there a point far enough to warrant some kind of response from the university?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on January 07, 2022, 10:11:11 PM
QuoteA lot of what she says does come across as more ranting than academic argument. She talks like white vs. nonwhite is exactly the same as European vs. non-European. Then she says its not about race, its about
"culture". And then there's that armchair psychologizing she does when she "speculates" as to why an Asian-American might vote Democrat...egad. And using what party someone votes for as a proxy measure of 'objective gratitude'?

Normally, over the course of my already long life I would say no, but recently, pissing all over America is de rigeur for democrats, so...sure. When the shoes fits, they are welcome to wear it. Of course, to be consistent, Dr. Wax should then be calling out her fellow Jews for the same voting preferences.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 08, 2022, 12:29:25 PM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on January 07, 2022, 10:06:28 PM
Yeah, students are complaining and making demands, but Wax has a decades-long history of making provocative statements and the university has a history of emphasizing that she has the right to say those things.

Wax herself is asserting there should be fewer non-whites in the country and in universities. If Wax says she doesn't want Asians in the medical schools or that most of the black students at her own university shouldn't be there, are the students doing so much worse by saying they don't want Wax there?

I usually post articles to keep the discussion going and to counter the claims, variously made, that "cancel culture" is not a major agent on our college campuses, and elsewhere.

I am a bit agnostic about whether Penn should haul her ass to the back door and give her a shove or not.  That's their business.  Students will avoid her classes if they can (I certainly would), and people of color should rightly be suspicious of her. 

I would be wary of false dichotomies, however, since Wax has no way of keeping Asians from her school or country----but students can and probably will keep Wax from her school.

What worries me is when people's livelihoods are in danger when they are sanctioned, stifled, and fired for activities not associated with their jobs.  This just seems like a very dangerous precedent in culture.  I do not want to be controlled by my employer when I am not at work.  No one should.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 08, 2022, 12:37:00 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on January 07, 2022, 10:11:11 PM
QuoteA lot of what she says does come across as more ranting than academic argument. She talks like white vs. nonwhite is exactly the same as European vs. non-European. Then she says its not about race, its about
"culture". And then there's that armchair psychologizing she does when she "speculates" as to why an Asian-American might vote Democrat...egad. And using what party someone votes for as a proxy measure of 'objective gratitude'?

Normally, over the course of my already long life I would say no, but recently, pissing all over America is de rigeur for democrats, so...sure. When the shoes fits, they are welcome to wear it. Of course, to be consistent, Dr. Wax should then be calling out her fellow Jews for the same voting preferences.

Democrats didn't attack the capitol. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on January 08, 2022, 12:52:22 PM
Wax doesn't have direct power to exclude blacks or asians, but neither do the students have direct power to remove her.

Aren't both Wax and the students trying to influence other people's decisions through words?

The dean already issued a statement on the importance of academic freedom and Wax's right to voice her views. Going back on that now may appease the students clamoring for her removal but just attract the ire of the 'cancel culture' critics, even more so than if they had fired her without first issuing that statement. It would make them hypocrites on top of everything else.

The dean did restrict her to teaching electives and not core courses back in 2017 so students could choose to avoid a situation in which Wax would have some direct authority over them. One commentator called that decision "chilling" but I find it hard to blame students who would want the option to stay clear of her courses due to concern her attitudes influence the way she treats her students.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 08, 2022, 12:58:26 PM
We will see if students (and non-students signing Change.org petitions) can actually get Wax removed.

It would not be unprecedented. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 08, 2022, 01:02:06 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 08, 2022, 12:29:25 PM

What worries me is when people's livelihoods are in danger when they are sanctioned, stifled, and fired for activities not associated with their jobs.  This just seems like a very dangerous precedent in culture.  I do not want to be controlled by my employer when I am not at work.  No one should.

Honest question; no snark intended:

Why do you think it has lately become the case that people on the left don't seem afraid of this? It seems most progressives only imagine people getting fired for "good" reasons. (The same thing goes for why they favour all kinds of censorship, such as on social media.) It wan't that long ago that people on the left worried about their views getting censored and used against them.

I'm honestly baffled as to how this seems to have changed within a decade or less. The apparent faith of progressives on big institutions (government, tech, etc.) to be on the same side with them is amazing, especially when Trump was president until just over a year ago. How do they not see that the tide can turn, and once someone is given the power to "cancel" others, they eventually start using it for their own convenience, and they rarely give it up.

Heck, even journalists sometimes talk about appointing a "truth czar" to distinguish between real news and fake news. How do they not worry that it would someday come back to bite them????

I truly don't get it.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on January 08, 2022, 01:49:12 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 08, 2022, 12:58:26 PM
We will see if students (and non-students signing Change.org petitions) can actually get Wax removed.

It would not be unprecedented.

I do get your concern that an employer might terminate someone unjustly due to pressure from protestors and such.

But I don't see that the students here are somehow the only real villains of the story because they might end up convincing someone.

No, it's not unprecedented. But neither is Wax-type rhetoric fueling and emboldening race-based hostility and discrimination. She might convince people too.

I hope the school sticks to its stated principles and doesn't cave in, but I don't really see why the students are so much more in the wrong here, as if only their speech is capable of threatening someone's livelihood.

It's not that I think the students demands should be catered to, I just don't think its true that Wax's statements are bigoted yet not truly harmful because she can't personally kick specific ethnicities out of the country or the universities. It would still be less direct I guess than if she were targeting specific individuals as the petitioners are here. But...

I don't know how clear I'm being. I'm not disagreeing with you about the reasons to be concerned by the petitioner's demands. I just think its important not to let that completely eclipse the potential impact of the type of scapegoating Wax is trying to promote.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on January 08, 2022, 01:57:35 PM
People tend to forget that free speech is a right that only the government can't abridge. Private institutions can do so with reckless abandon.

Let universities do what they will. Students can select whether they want to be exposed to ... whatever. Faculty would choose, too.

We could have free speech universities, controlled speech universities, and ... whatever.

May the best universities win!

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 08, 2022, 02:34:53 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 08, 2022, 01:02:06 PM
Why do you think it has lately become the case that people on the left don't seem afraid of this? It seems most progressives only imagine people getting fired for "good" reasons.

How do they not see that the tide can turn, and once someone is given the power to "cancel" others, they eventually start using it for their own convenience, and they rarely give it up.


I think it is a good question, and I am not smart enough or knowledgeable to say for sure.

I have always said that once we start policing people's thoughts other people are going to start policing ours.

But I suspect these scenarios are extreme reactions to extreme rhetoric.   The right has become a Trumpish bastion of all sorts of lies and misinformation.  And I think the Right is getting an extreme reaction in return. 

I also suspect that students and faculty cannot police the rabid race-baiting Trumpers et al. and so they police what they can, which again generates extreme reactions.  Hannity and Carlson simply lie on FOX news and there is very little any of us can do about that.  Hannity and Carlson lie and a certain percentage of the population is very receptive to their misinformation and are closed off to any other dialogue----and there is very little we can do about that.  So we police each other with extreme reactions.  The Right spews hate and gets hate in return...and this flashes back onto our campuses.  It is not so different from the rhetoric on the Left in the '70s and '80s, mind you, but the polarities have switched.

And I suspect that there is some justice in calling for a racist law professor to be removed.  Wax is very well credentialed (if you look at her CV she must be one of the best educated people in the world with a mountain of scholarship) but she does not serve her uni or her students because of (what appear to be) severe psychological problems.

Which is why I did NOT say that...

Quote from: smallcleanrat on January 08, 2022, 01:49:12 PM
But I don't see that the students here are somehow the only real villains of the story because they might end up convincing someone.

Wax has now diminished her role as an educator and scholar.  This is something Penn should be worried about.

There should be genuine concern about Wax's evaluation of Asian and African-American students.  Penn should take note of this.

One of my colleagues is a pacifist outspoken peacenik.  Should veterans (which we have a number) be concerned?

Quote from: smallcleanrat on January 08, 2022, 01:49:12 PM
No, it's not unprecedented. But neither is Wax-type rhetoric fueling and emboldening race-based hostility and discrimination. She might convince people too.

******

It's not that I think the students demands should be catered to, I just don't think its true that Wax's statements are bigoted yet not truly harmful because she can't personally kick specific ethnicities out of the country or the universities. It would still be less direct I guess than if she were targeting specific individuals as the petitioners are here. But...

I just think its important not to let that completely eclipse the potential impact of the type of scapegoating Wax is trying to promote.

Quite true.  But as Marshy points out, we are opening the can that might close us off.  There are many principles at work here.

We have a true conundrum in these scenaros.

Quote from: dismalist on January 08, 2022, 01:57:35 PM
People tend to forget that free speech is a right that only the government can't abridge. Private institutions can do so with reckless abandon.

Golly!  I never heard that one before.

Is smoking healthy?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 09, 2022, 05:54:27 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 08, 2022, 02:34:53 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 08, 2022, 01:02:06 PM
Why do you think it has lately become the case that people on the left don't seem afraid of this? It seems most progressives only imagine people getting fired for "good" reasons.

How do they not see that the tide can turn, and once someone is given the power to "cancel" others, they eventually start using it for their own convenience, and they rarely give it up.


I think it is a good question, and I am not smart enough or knowledgeable to say for sure.


One idea occurred to me. Is it possible that the "participation trophy" generation grew up so shielded from criticism that they really can't imagine themselves having the ideas someone else finds offensive? Has the effect of people having "curated" lives on social media so permeated a generation that they can't conceive ( and would be appalled at the idea) of being outside the mainstream?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on January 09, 2022, 07:05:33 AM
Apologies if there was a thread on this already. She says she was cancelled, and defamed as well. Others say she committed an egregious act for a journalist.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/01/08/freelance-writer-ruth-shalit-barrett-sues-the-atlantic-magazine-for-1-million-526793
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 09, 2022, 07:27:37 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 09, 2022, 05:54:27 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 08, 2022, 02:34:53 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 08, 2022, 01:02:06 PM
Why do you think it has lately become the case that people on the left don't seem afraid of this? It seems most progressives only imagine people getting fired for "good" reasons.

How do they not see that the tide can turn, and once someone is given the power to "cancel" others, they eventually start using it for their own convenience, and they rarely give it up.


I think it is a good question, and I am not smart enough or knowledgeable to say for sure.


One idea occurred to me. Is it possible that the "participation trophy" generation grew up so shielded from criticism that they really can't imagine themselves having the ideas someone else finds offensive? Has the effect of people having "curated" lives on social media so permeated a generation that they can't conceive ( and would be appalled at the idea) of being outside the mainstream?

No.  That's the old curmudgeon reaction, Marshy.  We ALWAYS think the kids are "pampered" or "shielded" or "entitled" or "[whatever]"-----it's just the way humans think.  Every generation says this kind of crapoloa about the younger generations.

Kids these days are post-AIDS, post-9/11, post-middle eastern wars, post-recession, post-rise of hate crimes and extremism, and in the midst of COVID and the culture wars.  They pay exorbitant amounts of tuition and have no guarantee of a social safety net.  Almost all students work and go to school at the same time these days.  We live in the midst of the Age of Information, so the kids are emphatically NOT shielded from anything.

What I read somewhere (but I can't remember) is that a great many people of color have seen images of police kneeling on a handcuffed man until he suffocated to death----and they are afraid.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 09, 2022, 07:48:19 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 09, 2022, 07:27:37 AM

What I read somewhere (but I can't remember) is that a great many people of color have seen images of police kneeling on a handcuffed man until he suffocated to death----and they are afraid.

But shouldn't that make them MORE afraid of government (or institutional) oversight???

If police are agents of the state, then giving the state more freedom to suppress speech is similar to giving police more powers. Again, the optimism about institutional power doesn't make sense.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 09, 2022, 08:29:02 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 09, 2022, 07:48:19 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 09, 2022, 07:27:37 AM

What I read somewhere (but I can't remember) is that a great many people of color have seen images of police kneeling on a handcuffed man until he suffocated to death----and they are afraid.

But shouldn't that make them MORE afraid of government (or institutional) oversight???

If police are agents of the state, then giving the state more freedom to suppress speech is similar to giving police more powers. Again, the optimism about institutional power doesn't make sense.

I think they are afraid of institutional racism and racists in positions of authority.

But I cannot speak for the minority experience, so I should not say more really.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: larryc on January 09, 2022, 11:50:29 AM
I am going to start a rumor that Antifa is trying to cancel Sesame Street. That should get Republicans to support more funding for PBS.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 10, 2022, 03:46:11 PM
The right way to shut down bigots:

Student raises over $70K for scholarship for women after professor's viral comments (https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Living/student-raises-70k-scholarship-women-professors-viral-comments/story?id=82121466)

The typical way we try to shut down bigots:

https://www.change.org/p/students-get-bsu-to-let-go-of-scott-yenor
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on January 10, 2022, 04:02:24 PM
This is a weird sentence: "Every effort must be made not to recruit women into engineering, but rather to recruit and demand more of men to become engineers." - Yenor

Not recruiting people doesn't take effort. But he is right if he says recruiting more men into STEM fields is a fine idea, (POC!) or if he says division of labor in a marriage can also be fine. People will choose.

Do today's feminists want 'less male achievement' as Yenor claims? I don't think they can stop us, but some of them seem to never to react to anything accomplished by a man with much other than sneering about privilege. My goodness: why aren't they better liked?

Let all the people who want to raise scholarship money for their favorite group continue. Fine.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 10, 2022, 04:13:58 PM
Plenty people like feminists, mahagonny.  Nutjob hardcore conservatives don't.

Feminists do not want less male achievement; don't let an idiot like Yenor warp your mind even more.

A great many dudes, like myself, are feminists.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on January 10, 2022, 07:01:40 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 10, 2022, 04:13:58 PM
Plenty people like feminists, mahagonny.  Nutjob hardcore conservatives don't.

Feminists do not want less male achievement; don't let an idiot like Yenor warp your mind even more.

A great many dudes, like myself, are feminists.

There's no equality of outcomes though. We can't all grow a baby in our abdomen.

Sure, I like them as individuals. We play pool, cribbage, drink together.

ETA: Here's a conversation. The feminist says they've come a long way in Scandinavia, but they're not perfect yet. What is perfection? That's what tires me out. Questions like that one. When is anything perfect, or likely to become something closer to perfect than it is now? We're lucky when things don't get worse. These people are barking up the wrong tree. Women can do anything they want. The more difficult job is deciding what you really want, and how much dues you'll pay to get there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddzf9Mm4hdY

In fact, your post illustrates that Prof Yenor, despite his podium and brashness, can do very little to stop women from their fulfillment.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 13, 2022, 07:31:28 AM
I don't plan on attending, but maybe someone here would be interested.

Students and Freedom of Expression on Campus (https://www.chronicle.com/events/virtual/students-and-freedom-of-expression-on-campus?cid2=gen_login_refresh&cid=gen_sign_in) CHE virtual seminar.

Quote
Upcoming, January 25, at 2 p.m., ET.

Today's students are challenging free-speech norms and are more likely than older generations to support restrictions that limit offensive speech. What's more, the rise of social media, new sexual-harassment policies, and demands for more racial diversity and inclusiveness have sometimes complicated free expression on campus. In this environment, how can colleges promote open inquiry and discussion while balancing changing attitudes?

Join us for a virtual forum that brings together Michael S. Roth, the president of Wesleyan University, and other experts to share their perspectives on these topics:

How is free expression evolving on college campuses?
How do college leaders respond to claims that their institutions have become unwelcoming places for certain views?
How can colleges mitigate potential conflicts when they do arise?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on January 13, 2022, 04:49:13 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 13, 2022, 07:31:28 AM
I don't plan on attending, but maybe someone here would be interested.

Students and Freedom of Expression on Campus (https://www.chronicle.com/events/virtual/students-and-freedom-of-expression-on-campus?cid2=gen_login_refresh&cid=gen_sign_in) CHE virtual seminar.

Quote
Upcoming, January 25, at 2 p.m., ET.

Today's students are challenging free-speech norms and are more likely than older generations to support restrictions that limit offensive speech. What's more, the rise of social media, new sexual-harassment policies, and demands for more racial diversity and inclusiveness have sometimes complicated free expression on campus. In this environment, how can colleges promote open inquiry and discussion while balancing changing attitudes?

Join us for a virtual forum that brings together Michael S. Roth, the president of Wesleyan University, and other experts to share their perspectives on these topics:

How is free expression evolving on college campuses?
How do college leaders respond to claims that their institutions have become unwelcoming places for certain views?
How can colleges mitigate potential conflicts when they do arise?

I appreciate knowing about it, but most likely I'll be working at that time.
Prediction (I would be happy to find out I'm mistaken): If the question even comes up, it will be easy, in most cases, for the presenters to claim that students and faculty with conservative views are absolutely free to express themselves on campus. But it would be impossible in most cases to claim that respect for conservatives is fostered. This despite recent reports that liberals have some outlandishly untrue beliefs...https://theologyweb.com/campus/forum/social-studies/civics-101/1242605-police-brutality-against-black-people-happens-way-less-than-public-thinks ...which is not worthy of being reported, according to Huffpost, Mother Jones, Guardian or my schools' brilliant team of *diversity* gurus.
Cultivating willful ignorance, and the political capitalizing from it, are their plan.
So they'll just pretend the question doesn't exist.
Lefty agenda-pushing on campus is the norm. We all know that.
ETA --- Example of a 'conservative position': the Waukesha massacre was carried out by an anti-white person racist. (Which of course is obviously true, observable by anyone.)
When stating a fact identifies you as a conservative...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on January 15, 2022, 06:25:23 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on December 28, 2021, 03:17:38 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 03:11:46 PM

Why would one retweet a statement unless one were amused by it, offended by it, or in agreement with it?


Or drinking.

We need to approach each other with more tolerance.

Does that include those whom you referred to on another thread as "dead or in dementia" for voting for H or T in 2016?  Or like T, were you merely being humorous?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on January 15, 2022, 06:36:22 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on January 15, 2022, 06:25:23 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on December 28, 2021, 03:17:38 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2021, 03:11:46 PM

Why would one retweet a statement unless one were amused by it, offended by it, or in agreement with it?


Or drinking.

We need to approach each other with more tolerance.

Does that include those whom you referred to on another thread as "dead or in dementia" for voting for H or T in 2016?  Or like T, were you merely being humorous?

That's what you thought i meant? Wow. I may have expressed myself poorly.
They were not in dementia when they voted, but in 2024, eight years later, many who voted in 2016 will either be deceased or very old and therefore less likely to vote. At the same time, many new young voters come along in eight years. So to the question 'who would vote for either Hillary or Trump in 2024 who didn't before, and who would not vote for either hillary or Trump who did in 2016' the answer could well be many 'many.' It's never really a replay.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 24, 2022, 10:39:56 AM
Florida School District Cancels Civil Rights Talk b/c CRT (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/florida-school-district-cancels-professors-civil-rights-lecture-critic-rcna13183)

Cancel culture cuts both ways.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 24, 2022, 10:59:31 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 24, 2022, 10:39:56 AM
Florida School District Cancels Civil Rights Talk b/c CRT (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/florida-school-district-cancels-professors-civil-rights-lecture-critic-rcna13183)

Cancel culture cuts both ways.

A fascinating quotation from the article:
Quote
Less than 24 hours before Butler was informed of the cancellation, a state Senate committee advanced legislation Tuesday at the behest of Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis to block public schools and private businesses from making people feel "discomfort" when they're taught about race.

The double-edged "discomfort" sword.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on January 24, 2022, 01:56:07 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 24, 2022, 10:59:31 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 24, 2022, 10:39:56 AM
Florida School District Cancels Civil Rights Talk b/c CRT (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/florida-school-district-cancels-professors-civil-rights-lecture-critic-rcna13183)

Cancel culture cuts both ways.

A fascinating quotation from the article:
Quote
Less than 24 hours before Butler was informed of the cancellation, a state Senate committee advanced legislation Tuesday at the behest of Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis to block public schools and private businesses from making people feel "discomfort" when they're taught about race.

The double-edged "discomfort" sword.

i'm hearing about Professor Butler for the first time, so i don't know anything about him or his lecture. But the (leftist) educators who see themselves as groundbreaking with respect to the proper teaching of racial history in the USA are absolutely in favor of government controlling (censoring) speech.

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2019/how-to-fix-politics-in-america/inequality/pass-an-anti-racist-constitutional-amendment/

"The amendment would make unconstitutional racial inequity over a certain threshold, as well as racist ideas by public officials (with "racist ideas" and "public official" clearly defined). It would establish and permanently fund the Department of Anti-racism (DOA) comprised of formally trained experts on racism and no political appointees. The DOA would be responsible for preclearing all local, state and federal public policies to ensure they won't yield racial inequity, monitor those policies, investigate private racist policies when racial inequity surfaces, and monitor public officials for expressions of racist ideas. The DOA would be empowered with disciplinary tools to wield over and against policymakers and public officials who do not voluntarily change their racist policy and ideas."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 02, 2022, 06:09:57 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/incoming-georgetown-law-official-placed-on-administrative-leave-for-tweets-about-supreme-court-pick/ar-AATkPud
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 02, 2022, 07:46:33 AM
Another news item on our topic: https://abcnews.go.com/US/whoopi-goldberg-suspended-view-weeks-holocaust-comments/story?id=82613265

If I understand correctly the issue is Goldberg saw European Jews as belonging to the same race as the German non-Jews. Whereas, she is being found wrong because the Nazis themselves considered the Jews an inferior race. I don't see why Goldberg can't express the belief that they were members of the same race when biologists reject the idea of race altogether. Of course, that would be inconsistent of her, because she's one of those who are fixated on keeping the idea of race alive in order to somehow advance the success, standard of living, etc. for American Black people. But that wouldn't make it false.
Of course, the Nazis believe the human race should not include breeding that included Jews as they were inferior genetically.

People in the USA who maintain one race is inferior to another genetically, if they exist, are practically never heard from. I can't think of any. It is true that Asians outperform Caucasians scholastically in the USA, but that is attributed to more vigorous study habits. In order to believe Caucasians are inferior to Asians genetically you would have to believe that if both 'races' studied exactly the same amount the Asians would still outperform.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 02, 2022, 07:52:35 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 02, 2022, 07:46:33 AM
Another news item on our topic: https://abcnews.go.com/US/whoopi-goldberg-suspended-view-weeks-holocaust-comments/story?id=82613265

If I understand correctly the issue is Goldberg saw European Jews as belonging to the same race as the German non-Jews.

Even hearing her trying to explain herself is ridiculous. "THEY'RE ALL WHITE PEOPLE!!!"

"racism" = "white people good, black people bad" according to Whoopi.

To someone with only a hammer, every problem is a nail.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 02, 2022, 08:12:57 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 02, 2022, 07:52:35 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 02, 2022, 07:46:33 AM
Another news item on our topic: https://abcnews.go.com/US/whoopi-goldberg-suspended-view-weeks-holocaust-comments/story?id=82613265

If I understand correctly the issue is Goldberg saw European Jews as belonging to the same race as the German non-Jews.

Even hearing her trying to explain herself is ridiculous. "THEY'RE ALL WHITE PEOPLE!!!"

"racism" = "white people good, black people bad" according to Whoopi.

To someone with only a hammer, every problem is a nail.

Well, why wouldn't that apply to the Kyle Rittenhouse incident then?

But Hannity did defend her, while accusing the liberal media of intolerance of diverse viewpoints. Eventually, of course the cancel culture devours people who have seen themselves as on the same side politically.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/hannity-whoopi-goldberg-change-channel
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on February 02, 2022, 12:31:37 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 02, 2022, 07:52:35 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 02, 2022, 07:46:33 AM
Another news item on our topic: https://abcnews.go.com/US/whoopi-goldberg-suspended-view-weeks-holocaust-comments/story?id=82613265

If I understand correctly the issue is Goldberg saw European Jews as belonging to the same race as the German non-Jews.

Even hearing her trying to explain herself is ridiculous. "THEY'RE ALL WHITE PEOPLE!!!"

"racism" = "white people good, black people bad" according to Whoopi.

To someone with only a hammer, every problem is a nail.

I read her statements attempting to clarify her point. I read the article regarding the banning of the book Maus from school libraries which was what prompted the discussion. I still don't understand what she was driving at. What broader point was she trying to make?

The article about the book banning cited "vulgar" language and nudity as the reason. I don't know how saying 'the Holocaust was not about race' is supposed to speak to that (though some of the arguments supporting the ban are also worth a raised eyebrow or two).




I don't exactly consider myself well-versed in the concepts and vocabulary related to the history and sociology of racism. So every time I read a story like this, I have to puzzle over it a bit to try to understand the different viewpoints being expressed.

But my take on the objections to a dismissive statement like, 'Well, they were all white people, so it wasn't about race' is that it seems to minimize the extent to which the Nazis targeted and persecuted the Jews, as well as the reasons they did so.

I think it might have some parallels to why people get upset when someone says the American Civil War was about state's rights and not slavery?

It can be true that categorization of different races has little to no relation to biological differences. But that does not mean that the consequences of these categorizations aren't real. So saying 'racial classifications have no grounding in biology' is not equivalent to saying 'racism does not exist.'




Goldberg says something along the lines of 'well, since the difference between a white Jew and a white non-Jew can't be seen, the Nazis really had to work to identify them by digging into records and such'.  Again, I don't see why she thinks this is such an important distinction.

I suspect she would not consider something like the one-drop rule (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule#Antebellum_conditions) as 'not about race' just because to discriminate against someone who 'passes' for white but has a black ancestor might require some record-digging.




She wasn't 'cancelled' so much as put in time-out for a couple of weeks and encouraged to use the time to 'reflect.' Perhaps it's just an empty, 'virtue-signaling' gesture, but is it really 'canceling' someone?

Hasn't Fox News also suspended hosts in the past? And don't they market themselves as the antithesis of the liberal media?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 02, 2022, 12:44:40 PM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 02, 2022, 12:31:37 PM

Goldberg says something along the lines of 'well, since the difference between a white Jew and a white non-Jew can't be seen, the Nazis really had to work to identify them by digging into records and such'.  Again, I don't see why she thinks this is such an important distinction.


I would imagine part of it goes to ideas like "black people can't be racist". For her, racism is a one-way street, and clearly defined. It's literally black and white.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 02, 2022, 12:53:39 PM
QuoteGoldberg says something along the lines of 'well, since the difference between a white Jew and a white non-Jew can't be seen, the Nazis really had to work to identify them by digging into records and such'.  Again, I don't see why she thinks this is such an important distinction.

I don't give a flying fxxk what Goldberg thinks or says. However, there is a kernel of something contemporary in her ahistorical and uninformed statements. Nazi ideology was that "all of history is a struggle between races." The Nazis had trouble identifying German Jews on average, because Jews were highly assimilated, a cultural exchange that was a two way street, by the way. [Once the Nazis moved east, this situation no longer existed.]

Blacks in the US at the moment on average are highly culturally assimilated, and that cultural exchange is a two way street, too. Thus, anyone wishing to pursue identity politics in the US has a problem -- there is insufficient difference! Differences must be manufactured. And what's left is color of skin. Goldberg is a mirror of her milieu.

I don't care if people are green.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 02, 2022, 01:02:34 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 02, 2022, 12:53:39 PM
QuoteGoldberg says something along the lines of 'well, since the difference between a white Jew and a white non-Jew can't be seen, the Nazis really had to work to identify them by digging into records and such'.  Again, I don't see why she thinks this is such an important distinction.

I don't give a flying fxxk what Goldberg thinks or says. However, there is a kernel of something contemporary in her ahistorical and uninformed statements. Nazi ideology was that "all of history is a struggle between races." The Nazis had trouble identifying German Jews on average, because Jews were highly assimilated, a cultural exchange that was a two way street, by the way. [Once the Nazis moved east, this situation no longer existed.]

Blacks in the US at the moment on average are highly culturally assimilated, and that cultural exchange is a two way street, too. Thus, anyone wishing to pursue identity politics in the US has a problem -- there is insufficient difference! Differences must be manufactured. And what's left is color of skin. Goldberg is a mirror of her milieu.


As Thomas Sowell points out, throughout history all over the world, slavery usually involved slaves and owners of the same or similar ethnicity. The trans-atlantic slave trade (which exploited the slave trade within Africa) was more the exception than the rule.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on February 02, 2022, 01:56:13 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 02, 2022, 12:53:39 PM
QuoteGoldberg says something along the lines of 'well, since the difference between a white Jew and a white non-Jew can't be seen, the Nazis really had to work to identify them by digging into records and such'.  Again, I don't see why she thinks this is such an important distinction.

I don't give a flying fxxk what Goldberg thinks or says. However, there is a kernel of something contemporary in her ahistorical and uninformed statements. Nazi ideology was that "all of history is a struggle between races." The Nazis had trouble identifying German Jews on average, because Jews were highly assimilated, a cultural exchange that was a two way street, by the way. [Once the Nazis moved east, this situation no longer existed.]

Blacks in the US at the moment on average are highly culturally assimilated, and that cultural exchange is a two way street, too. Thus, anyone wishing to pursue identity politics in the US has a problem -- there is insufficient difference! Differences must be manufactured. And what's left is color of skin. Goldberg is a mirror of her milieu.

I don't care if people are green.

Well, that's nice.

Unfortunately, some people, who are not you, do care a great deal.

I'm not saying proponents of identity politics don't ever manufacture outrage or use divisive rhetoric, but it seems disingenuous to imply that being 'culturally assimilated' means you won't be treated poorly due to your (perceived) race.




A common narrative among minorities in America relates to the frustration of being just as American as anyone else (culturally speaking) yet still treated as an other. People speak of desperately trying to fit in, but constantly being reminded of their differences by people who see their physical characteristics (and implied racial category) above all else.

In my high school class on American government, a few of the kids refused to work on a group project with me saying, "You're a Chink, so you're probably a Commie too. What would you know about democracy?"

I was never some SJW woke-scold or anti-capitalist activist. I was shy, quiet, and mostly just kept my head down. No action on my part prompted them to say that; my face did.

This was in the 21st century (and not at all the worst example). Things were worse in my dad's generation and worse still in my granddad's.

My dad was in the Boy Scouts, is a Christian, and votes Republican. My great uncles fought for America in WWII (even after being made homeless after their father lost his job due to rising animosity towards Japanese-Americans). You think that meant they were immune to racism? Perhaps they weren't subject to as much prejudice as they would have if they hadn't been so Americanized, but it was still a recurring part of their lives.




To some extent, I sympathize when people exasperatedly say, "Why do they have to make everything about race?" There are a lot of overblown claims, hyperbolic statements, and questionable policy proposals.

But I resent the implication that racism (or sexism or hostility towards LGBTQ people) is only an issue because people talk about it. As if everything would be just hunky-dory if people would just stop complaining, because "nobody cares" about your race or sexuality or what-have-you.

It's just not true.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 02, 2022, 02:02:45 PM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 02, 2022, 01:56:13 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 02, 2022, 12:53:39 PM
QuoteGoldberg says something along the lines of 'well, since the difference between a white Jew and a white non-Jew can't be seen, the Nazis really had to work to identify them by digging into records and such'.  Again, I don't see why she thinks this is such an important distinction.

I don't give a flying fxxk what Goldberg thinks or says. However, there is a kernel of something contemporary in her ahistorical and uninformed statements. Nazi ideology was that "all of history is a struggle between races." The Nazis had trouble identifying German Jews on average, because Jews were highly assimilated, a cultural exchange that was a two way street, by the way. [Once the Nazis moved east, this situation no longer existed.]

Blacks in the US at the moment on average are highly culturally assimilated, and that cultural exchange is a two way street, too. Thus, anyone wishing to pursue identity politics in the US has a problem -- there is insufficient difference! Differences must be manufactured. And what's left is color of skin. Goldberg is a mirror of her milieu.

I don't care if people are green.

Well, that's nice.

Unfortunately, some people, who are not you, do care a great deal.

I'm not saying proponents of identity politics don't ever manufacture outrage or use divisive rhetoric, but it seems disingenuous to imply that being 'culturally assimilated' means you won't be treated poorly due to your (perceived) race.




A common narrative among minorities in America relates to the frustration of being just as American as anyone else (culturally speaking) yet still treated as an other. People speak of desperately trying to fit in, but constantly being reminded of their differences by people who see their physical characteristics (and implied racial category) above all else.

In my high school class on American government, a few of the kids refused to work on a group project with me saying, "You're a Chink, so you're probably a Commie too. What would you know about democracy?"

I was never some SJW woke-scold or anti-capitalist activist. I was shy, quiet, and mostly just kept my head down. No action on my part prompted them to say that; my face did.

This was in the 21st century (and not at all the worst example). Things were worse in my dad's generation and worse still in my granddad's.

My dad was in the Boy Scouts, is a Christian, and votes Republican. My great uncles fought for America in WWII (even after being made homeless after their father lost his job due to rising animosity towards Japanese-Americans). You think that meant they were immune to racism? Perhaps they weren't subject to as much prejudice as they would have if they hadn't been so Americanized, but it was still a recurring part of their lives.




To some extent, I sympathize when people exasperatedly say, "Why do they have to make everything about race?" There are a lot of overblown claims, hyperbolic statements, and questionable policy proposals.

But I resent the implication that racism (or sexism or hostility towards LGBTQ people) is only an issue because people talk about it. As if everything would be just hunky-dory if people would just stop complaining, because "nobody cares" about your race or sexuality or what-have-you.

It's just not true.

Yo! Ask the Irish, spreaders of disease in the 18th century. [Irishmen and dogs need not apply (for jobs).] Controllers of the politics of cities in the 19th. Chicago: Vote early and vote often.

When I first saw "Kiss Me, I'm Irish Buttons" on people ages ago, I knew the problem, if any, had ceased to exist.

Next we'll see "Kiss Me, I'm Black [or hadn't you noticed]".

I really don't care if you're green. Take it or leave it. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 02, 2022, 05:25:45 PM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 02, 2022, 01:56:13 PM
I'm not saying proponents of identity politics don't ever manufacture outrage or use divisive rhetoric, but it seems disingenuous to imply that being 'culturally assimilated' means you won't be treated poorly due to your (perceived) race.

My first experience being treated differently (and with clear contempt) due to my perceived race happened at about age 11. I never forgot it. I don't dwell on it though.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on February 02, 2022, 07:07:45 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 02, 2022, 07:52:35 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 02, 2022, 07:46:33 AM
Another news item on our topic: https://abcnews.go.com/US/whoopi-goldberg-suspended-view-weeks-holocaust-comments/story?id=82613265

If I understand correctly the issue is Goldberg saw European Jews as belonging to the same race as the German non-Jews.

Even hearing her trying to explain herself is ridiculous. "THEY'RE ALL WHITE PEOPLE!!!"

"racism" = "white people good, black people bad" according to Whoopi.

To someone with only a hammer, every problem is a nail.

To White Supremacists, Jewsish people are not White. They are Semitic/Eastern European. Just look for images and tell me they aren't seeing different physical/racial characteristics, from a "swarthy" skin color to thick curly hair and a large nose.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 02, 2022, 07:30:50 PM
If you claim to have not heard anyone espouse that non-whites are inferior you clearly are trying not to hear it, or live in an incredibly liberal/progressive place. I had friends call Arabs sand n******s, and Jews are not referred to as "mud people" by US(!!) neo-Nazis because they are perceived to be white.

And, in the Midwest every US citizen of Asian heritage is Chinese, unless you are of WWII age and they are Japanese.

Jesus wept.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 02, 2022, 08:16:38 PM
People of WWII age are mostly dead. They are not people one runs into without frequenting nursing homes where there isn't even a lot of talking. Bill Maher thinks you have 'progressophobia.'
You've never lived through an experience even remotely like the threat of the second world war, so your scrutiny of those who did is...well, comes off a bit pompous. Some got over their distrust of the Japanese and some didn't. Younger Americans today think they would have been among the most forget-and-forgiving. But it's a guess.
Mistaking a person of Korean descent for a person of Chinese descent or a Japanese American for a Japanese tourist is something that makes you look provincial, unworldly, ignorant but it doesn't necessarily signify hate. Not at all.
Sure there are some racist whites, but it's a small minority of whites, yet there's a lot of rage against white people. I feel sorry for people who delve into that rage, as do a growing number of Black Americans.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 03, 2022, 04:39:14 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 02, 2022, 07:30:50 PM
If you claim to have not heard anyone espouse that non-whites are inferior you clearly are trying not to hear it, or live in an incredibly liberal/progressive place.

From Darrell Brooks (https://nypost.com/2021/11/24/darrell-brooks-called-for-violence-against-white-people/), the criminal who ran down several people including children and elderly ladies,
Quote
"So when we start bakk knokkin white people TF out ion wanna hear it...the old white ppl 2, KNOKK DEM TF OUT!! PERIOD," he wrote under his rap name, MathBoi Fly, along with a middle-finger emoji.

Sadly, no ethnic group has a monopoly on members saying (and doing) hateful things, and no group is immune to being on the receiving end.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 07:19:16 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 02, 2022, 08:16:38 PM
People of WWII age are mostly dead. They are not people one runs into without frequenting nursing homes where there isn't even a lot of talking. Bill Maher thinks you have 'progressophobia.'
You've never lived through an experience even remotely like the threat of the second world war, so your scrutiny of those who did is...well, comes off a bit pompous. Some got over their distrust of the Japanese and some didn't. Younger Americans today think they would have been among the most forget-and-forgiving. But it's a guess.
Mistaking a person of Korean descent for a person of Chinese descent or a Japanese American for a Japanese tourist is something that makes you look provincial, unworldly, ignorant but it doesn't necessarily signify hate. Not at all.
Sure there are some racist whites, but it's a small minority of whites, yet there's a lot of rage against white people. I feel sorry for people who delve into that rage, as do a growing number of Black Americans.

I had seven uncles and a grandfather who faught in WWII and Korea. My father and and father in law loudly reminisced about the "gooks" in Korea in the waiting room during my son's surgery until I said one of those "gooks" might be operating on their grandson. I worked at factories in the Midwest, a highway crew, and just told you what my FRIENDS referred to Iraqis as. The language I describe is common now in Midwestern small towns.

Frankly, you don't know crap about this, but keep on with your delusions.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on February 03, 2022, 07:43:05 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 07:19:16 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 02, 2022, 08:16:38 PM
People of WWII age are mostly dead. They are not people one runs into without frequenting nursing homes where there isn't even a lot of talking. Bill Maher thinks you have 'progressophobia.'
You've never lived through an experience even remotely like the threat of the second world war, so your scrutiny of those who did is...well, comes off a bit pompous. Some got over their distrust of the Japanese and some didn't. Younger Americans today think they would have been among the most forget-and-forgiving. But it's a guess.
Mistaking a person of Korean descent for a person of Chinese descent or a Japanese American for a Japanese tourist is something that makes you look provincial, unworldly, ignorant but it doesn't necessarily signify hate. Not at all.
Sure there are some racist whites, but it's a small minority of whites, yet there's a lot of rage against white people. I feel sorry for people who delve into that rage, as do a growing number of Black Americans.

I had seven uncles and a grandfather who faught in WWII and Korea. My father and and father in law loudly reminisced about the "gooks" in Korea in the waiting room during my son's surgery until I said one of those "gooks" might be operating on their grandson. I worked at factories in the Midwest, a highway crew, and just told you what my FRIENDS referred to Iraqis as. The language I describe is common now in Midwestern small towns.

Frankly, you don't know crap about this, but keep on with your delusions.

Didn't know there was so much of that in the Midwest.  Here in the south I've very seldom heard racial slurs against people of Asian and Middle Eastern origin.  I heard quite a few racial slurs against black people growing up, but mostly from schoolboys who used racial slurs as part of a broader adolescent tendency to use language they knew wasn't supposed to be used in polite society.  Racial slurs were no longer respectable by the 1970s.  That's not to say that expressions of disparaging attitudes didn't, and don't, remain.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on February 03, 2022, 08:08:24 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 03, 2022, 04:39:14 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 02, 2022, 07:30:50 PM
If you claim to have not heard anyone espouse that non-whites are inferior you clearly are trying not to hear it, or live in an incredibly liberal/progressive place.

From Darrell Brooks (https://nypost.com/2021/11/24/darrell-brooks-called-for-violence-against-white-people/), the criminal who ran down several people including children and elderly ladies,
Quote
"So when we start bakk knokkin white people TF out ion wanna hear it...the old white ppl 2, KNOKK DEM TF OUT!! PERIOD," he wrote under his rap name, MathBoi Fly, along with a middle-finger emoji.

Sadly, no ethnic group has a monopoly on members saying (and doing) hateful things, and no group is immune to being on the receiving end.

jimbogumbo's post didn't make the claim that only white people can be racist.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 03, 2022, 08:14:24 AM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 03, 2022, 08:08:24 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 03, 2022, 04:39:14 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 02, 2022, 07:30:50 PM
If you claim to have not heard anyone espouse that non-whites are inferior you clearly are trying not to hear it, or live in an incredibly liberal/progressive place.

From Darrell Brooks (https://nypost.com/2021/11/24/darrell-brooks-called-for-violence-against-white-people/), the criminal who ran down several people including children and elderly ladies,
Quote
"So when we start bakk knokkin white people TF out ion wanna hear it...the old white ppl 2, KNOKK DEM TF OUT!! PERIOD," he wrote under his rap name, MathBoi Fly, along with a middle-finger emoji.

Sadly, no ethnic group has a monopoly on members saying (and doing) hateful things, and no group is immune to being on the receiving end.

jimbogumbo's post didn't make the claim that only white people can be racist.

No, but the implication is common. Has any mainstream media outlet or government official even suggested that Darrell Brooks' attack was a racist action? If a white criminal had driven into a crowd of black people, would any mainstream media outlet or government official suggested it wasn't a racist action?

Calling racism has an incredible double standard.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 08:30:58 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 03, 2022, 08:14:24 AM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 03, 2022, 08:08:24 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 03, 2022, 04:39:14 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 02, 2022, 07:30:50 PM
If you claim to have not heard anyone espouse that non-whites are inferior you clearly are trying not to hear it, or live in an incredibly liberal/progressive place.

From Darrell Brooks (https://nypost.com/2021/11/24/darrell-brooks-called-for-violence-against-white-people/), the criminal who ran down several people including children and elderly ladies,
Quote
"So when we start bakk knokkin white people TF out ion wanna hear it...the old white ppl 2, KNOKK DEM TF OUT!! PERIOD," he wrote under his rap name, MathBoi Fly, along with a middle-finger emoji.

Sadly, no ethnic group has a monopoly on members saying (and doing) hateful things, and no group is immune to being on the receiving end.

jimbogumbo's post didn't make the claim that only white people can be racist.

No, but the implication is common. Has any mainstream media outlet or government official even suggested that Darrell Brooks' attack was a racist action? If a white criminal had driven into a crowd of black people, would any mainstream media outlet or government official suggested it wasn't a racist action?

Calling racism has an incredible double standard.

jimbogumbo did not make the claim, and would not. jimbogumbo has been trying politely (until a recent post) to push bacon the racism is no longer claims of some.

To apl68's post (always thoughtful and kind), no it is not polite nor common to hear racial pejoratives on the street in the Midwest. I am not claiming that, only that what small cleanrat experienced is common for citizens of Asian heritage. My state is referred to as "Southern" both in who lives here and attitude. It was largely a factory state, with workers from TN and KY who relocated here.

as to the claim there are no white supemacists, made by at least two posters, we have a KKK group 15 miles from where I've lived the past 40 years. And, in recent news from FL:

https://miami.cbslocal.com/2022/01/31/rabbi-discusses-safety-in-light-of-nazi-group-demonstrations/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 03, 2022, 08:42:14 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 07:19:16 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 02, 2022, 08:16:38 PM
People of WWII age are mostly dead. They are not people one runs into without frequenting nursing homes where there isn't even a lot of talking. Bill Maher thinks you have 'progressophobia.'
You've never lived through an experience even remotely like the threat of the second world war, so your scrutiny of those who did is...well, comes off a bit pompous. Some got over their distrust of the Japanese and some didn't. Younger Americans today think they would have been among the most forget-and-forgiving. But it's a guess.
Mistaking a person of Korean descent for a person of Chinese descent or a Japanese American for a Japanese tourist is something that makes you look provincial, unworldly, ignorant but it doesn't necessarily signify hate. Not at all.
Sure there are some racist whites, but it's a small minority of whites, yet there's a lot of rage against white people. I feel sorry for people who delve into that rage, as do a growing number of Black Americans.

I had seven uncles and a grandfather who faught in WWII and Korea. My father and and father in law loudly reminisced about the "gooks" in Korea in the waiting room during my son's surgery until I said one of those "gooks" might be operating on their grandson. I worked at factories in the Midwest, a highway crew, and just told you what my FRIENDS referred to Iraqis as. The language I describe is common now in Midwestern small towns.

Frankly, you don't know crap about this, but keep on with your delusions.

You have an odd family.

Quote
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 03, 2022, 08:14:24 AM


No, but the implication is common. Has any mainstream media outlet or government official even suggested that Darrell Brooks' attack was a racist action? If a white criminal had driven into a crowd of black people, would any mainstream media outlet or government official suggested it wasn't a racist action?

Calling racism has an incredible double standard.

Not only that, but this too. Dr. Cooper is still at Rutgers. Was there any apology or disciplinary action? I don't think so. Of course Eddie Glaude, another 'revolting race-baiter' (thank you Rod Dreher) is probably cheering.

https://nypost.com/2021/10/29/rutgers-professor-calls-white-people-villains/

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 03, 2022, 09:20:03 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 08:30:58 AM

jimbogumbo did not make the claim, and would not. jimbogumbo has been trying politely (until a recent post) to push bacon the racism is no longer claims of some.


I don't have the faintest clue what this means. Is it supposed to be
"push back on the 'racism is no longer' claims of some"?

I haven't heard anyone claim racism doesn't exist; rather that it it much less prevalent than it used to be, and it is amplified by many on the left.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on February 03, 2022, 09:28:23 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 02, 2022, 08:16:38 PM
...
You've never lived through an experience even remotely like the threat of the second world war, so your scrutiny of those who did is...well, comes off a bit pompous. Some got over their distrust of the Japanese and some didn't. Younger Americans today think they would have been among the most forget-and-forgiving. But it's a guess.
...

um...so...if someone went through a difficult time involving Japanese, it is pompous to say anything against the fact that they distrust all Japanese people for decades afterward as a result?

How does something like this apply as a general rule? Honest question.

Someone's prejudices may be understandable, but does that mean they should never be criticized?

Also, if jimbogumbo could say they actually have lived through a similar experience, would that really make you more inclined to lend credence to what they are saying?



Test Cases

If a black person lived through the time of the Civil Rights movement during which there was tremendous hostility from a not-exactly-tiny number of white people who were vociferously and sometimes violently against changes towards equality...should people be understanding, not critical, if they maintain a distrust of all white people?

If a Japanese-American whose family has had to leave their homes (which, along with their possessions, had to be either sold at dirt cheap prices or else abandoned all together) to be incarcerated for years in an internment camp, even as you or your father or your brothers are fighting for the country (in a segregated unit, of course) whose government gave those orders...well, should they get any disapproval if they maintain a distrust of all white people?




Ok, someone made a mean, racist comment to you when you were eleven, but you don't dwell on it. Since the point I was making is that people are going to do things like that whether there's a noisy identity politics movement or not, what you said is not inconsistent with what I said.

Side note, how much good do you think it does not to dwell on a racist encounter if another comes along soon after? And then another. And another. And another.



I wonder if you have ever lived through an experience remotely like those I describe above. If not, would you understand if someone said your "I don't dwell on it" comment comes across as a wee bit condescending?

I wonder if you have any idea how often Japanese-Americans seeking redress after their interment were told to stop "dwelling" on the past and to get over it.

I wonder if you have any idea how often they had to hear that they should be grateful that the camps weren't like the concentration camps in Nazi Germany. Like, "Well, all that happened was you were imprisoned despite no evidence of being engaged in espionage or any other crime. It's not like you were starved or beaten or murdered en masse, so I don't know what you're griping about."




I can easily believe racist white people are a minority. I have no idea how small a minority, but even a small minority can cause a lot of harm if they are vocal and active enough.

I think anyone who states that white people are all guilty of oppression by definition is full of it. I think it is important for progressives to speak against the extremists in their midst, even if only for the sake of their own goals.

For the same reason, it disturbs me when people are dismissive of racism or sexism or what-have-you just because it's not-all-white-people or not-all-men or whatever. It doesn't have to be all or even most to be a problem.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 03, 2022, 09:44:49 AM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 03, 2022, 09:28:23 AM

I think anyone who states that white people are all guilty of oppression by definition is full of it. I think it is important for progressives to speak against the extremists in their midst, even if only for the sake of their own goals.


So what you report is the face-to-face racist treatment. We agree that is awful. It hurt when it happened and it hurts when you think later that people think they should be able to get away with it. It's accepted, or at least in their circles. However a subset of minorities do this to whites too.

The idea that something called 'white supremacy' (not the actual belief that white people are genetically superior to others, but something else whose presence and nature are not even defined entities, that is concretely not that thing at thing at all, but somehow grabs the privilege to use same term) needs to be 'dismantled' is heard as an affront to white people, because it is one. It refers to something the United States worked hard to eradicate, while trying to give power to the 'white supremacy' charge by conflating distant past scenerios with present day life. It's a bad faith term.
Academics and journalists who seem to know just enough more history than the layman always try to transfer our emotional pain over the racial past to our assessment of the present with things like 'white people's reluctance to give up power over Black folks always shows up again in a new iteration as soon as any advance for Black people happens.' It's propaganda. We were taught to spot garbage like that in junior high.
It's a power grab by the democratic party. And it's quickly infiltrated corporate and higher education employment (even minimum wage retail work!), K-12 education, and if the progressives get their way, federal and state government. And people are gonna fight it like hell because it's necessary. Because now they're coming for your job, your children, your social life and the medical care you're paying for.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 03, 2022, 09:45:37 AM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 03, 2022, 09:28:23 AM



Test Cases

If a black person lived through the time of the Civil Rights movement during which there was tremendous hostility from a not-exactly-tiny number of white people who were vociferously and sometimes violently against changes towards equality...should people be understanding, not critical, if they maintain a distrust of all white people?


Since this person would be at least in their 60's by now, while it might be understandable, it is much less acceptable that their children and grandchildren have the same attitudes, grounded not in their own experience, but in that long-past experience of their elders.

Quote
If a Japanese-American whose family has had to leave their homes (which, along with their possessions, had to be either sold at dirt cheap prices or else abandoned all together) to be incarcerated for years in an internment camp, even as you or your father or your brothers are fighting for the country (in a segregated unit, of course) whose government gave those orders...well, should they get any disapproval if they maintain a distrust of all white people?


Same as above, only the time scale is even longer. Many Germans immigrated to North America after WWII. Is it reasonable for people to still worry about whether their descendants are neo-Nazis, anymore than other people?

Quote



Ok, someone made a mean, racist comment to you when you were eleven, but you don't dwell on it. Since the point I was making is that people are going to do things like that whether there's a noisy identity politics movement or not, what you said is not inconsistent with what I said.

Side note, how much good do you think it does not to dwell on a racist encounter if another comes along soon after? And then another. And another. And another.



I wonder if you have ever lived through an experience remotely like those I describe above. If not, would you understand if someone said your "I don't dwell on it" comment comes across as a wee bit condescending?


The province of Quebec used to be officially bilingual. In the 70's legislation started to be introduced to make Quebec officially French, to the point of making it illegal for businesses to have signage that is not French only. (To be clear, it's not just that French has to be prominent; it's that it is wrong to include anything else.)

English in Quebec are viewed as a "privileged minority", and thus don't deserve the protection that minority status might otherwise confer.

There are lots of people (most?) who have faced discrimination of one form or another. The Oppression Olympics don't help matters by trying to determine who is the most oppressed. Trying to get everyone to treat others fairly is vastly more productive in the long run.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 10:41:34 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 03, 2022, 09:20:03 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 08:30:58 AM

jimbogumbo did not make the claim, and would not. jimbogumbo has been trying politely (until a recent post) to push bacon the racism is no longer claims of some.


I don't have the faintest clue what this means. Is it supposed to be
"push back on the 'racism is no longer' claims of some"?

I haven't heard anyone claim racism doesn't exist; rather that it it much less prevalent than it used to be, and it is amplified by many on the left.

When my chubby fingers are auto-corrected, yes, bacon=back on
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 12:05:20 PM
It is noteworthy that public discussion of inter-group relations is couched as a discussion of racism -- rather than a discussion of discrimination.

Racism may be observed in the words people use or perhaps even the thoughts they report. Observable or not, such racism doesn't obviously hurt anyone. And it can be easily avoided by having nothing to do with racists.

Discrimination, on the other hand, is about deeds. Things that hurt others: Irishmen and dogs need not apply, e.g.

The deeds part, the discrimination part, has virtually disappeared from American life. It is in fact largely illegal. Certainly overt government discrimination has disappeared [except for minimum wage laws, which are effectively anti-black male discrimination, and the forcing of young blacks in inner cities into government run prisons called schools.]

Racism is more a state of mind than anything else. And what's observable about it is a bunch of words, nothing more.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 12:34:01 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 12:05:20 PM
It is noteworthy that public discussion of inter-group relations is couched as a discussion of racism -- rather than a discussion of discrimination.

Racism may be observed in the words people use or perhaps even the thoughts they report. Observable or not, such racism doesn't obviously hurt anyone. And it can be easily avoided by having nothing to do with racists.

Discrimination, on the other hand, is about deeds. Things that hurt others: Irishmen and dogs need not apply, e.g.

The deeds part, the discrimination part, has virtually disappeared from American life. It is in fact largely illegal. Certainly overt government discrimination has disappeared [except for minimum wage laws, which are effectively anti-black male discrimination, and the forcing of young blacks in inner cities into government run prisons called schools.]

Racism is more a state of mind than anything else. And what's observable about it is a bunch of words, nothing more.

Illegal doesn't mean it doesn't happen: https://www.indystar.com/story/money/2021/05/13/indianapolis-black-homeowner-home-appraisal-discrimination-fair-housing-center-central-indiana/4936571001/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 12:35:48 PM
And, not just a Midwest thing:https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/09/business/black-homeowners-appraisal-discrimination-lawsuit/index.html
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 12:46:39 PM
The articles are about disagreements. That's called life.

Fortunately, we have these things called courts to sort out such disagreements.

[On two separate occasions my house was appraised, once by a white man and once by a black man. The latter came out with a noticeably lower value than the former. What should I have done? Begin a lawsuit for racial discrimination?]
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 12:59:14 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 12:46:39 PM
The articles are about disagreements. That's called life.

Fortunately, we have these things called courts to sort out such disagreements.

[On two separate occasions my house was appraised, once by a white man and once by a black man. The latter came out with a noticeably lower value than the former. What should I have done? Begin a lawsuit for racial discrimination?]

There were tear downs in the area of the first article I sent with higher appraisals, so while it may have been life, probably not.

If you thought you were discriminated against then yes. Although, I'm guessing you felt the odds weren't good. One reason for that (shock) is that there is no long history of redlining whites out of black neighborhoods.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 01:08:28 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 12:59:14 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 12:46:39 PM
The articles are about disagreements. That's called life.

Fortunately, we have these things called courts to sort out such disagreements.

[On two separate occasions my house was appraised, once by a white man and once by a black man. The latter came out with a noticeably lower value than the former. What should I have done? Begin a lawsuit for racial discrimination?]

There were tear downs in the area of the first article I sent with higher appraisals, so while it may have been life, probably not.

If you thought you were discriminated against then yes. Although, I'm guessing you felt the odds weren't good. One reason for that (shock) is that there is no long history of redlining whites out of black neighborhoods.

The beginning of redlining was under the New Deal: Government policy that in effect discriminated against blacks.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 01:46:23 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 01:08:28 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 12:59:14 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 12:46:39 PM
The articles are about disagreements. That's called life.

Fortunately, we have these things called courts to sort out such disagreements.

[On two separate occasions my house was appraised, once by a white man and once by a black man. The latter came out with a noticeably lower value than the former. What should I have done? Begin a lawsuit for racial discrimination?]

There were tear downs in the area of the first article I sent with higher appraisals, so while it may have been life, probably not.

If you thought you were discriminated against then yes. Although, I'm guessing you felt the odds weren't good. One reason for that (shock) is that there is no long history of redlining whites out of black neighborhoods.

The beginning of redlining was under the New Deal: Government policy that in effect discriminated against blacks.

Stuck in a hotel room, so sadly too much time on this board. I'm well aware of when and how it started. I'm also well aware of how well received the practice (and similar discrimination related practices in Farm loan programs) were.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 01:53:03 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 01:46:23 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 01:08:28 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 12:59:14 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 12:46:39 PM
The articles are about disagreements. That's called life.

Fortunately, we have these things called courts to sort out such disagreements.

[On two separate occasions my house was appraised, once by a white man and once by a black man. The latter came out with a noticeably lower value than the former. What should I have done? Begin a lawsuit for racial discrimination?]

There were tear downs in the area of the first article I sent with higher appraisals, so while it may have been life, probably not.

If you thought you were discriminated against then yes. Although, I'm guessing you felt the odds weren't good. One reason for that (shock) is that there is no long history of redlining whites out of black neighborhoods.

The beginning of redlining was under the New Deal: Government policy that in effect discriminated against blacks.

Stuck in a hotel room, so sadly too much time on this board. I'm well aware of when and how it started. I'm also well aware of how well received the practice (and similar discrimination related practices in Farm loan programs) were.

Yes. And nowadays personal problems masquerade as political problems.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on February 03, 2022, 01:57:30 PM
marshwiggle, I agree with you in principle, but I think you are drawing things a little too cleanly.

Mind you, I am talking about whether prejudice is understandable, not excusable.

To start with, the experiences of one generation influence the next. If you lost your farm or your home (which may represent years or even generations of hard work and savings) because of the internment and had to start from scratch after being released, that is going to affect your kids. If your father's brother being murdered by a lynch mob is part of your family history, and you can see how the pain of that loss still affects him, that will have an impact.

It just seems a bit too glib to say, well those horrible things didn't happen to you specifically, so why do you care?

Secondly, it's not like the war ends or the Civil Rights Act is passed and all the racial tension dissipates and gives the next generation a clean slate. Those children and even those grandchildren may certainly have had their own experiences, and I don't know how easy it is to judge whether the level to which that affects them is as easy as saying 'yes, but by then it was illegal' or 'yes, but by then it was less socially acceptable.' Those are relevant factors, but I don't know how you'd draw a clear division between 'well, it's understandable you are upset' and 'oh, please. Now you're just being dramatic.'

There have also been periods of time since wwii when global events related to Asian nations stirred up hostility towards Asians in America.

And I don't know if mahagonny was suggesting that since wwii vets are either dead or so old they will be soon, anti-Japanese attitudes will die with them, but that's not the case. You think no one has used the wartime experiences of their parents or grandparents generation to deem all Japanese as evil?

I mean if you want to say 'minorities shouldn't be using the events of generations past to demonize all white people', ok. If you're going to say 'you don't see white people running around doing something like that', eh...




Now, is it fair to assume that the child or grandchild of a neo-nazi harbors the same sentiments of their forebear? No. Is it unreasonable to be concerned that someone raised by a neo-nazi may be more likely to harbor neo-nazi ideology than the average person? Well...aren't you essentially asking whether someone raised with a certain ideology is more likely to be influenced with that ideology than one who wasn't? What do you think?




I'm not always clear why people often point out that people are discriminated against for all kinds of things in discussions about racism. It sometimes comes across as someone saying "I think it's really important to support research that aims to reduce deaths from heart disease" and getting the response "Well, you know people die from all kinds of things, not just heart disease." As if the first person somehow implied that research into heart disease and only heart disease was important.

Oppression Olympics don't help matters, but neither does trying to deny or minimize other people's experiences so you can dismiss it as too trivial to be worth caring about.

And I wasn't trying  to make a point like oh these groups had it so much worse than those groups.

My point was if you're going to say 'you never went through what they went through, so who are you to judge' then wagging your finger at other people whose experiences you yourself didn't go through seems like an inconsistency.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 02:26:18 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 01:53:03 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 01:46:23 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 01:08:28 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 12:59:14 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 12:46:39 PM
The articles are about disagreements. That's called life.

Fortunately, we have these things called courts to sort out such disagreements.

[On two separate occasions my house was appraised, once by a white man and once by a black man. The latter came out with a noticeably lower value than the former. What should I have done? Begin a lawsuit for racial discrimination?]

There were tear downs in the area of the first article I sent with higher appraisals, so while it may have been life, probably not.

If you thought you were discriminated against then yes. Although, I'm guessing you felt the odds weren't good. One reason for that (shock) is that there is no long history of redlining whites out of black neighborhoods.

The beginning of redlining was under the New Deal: Government policy that in effect discriminated against blacks.

Stuck in a hotel room, so sadly too much time on this board. I'm well aware of when and how it started. I'm also well aware of how well received the practice (and similar discrimination related practices in Farm loan programs) were.

Yes. And nowadays personal problems masquerade as political problems.

Pretty well done study attached. Doesn't appear to be just a personal problem.

https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2020/01/racial-discrimination-in-mortgage-market-persistent-over-last-four-decades/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 02:56:42 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 02:26:18 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 01:53:03 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 01:46:23 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 01:08:28 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 12:59:14 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 12:46:39 PM
The articles are about disagreements. That's called life.

Fortunately, we have these things called courts to sort out such disagreements.

[On two separate occasions my house was appraised, once by a white man and once by a black man. The latter came out with a noticeably lower value than the former. What should I have done? Begin a lawsuit for racial discrimination?]

There were tear downs in the area of the first article I sent with higher appraisals, so while it may have been life, probably not.

If you thought you were discriminated against then yes. Although, I'm guessing you felt the odds weren't good. One reason for that (shock) is that there is no long history of redlining whites out of black neighborhoods.

The beginning of redlining was under the New Deal: Government policy that in effect discriminated against blacks.

Stuck in a hotel room, so sadly too much time on this board. I'm well aware of when and how it started. I'm also well aware of how well received the practice (and similar discrimination related practices in Farm loan programs) were.

Yes. And nowadays personal problems masquerade as political problems.

Pretty well done study attached. Doesn't appear to be just a personal problem.

https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2020/01/racial-discrimination-in-mortgage-market-persistent-over-last-four-decades/

Sub-heading of article is: Discrimination in housing market sees decrease during same time period.

Suggests there are differences in financing terms. Nothing about causation.

It is perfectly legal to use all kinds of data about people to determine their creditworthiness, such as income, location of dwelling, and so on. Illegal to use race, gender, and so on.

Outcomes may well be different. That is neither evidence of racism nor discrimination.

It's a state of mind.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 03:35:29 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 02:56:42 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 02:26:18 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 01:53:03 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 01:46:23 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 01:08:28 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 12:59:14 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 12:46:39 PM
The articles are about disagreements. That's called life.

Fortunately, we have these things called courts to sort out such disagreements.

[On two separate occasions my house was appraised, once by a white man and once by a black man. The latter came out with a noticeably lower value than the former. What should I have done? Begin a lawsuit for racial discrimination?]

There were tear downs in the area of the first article I sent with higher appraisals, so while it may have been life, probably not.

If you thought you were discriminated against then yes. Although, I'm guessing you felt the odds weren't good. One reason for that (shock) is that there is no long history of redlining whites out of black neighborhoods.

The beginning of redlining was under the New Deal: Government policy that in effect discriminated against blacks.

Stuck in a hotel room, so sadly too much time on this board. I'm well aware of when and how it started. I'm also well aware of how well received the practice (and similar discrimination related practices in Farm loan programs) were.

Yes. And nowadays personal problems masquerade as political problems.

Pretty well done study attached. Doesn't appear to be just a personal problem.

https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2020/01/racial-discrimination-in-mortgage-market-persistent-over-last-four-decades/

Sub-heading of article is: Discrimination in housing market sees decrease during same time period.

Suggests there are differences in financing terms. Nothing about causation.

It is perfectly legal to use all kinds of data about people to determine their creditworthiness, such as income, location of dwelling, and so on. Illegal to use race, gender, and so on.

Outcomes may well be different. That is neither evidence of racism nor discrimination.

It's a state of mind.

That is why it was a pretty good article?

Also says essentially steady by race over the past 40 years.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 03:43:25 PM
What's going on here is the assumption that differences in outcomes indicate racism or discrimination. They do not.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 04:13:18 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 03:43:25 PM
What's going on here is the assumption that differences in outcomes indicate racism or discrimination. They do not.

If you control for qualifications of applicants in your study what else would it be? Highly statically unlikely bad luck? Over a 40 year period?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on February 03, 2022, 04:14:44 PM
Sorry, marshwiggle.

I misread your point about neo-Nazis.

It's my understanding the German immigrants during the period leading up to wwii were generally people trying to get away from Nazi Germany, not Nazis themselves. So, no. I wouldn't suspect the child or grandchild of a non-nazi to be any more likely than anyone else to be a neo-nazi.

That doesn't really negate what I was saying. I'm actually not sure what it's meant to negate.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 04:28:57 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 04:13:18 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 03:43:25 PM
What's going on here is the assumption that differences in outcomes indicate racism or discrimination. They do not.

If you control for qualifications of applicants in your study what else would it be? Highly statically unlikely bad luck? Over a 40 year period?

What I said at the outset -- minimum wages locking black males youths out of the labor market and incarcerating black youth in prisons called schools.

The bad luck dished out to blacks is government policy. Not for the motive of racism, but to buy votes of others. That's discrimination.

But as I also said, that's pretty much all that's left of discrimination.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 04:39:30 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 04:28:57 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 03, 2022, 04:13:18 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2022, 03:43:25 PM
What's going on here is the assumption that differences in outcomes indicate racism or discrimination. They do not.

If you control for qualifications of applicants in your study what else would it be? Highly statically unlikely bad luck? Over a 40 year period?

What I said at the outset -- minimum wages locking black males youths out of the labor market and incarcerating black youth in prisons called schools.

The bad luck dished out to blacks is government policy. Not for the motive of racism, but to buy votes of others. That's discrimination.

But as I also said, that's pretty much all that's left of discrimination.

Thank you for your efforts at helping me understand your viewpoint. Where I guess we differ is that I think that's still quite a lot left.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 03, 2022, 04:44:09 PM
rest
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 04, 2022, 05:57:58 AM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 03, 2022, 04:14:44 PM

It's my understanding the German immigrants during the period leading up to wwii were generally people trying to get away from Nazi Germany, not Nazis themselves. So, no. I wouldn't suspect the child or grandchild of a non-nazi to be any more likely than anyone else to be a neo-nazi.

Just to clarify:
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 03, 2022, 09:45:37 AM
Many Germans immigrated to North America after WWII. Is it reasonable for people to still worry about whether their descendants are neo-Nazis, anymore than other people?

I specifically referred to Germans who immigrated after WWII, not before. This includes people who actually fought in the German armed forces.

Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 03, 2022, 01:57:30 PM
marshwiggle, I agree with you in principle, but I think you are drawing things a little too cleanly.

Mind you, I am talking about whether prejudice is understandable, not excusable.

To start with, the experiences of one generation influence the next. If you lost your farm or your home (which may represent years or even generations of hard work and savings) because of the internment and had to start from scratch after being released, that is going to affect your kids.

In Nanjing, there is a museum to commemorate the atrocities committed by the Japanese during WWII. Is a Chinese immigrant to North America, (or their child or grandchild), justified in being distrustful of people of Japanese descent in North America?

This is a hole with no bottom.

Quote

If your father's brother being murdered by a lynch mob is part of your family history, and you can see how the pain of that loss still affects him, that will have an impact.

It just seems a bit too glib to say, well those horrible things didn't happen to you specifically, so why do you care?

It's not about whether you "care", it's about the question of "What is the best way forward?"

Quote

I'm not always clear why people often point out that people are discriminated against for all kinds of things in discussions about racism. It sometimes comes across as someone saying "I think it's really important to support research that aims to reduce deaths from heart disease" and getting the response "Well, you know people die from all kinds of things, not just heart disease." As if the first person somehow implied that research into heart disease and only heart disease was important.

Oppression Olympics don't help matters, but neither does trying to deny or minimize other people's experiences so you can dismiss it as too trivial to be worth caring about.

Again, it's not about minimizing peoples' experiences; it's about treating people as human beings rather than as members of identity groups.

If a black police officer kneels on a suspect's neck until the person dies, is that not a big deal?
Is it less of a big deal than if a white person uses a racial slur against a black person?
Is it less of a big deal if a black person uses a racial slur against an Asian person than if a white person uses a racial slur against a black person?

OR

Are all of these things just simply bad, and everyone should be criticized for doing them?

For thousands of years, across lots of cultures, some variation of the Golden Rule has existed. "Treat others as you would want to be treated." That ideal has  been widely recognized, no matter how badly humans have been at trying to live up to it.

Laws should  created by looking at the ideal, rather than by trying to apportion blame according to perceptions of how many members of Group A were "oppressors" and how many of Group B were "victims", and what geographical and historical limits to consider, etc.




Quote

And I wasn't trying  to make a point like oh these groups had it so much worse than those groups.

My point was if you're going to say 'you never went through what they went through, so who are you to judge' then wagging your finger at other people whose experiences you yourself didn't go through seems like an inconsistency.

The "lived experience" idea is another hole with no bottom. Since no two people are identical, anyone can always claim their lived experience precludes anyone else judging their behaviour. (And it's entirely self-serving to claim one's own "lived experience" is somehow more valid, instructive, etc. than someone else's.)

The only way out is to appeal to common humanity, as the Golden Rule does, which is based on the idea that mistreatment of one person by another is easy to identify; if you wouldn't want it done to you, don't do it to someone else.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on February 04, 2022, 07:33:30 AM
I think we are saying the same core thing.

I actually was going for 'all of these are simply bad and everyone should be criticized for doing them.'

My point about  the generational stuff  was that there are other explanations (not justifications) to explain why some people may have formed their own prejudices. It was meant to counter the idea that it entirely comes from things that happened too long ago to have affected them.

My point about the lived experiences thing was that 'no, you don't have to have shared exactly the same experiences to criticize someone.'  I was making the point that if someone has criticized other people plenty even without having experienced what those people have experienced they are being inconsistent if they tell other people 'you shouldn't judge because you haven't lived through what they did.' I don't think this should be applied to anyone, and it especially shouldn't be applied selectively.

I've met so many people who do this. They tell people to be more understanding and compassionate when a white person who has suffered or been raised a certain way is acting on their prejudice, but when its a non-white they are quick enough to criticize without any of the same considerations. If its wrong to make special exceptions for non-white people to criticize white people, its wrong in the other direction too.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 04, 2022, 07:58:02 AM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 04, 2022, 07:33:30 AM
I think we are saying the same core thing.


I agree.

Quote
I've met so many people who do this. They tell people to be more understanding and compassionate when a white person who has suffered or been raised a certain way is acting on their prejudice, but when its a non-white they are quick enough to criticize without any of the same considerations. If its wrong to make special exceptions for non-white people to criticize white people, its wrong in the other direction too.

The point I would make here is that it isn't OK to publicly say anything prejudicial about almost any group. However, politicians, journalists, and academics can publicly say horrible things about "privileged" groups, including the universal source-of-all-evil group, straight white males, and be applauded, rather than censured.

The people who most disparage potential offense to other groups routinely and gleefully engage in it in the other direction. (And of course, the most galling is the virtue-signallers like "male feminists" who self-righteously disparage their own group, implying that somehow they themselves are thereby less evil, even though just belonging to that group makes anyone else evil.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on February 04, 2022, 12:29:07 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 04, 2022, 07:58:02 AM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 04, 2022, 07:33:30 AM
I think we are saying the same core thing.


I agree.

Quote
I've met so many people who do this. They tell people to be more understanding and compassionate when a white person who has suffered or been raised a certain way is acting on their prejudice, but when its a non-white they are quick enough to criticize without any of the same considerations. If its wrong to make special exceptions for non-white people to criticize white people, its wrong in the other direction too.

The point I would make here is that it isn't OK to publicly say anything prejudicial about almost any group. However, politicians, journalists, and academics can publicly say horrible things about "privileged" groups, including the universal source-of-all-evil group, straight white males, and be applauded, rather than censured.

The people who most disparage potential offense to other groups routinely and gleefully engage in it in the other direction. (And of course, the most galling is the virtue-signallers like "male feminists" who self-righteously disparage their own group, implying that somehow they themselves are thereby less evil, even though just belonging to that group makes anyone else evil.)

I agree there is an imbalance and that it well deserves criticism. I think the best argument against it is of the sort you describe: criticizing the whole principle of judging and condemning an entire demographic of people based on race or sex or sexuality whether the target is a 'privileged' class or not.

Though I don't think this argument is well-served by many of the common talking points. This argument does not depend on the premise that there is no more injustice and everyone who says there is must be 'manufacturing' it. This argument stands even if we can acknowledge that things can still be better.

This is where dismissing or minimizing other people's experiences can be relevant. If you are arguing that it is unfair to condemn all white people as evil based on things that happened before they were born, that's one thing. If you are arguing that people are too hung up on the slavery thing because a lot of slaves were well-treated and hey, some of them got to work inside the house, that's something else entirely.

When it comes to contemporary anger against historical injustices, I agree with the goal of acknowledging the past but focusing on moving forward. I disagree that the blame for failure to do this rests entirely on minorities. A specific act may lie in the past, but if the attitudes and prejudices which motivated those acts are still present, there's a reason to keep talking about it.

The US government didn't officially acknowledge the Japanese-American internment as unjust until 1988, and that required years of prodding from campaign groups for the government to investigate the matter. Decades after that, I still met people who would grumble about it, saying the internment was entirely justified. There were politicians post-9/11 talking about a registry or even internment for Muslim Americans as a matter of national security. They referred to the internment camps of wwii as a precedent in favor of the plan.

If instead of saying "Those past events were wrong. They shouldn't have happened and we should not let them happen again." someone (or many someones) are saying "Those past events were completely justified. I wish things could be the way they were back then." then they are contributing to keeping the relevance of historical grievances alive.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 04, 2022, 01:22:37 PM
Someone on Reddit just posted this:

Quote
70 bills in 27 states and that is not counting the ones that are already laws.

Many of these have a private right of action , with bounties (this means there is an end run around constitutionality with the legislature encouraging financial lynch mobs)

The penalty can be per student.

Your school can lose funding and accreditation in attempt to regulate private schools and higher ed.

Listen to this https://www.npr.org/2022/02/03/1077878538/legislation-restricts-what-teachers-can-discuss

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/states-weigh-raft-proposed-laws-limit-race-sexuality-lessons-schools-n1288108

This not not someone getting fired after posting a video .

This is some straight up fascist ****

"Across the U.S., educators are being censored for broaching controversial topics. Since January 2021, researcher Jeffrey Sachs says, 35 states have introduced 137 bills limiting what schools can teach with regard to race, American history, politics, sexual orientation and gender identity.

Sachs has been tracking this legislation for PEN America, a writers organization dedicated to free speech. He says the recent flurry of legislation has created a "minefield" for educators trying to figure out how to teach topics such as slavery, Jim Crow laws or the Holocaust. One proposed law in South Carolina, for instance, prohibits teachers from discussing any topic that creates "discomfort, guilt or anguish" on the basis of political belief.
"
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 04, 2022, 01:44:01 PM
Book Ban in Texas (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/1/27/2077191/-The-Book-Burning-Commences-in-Texas)

Harry Potter Book Burning in Tennessee and CRT military (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/book-burning-tennessee-harry-potter-b2007904.html)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 04, 2022, 02:49:14 PM
Is there a way to stop idiotic things like sorting students into groups by skin color and the having different activities for each without doing it through legislation? I ask because, democrats, here is your wake up call: It is going to be stopped, because the American people do not want it. Perhaps after this November and the thorough shellacking coming your way the wheels will start turing in some of those thick skulls. However, you have set something in motion that has a life its own. So...the time is now. Any bright ideas? Ball's in your court.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 14, 2022, 11:58:31 AM
I know we've discussed the UIC nightmare for Prof. Kilborn but this piece seems to me to be incredibly well done, with links to every important document/reference in the case: https://ericzorn.substack.com/p/the-ongoing-saga-at-uic-over-a-certain
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on February 14, 2022, 12:09:23 PM
I was reading Fox in Socks to the hatchling the other day, but the gazpacho knocked at the door and took it away.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 15, 2022, 06:40:33 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 14, 2022, 11:58:31 AM
I know we've discussed the UIC nightmare for Prof. Kilborn but this piece seems to me to be incredibly well done, with links to every important document/reference in the case: https://ericzorn.substack.com/p/the-ongoing-saga-at-uic-over-a-certain

I have been reading this during breaks from grading, and it is an amazing and outrageous story.

I think there have simply been too many big news stories lately and this must have been buried.  Then again, maybe we are just getting numb to these kind of scenarios (note: most posters have fled this thread).

My father was an ex-Army paratrooper turned attorney.  He had a lot to sat about attorneys.  How are these kids in Kilborn's class going to navigate the brutal legal jungle?

I am disappointed in the Netflix sitcom "The Chair."  It would be great to see a good academic satire,  but The Chair is, I dunno, cliched and predictable in some ways and actually kind of boring.  But the one narrative thread I kind of liked concerned the professor whose in-class comments about fascism are turned into a meme and taken out of context.  The students are insistent on being outraged no matter how hard the professor works to assuage them.  Seems accurate.

Well, colleges have allowed the hysteria to fester.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 16, 2022, 05:23:16 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 15, 2022, 06:40:33 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 14, 2022, 11:58:31 AM
I know we've discussed the UIC nightmare for Prof. Kilborn but this piece seems to me to be incredibly well done, with links to every important document/reference in the case: https://ericzorn.substack.com/p/the-ongoing-saga-at-uic-over-a-certain

I have been reading this during breaks from grading, and it is an amazing and outrageous story.

I think there have simply been too many big news stories lately and this must have been buried.  Then again, maybe we are just getting numb to these kind of scenarios (note: most posters have fled this thread).

My father was an ex-Army paratrooper turned attorney.  He had a lot to sat about attorneys.  How are these kids in Kilborn's class going to navigate the brutal legal jungle?

I am disappointed in the Netflix sitcom "The Chair."  It would be great to see a good academic satire,  but The Chair is, I dunno, cliched and predictable in some ways and actually kind of boring.  But the one narrative thread I kind of liked concerned the professor whose in-class comments about fascism are turned into a meme and taken out of context.  The students are insistent on being outraged no matter how hard the professor works to assuage them.  Seems accurate.

Well, colleges have allowed the hysteria to fester.

Allowed? Encouraged is probably more to the point. As more faculty define themselves as "activists", outrage is increasingly fashionable and expected.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 16, 2022, 07:55:48 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 16, 2022, 05:23:16 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 15, 2022, 06:40:33 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 14, 2022, 11:58:31 AM
I know we've discussed the UIC nightmare for Prof. Kilborn but this piece seems to me to be incredibly well done, with links to every important document/reference in the case: https://ericzorn.substack.com/p/the-ongoing-saga-at-uic-over-a-certain

I have been reading this during breaks from grading, and it is an amazing and outrageous story.

I think there have simply been too many big news stories lately and this must have been buried.  Then again, maybe we are just getting numb to these kind of scenarios (note: most posters have fled this thread).

My father was an ex-Army paratrooper turned attorney.  He had a lot to sat about attorneys.  How are these kids in Kilborn's class going to navigate the brutal legal jungle?

I am disappointed in the Netflix sitcom "The Chair."  It would be great to see a good academic satire,  but The Chair is, I dunno, cliched and predictable in some ways and actually kind of boring.  But the one narrative thread I kind of liked concerned the professor whose in-class comments about fascism are turned into a meme and taken out of context.  The students are insistent on being outraged no matter how hard the professor works to assuage them.  Seems accurate.

Well, colleges have allowed the hysteria to fester.

Allowed? Encouraged is probably more to the point. As more faculty define themselves as "activists", outrage is increasingly fashionable and expected.

If one believes that the recent letter from our college president is serious (and it certainly sounds like it is) then working for societal change is now required of each of us. The president now writes letters to the entire faculty jointly with the director of DIE (diversity inclusion equity). What that means specifically I don't know but you already can't get a grant without being, or pretending to be, a Lefty Koolaid guzzler. Perhaps after the November elections the democrats will get over their giddiness at having defeated Trump and there might be some effect. Right now, Black History Month, the admin is on social justice cloud nine. Or maybe a Civil War is coming. Who knows?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 17, 2022, 07:58:34 PM
IHE: Swiss / American law professor cluelessly lets rip a racial slur. (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/02/17/professor%E2%80%99s-anti-asian-slur-creates-stir-georgetown-law)

Dunno how bonebrained this guy is.  Video linked. 

But it is a perfect example of viral rage.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on February 17, 2022, 08:31:28 PM
Even if it's not a racial slur, it would be pretty weird and rude to call someone that in French or German or, I assume, Italian...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on February 17, 2022, 09:39:32 PM
It is a weird way to call on a student even if you don't think you are using a racial slur. "You in the second row/blue shirt/with your hand up, I'm sorry, I don't recall your name." How hard is that?

This also seems like a fairly small 'viral' story. 140,000 views is a pretty small splash in the twitter bucket

The 'outrage' also seems relatively tame.

The letter from the student association emphasizes they are not pushing for the prof to be fired or suspended and that they acknowledge and appreciate his apology.

The tone of their objections essentially portrays the prof as someone who had no malicious intention, but should have known better (NOT as some rabid white supremacist who needs to be ridden out of town on a rail).

They do spend a good chunk of the letter explaining why the term is considered a slur and they are urging the university to consider making bias training mandatory instead of optional. So I'm sure there will still be people labeling the students oversensitive snowflakes with victim complexes.

Even so, is there no room to acknowledge degrees of severity when it comes to 'cancel culture?'

Applying the terms 'canceled' or 'outrage' too broadly just dilutes their meanings and makes nuanced discussion more difficult. Similar to the complaints people have for overuse of terms like 'racist' or 'sexist.'
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 17, 2022, 10:06:15 PM
QuoteIt is a weird way to call on a student even if you don't think you are using a racial slur. "You in the second row/blue shirt/with your hand up, I'm sorry, I don't recall your name." How hard is that?

Of course. I would go farther than that. Why make assumptions about someone's race at all? Your race is no one's business but your own, if you choose to 'self-identify' racially. I don't. No one knows your race. You may not even know your own. A friend of mine who always assumed he was English/Irish/Dutch got a DNA test and found out he is also Eastern European and Jewish. For people who need to concern themselves with such urgent matters, Jews are a race, as Whoopi Goldberg has learned. But it's their business, not a topic for general discussion.
Another friend of mine, a former roommate, explained that his mother was 'white' and his father was 'black.' Roommate had dark skin while his biological brother had much lighter skin. Nobody knows your race.
Of course, if we don't have races, we don't have 'white' people who are ruining life for everyone else and need to rewire their brains so they can desist, by sometime yesterday. And this will infuriate the left, because they will be left with no mentionable ideas for how to accomplish anything.
OTOH, a teacher was recently raked over the coals for accidentally calling one 'Asian' student by the name of another. And that's ridiculous. An honest, benign error.
On social media some posters look at your photo and then decree based on your appearance ('white') which common English words are off limits for you.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on February 17, 2022, 10:14:23 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 17, 2022, 10:06:15 PM
QuoteIt is a weird way to call on a student even if you don't think you are using a racial slur. "You in the second row/blue shirt/with your hand up, I'm sorry, I don't recall your name." How hard is that?

Of course. I would go farther than that. Why make assumptions about someone's race at all?
[...]

That's the point I was making. Referencing someone's race to address them was inappropriate even without using a slur. It was also completely unnecessary.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 17, 2022, 10:19:04 PM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 17, 2022, 10:14:23 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 17, 2022, 10:06:15 PM
QuoteIt is a weird way to call on a student even if you don't think you are using a racial slur. "You in the second row/blue shirt/with your hand up, I'm sorry, I don't recall your name." How hard is that?

Of course. I would go farther than that. Why make assumptions about someone's race at all?
[...]

That's the point I was making. Referencing someone's race to address them was inappropriate even without using a slur. It was also completely unnecessary.

Except 'Black' and other 'non-white' people are regularly encouraged by liberals of all shades to identify 'white' people by appearance and converse about any thing relevant to that in the realm of social interaction, what is rude and not rude for the so-identified individuals. And to this group of liberals the list of words, thoughts, behaviors that warrant scrutiny, by the self-appointed group, for 'white' people is growing daily. I believe they refer to this as 'calling out.'
'White' people are the only 'race' whose 'race' is an acceptable subject for general discussion, in their presence.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on February 17, 2022, 10:34:50 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 17, 2022, 10:19:04 PM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 17, 2022, 10:14:23 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 17, 2022, 10:06:15 PM
QuoteIt is a weird way to call on a student even if you don't think you are using a racial slur. "You in the second row/blue shirt/with your hand up, I'm sorry, I don't recall your name." How hard is that?

Of course. I would go farther than that. Why make assumptions about someone's race at all?
[...]

That's the point I was making. Referencing someone's race to address them was inappropriate even without using a slur. It was also completely unnecessary.

Except 'Black' and other 'non-white' people are regularly encouraged by liberals of all shades to identify 'white' people by appearance and converse about any thing relevant to that in the realm of social interaction, what is rude and not rude for the so-identified individuals. And to this group of liberals the list of words, thoughts, behaviors that warrant scrutiny, by the self-appointed group, for 'white' people is growing daily. I believe they refer to this as 'calling out.'
'White' people are the only 'race' whose 'race' is an acceptable subject for general discussion, in their presence.

Which doesn't mean there is never anything to call out.

And recall there was discussion on this thread not too long ago about Whoopi Goldberg being 'called out' for her comments about the Holocaust. You don't have to be white to be called out for ignorant statements.

I'm willing to bet the prof would still have been criticized for calling a student "Mr. Chinaman" even if he hadn't been 'white.'
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 17, 2022, 10:50:15 PM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 17, 2022, 10:34:50 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 17, 2022, 10:19:04 PM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 17, 2022, 10:14:23 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 17, 2022, 10:06:15 PM
QuoteIt is a weird way to call on a student even if you don't think you are using a racial slur. "You in the second row/blue shirt/with your hand up, I'm sorry, I don't recall your name." How hard is that?

Of course. I would go farther than that. Why make assumptions about someone's race at all?
[...]

That's the point I was making. Referencing someone's race to address them was inappropriate even without using a slur. It was also completely unnecessary.

Except 'Black' and other 'non-white' people are regularly encouraged by liberals of all shades to identify 'white' people by appearance and converse about any thing relevant to that in the realm of social interaction, what is rude and not rude for the so-identified individuals. And to this group of liberals the list of words, thoughts, behaviors that warrant scrutiny, by the self-appointed group, for 'white' people is growing daily. I believe they refer to this as 'calling out.'
'White' people are the only 'race' whose 'race' is an acceptable subject for general discussion, in their presence.

Which doesn't mean there is never anything to call out.

And recall there was discussion on this thread not too long ago about Whoopi Goldberg being 'called out' for her comments about the Holocaust. You don't have to be white to be called out for ignorant statements.

I'm willing to bet the prof would still have been criticized for calling a student "Mr. Chinaman" even if he hadn't been 'white.'

But where matters of 'race' are concerned, one group and that group alone, "white," is considered by the liberal establishment to be most often predisposed to racial aggression, hatred and desire to oppress any and all others. The left uses that supposition and the reluctance of people to stand up to the lie, to advance its self concept of superiority and its political agenda. Which is...racist.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on February 17, 2022, 11:49:29 PM
This is why these threads get frustrating.

The details of the individual stories factor into the discussion so little.

Sometimes a person is slandered and maligned, and suffers for a wrong they never committed.

Sometimes a person actually says or does something worth criticizing, but receives a disproportionately vicious level of backlash and punishment.

Sometimes a person says or does something worth criticizing, people criticize them, and that's pretty much it.

Sometimes a person says or does something NOT worth criticizing, people get mad and criticize anyway, and that's pretty much it.

No matter. General comments in the spirit of 'the left is terrible' and 'nobody has it harder than white people.' tend to dominate and eclipse discussion of specifics.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 18, 2022, 04:43:44 AM
There was no statement 'nobody has it harder than white people.' That is the statement you'd relish the opportunity to refute, but you're out of luck. The people who have it the hardest are those who've been told they are perpetual victims, and believe it. Look at the data. Data says something like 88% of black Americans voted for Joe Biden and this group has undergone the sharpest drop in his approval ratings. Conservatives self report significantly higher levels of happiness than liberals.
It's true, whiteness has been demonized by the left, but the strategy is not working. It's making them miserable, it's causing people to leave their party, it's getting school board members ousted and it's causing them to lose elections they thought they had sealed up. Articulate black conservatives from all walks of life are getting up a head of steam.
The left is terrible? Doing terribly might be your concern if you're determined to be one of them. But before you fix your messaging problem, consider this: maybe the message has been getting heard, and that's your problem.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 18, 2022, 08:52:46 AM
Another stab at humor: https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/comics/strips/?name=pearls-before-swine&itid=sf_entertainment-comics
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on February 18, 2022, 09:34:12 AM
Saying I'd relish a chance to refute something, but I'd be out of luck implies the thing I want to refute is true. Which you just said it isn't... So...wouldn't I be in luck?

But my point wasn't even about that; it was about relevance and the discussion-killing effects of hyperbole.

What does Biden's approval rating among black voters have to do with this story?

How are students in this story "demonizing" all white people by 'calling out' one individual for an inappropriate remark he really did make?

It's not my messaging problem because I have never subscribed to messages like 'all white people are racist' or 'only white people deserve to be criticized for racism' or any number of messages justifiably scorned for extremism and overgeneralization.

My message here was that students saying "Calling a student 'Mr. Chinaman' is inappropriate and insensitive." are not necessarily trying to push any additional messages like 'white men = bad'

My point wasn't 'the left is wonderful and white people are never treated unfairly so who cares about them.' My point was pulling out 'the left is terrible and demonizes white people' comments for every single story regardless of the specific situations doesn't help discussions like this go anywhere new or useful.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 18, 2022, 01:04:24 PM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 18, 2022, 09:34:12 AM

My message here was that students saying "Calling a student 'Mr. Chinaman' is inappropriate and insensitive." are not necessarily trying to push any additional messages like 'white men = bad'


Sure, I thought we agreed on that.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 18, 2022, 02:03:54 PM
And another: https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/comics/strips/?name=cornered&itid=sf_entertainment-comics
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 18, 2022, 06:46:54 PM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on February 17, 2022, 11:49:29 PM
This is why these threads get frustrating.

The details of the individual stories factor into the discussion so little.

Sometimes a person is slandered and maligned, and suffers for a wrong they never committed.

Sometimes a person actually says or does something worth criticizing, but receives a disproportionately vicious level of backlash and punishment.

Sometimes a person says or does something worth criticizing, people criticize them, and that's pretty much it.

Sometimes a person says or does something NOT worth criticizing, people get mad and criticize anyway, and that's pretty much it.

No matter. General comments in the spirit of 'the left is terrible' and 'nobody has it harder than white people.' tend to dominate and eclipse discussion of specifics.

I ignore some commentary as pointless.

I think the points made in the commentary I did not ignore were very good.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 23, 2022, 06:45:06 AM
Cancellation nation in North Texas: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/texas-education-maga-trump-book-bans-1310603/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on February 23, 2022, 07:05:00 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 23, 2022, 06:45:06 AM
Cancellation nation in North Texas: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/texas-education-maga-trump-book-bans-1310603/

Interesting piece. I might well use that in one of my classes.

I don't know what radical means in these contexts. Maybe telling the truth to people who believe in the myth of American exceptionalism is radicalizing. Maybe pointing out that they are still benefitting from colonialism and the racism of the past could be radicalizing too. Though mostly people believe what they want to believe.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 23, 2022, 07:13:52 AM
Quote from: downer on February 23, 2022, 07:05:00 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 23, 2022, 06:45:06 AM
Cancellation nation in North Texas: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/texas-education-maga-trump-book-bans-1310603/

Interesting piece. I might well use that in one of my classes.

I don't know what radical means in these contexts. Maybe telling the truth to people who believe in the myth of American exceptionalism is radicalizing. Maybe pointing out that they are still benefitting from colonialism and the racism of the past could be radicalizing too. Though mostly people believe what they want to believe.

If a Native American person has strep throat and it is killed off by a course of penicillin, he's benefitting from colonialism of the past. Can liberal professors stand to teach true history irrespective of which political agenda it might appear to align with, or not align with?

What's radical? Example:

"Try to guess what the Princeton University students are talking about here:

We aim to decolonize our practice of ____, even as ____ remains an imperialist, colonialist, and white supremacist art form. (Answer: ballet)"

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/02/22/confronting_the_snake_oil_of_woke_ideology_147224.html




Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 23, 2022, 07:27:56 AM
But, what do you think of the article I posted, mahaggony? Are you for em or agin em?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 23, 2022, 07:30:15 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 23, 2022, 07:13:52 AM
Quote from: downer on February 23, 2022, 07:05:00 AM
Maybe pointing out that they are still benefitting from colonialism and the racism of the past could be radicalizing too. Though mostly people believe what they want to believe.

If a Native American person has strep throat and it is killed off by a course of penicillin, he's benefiting from colonialism of the past.

This opens a very big can of worms. If you compare the income and/or standard of living of people in the US whose ancestors were brought here as slaves with the income and/or standard of living of the descendants of related people who remained in Africa, then there is a case to be made that the people in this generation have benefited from the slavery of their own ancestors.
 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 23, 2022, 07:09:15 PM
Not sure this would be exactly classified as "cancel culture," but it is kind of funny...

SUNY prof rebuked for race / gender "progressive stacking" (https://nypost.com/2022/02/21/suny-binghamton-professor-rebuked-for-race-gender-policy/).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 23, 2022, 07:46:18 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 23, 2022, 07:30:15 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on February 23, 2022, 07:13:52 AM
Quote from: downer on February 23, 2022, 07:05:00 AM
Maybe pointing out that they are still benefitting from colonialism and the racism of the past could be radicalizing too. Though mostly people believe what they want to believe.

If a Native American person has strep throat and it is killed off by a course of penicillin, he's benefiting from colonialism of the past.

This opens a very big can of worms. If you compare the income and/or standard of living of people in the US whose ancestors were brought here as slaves with the income and/or standard of living of the descendants of related people who remained in Africa, then there is a case to be made that the people in this generation have benefited from the slavery of their own ancestors.


Careful, people. Yes, it is a can of worms.

The slaves taken here who have on average benefited from being enslaved benefit from survivorship bias, many having died on the Atlantic or prematurely here. Descendants from former slaves do also. Hence, restitution would have to take into account that one would have to give one hell of a lot of money to people to voluntarily accept a gamble with such a very high chance of death.

On the other hand, slavery has been the norm in human history. It was completely moral. What is special is that the West freed the surviving slaves! One must subtract the value of freedom to the ex-slaves from any compensation to them.

Figure it out!

[My personal attitude is to invoke the principle of a statute of limitations, but, hey, people just want more and want more votes.]
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ergative on February 24, 2022, 03:22:09 AM
Quote from: dismalist on February 23, 2022, 07:46:18 PM

On the other hand, slavery has been the norm in human history. It was completely moral. What is special is that the West freed the surviving slaves! One must subtract the value of freedom to the ex-slaves from any compensation to them.

No. What? No. Good grief, no. Just because people were shitty in the past doesn't mean we should charge their victims for the cessation of shittiness.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on February 24, 2022, 05:15:27 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 23, 2022, 07:09:15 PM
Not sure this would be exactly classified as "cancel culture," but it is kind of funny...

SUNY prof rebuked for race / gender "progressive stacking" (https://nypost.com/2022/02/21/suny-binghamton-professor-rebuked-for-race-gender-policy/).

I saw this a couple of days ago. Progressive stacking? Profiling your students on the basis of skin color, gender, sexual orientation, and other attributes unrelated to being a student? Prof, what were you thinking?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10535791/Woke-Binghamton-sociology-professor-slammed-saying-gives-priority-non-white-folks.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=1490
Quote
In her class syllabus, she asks white males and those 'privileged by the racial and gender structures of our society' to hold off on questions
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 24, 2022, 06:01:32 AM
She's going to call on quiet people first. LOL. I have found there's a reason some people are always quiet. They aren't doing the reading so they have nothing to add. There's no harm in calling on them though. They should step up to the plate. Engage them; let them see when they need a classmate to come to their rescue. Motivation.
Picture this: a white male decides to be quiet as a mouse in order to get called on more often, which he believes he should, because, being white, he's genetically superior, and being male, he's more mentally balanced than are people who menstruate. And the professor accomodates.

QuoteDubbed "progressive stacking," Candela's policy aimed to "give priority to non-white folks, to women, and to shy and quiet people who rarely raise their hands," the syllabus read.

She's my argument against tenure. Yes, 'liberal' indoctrination.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 24, 2022, 06:03:47 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 23, 2022, 07:09:15 PM
Not sure this would be exactly classified as "cancel culture," but it is kind of funny...

SUNY prof rebuked for race / gender "progressive stacking" (https://nypost.com/2022/02/21/suny-binghamton-professor-rebuked-for-race-gender-policy/).

I'm kind of curious abut the way in which you think it's "funny". And would it be just as "funny" if the stacking were in the reverse order? ("Regressive stacking?")
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: waterboy on February 24, 2022, 06:56:28 AM
Some of us are quiet because we prefer to hear what other's have to think and say before we offer a contribution. Not that my contributions were always particularly insightful, but this did often prevent me from saying something relatively dumb.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 24, 2022, 07:00:28 AM
Quote from: waterboy on February 24, 2022, 06:56:28 AM
Some of us are quiet because we prefer to hear what other's have to think and say before we offer a contribution. Not that my contributions were always particularly insightful, but this did often prevent me from saying something relatively dumb.

Sure, we all see that from time to time, but broadcasting your thought process as to who would you call on first is weird, and more so when your thought process is arbitrary and/or reeking of social justice superciliousness.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 24, 2022, 07:35:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 24, 2022, 06:03:47 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 23, 2022, 07:09:15 PM
Not sure this would be exactly classified as "cancel culture," but it is kind of funny...

SUNY prof rebuked for race / gender "progressive stacking" (https://nypost.com/2022/02/21/suny-binghamton-professor-rebuked-for-race-gender-policy/).

I'm kind of curious abut the way in which you think it's "funny". And would it be just as "funny" if the stacking were in the reverse order? ("Regressive stacking?")

Oh Marshy, you were doing so well----
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 24, 2022, 07:39:39 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 24, 2022, 07:35:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 24, 2022, 06:03:47 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 23, 2022, 07:09:15 PM
Not sure this would be exactly classified as "cancel culture," but it is kind of funny...

SUNY prof rebuked for race / gender "progressive stacking" (https://nypost.com/2022/02/21/suny-binghamton-professor-rebuked-for-race-gender-policy/).

I'm kind of curious abut the way in which you think it's "funny". And would it be just as "funny" if the stacking were in the reverse order? ("Regressive stacking?")

Oh Marshy, you were doing so well----

But seriously, do you think the idea is funny, or is it funny the prof thought it would be a good idea? I'm genuinely curious.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on February 24, 2022, 08:55:26 AM
I thought Wahoo was perhaps referring to the term "progressive stacking" being funny, not the prof's behavior.

It's not a phrase you see as often as say "reverse discrimination."

But that's just a guess.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 24, 2022, 02:43:58 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 24, 2022, 07:39:39 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 24, 2022, 07:35:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 24, 2022, 06:03:47 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 23, 2022, 07:09:15 PM
Not sure this would be exactly classified as "cancel culture," but it is kind of funny...

SUNY prof rebuked for race / gender "progressive stacking" (https://nypost.com/2022/02/21/suny-binghamton-professor-rebuked-for-race-gender-policy/).

I'm kind of curious abut the way in which you think it's "funny". And would it be just as "funny" if the stacking were in the reverse order? ("Regressive stacking?")

Oh Marshy, you were doing so well----

But seriously, do you think the idea is funny, or is it funny the prof thought it would be a good idea? I'm genuinely curious.

"Ironic" would have been a better choice of words.

I was thinking it was "funny" not in the "ha-ha" sense but in the sense of "look at the reverse of expectations"----the progressive reformist shut down by the rules meant to foster inclusion.

And more power to SUNY.  The prof was wrong.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on February 25, 2022, 05:01:53 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 24, 2022, 02:43:58 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 24, 2022, 07:39:39 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 24, 2022, 07:35:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 24, 2022, 06:03:47 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 23, 2022, 07:09:15 PM
Not sure this would be exactly classified as "cancel culture," but it is kind of funny...

SUNY prof rebuked for race / gender "progressive stacking" (https://nypost.com/2022/02/21/suny-binghamton-professor-rebuked-for-race-gender-policy/).

I'm kind of curious abut the way in which you think it's "funny". And would it be just as "funny" if the stacking were in the reverse order? ("Regressive stacking?")

Oh Marshy, you were doing so well----

But seriously, do you think the idea is funny, or is it funny the prof thought it would be a good idea? I'm genuinely curious.

"Ironic" would have been a better choice of words.

I was thinking it was "funny" not in the "ha-ha" sense but in the sense of "look at the reverse of expectations"----the progressive reformist shut down by the rules meant to foster inclusion.

And more power to SUNY.  The prof was wrong.

Must be something in the water in our state because we have other clueless progressive reformists in our state and city. A suggestion by one of our politicians to rename a post office has been met with outrage because the post office was named for Jeanne Manford
Quote
the first parent to march with their child in an LGBTQ parade a half century ago. She went on to found PFLAG, the country's first LGBTQ group designed to build solidarity between parents and LGBTQ children, with support from her husband, Jules.

The progressive reformist's response? It's "typical for elected representatives to consider new names for local post offices".
Quote
A name change would "erase our history," fumed former City Councilman Daniel Dromm (D-Queens), who worked with AOC's predecessor Joseph Crowley to name the post office for the Manfords five years ago.

"Is it that she doesn't know our history? Did they not check to see who the post office is named after right now? Does she not know who Jeanne Manford was?" Dromm said to the Daily News on Sunday.

An Ocasio-Cortez spokeswoman said it's typical for members of Congress to consider new names for local post offices and suggestions are being sought for a Corona, Queens, post office as well.

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/new-york-elections-government/ny-aoc-queens-post-office-lgbt-20220221-j7grkp4olzc4vfw7hyiji7ksxm-story.html

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 25, 2022, 06:12:28 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 24, 2022, 02:43:58 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 24, 2022, 07:39:39 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 24, 2022, 07:35:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 24, 2022, 06:03:47 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 23, 2022, 07:09:15 PM
Not sure this would be exactly classified as "cancel culture," but it is kind of funny...

SUNY prof rebuked for race / gender "progressive stacking" (https://nypost.com/2022/02/21/suny-binghamton-professor-rebuked-for-race-gender-policy/).

I'm kind of curious abut the way in which you think it's "funny". And would it be just as "funny" if the stacking were in the reverse order? ("Regressive stacking?")

Oh Marshy, you were doing so well----

But seriously, do you think the idea is funny, or is it funny the prof thought it would be a good idea? I'm genuinely curious.

"Ironic" would have been a better choice of words.

I was thinking it was "funny" not in the "ha-ha" sense but in the sense of "look at the reverse of expectations"----the progressive reformist shut down by the rules meant to foster inclusion.

And more power to SUNY.  The prof was wrong.

This illustrates what John McWhorter means about wishing ideas about discrimination could could go back to about 1992. The people who created those "rules meant to foster inclusion" had the audacity to believe that people should not be judged by external characteristics. Modern progressives would not create laws like that, since they believe it's essential to judge people by external characteristics. At least one of this prof's "academic ancestors", i.e. her supervisor or her supervisor's supervisor, no doubt believed that students shouldn't be discriminated against by their outward characteristics, but alas, they were not heeded.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on February 25, 2022, 08:46:02 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 25, 2022, 06:12:28 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 24, 2022, 02:43:58 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 24, 2022, 07:39:39 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 24, 2022, 07:35:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 24, 2022, 06:03:47 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 23, 2022, 07:09:15 PM
Not sure this would be exactly classified as "cancel culture," but it is kind of funny...

SUNY prof rebuked for race / gender "progressive stacking" (https://nypost.com/2022/02/21/suny-binghamton-professor-rebuked-for-race-gender-policy/).

I'm kind of curious abut the way in which you think it's "funny". And would it be just as "funny" if the stacking were in the reverse order? ("Regressive stacking?")

Oh Marshy, you were doing so well----

But seriously, do you think the idea is funny, or is it funny the prof thought it would be a good idea? I'm genuinely curious.

"Ironic" would have been a better choice of words.

I was thinking it was "funny" not in the "ha-ha" sense but in the sense of "look at the reverse of expectations"----the progressive reformist shut down by the rules meant to foster inclusion.

And more power to SUNY.  The prof was wrong.

This illustrates what John McWhorter means about wishing ideas about discrimination could could go back to about 1992. The people who created those "rules meant to foster inclusion" had the audacity to believe that people should not be judged by external characteristics. Modern progressives would not create laws like that, since they believe it's essential to judge people by external characteristics. At least one of this prof's "academic ancestors", i.e. her supervisor or her supervisor's supervisor, no doubt believed that students shouldn't be discriminated against by their outward characteristics, but alas, they were not heeded.

When society's supply of racism has dwindled, the activist needs to get creative to find some more.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 25, 2022, 04:09:11 PM
Dunno what'yer sayin' thar, Marshy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 26, 2022, 05:08:54 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 25, 2022, 04:09:11 PM
Dunno what'yer sayin' thar, Marshy.

What I'm saying is the laws that caught this prof only existed because a previous generation didn't have the same identity-obsessed view that she and most progressives have today.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 11, 2022, 08:58:29 AM
Sand Diego State Removes Professor Over Racial Slurs (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/03/11/san-diego-state-removes-professor-classes-over-slurs)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on March 11, 2022, 09:25:48 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 11, 2022, 08:58:29 AM
Sand Diego State Removes Professor Over Racial Slurs (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/03/11/san-diego-state-removes-professor-classes-over-slurs)

It is of course ironic that Corlett has devoted much of his career to arguing for racial justice. His website https://corlett.sdsu.edu/Corlett/Welcome.html starts off with "Black and American Indian lives certainly matter."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 11, 2022, 10:17:20 AM
Quote
A statement from the student group says that Corlett has used a specific anti-Black slur "over 60 times" and criticizes him for using the word "rape" for sexual violence.

This one baffles me. What's wrong with using the word "rape" for sexual violence????

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 11, 2022, 12:43:55 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 11, 2022, 10:17:20 AM
Quote
A statement from the student group says that Corlett has used a specific anti-Black slur "over 60 times" and criticizes him for using the word "rape" for sexual violence.

This one baffles me. What's wrong with using the word "rape" for sexual violence????

That new rule happened while you were sleeping. Never go to bed and you'll probably be all right.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on March 11, 2022, 01:06:26 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 11, 2022, 08:58:29 AM
Sand Diego State Removes Professor Over Racial Slurs (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/03/11/san-diego-state-removes-professor-classes-over-slurs)

Yes, as-described that seems rather overzealous. (Note, however, that the article has conflated use and mention of the slurs.)

I suspect, however, that the details we have don't quite accurately describe the case. Corlett just posted an open letter (https://leiterreports.typepad.com/files/corlett-open-letter.pdf) in response, and I have to say that what he says there raises more eyebrows and questions on my end. It's a poorly structured and argued letter, but I guess he's upset, but the way in which he describes what's necessary in his classes sounds off to me. He's leaning hard on the use/mention distinction, but unless he's counting a word's presence on a slide as a mention (and I'm not sure he should), he seems to be mentioning some slurs an awful lot.

Quote from: marshwiggle on March 11, 2022, 10:17:20 AM
Quote
A statement from the student group says that Corlett has used a specific anti-Black slur "over 60 times" and criticizes him for using the word "rape" for sexual violence.

This one baffles me. What's wrong with using the word "rape" for sexual violence????

If you were asking me, I'd say that rape is a specific kind of sexual violence, but doesn't exhaust the concept; it's sufficient for sexual violence, but not necessary. Plenty of sexual violence isn't rape.

But I have to assume that wasn't the nature of the complaint. So, for once, I'm as baffled as you. For me, that's another indicator that there's more to this story than what's in the public realm so far.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Juvenal on March 11, 2022, 02:20:38 PM
All this, the frothing indignation and high-horse condemnation, make me wonder.  I dunno.  It wearies me.  But, then, I am stuffed with white privilege, etc., so...  I used to think I was m.o.l. liberal, but some of these people (not all), make me wonder how I could stay in the same room with them for long.  Unless the pastries were exceptional.  There you have me.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 11, 2022, 03:07:13 PM
Wonder what would happen if Pulp Fiction were released today instead of in 1994.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 11, 2022, 03:52:32 PM
Interesting that while in one arena (Virginia) the social justice elite are saying explicitly that parents should not be involved in the decisions about what the students should (or shouldn't) be taught, and sticking to their guns against pushback, in other places the students themselves, who are younger and less educated than the parents, are saying what they should or should not be taught, and making the social justice elite listen to them instead of rebuff them. Of course where public K-12 is concerned you've already got the taxpayer's money, but the college students can choose another college.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2022, 10:02:54 AM
IHE: No Laughing Matter - Free Speech Lawsuit (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/03/15/judge-oks-professors-free-speech-case-against-u-north-texas)

I have IHE and CHE on my email feeds.  These types of stories are almost weekly now.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 15, 2022, 10:38:01 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2022, 10:02:54 AM
IHE: No Laughing Matter - Free Speech Lawsuit (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/03/15/judge-oks-professors-free-speech-case-against-u-north-texas)

I have IHE and CHE on my email feeds.  These types of stories are almost weekly now.

Quote
When Hiers asked Schmidt what had happened, Schmidt via said via email, "Everyone makes mistakes, and I'm all for forgiveness if actions are followed by honest regret. But you very much defended your actions, and stated clearly that you are not interested in any kind of diversity training."

Probably during the cultural revolution in China some people objected to "re-training" as well.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on March 16, 2022, 02:16:38 PM
It's Not Free Speech
Race, Democracy, and the Future of Academic Freedom
Michael Bérubé And Jennifer Ruth
https://www.press.jhu.edu/books/title/12770/its-not-free-speech

I've liked some of Bérubé's past work, so I'd give this a read. I am hoping for a 5 page synopsis though.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 16, 2022, 02:48:13 PM
What's this decline of tenure that they refer to? There are more tenured professors than ever before.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 17, 2022, 09:01:51 AM
IHE: University Allegedly Fired Prof for Inviting Gay Speaker (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/03/16/university-allegedly-fired-prof-inviting-gay-speaker)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 17, 2022, 09:11:02 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 17, 2022, 09:01:51 AM
IHE: University Allegedly Fired Prof for Inviting Gay Speaker (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/03/16/university-allegedly-fired-prof-inviting-gay-speaker)

The most egregious thing about this seems to be this:
Quote
Kevin Jacobs, O'Keefe's lawyer, reportedly said that Oklahoma Christian accused his client of gross misconduct, contrary to the mission and values of the university. Jacobs added, "Letting students expect a world where you may be different is the message Mr. O'Keefe wanted his students to hear. That's the message this speaker delivered, not an advocacy of gay rights. Unfortunately, that's not permitted at Oklahoma Christian University today. It cost Mr. O'Keefe his job."

Getting fired for admitting that there are different viewpoints, even without having to endorse them, is kind of the worst of cancel culture.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on March 20, 2022, 08:28:50 AM
And now, a petition to cancel the Emmett Till opera, because "it approaches the murder of a Black teenager through the lens of a fictional white woman".
https://playbill.com/article/more-than-8-000-sign-change-org-petition-to-cancel-planned-production-of-emmett-till-opera-its-authors-respond

https://www.nydailynews.com/snyde/ny-thousands-sign-online-petition-to-cancel-emmett-till-opera-john-jay-college-20220319-n4w6klziq5he5m2jg3fvmhg3zm-story.html
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 20, 2022, 09:28:47 AM
We want to fight racism and injustice.

We just don't know what to do anymore.

So we do things like this.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 20, 2022, 09:31:46 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on March 20, 2022, 08:28:50 AM
And now, a petition to cancel the Emmett Till opera, because "it approaches the murder of a Black teenager through the lens of a fictional white woman".
https://playbill.com/article/more-than-8-000-sign-change-org-petition-to-cancel-planned-production-of-emmett-till-opera-its-authors-respond

From the petition:
Quote
"If we are going to tell the story of Emmett Till, it should only be from a Black perspective, a Black writer, and [with] permission and approval from Till's family."


So I guess unless and until such an option exists, the story shouldn't be told.....

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 20, 2022, 10:24:09 AM
Part of me is confused. to marshwiggle, I guess the student doesn't know that the story has already been told very powerfully in several different media, Eyes on the Prize being one.

Another part of me thinks if there is an opera, this is a pretty good lead to have: https://operacarolina.org/cast-member/robert-mack/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 20, 2022, 10:39:10 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 20, 2022, 10:24:09 AM
Part of me is confused. to marshwiggle, I guess the student doesn't know that the story has already been told very powerfully in several different media, Eyes on the Prize being one.

Maybe it's best if the student doesn't know that. Who knows which other versions might, on closer scrutiny, fail the purity test for one reason or another.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 06:16:23 AM
U of Montana steps away form post...caught on door-cam using racial slurs (http://www.montanakaimin.com/news/um-prof-steps-away-from-spring-classes-amid-outcry-over-racist-messages/article_fd5e0294-a60a-11ec-ba68-6f1bedebb58a.html)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 06:39:14 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 06:16:23 AM
U of Montana steps away form post...caught on door-cam using racial slurs (http://www.montanakaimin.com/news/um-prof-steps-away-from-spring-classes-amid-outcry-over-racist-messages/article_fd5e0294-a60a-11ec-ba68-6f1bedebb58a.html)

From the article:
Quote
Clayton Looney, a Management Information Systems (MIS) professor in the College of Business, came under fire this semester after racist remarks recorded on a door cam video and text screenshots circulated online. The video, from August 2020, shows Looney calling his daughter the n-word. The texts capture him using racist language in messages to his now ex-wife.

I would guess the door with the door cam would belong to his ex-wife. If so, then all of this is related to personal interactions with family members. (And without firsthand knowledge of the situation, how family members communicate with each other can be very "idiosyncratic", to say the least.)

Not even remotely work-related.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on March 21, 2022, 07:02:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 06:39:14 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 06:16:23 AM
U of Montana steps away form post...caught on door-cam using racial slurs (http://www.montanakaimin.com/news/um-prof-steps-away-from-spring-classes-amid-outcry-over-racist-messages/article_fd5e0294-a60a-11ec-ba68-6f1bedebb58a.html)

From the article:
Quote
Clayton Looney, a Management Information Systems (MIS) professor in the College of Business, came under fire this semester after racist remarks recorded on a door cam video and text screenshots circulated online. The video, from August 2020, shows Looney calling his daughter the n-word. The texts capture him using racist language in messages to his now ex-wife.

I would guess the door with the door cam would belong to his ex-wife. If so, then all of this is related to personal interactions with family members. (And without firsthand knowledge of the situation, how family members communicate with each other can be very "idiosyncratic", to say the least.)

Not even remotely work-related.

He called his wife and daughter a racist slur?

Yikes.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 21, 2022, 07:22:38 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on March 21, 2022, 07:02:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 06:39:14 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 06:16:23 AM
U of Montana steps away form post...caught on door-cam using racial slurs (http://www.montanakaimin.com/news/um-prof-steps-away-from-spring-classes-amid-outcry-over-racist-messages/article_fd5e0294-a60a-11ec-ba68-6f1bedebb58a.html)

From the article:
Quote
Clayton Looney, a Management Information Systems (MIS) professor in the College of Business, came under fire this semester after racist remarks recorded on a door cam video and text screenshots circulated online. The video, from August 2020, shows Looney calling his daughter the n-word. The texts capture him using racist language in messages to his now ex-wife.

I would guess the door with the door cam would belong to his ex-wife. If so, then all of this is related to personal interactions with family members. (And without firsthand knowledge of the situation, how family members communicate with each other can be very "idiosyncratic", to say the least.)

Not even remotely work-related.

He called his wife and daughter a racist slur?

Yikes.

That's terrible. It was probably in the middle of an ugly argument. He yelled something like 'you Goddamned racist slur!'

QuoteThe video, from August 2020, shows Looney calling his daughter the n-word.

That's ridiculous. How can a person be a word?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 07:23:26 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on March 21, 2022, 07:02:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 06:39:14 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 06:16:23 AM
U of Montana steps away form post...caught on door-cam using racial slurs (http://www.montanakaimin.com/news/um-prof-steps-away-from-spring-classes-amid-outcry-over-racist-messages/article_fd5e0294-a60a-11ec-ba68-6f1bedebb58a.html)

From the article:
Quote
Clayton Looney, a Management Information Systems (MIS) professor in the College of Business, came under fire this semester after racist remarks recorded on a door cam video and text screenshots circulated online. The video, from August 2020, shows Looney calling his daughter the n-word. The texts capture him using racist language in messages to his now ex-wife.

I would guess the door with the door cam would belong to his ex-wife. If so, then all of this is related to personal interactions with family members. (And without firsthand knowledge of the situation, how family members communicate with each other can be very "idiosyncratic", to say the least.)

Not even remotely work-related.

He called his wife and daughter a racist slur?

Yikes.

This is where context really matters. Within families sometimes people have all kinds of nicknames for each other which would sound offensive to people outside, but which among the family are terms of endearment (often related to some sort of historical in-joke).

(It's also not uncommon for close friends to use similarly "odd" ways of communicating with each other; it shouldn't be judged by outsiders who aren't familiar with their normal communication patterns.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 21, 2022, 09:14:07 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 07:23:26 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on March 21, 2022, 07:02:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 06:39:14 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 06:16:23 AM
U of Montana steps away form post...caught on door-cam using racial slurs (http://www.montanakaimin.com/news/um-prof-steps-away-from-spring-classes-amid-outcry-over-racist-messages/article_fd5e0294-a60a-11ec-ba68-6f1bedebb58a.html)

From the article:
Quote
Clayton Looney, a Management Information Systems (MIS) professor in the College of Business, came under fire this semester after racist remarks recorded on a door cam video and text screenshots circulated online. The video, from August 2020, shows Looney calling his daughter the n-word. The texts capture him using racist language in messages to his now ex-wife.

I would guess the door with the door cam would belong to his ex-wife. If so, then all of this is related to personal interactions with family members. (And without firsthand knowledge of the situation, how family members communicate with each other can be very "idiosyncratic", to say the least.)

Not even remotely work-related.

He called his wife and daughter a racist slur?

Yikes.

This is where context really matters. Within families sometimes people have all kinds of nicknames for each other which would sound offensive to people outside, but which among the family are terms of endearment (often related to some sort of historical in-joke).

(It's also not uncommon for close friends to use similarly "odd" ways of communicating with each other; it shouldn't be judged by outsiders who aren't familiar with their normal communication patterns.)

Here is some context from an October article. Just read the second half for the flavor.

https://dailymontanan.com/2021/10/29/um-professor-discrimination-allegation-deemed-non-workplace-issue/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 09:31:28 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 21, 2022, 09:14:07 AM

Here is some context from an October article. Just read the second half for the flavor.

https://dailymontanan.com/2021/10/29/um-professor-discrimination-allegation-deemed-non-workplace-issue/

From the article:
Quote
This week, Looney said he was cleared after a review last semester by the UM Office of Equal Opportunity and Title IX, which handles discrimination complaints on campus. He also said the only two people who ever complained had never met him.

"In 15 years of service, no other student complaints have been filed against me"

Former UM student Ajaysia Hill said she sent screenshots of the messages she saw on Facebook last semester to UM President Seth Bodnar, who turned them over to the Title IX Office.

Hill, who has not taken classes with Looney, said she was not informed of the outcome of any investigation. However, she said she was concerned that Looney remained on faculty given UM's stated support for inclusion, and she said she does not believe diversity training can scrub the racism in the messages.

Translation: "I've never met this person, or had any contact, but he's clearly evil."

Some people really need hobbies.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 10:42:33 AM
From the article:

Quote
In an email, Looney said the text messages in question were between him and his ex-wife, who is an African-American woman, and she posted them on Facebook when she was upset during a child custody dispute. He said the texts were not intended to be public and have been taken out of context.

Way to hand your ex an atom bomb during a war, buddy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 11:05:07 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 10:42:33 AM
From the article:

Quote
In an email, Looney said the text messages in question were between him and his ex-wife, who is an African-American woman, and she posted them on Facebook when she was upset during a child custody dispute. He said the texts were not intended to be public and have been taken out of context.

Way to hand your ex an atom bomb during a war, buddy.

But do you think they should be used to fire him from his employment?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 12:09:46 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 11:05:07 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 10:42:33 AM
From the article:

Quote
In an email, Looney said the text messages in question were between him and his ex-wife, who is an African-American woman, and she posted them on Facebook when she was upset during a child custody dispute. He said the texts were not intended to be public and have been taken out of context.

Way to hand your ex an atom bomb during a war, buddy.

But do you think they should be used to fire him from his employment?

I have been stating from the get-go that it is very disturbing to me when corporate entities, including state institutions, can dictate what we say off the clock. 

In this case, however, I believe U of M issued a statement that these were events off-campus and therefore there were no Title IX or campus issues so no action was to be taken----and good for them!  Looney temporarily stepped down on his own because of student protest. 

Students claimed they felt "threatened" and challenged Looney's ability to grade fairly, even though he has a good record as an academic and was, weirdly enough, married to an African-American woman who posted his racial slurs on Facebook.

Free speech has consequences.  And for the record, I think Looney was well named for being a looney, moronic, racist, tone-deaf dumbass...but should the students have the ability to hound him from his job?...I dunno...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 12:51:16 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 12:09:46 PM


In this case, however, I believe U of M issued a statement that these were events off-campus and therefore there were no Title IX or campus issues so no action was to be taken----and good for them! 

That's what I thought you'd say; I just wanted to confirm it.

Quote

Students claimed they felt "threatened" and challenged Looney's ability to grade fairly, even though he has a good record as an academic and was, weirdly enough, married to an African-American woman who posted his racial slurs on Facebook.

This is why I keep talking about context. I have NO IDEA whether, in their relationship, BEFORE things went south, if they used those kinds of terms regularly. (As I've repeated, people often use what would normally be considered insults as terms of endearment for special people; this may or may not apply in this case.)

ETA: Yes, sometimes those terms will not be appreciated after a relationship goes bad, but so will all kinds of communication, and it still has a very different meaning (ie. in reference to their relationship) than it would used in another context.


Quote
Free speech has consequences.  And for the record, I think Looney was well named for being a looney, moronic, racist, tone-deaf dumbass...but should the students have the ability to hound him from his job?...I dunno...

The meaning of the term "racist" is pretty murky in this case given that

Tone-deaf? He only used the terms he did in private conversations with family, so had it not been for someone who had never met him digging around in his *Facebook posts, this would never have been an issue.


*I don't use Facebook or Twitter. Yes, people should know better than to ever put anything in any sort of online posting, email, etc. that could be damaging. But that's about being prudent, not about being virtuous.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 21, 2022, 01:14:06 PM
I would say in the context of a custody battle it was way more than tone deaf.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 01:27:23 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 21, 2022, 01:14:06 PM
I would say in the context of a custody battle it was way more than tone deaf.

In court? In the presence of lawyers? Sure. In a one-on-one conversation? The tone of that conversation is completely defined by the relationship, and anything that is said will be interpreted according to that, no matter what language is used.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 21, 2022, 04:11:27 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 01:27:23 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 21, 2022, 01:14:06 PM
I would say in the context of a custody battle it was way more than tone deaf.

In court? In the presence of lawyers? Sure. In a one-on-one conversation? The tone of that conversation is completely defined by the relationship, and anything that is said will be interpreted according to that, no matter what language is used.

I am not a member of SCOTUS or any other legal organization. Of course I meant in court, and if You read the articles the reporting clearly states the custodial relationship is adversarial. So, protest all you want but this is not a team of endearment in that family, and Looney stated that in several places.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 04:32:33 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 01:27:23 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 21, 2022, 01:14:06 PM
I would say in the context of a custody battle it was way more than tone deaf.

In court? In the presence of lawyers? Sure. In a one-on-one conversation? The tone of that conversation is completely defined by the relationship, and anything that is said will be interpreted according to that, no matter what language is used.

He was stupid.

And his vindictive ex burned him but good with his stupidity and the zeitgeist.

I sure feel sorry for the daughters.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on March 21, 2022, 04:44:49 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 12:09:46 PM

In this case, however, I believe U of M issued a statement that these were events off-campus and therefore there were no Title IX or campus issues so no action was to be taken----and good for them!  Looney temporarily stepped down on his own because of student protest. 

[...]

Free speech has consequences.  And for the record, I think Looney was well named for being a looney, moronic, racist, tone-deaf dumbass...but should the students have the ability to hound him from his job?...I dunno...

Agree that the university made the right decision, but not sure what you mean by the last bit.

What specific 'abilities' should be curtailed and under whose authority?

Not saying the students were in the right, but also not sure what specific student actions one could point to and say "That should not be allowed." by law or by university policy.

Direct harassment (stalking, doxxing, vandalism, threats of violence, etc.) has not been mentioned, so I'm working off the assumption Looney was not subjected to such. There's no mention even of him directly getting nasty messages from students.

Based on the reporting on this story, student actions have been:
(1) Notifying admins of the existence of the screenshots/video (which a non-student made publicly available)
(2) A protest on campus
(3) An online petition

Should any of these actions have been banned or resulted in disciplinary measures against the students?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 07:05:51 PM
Quote from: smallcleanrat on March 21, 2022, 04:44:49 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2022, 12:09:46 PM

In this case, however, I believe U of M issued a statement that these were events off-campus and therefore there were no Title IX or campus issues so no action was to be taken----and good for them!  Looney temporarily stepped down on his own because of student protest. 

[...]

Free speech has consequences.  And for the record, I think Looney was well named for being a looney, moronic, racist, tone-deaf dumbass...but should the students have the ability to hound him from his job?...I dunno...

Agree that the university made the right decision, but not sure what you mean by the last bit.

Well, it is pretty easy, actually.  While the university did the right thing in refusing to sanction the professor for off-campus behavior, the students have the right to voice their concerns----even if they are a bit melodramatic.  Looney took leave of his own accord because of his actions when his poor judgment and sublimated racism were brought to light.  In other words, rightly or wrongly, the professor brought this on himself.

At the same time, the guy is not one of these torchlight neo-Nazis who parade around screaming racist obscenities, so his punishment does not seem to fit the crime.

There is this frontier-style justice with the Internet which is not always wrong (anyone remember Brock Turner?) but is often intemperate and hysterical.

It's a conundrum. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 22, 2022, 05:00:20 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 21, 2022, 04:11:27 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 01:27:23 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 21, 2022, 01:14:06 PM
I would say in the context of a custody battle it was way more than tone deaf.

In court? In the presence of lawyers? Sure. In a one-on-one conversation? The tone of that conversation is completely defined by the relationship, and anything that is said will be interpreted according to that, no matter what language is used.

I am not a member of SCOTUS or any other legal organization. Of course I meant in court, and if You read the articles the reporting clearly states the custodial relationship is adversarial.

I meant that if he made those comments in court, or in the presence of lawyers, it would have been extremely stupid and bad for his case. People who are angry with each other say things all the time like "drop dead" but those aren't treated like actual death threats in court, no matter how angry the person was who said them, unless they are followed by some sort of action indicative of criminal intent.

The fact that private communications between individuals totally unrelated to the work environment of one of them was used by a third party who had no connection to the accused person in the work environment to try to get the person fired is very worrying.

Thoughtcrime is very close to a reality.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 22, 2022, 06:44:16 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 22, 2022, 05:00:20 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 21, 2022, 04:11:27 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 21, 2022, 01:27:23 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 21, 2022, 01:14:06 PM
I would say in the context of a custody battle it was way more than tone deaf.

In court? In the presence of lawyers? Sure. In a one-on-one conversation? The tone of that conversation is completely defined by the relationship, and anything that is said will be interpreted according to that, no matter what language is used.

I am not a member of SCOTUS or any other legal organization. Of course I meant in court, and if You read the articles the reporting clearly states the custodial relationship is adversarial.

I meant that if he made those comments in court, or in the presence of lawyers, it would have been extremely stupid and bad for his case. People who are angry with each other say things all the time like "drop dead" but those aren't treated like actual death threats in court, no matter how angry the person was who said them, unless they are followed by some sort of action indicative of criminal intent.

The fact that private communications between individuals totally unrelated to the work environment of one of them was used by a third party who had no connection to the accused person in the work environment to try to get the person fired is very worrying.

Thoughtcrime is very close to a reality.

marshwiggle, you post as though you aren't really up on the US legal system. He is not in court the way you are using the term I think. He is in Family Court. Having some experience with family members and reading a lot, it is a whole different concept. He is not being tried; the discussion is centered solely on fitness for custody, visitation rights, in addition to financial responsibility for care and child rearing expenses. Please trust that his words will be considered sole in that context in the court I'm referring to, and almost certainly will hurt him badly.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 28, 2022, 12:38:13 PM
CHE: Professor's career jeopardized by protest (and watching the video it seems appropriate to me).

The Professor and the Protester (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHF_w0gkyiI)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 28, 2022, 12:41:57 PM
CHE: State of Conflict: How a tiny protest at the U. of Nebraska turned into a proxy war for the future of campus politics


State of Conflict]

(https://www.chronicle.com/article/state-of-conflict/)
Quote
Over the next few months, Nebraska would become the next front of a battle over what kinds of speech should be tolerated on a college campus. It was a case study in the politics of provocation and the increasingly fraught relationship between state universities and the public they serve. What started as a brief verbal clash between two women on a campus plaza ended with a drawn-out standoff between powerful institutions over what a state, and its people, should stand for.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 28, 2022, 12:43:37 PM
CHE: A University Resisted Pressure to Cancel a Controversial Speaker. But It Moved the Event Online.


Controversal Speaker Moved Online]
(https://www.chronicle.com/article/a-university-resisted-pressure-to-cancel-a-controversial-speaker-but-it-moved-the-event-online)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 28, 2022, 01:42:54 PM
Wahoo: would you say a little bit more about the first one you just posted?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 28, 2022, 04:38:00 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 28, 2022, 01:42:54 PM
Wahoo: would you say a little bit more about the first one you just posted?

D'oh!!!

OMG!!!  That link was a post for my class on "Things Fall Apart!"  My sucky university-issued computer apparently held onto the url for that presentation.

Geeze!

Apologies all.

What I meant to post was this:

https://www.chronicle.com/article/the-professor-and-the-protester
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 28, 2022, 04:46:25 PM
Thank God! I thought I might have permanent brain fog.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 28, 2022, 05:12:26 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 28, 2022, 04:46:25 PM
Thank God! I thought I might have permanent brain fog.

Afraid the brain fog is mine...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 28, 2022, 05:33:41 PM
Sounds to me like Oliver Baker tried to grab the sign from the counter-protester, a struggle ensued and the two of them fell to the ground, resulting in a bloody nose for the student, but there's no video evidence showing that and none of the protesters would tell the truth about what happened, because they hate the counter protester. They are a worked up mob. So the charges were either dismissed or the defendant was acquitted. The counter protester and the protesters already knew each other before that day and had argued, likely.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 29, 2022, 05:41:24 AM
The very sad underlying principle in all of these is that civility is viewed as some sort of moral failure by activists on all sides of issues. Two-year olds have tantrums; developing self-control takes a lot of time and work. Unfortunately, we live in a society where actions by someone on the right "side", (whatever that is), are lauded even when they are extreme, and by people who should know better, like educators, journalists, and politicians.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on March 29, 2022, 07:56:44 AM
There's a point where you try to de-escalate, and there's a point where you back off and let the authorities handle it. Assistant prof seemed to mean well in dealing with a loose cannon, but grabbing the sign was an error.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 29, 2022, 09:56:30 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 29, 2022, 05:41:24 AM
The very sad underlying principle in all of these is that civility is viewed as some sort of moral failure by activists on all sides of issues. Two-year olds have tantrums; developing self-control takes a lot of time and work. Unfortunately, we live in a society where actions by someone on the right "side", (whatever that is), are lauded even when they are extreme, and by people who should know better, like educators, journalists, and politicians.

Agreed, but at this date, is it realistic to expect college age people to behave better than their elders did during the George Floyd riots?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: D@mnD@n1el on March 30, 2022, 09:59:23 PM
What sucks is that lots of times educators are fired even if they do something right so in this case there is a UCLA prof who gets fired for a short amount of time because some of the black students ask for no test and the teacher replies that it isn't fair to the other students and what should he do if a student is half white half black.

Here is an article about it: https://www.the-sun.com/news/962623/professor-suspended-refusing-black-students-leniency-george-floyd/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: smallcleanrat on March 30, 2022, 11:12:51 PM
Quote from: D@mnD@n1el on March 30, 2022, 09:59:23 PM
What sucks is that lots of times educators are fired even if they do something right so in this case there is a UCLA prof who gets fired for a short amount of time because some of the black students ask for no test and the teacher replies that it isn't fair to the other students and what should he do if a student is half white half black.

Here is an article about it: https://www.the-sun.com/news/962623/professor-suspended-refusing-black-students-leniency-george-floyd/

He was suspended then reinstated after a few weeks.

He seems to be pursuing a lawsuit for the suspension. His description of what happened focuses largely on the actions of the particular dean who suspended him, apparently without regard to university policy.

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/why-i-am-suing-ucla?s=r

He mentions that UCLA's Academic Freedom Committee spoke out in his defense and that the office that handles discrimination claims stated that this incident did not warrant an investigation.

There's a change.org petition to have the dean fired, but I don't know that it's getting much attention.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on March 31, 2022, 09:05:22 AM
Quote from: D@mnD@n1el on March 30, 2022, 09:59:23 PM
What sucks is that lots of times educators are fired even if they do something right so in this case there is a UCLA prof who gets fired for a short amount of time because some of the black students ask for no test and the teacher replies that it isn't fair to the other students and what should he do if a student is half white half black.

Here is an article about it: https://www.the-sun.com/news/962623/professor-suspended-refusing-black-students-leniency-george-floyd/

I'll regret wading into this, but that's not really an accurate description of what happened. All he had to say in response to this email was that he understood the student's concerns, but that it would violate university rules to make a final optional for some students but not all, and simply making the final optional for everyone at the last minute isn't something he could do either. Then just add that, of course, if there were students who were struggling with this in a way that would make it difficult for them to take the exam, I would obviously work with them and allow an incomplete if possible. I might be tempted to also tell this white student that I wouldn't want to make blanket assumptions about how black students are handling this...

Instead the guy decided that this was a good moment to quote MLK and preen. I would never write something to a student in that tone-it's obnoxious and its punching down as a professor. Do I think it should have gotten him suspended? No, I don't. He was acting like a jerk, but it was within the bonds of professional and academic discourse. He's not some hero though.































































Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: D@mnD@n1el on March 31, 2022, 09:19:01 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 31, 2022, 09:05:22 AM
Quote from: D@mnD@n1el on March 30, 2022, 09:59:23 PM
What sucks is that lots of times educators are fired even if they do something right so in this case there is a UCLA prof who gets fired for a short amount of time because some of the black students ask for no test and the teacher replies that it isn't fair to the other students and what should he do if a student is half white half black.

Here is an article about it: https://www.the-sun.com/news/962623/professor-suspended-refusing-black-students-leniency-george-floyd/

I'll regret wading into this, but that's not really an accurate description of what happened. All he had to say in response to this email was that he understood the student's concerns, but that it would violate university rules to make a final optional for some students but not all, and simply making the final optional for everyone at the last minute isn't something he could do either. Then just add that, of course, if there were students who were struggling with this in a way that would make it difficult for them to take the exam, I would obviously work with them and allow an incomplete if possible. I might be tempted to also tell this white student that I wouldn't want to make blanket assumptions about how black students are handling this...

Instead the guy decided that this was a good moment to quote MLK and preen. I would never write something to a student in that tone-it's obnoxious and its punching down as a professor. Do I think it should have gotten him suspended? No, I don't. He was acting like a jerk, but it was within the bonds of professional and academic discourse. He's not some hero though.


I do agree with you Caracal about how he may have not approached things in the best manner but I believe that the main point that they shouldn't get a no harm final exam is there. So I believe that what he said was right, just the way he said it was wrong.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 31, 2022, 09:40:58 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 31, 2022, 09:05:22 AM
Quote from: D@mnD@n1el on March 30, 2022, 09:59:23 PM
What sucks is that lots of times educators are fired even if they do something right so in this case there is a UCLA prof who gets fired for a short amount of time because some of the black students ask for no test and the teacher replies that it isn't fair to the other students and what should he do if a student is half white half black.

Here is an article about it: https://www.the-sun.com/news/962623/professor-suspended-refusing-black-students-leniency-george-floyd/

I'll regret wading into this, but that's not really an accurate description of what happened. All he had to say in response to this email was that he understood the student's concerns, but that it would violate university rules to make a final optional for some students but not all, and simply making the final optional for everyone at the last minute isn't something he could do either. Then just add that, of course, if there were students who were struggling with this in a way that would make it difficult for them to take the exam, I would obviously work with them and allow an incomplete if possible. I might be tempted to also tell this white student that I wouldn't want to make blanket assumptions about how black students are handling this...


I wouldn't go that far. Back when Lady Diana died, I remember people being in tears over it; not relatives, or people who lived in the UK or had even visited there, but just had this "celebrity drama" moment. It bothers me because it cheapens the real grief of people who are entitled to it.

If a relative or close friend of George Floyd wasn't up to the exam because of grief, that would be one thing, but someone who hadn't heard his name until a few days prior but who was that *broken up is not going to be able to handle normal life.


*Many of those who claim to be are probably just trying to get out of an exam; i.e. "any port in a storm".
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 31, 2022, 09:51:25 AM
I believe if the students started playing in the wrong sandbox (and maybe even breaking the law), they deserve a little ridicule that, given the asininity of the request, was, if anything, soft pedaled. I'm one of the ones cheering when the loony left gets a dose of reality they can't handle.
Explaining why you grade as you do is part of being available to students.

This would have been an interesting plot twist: the white students pressure the professor to change his grading to more leniency because of the George Floyd incident. The professor says 'oh...all right, since you feel that strongly.'  The black students then take legal action to remedy their having been deprived of being awarded the proper grades, to which they are entitled by having paid tuition.

Quote from: marshwiggle on March 31, 2022, 09:40:58 AM
Quote from: Caracal on March 31, 2022, 09:05:22 AM
Quote from: D@mnD@n1el on March 30, 2022, 09:59:23 PM
What sucks is that lots of times educators are fired even if they do something right so in this case there is a UCLA prof who gets fired for a short amount of time because some of the black students ask for no test and the teacher replies that it isn't fair to the other students and what should he do if a student is half white half black.

Here is an article about it: https://www.the-sun.com/news/962623/professor-suspended-refusing-black-students-leniency-george-floyd/

I'll regret wading into this, but that's not really an accurate description of what happened. All he had to say in response to this email was that he understood the student's concerns, but that it would violate university rules to make a final optional for some students but not all, and simply making the final optional for everyone at the last minute isn't something he could do either. Then just add that, of course, if there were students who were struggling with this in a way that would make it difficult for them to take the exam, I would obviously work with them and allow an incomplete if possible. I might be tempted to also tell this white student that I wouldn't want to make blanket assumptions about how black students are handling this...


I wouldn't go that far. Back when Lady Diana died, I remember people being in tears over it; not relatives, or people who lived in the UK or had even visited there, but just had this "celebrity drama" moment. It bothers me because it cheapens the real grief of people who are entitled to it.

If a relative or close friend of George Floyd wasn't up to the exam because of grief, that would be one thing, but someone who hadn't heard his name until a few days prior but who was that *broken up is not going to be able to handle normal life.


*Many of those who claim to be are probably just trying to get out of an exam; i.e. "any port in a storm".


How about the pregnant lady whose home was invaded by George Floyd and his criminal pals. If she were a student she could ask for an accommodation for the temporary stress experienced from hearing his name, after trying to move on from the trauma. Black Lives Matter, anyone?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2022, 10:52:20 AM
I'm making a standing offer: I will pay for whatever streaming service is best for this purpose FOR YOU for one year if you will watch (start to end, no Cliff/Spark or whatever) both of:

Eyes on the Prize
Attica


Attica was 50 years ago, and Eyes on the Prize chronicles the history of the Civil Rights movement until about the 1980s. If you cab watch either without at least some rethinking of your position I'll give up.

And yes, Black Lives Matter.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 31, 2022, 11:14:17 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2022, 10:52:20 AM
I'm making a standing offer: I will pay for whatever streaming service is best for this purpose FOR YOU for one year if you will watch (start to end, no Cliff/Spark or whatever) both of:

Eyes on the Prize
Attica


Attica was 50 years ago, and Eyes on the Prize chronicles the history of the Civil Rights movement until about the 1980s. If you cab watch either without at least some rethinking of your position I'll give up.

And yes, Black Lives Matter.

You want to find out who I am by setting up communications. Sorry.
I can afford to rent movies.
Maybe I'll think of a homework assignment for you and we can compare notes later. But at the moment I think I've already given up.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 31, 2022, 11:47:54 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2022, 10:52:20 AM
I'm making a standing offer: I will pay for whatever streaming service is best for this purpose FOR YOU for one year if you will watch (start to end, no Cliff/Spark or whatever) both of:

Eyes on the Prize
Attica


Attica was 50 years ago, and Eyes on the Prize chronicles the history of the Civil Rights movement until about the 1980s. If you cab watch either without at least some rethinking of your position I'll give up.


I haven't seen anyone on here complaining much about goals or achievements of the civil rights movement 40 or 50 years ago; the issue is with some of the extremes in the last couple of decades, and the the last decade in particular.
(As John McWhorter has said, he'd like to see discussions of race go back to about what they were mid '90's.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2022, 12:29:15 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 31, 2022, 11:47:54 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2022, 10:52:20 AM
I'm making a standing offer: I will pay for whatever streaming service is best for this purpose FOR YOU for one year if you will watch (start to end, no Cliff/Spark or whatever) both of:

Eyes on the Prize
Attica


Attica was 50 years ago, and Eyes on the Prize chronicles the history of the Civil Rights movement until about the 1980s. If you cab watch either without at least some rethinking of your position I'll give up.


I haven't seen anyone on here complaining much about goals or achievements of the civil rights movement 40 or 50 years ago; the issue is with some of the extremes in the last couple of decades, and the the last decade in particular.
(As John McWhorter has said, he'd like to see discussions of race go back to about what they were mid '90's.)

Watch Attica. And if you think things have changed that much, remember that police have been exonerated in almost (almost, not all) all shootings of young Black men. They weren't convicted in the Rodney King trial. In the Eric Garner case. For shooting and killing the unarmed, not threatening anyone homeless man in LA in the early 2000s. The young man in Minnesota in his car telling them he had a carry permit. Again and again and again. At least 30 times in the past five years.

So it happens once in a case that was so heinous, so unbelievable and seen by so many and of course, everything has changed, no hard feelings.

Just keep on quoting McWhoreter. Or Sowell. Or whoever else the latest voice is. And we'll be having the same discussion 10 years from now.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 31, 2022, 12:38:11 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2022, 12:29:15 PM
And if you think things have changed that much, remember that police have been exonerated in almost (almost, not all) all shootings of young Black men.

How often are police found guilty in the killing of young white men?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2022, 01:19:31 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 31, 2022, 12:38:11 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2022, 12:29:15 PM
And if you think things have changed that much, remember that police have been exonerated in almost (almost, not all) all shootings of young Black men.

How often are police found guilty in the killing of young white men?

IMO, not often enough. That, however, is beside the point re how Blacks feel in the US, and clearly has no analogue in terms of whites being discriminated against. This isn't a debate to me about whether or not we are a racist nation. We were, and things have changed for the better. The discussion has always beeb centered on what problems still exist, and how to make them better.

Do you not see that the many of the people that things were done to 50 years ago are still alive? And that even if they think things are better, they still see many of those same things happening now?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on March 31, 2022, 04:24:14 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2022, 01:19:31 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 31, 2022, 12:38:11 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2022, 12:29:15 PM
And if you think things have changed that much, remember that police have been exonerated in almost (almost, not all) all shootings of young Black men.

How often are police found guilty in the killing of young white men?

IMO, not often enough.
That, however, is beside the point re how Blacks feel in the US, and clearly has no analogue in terms of whites being discriminated against. This isn't a...

Try not to get yourself all worked up. it's bad for your blood pressure.

I would trust a random black American of any occupation more than I would trust a random contemporary full time academic to respond reasonably to true information about numbers of white, black and other Americans who are unjustly killed by police. Thing is so many are misinformed about how the numbers break down race-wise, and the more liberal you are, the more misinformed you're likely to be. Statistically, any way. One should suspect lefty academics are more likely to be dishonest or intransigent than misinformed, given their education.

QuoteInstead the guy decided that this was a good moment to quote MLK and preen. I would never write something to a student in that tone-it's obnoxious and its punching down as a professor.

Disagreeing with liberals on a college campus is punching down? Hardly.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 01, 2022, 05:18:57 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2022, 01:19:31 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 31, 2022, 12:38:11 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2022, 12:29:15 PM
And if you think things have changed that much, remember that police have been exonerated in almost (almost, not all) all shootings of young Black men.

How often are police found guilty in the killing of young white men?

IMO, not often enough. That, however, is beside the point re how Blacks feel in the US, and clearly has no analogue in terms of whites being discriminated against.


If you're going to claim differential rates of criminal actions by police by race of the victim, then you have to have evidence of the different rates. Otherwise you're just making stuff up.

And how people "feel" isn't evidence.

Quote
This isn't a debate to me about whether or not we are a racist nation. We were, and things have changed for the better. The discussion has always beeb centered on what problems still exist, and how to make them better.

So is the US no longer a "racist nation"? (And if it still is, then is there any nation that isn't? And is there any finite possibility of enough change to ever happen to satisfy retiring that term, in any country with millions of residents where there will always be some who are obnoxious jerks, even if they represent a small fraction of the population?)

Quote
Do you not see that the many of the people that things were done to 50 years ago are still alive? And that even if they think things are better, they still see many of those same things happening now?

By the same logic, you could describe any nation as "a nation of" murderers, pedophiles, etc. because there will always be some of those, and people who have been victims of those things will be acutely aware of it.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on April 01, 2022, 07:55:42 AM
dismalist and I discussed the differential rates of police killings quite some time ago in a different thread. I posted a link to an extensive well-done study, he said it showed no difference in the rates, I pointed out something he had missed. His response was something like "damn, you're right". I'm not making up stuff related to data.

I am not talking about "any country", I'm talking about my own.

Blacks' feelings, in light of the too slow rate of change are precisely the point of how they react.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 01, 2022, 10:07:41 AM
The info is easy to find, Marshy.

Just remember that black people are only 13.4% of the US population, so the per capita rate of police shootings are wildly out of proportion to the number of citizens.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/

And how people "feel" is extremely important.  If nothing else, Fat Donny should have taught us that.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 01, 2022, 10:44:37 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 01, 2022, 10:07:41 AM
The info is easy to find, Marshy.

Just remember that black people are only 13.4% of the US population, so the per capita rate of police shootings are wildly out of proportion to the number of citizens.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/


From 2015 to 2022

There are many variables that are important that are needed to provide context, such as location. Also, the number of shootings as a proportion of arrests may be much more relevant.

And the number of unarmed people shot by police is going to be much smaller than this. (And the same rules about context apply.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on April 01, 2022, 11:09:00 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 01, 2022, 07:55:42 AM
dismalist and I discussed the differential rates of police killings quite some time ago in a different thread. I posted a link to an extensive well-done study, he said it showed no difference in the rates, I pointed out something he had missed. His response was something like "damn, you're right". I'm not making up stuff related to data.

I am not talking about "any country", I'm talking about my own.

Blacks' feelings, in light of the too slow rate of change are precisely the point of how they react.

Yeah, that was about 911 calls, which you correctly pointed out were distributed like the racial mix of the population as a whole, whereas I had thought that blacks called 911 more frequently than Whites. The idea for using 911 calls is that the police dispatched do not know the race of the caller ex ante.

The discussion was about the share of crime perpetrated by various races. Thus, if one group were more criminal or violent than another, one would not be surprised if the police were more violent against that group.

QuoteBased on data compiled by the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program, it found that while Black people make up 13% of the U.S. population, they were 33% of persons arrested for non-fatal violent crime (NVC), which includes rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and other assaults. Black people were 36% of those arrested for serious non-fatal violent crimes (SNVC), including rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.
https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2021/jun/1/us-doj-statistics-race-and-ethnicity-violent-crime-perpetrators/ (https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2021/jun/1/us-doj-statistics-race-and-ethnicity-violent-crime-perpetrators/)

The National Crime Victimization data, which is meant to take care of ex ante bias  are not very different.

Black crime is overwhelmingly Black-on-Black, by the way.

It would be pure happenstance if anything corresponded to the racial distribution of the population.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 01, 2022, 04:41:55 PM
Quote from: dismalist on April 01, 2022, 11:09:00 AM

It would be pure happenstance if anything corresponded to the racial distribution of the population.

And lack of diversity.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 06, 2022, 06:15:17 AM
If you don't like Kamala Harris' wardrobe, you're a racist.

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/fired-joke-kamala-harris-outfit-wmal-cumulus-cancel-culture/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on April 06, 2022, 06:55:08 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 06, 2022, 06:15:17 AM
If you don't like Kamala Harris' wardrobe, you're a racist.

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/fired-joke-kamala-harris-outfit-wmal-cumulus-cancel-culture/

Kind of a subtly racist joke, not to mention unprofessional.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 06, 2022, 07:08:08 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 06, 2022, 06:55:08 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 06, 2022, 06:15:17 AM
If you don't like Kamala Harris' wardrobe, you're a racist.

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/fired-joke-kamala-harris-outfit-wmal-cumulus-cancel-culture/

Kind of a subtly racist joke, not to mention unprofessional.

Only if every possible reference to color must be taken as a racial slur if the color "matches" that of the person. But in that case, countless things would be "subtly racist" in the same way if a person was accused of "whitewashing" some problem if the person was "white". (There are numerous other words with "white" in them; that's the easiest example I could think of. Pesumeably calling any issue "black and white" would qualify as a slur to almost anyone associated with it for the same reason.)


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 06, 2022, 09:56:43 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 06, 2022, 06:55:08 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 06, 2022, 06:15:17 AM
If you don't like Kamala Harris' wardrobe, you're a racist.

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/fired-joke-kamala-harris-outfit-wmal-cumulus-cancel-culture/

Kind of a subtly racist joke, not to mention unprofessional.

So you must have been really incensed when Kurt Eichenwald of the NYT tweeted 'These trashy, evil, stupid people need to get out of our house', and 'what GALL she has.' Referring to first lady Melania Trump. He was angry because she had redone a garden at the white house.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 10, 2022, 02:10:57 PM
Elon Musk tweaking Twitter.

https://thehill.com/opinion/technology/3263157-elon-musk-free-speech-absolutist-may-be-trumps-twitter-ticket/?utm_source=hill_app&utm_medium=social&utm_content=share-link
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 10, 2022, 02:52:42 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 06, 2022, 09:56:43 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 06, 2022, 06:55:08 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 06, 2022, 06:15:17 AM
If you don't like Kamala Harris' wardrobe, you're a racist.

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/fired-joke-kamala-harris-outfit-wmal-cumulus-cancel-culture/

Kind of a subtly racist joke, not to mention unprofessional.

So you must have been really incensed when Kurt Eichenwald of the NYT tweeted 'These trashy, evil, stupid people need to get out of our house', and 'what GALL she has.' Referring to first lady Melania Trump. He was angry because she had redone a garden at the white house.

QuoteA group of maniacal left-wing activists who want to chemically castrate children in the name of "gender affirmation" came after me.

You have whining, hysterical, distorting snowflakes there, buddy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 11, 2022, 04:24:31 AM
Hmm..pal, she's probably not too pleased with people entrusted with teaching our children inserting themselves into the little one's sexual psyche.

ETA: You know that cliché about 'don't get between a lioness and her cubs' (or even a bitch and her puppies) or some such. Clichés exist for a reason.

Too often the point is not taken that giving your child to someone for educating is an act of trust and that trust needs to be earned. It's a collaboration. Working together for the child's health and future. This is true even if you think the parents are poorly educated.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 11, 2022, 03:52:49 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 11, 2022, 04:24:31 AM
Hmm..pal, she's probably not too pleased with people entrusted with teaching our children inserting themselves into the little one's sexual psyche.

And you have a typical propagandist, mahagonny.  You should be smarter.

What is most curious to me is that those people who are the most hateful, the most obnoxious, and the most untrustworthy are always the biggest babies.  Athey is just one whiney bully who starts a fight and then cries to the principal when she gets her ass kicked.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 11, 2022, 06:16:20 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 11, 2022, 03:52:49 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 11, 2022, 04:24:31 AM
Hmm..pal, she's probably not too pleased with people entrusted with teaching our children inserting themselves into the little one's sexual psyche.

And you have a typical propagandist, mahagonny.  You should be smarter.

What is most curious to me is that those people who are the most hateful, the most obnoxious, and the most untrustworthy are always the biggest babies.  Athey is just one whiney bully who starts a fight and then cries to the principal when she gets her ass kicked.

Y'all will be crying plenty when November comes.




Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 11, 2022, 08:40:26 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 11, 2022, 06:16:20 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 11, 2022, 03:52:49 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 11, 2022, 04:24:31 AM
Hmm..pal, she's probably not too pleased with people entrusted with teaching our children inserting themselves into the little one's sexual psyche.

And you have a typical propagandist, mahagonny.  You should be smarter.

What is most curious to me is that those people who are the most hateful, the most obnoxious, and the most untrustworthy are always the biggest babies.  Athey is just one whiney bully who starts a fight and then cries to the principal when she gets her ass kicked.

Y'all will be crying plenty when November comes.

You've gone too far down the rabbit hole, my friend.  One American News----you're wanted there.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 12, 2022, 08:22:03 AM
Here you are: the republicans want to bring back Jim Crow. Some words of rapture for you, Professor Fishy.

https://newrepublic.com/article/165914/matthew-continetti-right-book-review-struggle-soul-gop
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 12, 2022, 09:00:09 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 12, 2022, 08:22:03 AM
Here you are: the republicans want to bring back Jim Crow. Some words of rapture for you, Professor Fishy.

https://newrepublic.com/article/165914/matthew-continetti-right-book-review-struggle-soul-gop

Quote
Of course, January 6 was only the beginning. Republicans have turned against democracy, and peddlers of the Big Lie are laying the groundwork for the next coup. Experts tell us that a civil war might be around the corner, or that one is already here. After losing the popular vote in seven of the last eight presidential elections, the GOP is using every tool at its disposal to impose minority rule: gerrymandering, voter suppression, a hammerlock on the judiciary, a Senate tilted toward small states, and an Electoral College biased in favor of rural America.

All factual.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 13, 2022, 01:26:24 PM
Free Speech for Me, and Thee? (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/04/12/princeton-says-it-wont-censor-webpage-criticizing-professor)

Lower deck from the article:

Quote
Princeton says it won't remove a reference to a professor's controversial comment about a Black student group from a university-sponsored webpage. Some say this is retaliation, but others say the pro–free speech professor is now advocating censorship.

This, BTW mahaggony, is a great example of a snowflake throwing down the gauntlet and then crying foul when he gets a fight.

Spew hate, get hate back.  I don't know what that is so hard for some people to reason out.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 13, 2022, 03:40:03 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 13, 2022, 01:26:24 PM
Free Speech for Me, and Thee? (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/04/12/princeton-says-it-wont-censor-webpage-criticizing-professor)

Lower deck from the article:

Quote
Princeton says it won't remove a reference to a professor's controversial comment about a Black student group from a university-sponsored webpage. Some say this is retaliation, but others say the pro–free speech professor is now advocating censorship.

This, BTW mahaggony, is a great example of a snowflake throwing down the gauntlet and then crying foul when he gets a fight.

Spew hate, get hate back.  I don't know what that is so hard for some people to reason out.


From the article:
Quote
In October, eight faculty members at Princeton reportedly filed an internal complaint that accused the university of trying to portray Katz as a racist, via a university-sponsored online project called "To Be Known and Heard: Systemic Racism at Princeton University." The site, which is led by the university's Carl A. Fields Center for Equality and Cultural Understanding and Office of Wintersession and Campus Engagement, and which has been featured in student orientation sessions, includes Katz's Black Justice League statement within a larger racial history of the university.


Princeton's formal response to the complaint said, in part, that the website wasn't an official university document—a position that Katz's supporters said was ridiculous. Michael Poliakoff, president of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, for instance, wrote to Princeton to say that the university had put itself "in the position of violating its own rules by severely harassing a member of the academic community whose speech the president declared to be protected."

It sounds to me like the complaint is not so much that his earlier comments are publicized, but that they are the subject of a university-sponsored criticism. It's normal for faculty to disagree with one another in academic forums; it's another for an institution to publicly criticize one of its own in some non-judicial forum that doesn't allow for rebuttal. (The typical response to something the insitution  doesn't like is just "the views expressed by Prof. Extreme are his own and do not represent the views of the university" so they can distance themselves but without some sort of attack.)
 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 13, 2022, 03:49:52 PM
The question, however, revolves around Katz's response to counter-criticism.  Katz wants to use a hyperbolic pejorative to describe a university group.  He and his supporters attacked anyone who tried to censor Katz's free expression.  And then, with typical irony, Katz demands that the university not post material that can be perceived as demeaning.

I agree that it is unusual for a faculty to attack another faculty on a university forum, but as I understand the issue, Princeton faculty took it upon themselves to challenge Katz's point of view. 

Being a faculty member does not exempt one from criticism.

Katz opened his yap.  He made people mad.  Now he is mad that people are mad.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 13, 2022, 04:00:59 PM
Isn't Princeton the school that employs Eddie Glaude? Maybe this professor should get himself out of the cesspool and start fresh.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 13, 2022, 04:25:19 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 13, 2022, 03:49:52 PM
The question, however, revolves around Katz's response to counter-criticism.  Katz wants to use a hyperbolic pejorative to describe a university group.  He and his supporters attacked anyone who tried to censor Katz's free expression.  And then, with typical irony, Katz demands that the university not post material that can be perceived as demeaning.

I agree that it is unusual for a faculty to attack another faculty on a university forum, but as I understand the issue, Princeton faculty took it upon themselves to challenge Katz's point of view. 


It's not clear what is meant by "a university-sponsored online project called "To Be Known and Heard: Systemic Racism at Princeton University."  If there were just some internal university forum (eveen if visible to the public) where faculty could debate things, that would be fine, but if the university actually put re$ource$, such as cour$e relea$e$ if not actual ca$h, then it's not just some faculty disagreeing with a colleague.
The institution can't have it both ways; they're not credible if they say they "value free speech" on one hand and then provide resources and their backing to projects aimed at discrediting faculty with "wrong" views.

(To be clear: I have no problem with people publishing his past comments as long as they're as visible as they were originally, even if he'd like them to be forgotten. I just disagree with the smarminess of the institution trying to play both sides of the fence.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 13, 2022, 04:40:22 PM
Katz openly published his statements as a faculty member calling a student group on his own campus "terrorists."   It was not something that appeared on Facebook or Twitter.   So it is not something taken from Katz's private life or something taken out of context.  The man published his opinion; now he is mad that that opinion is being published.  He should have known that this would generate backlash.   

Since Katz published as a faculty member about his own campus, the campus has the right to challenge it

And then there's this:

Quote
The site, which is led by the university's Carl A. Fields Center for Equality and Cultural Understanding and Office of Wintersession and Campus Engagement, and which has been featured in student orientation sessions, includes Katz's Black Justice League statement within a larger racial history of the university.

Should the university censor the Center?

This is the quote that convinced me:

Quote
Wilson said in "Academe" that "Like Katz, I denounced the 2020 letter signed by numerous Princeton faculty because one proposal endangered academic freedom, and I would strongly denounce any effort to have Katz investigated or punished for his views. But Katz wasn't punished. And that standard of free speech belongs to Katz's critics as well as Katz himself." As for the notion that Katz has experienced retaliation, Wilsons said that this "should only refer to some kind of official penalty. Criticism is not retaliation. Criticism may be unfair, but the response should be counterspeech, not censorship. Redefining criticism as retaliation creates the danger of seeking to end the retaliation by silencing the criticism."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 14, 2022, 06:06:21 AM
Angry mob or 75 chased student who then hid in a men's restroom, fearing for her life, and called 911. The mob was upset because the student was part of a 'conservative' group that invited Allen West, who is black, to speak on campus. His appearance had to be stopped as the crowd became unruly.

https://buffalonews.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/student-group-leaders-report-harassment-after-conservative-commentators-speech-at-ub/article_f4ae991e-b76d-11ec-919e-933aaf30ab02.html
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 14, 2022, 09:51:57 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 14, 2022, 06:06:21 AM
Angry mob or 75 chased student who then hid in a men's restroom, fearing for her life, and called 911. The mob was upset because the student was part of a 'conservative' group that invited Allen West, who is black, to speak on campus. His appearance had to be stopped as the crowd became unruly.

https://buffalonews.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/student-group-leaders-report-harassment-after-conservative-commentators-speech-at-ub/article_f4ae991e-b76d-11ec-919e-933aaf30ab02.html

Spew hate, get hate in return.  It works for all sides.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 14, 2022, 10:02:46 AM
CHE:
What's Going On At Yale?  A Lot Of Drama. (https://www.chronicle.com/article/whats-going-on-at-yale-law-school-a-lot-of-drama)

Quote
Last month student protesters disrupted an event at the school. They were raucous, obnoxious even: Walls were banged on, slogans shouted, middle fingers extended. The ire of the 100 or so students was directed mostly at Kristen Waggoner, general counsel of the Alliance Defending Freedom, which bills itself as the largest legal organization devoted to "religious freedom, free speech, and the sanctity of life." Scroll through ADF's website, and you'll see the group is opposed to gay marriage, abortion, and transgender women participating in women's sports. The students were upset, too, with the Federalist Society for inviting Waggoner and also, apparently, with Kate Stith, a longtime Yale Law professor who moderated the event and who, at one point, told the protesters to "grow up," an admonition that inspired further derision. (As it happens, the influential Federalist Society was born at Yale during a three-day symposium in 1982.)


Quote
The fact that no one will talk frankly on the record speaks to an overall loss of trust between certain factions of professors. More than one of them mentioned to me that they feared their comments in faculty meetings would be recorded and leaked. It mirrors the distrust between members of the Federalist Society and progressive students, with both sides complaining that they're being recorded or photographed by their classmates in hopes the pictures or recordings will go viral and get them in trouble.

And, related:

Why I Didn't Apologize For That Email (https://www.persuasion.community/p/why-i-didnt-apologize-for-that-yale?s=r)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 14, 2022, 10:10:23 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 14, 2022, 09:51:57 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 14, 2022, 06:06:21 AM
Angry mob or 75 chased student who then hid in a men's restroom, fearing for her life, and called 911. The mob was upset because the student was part of a 'conservative' group that invited Allen West, who is black, to speak on campus. His appearance had to be stopped as the crowd became unruly.

https://buffalonews.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/student-group-leaders-report-harassment-after-conservative-commentators-speech-at-ub/article_f4ae991e-b76d-11ec-919e-933aaf30ab02.html

Spew hate, get hate in return.  It works for all sides.

I'm looking around for the hate being spewed by either Allen West or the students who invited him, and I don't see it. The name of the talk was 'America is not racist.' Is that the 'hate' you're referring to?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 14, 2022, 11:44:13 AM
This one made me kind of laugh:

Drag Show at Clemson Infuriates College Republicans (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/04/14/drag-show-clemson-infuriates-college-republicans)

Here's a wee bit of hate for'ya, Big M.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 14, 2022, 11:54:30 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 14, 2022, 10:10:23 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 14, 2022, 09:51:57 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 14, 2022, 06:06:21 AM
Angry mob or 75 chased student who then hid in a men's restroom, fearing for her life, and called 911. The mob was upset because the student was part of a 'conservative' group that invited Allen West, who is black, to speak on campus. His appearance had to be stopped as the crowd became unruly.

https://buffalonews.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/student-group-leaders-report-harassment-after-conservative-commentators-speech-at-ub/article_f4ae991e-b76d-11ec-919e-933aaf30ab02.html

Spew hate, get hate in return.  It works for all sides.

I'm looking around for the hate being spewed by either Allen West or the students who invited him, and I don't see it. The name of the talk was 'America is not racist.' Is that the 'hate' you're referring to?

I was referring to everyone in this scenario, the students who chased and the students who invited a guy who says stuff like this:

Quote
"Indeed, there are Islamic terrorist training camps in America"
-- Allen West

"I want no part of peace with savages who throw acid on and gun down young girls going to school. I would prefer to crush them and kill them wherever they exist. That’s not being a warmonger. It’s being a realist."
-- Allen West

"I must confess, when I see anyone with an Obama 2012 bumper sticker, I recognize them as a threat to the gene pool."
-- Allen West

"When more Americans prefer freebies to freedom, these great United States will become a fertile ground for tyranny."
-- Allen West

"These Planned Parenthood women, the Code Pink women, and all of these women have been neutering American men and bringing us to the point of this incredible weakness...We are not going to have our men become subservient."
-- Allen West

"I'll give you a great example of an issue that no one brought up during this Florida primary, the fact that we're going to have a Chinese made oil rig put in place about 60 miles off the coast of Florida."
-- Allen West

Students are no so dumb that they fail to recognize a man who, as do many politicians (particularly of the conservative stripe these days), made a career out of demonizing other people. 

And don't forget "Young Americans for Freedom" (https://www.yaf.org/news/in-shark-tank-style-pitch-competition-community-votes-to-fund-middle-school-drag-show/) is an organization that fosters hate.  Just look at their website.

I hope the students who chased and assaulted the Young Nutjob for Freedom are arrested and charged (if they are, indeed, guilty) but I can't feel to sorry for hatemongers who get hate in return.

Don't be stupid, mahagonny.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 14, 2022, 02:59:45 PM
I was not being stupid. I was asking a question, because I'm not really familiar with West. I may not agree with everything he says, but I do say for Chrissake, let him talk. Actually he sounds like he would liven things up. Something the lefties in Buffalo could use more of.
That's what the thread is about, speakers getting cancelled. They literally disrupted the show with noise, then had to throw a hissy fit afterward. that took a lot of guts, liberals.
I expect they flipped out as soon as they heard the swearing, e.g. 'All Lives Matter.' Some of them probably flipped out as soon as they heard their friends would.
I would probably still agree with him more often than I would agree with people who say men should have a right to have babies and nurse them, or more than I would agree with your hero at Rutgers, Brittney Cooper, who thinks society would be better without white people.
Saying you hate Obama because he's an idiot is not fascism.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 14, 2022, 04:42:44 PM
Well, first of all, find out who West [or whoever] is.

Then sure, let them talk.  Don't cancel their presentation.

But don't be surprised when intemperate talk receives an intemperate reaction.  Freedom of speech works both ways.

I am never for violence, but I'm okay with shouting back.  If speakers are irrational, propagandistic, divisive, and just plain jackasses they are going to get a shouted down because rational debate and discussion will not work with them.  West is not interested in discussion, he is interested in extremism and propaganda.

This is why I keep urging you to go to One American News.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 14, 2022, 06:14:19 PM
Not if they were banging on the door from the outside. Then they were objecting not to what he said, but to who they think he is and the fact that he was allowed on campus. Cancel culture at its purest and most harmful.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 15, 2022, 04:52:25 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 14, 2022, 04:42:44 PM

I am never for violence, but I'm okay with shouting back.  If speakers are irrational, propagandistic, divisive, and just plain jackasses they are going to get a shouted down because rational debate and discussion will not work with them. 

You do realize that this is in the eye of the beholder; i.e. extremists from both sides of an issue think the other side are "irrational, propagandistic, divisive, and just plain jackasses" and would use the same tactics to silence them if allowed.

In that world, the only people who can get to speak are expressing completely anodyne pablum. "Grass is green; air is good."

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 15, 2022, 05:55:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 15, 2022, 04:52:25 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 14, 2022, 04:42:44 PM

I am never for violence, but I'm okay with shouting back.  If speakers are irrational, propagandistic, divisive, and just plain jackasses they are going to get a shouted down because rational debate and discussion will not work with them. 

You do realize that this is in the eye of the beholder; i.e. extremists from both sides of an issue think the other side are "irrational, propagandistic, divisive, and just plain jackasses" and would use the same tactics to silence them if allowed.

In that world, the only people who can get to speak are expressing completely anodyne pablum. "Grass is green; air is good."

+1, moreover

QuoteWest is not interested in discussion, he is interested in extremism and propaganda.

Is an assumption about someone's thought process that, even if it were a matter of consensus (it is not) is an assumption.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 15, 2022, 07:14:50 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 15, 2022, 05:55:54 AM
QuoteWest is not interested in discussion, he is interested in extremism and propaganda.

Is an assumption about someone's thought process that, even if it were a matter of consensus (it is not) is an assumption.

Walk your talk, mahagonny. I have read enough of your comments to know that you are blowing a wee bit of mierda there.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 15, 2022, 07:21:56 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 15, 2022, 04:52:25 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 14, 2022, 04:42:44 PM

I am never for violence, but I'm okay with shouting back.  If speakers are irrational, propagandistic, divisive, and just plain jackasses they are going to get a shouted down because rational debate and discussion will not work with them. 

You do realize that this is in the eye of the beholder; i.e. extremists from both sides of an issue think the other side are "irrational, propagandistic, divisive, and just plain jackasses" and would use the same tactics to silence them if allowed.

Granted.  That is why I keep posting on this thread. 

But you can look at West's comments, admitted cherry-picked, and factcheck them to see if they are accurate-----and they are not.  They are incendiary political hyperbole and propaganda. 

An objective person (and the civil court system) would probably agree that Oberlin University owes Gibson's Bakery an apology and a wee bit of change.  The question has less to do with "sides" and everything to do with decorum, rational behavior, and honesty. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 15, 2022, 08:45:17 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 15, 2022, 07:21:56 PM

An objective person (and the civil court system) would probably agree that Oberlin University owes Gibson's Bakery an apology and a wee bit of change.  The question has less to do with "sides" and everything to do with decorum, rational behavior, and honesty.

They do not apologize. Maybe that's why the award was as high as it was. To make the point that racism is not cool.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 16, 2022, 09:23:21 AM
This statement bothers you?

Quote
"When more Americans prefer freebies to freedom, these great United States will become a fertile ground for tyranny."
-- Allen West

Wow. Is it demonizing someone?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 16, 2022, 07:21:57 PM
Think it through, Big M.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 18, 2022, 05:30:11 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 16, 2022, 07:21:57 PM
Think it through, Big M.

I would think you would either engage with the question or not comment at all, rather than just act like a pest.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 18, 2022, 07:29:05 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 18, 2022, 05:30:11 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 16, 2022, 07:21:57 PM
Think it through, Big M.

I would think you would either engage with the question or not comment at all, rather than just act like a pest.

I have to agree with that, Wahoo. Whenever you make comments like that, including to me, I have no idea what actual point you're assuming I get.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 18, 2022, 08:32:57 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 18, 2022, 07:29:05 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 18, 2022, 05:30:11 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 16, 2022, 07:21:57 PM
Think it through, Big M.

I would think you would either engage with the question or not comment at all, rather than just act like a pest.

I have to agree with that, Wahoo. Whenever you make comments like that, including to me, I have no idea what actual point you're assuming I get.

This is why I tend not to engage with you two guys.

This is more divisive hyperbole filled with loaded words?  Do neither of you see that?

Okay:

1) this is a slippery slope argument without any backing.  How are "freebies" going to lead to "tyranny?"  That is simply hysterical propaganda. 

2) "freebies" are part of the favorite mythology of lowbrow conservatives that somehow they are the hard working people and everyone else is on the public dole. 

3) "freebies" is often used as a pejorative for people of color, many of whom are still working through the 500 years of racial inequity in North America.

4) on the face of it West's comment is idiotic.  "Tyranny" does not come from "freebies"; tyranny comes from totalitarian governments.

Really, you two, use your brains.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 18, 2022, 08:48:19 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 18, 2022, 08:32:57 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 18, 2022, 07:29:05 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 18, 2022, 05:30:11 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 16, 2022, 07:21:57 PM
Think it through, Big M.

I would think you would either engage with the question or not comment at all, rather than just act like a pest.

I have to agree with that, Wahoo. Whenever you make comments like that, including to me, I have no idea what actual point you're assuming I get.

This is why I tend not to engage with you two guys.

This is more divisive hyperbole filled with loaded words?  Do neither of you see that?

Okay:

1) this is a slippery slope argument without any backing.  How are "freebies" going to lead to "tyranny?"  That is simply hysterical propaganda. 

2) "freebies" are part of the favorite mythology of lowbrow conservatives that somehow they are the hard working people and everyone else is on the public dole. 

3) "freebies" is often used as a pejorative for people of color, many of whom are still working through the 500 years of racial inequity in North America.

4) on the face of it West's comment is idiotic.  "Tyranny" does not come from "freebies"; tyranny comes from totalitarian governments.

Really, you two, use your brains.

I'm not psychic, so I can't claim to know exactly what anyone else means when they say "freebies". However, given all of the stories in the news over the past few years about Big Tech use of personal data, it's pretty clear that there are lots of valid concerns about services that people perceive as "free" and how those "free"services do in fact compromise peoples' privacy at the very least, whether that counts as "freedom" or not.

Much of your criticism seems to be based on ideas about what "freebies" is supposed to be subtly referring to. I've never heard West, but there's a saying that's been around for ages that says "If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is". Government service may be viewed as "free" if individuals don't directly pay for them. but the important thing people need to understand about anything that appears "free" is that someone, somewhere is paying for it.  Only when you understand how and by whom a "freebie" is being financed can you decide if it's a good idea or not.
(I say this as a Canadian who thinks universal healthcare is great; but it's far from "free". It's a good use of tax revenue.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 18, 2022, 10:51:47 AM
Quote
This is why I tend not to engage with you two guys.

LOL you follow marshy around like a dog follows a guy with bacon strips in his pocket.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 18, 2022, 04:24:00 PM
NYT: A White Author's Book About Black Feminism Was Pulled After a Social Media Outcry (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/15/arts/jennifer-buck-bad-and-boujee-book-pulled.html)

Quote
The book "Bad and Boujee" centers on Black women's experience, but critics said it was written by a white professor and was flawed in its execution.

Quote
The blurb for the book "Bad and Boujee: Toward a Trap Feminist Theology" says that it "engages with the overlap of Black experience, hip-hop music, ethics and feminism to focus on a subsection known as 'trap feminism.'"

But the book, written by Jennifer M. Buck, a white academic at a Christian university, was criticized by some authors and theologians as academically flawed, with deeply problematic passages, including repeated references to the ghetto. The project was also widely condemned on social media as poorly executed and as an example of cultural appropriation.

In response to the criticism, the book's publisher, Wipf and Stock Publishers, decided on Wednesday that it would pull the title from circulation.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 18, 2022, 06:07:48 PM
Saint Vincent Debates Whether Speech Was Racist (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/04/18/saint-vincent-debates-whether-speech-was-racist)

Quote
Azerrad told Inside Higher Ed via email, "You have seen a version of this unfold an untold number of times on our college campuses: a speaker says something perfectly sensible on race (in my case, a defense of colorblindness and a denunciation of preferential treatment), most in attendance are in full agreement, a handful disagree loudly (albeit without offering any counterarguments beyond their indignation that someone deviated from the accepted script when talking about race), and the university administration cowers before their indignation."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 20, 2022, 01:38:52 PM
Texas A&M, America's Largest College, Won't Say Why It Defunded Its Campus Drag Show (https://www.thedailybeast.com/texas-aandm-americas-largest-college-wont-say-why-it-defunded-its-campus-drag-show)

Quote
When Texas A&M University held its first-ever drag show two years ago, it was met with resistance almost immediately. Right-wing student groups lobbied to shut it down, collecting over 1,800 signatures on a Change.org petition claiming the February 2020 event would foster a "climate of degradation" on campus. Dozens of protesters gathered outside Texas A&M's Rudder Auditorium holding signs reading "God Created Them Male and Female" and "Texans Reject Transgender Tyranny."

The backlash was even worse the following year. A petition referring to the show—dubbed "Draggieland" in a reference to the college's nickname–as "sinful" and "immoral" this time attracted nearly 20,000 signatures. It was accompanied by an even larger rally. Daniel Hou, the executive showrunner of Draggieland 2022, says protesters flicked holy water at LGBTQ+ students with their fingers.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 20, 2022, 01:45:21 PM
White Principal Claims She Was Bullied Into Quitting After Racist 'Slip of the Tongue' (https://www.thedailybeast.com/white-principal-emily-mais-claims-she-was-bullied-into-quitting-agnor-hurt-elementary)

Quote
Former assistant principal Emily Mais complains about "reverse racism" in a lawsuit claiming she was abused for using the term "colored people."

Quote
During the last training session in June 2021, the lawsuit says Mais accidentally used the term "colored people" instead of "people of color" while making a comment during the presentation. The suit claims Mais immediately apologized for the derogatory term but was verbally attacked by a teaching aide for her poor word choice. Mais was then asked to attend meetings with the school guidance counselor, an equity specialist, and the district's superintendent and assistant superintendents.

Same story:

Ex-school official sues Virginia board over anti-racism training (https://nypost.com/2022/04/19/emily-mais-sue-over-critical-race-theory-training/)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 20, 2022, 01:48:39 PM
Students Give School Board 'Wokeness Checker' an Earful After Anti-Migrant Crusade (https://www.thedailybeast.com/virginia-beach-students-give-school-wokeness-checker-victoria-manning-an-earful-after-esl-rant)

Quote
"Most are from South America," she claimed. "Our ESL budget has increased over $1 million in two years. Continuing to educate South Americans is not sustainable."

Manning's comments caused her to lose her newly-awarded post with a government working group focused on innovative education methods for schools in Virginia. She was specifically selected for the group by Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin and state Education Secretary Aimee Guidera.

"We wholly condemn Mrs. Manning's comments," Guidera previously told The Daily Beast. "They are completely unacceptable and are in absolute opposition to the Youngkin administration's commitment to educate and prepare every child in the Commonwealth for success in life. Victoria Manning will no longer participate in our working group."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 22, 2022, 10:56:44 AM
I tried to pull The Shape of Me and Other Stuff off the shelf yesterday, to read to the hatchling, but alas it had been cancelled, and no alternatives given.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on April 23, 2022, 10:19:56 AM
In Florida, a list of banned books, including Everywhere Babies: https://twitter.com/DWUhlfelderLaw/status/1516899552426700804/photo/1
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 24, 2022, 09:48:29 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 23, 2022, 10:19:56 AM
In Florida, a list of banned books, including Everywhere Babies: https://twitter.com/DWUhlfelderLaw/status/1516899552426700804/photo/1

it's another feather in the hat of the writer to get banned. She's got more notoriety now. for a work that probably required zero imagination.

'"And I thought, 'Oh, my God, I'm banned! Wow!' I mean, I've been following all this book-banning stuff and wondering what is wrong with these people," she said. "And they're only bringing more attention to these books — there are plenty of people who will then seek them out and want to read them. So I wasn't really upset."

'"Authoritarian and fascist communities, this is what they always go for, they always burn the books. It actually shows the power of books," she said. "If they didn't have any power, they wouldn't be burning or banning them. So that's one thing to remember and celebrate: The power of books."'

So self-dramatizing.

Maybe your book just sucks. Maybe the library or the school system doesn't have to endorse it because there is nothing special about you. Your work has been ignored, declined.

https://news.yahoo.com/everywhere-babies-picture-book-celebrating-183843897.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw&tsrc=twtr
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on April 25, 2022, 04:36:14 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 24, 2022, 09:48:29 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 23, 2022, 10:19:56 AM
In Florida, a list of banned books, including Everywhere Babies: https://twitter.com/DWUhlfelderLaw/status/1516899552426700804/photo/1

it's another feather in the hat of the writer to get banned. She's got more notoriety now. for a work that probably required zero imagination.

'"And I thought, 'Oh, my God, I'm banned! Wow!' I mean, I've been following all this book-banning stuff and wondering what is wrong with these people," she said. "And they're only bringing more attention to these books — there are plenty of people who will then seek them out and want to read them. So I wasn't really upset."

'"Authoritarian and fascist communities, this is what they always go for, they always burn the books. It actually shows the power of books," she said. "If they didn't have any power, they wouldn't be burning or banning them. So that's one thing to remember and celebrate: The power of books."'

So self-dramatizing.

Maybe your book just sucks. Maybe the library or the school system doesn't have to endorse it because there is nothing special about you. Your work has been ignored, declined.

https://news.yahoo.com/everywhere-babies-picture-book-celebrating-183843897.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw&tsrc=twtr

Good lord, this is dumb. You wouldn't think you could fit so many ridiculous statements into just a few short sentences, but he's done it. Its intellectually dishonest and foolish at the the same time with a dash of self important blather thrown in.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 25, 2022, 05:22:46 AM
Quote from: Caracal on April 25, 2022, 04:36:14 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 24, 2022, 09:48:29 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 23, 2022, 10:19:56 AM
In Florida, a list of banned books, including Everywhere Babies: https://twitter.com/DWUhlfelderLaw/status/1516899552426700804/photo/1

it's another feather in the hat of the writer to get banned. She's got more notoriety now. for a work that probably required zero imagination.

'"And I thought, 'Oh, my God, I'm banned! Wow!' I mean, I've been following all this book-banning stuff and wondering what is wrong with these people," she said. "And they're only bringing more attention to these books — there are plenty of people who will then seek them out and want to read them. So I wasn't really upset."

'"Authoritarian and fascist communities, this is what they always go for, they always burn the books. It actually shows the power of books," she said. "If they didn't have any power, they wouldn't be burning or banning them. So that's one thing to remember and celebrate: The power of books."'

So self-dramatizing.

Maybe your book just sucks. Maybe the library or the school system doesn't have to endorse it because there is nothing special about you. Your work has been ignored, declined.

https://news.yahoo.com/everywhere-babies-picture-book-celebrating-183843897.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw&tsrc=twtr

Good lord, this is dumb. You wouldn't think you could fit so many ridiculous statements into just a few short sentences, but he's done it. Its intellectually dishonest and foolish at the the same time with a dash of self important blather thrown in.

'They' have done it. You refuse to use my preferred pronouns. You are hateful.

I haven't seen the book. <snip> Can't remember the title.

The whole business could be properly regulated by a constitutional amendment that enshrines the principles of family vales and common sense. The Amendment would make unconstitutional any assault on family values, or lack of common sense over a certain threshold. It would establish and permanently fund the Department of Common Sense and Family Values comprised of formally trained experts and no political appointees. The Department would be responsible for preclearing all local, state and federal public policies, statements and personnel to ensure they won't undermine families or common sense.

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2019/how-to-fix-politics-in-america/inequality/pass-an-anti-racist-constitutional-amendment/

Go looking for a culture war and you may just find one.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on April 25, 2022, 06:51:13 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 25, 2022, 05:22:46 AM


I haven't seen the book. <snip> Can't remember the title.


What a weird creep. Is there some particular reason we should keep letting this stuff be on here?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 25, 2022, 07:46:44 AM
Quote from: Caracal on April 25, 2022, 06:51:13 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 25, 2022, 05:22:46 AM


I haven't seen the book. <snip> Can't remember the title.


What a weird creep. Is there some particular reason we should keep letting this stuff be on here?

Vociferous opposition to meaningful moderation, coupled with very little vocal support for more muscular interventions.

I'm all for it, but I don't want to unilaterally impose standards on a community that doesn't want them. If there's renewed appetite for it, I'd be happy to draw up revised guidelines and put them to you all for feedback, however. I certainly think it'd be an improvement.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Caracal on April 25, 2022, 08:20:42 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 25, 2022, 07:46:44 AM
Quote from: Caracal on April 25, 2022, 06:51:13 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 25, 2022, 05:22:46 AM


I haven't seen the book. <snip> Can't remember the title.


What a weird creep. Is there some particular reason we should keep letting this stuff be on here?

Vociferous opposition to meaningful moderation, coupled with very little vocal support for more muscular interventions.

I'm all for it, but I don't want to unilaterally impose standards on a community that doesn't want them. If there's renewed appetite for it, I'd be happy to draw up revised guidelines and put them to you all for feedback, however. I certainly think it'd be an improvement.

Fair enough.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 25, 2022, 10:28:00 AM
I think a certain somebody's psyche is unraveling. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 25, 2022, 06:07:50 PM
CHE: 'Campus Reform' and a Clash Over an Assignment on Whiteness at BYU (https://www.chronicle.com/article/campus-reform-and-a-clash-over-an-assignment-on-whiteness-at-byu)

Quote
Last month a Brigham Young University professor went to bat for a colleague who was facing criticism over a class assignment she gave about whiteness. That led to an online scuffle between the professor and two conservative students running an Instagram account. Then the professor, like many others before him, became swept up in a right-wing media frenzy over course materials.

But the case of Eric Ruiz Bybee, an associate professor of multicultural education, is unusual: Bybee invoked BYU's strict honor code as leverage against the students, which he said he did to protect his colleague and her course materials. The students, meanwhile, feel that Bybee unfairly targeted them.

Another example of conservative snowflakes starting a fight and then crying to the principal? 

Quote
A survey last year by the American Association of University Professors found that 40 percent of professors who'd been featured on the right-wing news site had fielded threatening messages after the articles ran, including over email, by phone, in letters, and on social media. Some professors have developed their own protocols for how to deal with the fallout that comes with appearing on the site.

Another example of conservative menace?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Puget on April 25, 2022, 06:22:17 PM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 25, 2022, 07:46:44 AM
Quote from: Caracal on April 25, 2022, 06:51:13 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 25, 2022, 05:22:46 AM


I haven't seen the book. <snip> Can't remember the title.


What a weird creep. Is there some particular reason we should keep letting this stuff be on here?

Vociferous opposition to meaningful moderation, coupled with very little vocal support for more muscular interventions.

I'm all for it, but I don't want to unilaterally impose standards on a community that doesn't want them. If there's renewed appetite for it, I'd be happy to draw up revised guidelines and put them to you all for feedback, however. I certainly think it'd be an improvement.

I reported the comment because it is completely inappropriate. Although I'm not in favor of strong moderation, I am in favor of rules around personal attacks and blatantly inappropriate content. This crosses a line that I think is worth holding.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on April 25, 2022, 06:30:47 PM
Quote from: Puget on April 25, 2022, 06:22:17 PM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 25, 2022, 07:46:44 AM
Quote from: Caracal on April 25, 2022, 06:51:13 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on April 25, 2022, 05:22:46 AM


I haven't seen the book. <snip> Can't remember the title.


What a weird creep. Is there some particular reason we should keep letting this stuff be on here?

Vociferous opposition to meaningful moderation, coupled with very little vocal support for more muscular interventions.

I'm all for it, but I don't want to unilaterally impose standards on a community that doesn't want them. If there's renewed appetite for it, I'd be happy to draw up revised guidelines and put them to you all for feedback, however. I certainly think it'd be an improvement.

I reported the comment because it is completely inappropriate. Although I'm not in favor of strong moderation, I am in favor of rules around personal attacks and blatantly inappropriate content. This crosses a line that I think is worth holding.

+1 to the bolded.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 26, 2022, 05:14:32 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 25, 2022, 06:07:50 PM
CHE: 'Campus Reform' and a Clash Over an Assignment on Whiteness at BYU (https://www.chronicle.com/article/campus-reform-and-a-clash-over-an-assignment-on-whiteness-at-byu)


From the article:
Quote
In mid-February, a colleague told Bybee she'd been receiving harassing emails after one of her class assignments was posted online. The assignment, "Revealing Whiteness," asked students to "spend 30 minutes exploring some elements of the physical and social environment at BYU" by photographing "manifestations of 'Whiteness'" on campus.

What would that be? Buildings with white walls? Flowers that have white petals? Cars with white paint? Other than in a fine arts class, it's not clear what the point would be.

Quote
Faculty members, meanwhile, are becoming more leery of their course materials being made public, concerned that sharing assignments and readings could lack the kind of context that might be provided in a classroom discussion.

Some are adding statements to their syllabi prohibiting the unauthorized sharing of course materials. At BYU, some professors — particularly those who teach topics like race and gender — are including disclaimers that doing so could lead to consequences under the institution's honor code, Bybee said.

No better way to fuel conspiracy theories than to try to be secretive about everything......
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 26, 2022, 07:55:16 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 26, 2022, 05:14:32 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 25, 2022, 06:07:50 PM
CHE: 'Campus Reform' and a Clash Over an Assignment on Whiteness at BYU (https://www.chronicle.com/article/campus-reform-and-a-clash-over-an-assignment-on-whiteness-at-byu)


From the article:
Quote
In mid-February, a colleague told Bybee she'd been receiving harassing emails after one of her class assignments was posted online. The assignment, "Revealing Whiteness," asked students to "spend 30 minutes exploring some elements of the physical and social environment at BYU" by photographing "manifestations of 'Whiteness'" on campus.

What would that be? Buildings with white walls? Flowers that have white petals? Cars with white paint? Other than in a fine arts class, it's not clear what the point would be.

Quote
Faculty members, meanwhile, are becoming more leery of their course materials being made public, concerned that sharing assignments and readings could lack the kind of context that might be provided in a classroom discussion.

Some are adding statements to their syllabi prohibiting the unauthorized sharing of course materials. At BYU, some professors — particularly those who teach topics like race and gender — are including disclaimers that doing so could lead to consequences under the institution's honor code, Bybee said.

No better way to fuel conspiracy theories than to try to be secretive about everything......

Oh Marshy...

There is nothing "secretive" about a classroom full of students. 

If you want to know what the prof in question means about "manifestations of whiteness" you have to take the class----mocking it based on the title is juvenile.   

Think before you post, buddy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 26, 2022, 08:08:46 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 26, 2022, 07:55:16 AM

If you want to know what the prof in question means about "manifestations of whiteness" you have to take the class----mocking it based on the title is juvenile.   

The title assumes "whiteness" has some deeper meaning other than as a simple definition of an optical property. It would be completely reasonable for a student to implicitly challenge that assertion. (As many have pointed out, even in cultural terms who has qualified as "white" has varied a lot over time and geography, so any assumed definition even in cultural terms is highly idiosyncratic.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on April 26, 2022, 10:45:48 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 26, 2022, 05:14:32 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 25, 2022, 06:07:50 PM
CHE: 'Campus Reform' and a Clash Over an Assignment on Whiteness at BYU (https://www.chronicle.com/article/campus-reform-and-a-clash-over-an-assignment-on-whiteness-at-byu)


From the article:
Quote
In mid-February, a colleague told Bybee she'd been receiving harassing emails after one of her class assignments was posted online. The assignment, "Revealing Whiteness," asked students to "spend 30 minutes exploring some elements of the physical and social environment at BYU" by photographing "manifestations of 'Whiteness'" on campus.

What would that be? Buildings with white walls? Flowers that have white petals? Cars with white paint? Other than in a fine arts class, it's not clear what the point would be.

Quote
Faculty members, meanwhile, are becoming more leery of their course materials being made public, concerned that sharing assignments and readings could lack the kind of context that might be provided in a classroom discussion.

Some are adding statements to their syllabi prohibiting the unauthorized sharing of course materials. At BYU, some professors — particularly those who teach topics like race and gender — are including disclaimers that doing so could lead to consequences under the institution's honor code, Bybee said.

No better way to fuel conspiracy theories than to try to be secretive about everything......

The AAUP apparently wants us to accept any report of harassment or unwanted messages as an instance of clear harassment. They don't indicate asking for any documentation. I would expect if a lot of professors are being harassed by more conservative students then at least some of this would be getting reported to authorities. Not just by an organization that doesn't like conservatives and reaches out to liberal professors.

https://www.aaup.org/article/data-snapshot-whom-does-campus-reform-target-and-what-are-effects#.Ymgu7C-cZQL
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Anon1787 on April 26, 2022, 08:02:00 PM
Whiteness is a highly problematic social contructivist narrative that is deployed in order to center race and race relations in thinking critically and transgressively about the hegemonic structures of social, economic, and political life in the U.S. across spatial and temporal scales.

Is that highbrow enough?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 28, 2022, 03:36:27 PM
Quote from: Sun_Worshiper on April 11, 2021, 10:00:47 AM
Great! I'll look forward to the threads from you and others about conservative efforts to cancel people, since we both apparently agree that this is not something that is specific to liberals or Democrats. I'd start with the efforts to cancel the 1619 project, then move on to the attacks on Colin Kirkpatrick's right to free expression (and that of other athletes). If you want something more recent, how about calls by people like Moscow Mitch and Rand Paul for boycotts on MLB or Coca Cola. All of these are more chilling of speech than Dr. Seuss deciding not to print a few of their own books, each is deeply inconsistent with conservative "values," and each was actually endorsed by conservative media and/or politicians.

Looking forward to a rousing discussion of the various conservative efforts to cancel speech!

This Professor Officiated at a Gay Wedding. Then He Lost His Job. (https://www.chronicle.com/article/this-professor-officiated-at-a-gay-wedding-then-he-lost-his-job)

Quote
Joseph Kuilema was already on thin ice at Calvin University. His public advocacy on LGBTQ+ issues as an assistant professor of social work at Calvin, a private college affiliated with the Christian Reformed Church, had been a source of increasing tension with administrators and trustees. The board, in 2018, had denied Kuilema tenure, citing concerns about his "tone and strategy" on matters related to same-sex marriage.

It was against this backdrop that, in December, Calvin's provost received photos that appeared to show Kuilema officiating at a same-sex wedding. That information set off a chain of events that concluded, on April 18, with the university's decision to not reappoint Kuilema to his untenured faculty position, a move that is likely to end his 14-year career at Calvin.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Anon1787 on April 28, 2022, 04:55:42 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 28, 2022, 03:36:27 PM

This Professor Officiated at a Gay Wedding. Then He Lost His Job. (https://www.chronicle.com/article/this-professor-officiated-at-a-gay-wedding-then-he-lost-his-job)

Quote
Joseph Kuilema was already on thin ice at Calvin University. His public advocacy on LGBTQ+ issues as an assistant professor of social work at Calvin, a private college affiliated with the Christian Reformed Church, had been a source of increasing tension with administrators and trustees. The board, in 2018, had denied Kuilema tenure, citing concerns about his "tone and strategy" on matters related to same-sex marriage.

It was against this backdrop that, in December, Calvin's provost received photos that appeared to show Kuilema officiating at a same-sex wedding. That information set off a chain of events that concluded, on April 18, with the university's decision to not reappoint Kuilema to his untenured faculty position, a move that is likely to end his 14-year career at Calvin.

It's a religious school where it is the norm to have detailed restrictions on speech and behavior. Officiating at a ceremony of holy matrimony against church doctrine seems to be a clear firing offense. Other universities with their own dogmas that want to punish blasphemy, heresy, sacrilege, apostasy, etc. should drop the pretense of not being religious.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mamselle on April 29, 2022, 08:02:52 AM
I think I met him briefly, once. He was a kind person.

I can see the problem, though, there are topics like that which I can't discuss with an ordained friend who teaches there, and it's actually surprising he's made it to 14 years, even untenured, given the school's background and mindset.

Fuller, Gordon Conwell, and Emory, among others, will need to address this concern more pastorally and more inclusively, I believe. Many students are more understanding and accepting of difference now. They will seek schools where they, their friends, and those they don't know are treated less judgementally--in fact, they already do.

The overriding and undergirding message of love in the Hebrew and Christian scriptures needs to be considered above, beneath, and around all other messages.

It is possible to love God and others, and not to conform to heteronormativity, or require it of those others (if indeed policing whom and how we love is anyone eles' business where no harms are effected).

M.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on April 29, 2022, 08:43:15 AM
From what I've seen from a friend's Facebook posts at the situation at Calvin College/University, things are complicated. In some ways it is a school that has intentionally hired progressive faculty and wants to be a good place for diverse students. The student newspaper is clearly very much in favor of gay and lesbian rights. Yet there are many conservatives.

There's considerable push back to the decision from the community.
https://calvinchimes.org/2022/04/21/calvin-denies-reappointment-for-professor-who-officiated-same-sex-marriage/

It is also a school that has a rapidly declining student popuation. So the administration may be trying to play to alumni who would support it in a crisis.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mamselle on April 30, 2022, 03:57:44 PM
That could be true.

M.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 13, 2022, 07:57:13 AM
NBC News: 'There's no way to hide history': Teachers react to Georgia law limiting discussion of race (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/s-no-way-hide-history-teachers-react-georgia-law-limiting-discussion-r-rcna28377)

Quote
The new law, signed by Gov. Brian Kemp, seeks to prevent "divisive concepts and ideologies from invading the classroom" and removes "obscene materials" from school libraries.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 13, 2022, 08:59:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 13, 2022, 07:57:13 AM
NBC News: 'There's no way to hide history': Teachers react to Georgia law limiting discussion of race (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/s-no-way-hide-history-teachers-react-georgia-law-limiting-discussion-r-rcna28377)

Quote
The new law, signed by Gov. Brian Kemp, seeks to prevent "divisive concepts and ideologies from invading the classroom" and removes "obscene materials" from school libraries.

Quote
The law is part of a growing nationwide campaign to remove books and curricula about race, racism or the contributions of people of color from classrooms. Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Florida, New Hampshire and Tennessee are among the states that have passed similar bills, with more than a dozen others with bills or policies moving through state legislatures. As Phyllis Graham, a retired teacher in Augusta, put it, the laws are designed to "not have white kids feel bad about what their great-grandparents did."

"They are thinking nothing of what Black children need to know about history — or even what's happening now in America," she said. "And with the racial divide in America now, they want teachers to be mum in the classroom? To say this bill is about helping is disingenuous."

<snip>

Chris Stewart, the CEO of Brightbeam, a nonprofit network of education influencers, said the Georgia bill indicates that the momentum for this kind of legislation is surging.

"We're in real trouble if we continue to allow the restriction of educators ... and turn a blind eye to it," he said. "You will literally have educators who we entrust to teach kids every day ... There are going to be things that they can't teach. There are going to be books that they can't use. There are going to be movies that they can't show ... They're not just the laws that don't have any real impact. They will have a literal impact on how educated our children — Black, white and brown — will become, from what their teachers can teach them in classrooms."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 13, 2022, 09:25:37 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 13, 2022, 08:59:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 13, 2022, 07:57:13 AM
NBC News: 'There's no way to hide history': Teachers react to Georgia law limiting discussion of race (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/s-no-way-hide-history-teachers-react-georgia-law-limiting-discussion-r-rcna28377)

Quote
The new law, signed by Gov. Brian Kemp, seeks to prevent "divisive concepts and ideologies from invading the classroom" and removes "obscene materials" from school libraries.

Quote
The law is part of a growing nationwide campaign to remove books and curricula about race, racism or the contributions of people of color from classrooms. Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Florida, New Hampshire and Tennessee are among the states that have passed similar bills, with more than a dozen others with bills or policies moving through state legislatures. As Phyllis Graham, a retired teacher in Augusta, put it, the laws are designed to "not have white kids feel bad about what their great-grandparents did."

"They are thinking nothing of what Black children need to know about history — or even what's happening now in America," she said. "And with the racial divide in America now, they want teachers to be mum in the classroom? To say this bill is about helping is disingenuous."

<snip>

Chris Stewart, the CEO of Brightbeam, a nonprofit network of education influencers, said the Georgia bill indicates that the momentum for this kind of legislation is surging.

"We're in real trouble if we continue to allow the restriction of educators ... and turn a blind eye to it," he said. "You will literally have educators who we entrust to teach kids every day ... There are going to be things that they can't teach. There are going to be books that they can't use. There are going to be movies that they can't show ... They're not just the laws that don't have any real impact. They will have a literal impact on how educated our children — Black, white and brown — will become, from what their teachers can teach them in classrooms."


It's kind of a rich irony coming from the same people who want to get rid of statues, rename public monuments, etc. in order to "protect people" from having to see those reminders of history.

Yes, history is messy and uncomfortable if presented in its entirety, whether that's in school or in public reminders of it.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 13, 2022, 09:53:22 AM
I see your point, Marshy, but I do think there is a difference between teaching factual subject matter, no matter how uncomfortable for some, and lionizing slave owners on public land.

I don't know why we cannot teach in equal measure that the Founding Fathers were slaveowners and that they also crafted the beauty of the Constitution, essentially the flip-sides and paradox of American culture, which allows us to talk about them. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on May 13, 2022, 10:31:38 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 13, 2022, 09:25:37 AM

It's kind of a rich irony coming from the same people who want to get rid of statues, rename public monuments, etc. in order to "protect people" from having to see those reminders of history.

Yes, history is messy and uncomfortable if presented in its entirety, whether that's in school or in public reminders of it.

It's not to protect people  from seeing reminders of history, it's to stop celebrating shameful aspects of history.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 13, 2022, 11:12:33 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 13, 2022, 09:53:22 AM
I see your point, Marshy, but I do think there is a difference between teaching factual subject matter, no matter how uncomfortable for some, and lionizing slave owners on public land.

I don't know why we cannot teach in equal measure that the Founding Fathers were slaveowners and that they also crafted the beauty of the Constitution, essentially the flip-sides and paradox of American culture, which allows us to talk about them.

Taught in the context that slave ownership of one sort or another has been practiced all over the *world and all through history, then admitting that the Founding Fathers were products of their culture is completely reasonable.

As far as statues go, it would be far better (IMHO) to add a plaque to a statue outlining the contradictions about some historical figure than simply removing the statue.

It is absolutely impossible to learn anything from history if everything is just viewed from the lens of the current moment, since the whole idea of progress involves people changing their views and attitudes over time, and in a similar way people who are viewed as "heroes" today will be viewed as "villains" at some point in the future.




(* And contrary to what Roots would have you believe, Africans captured slaves and sold them to others; it wasn't white people chasing Africans in Africa.)
The Atlantic slave trade: What too few textbooks told you - Anthony Hazard (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NXC4Q_4JVg)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 08:07:11 AM
Don't quite know what to make of this one, except to note that this class has been taught for years and only recently became a target:

IHE: University could fire writing professor over deviant pornography (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/05/16/university-could-fire-writing-professor-over-deviant-pornography)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 16, 2022, 08:25:07 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 08:07:11 AM
Don't quite know what to make of this one, except to note that this class has been taught for years and only recently became a target:

IHE: University could fire writing professor over deviant pornography (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/05/16/university-could-fire-writing-professor-over-deviant-pornography)

A couple of things from the article:
Quote
Rallin says the accusations are based on complaints from three students who took Writing the Body in the fall and from one student outside the course. Only one of the complaints has a clear submission date, but all appear to have been written in December, Rallin also says. Yet Soka only verbally informed them (the pronoun Rallin uses) of the complaints at the end of March, halfway through the spring semester.

It's not clear if the student "outside" the course had ever taken it, but complaints from people who have never taken the course shouldn't count. Too many witch hunts have been instigated and/or fueled by people who had not actually been in the course, but were acting on hearsay. Enough already.

Complaints should be dealt with in a timely manner. If there's a concern about an instructor potentially identifying a complainant and retaliating during grading, then as long as complaints are present after final grades are submitted, there's no reason for further delay.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on May 16, 2022, 08:35:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 08:07:11 AM
Don't quite know what to make of this one, except to note that this class has been taught for years and only recently became a target:

IHE: University could fire writing professor over deviant pornography (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/05/16/university-could-fire-writing-professor-over-deviant-pornography)

The course description is
QuoteBodies as sites of meaning, modes of representation, political signifiers, and lived experiences are of central concern to work across the disciplines. Taking as its purview the production, regulation, and circulation of bodies in the context of late capitalism and globalism, this course considers how bodies are politically, socially, sexually, racially, culturally, metaphorically, and historically constituted, and promotes the invention of insurgent forms for reading and writing bodies that do not reinscribe the body in narrative myths and dualistic structures that dominate conventional understandings of bodies.
https://catalog.soka.edu/writing-program/writ-305-3

The idea that the professor's approach is inappropriate, given that course description, is ridiculous. The students signed up for the course. If they didn't know what they were doing, then there's a problem at the university with advising.

The administration should be ashamed and the interim dean who wrote the letter should resign immediately.

If they don't want such a course offered, they should remove it from the catalog.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on May 16, 2022, 08:52:55 AM
Quotelate capitalism

How do we know it's late?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 09:00:46 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 16, 2022, 08:52:55 AM
Quotelate capitalism

How do we know it's late?

You have to ask Fredric Jameson.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on May 16, 2022, 09:06:56 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 09:00:46 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 16, 2022, 08:52:55 AM
Quotelate capitalism

How do we know it's late?

You have to ask Fredric Jameson.

He doesn't know why it's "late", either. He just uses the word "late", letting it mean what he pleases.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 09:10:35 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 16, 2022, 09:06:56 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 09:00:46 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 16, 2022, 08:52:55 AM
Quotelate capitalism

How do we know it's late?

You have to ask Fredric Jameson.

He doesn't know why it's "late", either. He just uses the word "late", letting it mean what he pleases.

Yeah, but that's his job.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on May 16, 2022, 09:46:37 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 09:10:35 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 16, 2022, 09:06:56 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 09:00:46 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 16, 2022, 08:52:55 AM
Quotelate capitalism

How do we know it's late?

You have to ask Fredric Jameson.

He doesn't know why it's "late", either. He just uses the word "late", letting it mean what he pleases.

Yeah, but that's his job.

It's all true by definition, and only by definition.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on May 16, 2022, 10:07:29 AM
Thanks for that edifying scholarly exchange.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 10:28:20 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 16, 2022, 09:46:37 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 09:10:35 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 16, 2022, 09:06:56 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 09:00:46 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 16, 2022, 08:52:55 AM
Quotelate capitalism

How do we know it's late?

You have to ask Fredric Jameson.

He doesn't know why it's "late", either. He just uses the word "late", letting it mean what he pleases.

Yeah, but that's his job.

It's all true by definition, and only by definition.

Maybe you and Fredric should fight after school.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 10:30:22 AM
Quote from: downer on May 16, 2022, 10:07:29 AM
Thanks for that edifying scholarly exchange.

I aim to please.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 10:36:46 AM
She just lost her court case:

Controversial Anthropologist Loses Request for Injunction (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/05/16/controversial-anthropologist-loses-request-injunction)


Here is the original article with excerpts of her book:

Anthropologist says she is being punished because of her views (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/02/15/anthropologist-says-shes-being-punished-views-bones)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 16, 2022, 11:43:04 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 10:36:46 AM

Here is the original article with excerpts of her book:

Anthropologist says she is being punished because of her views (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/02/15/anthropologist-says-shes-being-punished-views-bones)

From the article:
Quote
Most of the bones in question were found in Alameda County, Calif., and range from 500 to 3,000 years old, Weiss said in an interview. They are in the process of being repatriated, but she would like access to them until they're gone.

If anyone finds bones of someone they think is an ancestor of mine from 500+ years ago, they're welcome to keep them in a museum. If the only connections are by DNA and geographical speculation, that's a tenuous enough connection to not worry about.

(I'm not opposed to guidelines around handling any human remains with respect, so forbidding skulls to be used for batting practice is reasonable, but scientific research is fine with me.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 04:33:39 PM
I think the scenario for Native-Americans is different than the scenario for we pinkish-white people, Marshy.

I refuse to take the blame for the destruction of the First Nations, but I do want to have absolute respect for the people of First Nation ancestry.  This is one of the ways in which we can anneal the past.

Return the remains out of respect for the living.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 17, 2022, 05:21:16 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 16, 2022, 04:33:39 PM
I think the scenario for Native-Americans is different than the scenario for we pinkish-white people, Marshy.

I refuse to take the blame for the destruction of the First Nations, but I do want to have absolute respect for the people of First Nation ancestry.  This is one of the ways in which we can anneal the past.

Return the remains out of respect for the living.

Part of the problem with the really ancient remains is that they're not clearly tied to existing groups. There are areas where different groups have occupied the same geographical area with centuries-long gaps between them. They have different artifacts and so there's no indication whether or not the later groups were decendents of the earlier ones.

I'm completely in favour of returning artifacts and remains that were taken from existing groups. If remains are from a group that no longer exists, there's no one to "return" them to, and simply interring them has no obvious benefit. (As I indicated, I don't care if remains that may be from ancestors of mine from 1000 years ago are interred or not; there's nothing sacred about having them even on the same continent as where they came from.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Diogenes on May 17, 2022, 06:52:08 AM
Not sure how I feel about that case, but the article should have done a better job of putting more context- anthropology and archaeology are constantly having to face their overtly racist past and so the sensitivity the greater community is having around this case isn't just about what was found on federal land when.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on May 18, 2022, 03:25:36 AM
Long article, behind a paywall.
https://www.chronicle.com/article/an-unacceptable-idea

Older Newsweek article here:
https://www.newsweek.com/allyn-walker-virginia-old-dominion-university-pedophilia-minor-attracted-1653340
which has the usual set of moronic comments from readers.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 18, 2022, 05:29:15 AM
Quote from: downer on May 18, 2022, 03:25:36 AM
Long article, behind a paywall.
https://www.chronicle.com/article/an-unacceptable-idea

Older Newsweek article here:
https://www.newsweek.com/allyn-walker-virginia-old-dominion-university-pedophilia-minor-attracted-1653340
which has the usual set of moronic comments from readers.

I realize this is a bit separate from the "cancellation" issue, but the underlying idea that all of a person's proclivities should be publicized, even if they aren't going to be acted on, is weird, to say the least. If a step-parent was attracted to their step-child, should they express that, even if they aren't going to act on it? Should a supervisor who is attracted to a subordinate express that, even if they aren't going to act on it? Should someone who wonders what the family pet would taste like express that, even if they don't intend to act on it?

It's a ridiculous premise. Every thought that crosses a person's mind is not automatically good for sharing.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on May 18, 2022, 06:23:26 AM
Here's a story from a far right source.
https://freebeacon.com/campus/double-jeopardy-princeton-prepares-to-axe-star-professor-who-raised-hell-over-woke-lunacy/

Supposedly Princeton will be firing an "anti-woke" professor today. We will see. I suspect it is a distortion. Katz has also been accused of sexual relationships with students, which may be the actual reason he could be fired. The far right media downplay that part of the story.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/princeton-preparing-to-fire-tenured-professor-for-opposing-far-left-activists/

Katz seems to be spoiling for a fight, but losing.
https://www.dailyprincetonian.com/article/2021/10/joshua-katz-lawsuit-acls-dismissed-by-nj-court
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on May 18, 2022, 06:35:55 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 18, 2022, 05:29:15 AM

I realize this is a bit separate from the "cancellation" issue, but the underlying idea that all of a person's proclivities should be publicized, even if they aren't going to be acted on, is weird, to say the least. If a step-parent was attracted to their step-child, should they express that, even if they aren't going to act on it? Should a supervisor who is attracted to a subordinate express that, even if they aren't going to act on it? Should someone who wonders what the family pet would taste like express that, even if they don't intend to act on it?

It's a ridiculous premise. Every thought that crosses a person's mind is not automatically good for sharing.


How is that the underlying premise? Did the CNN article say something crazy? Because the other one didn't. Walker isn't saying that you should shout your attraction to minors from the rooftops; they're saying there's a difference between feelings of attraction and sexual abuse.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 18, 2022, 08:50:23 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on May 18, 2022, 06:35:55 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 18, 2022, 05:29:15 AM

I realize this is a bit separate from the "cancellation" issue, but the underlying idea that all of a person's proclivities should be publicized, even if they aren't going to be acted on, is weird, to say the least. If a step-parent was attracted to their step-child, should they express that, even if they aren't going to act on it? Should a supervisor who is attracted to a subordinate express that, even if they aren't going to act on it? Should someone who wonders what the family pet would taste like express that, even if they don't intend to act on it?

It's a ridiculous premise. Every thought that crosses a person's mind is not automatically good for sharing.


How is that the underlying premise? Did the CNN article say something crazy? Because the other one didn't. Walker isn't saying that you should shout your attraction to minors from the rooftops; they're saying there's a difference between feelings of attraction and sexual abuse.


Quote
Walker's book, "A Long, Dark Shadow: Minor-Attracted People and Their Pursuit of Dignity", was published in June.

The "pursuit of dignity" is unnecessary if they're not engaging in any illegal activity and not shouting it from the rooftops; if their interests are kept private, then  they will be seen and treated like anyone else. The only problem comes if and when they want other people to know of their interests, i.e. when they shout it from the rooftops.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 18, 2022, 09:01:04 AM
Read the article.  Think about it before you post, Marshy.  And then don't obstinately defend your misinterpretation when it is pointed out to you.

We've discussed this before somewhere.  I think that part of Walker's problem is rhetorical and semantic.  "minor-attracted people" is a terrible relabeling during the MeToo era.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on May 18, 2022, 09:04:20 AM
I'd suggest taking your comments on how society treats minor-attracted people to a different thread. Stick to free speech issues here.

The far right is really up in arms about the Katz case at Princeton. Here's one published today.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/princeton-disgrace-joshua-katz/
It contains the sentence "Princeton University advances towards woke madrassah status:"
Nothing like a little Islamaphobia to spice up the reader's outrage.
I wonder why these hypocritical book burners are so upset about this particular case.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 18, 2022, 10:23:18 AM
Quote from: downer on May 18, 2022, 09:04:20 AM
I'd suggest taking your comments on how society treats minor-attracted people to a different thread. Stick to free speech issues here.

Again, I think the phrase "minor-attracted person" does sound like Walker is embracing or legitimizing pedophilia----which is obviously not the case----but no matter what, that is a very tone-deaf pseudo-scientific term for people who do the worst possible thing during an era in which we are hyper attuned to sexual violence.  We come on the heels of a great liberalizing of ideas----homosexuality was considered a mental illness as was gender dysphoria.  The stigma was lifted from drug addiction and alcoholism and people feel safe asking for help now; as a guy in recovery myself I have been eternally grateful for the support I have received from virtually everyone I've ever talked to about it; I think that is what Walker was aiming for. 

But still, imagine a book on "rape-attracted men" (which is a pathology) and how they can find acceptance and control rather than working for a cure to their pathology. 

Focus on free speech, yes, but maybe we shouldn't be accepting of everything.  And part of free speech is having an opinion about people who do the wrong things for the right reasons.

I wonder if there might have been a better venue to publish this in than a university press.  I don't know what that might be, however.

I am agnostic about whether Walker's approach works or not because it is so far outside my wheelhouse, but the timing is bad, the wording is bad, and maybe the whole idea is bad. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on May 18, 2022, 10:49:51 AM
What does "accepting free speech" mean?

Do we have to agree with the speech? No.
But whatever feelings of discomfort the speech generates, and how strong our disagreement, that doesn't justify Old Dominion in pushing the professor out. Similarly for Princeton, if the Katz case is really just about Katz wrote.

I'm perfectly happy to have a full discussion of sexuality, deviance, normality, and hypocrisy, but I still don't think this is the thread to do it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 18, 2022, 10:51:38 AM
The prez of Old Dominion is very cowardly, I would agree.

And this is just another example of the cancel culture hysteria running rampant on our college campuses.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 19, 2022, 04:47:52 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 18, 2022, 10:23:18 AM
Quote from: downer on May 18, 2022, 09:04:20 AM
I'd suggest taking your comments on how society treats minor-attracted people to a different thread. Stick to free speech issues here.

Again, I think the phrase "minor-attracted person" does sound like Walker is embracing or legitimizing pedophilia----which is obviously not the case----but no matter what, that is a very tone-deaf pseudo-scientific term for people who do the worst possible thing during an era in which we are hyper attuned to sexual violence.  We come on the heels of a great liberalizing of ideas----homosexuality was considered a mental illness as was gender dysphoria.  The stigma was lifted from drug addiction and alcoholism and people feel safe asking for help now; as a guy in recovery myself I have been eternally grateful for the support I have received from virtually everyone I've ever talked to about it; I think that is what Walker was aiming for. 

But still, imagine a book on "rape-attracted men" (which is a pathology) and how they can find acceptance and control rather than working for a cure to their pathology. 


Part of cancel culture is around not merely whether something can be labeled "pathology", but even whether a person who wishes to change it in themselves should have access to services to do so. A simple example is obesity, and the push by many to deny the science about the health costs of obesity. It's why the ogranization changed its name from "Weight Watchers" to "WW", because caring about weight is considered by many to be inherently bad.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Diogenes on May 19, 2022, 08:13:51 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 19, 2022, 04:47:52 AM
A simple example is obesity, and the push by many to deny the science about the health costs of obesity. It's why the ogranization changed its name from "Weight Watchers" to "WW", because caring about weight is considered by many to be inherently bad.

NO... they are just keeping up with the latest science, as any good academic ought to do, right?
BMI is BS https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106268439
In fact, the originators of it have been screaming about it's misuse from the beginning.  https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/the-body-mass-index/id1535408667?i=1000530850955

If that's your idea of this amorphous "cancel culture" you go on about, I suppose we Liberal snowflakes CANCELLED flat earth theory
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 19, 2022, 08:41:46 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on May 19, 2022, 08:13:51 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 19, 2022, 04:47:52 AM
A simple example is obesity, and the push by many to deny the science about the health costs of obesity. It's why the ogranization changed its name from "Weight Watchers" to "WW", because caring about weight is considered by many to be inherently bad.

NO... they are just keeping up with the latest science, as any good academic ought to do, right?
BMI is BS https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106268439
In fact, the originators of it have been screaming about it's misuse from the beginning.  https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/the-body-mass-index/id1535408667?i=1000530850955

If that's your idea of this amorphous "cancel culture" you go on about, I suppose we Liberal snowflakes CANCELLED flat earth theory

Problems with the BMI as a metric don't negate all of the medical data about effects of weight on health. Thee above response illustrates the point I was making about cancel culture quite well.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 19, 2022, 09:13:05 AM
Racist Fraternity Joke Prompts Outrage at Duke (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/05/19/racist-fraternity-joke-prompts-outrage-duke)

Gotta say, though, that these D-bags are the types to give frats a bad name.

What bothers me, as always, is our impulse to form some sort of censorious entity to control what we say.

Quote
Multiple Duke student organizations, including Mi Gente, Duke's largest Latinx student group, signed on to a letter making several demands of the university, including that it create a "peer judicial board" so students can hold each other accountable and establish more systems to allow for confidential peer reporting about Greek life.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 19, 2022, 11:07:32 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 19, 2022, 09:13:05 AM
Racist Fraternity Joke Prompts Outrage at Duke (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/05/19/racist-fraternity-joke-prompts-outrage-duke)

Gotta say, though, that these D-bags are the types to give frats a bad name.

What bothers me, as always, is our impulse to form some sort of censorious entity to control what we say.

Quote
Multiple Duke student organizations, including Mi Gente, Duke's largest Latinx student group, signed on to a letter making several demands of the university, including that it create a "peer judicial board" so students can hold each other accountable and establish more systems to allow for confidential peer reporting about Greek life.

It's based on the mistaken notion that rudeness can be legislated out of existence. Wherever the line is drawn as to what is "illegal", there will be people who will push right up to that line; i.e. that is what is "rude". The only sane way to make laws is to try to base them on objective concepts  of harm, rather than on subjective experiences of "offense".   Harm should be determined by the damage that is universally observable, rather than on what is individually perceived.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: waterboy on May 19, 2022, 02:51:03 PM
That would seem to me to allow for only punishment for physical abuse and relegate verbal abuse to the legal dustbin. I don't think that's equitable.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 20, 2022, 05:51:24 AM
IHE: Professor Who Tweeted About Black Privilege Reinstated (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/05/20/professor-who-tweeted-about-%E2%80%98black-privilege%E2%80%99-reinstated) despite the trumped up charges
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 20, 2022, 05:53:06 AM
IHE: Princeton Moves to Fire Professor (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/05/20/princeton-moves-fire-professor) with a bunch of trumped up charges.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on May 20, 2022, 09:33:58 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 20, 2022, 05:53:06 AM
IHE: Princeton Moves to Fire Professor (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/05/20/princeton-moves-fire-professor) with a bunch of trumped up charges.

That's just repeating claims by The Free Beacon. Not a reliable source.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on May 24, 2022, 08:42:06 AM
Quote from: downer on May 20, 2022, 09:33:58 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 20, 2022, 05:53:06 AM
IHE: Princeton Moves to Fire Professor (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/05/20/princeton-moves-fire-professor) with a bunch of trumped up charges.

That's just repeating claims by The Free Beacon. Not a reliable source.

Katz got fired.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/23/us/princeton-fires-joshua-katz.html
As expected, Princeton says it is because of his sexual misconduct and his lying about it, and he says it is because of his political stance on inclusiveness.

QuoteDr. Katz, 52, said Princeton had treated him with "gross unfairness" after he had given his "entire career" to the university.

I'm looking forward to him also saying "My name and family have been totally and permanently destroyed." wlb
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 24, 2022, 08:56:00 AM
IHE: Retract or Attack (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/05/24/black-scholars-demand-retraction-autoethnography-article)

Quote
The African Studies Review is facing calls to retract a recent article by two white Africanists promoting "autoethnography," or research incorporating one's own personal experiences.

Quote
Thompson and Mara don't suggest that they've invented autoethnography (which has long existed), and they discuss at length various opportunities for collaborative autoethnography, such as crediting research participants for their ideas and doing research together with them. Their critics nevertheless fault them (and the journal) for thinking it was a good idea for two white women to suggest centering personal experience in research involving African people, especially in the name of decolonization.

"Instead of actually being mindful of power and positionality, the authors instead co-opt autoethnography—a methodology that should be used to advocate empowerment within postcolonial discourses—to grant themselves authority to speak for African people," the demand-for-retraction letter says. "This reflects a growing trend in disconnecting the logics of decolonization from its liberatory praxis to 'campfire decolonization', which replaces engaged critique of theory with a warm and safe space under the misappropriation of inclusion and equality frameworks."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 24, 2022, 10:38:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 24, 2022, 08:56:00 AM
IHE: Retract or Attack (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/05/24/black-scholars-demand-retraction-autoethnography-article)

Quote
The African Studies Review is facing calls to retract a recent article by two white Africanists promoting "autoethnography," or research incorporating one's own personal experiences.

Quote

"Instead of actually being mindful of power and positionality, the authors instead co-opt autoethnography—a methodology that should be used to advocate empowerment within postcolonial discourses—to grant themselves authority to speak for African people," the demand-for-retraction letter says. "This reflects a growing trend in disconnecting the logics of decolonization from its liberatory praxis to 'campfire decolonization', which replaces engaged critique of theory with a warm and safe space under the misappropriation of inclusion and equality frameworks."

So am I reading this to mean that it's not sufficient for white people to incorporate the stories and insights of Africans into their research, but that they should instead vacate that field entirely so that only people from a community (in this case Africans) can research their own community?

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Diogenes on May 31, 2022, 08:03:30 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 19, 2022, 08:41:46 AM


Problems with the BMI as a metric don't negate all of the medical data about effects of weight on health. Thee above response illustrates the point I was making about cancel culture quite well.

You should probably listen to the sources I cited. It does negate it because it breaks down the validity of your independent variable. You have no equation.

Multiple threads over many weeks and we still can't get an operational definition from you about what exactly "Cancel Culture" is. Can you at least pleeaseeee define it? Until you do, I must just call it as a see it- an amorphous moving goal post that you toss around whenever it's self serving to your personal political proclivities.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 31, 2022, 08:32:06 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on May 31, 2022, 08:03:30 AM

Multiple threads over many weeks and we still can't get an operational definition from you about what exactly "Cancel Culture" is. Can you at least pleeaseeee define it?

At its most basic, it's about silencing people rather than refuting  arguments. Saying "This person is wrong, and this is why...." isn't cancel culture. Saying "This person is wrong, and should be fired for saying such a thing" is cancel culture. It isn't confined to one end of the political spectrum; it has a long tradition in religious circles where people were punished for blasphemy. It's the idea that certain statements cannot be made publicly, or that even certain questions cannot be asked.(In the absence of cancel culture, there can still be statements or questions that may be considered in bad taste, or poorly worded, but in that manner they are violations of etiquette, rather than violations of laws or formal codes of conduct.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on May 31, 2022, 10:12:26 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 31, 2022, 08:32:06 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on May 31, 2022, 08:03:30 AM

Multiple threads over many weeks and we still can't get an operational definition from you about what exactly "Cancel Culture" is. Can you at least pleeaseeee define it?

At its most basic, it's about silencing people rather than refuting  arguments. Saying "This person is wrong, and this is why...." isn't cancel culture. Saying "This person is wrong, and should be fired for saying such a thing" is cancel culture. It isn't confined to one end of the political spectrum; it has a long tradition in religious circles where people were punished for blasphemy. It's the idea that certain statements cannot be made publicly, or that even certain questions cannot be asked.(In the absence of cancel culture, there can still be statements or questions that may be considered in bad taste, or poorly worded, but in that manner they are violations of etiquette, rather than violations of laws or formal codes of conduct.)

Still, anyone has the right to say "You know what? I don't feel like engaging in discussion with you any more. And frankly, you are being toxic and dragging the conversation into the pits of heck instead of moving it forward. So... kthxbye."

Is that Cancel Culture? Or just natural consequences to behaving like a tool?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 31, 2022, 10:21:18 AM
There actually is a Merriam-Webster  definition of "cancel culture": (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cancel%20culture)

Quote
Definition of cancel culture
: the practice or tendency of engaging in mass canceling (see CANCEL entry 1 sense 1e) as a way of expressing disapproval and exerting social pressure

For those of you who aren't aware, cancel culture refers to the mass withdrawal of support from public figures or celebrities who have done things that aren't socially accepted today. This practice of "canceling" or mass shaming often occurs on social media platforms such as Twitter, Instagram, or Facebook.
— Demetria Slyt

At a Republican National Convention where speakers' rage about cancel culture has been clear, former Covington Catholic student Nick Sandmann used his speaking slot to introduce himself as "the teenager who was defamed by the media."
— Hunter Woodall

The relative difficulty of doing something good and the prolonged waiting period to receive credit for it is why cancel culture has flourished. It offers quicker social rewards.
— Rob Henderson
Cancel culture is supported as a tool to stop offensive and harmful behavior, while others find it problematic and toxic.
— Elise Krumholz

cancel culture warriors

the cancel culture movement

also : the people who engage in or support this practice
I have to admit that I'm not opposed to the majority of legacies, groups of people, and trends being scrutinized by the cancel culture. In fact, the response to many of the ideologies and personalities that have been "cancelled" is, in most cases, long, long overdue. But I have a few concerns ...
— Brad Peters

First Known Use of cancel culture
2016, in the meaning defined above



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 31, 2022, 11:05:30 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 31, 2022, 10:12:26 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 31, 2022, 08:32:06 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on May 31, 2022, 08:03:30 AM

Multiple threads over many weeks and we still can't get an operational definition from you about what exactly "Cancel Culture" is. Can you at least pleeaseeee define it?

At its most basic, it's about silencing people rather than refuting  arguments. Saying "This person is wrong, and this is why...." isn't cancel culture. Saying "This person is wrong, and should be fired for saying such a thing" is cancel culture. It isn't confined to one end of the political spectrum; it has a long tradition in religious circles where people were punished for blasphemy. It's the idea that certain statements cannot be made publicly, or that even certain questions cannot be asked.(In the absence of cancel culture, there can still be statements or questions that may be considered in bad taste, or poorly worded, but in that manner they are violations of etiquette, rather than violations of laws or formal codes of conduct.)

Still, anyone has the right to say "You know what? I don't feel like engaging in discussion with you any more. And frankly, you are being toxic and dragging the conversation into the pits of heck instead of moving it forward. So... kthxbye."

Is that Cancel Culture? Or just natural consequences to behaving like a tool?

Any individual is completely welcome to ignore, avoid, whatever someone they think is "behaving like a tool". It only becomes cancel culture when they try to enlist a mob, the person's employer, the government, etc. to punish the person for "behaving like a tool". Among other things, it reflects a strong self-righteous streak to say that just because I think something is offensive, I don't think someone else should be allowed to say it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on May 31, 2022, 01:22:36 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 31, 2022, 10:21:18 AM
There actually is a Merriam-Webster  definition of "cancel culture": (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cancel%20culture)

Quote
At a Republican National Convention where speakers' rage about cancel culture has been clear, former Covington Catholic student Nick Sandmann used his speaking slot to introduce himself as "the teenager who was defamed by the media."
— Hunter Woodall

He was hardly "defamed" if he is speaking at the RNC. So looks like cancel culture is failing miserably.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 31, 2022, 02:09:10 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 31, 2022, 11:05:30 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 31, 2022, 10:12:26 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 31, 2022, 08:32:06 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on May 31, 2022, 08:03:30 AM

Multiple threads over many weeks and we still can't get an operational definition from you about what exactly "Cancel Culture" is. Can you at least pleeaseeee define it?

At its most basic, it's about silencing people rather than refuting  arguments. Saying "This person is wrong, and this is why...." isn't cancel culture. Saying "This person is wrong, and should be fired for saying such a thing" is cancel culture. It isn't confined to one end of the political spectrum; it has a long tradition in religious circles where people were punished for blasphemy. It's the idea that certain statements cannot be made publicly, or that even certain questions cannot be asked.(In the absence of cancel culture, there can still be statements or questions that may be considered in bad taste, or poorly worded, but in that manner they are violations of etiquette, rather than violations of laws or formal codes of conduct.)

Still, anyone has the right to say "You know what? I don't feel like engaging in discussion with you any more. And frankly, you are being toxic and dragging the conversation into the pits of heck instead of moving it forward. So... kthxbye."

Is that Cancel Culture? Or just natural consequences to behaving like a tool?

Any individual is completely welcome to ignore, avoid, whatever someone they think is "behaving like a tool". It only becomes cancel culture when they try to enlist a mob, the person's employer, the government, etc. to punish the person for "behaving like a tool". Among other things, it reflects a strong self-righteous streak to say that just because I think something is offensive, I don't think someone else should be allowed to say it.

Honestly, Marshy's explanation is pretty good.

I have no problem with talking back to someone or disagreeing, loudly if need be, but it is dangerous for all of us to threaten people's livelihoods or safety or online personas. 

Can't we see that we are on thin ice when our opinions are curtailed out of menace and fear?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on May 31, 2022, 08:06:15 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 31, 2022, 11:05:30 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 31, 2022, 10:12:26 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 31, 2022, 08:32:06 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on May 31, 2022, 08:03:30 AM

Multiple threads over many weeks and we still can't get an operational definition from you about what exactly "Cancel Culture" is. Can you at least pleeaseeee define it?

At its most basic, it's about silencing people rather than refuting  arguments. Saying "This person is wrong, and this is why...." isn't cancel culture. Saying "This person is wrong, and should be fired for saying such a thing" is cancel culture. It isn't confined to one end of the political spectrum; it has a long tradition in religious circles where people were punished for blasphemy. It's the idea that certain statements cannot be made publicly, or that even certain questions cannot be asked.(In the absence of cancel culture, there can still be statements or questions that may be considered in bad taste, or poorly worded, but in that manner they are violations of etiquette, rather than violations of laws or formal codes of conduct.)

Still, anyone has the right to say "You know what? I don't feel like engaging in discussion with you any more. And frankly, you are being toxic and dragging the conversation into the pits of heck instead of moving it forward. So... kthxbye."

Is that Cancel Culture? Or just natural consequences to behaving like a tool?

Any individual is completely welcome to ignore, avoid, whatever someone they think is "behaving like a tool". It only becomes cancel culture when they try to enlist a mob, the person's employer, the government, etc. to punish the person for "behaving like a tool". Among other things, it reflects a strong self-righteous streak to say that just because I think something is offensive, I don't think someone else should be allowed to say it.

I used to work at a company where one of the founders had a rather right-wing blog with Islamophobic themes. Many who worked at the company were Muslim.

Should the founder, even as a private citizen, be permitted by the company's board, to say hateful things about his own employees?

Could the employees point to discrimination on the basis of religion? And sue?

Would talented candidates, upon seeing this drivel, choose to work elsewhere? And, would that hurt the company, other employees, the investors?

When is it "cancel culture?" And when is it saying "This is inappropriate and we are not going to tolerate this kind of behavior?"

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on May 31, 2022, 08:31:22 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 31, 2022, 08:06:15 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 31, 2022, 11:05:30 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 31, 2022, 10:12:26 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 31, 2022, 08:32:06 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on May 31, 2022, 08:03:30 AM

Multiple threads over many weeks and we still can't get an operational definition from you about what exactly "Cancel Culture" is. Can you at least pleeaseeee define it?

At its most basic, it's about silencing people rather than refuting  arguments. Saying "This person is wrong, and this is why...." isn't cancel culture. Saying "This person is wrong, and should be fired for saying such a thing" is cancel culture. It isn't confined to one end of the political spectrum; it has a long tradition in religious circles where people were punished for blasphemy. It's the idea that certain statements cannot be made publicly, or that even certain questions cannot be asked.(In the absence of cancel culture, there can still be statements or questions that may be considered in bad taste, or poorly worded, but in that manner they are violations of etiquette, rather than violations of laws or formal codes of conduct.)

Still, anyone has the right to say "You know what? I don't feel like engaging in discussion with you any more. And frankly, you are being toxic and dragging the conversation into the pits of heck instead of moving it forward. So... kthxbye."

Is that Cancel Culture? Or just natural consequences to behaving like a tool?

Any individual is completely welcome to ignore, avoid, whatever someone they think is "behaving like a tool". It only becomes cancel culture when they try to enlist a mob, the person's employer, the government, etc. to punish the person for "behaving like a tool". Among other things, it reflects a strong self-righteous streak to say that just because I think something is offensive, I don't think someone else should be allowed to say it.

I used to work at a company where one of the founders had a rather right-wing blog with Islamophobic themes. Many who worked at the company were Muslim.

Should the founder, even as a private citizen, be permitted by the company's board, to say hateful things about his own employees?

Could the employees point to discrimination on the basis of religion? And sue?

Would talented candidates, upon seeing this drivel, choose to work elsewhere? And, would that hurt the company, other employees, the investors?

When is it "cancel culture?" And when is it saying "This is inappropriate and we are not going to tolerate this kind of behavior?"

That is an an instructive example of the consequences of discrimination from animus.

Muslim workers would presumably like less to work for such a person. He would have staffing difficulties and have to pay people more. His profits would be  lower. He'd find it harder to get bank credit, and so on.

The discriminator loses income. People like that tend to disappear.

On that logic, discrimination from animus is not so much present. What's surely present is statistical discrimination.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ergative on June 01, 2022, 03:19:24 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 31, 2022, 08:31:22 PM

That is an an instructive example of the consequences of discrimination from animus.

Muslim workers would presumably like less to work for such a person. He would have staffing difficulties and have to pay people more. His profits would be  lower. He'd find it harder to get bank credit, and so on.

The discriminator loses income. People like that tend to disappear.

On that logic, discrimination from animus is not so much present. What's surely present is statistical discrimination.

You may well be right about the long-term consequences and systemic issues. However, I am cynical enough to believe that people are very happy to take a personal hit to their finances if it serves their bigotry, so I'm hesitant to conclude that the detrimental consequences of discrimination from animus are sufficient to ensure it peters out.

But regardless, whether or not the discrimination is statistical or motivated by animus, the consequences for the targets of it are the same: Muslim workers do not have access to a job for which non-Muslims get paid higher wages. Knowing that the company might go bankrupt in a year or five years is not much comfort if I need to pay my rent this month.

If there are not explicit consequences for this sort of behavior, then losing this company due to economic forces will not prevent another company from being started by another bigot with the same practices. There's no shortage of bigots refusing to hire Muslims, and as long as they're learning the hard way that they shouldn't discriminate against Muslims, there are Muslims being shut out of a portion of the job market. Why should it be on them to wait for the 'natural' consequences of discrimination by animus to clear it out of the workplace? (if it can be cleared out in the first place, which, as I've said, I don't think is likely.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 01, 2022, 05:30:48 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 31, 2022, 08:06:15 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 31, 2022, 11:05:30 AM

Any individual is completely welcome to ignore, avoid, whatever someone they think is "behaving like a tool". It only becomes cancel culture when they try to enlist a mob, the person's employer, the government, etc. to punish the person for "behaving like a tool". Among other things, it reflects a strong self-righteous streak to say that just because I think something is offensive, I don't think someone else should be allowed to say it.

I used to work at a company where one of the founders had a rather right-wing blog with Islamophobic themes. Many who worked at the company were Muslim.

Should the founder, even as a private citizen, be permitted by the company's board, to say hateful things about his own employees?



A company can have policies about employees (including the CEO) saying negative things in public about the company or any of its other employees. This would work both ways, so if employees publicly said nasty things about a supervisor they could also be subject to sanctions.

Quote from: ergative on June 01, 2022, 03:19:24 AM

If there are not explicit consequences for this sort of behavior, then losing this company due to economic forces will not prevent another company from being started by another bigot with the same practices.

As I said above, an organization can have consequences for members of that organization publicly saying bad things about other members of the organization. That's a far cry from firing someone for saying something negative about people who share a characteristic with some members of the organization.

(And in that case, as Dismalist indicated, the more widely known those comments are the more likely they are to negatively affect the organization. Most people don't like bigotry in general, like any other rude behaviour, and will avoid it.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 01, 2022, 07:09:40 AM
Quote from: ergative on June 01, 2022, 03:19:24 AM
If there are not explicit consequences for this sort of behavior, then losing this company due to economic forces will not prevent another company from being started by another bigot with the same practices. There's no shortage of bigots refusing to hire Muslims, and as long as they're learning the hard way that they shouldn't discriminate against Muslims, there are Muslims being shut out of a portion of the job market. Why should it be on them to wait for the 'natural' consequences of discrimination by animus to clear it out of the workplace? (if it can be cleared out in the first place, which, as I've said, I don't think is likely.)

What, then, is your solution?

At what point does this become Orwellian?  And at what point do we all become afraid to speak our minds?

We all have prejudices.  I do not like or respect Trump voters as a group, not necessarily on a one-to-one basis.  The rhetoric and politics of certain fundamental religious groups really bother me.  Except for the Eagles and some "horse with no name" type songs, I hate, hate, hate '70s "soft rock."  My opinions are based on lived experience and media coverage. 

I do not discuss these opinions in the classroom (or whatever career might come next) as they are not germane to what I do and would be inappropriate.  So my opinions are separate from my job.

Am I not allowed to express these thoughts anywhere else because someone might not want to work with me of their own accord?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 01, 2022, 07:14:12 AM
The other problem with the thought police is that the patrol does not stop with bigots who run companies but bleeds out into many other parts of life.  This problem becomes particularly acute now that the Internet holds our thoughts in a kind of limbo, potentially forever.

I am glad to see that cancel culture does not always work:

IHE: 'African Studies Review' Won't Retract Autoethnography Essay (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/06/01/%E2%80%98african-studies-review%E2%80%99-won%E2%80%99t-retract-autoethnography-essay).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 01, 2022, 09:33:29 AM
Don't know if this belongs here, but I stumbled over this on Reddit:

Reddit: Students are upset about use of the n-word, what should I do? (https://www.reddit.com/r/Professors/comments/v2hhdl/students_are_upset_about_use_of_the_nword_what/)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 01, 2022, 10:18:02 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 01, 2022, 09:33:29 AM
Don't know if this belongs here, but I stumbled over this on Reddit:

Reddit: Students are upset about use of the n-word, what should I do? (https://www.reddit.com/r/Professors/comments/v2hhdl/students_are_upset_about_use_of_the_nword_what/)

Here is John McWhorter's disquisition on the word. Looks like words come and go into taboo.
QuoteSlurs have become our profanity.

Treat the n-word as you would the c-word and the f-word.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/30/opinion/john-mcwhorter-n-word-unsayable.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/30/opinion/john-mcwhorter-n-word-unsayable.html)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 01, 2022, 11:29:07 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 01, 2022, 09:33:29 AM
Don't know if this belongs here, but I stumbled over this on Reddit:

Reddit: Students are upset about use of the n-word, what should I do? (https://www.reddit.com/r/Professors/comments/v2hhdl/students_are_upset_about_use_of_the_nword_what/)


From the link:
Quote
One student specifically stated, "In a different class, one of my Black classmates who had heard of this incident had broken down in tears that this white history professor, who was teaching the human rights unit this week, chose to say the n–word in front of Black freshmen students who felt that they could not share their uncomfortableness out loud."


This is one of the most asinine parts of cancel culture- someone who did not even directly hear the offensive word is distraught due to the mere knowledge that it was uttered somewhere.
God help them if people like that ever see the news.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 01, 2022, 11:52:33 AM
I don't think it's asinine, Marsh, but rather religion-like. Imagine the reaction of a western European in the middle ages upon learning that there were infidels abroad [and that perhaps he should go on a crusade ...] .

But the wider point of McWorther is that usage does change, so I sympathize, at least a little.



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 02, 2022, 04:56:04 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 01, 2022, 11:52:33 AM
I don't think it's asinine, Marsh, but rather religion-like. Imagine the reaction of a western European in the middle ages upon learning that there were infidels abroad [and that perhaps he should go on a crusade ...] .

But the wider point of McWorther is that usage does change, so I sympathize, at least a little.

It's definitely *religion-like. But it's not like someone hearing about infidels for the first time; the person here obviously knew "the word" was used historically, and presumably also knew that historical documents would contain "the word", and so anyone reading one of those documents would see "the word". It's more like the reaction when Harry Potter first innocently said Voldemort, rather than He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named.

(*And as McWhorter says, it's a bad religion.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 02, 2022, 06:45:37 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 31, 2022, 08:31:22 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 31, 2022, 08:06:15 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 31, 2022, 11:05:30 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 31, 2022, 10:12:26 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 31, 2022, 08:32:06 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on May 31, 2022, 08:03:30 AM

Multiple threads over many weeks and we still can't get an operational definition from you about what exactly "Cancel Culture" is. Can you at least pleeaseeee define it?

At its most basic, it's about silencing people rather than refuting  arguments. Saying "This person is wrong, and this is why...." isn't cancel culture. Saying "This person is wrong, and should be fired for saying such a thing" is cancel culture. It isn't confined to one end of the political spectrum; it has a long tradition in religious circles where people were punished for blasphemy. It's the idea that certain statements cannot be made publicly, or that even certain questions cannot be asked.(In the absence of cancel culture, there can still be statements or questions that may be considered in bad taste, or poorly worded, but in that manner they are violations of etiquette, rather than violations of laws or formal codes of conduct.)

Still, anyone has the right to say "You know what? I don't feel like engaging in discussion with you any more. And frankly, you are being toxic and dragging the conversation into the pits of heck instead of moving it forward. So... kthxbye."

Is that Cancel Culture? Or just natural consequences to behaving like a tool?

Any individual is completely welcome to ignore, avoid, whatever someone they think is "behaving like a tool". It only becomes cancel culture when they try to enlist a mob, the person's employer, the government, etc. to punish the person for "behaving like a tool". Among other things, it reflects a strong self-righteous streak to say that just because I think something is offensive, I don't think someone else should be allowed to say it.

I used to work at a company where one of the founders had a rather right-wing blog with Islamophobic themes. Many who worked at the company were Muslim.

Should the founder, even as a private citizen, be permitted by the company's board, to say hateful things about his own employees?

Could the employees point to discrimination on the basis of religion? And sue?

Would talented candidates, upon seeing this drivel, choose to work elsewhere? And, would that hurt the company, other employees, the investors?

When is it "cancel culture?" And when is it saying "This is inappropriate and we are not going to tolerate this kind of behavior?"

That is an an instructive example of the consequences of discrimination from animus.

Muslim workers would presumably like less to work for such a person. He would have staffing difficulties and have to pay people more. His profits would be  lower. He'd find it harder to get bank credit, and so on.

The discriminator loses income. People like that tend to disappear.

On that logic, discrimination from animus is not so much present. What's surely present is statistical discrimination.

Here is the problem. We hope that there are natural consequences from behaving badly. But, there are not. Or those at the wrong end of the bad behavior tend to be hurt more, because the founder of the company was already a wealthy man and the Muslim employees had to decide how much crap they were going to take from him to keep their jobs.

Another example - this bizarro system we have of declaring some people "illegal." What does it cost our economy in law enforcement, lost wages, lost taxes and imprisoning people who are caught and deported simply for the reason of existence?

Imagine if we allowed anyone who wanted to immigrate to register for a Social Security number, register with the local authorities, get a job, pay taxes, send their kids to school and eventually become citizens?

No border control, no deaths in the Rio Grande, taxes would be paid, real crimes could be reported because victims wouldn't fear being exposed...

The fact is, a few people selfishly benefit from this system, but it hurts the undocumented workers, their families, and frankly, the overall US economy.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 02, 2022, 07:08:00 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 02, 2022, 06:45:37 AM

Here is the problem. We hope that there are natural consequences from behaving badly. But, there are not.


Actually, most of us sincerely hope there are no (or at least very mild) consequences for our own bad actions. It's the bad actions of others that we want to come with consequences.


Quote
Another example - this bizarro system we have of declaring some people "illegal." What does it cost our economy in law enforcement, lost wages, lost taxes and imprisoning people who are caught and deported simply for the reason of existence?

Imagine if we allowed anyone who wanted to immigrate to register for a Social Security number, register with the local authorities, get a job, pay taxes, send their kids to school and eventually become citizens?

This assumes that everyone who wants to enter a country is both able and willing to "get a job". If an illiterate person from some country who doesn't speak the language arrives, how long will it be before that person can get a job and pay taxes? What happens if a billion people want to come to a given country?

This is a "tragedy of the commons issue"; it's only remotely feasible if the total number of people doing it is small enough for the system to absorb. If everyone did it, the entire system would collapse.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 02, 2022, 07:18:14 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 02, 2022, 07:08:00 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 02, 2022, 06:45:37 AM

Here is the problem. We hope that there are natural consequences from behaving badly. But, there are not.


Actually, most of us sincerely hope there are no (or at least very mild) consequences for our own bad actions. It's the bad actions of others that we want to come with consequences.


Quote
Another example - this bizarro system we have of declaring some people "illegal." What does it cost our economy in law enforcement, lost wages, lost taxes and imprisoning people who are caught and deported simply for the reason of existence?

Imagine if we allowed anyone who wanted to immigrate to register for a Social Security number, register with the local authorities, get a job, pay taxes, send their kids to school and eventually become citizens?

This assumes that everyone who wants to enter a country is both able and willing to "get a job". If an illiterate person from some country who doesn't speak the language arrives, how long will it be before that person can get a job and pay taxes? What happens if a billion people want to come to a given country?

This is a "tragedy of the commons issue"; it's only remotely feasible if the total number of people doing it is small enough for the system to absorb. If everyone did it, the entire system would collapse.

So far, lots of people who come to this country get jobs and work pretty hard, even if English is their second language and they weren't highly literate in their primary language.

I'd rather have a billion more people in this country than a massive border patrol, dead bodies in the borderlands, human trafficking and all the other abuses that take place because we have declared a group of people "illegal."

I'd like to think that we can build a longer table, not a higher wall.



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 02, 2022, 07:25:33 AM
QuoteImagine if we allowed anyone who wanted to immigrate to register for a Social Security number, register with the local authorities, get a job, pay taxes, send their kids to school and eventually become citizens?

One can have free immigration or a welfare state, but not both.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 02, 2022, 08:20:44 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 02, 2022, 07:18:14 AM

I'd rather have a billion more people in this country than a massive border patrol, dead bodies in the borderlands, human trafficking and all the other abuses that take place because we have declared a group of people "illegal."


None of those people would have housing, and have schools to go to right now. And with all of the governments services they'll need until they're able to get jobs and pay taxes, (assuming whatever they work at can find markets for what they produce), there will be no government resources available to build housing or schools.

Immigration is necessary and good; however, it needs to be at pace that the economy can absorb. In the scenario above, those hundreds of millions of immigrants who don't yet have housing or schools or government support would be living in dire poverty for the forseeable future. Letting them in the country wouldn't be doing them any favours, and may actually leave them worse off than they were in their countries of origin.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 02, 2022, 05:06:46 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 02, 2022, 06:45:37 AM
Here is the problem. We hope that there are natural consequences from behaving badly. But, there are not. Or those at the wrong end of the bad behavior tend to be hurt more, because the founder of the company was already a wealthy man and the Muslim employees had to decide how much crap they were going to take from him to keep their jobs.

I'm sorry, but again, what is your solution?

Do we just police everyone to make sure they are not "behaving badly?"

And we must acknowledge that to certain people, we are "behaving badly" in one way or another.  Your bigot boss undoubtedly believes we academics behave badly----stereotyping conservative bigot acknowledged.

People are simply going to behave badly. 

As unfair as it is (and I acknowledge that my idea of the importance of "fair" is predicated upon my background as a pinkish-white cisgender straight married middle-aged male from an educated and Episcopalian middle-class family) but the Muslim employees must decide what is more important, job-security or working for a bigot.  They always have the option of looking for a new job or writing their own blogs and calling their boss out on his bigotry too and then facing the consequences as we all do for our opinions (as unfair as that may be and acknowledging the power dynamic and threat of losing one's job----followed by a wrongful termination lawsuit).


Quote from: ciao_yall on June 02, 2022, 06:45:37 AM
Another example - this bizarro system we have of declaring some people "illegal." What does it cost our economy in law enforcement, lost wages, lost taxes and imprisoning people who are caught and deported simply for the reason of existence?

Imagine if we allowed anyone who wanted to immigrate to register for a Social Security number, register with the local authorities, get a job, pay taxes, send their kids to school and eventually become citizens?

No border control, no deaths in the Rio Grande, taxes would be paid, real crimes could be reported because victims wouldn't fear being exposed...

The fact is, a few people selfishly benefit from this system, but it hurts the undocumented workers, their families, and frankly, the overall US economy.

Sounds very logical and humane.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 02, 2022, 05:13:15 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 02, 2022, 08:20:44 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 02, 2022, 07:18:14 AM

I'd rather have a billion more people in this country than a massive border patrol, dead bodies in the borderlands, human trafficking and all the other abuses that take place because we have declared a group of people "illegal."


None of those people would have housing, and have schools to go to right now. And with all of the governments services they'll need until they're able to get jobs and pay taxes, (assuming whatever they work at can find markets for what they produce), there will be no government resources available to build housing or schools.

Immigration is necessary and good; however, it needs to be at pace that the economy can absorb. In the scenario above, those hundreds of millions of immigrants who don't yet have housing or schools or government support would be living in dire poverty for the forseeable future. Letting them in the country wouldn't be doing them any favours, and may actually leave them worse off than they were in their countries of origin.

You might look into how Americans deal with immigration, Marshy.  I've done a bit of journalism on this very subject.

Your conjectures are all wrong.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 03, 2022, 04:56:11 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 02, 2022, 05:13:15 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 02, 2022, 08:20:44 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 02, 2022, 07:18:14 AM

I'd rather have a billion more people in this country than a massive border patrol, dead bodies in the borderlands, human trafficking and all the other abuses that take place because we have declared a group of people "illegal."


None of those people would have housing, and have schools to go to right now. And with all of the governments services they'll need until they're able to get jobs and pay taxes, (assuming whatever they work at can find markets for what they produce), there will be no government resources available to build housing or schools.

Immigration is necessary and good; however, it needs to be at pace that the economy can absorb. In the scenario above, those hundreds of millions of immigrants who don't yet have housing or schools or government support would be living in dire poverty for the forseeable future. Letting them in the country wouldn't be doing them any favours, and may actually leave them worse off than they were in their countries of origin.

You might look into how Americans deal with immigration, Marshy.  I've done a bit of journalism on this very subject.

Your conjectures are all wrong.

Come on, Wahoo. Quadrupling the population over some unspecified (but apparently short) time frame would be catastrophic for any country.  (Look at the strain on Ukraine's neighbours right now.)

The ridiculous hyperbole doesn't help anything.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 03, 2022, 08:30:17 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 03, 2022, 04:56:11 AM
The ridiculous hyperbole doesn't help anything.

Marshy, quadrupling the population is hyperbole. Not gunna happen.  A good deal of what you say is hyperbole or an unfounded supposition on your part.

And America has a system for incorporating immigrants that works very well if it is allowed to work.

And many places in America could use the economic benefit and industry of immigrants----I live in one such place.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 03, 2022, 08:38:25 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 03, 2022, 08:30:17 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 03, 2022, 04:56:11 AM
The ridiculous hyperbole doesn't help anything.

Marshy, quadrupling the population is hyperbole. Not gunna happen.  A good deal of what you say is hyperbole or an unfounded supposition on your part.

And America has a system for incorporating immigrants that works very well if it is allowed to work.

And many places in America could use the economic benefit and industry of immigrants----I live in one such place.

And I bet where you live the pace of immigration is somewhat controlled, so that, as you say, the community can use "the economic benefit and industry of immigrants". With open borders, there would be certain communities that would be swamped with immigrants beyond what would be helpful.

Even Sweden has admitted that taking in immigration at too high a rate has resulted in serious problems for the country.
Why does SWEDEN NO LONGER WANT IMMIGRANTS? - VisualPolitik EN (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CSUimZjiI0)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on June 03, 2022, 08:43:38 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 03, 2022, 08:38:25 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 03, 2022, 08:30:17 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 03, 2022, 04:56:11 AM
The ridiculous hyperbole doesn't help anything.

Marshy, quadrupling the population is hyperbole. Not gunna happen.  A good deal of what you say is hyperbole or an unfounded supposition on your part.

And America has a system for incorporating immigrants that works very well if it is allowed to work.

And many places in America could use the economic benefit and industry of immigrants----I live in one such place.

And I bet where you live the pace of immigration is somewhat controlled, so that, as you say, the community can use "the economic benefit and industry of immigrants". With open borders, there would be certain communities that would be swamped with immigrants beyond what would be helpful.

Even Sweden has admitted that taking in immigration at too high a rate has resulted in serious problems for the country.
Why does SWEDEN NO LONGER WANT IMMIGRANTS? - VisualPolitik EN (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CSUimZjiI0)

The point is that the US has ALWAYS counted on steady immigration to provide a workforce. We are now in danger of becoming Japan in terms of the age demographic of our population. We simply don't have enough workers, and it has been self-inflicted by drastically cutting the pipeline of new labor.

Several years ago this was documented in a great documentary: A Day without a Mexican.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 03, 2022, 11:34:06 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on June 03, 2022, 08:43:38 AM

The point is that the US has ALWAYS counted on steady immigration to provide a workforce. We are now in danger of becoming Japan in terms of the age demographic of our population. We simply don't have enough workers, and it has been self-inflicted by drastically cutting the pipeline of new labor.

Several years ago this was documented in a great documentary: A Day without a Mexican.

Basically all developed countries are below their natural replacement rate, so all developed countries need immigration to maintain a stable (and preferably, slightly growing, population).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on June 03, 2022, 01:30:23 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 03, 2022, 11:34:06 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on June 03, 2022, 08:43:38 AM

The point is that the US has ALWAYS counted on steady immigration to provide a workforce. We are now in danger of becoming Japan in terms of the age demographic of our population. We simply don't have enough workers, and it has been self-inflicted by drastically cutting the pipeline of new labor.

Several years ago this was documented in a great documentary: A Day without a Mexican.

Basically all developed countries are below their natural replacement rate, so all developed countries need immigration to maintain a stable (and preferably, slightly growing, population).

So I guess that's an agreement with what I posted?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 03, 2022, 01:44:46 PM
Just for the record, people, I'm for more legal immigration, a lot more, and a lot less illegal immigration.

But don't worry about replacement rates. If people don't want to be replaced, they won't be replaced. So what?

I thought there was an overpopulation problem just a few decades ago. And there were depleting resources. And now we got too much CO2. Fewer people would mean less global warming.

Just everybody decide which problem is biggest. :-)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on June 03, 2022, 01:53:26 PM
Well, nobody said it would be easy:)

Channeling Gilda as Rosanne Roseannadanna: If it's not one thing it's another.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 03, 2022, 06:14:45 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 03, 2022, 01:44:46 PM
Just for the record, people, I'm for more legal immigration, a lot more, and a lot less illegal immigration.


Legal and illegal are set by policy. We can change policy. It's not like the law of gravity.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 03, 2022, 06:18:22 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 03, 2022, 06:14:45 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 03, 2022, 01:44:46 PM
Just for the record, people, I'm for more legal immigration, a lot more, and a lot less illegal immigration.


Legal and illegal are set by policy. We can change policy. It's not like the law of gravity.

Precisely!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 03, 2022, 07:54:59 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on June 03, 2022, 01:30:23 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 03, 2022, 11:34:06 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on June 03, 2022, 08:43:38 AM

The point is that the US has ALWAYS counted on steady immigration to provide a workforce. We are now in danger of becoming Japan in terms of the age demographic of our population. We simply don't have enough workers, and it has been self-inflicted by drastically cutting the pipeline of new labor.

Several years ago this was documented in a great documentary: A Day without a Mexican.

Basically all developed countries are below their natural replacement rate, so all developed countries need immigration to maintain a stable (and preferably, slightly growing, population).

So I guess that's an agreement with what I posted?

Sure. The small fringe on one end of the spectrum who think all immigration is bad and the small fringe on the other end who think open borders is a good idea both have no grasp of how immigrants fit in the economy. Most people are smarter than that and realize the need for  controlled, sustainable immigration.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on June 04, 2022, 06:54:17 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 03, 2022, 07:54:59 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on June 03, 2022, 01:30:23 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 03, 2022, 11:34:06 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on June 03, 2022, 08:43:38 AM

The point is that the US has ALWAYS counted on steady immigration to provide a workforce. We are now in danger of becoming Japan in terms of the age demographic of our population. We simply don't have enough workers, and it has been self-inflicted by drastically cutting the pipeline of new labor.

Several years ago this was documented in a great documentary: A Day without a Mexican.

Basically all developed countries are below their natural replacement rate, so all developed countries need immigration to maintain a stable (and preferably, slightly growing, population).

So I guess that's an agreement with what I posted?

Sure. The small fringe on one end of the spectrum who think all immigration is bad and the small fringe on the other end who think open borders is a good idea both have no grasp of how immigrants fit in the economy. Most people are smarter than that and realize the need for  controlled, sustainable immigration.

Don't have the citation (sorry!) but the data I saw recently puts your no immigration tail at an (astounding to me) 31% in the US.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 04, 2022, 10:31:52 AM
Do not know if this belongs here.  I have a lot of sympathy for the Lakota peoples in this story.

NBC News: Native American Language Preservation controversy. (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/native-american-language-preservation-rcna31396)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 04, 2022, 10:56:03 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 04, 2022, 10:31:52 AM
Do not know if this belongs here.  I have a lot of sympathy for the Lakota peoples in this story.

NBC News: Native American Language Preservation controversy. (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/native-american-language-preservation-rcna31396)

There's a lot of confusing stuff which raises lots of questions, above and beyond the "he-said-she-said" disagreements of fact.

For instance:
Quote
Gloria Runs Close To Lodge-Goggles said it was a great honor when she was chosen to keep the Calico Winter Count and its translations. Her ancestor Black Shield documented a multitude of events, including when he acted as Lakota Chief Red Cloud's interpreter during a diplomatic visit to Washington, D.C., in 1870.

Goggles stored the audio and written translations at the Oglala Lakota College for safekeeping, only to be accessed by students with the family's permission.

Meya got access to them while attending the college in the 1990s — without Goggles' knowledge, she said — and he soon began writing and lecturing on their contents. Meya said he received them with the permission of the college's archivist.

In 1998, Meya donated copies of the winter count translations to the University of Washington as source material to receive a grant.

I don't know how institutional archives work. Is that sort of arrangement common, where material is submitted but only to be shared with express permission?

Also, I can see that the dictionary of the language should be freely available in electronic form to the community (and the wider public), but the specific lessons produced by the institute wouldn't automatically be.

A lot of this is obviously complicated by the clash between a culture with oral history and a culture with written history, copyright law, etc.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 07, 2022, 08:32:08 PM
UNC-Ashville Professor Fired After Online Sex Sting (https://nsjonline.com/article/2022/03/unc-asheville-professor-on-leave-amateur-sting-video-surfaces/)

Don't know if this fits the "cancelling Dr. Seuss" category exactly, but it is an interesting demonstration of vigilante justice and the power of the Internet.  The actual YouTube "sting" is embedded.

Quote
George Heard, an inorganic and computational chemistry professor at UNC Asheville, is apparently the man featured in the sting video published by "Dads Against Predators – South Carolina."

The video claims that Heard showed up at a mall to meet with a 14-year-old boy which he had met and been texting with using the social media app, Grindr. The video clip was posted late in the evening on Mar. 22 and has already been viewed over 25,000 times.

The students wasted no time in jumping on RMP:

https://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=658777
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 10, 2022, 08:00:39 AM
Felicia Sonmez fired by The Washington Post (https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/09/felicia-sonmez-fired-by-the-washington-post-00038622)

Quote
The Washington Post has fired Felicia Sonmez for "insubordination" after the well-known reporter spent days publicly accusing fellow colleagues and leadership at the paper of fostering an environment unsupportive of female staffers.

Sonmez's firing tops a whirlwind week for one of the nation's most venerable media institutions, in which internal newsroom strife erupted into public view, affecting some of the most high-profile people on staff. It comes just days after the paper suspended a fellow reporter, Dave Weigel, for a month after he retweeted a crude joke about women.

Sonmez was highly critical of Weigel for the tweet, prompting Washington Post Executive Editor Sally Buzbee to put out a memo encouraging staff members to treat one another with respect and kindness, including on social media platforms, and reminding staff that criticizing fellow employees was a violation of company policies.

"We do not tolerate colleagues attacking colleagues either face to face or online," the paper's top editor said in a memo on Tuesday.

But the infighting continued from there. Another Post reporter, Jose A. Del Real, accused Sonmez of trying to publicly bully Weigel over a mistake for which he had apologized. Sonmez responded in kind: "When women stand up for themselves, some people respond with even more vitriol."
In an interesting irony,
Quote
Sonmez continued to rail against the paper's leadership from there, with lengthy threads arguing that it had done little to create an inclusive culture or protect reporters from internal and external harassment. The New York Times reported on Thursday that in its termination letter to Sonmez, Post leadership wrote that her conduct amounted to "insubordination, maligning your co-workers online and violating The Post's standards on workplace collegiality and inclusivity."

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 15, 2022, 09:25:59 AM
NBC News: James Patterson apologizes for saying white male writers face "racism" (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/james-patterson-apologizes-saying-white-male-writers-are-victims-racis-rcna33635)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on June 15, 2022, 10:03:54 AM
NYT article on "inclusive" terminology for pregnancy, breastfeeding, and related words:
Quote
Progressive groups and medical organizations have adopted inclusive language, which has led to terms like "pregnant people" and "chestfeeding."

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/08/us/women-gender-aclu-abortion.html

Other reports on this trend:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-manchester-56372118
https://www.mamamia.com.au/gender-neutral-terms-mother-father/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on June 15, 2022, 10:31:35 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 15, 2022, 09:25:59 AM
NBC News: James Patterson apologizes for saying white male writers face "racism" (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/james-patterson-apologizes-saying-white-male-writers-are-victims-racis-rcna33635)

QuoteIn an article published Sunday, The Sunday Times paraphrased Patterson as worrying "that it is hard for white men to get writing gigs in film, theatre, TV or publishing."

The Sunday Times quoted Patterson as saying the alleged problem is "just another form of racism. What's that all about?"

"Can you get a job? Yes. Is it harder? Yes. It's even harder for older writers. You don't meet many 52-year-old white males," Patterson told the outlet.

Tuesday afternoon, Patterson shared an apology on Twitter.

"I apologize for saying white male writers having trouble finding work is a form of racism. I absolutely do not believe that racism is practiced against white writers," he wrote. "Please know that I strongly support a diversity of voices being heard—in literature, in Hollywood, everywhere."


If the bolded is all he actually said about the matter, then it sounds like they misquoted him pretty badly in their paraphrase.  The bolded looks like it might have been intended more as a complaint about ageism.  But he did have to put the "white" and "male" in there, and that's always inviting pushback whenever somebody is complaining about having a hard time getting consideration of any kind.

High-profile writing gigs and publications are like breaking into academia--it's hard for anybody to do, no matter how much "privilege" or "reverse-privilege" they allegedly have.  That's part of the reason why so many of all colors, ethnicities, and genders seem so prone to feel that "others," whoever they may be, have some unfair advantage. 

The statistics cited in the last paragraph do indicate that white writers still don't really have anything to complain about in terms of "discrimination" in their particular profession.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 21, 2022, 05:22:16 PM
Cleveland Officer of the Year Under Investigation for Over Alleged Antisemitic Social Media Posts (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/cleveland-officer-investigation-alleged-anti-semitic-social-media-post-rcna34619)

Quote
Cleveland Division of Police officer Ismail Quran was moved to administrative duties pending the outcome of an internal affairs investigation.

Quote
A Cleveland police officer who was once recognized as officer of the year is under investigation after he was accused of glorifying Adolf Hitler and spreading antisemitism in old social media posts that have resurfaced.

<snip>

The alleged social media posts were dug up by Canary Mission, which documents people and organizations that spread hatred against Jewish people. Quran either deleted the posts — which date back to 2012 — or made them private.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on June 22, 2022, 06:26:18 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 21, 2022, 05:22:16 PM
Cleveland Officer of the Year Under Investigation for Over Alleged Antisemitic Social Media Posts (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/cleveland-officer-investigation-alleged-anti-semitic-social-media-post-rcna34619)

Quote
Cleveland Division of Police officer Ismail Quran was moved to administrative duties pending the outcome of an internal affairs investigation.

Quote
A Cleveland police officer who was once recognized as officer of the year is under investigation after he was accused of glorifying Adolf Hitler and spreading antisemitism in old social media posts that have resurfaced.

<snip>

The alleged social media posts were dug up by Canary Mission, which documents people and organizations that spread hatred against Jewish people. Quran either deleted the posts — which date back to 2012 — or made them private.

Well, if it's a whole ten years ago, and there's been nothing to cause concern more recently than that...people do change, and have things left behind that they regret.  I don't blame them from being concerned about a history like that, though.  His record needs to be checked out.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 23, 2022, 01:59:45 PM
This guy sure seems like a jackass and brings his problems on himself.  It will be interesting to see what happens to him.

Canadian Professor Ripped After Trying to Mask-Shame Flight Attendant in Unhinged Twitter Rant (https://nypost.com/2022/06/20/canadian-professor-ripped-after-trying-to-mask-shame-flight-attendant-in-unhinged-twitter-rant/).

On a side note, I am always interested when professors are publicly called out for their behavior.  Would this jerk be called out in this manner if he were a barber or used car salesman?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 29, 2022, 10:44:44 AM
Yup, here's the flip side of cancel culture

ProPublica: The Other Cancel Culture: How a Public University Is Bowing to a Conservative Crusade (https://www.propublica.org/article/idaho-crt-boise-state-university)

Quote
With a rising national profile and donor base and relatively little state funding, Boise State University should be able to resist pressure by the Idaho Legislature. Instead the university, led by a liberal transplant, has repeatedly capitulated.

Quote
The convocation was to be virtual, because of the pandemic. Fillmore put on beaded Native American jewelry and recorded an eight-minute video on her phone. She began by naming the "rightful owners of this land," the Boise Valley Indigenous tribes, and then described her own "complicated" background. Her father was Hunkpapa Lakota, her mother white. "I can trace eight generations of my Lakota ancestors being removed from the land of their lifeblood to the reservation, just as I can trace seven generations of Norwegian and English ancestors taking that land," she said.

<snip>

Across the country, elected officials in red states are seeking to impose their political views on public universities. Even as they decry liberal cancel culture, they're leveraging the threat of budget cuts to scale back diversity initiatives, sanitize the teaching of American history and interfere with university policies and appointments.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 29, 2022, 11:01:13 AM
Quote
Across the country, elected officials in red states are seeking to impose their political views on public universities. Even as they decry liberal cancel culture, they're leveraging the threat of budget cuts to scale back diversity initiatives, sanitize the teaching of American history and interfere with university policies and appointments.

It's pretty clear that people from both sides who engage in "cancel culture" are more driven by the desire to promote their own ideology than anything else; otherwise they could band together with people from the other side to support freedom of speech for everyone.

(In other words, if they really felt they were just responding in kind to threats to free speech from the other side, then they should be able to negotiate some sort of mutually acceptable policy of defending free speech.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 29, 2022, 11:10:37 AM
It's also heartening to see that not everyone caves. Apparently, George Washington University has some intestinal fortitude. The university was petitioned to get rid of Justice Clarence Thomas' course at the law school, where he is an adjunct.

The university refused on the grounds that there must be open debate, even if its offensive to some. Sounds like U Chicago principles.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/3540706-george-washington-university-rejects-calls-to-remove-clarence-thomas-from-teaching-role/ (https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/3540706-george-washington-university-rejects-calls-to-remove-clarence-thomas-from-teaching-role/)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 29, 2022, 11:14:20 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 29, 2022, 11:10:37 AM
It's also heartening to see that not everyone caves. Apparently, George Washington University has some intestinal fortitude. The university was petitioned to get rid of Justice Clarence Thomas' course at the law school, where he is an adjunct.

The university refused on the grounds that there must be open debate, even if its offensive to some. Sounds like U Chicago principles.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/3540706-george-washington-university-rejects-calls-to-remove-clarence-thomas-from-teaching-role/ (https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/3540706-george-washington-university-rejects-calls-to-remove-clarence-thomas-from-teaching-role/)

Over time, the more this is publicized the more these places will attract the best and brightest students who are interested in real intellectual challenge, and the most "cancelly" places, left or right, will mostly attract the drones who don't think too much and don't want to.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on June 30, 2022, 06:11:15 AM
Lincoln continues to be canceled, this time based on a single complaint.
https://www.thecollegefix.com/cornell-library-removes-gettysburg-address-lincoln-bust/

Quote
Cornell library removes Gettysburg Address, Lincoln bust
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 30, 2022, 07:19:04 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on June 30, 2022, 06:11:15 AM
Lincoln continues to be canceled, this time based on a single complaint.

And an unspecified one, at that.
Quote
He asked the librarians about it, and they had no details to provide, except to say it was removed after some sort of complaint, he said. It's been replaced with, "well, nothing," Wayne said. The walls are white, according to photos Wayne took for The Fix.

Someone should put a plaque on a huge blank wall identifying it as "Everything that can be said that is not offensive." (Of course, the plaque would then be removed for being offensive.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 30, 2022, 09:07:16 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 30, 2022, 07:19:04 AM
Someone should put a plaque on a huge blank wall identifying it as "Everything that can be said that is not offensive." (Of course, the plaque would then be removed for being offensive.)

Marshy, that hyperbole is pretty darn funny.  Good job.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on June 30, 2022, 12:45:06 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 30, 2022, 07:19:04 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on June 30, 2022, 06:11:15 AM
Lincoln continues to be canceled, this time based on a single complaint.

And an unspecified one, at that.
Quote
He asked the librarians about it, and they had no details to provide, except to say it was removed after some sort of complaint, he said. It's been replaced with, "well, nothing," Wayne said. The walls are white, according to photos Wayne took for The Fix.

Someone should put a plaque on a huge blank wall identifying it as "Everything that can be said that is not offensive." (Of course, the plaque would then be removed for being offensive.)

The irony is that with all the canceling (NYC Planned Parenthood scrubbing out Margaret Sanger's name, Sierra Club erasing John Muir, SF school district removing or trying to remove Lincoln's name) and calling out so-called microaggressions, the Supreme Court ruling has now taken away women's right to their own bodies.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 30, 2022, 12:45:48 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 30, 2022, 09:07:16 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 30, 2022, 07:19:04 AM
Someone should put a plaque on a huge blank wall identifying it as "Everything that can be said that is not offensive." (Of course, the plaque would then be removed for being offensive.)

Marshy, that hyperbole is pretty darn funny.  Good job.

Sadly, I don't think I'm being hyperbolic. Someone would certainly be offended by the sarcasm.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on July 13, 2022, 08:27:48 AM
IHE: Punished, Then Vindicated for Her Past (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/07/13/former-porn-performer-wins-suit-against-community-college#:~:text=Nicole%20Gililland%20and%20family%20after%20she%20graduated%20with%20her%20bachelor's%20degree.&text=A%20former%20nursing%20student%20who,Oregon%20Community%20College%20last%20week.)

Quote
A former porn performer won $1.7 million after suing Southwestern Oregon Community College for discriminating against her because of her past work.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on July 13, 2022, 09:03:18 AM
I read this earlier, and have to say I was pleased. The self-anointers of what is "classy" really anger me. And, we are supposed to be the country of it's never too late.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on July 13, 2022, 11:22:55 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on July 13, 2022, 09:03:18 AM
I read this earlier, and have to say I was pleased. The self-anointers of what is "classy" really anger me. And, we are supposed to be the country of it's never too late.

I wouldn't necessarily have a problem if the program had some sort of "code of conduct" that students were required to agree to, but if faculty actually engaged in professional mischief just to get rid of her, they get no sympathy from me.

Quote
That's when Gililland claims instructors' and administrators' behavior toward her shifted. She said Sperry gave her an assignment and then claimed she had given Gililland a different assignment and gave her a failing grade on it as a result. Sperry also docked Gililland's grade on a make-up exam as a penalty for completing it late, despite Gililland's request to take it early because of a doctor's appointment, according to court documents. Gililland said in the lawsuit that she was recovering from a kidney infection and sepsis at the time.

Profs get to make the rules for their own courses, but their students and they themselves need to abide by them.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on July 19, 2022, 09:41:05 AM
IHE: Is Penn Going to Punish Amy Wax? (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/07/19/penn-going-punish-amy-wax)

Quote
Dean of law school says she deserves a "major sanction." A faculty panel is studying the issues involved with her statements about Black, Asian, Latino, Jewish and gay people.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on July 19, 2022, 09:58:31 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on July 19, 2022, 09:41:05 AM
IHE: Is Penn Going to Punish Amy Wax? (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/07/19/penn-going-punish-amy-wax)

Quote
Dean of law school says she deserves a "major sanction." A faculty panel is studying the issues involved with her statements about Black, Asian, Latino, Jewish and gay people.

Since this is a higher education professional publication, this shows how far things have changed:
Quote
Some students and faculty at the University of Pennsylvania have been clamoring for years for the ouster of Amy Wax, the polarizing law professor who courted scandal with incendiary and racist remarks and writings and seemed to relish the resulting controversies. Despite the repeated calls for her removal from her tenured position, and the criticisms of her actions—including by university leaders—that followed each controversy, Wax remained in the position and seemed firmly protected by free speech and academic freedom rights.

The inherent dismissal of academic freedom as an important principle and assumption of the need for censorship would have been totally foreign a couple of decades ago.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on July 19, 2022, 10:28:51 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on July 19, 2022, 09:58:31 AM

Some students and faculty at the University of Pennsylvania have been clamoring for years for the ouster of Amy Wax, the polarizing law professor who courted scandal with incendiary and racist remarks and writings and seemed to relish the resulting controversies. Despite the repeated calls for her removal from her tenured position, and the criticisms of her actions—including by university leaders—that followed each controversy, Wax remained in the position and seemed firmly protected by free speech and academic freedom rights.

The inherent dismissal of academic freedom as an important principle and assumption of the need for censorship would have been totally foreign a couple of decades ago.
[/quote]

Twenty-plus years ago, they remembered the McCarthy era.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on July 19, 2022, 11:10:58 AM
Clearly, Amy Wax is a problem for the Penn Law School that the Dean wants to go away.

She is alleged to have said it is rational for her to fear being in elevators with black men.

Is it rational for black students to fear being in her classes? I wonder what the student teaching evaluations say. She certainly seems to favor a "harsh" approach rather than providing "warm" comments, looking at her RMP.

She seems to teach two main courses:
Freedom, Responsibility, and Neuroscience
Conservative Political and Legal Thought

Both courses look like they were designed for her. I don't see a course in Marxist Political and Legal Thought in their catalog.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on July 19, 2022, 11:45:28 AM
Perhaps strangely, perhaps not, it looks to me like Amy is a piece of work!

Academic freedom to talk drivel is limited to talking drivel on one's own subject, in her case, the law. See AAUP statements on academic freedom of 1940:

QuoteTeachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject. Limitations of academic freedom because of religious or other aims of the institution should be clearly stated in writing at the time of the appointment.
Apparently, but only apparently she extends her reach a tad beyond the law.

In any case, perhaps Penn's statements on freedom of expression are narrower or broader than some on either side would like. I don't know. That is surely relevant for "extra-mural" statements, which Penn or any other private university can regulate however the hell it pleases. Maybe it's better phrased as an ex post vs ex ante question. Again, I don't know.

Without doing unbiased investigations it's hard to know all the detail of what's going on. Maybe some students just don't like her. Maybe she's acid. I don't know.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on July 19, 2022, 12:17:23 PM
Quote from: downer on July 19, 2022, 11:10:58 AM
Clearly, Amy Wax is a problem for the Penn Law School that the Dean wants to go away.

She is alleged to have said it is rational for her to fear being in elevators with black men.

Is it rational for black students to fear being in her classes? I wonder what the student teaching evaluations say. She certainly seems to favor a "harsh" approach rather than providing "warm" comments, looking at her RMP.


Keep in mind she's a law professor, teaching future lawyers. If there's a profession requiring people to have a thick skin and to be prepared to handle outrageous statements from other people, that would be it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on July 19, 2022, 06:44:24 PM
Dallas Morning News: LGBT students denounce UT-Dallas professor who wants 'a cure for homosexuality' (https://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/2022/07/19/lgbt-students-denounce-ut-dallas-professor-who-wants-a-cure-for-homosexuality/)

Quote
Students at the University of Texas at Dallas want action taken against a faculty member who is defending his comments calling for "cure for homosexuality."

vs.

The Advocate: Mark Ballard: Conservatives want to clip tenure protections for outspoken college professors (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/mark_ballard/article_4c99cf7a-0450-11ed-b0f5-5f8eff70c97e.html)

Quote
Louisiana began down what one legislator calls the "slippery slope" toward eliminating job-protecting tenure for college professors who mouth off in unapproved ways.
Behind a paywall, but I think you get the issue here...

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on July 19, 2022, 06:51:05 PM
This sounds like Amy's case, somebody mouthing off outside their field of expertise. Given this guy is a Computer Science professor, what I said about Amy may well apply here, too.

Quote from: dismalist on July 19, 2022, 11:45:28 AM
Perhaps strangely, perhaps not, it looks to me like Amy is a piece of work!

Academic freedom to talk drivel is limited to talking drivel on one's own subject, in her case, the law. See AAUP statements on academic freedom of 1940:

QuoteTeachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject. Limitations of academic freedom because of religious or other aims of the institution should be clearly stated in writing at the time of the appointment.
Apparently, but only apparently she extends her reach a tad beyond the law.

In any case, perhaps Penn's statements on freedom of expression are narrower or broader than some on either side would like. I don't know. That is surely relevant for "extra-mural" statements, which Penn or any other private university can regulate however the hell it pleases. Maybe it's better phrased as an ex post vs ex ante question. Again, I don't know.

Without doing unbiased investigations it's hard to know all the detail of what's going on. Maybe some students just don't like her. Maybe she's acid. I don't know.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on July 21, 2022, 10:21:16 AM
Reddit: Is LinkedIn and all not my private business? (https://www.reddit.com/r/Professors/comments/w4hkbx/is_linkedin_and_all_not_my_private_business/)

Some interesting responses.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on July 21, 2022, 10:56:52 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on July 21, 2022, 10:21:16 AM
Reddit: Is LinkedIn and all not my private business? (https://www.reddit.com/r/Professors/comments/w4hkbx/is_linkedin_and_all_not_my_private_business/)

Some interesting responses.

The responses are the best part! They're pretty reasonable, even insightful.

Here, as with part of the Amy story, if true, the question is manners. In my yute I learned that one did not talk about sex, money, religion, or politics over dinner. Never mind that I thought then there's nothing interesting left to talk about, but I learned to keep my mouth shut about these subjects at dinner. There were other times and places these subjects could be talked about. One of the commenters says this about linked in.

This is not cancellation, as for speakers, or faculty at Georgetown.  This is about choosing what channel to make what comments on. God knows we have plenty.

Good manners will not save anyone from cancellation, but will save themselves a lot of other trouble.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on July 21, 2022, 11:26:50 AM
My understanding was that LinkedIn was a professional networking site, where rants and strong personal opinions would be a violation of norms.

The OP on that thread said "thanks" at one point.  I think the experience proved educational.  Sadder but wiser, maybe.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on July 21, 2022, 01:39:19 PM
I know one person on LinkedIn who poured scorn on administators from their previous place of employment. Probably with some justification. It was quite enjoyable to see. I don't think there were any consequences for the poster.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on July 28, 2022, 09:05:20 AM
IHE: Dissecting the Campus Speech Problem (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/07/28/dissecting-campus-speech-problem-its-not-what-you-think)

Quote
"I understand what they're trying to do: they think conservative students feel uncomfortable in a classroom because their liberal professors are indoctrinating them. They think, 'If we just ban certain stuff from the classroom, we can address that problem,'" Young said.

The lawmakers promoting that point of view are wrong about the cause of the problem and they've chosen the wrong way to try to solve it, Young told the attendees—"but there is a problem."

"Students feel silenced," but it's generally not their professors doing the silencing, he said—it's mostly their fellow students, who are more comfortable than ever before with the idea of restricting speech to protect people.

"We can't ignore this problem," he said. "But we have to provide an alternative to banning speech."

I've said it before and I'll say it again: cutting what people can say swings all ways.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on July 28, 2022, 01:18:23 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on July 28, 2022, 09:05:20 AM
IHE: Dissecting the Campus Speech Problem (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/07/28/dissecting-campus-speech-problem-its-not-what-you-think)


This is pretty disturbing:
Quote
Ashley Zohn, vice president for learning and impact at Knight, presented data from the foundation's annual survey of college students in 2021 that showed a minority of students (47 percent) feel that free speech rights are secure, down from 73 percent in 2016.

That's a huge change (73% to 47%) in 5 years, since that's only slightly longer than the time one student takes to get a degree. (If they get a Bachelor's and a Master's, then it's during one student's time at university.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on August 03, 2022, 07:18:20 PM
CBS: Ferris State Professor Settles for $95K (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/barry-mehler-michigan-college-professor-video-ferris-university-settlement/)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on August 04, 2022, 03:51:21 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 03, 2022, 07:18:20 PM
CBS: Ferris State Professor Settles for $95K (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/barry-mehler-michigan-college-professor-video-ferris-university-settlement/)

At least in this case, he was specifically addressing his students directly about matters related to them, and of an academic nature (such as grading), so scrutiny by the administration is appropriate.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on August 04, 2022, 09:14:11 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on August 04, 2022, 03:51:21 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 03, 2022, 07:18:20 PM
CBS: Ferris State Professor Settles for $95K (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/barry-mehler-michigan-college-professor-video-ferris-university-settlement/)

At least in this case, he was specifically addressing his students directly about matters related to them, and of an academic nature (such as grading), so scrutiny by the administration is appropriate.

I watched part of the video.  I swear this guy was trying to get himself fired.  In a certain context it is hilarious, and I can imagine the kids from my hedonistic age (the '80s) getting a yuge kick out of it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on August 04, 2022, 02:09:34 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 04, 2022, 09:14:11 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on August 04, 2022, 03:51:21 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 03, 2022, 07:18:20 PM
CBS: Ferris State Professor Settles for $95K (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/barry-mehler-michigan-college-professor-video-ferris-university-settlement/)

At least in this case, he was specifically addressing his students directly about matters related to them, and of an academic nature (such as grading), so scrutiny by the administration is appropriate.

I watched part of the video.  I swear this guy was trying to get himself fired.  In a certain context it is hilarious, and I can imagine the kids from my hedonistic age (the '80s) getting a yuge kick out of it.

I watched the video too, and generally found it fairly harmless. I wouldn't do that much cursing (though the "plagiarism of Deadwood" thing was sort of inspired). I also wouldn't spend so much time talking about "Indians". The only thing I thought skirted inappropriate for the audience was the material about predetermined grades. It was funny and memorable, but if there's one sure-fire way to upset students, it's joking about grades.

The material about class attendance seemed designed to get a rise out of administration, rather than students. Not sure he was trying to get fired per se, but there was a certain level of "I'm retiring next year anyway, lets f$ck around and find out"
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on August 30, 2022, 03:23:58 AM
The Babylon Bee is banned from Tik Tok, and has already been banned from Twitter for not deleting a tweet. Tik Tok doesn't not believe they need to give a reason and they certainly don't, but I would be boycotting them now in response, except I can't because I've never used them.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jul/5/christian-satire-site-babylon-bee-banned-without-e/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on August 30, 2022, 05:11:54 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on August 30, 2022, 03:23:58 AM
The Babylon Bee is banned from Tik Tok, and has already been banned from Twitter for not deleting a tweet. Tik Tok doesn't not believe they need to give a reason and they certainly don't, but I would be boycotting them now in response, except I can't because I've never used them.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jul/5/christian-satire-site-babylon-bee-banned-without-e/

We are an increasingly offendable society.  I cannot imagine a Merry Prankster bus journey, the movies Animal House or Airplane, or the jokes in The National Lampoon being tolerated these days.

At the same time, a private corporate entity has no obligation to carry content it thinks will damage its image or business, including social media.  Free speech is also the freedom NOT to say something.  I know that enrages some Trumpees.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on August 30, 2022, 05:23:22 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 30, 2022, 05:11:54 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on August 30, 2022, 03:23:58 AM
The Babylon Bee is banned from Tik Tok, and has already been banned from Twitter for not deleting a tweet. Tik Tok doesn't not believe they need to give a reason and they certainly don't, but I would be boycotting them now in response, except I can't because I've never used them.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jul/5/christian-satire-site-babylon-bee-banned-without-e/

We are an increasingly offendable society.  I cannot imagine a Merry Prankster bus journey, the movies Animal House or Airplane, or the jokes in The National Lampoon being tolerated these days.

At the same time, a private corporate entity has no obligation to carry content it thinks will damage its image or business, including social media.  Free speech is also the freedom NOT to say something.  I know that enrages some Trumpees.

Are you following the business with Joe Rogan's interview of Mark Zuckerberg? Zuck says, if I remember correctly, that the FBI warned Facebook about a pre-2020 election dump of Russian disinformation, with the result that FB reduced its circulation of anything coming from the NY Post, who of course broke the story that the laptop belonging to the current president's criminal son was real. And many voters now report that they would have voted differently had they known. So, as I understand it, while FB is a private corporate entity, there may be an allegation that they were 'state actors', that is, changing their content on request from the government, and inclined to take it seriously, as it's the FBI. Which means, potentially, suppression of free speech.

What if anything did the FBI tell twitter around that time? They suspended the NY Post. We may be finding out.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on August 30, 2022, 05:58:40 PM
I think Facebook was very responsible there.  Trump loves the Rooskies who, for some weird reason, wanted Trump in office.  Zuck acted like a good, loyal American. 

And no, it has not been confirmed that the laptop was Hunter's despite what a tabloid reported, and the poor embarrassing Hunter is in recovery.  I thought you might admire that.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on August 31, 2022, 03:53:46 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 30, 2022, 05:11:54 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on August 30, 2022, 03:23:58 AM
The Babylon Bee is banned from Tik Tok, and has already been banned from Twitter for not deleting a tweet. Tik Tok doesn't not believe they need to give a reason and they certainly don't, but I would be boycotting them now in response, except I can't because I've never used them.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jul/5/christian-satire-site-babylon-bee-banned-without-e/

We are an increasingly offendable society.  I cannot imagine a Merry Prankster bus journey, the movies Animal House or Airplane, or the jokes in The National Lampoon being tolerated these days.

At the same time, a private corporate entity has no obligation to carry content it thinks will damage its image or business, including social media.  Free speech is also the freedom NOT to say something.  I know that enrages some Trumpees.

But also, "silence is violence", according to many anti-Trumpees. So neither side gets off on that one.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on August 31, 2022, 10:05:14 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on August 31, 2022, 03:53:46 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 30, 2022, 05:11:54 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on August 30, 2022, 03:23:58 AM
The Babylon Bee is banned from Tik Tok, and has already been banned from Twitter for not deleting a tweet. Tik Tok doesn't not believe they need to give a reason and they certainly don't, but I would be boycotting them now in response, except I can't because I've never used them.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jul/5/christian-satire-site-babylon-bee-banned-without-e/

We are an increasingly offendable society.  I cannot imagine a Merry Prankster bus journey, the movies Animal House or Airplane, or the jokes in The National Lampoon being tolerated these days.

At the same time, a private corporate entity has no obligation to carry content it thinks will damage its image or business, including social media.  Free speech is also the freedom NOT to say something.  I know that enrages some Trumpees.

But also, "silence is violence", according to many anti-Trumpees. So neither side gets off on that one.

So?  Don't be silent.  Just don't force me to wear your sandwich board.

Think before you post, Marshy!!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on August 31, 2022, 10:54:02 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 30, 2022, 05:11:54 PM

We are an increasingly offendable society.  I cannot imagine a Merry Prankster bus journey, the movies Animal House or Airplane, or the jokes in The National Lampoon being tolerated these days.


This is because until recently, people felt they had a right to privacy; i.e. they had a right to hold their own opinions as long as they didn't have to try and impose them on others. This has been replaced by feelings of a right to validation; i.e. they have a right to having their opinions supported by others. The problem is, that sense of "support" can only be maintained as long as the person doesn't get exposed to conflicting opinions. Only the most oppressive police state could even pretend to offer people the "freedom" from hearing anything that contradicts their own views. When privacy was the goal, no-one even had to pretend that everyone agreed with them to feel that society was operating as intended, but with validation as the goal, as soon as anyone hears a dissenting opinion it represents a failure of society.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on August 31, 2022, 11:00:12 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on August 31, 2022, 10:54:02 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 30, 2022, 05:11:54 PM

We are an increasingly offendable society.  I cannot imagine a Merry Prankster bus journey, the movies Animal House or Airplane, or the jokes in The National Lampoon being tolerated these days.


This is because until recently, people felt they had a right to privacy; i.e. they had a right to hold their own opinions as long as they didn't have to try and impose them on others. This has been replaced by feelings of a right to validation; i.e. they have a right to having their opinions supported by others. The problem is, that sense of "support" can only be maintained as long as the person doesn't get exposed to conflicting opinions. Only the most oppressive police state could even pretend to offer people the "freedom" from hearing anything that contradicts their own views. When privacy was the goal, no-one even had to pretend that everyone agreed with them to feel that society was operating as intended, but with validation as the goal, as soon as anyone hears a dissenting opinion it represents a failure of society.

The internet draws you and your opinions out into the open where they get either validated or fired upon. The pseudonymous forum can be a seduction of the id. As P. J. O'Rourke said (I'm going from memory, not quoting exactly) 'whose bright idea was it to put all the most ignorant, hot-headed people in the world instantly in touch with all the others like them? We don't need more love in the world. We need to leave each alone more often.'
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 09, 2022, 10:30:38 AM
First watch the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejGz1q3dJfY).

Then I hope that this excellent article in The New York Times Magazine The Safe Space That Became a Viral Nightmare (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/07/magazine/arizona-state-university-multicultural-center.html) is not behind a paywall.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 09, 2022, 11:24:14 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 09, 2022, 10:30:38 AM
First watch the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejGz1q3dJfY).

Then I hope that this excellent article in The New York Times Magazine The Safe Space That Became a Viral Nightmare (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/07/magazine/arizona-state-university-multicultural-center.html) is not behind a paywall.

Diversity and Inclusion is all rainbows and unicorns for everyone. It makes for so much more courtesy and civility.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 09, 2022, 12:25:11 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 09, 2022, 11:24:14 AM

Diversity and Inclusion is all rainbows and unicorns for everyone.


Be fair, Marshy.  Don't fall into that pit of squalling, immature frustration.

There are valid reasons for "diversity."  It's how we deal with its problems that is important.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on September 09, 2022, 01:46:23 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 09, 2022, 10:30:38 AM
First watch the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejGz1q3dJfY).

Then I hope that this excellent article in The New York Times Magazine The Safe Space That Became a Viral Nightmare (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/07/magazine/arizona-state-university-multicultural-center.html) is not behind a paywall.

I read it a few days ago, but I did not watch the video.

Anyone marching around with a T-shirt that says anything of that nature about a President (and yes, that includes 45) is looking for a confrontation.

I'm a little less concerned about the sticker but I hope the student ultimately learns that things he thinks might be saying one thing are actually implying something else.

Those confronting them? They have a right to stand up for themselves. Not crazy about posting a video because I hope they ultimately learned that posting things like that results in pile-ons for EVERYONE.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 09, 2022, 02:07:42 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on September 09, 2022, 01:46:23 PM

Anyone marching around with a T-shirt that says anything of that nature about a President (and yes, that includes 45) is looking for a confrontation.


Anyone with white skin in the USA is potentially inviting woke attention, especially one who appears male.

ETA: some places like maybe North Dakota the chances of receiving that attention are minimal, but on a college campus, much more. They are presumed (by the wokeist missionary) to be responsible for acting to change their beliefs and thoughts. But if they are already wokeist themselves then they probably find the attention soothing. A T-shirt like that one or a sticker like that one, true, would signify that one is probably not on board with the expectation and reserving the right to one's basic human dignity.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 09, 2022, 03:37:36 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 09, 2022, 12:25:11 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 09, 2022, 11:24:14 AM

Diversity and Inclusion is all rainbows and unicorns for everyone.


Be fair, Marshy.  Don't fall into that pit of squalling, immature frustration.

There are valid reasons for "diversity."  It's how we deal with its problems that is important.

It's Orwellian that the way to promote "diversity and inclusion" is to specifically exclude certain groups of people. (And no, it's not really because white people won't have anywhere to go.) It's the same mindset that wanted "coloured" drinking fountains because "those people" would somehow pollute the space just by occupying it. The principle is odious, whenever it is applied.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 09, 2022, 04:10:50 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on September 09, 2022, 01:46:23 PM
Anyone marching around with a T-shirt that says anything of that nature about a President (and yes, that includes 45) is looking for a confrontation.

Like the professor locked out of his office on the other thread, throwing the "racist" label around is a very dangerous game that backfires if accusers are too free with it.  You should not call someone a "racist" or "sexist" just because you disagree with them or they do something you do not like.  It is the psychic equivalent to throwing a punch. Expect to get in a fight.  This backfired very badly on the women involved, and I was inclined to feel sorry for them until I watched the vid.  These students are obsessed with racism and victimization. 

We have a right to our opinions, after all, and the young men, while clueless and insensitive, have a right to theirs.

The verbal, psychological, and literal violence in our culture is out of hand.  I'm willing to say enough with the "confrontation" as a way to make people think about their choices.  As with this case, I don't think it works.   

The smartest comment I read on the NYT Mag article was one that said, "What a missed opportunity for a conversation."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on September 09, 2022, 05:28:33 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 09, 2022, 02:07:42 PM
A T-shirt like that one or a sticker like that one, true, would signify that one is probably not on board with the expectation and reserving the right to one's basic human dignity.

Displaying and wearing them in a multicultural center might suggest you are welcoming a confrontation.

BTW this is an old story. Just curious as to why is it news now?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 09, 2022, 05:33:35 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on September 09, 2022, 05:28:33 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 09, 2022, 02:07:42 PM
A T-shirt like that one or a sticker like that one, true, would signify that one is probably not on board with the expectation and reserving the right to one's basic human dignity.

Displaying and wearing them in a multicultural center might suggest you are welcoming a confrontation.

BTW this is an old story. Just curious as to why is it news now?

I would have just sat there and waited for them to throw punches or carry me out. Then got busy with my attorney.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 09, 2022, 06:04:33 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on September 09, 2022, 05:28:33 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 09, 2022, 02:07:42 PM
A T-shirt like that one or a sticker like that one, true, would signify that one is probably not on board with the expectation and reserving the right to one's basic human dignity.

Displaying and wearing them in a multicultural center might suggest you are welcoming a confrontation.

BTW this is an old story. Just curious as to why is it news now?

Well, if you read the article, the young men thought it was a study center.  The multicultural center was not well publicized nor was there good signage.  They had been there several hours, studying for a test, before anyone even noticed them. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on September 09, 2022, 06:11:52 PM
Thanks. I couldn't as I've hit my free limit. Didn't see anything about that aspect in the older stuff I found.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 10, 2022, 03:55:28 AM
Putting my cards on the table: a 'multicultural center' that is understood to be off-limits to people whom others choose to identify as racially white is a horrible idea, but may well serve as a useful negative example to mobilize sensible people against the woke culture and cult. This idiocy needs to be fought and defeated. The logic of it alone is futile. If whiteness is not culture, then how do you 'de-center' whiteness? There is nothing to de-center. I'm surprised more of these things have net ended up in court, but I expect when they do, things will change.

[on-topic rant]
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 10, 2022, 10:34:32 AM
And the hits just keep coming!!!!

Carnegie-Mellon prof wishes Queen to die "agonizing death." (https://www.post-gazette.com/news/education/2022/09/09/carnegie-mellon-university-queen-elizabeth-ii-uju-anya-free-expression-campus-speech/stories/202209090111)

Quote
Uju Anya's tweet wishing a dying Queen Elizabeth II "excruciating" pain has faced an avalanche of criticism and calls that she be disciplined or fired since she posted it early Thursday.

Some, though, are rallying to her defense. The Philadelphia-based Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression confirmed Friday that it has urged Carnegie Mellon President Farnam Jahanian in a letter not to sanction her, even if the words were offensive.

<snip>

The initial tweet, followed by others in which she appeared to double down, said, "I heard the chief monarch of a thieving raping genocidal empire is finally dying. May her pain be excruciating."

This one makes me a sick.  What's wrong with this woman!?

Her justification is that she was born after the Nigerian civil war, which she blamed the Queen for.

Once again, we have someone striking out with words at a person who was not there and did not do the things which make her so angry.  Since we cannot punish the criminals of the past, some feel the need to vent on the people alive (or dead) today.  That really should stop.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 10, 2022, 11:03:26 AM
Lawsuit Challenges Florida Ban on "WOKE" Subjects. (https://www.thefire.org/lawsuit-fire-challenges-stop-woke-acts-limits-on-how-florida-professors-can-teach-about-race-sex/)

DeSantis is a fascist.

Quote
Today, a professor and student group from the University of South Florida sued to protect professors' ability to teach and students' ability to learn. The lawsuit, filed by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, alleges that the higher education provisions of Florida's "Individual Freedom" law (dubbed the "Stop WOKE Act" by its proponents), impermissibly chill free expression and promote unconstitutional censorship on the state's college campuses.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 10, 2022, 01:15:22 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 10, 2022, 11:03:26 AM
Lawsuit Challenges Florida Ban on "WOKE" Subjects. (https://www.thefire.org/lawsuit-fire-challenges-stop-woke-acts-limits-on-how-florida-professors-can-teach-about-race-sex/)

DeSantis is a fascist.

Quote
Today, a professor and student group from the University of South Florida sued to protect professors' ability to teach and students' ability to learn. The lawsuit, filed by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, alleges that the higher education provisions of Florida's "Individual Freedom" law (dubbed the "Stop WOKE Act" by its proponents), impermissibly chill free expression and promote unconstitutional censorship on the state's college campuses.

Well, considering Biden would have a fascist government body in place by now, the 'Misinformation Governance Board,' if there hadn't been a furor, we should expect some from the right fighting back in heavy handed ways. The POTUS sets the tone. And, outside of Trump, there hasn't been a president in my lifetime who's been this reckless or divisive.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on September 10, 2022, 02:12:01 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 09, 2022, 06:04:33 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on September 09, 2022, 05:28:33 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 09, 2022, 02:07:42 PM
A T-shirt like that one or a sticker like that one, true, would signify that one is probably not on board with the expectation and reserving the right to one's basic human dignity.

Displaying and wearing them in a multicultural center might suggest you are welcoming a confrontation.

BTW this is an old story. Just curious as to why is it news now?

Well, if you read the article, the young men thought it was a study center.  The multicultural center was not well publicized nor was there good signage.  They had been there several hours, studying for a test, before anyone even noticed them.

I didn't watch the video but read the rather wordy article, according to which, one of the two white students had come straight to campus from his ER job where he worked as a scribe, attended a 7:30 class and was studying for a test. In one of the photos he and the other white student are seen sitting at a table in a rather large room, so the student who claimed to have felt threatened could have easily moved to another part of the room. Other than the sign on the door "Multicultural Communities of Excellence" there is no indication that certain ethnicities are excluded from this room or that only a subset of the students enrolled in the school can use the room. The student who confronted them is described as an "activist" who goes by the nickname "The troublemaker". At the end of the encounter the two white students leave. Subsequently the university instituted disciplinary hearings against the three "activist" students, following which:
Quote
Managing the responses on that page soon became emotionally taxing, so Tekola recruited friends to draft posts and moderate comments. One of those moderators, Amanda Salvione, told university investigators that on Sept. 30 she posted an analysis of racism in the medical field and tagged Beckerman in it. "If he's willing to insert himself intentionally in the only A.S.U. campus space not created with him central to its design," that post read, "what harms will he be willing to commit behind closed doors one on one with a Black patient?"

Quote
According to Will Knight, the lawyer who represented Tekola, Qureshi and Araya in eventual disciplinary hearings, an A.S.U. investigator told him the university had received more than 1,500 email messages about the incident within the first week. I requested copies of those emails, and of those I received, almost all either criticized Tekola and Qureshi — one alumna called them "terrorists" in her email — or A.S.U. for not yet punishing them. A group of 20 Arizona state legislators signed an open letter threatening funding cuts against A.S.U. for "using taxpayer dollars to institutionalize racism and further divide our society by enabling neo-segregation." Paul Gosar, a U.S. representative from Arizona, tagged Crow in a post that called the incident a " racist attack." Then, someone on the internet found out that Tekola had a fellowship from the Ford Foundation and Tucker Carlson invited the U.S. senatorial candidate J.D. Vance onto his show to discuss why that foundation and other organizations, like the Harvard Endowment, should lose their tax-exempt status.

It appears from the article that the university sided with the two students who were studying and were clearly harassed, but the students who confronted them are still playing the victim card. Universities are supposed to broaden one's horizons and not help certain students live in bubbles where other students are excluded.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 10, 2022, 02:34:06 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on September 10, 2022, 02:12:01 PM

Quote
Managing the responses on that page soon became emotionally taxing, so Tekola recruited friends to draft posts and moderate comments. One of those moderators, Amanda Salvione, told university investigators that on Sept. 30 she posted an analysis of racism in the medical field and tagged Beckerman in it. "If he's willing to insert himself intentionally in the only A.S.U. campus space not created with him central to its design," that post read, "what harms will he be willing to commit behind closed doors one on one with a Black patient?"



I'd really like to hear how a space can be created where the skin colour of people occupying it will somehow be "central to its design". Special lighting? Paint and fabric to match or complement their skin colour???
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 11, 2022, 05:39:49 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 10, 2022, 02:34:06 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on September 10, 2022, 02:12:01 PM

Quote
Managing the responses on that page soon became emotionally taxing, so Tekola recruited friends to draft posts and moderate comments. One of those moderators, Amanda Salvione, told university investigators that on Sept. 30 she posted an analysis of racism in the medical field and tagged Beckerman in it. "If he's willing to insert himself intentionally in the only A.S.U. campus space not created with him central to its design," that post read, "what harms will he be willing to commit behind closed doors one on one with a Black patient?"

First, do no harm.



I'd really like to hear how a space can be created where the skin colour of people occupying it will somehow be "central to its design". Special lighting? Paint and fabric to match or complement their skin colour???
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on September 11, 2022, 07:57:09 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 10, 2022, 02:34:06 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on September 10, 2022, 02:12:01 PM

Quote
Managing the responses on that page soon became emotionally taxing, so Tekola recruited friends to draft posts and moderate comments. One of those moderators, Amanda Salvione, told university investigators that on Sept. 30 she posted an analysis of racism in the medical field and tagged Beckerman in it. "If he's willing to insert himself intentionally in the only A.S.U. campus space not created with him central to its design," that post read, "what harms will he be willing to commit behind closed doors one on one with a Black patient?"




I'd really like to hear how a space can be created where the skin colour of people occupying it will somehow be "central to its design". Special lighting? Paint and fabric to match or complement their skin colour???

It's probably illegal to exclude students from certain spaces on campus because of their ethnicity, especially in institutions that receive state and federal funding. According to the article, the activists' position seems to be that "white" is not a culture and therefore white students should not be sitting in "multicultural" spaces.
Quote
Tekola can be heard telling one of the seated men why the Police Lives Matter sticker on his laptop is racist, telling the other that white is not a culture and explaining to both the significance of the space they were in that day: a sprawling third-floor room with floor-to-ceiling windows, neatly organized study tables and a smattering of pleather-bound, square backed couches and chairs.

"Do you understand what a multicultural space is?" Tekola asks at a point in which all the voices in the video begin to rise. "It means you're not being centered."

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on September 11, 2022, 03:04:08 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on August 31, 2022, 10:54:02 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 30, 2022, 05:11:54 PM

We are an increasingly offendable society.  I cannot imagine a Merry Prankster bus journey, the movies Animal House or Airplane, or the jokes in The National Lampoon being tolerated these days.


This is because until recently, people felt they had a right to privacy; i.e. they had a right to hold their own opinions as long as they didn't have to try and impose them on others. This has been replaced by feelings of a right to validation; i.e. they have a right to having their opinions supported by others. The problem is, that sense of "support" can only be maintained as long as the person doesn't get exposed to conflicting opinions. Only the most oppressive police state could even pretend to offer people the "freedom" from hearing anything that contradicts their own views. When privacy was the goal, no-one even had to pretend that everyone agreed with them to feel that society was operating as intended, but with validation as the goal, as soon as anyone hears a dissenting opinion it represents a failure of society.

Ahhh....Sounds like book banners and forced birthers.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 11, 2022, 03:04:35 PM
More hits. https://www.judicialwatch.org/ma-school-district-settles-lawsuit/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=corruption+chronicles&utm_term=members

Maybe the tide is turning.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on September 11, 2022, 03:22:35 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 11, 2022, 03:04:35 PM
More hits. https://www.judicialwatch.org/ma-school-district-settles-lawsuit/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=corruption+chronicles&utm_term=members

Maybe the tide is turning.

Yup.  Bought time they stopped teaching about colored folk to innocent young white folk in history classes.  Guess in SC and Texas and other true southern states, they better stop teaching about Emancipation and the Great Skedaddle, and how Jefferson's negro slave concubine was his white dead wife's half sister.  Best to stick with Pitchfork Ben and Longstreet and all the lovely white women of the United Daughters of the Confederacy, and those other supporters of the Lost Cause.

Oh Mahog.....Thank you so much for bringing to our attention the evils of knowing all those dreadful things.  I swoon before your insights and deep, true knowledge.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on September 11, 2022, 03:23:18 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 30, 2022, 05:11:54 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on August 30, 2022, 03:23:58 AM
The Babylon Bee is banned from Tik Tok, and has already been banned from Twitter for not deleting a tweet. Tik Tok doesn't not believe they need to give a reason and they certainly don't, but I would be boycotting them now in response, except I can't because I've never used them.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jul/5/christian-satire-site-babylon-bee-banned-without-e/

We are an increasingly offendable society.  I cannot imagine a Merry Prankster bus journey, the movies Animal House or Airplane, or the jokes in The National Lampoon being tolerated these days.

At the same time, a private corporate entity has no obligation to carry content it thinks will damage its image or business, including social media.  Free speech is also the freedom NOT to say something.  I know that enrages some Trumpees.

Seriously?  I see all sorts of things on tv that would not have been accepted in the past.  We must watch different programming.

They didn't used to be able to say pregnant on tv....

This whole thought that we are more easily offended these days is ridiculous.  People have always been offended.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 11, 2022, 03:36:28 PM
Quote from: nebo113 on September 11, 2022, 03:22:35 PM

Oh Mahog.....Thank you so much for bringing to our attention the evils of knowing all those dreadful things.  I swoon before your insights and deep, true knowledge.

Compliments are welcome regardless of the source. Thank you!

ETA: But hey...it ain't about me. There are things in the news neither of us likes. You could always write a letter to the Dedham Public Schools and tell them they were wrong to apologize to those parents or should have fought harder, somehow, against the laws. Or maybe hold a mostly peaceful demonstration. They'd love to hear from you.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 11, 2022, 05:52:30 PM
Quote from: Kron3007 on September 11, 2022, 03:23:18 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 30, 2022, 05:11:54 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on August 30, 2022, 03:23:58 AM
The Babylon Bee is banned from Tik Tok, and has already been banned from Twitter for not deleting a tweet. Tik Tok doesn't not believe they need to give a reason and they certainly don't, but I would be boycotting them now in response, except I can't because I've never used them.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jul/5/christian-satire-site-babylon-bee-banned-without-e/

We are an increasingly offendable society.  I cannot imagine a Merry Prankster bus journey, the movies Animal House or Airplane, or the jokes in The National Lampoon being tolerated these days.

At the same time, a private corporate entity has no obligation to carry content it thinks will damage its image or business, including social media.  Free speech is also the freedom NOT to say something.  I know that enrages some Trumpees.

Seriously?  I see all sorts of things on tv that would not have been accepted in the past.  We must watch different programming.

They didn't used to be able to say pregnant on tv....

This whole thought that we are more easily offended these days is ridiculous.  People have always been offended.

An excellent point.  I should have been clearer.  Lots of stuff is over the top.  Consider Eddie Izzard.
Think of the Dumb and Dumber franchise.

Above I was specifically thinking about some of the gendered and racial jokes in the media I mentioned, particularly considering that these were considered mainstream "harmless" satire.  I think all three of those sources were excellent examples caricature regarding stereotypes and cultural divisions ("Excuse me, stewardess, but I speak jive") which I think might generate a lot of heat if these sources were produced today.

I suppose there is 1998's Something About Mary (which really is hilarious) jokes about genitals caught in zippers, black step-fathers who are clearly middleclass but very "urban," and developmental disability----but that was dangerous territory.

Maybe I am wrong.  I just see a bit of a seachange for what we think is offensive lately.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 11, 2022, 06:07:22 PM
The Babylon Bee is a satiric broadside against the woke culture and the woke culture is famously humorless. It's like being in the stuffiest church you've ever attended. So Twitter hates them.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 13, 2022, 04:40:45 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on September 11, 2022, 03:23:18 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on August 30, 2022, 05:11:54 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on August 30, 2022, 03:23:58 AM
The Babylon Bee is banned from Tik Tok, and has already been banned from Twitter for not deleting a tweet. Tik Tok doesn't not believe they need to give a reason and they certainly don't, but I would be boycotting them now in response, except I can't because I've never used them.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jul/5/christian-satire-site-babylon-bee-banned-without-e/

We are an increasingly offendable society.  I cannot imagine a Merry Prankster bus journey, the movies Animal House or Airplane, or the jokes in The National Lampoon being tolerated these days.

At the same time, a private corporate entity has no obligation to carry content it thinks will damage its image or business, including social media.  Free speech is also the freedom NOT to say something.  I know that enrages some Trumpees.

Seriously?  I see all sorts of things on tv that would not have been accepted in the past.  We must watch different programming.

They didn't used to be able to say pregnant on tv....

This whole thought that we are more easily offended these days is ridiculous.  People have always been offended.

The things that we are supposed to be offended by shift and in retrospect it seems almost arbitrary. But we have always been offended. 'In olden days a glimpse of stocking was looked on as something shocking...' but now with society so polarized the power struggle between political left and right and the dominance of the left mean that the same things are offensive or not offensive according to who says them. Double standard. Language and speech infractions are weaponized to the service of the culture war. For example, if a conservative were to say 'My daughter is talking about changing genders and wife I were horrified' he is branded a bigot. Whereas if Ibram X. Kendi says (he did) it isn't even news. The political left and most of the media start out with the idea that all republicans need to show they are not bigoted to be acceptable company and all democrats are assumed to be trying their utmost not to be bigoted, as evidenced by their party affiliation.

ETA: And along with that the idea being pushed is that bigotry in any form is the worst thing human beings do to each other, which isn't necessarily true at all.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 14, 2022, 09:35:11 PM
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Thousands Defend Professor Who Wished Queen Agonizing Death (https://www.post-gazette.com/news/education/2022/09/12/carnegie-mellon-university-professor-tweet-queen-elizabeth-ii-uju-anya-free-speech-higher-education/stories/202209110207)

Quote
Nearly 4,000 people have signed a petition defending Uju Anya, a Carnegie Mellon University professor whose viral tweet about a dying queen Elizabeth II — wishing her "excruciating" pain — drew scorn but also touched off a debate about free speech on college campuses.

<snip>

"As colleagues at other institutions, one thing that sticks out to us is that universities have nothing to gain by calling out individual employees on free speech—especially when they can be seen doing it selectively—as is the case for CMU. Professor Anya's Twitter clearly states: 'Views are mine,'" the letter reads in part.

I still think Anya is one sick lady, but I am very happy to see people supporting her right to privately express her opinion, no matter how shocking and offensive.  This is America, after all.

However, I am irritated and saddened to see the SJW's as always falling back upon race as a debate point when the furor is really not about the speaker's race but about the speaker's words, essentially turning an obnoxious and insensitive person into a martyr. 

Quote
"Yet, her institution took up the charge to admonish a Black woman professor, calling her response to her lived experiences of the real and tangible impacts of colonialism and white supremacy, 'offensive and objectionable.' This is unacceptable and dehumanizing.

At the same time, Anya's supporters make a very good point:

Quote
"Where is the space for this sort of discourse if not within the free speech that academia purports to uplift?"

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on September 15, 2022, 04:59:55 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 14, 2022, 09:35:11 PM
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Thousands Defend Professor Who Wished Queen Agonizing Death (https://www.post-gazette.com/news/education/2022/09/12/carnegie-mellon-university-professor-tweet-queen-elizabeth-ii-uju-anya-free-speech-higher-education/stories/202209110207)

Quote
Nearly 4,000 people have signed a petition defending Uju Anya, a Carnegie Mellon University professor whose viral tweet about a dying queen Elizabeth II — wishing her "excruciating" pain — drew scorn but also touched off a debate about free speech on college campuses.

<snip>

"As colleagues at other institutions, one thing that sticks out to us is that universities have nothing to gain by calling out individual employees on free speech—especially when they can be seen doing it selectively—as is the case for CMU. Professor Anya's Twitter clearly states: 'Views are mine,'" the letter reads in part.

I still think Anya is one sick lady, but I am very happy to see people supporting her right to privately express her opinion, no matter how shocking and offensive.  This is America, after all.

However, I am irritated and saddened to see the SJW's as always falling back upon race as a debate point when the furor is really not about the speaker's race but about the speaker's words, essentially turning an obnoxious and insensitive person into a martyr. 

Quote
"Yet, her institution took up the charge to admonish a Black woman professor, calling her response to her lived experiences of the real and tangible impacts of colonialism and white supremacy, 'offensive and objectionable.' This is unacceptable and dehumanizing.

At the same time, Anya's supporters make a very good point:

Quote
"Where is the space for this sort of discourse if not within the free speech that academia purports to uplift?"

In addition to being "shocking and offensive", her statements on the impact of colonialism are not borne out by facts.
https://www.britannica.com/place/Nigeria/Independent-Nigeria

If she had expressed similar sentiments about current rulers/people in power in Nigeria, she would most likely be in prison or worse.

It is disheartening to see academics rush to the defense of people like Anya, the California professor who falsely accused the security guard of racism, and the NYU professor who harassed her student and who was subsequently suspended. Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on September 15, 2022, 09:37:39 AM
One of the most disturbing aspects of our current culture wars is that so many seem to feel that because they belong to some disadvantaged group, they are therefore entitled to claim the privilege of exemption from any sort of expectations of civility or ordinary consideration for other human beings.  It shows a profound lack of self-awareness that they either don't recognize how their attitudes stem from hatred toward others, or else feel that their hate--as opposed to the hate that they themselves have experienced--is justified.  This is the sort of thing that helps put the "war" in culture war.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 10:02:37 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on September 15, 2022, 04:59:55 AM
Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

I've seen a couple of comments about this.  To be fair, what is there to say?

We're all horrified and angered.  Any organization can condemn the crime, but I think it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 15, 2022, 10:43:59 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 10:02:37 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on September 15, 2022, 04:59:55 AM
Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

I've seen a couple of comments about this.  To be fair, what is there to say?

We're all horrified and angered.  Any organization can condemn the crime, but I think it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

I think the point is that how much coverage something gets is more determined by the identities of the perpetrator and victim than the egregiousness of the crime. (In this case, the identity of the attacker makes it something no-one wants to talk about.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 15, 2022, 02:52:14 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 10:02:37 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on September 15, 2022, 04:59:55 AM
Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

I've seen a couple of comments about this.  To be fair, what is there to say?

We're all horrified and angered.  Any organization can condemn the crime, but I think it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

Does that include Ilhan Omar? I haven't heard her weigh in yet.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on September 15, 2022, 03:43:41 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 15, 2022, 02:52:14 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 10:02:37 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on September 15, 2022, 04:59:55 AM
Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

I've seen a couple of comments about this.  To be fair, what is there to say?

We're all horrified and angered.  Any organization can condemn the crime, but I think it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

Does that include Ilhan Omar? I haven't heard her weigh in yet.

You are soooo predictable.  LOL.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 04:04:15 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 15, 2022, 10:43:59 AM
I think the point is that how much coverage something gets is more determined by the identities of the perpetrator and victim than the egregiousness of the crime. (In this case, the identity of the attacker makes it something no-one wants to talk about.)

This has gotten a lot of coverage.

Biden is considering sanctions against Iran.

What would we talk about?

This is a result of the fatwa against Rushdie and I suspect the suspect is mentally ill.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 04:08:34 PM
Quote from: nebo113 on September 15, 2022, 03:43:41 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 15, 2022, 02:52:14 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 10:02:37 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on September 15, 2022, 04:59:55 AM
Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

I've seen a couple of comments about this.  To be fair, what is there to say?

We're all horrified and angered.  Any organization can condemn the crime, but I think it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

Does that include Ilhan Omar? I haven't heard her weigh in yet.

You are soooo predictable.  LOL.

Later our friend will feel victimized when someone asserts that the Republicans harbor racists in their camp.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on September 15, 2022, 04:33:54 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 15, 2022, 10:43:59 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 10:02:37 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on September 15, 2022, 04:59:55 AM
Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

I've seen a couple of comments about this.  To be fair, what is there to say?

We're all horrified and angered.  Any organization can condemn the crime, but I think it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

I think the point is that how much coverage something gets is more determined by the identities of the perpetrator and victim than the egregiousness of the crime. (In this case, the identity of the attacker makes it something no-one wants to talk about.)

It's not only the coverage but the failure to ascertain that the facts posted are accurate. In the case of Anya, for instance, people have rushed to support her without checking to see if the facts are indeed accurate and if Anya's compatriots in Nigeria share her opinion.

BBC News https://www.bbc.com/news/world suggests that this is not the case for at least one segment of the population.
Quote
Posted at 12:5012:50
Nigerian Anglicans remember 'courageous' Queen

Tamara Ebiwei

BBC News Pidgin

Scroll all the way to the end of the page for the report:
Quote
Hundreds of people packed out a remembrance service in Abuja for Queen Elizabeth lI organised by the Church of Nigeria Anglican Communion.

Rev Ali Buba Lamido, Dean of the Church of Nigeria, said that as the head of the Anglican Communion, the Queen was also "the head of our church".

Others described her as "lovable, soft spoken and courageous".

One of those at the service, Saratu Beatrice Chidoko, told the BBC that she "admired the Queen as one who loved colours".

"I am attracted to the Queen's dressing," she added.

British High Commissioner to Nigeria Catriona Laing and Defence Attache Matt Munro were also at the service.

Prayers were said for the Queen's soul to find eternal rest and those present also prayed for King Charles III.

This is particularly disheartening because part of our academic training is to check our sources and also to make sure that whoever we are championing has presented the correct facts as opposed to merely flinging accusations as in the case of Alex Jones.

As for Salman Rushdie although
Quote
...it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

the absence of strong condemnations by academics/universities is telling (see marshwiggle's comments).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on September 15, 2022, 05:40:36 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on September 15, 2022, 04:33:54 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 15, 2022, 10:43:59 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 10:02:37 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on September 15, 2022, 04:59:55 AM
Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

I've seen a couple of comments about this.  To be fair, what is there to say?

We're all horrified and angered.  Any organization can condemn the crime, but I think it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

I think the point is that how much coverage something gets is more determined by the identities of the perpetrator and victim than the egregiousness of the crime. (In this case, the identity of the attacker makes it something no-one wants to talk about.)

It's not only the coverage but the failure to ascertain that the facts posted are accurate. In the case of Anya, for instance, people have rushed to support her without checking to see if the facts are indeed accurate and if Anya's compatriots in Nigeria share her opinion.

BBC News https://www.bbc.com/news/world suggests that this is not the case for at least one segment of the population.
Quote
Posted at 12:5012:50
Nigerian Anglicans remember 'courageous' Queen

Tamara Ebiwei

BBC News Pidgin

Scroll all the way to the end of the page for the report:
Quote
Hundreds of people packed out a remembrance service in Abuja for Queen Elizabeth lI organised by the Church of Nigeria Anglican Communion.

Rev Ali Buba Lamido, Dean of the Church of Nigeria, said that as the head of the Anglican Communion, the Queen was also "the head of our church".

Others described her as "lovable, soft spoken and courageous".

One of those at the service, Saratu Beatrice Chidoko, told the BBC that she "admired the Queen as one who loved colours".

"I am attracted to the Queen's dressing," she added.

British High Commissioner to Nigeria Catriona Laing and Defence Attache Matt Munro were also at the service.

Prayers were said for the Queen's soul to find eternal rest and those present also prayed for King Charles III.

This is particularly disheartening because part of our academic training is to check our sources and also to make sure that whoever we are championing has presented the correct facts as opposed to merely flinging accusations as in the case of Alex Jones.

As for Salman Rushdie although
Quote
...it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

the absence of strong condemnations by academics/universities is telling (see marshwiggle's comments).

Many writers have (see Twitter) including Stephen King, J. K. Rowling and the Writters Guild of America

Among academics:
Tim Winter, Islamic Scholar at the University of Cambridge
Juan Cole, Professor of History, University of Michigan
Daniel O'Gorman, Literature, Oxford
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on September 15, 2022, 05:49:55 PM
Sorry for the double. Also

Kathy Kiely, Lee Hills chair of free press studies at the University of Missouri
Tracy Higgins, Law, Fordham
PEN America
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 05:51:23 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on September 15, 2022, 04:33:54 PM
Quote
...it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

the absence of strong condemnations by academics/universities is telling (see marshwiggle's comments).

Yeah, I understand the objection. 

But again, what are they supposed to say?  This is an atrocity among many atrocities.

I'm sure we would all condemn the Highland Park shooter or the people who kill other people in places like Philadelphia and Chicago, and that's fine with me if we want our colleges to issue statements condemning violent criminals, but I don't know what these achieve in the practical sense; I just assume we are all horrified and enraged.

If there IS a good reason to withhold public condemnation of the attack, it's that at this period of time many people equate Hadi Matar with all Muslims----we even have a poster on this very thread who seems to be doing just that.  There is no reason to further antagonize the zealots and angry people who are swept up into the culture wars by bringing more attention to the religion of a demented man.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 15, 2022, 05:59:29 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 05:51:23 PM

If there IS a good reason to withhold public condemnation of the attack, it's that at this period of time many people equate Hadi Matar with all Muslims----we even have a poster on this very thread who seems to be doing just that. 

Sort of like equating Derek Chauvin with all police, or all Minneapolis police. Now who would stand for such ridiculousness?
It depends on how it is publicized. As someone here posted, the minimum should be to get the basic facts right. Then at least we have a hope (possibility) of working together.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 06:50:11 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 15, 2022, 05:59:29 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 05:51:23 PM

If there IS a good reason to withhold public condemnation of the attack, it's that at this period of time many people equate Hadi Matar with all Muslims----we even have a poster on this very thread who seems to be doing just that. 

Sort of like equating Derek Chauvin with all police, or all Minneapolis police. Now who would stand for such ridiculousness?

You are absolutely correct. 

Intelligent and rational people do not think that way.

So don't think that way, Mahag.   Don't be yet another zombie in the culture wars.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on September 16, 2022, 04:14:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 05:51:23 PM

If there IS a good reason to withhold public condemnation of the attack, it's that at this period of time many people equate Hadi Matar with all Muslims----we even have a poster on this very thread who seems to be doing just that.  There is no reason to further antagonize the zealots and angry people who are swept up into the culture wars by bringing more attention to the religion of a demented man.

But mental illness isn't nearly as important (or even discussed) if it's a white attacker and a non-white victim. It's only a mitigating factor for "marginalized" people.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 16, 2022, 04:15:59 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 06:50:11 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 15, 2022, 05:59:29 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 05:51:23 PM

If there IS a good reason to withhold public condemnation of the attack, it's that at this period of time many people equate Hadi Matar with all Muslims----we even have a poster on this very thread who seems to be doing just that. 

Sort of like equating Derek Chauvin with all police, or all Minneapolis police. Now who would stand for such ridiculousness?

You are absolutely correct. 

Intelligent and rational people do not think that way.

So don't think that way, Mahag.   Don't be yet another zombie in the culture wars.

Increasingly, they do if they believe it will help them win an election, sell a newspaper, get called for an acting gig in Hollywood, or land a juicy gig in the DEI administration. Logic tells them they should join the culture war on the side that seems to be winning in their immediate vicinity.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on September 16, 2022, 05:19:22 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 16, 2022, 04:14:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 05:51:23 PM

If there IS a good reason to withhold public condemnation of the attack, it's that at this period of time many people equate Hadi Matar with all Muslims----we even have a poster on this very thread who seems to be doing just that.  There is no reason to further antagonize the zealots and angry people who are swept up into the culture wars by bringing more attention to the religion of a demented man.

But mental illness isn't nearly as important (or even discussed) if it's a white attacker and a non-white victim. It's only a mitigating factor for "marginalized" people.

Seriously?  Mental illness is raised any time there is a white shooter/bomber/etc.  It is raised any time someone questions the rate of shooting related death in America.   

If it is a Muslim bomber, that dosn't seem to be a factor... 

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2022, 06:03:45 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 16, 2022, 04:14:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 05:51:23 PM

If there IS a good reason to withhold public condemnation of the attack, it's that at this period of time many people equate Hadi Matar with all Muslims----we even have a poster on this very thread who seems to be doing just that.  There is no reason to further antagonize the zealots and angry people who are swept up into the culture wars by bringing more attention to the religion of a demented man.

But mental illness isn't nearly as important (or even discussed) if it's a white attacker and a non-white victim. It's only a mitigating factor for "marginalized" people.

We have a history of violent racism by white majorities in North America and we are extremely well aware of that.

We should be cognizant of the cultural context too. 

Perhaps I am wrong, but it appeared to me that Rushdie's attacker is mentally ill.  He's a zealot, certainly, but his interviews are strange and garbled and his demeaner is weird.  And I do not see any mental illness as "mitigating" at all but a fact (if, in fact, I am correct).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2022, 06:13:20 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on September 16, 2022, 05:19:22 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 16, 2022, 04:14:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 05:51:23 PM

If there IS a good reason to withhold public condemnation of the attack, it's that at this period of time many people equate Hadi Matar with all Muslims----we even have a poster on this very thread who seems to be doing just that.  There is no reason to further antagonize the zealots and angry people who are swept up into the culture wars by bringing more attention to the religion of a demented man.

But mental illness isn't nearly as important (or even discussed) if it's a white attacker and a non-white victim. It's only a mitigating factor for "marginalized" people.

Seriously?  Mental illness is raised any time there is a white shooter/bomber/etc.  It is raised any time someone questions the rate of shooting related death in America.   

If it is a Muslim bomber, that dosn't seem to be a factor...

Read up on Nikolas Cruz, Ethan Crumbly, Dylan Storm Roof, James Holms, or Jared Loughner, Marshy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 16, 2022, 06:52:07 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2022, 06:13:20 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on September 16, 2022, 05:19:22 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 16, 2022, 04:14:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 05:51:23 PM

If there IS a good reason to withhold public condemnation of the attack, it's that at this period of time many people equate Hadi Matar with all Muslims----we even have a poster on this very thread who seems to be doing just that.  There is no reason to further antagonize the zealots and angry people who are swept up into the culture wars by bringing more attention to the religion of a demented man.

But mental illness isn't nearly as important (or even discussed) if it's a white attacker and a non-white victim. It's only a mitigating factor for "marginalized" people.

Seriously?  Mental illness is raised any time there is a white shooter/bomber/etc.  It is raised any time someone questions the rate of shooting related death in America.   

If it is a Muslim bomber, that dosn't seem to be a factor...

Read up on Nikolas Cruz, Ethan Crumbly, Dylan Storm Roof, James Holms, or Jared Loughner, Marshy.

What tells the story: President Biden states that White Supremacy is the greatest threat within our shores, which is an obvious lie to anyone who pays attention, even sporadically, and 'progessives' who know it's a lie mostly don't care if people believe it, because all they care about is making sure Trump never gets near the White House again.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on September 16, 2022, 09:34:09 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 16, 2022, 06:52:07 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2022, 06:13:20 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on September 16, 2022, 05:19:22 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 16, 2022, 04:14:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 05:51:23 PM

If there IS a good reason to withhold public condemnation of the attack, it's that at this period of time many people equate Hadi Matar with all Muslims----we even have a poster on this very thread who seems to be doing just that.  There is no reason to further antagonize the zealots and angry people who are swept up into the culture wars by bringing more attention to the religion of a demented man.



But mental illness isn't nearly as important (or even discussed) if it's a white attacker and a non-white victim. It's only a mitigating factor for "marginalized" people.

Seriously?  Mental illness is raised any time there is a white shooter/bomber/etc.  It is raised any time someone questions the rate of shooting related death in America.   

If it is a Muslim bomber, that dosn't seem to be a factor...

Read up on Nikolas Cruz, Ethan Crumbly, Dylan Storm Roof, James Holms, or Jared Loughner, Marshy.

What tells the story: President Biden states that White Supremacy is the greatest threat within our shores, which is an obvious lie to anyone who pays attention, even sporadically, and 'progessives' who know it's a lie mostly don't care if people believe it, because all they care about is making sure Trump never gets near the White House again.

This is from a congressional report:

" On February 22, 2019, a Trump Administration United States Department of Justice official wrote in a New York Times op-ed that "white supremacy and far-right extremism are among the greatest domestic-security threats facing the United States. Regrettably, over the past 25 years, law enforcement, at both the Federal and State levels, has been slow to respond. ... Killings committed by individuals and groups associated with far-right extremist groups have risen significantly."."


From the mouths of republicans...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 16, 2022, 09:38:13 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on September 16, 2022, 09:34:09 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 16, 2022, 06:52:07 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2022, 06:13:20 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on September 16, 2022, 05:19:22 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on September 16, 2022, 04:14:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 15, 2022, 05:51:23 PM

If there IS a good reason to withhold public condemnation of the attack, it's that at this period of time many people equate Hadi Matar with all Muslims----we even have a poster on this very thread who seems to be doing just that.  There is no reason to further antagonize the zealots and angry people who are swept up into the culture wars by bringing more attention to the religion of a demented man.



But mental illness isn't nearly as important (or even discussed) if it's a white attacker and a non-white victim. It's only a mitigating factor for "marginalized" people.

Seriously?  Mental illness is raised any time there is a white shooter/bomber/etc.  It is raised any time someone questions the rate of shooting related death in America.   

If it is a Muslim bomber, that dosn't seem to be a factor...

Read up on Nikolas Cruz, Ethan Crumbly, Dylan Storm Roof, James Holms, or Jared Loughner, Marshy.

What tells the story: President Biden states that White Supremacy is the greatest threat within our shores, which is an obvious lie to anyone who pays attention, even sporadically, and 'progessives' who know it's a lie mostly don't care if people believe it, because all they care about is making sure Trump never gets near the White House again.

This is from a congressional report:

" On February 22, 2019, a Trump Administration United States Department of Justice official wrote in a New York Times op-ed that "white supremacy and far-right extremism are among the greatest domestic-security threats facing the United States. Regrettably, over the past 25 years, law enforcement, at both the Federal and State levels, has been slow to respond. ... Killings committed by individuals and groups associated with far-right extremist groups have risen significantly."."


From the mouths of republicans...

And that's why they are racists.
I still say urban crime, most of which is black perp/black victim, is a worse problem by far.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 16, 2022, 11:07:06 AM
[double post, sorry]

Also, 2019 was before the George Floyd riots.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2022, 11:23:54 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 16, 2022, 11:07:06 AM
[double post, sorry]

Also, 2019 was before the George Floyd riots.

Did you actually read Kron's excerpt?

I don't want the thread to devolve into craziness and subject matter having nothing to do with the topic.  I was just curious.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 16, 2022, 12:04:40 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on September 16, 2022, 11:23:54 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on September 16, 2022, 11:07:06 AM
[double post, sorry]

Also, 2019 was before the George Floyd riots.

Did you actually read Kron's excerpt?

I don't want the thread to devolve into craziness and subject matter having nothing to do with the topic.  I was just curious.

By all means, let's skip the craziness. I've got work to do anyway. Enjoy the rest of your day.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on September 17, 2022, 06:42:05 AM
More hits:

CNN (somewhat quietly) admits they were conned by yet another Duke University racism hoax.

https://www.mediaite.com/sports/cnns-john-avlon-acknowledges-widespread-media-failure-on-byu-racist-heckling-allegations-there-was-a-rush-to-judgment/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 04, 2022, 12:27:57 PM
Well, for a change perhaps, some good news, or at least what I would call good news: a student group tried to cancel an appearance by a controversial speaker, but nothing doing. The event will happen as scheduled.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/catholic-university-president-responds-to-calls-by-leftists-to-disinvite-matt-walsh-from-speaking-event?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dwbrand
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on October 05, 2022, 07:22:25 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 04, 2022, 12:27:57 PM
Well, for a change perhaps, some good news, or at least what I would call good news: a student group tried to cancel an appearance by a controversial speaker, but nothing doing. The event will happen as scheduled.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/catholic-university-president-responds-to-calls-by-leftists-to-disinvite-matt-walsh-from-speaking-event?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dwbrand

I agree.  This is good news.

I do hope, however, that there are plenty of people there to lawfully engage his incredible bigotry.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on October 05, 2022, 08:13:27 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 05, 2022, 07:22:25 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 04, 2022, 12:27:57 PM
Well, for a change perhaps, some good news, or at least what I would call good news: a student group tried to cancel an appearance by a controversial speaker, but nothing doing. The event will happen as scheduled.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/catholic-university-president-responds-to-calls-by-leftists-to-disinvite-matt-walsh-from-speaking-event?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dwbrand

I agree.  This is good news.

I do hope, however, that there are plenty of people there to lawfully engage his incredible bigotry.

It is good news for free speech on campus. However he is an odious man putting targets on the back of health care workers.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 08:44:59 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 05, 2022, 07:22:25 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 04, 2022, 12:27:57 PM
Well, for a change perhaps, some good news, or at least what I would call good news: a student group tried to cancel an appearance by a controversial speaker, but nothing doing. The event will happen as scheduled.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/catholic-university-president-responds-to-calls-by-leftists-to-disinvite-matt-walsh-from-speaking-event?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dwbrand

I agree.  This is good news.

I do hope, however, that there are plenty of people there to lawfully engage his incredible bigotry.

So what should we do about bigots? Give them tenure?
https://nypost.com/2021/10/29/rutgers-professor-calls-white-people-villains/

ETA: It's important to recognize when the line separating legitimate free speech from something else is crossed. Matt Walsh says in so many words 'you cannot tell me what a woman is; therefore, you are refusing to understand your world awhile bullying others into accepting your view.' Brittney Cooper promotes murdering white people as a solution to what she sees as intractable social justice problems while pretending not to.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on October 05, 2022, 09:46:55 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on October 05, 2022, 08:13:27 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 05, 2022, 07:22:25 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 04, 2022, 12:27:57 PM
Well, for a change perhaps, some good news, or at least what I would call good news: a student group tried to cancel an appearance by a controversial speaker, but nothing doing. The event will happen as scheduled.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/catholic-university-president-responds-to-calls-by-leftists-to-disinvite-matt-walsh-from-speaking-event?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dwbrand

I agree.  This is good news.

I do hope, however, that there are plenty of people there to lawfully engage his incredible bigotry.

It is good news for free speech on campus. However he is an odious man putting targets on the back of health care workers.

I'd rather see the auditorium sit empty because people have better thing to do than listen to him blather.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on October 05, 2022, 09:58:40 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on October 05, 2022, 09:46:55 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on October 05, 2022, 08:13:27 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 05, 2022, 07:22:25 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 04, 2022, 12:27:57 PM
Well, for a change perhaps, some good news, or at least what I would call good news: a student group tried to cancel an appearance by a controversial speaker, but nothing doing. The event will happen as scheduled.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/catholic-university-president-responds-to-calls-by-leftists-to-disinvite-matt-walsh-from-speaking-event?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dwbrand

I agree.  This is good news.

I do hope, however, that there are plenty of people there to lawfully engage his incredible bigotry.

It is good news for free speech on campus. However he is an odious man putting targets on the back of health care workers.

I'd rather see the auditorium sit empty because people have better thing to do than listen to him blather.

That is the ideal!!

But we are not there yet.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on October 05, 2022, 10:02:35 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 08:44:59 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 05, 2022, 07:22:25 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 04, 2022, 12:27:57 PM
Well, for a change perhaps, some good news, or at least what I would call good news: a student group tried to cancel an appearance by a controversial speaker, but nothing doing. The event will happen as scheduled.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/catholic-university-president-responds-to-calls-by-leftists-to-disinvite-matt-walsh-from-speaking-event?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dwbrand

I agree.  This is good news.

I do hope, however, that there are plenty of people there to lawfully engage his incredible bigotry.

So what should we do about bigots? Give them tenure?
https://nypost.com/2021/10/29/rutgers-professor-calls-white-people-villains/

ETA: It's important to recognize when the line separating legitimate free speech from something else is crossed. Matt Walsh says in so many words 'you cannot tell me what a woman is; therefore, you are refusing to understand your world awhile bullying others into accepting your view.' Brittney Cooper promotes murdering white people as a solution to what she sees as intractable social justice problems while pretending not to.

Didn't we post about this already?

That's the trouble with free speech, Big-M.  Someone is going to say something you find offensive and alarming.  Just is.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 10:05:36 AM
I have a big problem with people who promote racial murder.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on October 05, 2022, 10:09:47 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 10:05:36 AM
I have a big problem with people who promote racial murder.

You have the right to speak out.  That is part of free speech.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 10:21:35 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 05, 2022, 10:09:47 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 10:05:36 AM
I have a big problem with people who promote racial murder.

You have the right to speak out.  That is part of free speech.

Yes, long as I am prepared to lose my employment. See, calling Matt Walsh a bigot is in style these days, and nowhere more so than in academia. Like bell-bottom jeans in 1970. My situation is different. Speaking out against the bigotry of a black tenured woman at a prestigious college is risky.

Even saying you are not yet convinced Matt Walsh is a bigot is risky.

The likelihood that thoughtful people will take full advantage of their legal free speech rights varies greatly according other factors.

ETA: If/when I should decide to speak out about this, you may read about it in the news and find out who I am. It wouldn't amaze me. The thing that would be more likely to motivate me would be the killings I keep reading about in the news.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on October 05, 2022, 11:18:58 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 10:21:35 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 05, 2022, 10:09:47 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 10:05:36 AM
I have a big problem with people who promote racial murder.

You have the right to speak out.  That is part of free speech.

Yes, long as I am prepared to lose my employment. See, calling Matt Walsh a bigot is in style these days, and nowhere more so than in academia. Like bell-bottom jeans in 1970. My situation is different. Speaking out against the bigotry of a black tenured woman at a prestigious college is risky.

Even saying you are not yet convinced Matt Walsh is a bigot is risky.

The likelihood that thoughtful people will take full advantage of their legal free speech rights varies greatly according other factors.

ETA: If/when I should decide to speak out about this, you may read about it in the news and find out who I am. It wouldn't amaze me. The thing that would be more likely to motivate me would be the killings I keep reading about in the news.

Always the victim.  I seriously doubt your melodrama.  Maybe you should be brave and speak your mind and see what happens.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 12:40:15 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 05, 2022, 11:18:58 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 10:21:35 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 05, 2022, 10:09:47 AM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 10:05:36 AM
I have a big problem with people who promote racial murder.

You have the right to speak out.  That is part of free speech.

Yes, long as I am prepared to lose my employment. See, calling Matt Walsh a bigot is in style these days, and nowhere more so than in academia. Like bell-bottom jeans in 1970. My situation is different. Speaking out against the bigotry of a black tenured woman at a prestigious college is risky.

Even saying you are not yet convinced Matt Walsh is a bigot is risky.

The likelihood that thoughtful people will take full advantage of their legal free speech rights varies greatly according other factors.

ETA: If/when I should decide to speak out about this, you may read about it in the news and find out who I am. It wouldn't amaze me. The thing that would be more likely to motivate me would be the killings I keep reading about in the news.

Always the victim.  I seriously doubt your melodrama.  Maybe you should be brave and speak your mind and see what happens.

Hopefully I will get up the nerve before <snip>
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on October 05, 2022, 01:23:07 PM
I did not call Walsh a bigot. What I objected to was his doxxing of healthcare workers, and promoting posting videos which he presents as one thing and in reality are something else. When you do that, and crazed people act on them, I think you are odious. That is also my right, yes?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 01:25:58 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on October 05, 2022, 01:23:07 PM
I did not call Walsh a bigot. What I objected to was his doxxing of healthcare workers, and promoting posting videos which he presents as one thing and in reality are something else. When you do that, and crazed people act on them, I think you are odious. That is also my right, yes?

Everyone has the right, but if you also have job security with due process for dismissal, you also have the privilege. Which means we have a greater chance of hearing from you.

And humanities fields being so heavily populated by the political far left, together with so many people believing that college is essential for a good life, would be one of the likely reasons our society is in a state of decay these days.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 01:35:58 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on October 05, 2022, 01:23:07 PM
I did not call Walsh a bigot. What I objected to was his doxxing of healthcare workers, and promoting posting videos which he presents as one thing and in reality are something else. When you do that, and crazed people act on them, I think you are odious. That is also my right, yes?

I'm taking it that you would consider a surgeon who takes a piece of a person's bowel and fashions it into a homemade vagina to be surgically put in healthy body is a healthcare worker. I guess you can believe that, and you can believe it is treating a patient. But I doubt the people who do this are shrinking violets. They seem to kind of like the publicity. I think they tend to be fully aware they have placed themselves in the arena of 'movers and shakers.'
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on October 05, 2022, 01:53:10 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 01:35:58 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on October 05, 2022, 01:23:07 PM
I did not call Walsh a bigot. What I objected to was his doxxing of healthcare workers, and promoting posting videos which he presents as one thing and in reality are something else. When you do that, and crazed people act on them, I think you are odious. That is also my right, yes?

I'm taking it that you would consider a surgeon who takes a piece of a person's bowel and fashions it into a homemade vagina to be surgically put in healthy body is a healthcare worker. I guess you can believe that, and you can believe it is treating a patient. But I doubt the people who do this are shrinking violets. They seem to kind of like the publicity. I think they tend to be fully aware they have placed themselves in the arena of 'movers and shakers.'

You and I can disagree whether or not it is. That is not what Walsh does. he says the procedures are being performed on children (the hospitals he cites only do so for those 18 years and older who have gone through years of therapy), and as a result places like Boston Children's and Vanderbilt Medical have had staff receive death threats, and bomb threats. As someone whose sister was treated extensively by physicians and staff at a leading children's hospital I do take those threats seriously, and they impact all who work there, not just the surgeon you mentioned. Care for thousands of children in need is put at risk, and all who provide it are frightened.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 02:05:02 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on October 05, 2022, 01:53:10 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 01:35:58 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on October 05, 2022, 01:23:07 PM
I did not call Walsh a bigot. What I objected to was his doxxing of healthcare workers, and promoting posting videos which he presents as one thing and in reality are something else. When you do that, and crazed people act on them, I think you are odious. That is also my right, yes?

I'm taking it that you would consider a surgeon who takes a piece of a person's bowel and fashions it into a homemade vagina to be surgically put in healthy body is a healthcare worker. I guess you can believe that, and you can believe it is treating a patient. But I doubt the people who do this are shrinking violets. They seem to kind of like the publicity. I think they tend to be fully aware they have placed themselves in the arena of 'movers and shakers.'

You and I can disagree whether or not it is. That is not what Walsh does. he says the procedures are being performed on children (the hospitals he cites only do so for those 18 years and older who have gone through years of therapy), and as a result places like Boston Children's and Vanderbilt Medical have had staff receive death threats, and bomb threats. As someone whose sister was treated extensively by physicians and staff at a leading children's hospital I do take those threats seriously, and they impact all who work there, not just the surgeon you mentioned. Care for thousands of children in need is put at risk, and all who provide it are frightened.

In a case like that I would predict the plain truth would be the enough to bring a lot of furor. Especially if the process was likely begun years prior, and not initiated by child with their parents' oversight but by the child together with the contact with their radicalized school, which does not consider the parents an ally in the upbringing of the child, can easily be anti-western religion, and may even intentionally keep conversations concealed from the parent. A parent who finds himself in the position of having to make the best of a horrible situation could conceivably get on board with surgery beginning at age eighteen, even while, if it's the legal age to be considered, is still way too young for that kind of decision. If Walsh made flat out erroneous claims that have put hospital staff in danger, he'll probably get sued for defamation or worse. But if he's claiming child sexual abuse he may have a leg to stand on. I guess we'll see.
I hope everything goes fine for your sister and her health, Jimbo.
Alternatively, one could just look at Walsh playing fast and loose with the facts (if he is) and just shrug our shoulders and say 'well...a lot of people are upset lately' as the White House Press secretary said when Brett Kavanaugh was being threatened. Works for all kinds of mischief, and I guess now there's a precedent.
We have a culture war. I can't see the beginning of it as I look in the rear view mirror. It's gone, we are certainly in it now.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on October 05, 2022, 02:16:17 PM
Thank you for your concern, but my sister died some time ago. She was treated on two separate occasions a long time ago, each stay lengthy and  involving a coma. She had serious liver issues as a middle schooler, and suffered a burst abdominal artery at that time. Died after a liver transplant in her twenties.

I'm sorry, but threatening needed care for children like that for me simply doesn't equate to your Kavenough example. And no, I did not for do I condone threats against anyone who is simply doing a much needed job. Not even police officers, believe it or not. I can protest against what I consider bad or unequal practices and the crimes of individuals while abhorring generalized calls for violence.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 05, 2022, 02:18:49 PM
I'm sorry about your loss, Jimbo.

QuoteI'm sorry, but threatening needed care for children like that for me simply doesn't equate to your Kavenough example. And no, I did not for do I condone threats against anyone who is simply doing a much needed job. Not even police officers, believe it or not. I can protest against what I consider bad or unequal practices and the crimes of individuals while abhorring generalized calls for violence.

There is nothing as precious as any child.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on October 10, 2022, 07:54:56 PM
IHE: Professor Won't Be Replaced for Statements on Gender (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/10/10/professor-won%E2%80%99t-be-replaced-statements-gender)

Quote
The University of Southern Maine will not remove Christy Hammer from teaching a graduate class in education because she told the class that there are only two sexes, The Bangor Daily News reported.

However, the university will have another professor teach an identical class for students who do not wish to remain in Hammer's class.

"We have developed an alternative plan for this class and will be opening a new section of this course for those students who would like to move," said a university spokeswoman. "The original section taught by Professor Hammer will continue for any student who wishes to remain in that class."

Hammer did not respond to requests for a comment.

Students in the class staged a walkout to protest Hammer's statement.

Sounds like a win-win to me.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 11, 2022, 04:33:39 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 10, 2022, 07:54:56 PM
IHE: Professor Won't Be Replaced for Statements on Gender (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/10/10/professor-won%E2%80%99t-be-replaced-statements-gender)

Quote
The University of Southern Maine will not remove Christy Hammer from teaching a graduate class in education because she told the class that there are only two sexes, The Bangor Daily News reported.

However, the university will have another professor teach an identical class for students who do not wish to remain in Hammer's class.

"We have developed an alternative plan for this class and will be opening a new section of this course for those students who would like to move," said a university spokeswoman. "The original section taught by Professor Hammer will continue for any student who wishes to remain in that class."

Hammer did not respond to requests for a comment.

Students in the class staged a walkout to protest Hammer's statement.

Sounds like a win-win to me.

No apology to Professor Hammer for the threat to remove her from the teaching position?  She did the right thing to decline comment then.
Alternatively, they could have told the students 'this is the instructor we've hired and she does the job as she sees fit. There are other schools.' No one's freedom of speech violated.
If I ran a school, we would run it, not the students.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on October 16, 2022, 02:17:30 PM
UCSD: Guardian: BREAKING: Organic Chemistry Lecturer Caught Saying Racist Remarks Against Latino Community (https://ucsdguardian.org/2022/10/14/breaking-organic-chemistry-lecturer-caught-saying-racist-remarks-against-latino-community/)

Quote
As of Oct. 14, the video has amassed nearly 2,000 reactions and 500 comments, with many urging Chancellor Khosla and the UCSD administration to take action. The student who posted the video, Alfonso Lazo-Cazarez, himself disclosed his anger, admonishing the lecturer for espousing "unfortunate and sad" rhetoric while diminishing the value of workers who ensure that the "university is functioning."

It is unclear what disciplinary measures will be taken. Student leaders, however, have made statements of their own. For example,  A.S. President Sky Yang commented under the video post, "Need to look into this!", while the A.S. Office of Academic Affairs vowed to fight for proper consequences being brought against the lecturer, demanding that administrators remove the professor.

Watch the video.  I do not think this idiot mean any harm----he's just a clueless idiot who has yet to adjust to the new world of hyper-sensitivity. 

Aside: This is very awkward journalism. They need someone to teach style.   I'm available for hire!!!!!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 16, 2022, 02:41:55 PM
QuoteAs Ternansky is not tenured and works primarily as a lecturer, repercussions may be harsher than they would be for tenured professors.

I'd have no compunction about issuing the harshest repercussion available. Non-renewal, for any reason, or no reason!

ETA: Bad taste wisecrack. Should be able to apologize and move on in my opinion. Someday these students will be put in a position where they will be forced to realize that no matter how qualified or vetted, everyone in your hiring pool is a human being.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on October 18, 2022, 10:11:21 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 16, 2022, 02:17:30 PM
UCSD: Guardian: BREAKING: Organic Chemistry Lecturer Caught Saying Racist Remarks Against Latino Community (https://ucsdguardian.org/2022/10/14/breaking-organic-chemistry-lecturer-caught-saying-racist-remarks-against-latino-community/)

Quote
As of Oct. 14, the video has amassed nearly 2,000 reactions and 500 comments, with many urging Chancellor Khosla and the UCSD administration to take action. The student who posted the video, Alfonso Lazo-Cazarez, himself disclosed his anger, admonishing the lecturer for espousing "unfortunate and sad" rhetoric while diminishing the value of workers who ensure that the "university is functioning."

It is unclear what disciplinary measures will be taken. Student leaders, however, have made statements of their own. For example,  A.S. President Sky Yang commented under the video post, "Need to look into this!", while the A.S. Office of Academic Affairs vowed to fight for proper consequences being brought against the lecturer, demanding that administrators remove the professor.

Watch the video.  I do not think this idiot mean any harm----he's just a clueless idiot who has yet to adjust to the new world of hyper-sensitivity. 

Aside: This is very awkward journalism. They need someone to teach style.   I'm available for hire!!!!!

Well, if he gets let go by the university, he may have a future on the Los Angeles City Council.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on October 18, 2022, 11:59:59 AM
Quote from: apl68 on October 18, 2022, 10:11:21 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 16, 2022, 02:17:30 PM
UCSD: Guardian: BREAKING: Organic Chemistry Lecturer Caught Saying Racist Remarks Against Latino Community (https://ucsdguardian.org/2022/10/14/breaking-organic-chemistry-lecturer-caught-saying-racist-remarks-against-latino-community/)

Quote
As of Oct. 14, the video has amassed nearly 2,000 reactions and 500 comments, with many urging Chancellor Khosla and the UCSD administration to take action. The student who posted the video, Alfonso Lazo-Cazarez, himself disclosed his anger, admonishing the lecturer for espousing "unfortunate and sad" rhetoric while diminishing the value of workers who ensure that the "university is functioning."

It is unclear what disciplinary measures will be taken. Student leaders, however, have made statements of their own. For example,  A.S. President Sky Yang commented under the video post, "Need to look into this!", while the A.S. Office of Academic Affairs vowed to fight for proper consequences being brought against the lecturer, demanding that administrators remove the professor.

Watch the video.  I do not think this idiot mean any harm----he's just a clueless idiot who has yet to adjust to the new world of hyper-sensitivity. 

Aside: This is very awkward journalism. They need someone to teach style.   I'm available for hire!!!!!

Well, if he gets let go by the university, he may have a future on the Los Angeles City Council.

Actually, I think he'd have exactly the same problem.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 20, 2022, 06:53:42 PM
Kanye West is getting his interview pulled from a handful of big time online venues. Of course they have that right. They are not the government. He's being canceled, but then West is ultra-wealthy and he just bought Parler media or something, so he's not going to be silenced. I was wondering what would happen to me if I posted on Facebook that George Floyd died from a fentanyl/amphetamine overdose complicated by pre-existing conditions. In other words, not Chauvin's doing. Which I have always considered a possibility. Because - three reasons - (1) nobody but Derek Chauvin knows how much, if any, pressure, he was applying to the neck and Eric Nelson didn't dare put him on the stand, and (2) you can find a medical expert who will say what you want for the pay, and (3) any one of us can die at any time. That's what we signed up  for.
See, me posting on FB is not a big deal, because I am not Kanye West. I'm another anonymous working stiff. So maybe it would be left alone. Then again, rules. I'm curious what would happen. But I'm not going to try it, because (1) my friends & employers, and (2) I'm not really qualified to know what killed Floyd, and (3) whatever the truth is about that unpleasant evening, I'm thinking of African Americans and how painful many things can be these days. Including fentanyl addiction, encounters with the police, poverty, etc.
Can you imagine the flaming? I mean the photos of Chauvin. He just looks like a white supremacist. First, all of his skin is white. Second, the light grey suit. An obvious ploy to make him appear gentle. Anyone can see through that.
I spent three days in FB jail and one of my bigot far right friends is now in FB jail.
ETA: The Floyds are thinking of suing West for having an opinion. Like they haven't got enough litigation cash yet. Plus the rest of those $20 bills.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on October 20, 2022, 09:38:23 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on October 20, 2022, 06:53:42 PM
Kanye West is getting his interview pulled from a handful of big time online venues. Of course they have that right. They are not the government. He's being canceled, but then West is ultra-wealthy and he just bought Parler media or something, so he's not going to be silenced.

Can I just be a fly on the wall to see the look on Ye's face when he realizes he bought Parler, a worthless platform, for BIG REAL CASH MONEY from the Mercers who are (Death Con 3) Jews?

pleasepleasepleaseillneveraskforanythingeveragain....
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 22, 2022, 05:28:49 AM
I don't know much about Ye and not being knowledgeable of hip hop generally (other than enough to be mostly repelled by it) I was unaware of him except as a familiar name. I admit I liked the White Lives Matter stunt with Candace Owens. If I could make a prediction: a society in which it is acceptable to declare 'F Lives Matter' but it is unacceptable to declare 'G Lives Matter' is unsustainable. Doesn't matter what a nation's history is. You just can't do something like that even if the liberals agree it's necessary or correct, because they are not the society. They're just the liberals.
Bari Weiss now considers West an anti-semitic threat. Of course, as I recall, no one on this forum likes Bari either.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on October 22, 2022, 08:47:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on October 16, 2022, 02:17:30 PM
UCSD: Guardian: BREAKING: Organic Chemistry Lecturer Caught Saying Racist Remarks Against Latino Community (https://ucsdguardian.org/2022/10/14/breaking-organic-chemistry-lecturer-caught-saying-racist-remarks-against-latino-community/)

Quote
As of Oct. 14, the video has amassed nearly 2,000 reactions and 500 comments, with many urging Chancellor Khosla and the UCSD administration to take action. The student who posted the video, Alfonso Lazo-Cazarez, himself disclosed his anger, admonishing the lecturer for espousing "unfortunate and sad" rhetoric while diminishing the value of workers who ensure that the "university is functioning."

It is unclear what disciplinary measures will be taken. Student leaders, however, have made statements of their own. For example,  A.S. President Sky Yang commented under the video post, "Need to look into this!", while the A.S. Office of Academic Affairs vowed to fight for proper consequences being brought against the lecturer, demanding that administrators remove the professor.

Watch the video.  I do not think this idiot mean any harm----he's just a clueless idiot who has yet to adjust to the new world of hyper-sensitivity. 

Aside: This is very awkward journalism. They need someone to teach style.   I'm available for hire!!!!!

IHE: UC San Diego suspends instructor for racist comments (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/10/19/uc-san-diego-suspends-instructor-racist-comments)

Lower Deck:
Quote
A chemistry instructor at the University of California, San Diego, interrupted class last week to malign "Mexican" campus workers. He's now suspended for the term, but this hasn't satisfied everyone—if anyone.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on October 22, 2022, 09:27:44 AM
QuoteUCSD may need to improve its faculty diversity, equity and inclusion training, she added, and should convene a meeting for students to discuss the Ternansky case.

Will the new improved diversity equity and inclusion training include training Hispanic or Latino people to use the term 'Latinx?'

Reminds me of the old joke. A father comes home from work and asks his son, a boy scout, if he has done his good deed for the day.
"Oh yes Dad. Me and two other scouts helped an old lady across the street."
"Why did it take three of you?"
"She didn't want to go."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on November 04, 2022, 04:57:26 PM
An interesting discussion of the latest bruhaha in African history:

The Atlantic: The New History Wars: Inside the strife set off by an essay from the president of the American Historical Association (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/american-historical-association-james-sweet/671853/)

Quote
The August edition of the association's monthly magazine featured, as usual, a short essay by the association's president, James H. Sweet, a professor at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. Within hours of its publication, an outrage volcano erupted on social media. A professor at Cornell vented about the author's "white gaze." A historian at the University of San Diego denounced the essay as "significant and substantial violence." A historian at Knox College, in Illinois, organized an email campaign to pressure the AHA to respond.

******

That attempt at mollification only widened the controversy. An op-ed in The Wall Street Journal denounced the "woke mob" that had extracted Sweet's mea culpa. Fox News soon followed in similar terms. On August 20, the AHA temporarily locked its Twitter account to shut down a discussion it said had been hijacked by "trolls."

******

But the seeming triumph of the adversarial approach to history in 2019 and 2020 elicited a sharp backlash. Idaho, Iowa, and Oklahoma enacted laws in 2021 to forbid the teaching of "divisive concepts" in schools and universities—the critical, race-conscious attitude to history heading the list of such concepts. Florida, Georgia, and Mississippi followed in 2022. Several of these divisive-concepts laws pack a powerful legal punch. Some versions create rights to civil action that would permit students or parents to sue professors who teach history in a way that the students or parents don't want. Other versions would empower the state to police the political content of university teaching and even academic research. Florida is arguing in federal court that the state can lawfully decree or forbid what state-university professors may say in class.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on November 08, 2022, 12:06:08 PM
Sound reasonable to me. Black trans comedienne defends Dave Chappelle.

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=881907709107238
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on November 17, 2022, 09:16:10 AM
IHE: Biology Professor Reportedly Told to Stop Teaching Gender (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/11/17/biology-professor-reportedly-told-stop-teaching-gender)

Quote
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression and PEN America are demanding answers from Valdosta State University over reports that it told a professor of biology to change how she teaches sex and gender following a parent complaint. Jeremy C. Young, senior manager of free expression and education at PEN, said in a statement, "Most college students are adults, and parents should not be controlling what their adult children can learn, let alone what a professor can teach to a whole class. Faculty must be free to explore academic topics with their students, including those that are controversial or make some uncomfortable, without fear of repercussions. Doing so is at the core of universities' academic mission."

The sword cuts both ways.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on November 17, 2022, 09:42:23 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 17, 2022, 09:16:10 AM
IHE: Biology Professor Reportedly Told to Stop Teaching Gender (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/11/17/biology-professor-reportedly-told-stop-teaching-gender)

Quote
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression and PEN America are demanding answers from Valdosta State University over reports that it told a professor of biology to change how she teaches sex and gender following a parent complaint. Jeremy C. Young, senior manager of free expression and education at PEN, said in a statement, "Most college students are adults, and parents should not be controlling what their adult children can learn, let alone what a professor can teach to a whole class. Faculty must be free to explore academic topics with their students, including those that are controversial or make some uncomfortable, without fear of repercussions. Doing so is at the core of universities' academic mission."

The sword cuts both ways.

As it should. Right now it seems more of the time it's the left talking about "weaponizing free speech".
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on November 17, 2022, 09:42:40 AM
Princeton Supports Professor Who Apologized for Slur (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/11/17/princeton-supports-professor-who-apologized-slur#:~:text=In%20response%20to%20student%20complaints,inside%20and%20outside%20the%20classroom.)

Quote
In response to student complaints about a professor saying the N-word in class in reference to a poem that includes the word repeatedly, Princeton University said in a statement that it "guarantees all faculty and students the 'broadest possible latitude' to speak freely inside and outside the classroom. Speech is only restricted under narrow exceptions that do not apply to this incident. Our rules recognize that these free speech protections apply to words and ideas that people may find 'offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed,' but these protections are essential for Princeton's truth-seeking mission."

For background:

Princeton Professor Under Fire for Saying N-Word in Class (https://hyperallergic.com/779782/joe-scanlan-princeton-professor-under-fire-for-saying-n-word-in-class/)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on November 17, 2022, 09:47:07 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 17, 2022, 09:42:40 AM
Princeton Supports Professor Who Apologized for Slur (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/11/17/princeton-supports-professor-who-apologized-slur#:~:text=In%20response%20to%20student%20complaints,inside%20and%20outside%20the%20classroom.)

Quote
In response to student complaints about a professor saying the N-word in class in reference to a poem that includes the word repeatedly, Princeton University said in a statement that it "guarantees all faculty and students the 'broadest possible latitude' to speak freely inside and outside the classroom. Speech is only restricted under narrow exceptions that do not apply to this incident. Our rules recognize that these free speech protections apply to words and ideas that people may find 'offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed,' but these protections are essential for Princeton's truth-seeking mission."

For background:

Princeton Professor Under Fire for Saying N-Word in Class (https://hyperallergic.com/779782/joe-scanlan-princeton-professor-under-fire-for-saying-n-word-in-class/)

Have there been any cases of institutions cancelling courses on things like popular music because the music contains words that can't be uttered in class? That would be fascinating (but totally logical).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on November 17, 2022, 09:51:53 AM
I have not heard of that.  But that's what Google is for.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: mahagonny on November 17, 2022, 03:37:54 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on November 17, 2022, 09:42:23 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 17, 2022, 09:16:10 AM
IHE: Biology Professor Reportedly Told to Stop Teaching Gender (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/11/17/biology-professor-reportedly-told-stop-teaching-gender)

Quote
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression and PEN America are demanding answers from Valdosta State University over reports that it told a professor of biology to change how she teaches sex and gender following a parent complaint. Jeremy C. Young, senior manager of free expression and education at PEN, said in a statement, "Most college students are adults, and parents should not be controlling what their adult children can learn, let alone what a professor can teach to a whole class. Faculty must be free to explore academic topics with their students, including those that are controversial or make some uncomfortable, without fear of repercussions. Doing so is at the core of universities' academic mission."

The sword cuts both ways.

As it should. Right now it seems more of the time it's the left talking about "weaponizing free speech".

'It's not that your ideas are uncomfortable to hear because they challenge established beliefs that people are emotionally invested in. It's that your ideas are painful to hear because they are so idiotic.' - Peterson

I'm looking around for this. Instead of inserting themselves in the official process, a parent might just start writing letters to the press. Don't talk to the offending party. Talk about them.

The Babylon Bee does a decent job. Comedy is now the domain of the political right (other than humor w/no politics), woke being a religion that banishes humor, while being an excellent subject for it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on November 19, 2022, 09:25:11 AM
Don't know if this belongs here, but it is about canceling student journalists. Maybe more about the dark side  of social media. Paywalled probably, from WaPo.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/11/19/student-journalist-harass-arizona/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on November 19, 2022, 11:38:03 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on November 19, 2022, 09:25:11 AM
Don't know if this belongs here, but it is about canceling student journalists. Maybe more about the dark side  of social media. Paywalled probably, from WaPo.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/11/19/student-journalist-harass-arizona/

Interesting issues regarding Gen Z and social media come up here:
Quote
Lukas Pakter, a senior and former fraternity president, has amassed more than 129,000 followers on TikTok by posting about his workouts, advice on how to balance partying and school, and how to handle relationships. His videos are candid and self-effacing. He takes questions primarily from young men about things like dating and professional networking.

In August, Krupp contacted Pakter and said she was interested in profiling him for the student paper. Pakter obliged, and granted her an interview.

Krupp's profile of him, published in the online version of The Daily Wildcat under the Opinion section, critiqued Pakter and his fans, comparing him to Andrew Tate, an influencer whose misogynistic posts have gotten him banned from YouTube and TikTok. She called Pakter's TikTok commentary "troublesome" and questioned whether he was a good role model for his thousands of followers.

It's interesting in light of this:
Quote
As the first generation of digital natives, Gen Z students' lives are intertwined with the internet in a way that older journalists' might not be. "So much of our lives are online and so much of how people perceive us and our identity is online," Krupp said. "Part of me is my social media presence, it's a big part of my life. And that's true for all my friends and all other young people I know."

For a generation who lives and dies by social media reputation, they often seem surprised by bad reactions to what they themselves post about others. They seem unable to put themselves in the shoes of the other person to anticipate how their own actions will be perceived.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on November 19, 2022, 11:58:51 AM
None of this cancellation business -- for whatever reason -- worries me muchly. The reason is that we indeed have lots of diversity among colleges and universities in the United States and thus everyone can pick his favorite drug. [The same applies to social media]. As a general rule, public colleges are obliged to respect A1 and generally abide by it. It's the private colleges, on average more expensive, that restrict speech even if they proclaim free speech in their advertising.

As for counterthrusts, say by the State of Florida prescribing speech guidelines, even if it is legal, if one doesn't like it, one can go someplace else.

Here is a free speech ranking of colleges  put together by Fire https://www.realcleareducation.com/speech/index.html (https://www.realcleareducation.com/speech/index.html) It is worth perusing. One will see that it's the private colleges that have virtually all of the problem. Look, if the kids of the rich want to be in a safe space and can pay for it, let them. The working stiffs will learn more and better and succeed.

Variety is the spice of life!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on November 27, 2022, 09:32:20 AM
Auburn professor awarded damages for university punishment over published comments about football program (https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/auburn-football/auburn-professor-awarded-damages-for-university-punishment-over-published-comments-about-football-program/)

Quote
An Alabama jury found that an Auburn professor, Michael Stern, was unjustly targeted after making comments about the concentration of athletes in one of the university's administration programs, per AL.com's Ruth Serven Smith. Stern was awarded $645,837 in damages after the two-week trial that found the former dean unduly punished him.

Stern has had a history of speaking out against perceived issues regardless of the implications from other staff members.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on November 27, 2022, 10:45:06 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 27, 2022, 09:32:20 AM
Auburn professor awarded damages for university punishment over published comments about football program (https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/auburn-football/auburn-professor-awarded-damages-for-university-punishment-over-published-comments-about-football-program/)

Quote
An Alabama jury found that an Auburn professor, Michael Stern, was unjustly targeted after making comments about the concentration of athletes in one of the university's administration programs, per AL.com's Ruth Serven Smith. Stern was awarded $645,837 in damages after the two-week trial that found the former dean unduly punished him.

Stern has had a history of speaking out against perceived issues regardless of the implications from other staff members.

From later in the article:
Quote
Stern in 2014 made several statements about the demographic of student-athletes in the public administration department. Then in 2015, The Wall Street Journal published that the department was almost 50% athletes which included many of the top football players.

Since something like that must be a matter of public record, it's hard to see how they could justify punishing him for pointing it out.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 01, 2022, 08:09:03 AM
IHE: New Auburn Coach Apologizes for Social Media Activity (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/12/01/new-auburn-coach-apologizes-social-media-activity)

Quote
The freshly hired Auburn University football coach is mere days into his job, but he's already issued an apology amid outrage over his previous Twitter use at Liberty University.

While employed at Liberty, Hugh Freeze messaged former student Chelsea Andrews on three different occasions while she was actively engaged in litigation against the university for what she said was a failure to appropriately address issues of sexual assault.

****

Freeze on Twitter defended Ian McCaw, the athletic director at Liberty who resigned from Baylor University in 2016 in the wake of a major sexual assault scandal related to the football team. Freeze defended McCaw in direct messages to Andrews, who was critical of the athletic director. Freeze's interaction with Andrews drew little attention at the time but prompted questions and criticism when Auburn announced his hiring this week.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 02, 2022, 09:09:37 PM
IHE: Reed College Professor Quits Months After Racist Video (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/12/02/reed-college-professor-quits-months-after-racist-video)

Quote
Students have been demanding Currie's ouster since March, when a video surfaced of him making racist statements. In the video, he asks a woman if she was born in the United States or is an illegal immigrant. (She answers that she was born in Portland.)

Audrey Bilger, president of Reed, wrote that "last spring, many community members expressed concerns, ones I shared, about a video circulated on social media that captured remarks made by a professor on leave from the college, Paul Currie. Based on the content of the video, the incident led to calls for reconsideration of Professor Currie's appointment, a position he held with indefinite tenure. Following the procedure outlined in college documents governing faculty employment, a faculty committee investigated the incident and found no violation of college policy. I have accepted the committee's decision. After receiving the report, I discussed the committee's findings with legal experts and with Professor Currie. As a result of these discussions, Professor Currie has resigned from his position."

The Oregonian reported Currie issued a written apology

Note: the offending video appears to have been removed from its several platforms (Twitter account suspended).

Here it is on YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0k3MbV78Pgw).

Reed students held a sit-in in their administration building, posted on Facebook, and actually dedicated a a website (https://www.firepaulcurrie.com/) to firing Currie.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on December 03, 2022, 06:23:02 PM
Quote from: mahagonny on November 17, 2022, 03:37:54 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on November 17, 2022, 09:42:23 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on November 17, 2022, 09:16:10 AM
IHE: Biology Professor Reportedly Told to Stop Teaching Gender (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/11/17/biology-professor-reportedly-told-stop-teaching-gender)

Quote
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression and PEN America are demanding answers from Valdosta State University over reports that it told a professor of biology to change how she teaches sex and gender following a parent complaint. Jeremy C. Young, senior manager of free expression and education at PEN, said in a statement, "Most college students are adults, and parents should not be controlling what their adult children can learn, let alone what a professor can teach to a whole class. Faculty must be free to explore academic topics with their students, including those that are controversial or make some uncomfortable, without fear of repercussions. Doing so is at the core of universities' academic mission."

The sword cuts both ways.

As it should. Right now it seems more of the time it's the left talking about "weaponizing free speech".

'It's not that your ideas are uncomfortable to hear because they challenge established beliefs that people are emotionally invested in. It's that your ideas are painful to hear because they are so idiotic.' - Peterson

Is he talking to himself here? 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 04, 2022, 10:42:26 AM
The Atlantic: Free Speech for Me but Not for Thee. The American right has lost the plot on free speech. (https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/the-third-rail/email/1eff62d6-d95e-49f2-8e85-5a8ac4333206/)

Quote
The American right has lost the plot on free speech. The passage of Florida's House Bill 1557, which bans "classroom instruction" on "sexual orientation and gender identity" in kindergarten through third grade and in a manner that isn't "age appropriate or developmentally appropriate" in all grades, K–12, is merely the latest in a string of what the free-speech-advocacy organization PEN America has called "education gag orders" that have been proposed by Republicans and passed by red-state legislatures from coast to coast.

Quote
To understand the transformation of Republican legal priorities, one need not turn back the clock very far. For more than 20 years, the dominant conservative mantra in education could be summed up in two words: free speech. The reason for the emphasis on free speech was crystal clear—college campuses had enacted speech codes at a breathtaking rate.

In the effort to make campuses more welcoming to historically marginalized communities, colleges promulgated speech regulations that were designed to eliminate hate speech and other communications that members of university communities deemed offensive.

Although the impulse behind these codes was virtuous, their legal application was profoundly problematic. University speech codes tended to possess three salient characteristics. First, they were aimed directly at the suppression of words and ideas. Second, they were usually broad and vague, leaving teachers and students with little guidance as to the law's true meaning. And third, they typically relied on the subjective feelings of community members for enforcement.

Sword goes both ways.

Quote
Conservative efforts to protect free speech extended to public employees as well, including public-school teachers. My last two significant cases before I became a full-time journalist were successful lawsuits on behalf of public-university professors who had faced reprisal and retaliation for their protected speech.

In one case, a professor was denied a promotion because of his politics. In the other, a professor was forced out of his job after he questioned the scientific research of his colleagues and blew the whistle on unlawful appointments to a state environmental board.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 04, 2022, 07:04:12 PM
The conundrum. 

CBS News: Supreme Court again confronts case pitting free speech against LGBTQ rights (https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/supreme-court-lorie-smith-303-creative-first-amendment-free-speech-against-lgbtq-rights/)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Anon1787 on December 04, 2022, 09:32:59 PM
K-12 public schools are a distinct case since state governments determine the content of the curriculum for minors. State governments may forbid teaching students about astrology, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, etc. Public school teachers have no 1A right to override those decisions. As Prof. Volokh notes,

While teachers have considerable rights, for instance, to say what they want outside class, when they are teaching on behalf of the school, their speech in class is the government's speech, and they have no special First Amendment right to dictate what that speech would be. To quote some federal appellate courts,
    "Teachers do not have a protected First Amendment right to decide the content of their lessons or how the material should be presented to their students.... '[N]o court has found that teachers' First Amendment rights extend to choosing their own curriculum or classroom management techniques in contravention of school policy or dictates.'" "The right to free speech protected by the First Amendment does not extend to the in-class curricular speech of teachers in primary and secondary schools made 'pursuant to' their official duties."
    "[P]ublic-school teachers must hew to the approach prescribed by principals (and others higher up in the chain of authority).... [A teacher does] not have a constitutional right to introduce his own views on the subject but must stick to the prescribed curriculum—not only the prescribed subject matter, but also the prescribed perspective on that subject matter."
        "[T]he concept of academic freedom ... has never conferred upon teachers the control of public school curricula."
https://reason.com/volokh/2022/04/18/floridas-supposed-dont-say-gay-law/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 05, 2022, 05:21:35 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 04, 2022, 07:04:12 PM
The conundrum. 

CBS News: Supreme Court again confronts case pitting free speech against LGBTQ rights (https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/supreme-court-lorie-smith-303-creative-first-amendment-free-speech-against-lgbtq-rights/)

Interesting contrast with the issue of censorship in social media. The argument made for "content moderation" has traditionally been that, as a private company, an organization could arbitrarily decide what is acceptable or not. Cases like this one have people making the argument that private companies cannot decide what is acceptable.

At some point these two arguments have to come up against each other.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Anon1787 on December 05, 2022, 10:25:58 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 05, 2022, 05:21:35 AM
Interesting contrast with the issue of censorship in social media. The argument made for "content moderation" has traditionally been that, as a private company, an organization could arbitrarily decide what is acceptable or not. Cases like this one have people making the argument that private companies cannot decide what is acceptable.

At some point these two arguments have to come up against each other.

Good point. If a firm that hosts content created by others is concerned about how user content will affect the public's perception of the hosting firm, then a hosting firm would have an even greater concern with being identified with the content if the hosting firm itself is creating the content for others.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: pondering on December 06, 2022, 12:17:40 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 04, 2022, 10:42:26 AM
The Atlantic: Free Speech for Me but Not for Thee. The American right has lost the plot on free speech. (https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/the-third-rail/email/1eff62d6-d95e-49f2-8e85-5a8ac4333206/)

Quote
The American right has lost the plot on free speech. The passage of Florida's House Bill 1557, which bans "classroom instruction" on "sexual orientation and gender identity" in kindergarten through third grade and in a manner that isn't "age appropriate or developmentally appropriate" in all grades, K–12, is merely the latest in a string of what the free-speech-advocacy organization PEN America has called "education gag orders" that have been proposed by Republicans and passed by red-state legislatures from coast to coast.

Quote
To understand the transformation of Republican legal priorities, one need not turn back the clock very far. For more than 20 years, the dominant conservative mantra in education could be summed up in two words: free speech. The reason for the emphasis on free speech was crystal clear—college campuses had enacted speech codes at a breathtaking rate.

In the effort to make campuses more welcoming to historically marginalized communities, colleges promulgated speech regulations that were designed to eliminate hate speech and other communications that members of university communities deemed offensive.

Although the impulse behind these codes was virtuous, their legal application was profoundly problematic. University speech codes tended to possess three salient characteristics. First, they were aimed directly at the suppression of words and ideas. Second, they were usually broad and vague, leaving teachers and students with little guidance as to the law's true meaning. And third, they typically relied on the subjective feelings of community members for enforcement.

Sword goes both ways.

Quote
Conservative efforts to protect free speech extended to public employees as well, including public-school teachers. My last two significant cases before I became a full-time journalist were successful lawsuits on behalf of public-university professors who had faced reprisal and retaliation for their protected speech.

In one case, a professor was denied a promotion because of his politics. In the other, a professor was forced out of his job after he questioned the scientific research of his colleagues and blew the whistle on unlawful appointments to a state environmental board.

https://news.wgcu.org/2022-10-15/a-federal-judge-weighs-arguments-against-floridas-stop-woke-act

A district judge has issued an injunction temporarily blocking that house bill (the "Stop WOKE Act") and we as faculty have been told it no longer applies, for now. The state of Florida is appealing to the federal circuit court.

The extracts included in the article are quite revealing:

QuoteWalker questioned the state's approach, asking whether it could also result in students' inculcation into certain beliefs. He said it could allow the Legislature to decide what viewpoints should be taught.

"You (the government) can pick and choose what viewpoint you like and, under the guise of stopping indoctrination, you promote indoctrination. Why is that not so?" he asked.

"The government, again, is the one who decides," Cooper said, adding "the state embraces academic freedom."

"So long as you say what we like," Walker said.

The state's rationale leads to a "dystopian" conclusion, he said.

"We believe in academic freedom, so long as you say what we want you to say. That sounds like something George Orwell wrote," the judge chided.

Walker also peppered Cooper with a series of hypothetical circumstances to test what would be considered violations of the law.

For example, Walker asked if a professor would be espousing or advancing one of the prohibited concepts if she invited Cornel West, a high-profile academic who has written extensively about race, to speak to a class about his book.

"I think you may well be advancing one of the concepts if you bring in Dr. West ... and he articulates any of these concepts," Cooper said.

Walker asked if a professor could bring in a "countervailing" speaker to offset West, who has called the U.S. a "racist patriarchal" nation.

"Those events would be analyzed apart from each other, not necessarily in conjunction with each other," Cooper said.

Walker also tangled with Cooper over how much power the government has over instructors' speech, asking whether universities "literally can control every word" professors say and provide transcripts to be read in class.

"The autonomy of professors ... can never, never overcome the university's decision about what can and cannot be taught," Cooper said.

Walker, who has frequently clashed with the state's lawyers in other cases, also posed a scenario involving a teacher who uses a racial epithet, noting that, under federal law, the instructor could not be fired for saying such a word.

"Using the N-word one time by a teacher would not be actionable, but if they mention affirmative action" they could be sued under the Florida law, Walker said.

"Maybe affirmative action is more abhorrent in the new age than the N-word. ... It's shocking if that's the new values that we embrace," he added.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Anon1787 on December 06, 2022, 07:24:53 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 04, 2022, 07:04:12 PM
The conundrum. 
CBS News: Supreme Court again confronts case pitting free speech against LGBTQ rights (https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/supreme-court-lorie-smith-303-creative-first-amendment-free-speech-against-lgbtq-rights/)

Framing it as free speech v. LGBT rights may not be the best way to frame the issue:

"Much of the commentary on today's argument in 303 Creative starts from the premise that the case pits free speech (or maybe religious freedom) against LGBTQ rights...One thing is clear from the argument: 303 Creative is not about whether protections for LGBT people will be dampened. The decision will apply across the board. The question is whether civil rights protections properly include the suppression of speech that disagrees with legal norms, or compels speech that celebrates those norms. Alternatively: do artists (including web designers) have the freedom to depict what subjects they wish, and how—even if they take money for doing it, and even if their perspective is hurtful (to some people)?

One of the most telling exchanges during the argument involved a hypothetical from Justice Barrett, who asked...what would happen if the shoe were on the other foot—i.e., what if a gay web designer declined to create a custom website for a Christian organization that advocates for traditional marriage? Could the state compel such a person to design such a website?

Remarkably, [the Deputy Solicitor General] responded that the two cases should come out differently. That is, Colorado can compel a Christian to design a custom website celebrating a same-sex marriage, but cannot compel a gay person to design a custom website advocating for traditional marriage. His reasoning for this answer reveals the fundamental flaws in the government's position.


According to the Deputy Solicitor General, declining to design a website for a same-sex marriage is inherently a form of "status discrimination," which the government can treat as a form of "conduct" (not speech) and therefore compel or suppress as it sees fit. But declining to design a website promoting traditional marriage is discrimination based on the message (not status) and is therefore protected speech.

There are several problems with this argument. First, it embraces a blatant form of viewpoint discrimination. Whether an expressive activity is "conduct" that discriminates based on "status," or instead is "speech" on the basis of "message," and thus protected, cannot depend on which side of the issue you are on. It is hard to imagine a regime more antithetical to the principle that the government must not favor or disfavor speech based on its viewpoint.

Second, as Justices Barrett and Gorsuch noted, declining to design a website promoting traditional marriage can easily be deemed "status discrimination," too. Built into Justice Barrett's hypothetical was the fact that the organization promoting traditional marriage was doing so based on its Christian beliefs about marriage. Religious beliefs are no less central to the status of "religion" than beliefs about marriage are to the status of being gay. So refusing to design the Christian website discriminates not only based on the message, but also based on the religious beliefs of the person seeking to express it. In other words, the message (celebrating traditional marriage) is inextricably intertwined with the religious beliefs of the customer requesting it, just as the government claims a message celebrating a same-sex marriage is inextricably intertwined with the status of the individuals requesting it."
https://reason.com/volokh/2022/12/06/prof-michael-mcconnell-stanford-on-303-creative-the-web-site-designer-same-sex-wedding-case/#more-8214270
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 06, 2022, 09:17:32 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on December 06, 2022, 07:24:53 PM
One of the most telling exchanges during the argument involved a hypothetical from Justice Barrett, who asked...what would happen if the shoe were on the other foot—i.e., what if a gay web designer declined to create a custom website for a Christian organization that advocates for traditional marriage? Could the state compel such a person to design such a website?



Sword cuts both ways.

What's just too bad is that we cannot voluntarily convince homophobes that what they believe is one of the last partially acceptable (in some circles, anyway) bigotry.

There are reasons that church membership is steadily dropping in this country.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 07, 2022, 05:31:36 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 06, 2022, 09:17:32 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on December 06, 2022, 07:24:53 PM
One of the most telling exchanges during the argument involved a hypothetical from Justice Barrett, who asked...what would happen if the shoe were on the other foot—i.e., what if a gay web designer declined to create a custom website for a Christian organization that advocates for traditional marriage? Could the state compel such a person to design such a website?



Sword cuts both ways.

What's just too bad is that we cannot voluntarily convince homophobes that what they believe is one of the last partially acceptable (in some circles, anyway) bigotry.


Is it bigotry for a denomination to refuse to marry previously-divorced people?

Is it bigotry to require anyone desiring membership to be a vegan?

Is it bigotry to require people joining a religious order to divest themselves of property?

Why does a religious community, which is a voluntary organization), need to have the rules required for membership vetted by some non-religious authority?

(Just to be clear, I used those examples since they are all things that would be bars for entry to me, but I totally support religious communities' right to create and uphold such rules. My exclusion isn't relevant, since I can choose to belong to a community whose rules do not restrict me. And there are  a huge diversity of denominations, so it's easy to find one (or more) that would accept me.)

By the way (https://news.gallup.com/poll/341963/church-membership-falls-below-majority-first-time.aspx):
Quote
In addition to Protestants, declines in church membership are proportionately smaller among political conservatives, Republicans, married adults and college graduates. These groups tend to have among the highest rates of church membership, along with Southern residents and non-Hispanic Black adults.

In other words, the wokest denominations are declining the fastest.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 08:30:03 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 07, 2022, 05:31:36 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 06, 2022, 09:17:32 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on December 06, 2022, 07:24:53 PM
One of the most telling exchanges during the argument involved a hypothetical from Justice Barrett, who asked...what would happen if the shoe were on the other foot—i.e., what if a gay web designer declined to create a custom website for a Christian organization that advocates for traditional marriage? Could the state compel such a person to design such a website?



Sword cuts both ways.

What's just too bad is that we cannot voluntarily convince homophobes that what they believe is one of the last partially acceptable (in some circles, anyway) bigotry.


Is it bigotry for a denomination to refuse to marry previously-divorced people?

Is it bigotry to require anyone desiring membership to be a vegan?

Is it bigotry to require people joining a religious order to divest themselves of property?

Why does a religious community, which is a voluntary organization), need to have the rules required for membership vetted by some non-religious authority?

(Just to be clear, I used those examples since they are all things that would be bars for entry to me, but I totally support religious communities' right to create and uphold such rules. My exclusion isn't relevant, since I can choose to belong to a community whose rules do not restrict me. And there are  a huge diversity of denominations, so it's easy to find one (or more) that would accept me.)

By the way (https://news.gallup.com/poll/341963/church-membership-falls-below-majority-first-time.aspx):
Quote
In addition to Protestants, declines in church membership are proportionately smaller among political conservatives, Republicans, married adults and college graduates. These groups tend to have among the highest rates of church membership, along with Southern residents and non-Hispanic Black adults.

In other words, the wokest denominations are declining the fastest.

Ha!  I knew you'd respond to this one.

None of the above.

We know what bigotry is.  Your church may be a voluntarily bigoted organization, but it is still comprised of bigots.

Sounds like "wokism" (whatever that is) is winning.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 07, 2022, 08:39:36 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 08:30:03 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 07, 2022, 05:31:36 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 06, 2022, 09:17:32 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on December 06, 2022, 07:24:53 PM
One of the most telling exchanges during the argument involved a hypothetical from Justice Barrett, who asked...what would happen if the shoe were on the other foot—i.e., what if a gay web designer declined to create a custom website for a Christian organization that advocates for traditional marriage? Could the state compel such a person to design such a website?



Sword cuts both ways.

What's just too bad is that we cannot voluntarily convince homophobes that what they believe is one of the last partially acceptable (in some circles, anyway) bigotry.


Is it bigotry for a denomination to refuse to marry previously-divorced people?

Is it bigotry to require anyone desiring membership to be a vegan?

Is it bigotry to require people joining a religious order to divest themselves of property?

Why does a religious community, which is a voluntary organization), need to have the rules required for membership vetted by some non-religious authority?

(Just to be clear, I used those examples since they are all things that would be bars for entry to me, but I totally support religious communities' right to create and uphold such rules. My exclusion isn't relevant, since I can choose to belong to a community whose rules do not restrict me. And there are  a huge diversity of denominations, so it's easy to find one (or more) that would accept me.)

By the way (https://news.gallup.com/poll/341963/church-membership-falls-below-majority-first-time.aspx):
Quote
In addition to Protestants, declines in church membership are proportionately smaller among political conservatives, Republicans, married adults and college graduates. These groups tend to have among the highest rates of church membership, along with Southern residents and non-Hispanic Black adults.

In other words, the wokest denominations are declining the fastest.

Ha!  I knew you'd respond to this one.

None of the above.

We know what bigotry is. Your church may be a voluntarily bigoted organization, but it is still comprised of bigots.

Sounds like "wokism" (whatever that is) is winning.

I have no clue how you define "bigotry" so that those things don't count, while other things do. Please explain, particularly when in each case the question is always about what people are allowed to do, not about what they prefer to do. I'm not aware of any denomination that tries to police peoples' preferences, (which would be pretty much impossible in practice, among other things).

And I have no clue how you can infer anything about what kind of organization my church is from what I've said. Unless it's a cult, most churches are composed of a variety of people with a range of opinions on all kinds of things.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 09:09:39 AM
Quote
I'm not aware of any denomination that tries to police peoples' preferences, (which would be pretty much impossible in practice, among other things).

Seriously?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 07, 2022, 09:17:36 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 09:09:39 AM
Quote
I'm not aware of any denomination that tries to police peoples' preferences, (which would be pretty much impossible in practice, among other things).

Seriously?

Do you have an example of a denomination that rejects people for their thoughts, rather than their actions? For instance, any denomination I know of that does not support gay marriage doesn't prevent people from being members based on their orientation specifically.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 10:07:04 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 07, 2022, 09:17:36 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 09:09:39 AM
Quote
I'm not aware of any denomination that tries to police peoples' preferences, (which would be pretty much impossible in practice, among other things).

Seriously?

Do you have an example of a denomination that rejects people for their thoughts, rather than their actions? For instance, any denomination I know of that does not support gay marriage doesn't prevent people from being members based on their orientation specifically.

You can pretend the issue is preventing people from joining, but it is not just that.  And then sometimes it is:

https://apnews.com/article/us-news-religion-gay-rights-west-virginia-fairmont-60c889951eb742e797c65523a2d379f3

Quote
A church in West Virginia has been voted out of its local Baptist association because its pastor says gays and lesbians should be welcomed.

Then there is the most well-known Christian bigotry:

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2012/12/07/religious-groups-official-positions-on-same-sex-marriage/

https://www.npr.org/2021/03/15/977415222/illicit-for-catholic-church-to-bless-same-sex-marriages-vatican-says

https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2021/03/15/210315b.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-56402096

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-religion-gaymarriage/presbyterian-church-rejects-gay-marriage-proposal-idUSBRE86600220120707

https://www.metroweekly.com/2022/11/gay-couple-rejected-31-times-while-seeking-out-church-wedding/

https://abc7news.com/supreme-court-gay-marriage-same-sex-jubilee-christian-center/819770/

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/religion/2019/02/26/united-methodist-church-general-conference-same-sex-marriage-lgbt-clergy-division-splitting/2989179002/

And after that you will need to use Google yourself.

You may try to hide behind vague terms such as "wokism" (which I only see conservatives using) or try to limit your scope to some strawman about preventing "people from being members based on their orientation specifically" while ignoring the rejection of basic human rights, but the onus is on good people like you, Mahag, to reject the bigotry the same way you would reject, I assume, bans on interracial marriage or public denouncements of race base on dubious readings of Scripture.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 07, 2022, 10:23:22 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 10:07:04 AM

You may try to hide behind vague terms such as "wokism" (which I only see conservatives using) or try to limit your scope to some strawman about preventing "people from being members based on their orientation specifically" while ignoring the rejection of basic human rights, but the onus is on good people like you, Mahag,
???

Quote
to reject the bigotry the same way you would reject, I assume, bans on interracial marriage or public denouncements of race base on dubious readings of Scripture.

I don't need to "reject" those other than by choosing not to belong to a denomination that has them. That's the point.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 10:35:18 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 07, 2022, 10:23:22 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 10:07:04 AM

You may try to hide behind vague terms such as "wokism" (which I only see conservatives using) or try to limit your scope to some strawman about preventing "people from being members based on their orientation specifically" while ignoring the rejection of basic human rights, but the onus is on good people like you, Mahag,
???

Quote
to reject the bigotry the same way you would reject, I assume, bans on interracial marriage or public denouncements of race base on dubious readings of Scripture.

I don't need to "reject" those other than by choosing not to belong to a denomination that has them. That's the point.

It is also "the point" not to deny that this goes on among Christians.  Don't defend them as you did when you posted

Quote
Do you have an example of a denomination that rejects people for their thoughts, rather than their actions?

which doesn't really make a lot of sense since we don't really have access to people's "thoughts" anyway.

Just admit that this kind of bigotry is rampant and justified among many Christian groups.  Don't try and hide behind semiotics or cherrypicked / confabulated rationales. 

Be an Episcopalian.  That denomination overtly rejects homophobia, even if not all its members agree.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on December 07, 2022, 10:58:59 AM
I'm not aware of any cases where anybody is trying to use the law to compel gay, atheist, agnostic, etc. to work on Christian-oriented web sites when they have said that they don't want to do so.  But there is a definite move to go to Christian vendors of various services and tell them, in effect, "You will do what we demand of you regardless of what you believe, or we will use the law to hound you out of business."  If the right to do this becomes enshrined in U.S. court precedent, then I predict a fast tumble down a very slippery slope that will force large numbers of Christians with biblical views on marriage to either go against their consciences or be effectively driven out of their chosen businesses or professions, as activists actively go after them.  Looks like a religious freedom issue to me.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on December 07, 2022, 11:20:34 AM
It's worth trying a different perspective on the "forced website case" and others like it, though it is not enshrined in law about these types of cases.

If there is competition in the website service market, the potential customer is not really being hurt by the refusal of service. S/he just goes to the competition. Thus we can safely allow the seller to sell to whom s/he pleases, no matter the discriminatory target.

[This market process, by the way, is why the Southern states of America and the Union of South Africa imposed government enforced apartheid. They knew that competition would drive discriminators to the wall, for the discriminator pays in loss of business.] 

In contrast, if the service is a monopoly, say a single airline serving a remote Alaskan airport, the thing to do is invoke "common carrier" status, forcing the airline to carry people it didn't like, for the cost to a passenger left behind is high.

Personally, I don't believe that making websites or making cakes needs common carrier status. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 11:29:48 AM
Quote from: apl68 on December 07, 2022, 10:58:59 AM
I'm not aware of any cases where anybody is trying to use the law to compel gay, atheist, agnostic, etc. to work on Christian-oriented web sites when they have said that they don't want to do so.  But there is a definite move to go to Christian vendors of various services and tell them, in effect, "You will do what we demand of you regardless of what you believe, or we will use the law to hound you out of business."  If the right to do this becomes enshrined in U.S. court precedent, then I predict a fast tumble down a very slippery slope that will force large numbers of Christians with biblical views on marriage to either go against their consciences or be effectively driven out of their chosen businesses or professions, as activists actively go after them.  Looks like a religious freedom issue to me.

I agree.  It's frightening to me. 

This whole culture of government and employers dictating our speech and our beliefs is extremely alarming, and that is why I keep this thread ticking.  I focus mostly on college campus issues, and the tower has a controversy or an action somewhere in North America almost every other week.  And these are just what make the news. 

I would much rather the church face the private, personal, vernacular, grass roots opprobrium that it  is already experiencing because it cannot reason its way out of our last acceptable prejudice. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 07, 2022, 11:45:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 11:29:48 AM
Quote from: apl68 on December 07, 2022, 10:58:59 AM
I'm not aware of any cases where anybody is trying to use the law to compel gay, atheist, agnostic, etc. to work on Christian-oriented web sites when they have said that they don't want to do so.  But there is a definite move to go to Christian vendors of various services and tell them, in effect, "You will do what we demand of you regardless of what you believe, or we will use the law to hound you out of business."  If the right to do this becomes enshrined in U.S. court precedent, then I predict a fast tumble down a very slippery slope that will force large numbers of Christians with biblical views on marriage to either go against their consciences or be effectively driven out of their chosen businesses or professions, as activists actively go after them.  Looks like a religious freedom issue to me.

I agree.  It's frightening to me. 

This whole culture of government and employers dictating our speech and our beliefs is extremely alarming, and that is why I keep this thread ticking.  I focus mostly on college campus issues, and the tower has a controversy or an action somewhere in North America almost every other week.  And these are just what make the news. 

I would much rather the church face the private, personal, vernacular, grass roots opprobrium that it  is already experiencing because it cannot reason its way out of our last acceptable prejudice.

You clearly haven't studied much church history. (And you're very naive if you think this is the "last" issue that will be seen as church "prejudice".)  The church has *constantly gone against the grain of culture in some area or another, except perhaps for cases like the state church in Nazi Germany, that was onside with the government.  Not exactly the example we'd want to emulate......

(*Sometimes, they have eventually changed; other times culture has changed, such as in the case of church opposition to slavery. Being "with" culture or "against" culture is not automatically good or bad; but being able to choose is fundamental to religious freedom.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 11:54:18 AM
Former church acolyte here.

I know church history, Marshy, including church acceptance and even embrace of American slavery, the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Witch Trials, anti-evolution and anti-science stances throughout history, and, yes, collaboration with the damn Nazis...

...as well as the church saving literacy, charity, and education, and producing hospitals, universities, and some of the greatest art and architecture in the history of the world.

All of which has nothing to do with what I was posting about.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 07, 2022, 12:05:17 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 11:54:18 AM
Former church acolyte here.

I know church history, Marshy, including church acceptance and even embrace of American slavery, the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Witch Trials, anti-evolution and anti-science stances throughout history, and, yes, collaboration with the damn Nazis...

...as well as the church saving literacy, charity, and education, and producing hospitals, universities, and some of the greatest art and architecture in the history of the world.

All of which has nothing to do with what I was posting about.

All kinds of things that are now acceptable were at one time unacceptable, and all kinds of things that are now unacceptable were at one time acceptable. Only time will tell which way something goes. And, things can swing like a pendulum as well.

Two issues which are rising in the broader culture which will result in the same kind of debate are  polyamorous relationships, and the status of "Minor Attracted Persons", as they wish to be called, and their preferred relationships. Is it bigotry for the church to forbid or otherwise restrict either of those? Does a certain level of public acceptance demand that the church also accept them?

Those are issues which are rising now. I have no idea what the issues will be in 20 years or more, but I can guarantee that there will be issues that are not on the radar now that will be a big deal eventually.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 01:50:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 07, 2022, 12:05:17 PM
Two issues which are rising in the broader culture which will result in the same kind of debate are  polyamorous relationships,

I had to look up "polyamorous relationship."

As long as these are consenting adults, I don't know why the church would object.  We've had polyamorous relationships since as long as we've know about relationships.  Sister wives, anyone?

And this is not the same thing as bigotry, anyway.

Quote
and the status of "Minor Attracted Persons", as they wish to be called, and their preferred relationships. Is it bigotry for the church to forbid or otherwise restrict either of those? Does a certain level of public acceptance demand that the church also accept them?

This is where I would suggest you think a little, Marshy...think about it a minute...

"Minor attracted people" is the largely rejected terminology of Allyn Walker, who lost a job over the term I believe.  Walker was suggesting we destigmatize people who admit to having a problem with pedophilia so they can be taught to control their urges.  It did not go over.  Wikipedia does not even have an entry for the idea.  You're just grasping for straws there.  You coughed up a bad analogy.

And there is a profound difference between pedophiles, who are predominantly straight adult males, and LGBTQ people who are consenting adults.

Pedophiles hurt children profoundly.  That is why they are not accepted by churches or anyone else.

Think, Marshy, don't just react.  Think. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Anon1787 on December 07, 2022, 03:24:54 PM
Religions generally have their own distinctive views and regulations of marriage, and I don't care if people refuse to create content for marriages on the basis of such beliefs. I do care that people in the grips of isothymia engage in a power play demanding that people create such content in violation of their beliefs simply to make a point when there are many willing providers of such content.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 05:13:19 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on December 07, 2022, 03:24:54 PM
Religions generally have their own distinctive views and regulations of marriage, and I don't care if people refuse to create content for marriages on the basis of such beliefs. I do care that people in the grips of isothymia engage in a power play demanding that people create such content in violation of their beliefs simply to make a point when there are many willing providers of such content.

It's a good point.

There is not just one designer out there.  Of course, we must acknowledge that this is easy to say when one is a member of the mainstream, someone who will probably not face exclusion, but that does not make your point less valid.

It would be different if one is excluded from supermarkets or restaurants or hospitals or other places where we get our daily necessities.  I do worry, however, that if the court allows "artists" to exclude a certain message or demographic then we are opening the door for chefs, also "artists," to begin catering to "white only" patrons.  Hopefully culture will react appropriately if that happens.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on December 08, 2022, 01:50:30 AM
Forget the freedom of religion issue that apl clearly explains, and with which I agree.   This is also a freedom of speech issue, and can also be seen as a freedom of the press issue.   Put another way, no one would ever say that the local newspaper has to sell any ad to anyone/ group that advocates something of which the paper disapproves.   And this is not only true for generic secular papers, whether the NYT on the one hand or the Bugtussle Bugle on the other, but also it must clearly be true for a religious or otherwise ideologically-driven publication.   Just as no one would say that the Gay Times, just because it does sell ads, must also sell one to Focus on the Family, so we must also acknowledge that the Pentecostal Press must never be compelled to sell ads to ACT UP.   Whether homosexual activists who, like it or not, are trying to make opposition to homosexuality as societally unacceptable, backed up with government force, as overt racism, like it or not.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 08, 2022, 05:18:23 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 01:50:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 07, 2022, 12:05:17 PM
Two issues which are rising in the broader culture which will result in the same kind of debate are  polyamorous relationships,

I had to look up "polyamorous relationship."

As long as these are consenting adults, I don't know why the church would object.  We've had polyamorous relationships since as long as we've know about relationships.  Sister wives, anyone?

And this is not the same thing as bigotry, anyway.

Why isn't it? The question is whether a church is bigoted in refusing to marry people in a particular category.  Are you saying simply refusing to marry gay couples isn't by itself, bigotry?

And are the churches supporting "sister wives", aka polygamy, being "affirming", or are they being immoral?

Quote
Quote
and the status of "Minor Attracted Persons", as they wish to be called, and their preferred relationships. Is it bigotry for the church to forbid or otherwise restrict either of those? Does a certain level of public acceptance demand that the church also accept them?

This is where I would suggest you think a little, Marshy...think about it a minute...

"Minor attracted people" is the largely rejected terminology of Allyn Walker, who lost a job over the term I believe.  Walker was suggesting we destigmatize people who admit to having a problem with pedophilia so they can be taught to control their urges.  It did not go over.  Wikipedia does not even have an entry for the idea.  You're just grasping for straws there.  You coughed up a bad analogy.

And there is a profound difference between pedophiles, who are predominantly straight adult males, and LGBTQ people who are consenting adults.

Pedophiles hurt children profoundly.  That is why they are not accepted by churches or anyone else.


I'm sure that some denomination somewhere will, if they don't already, "affirm" this.

This is exactly the point. People who approve of any practice call a church who also approves "affirming" and a church that doesn't "bigoted". The label simply refers to which side the speaker is on.

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 05:13:19 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on December 07, 2022, 03:24:54 PM
Religions generally have their own distinctive views and regulations of marriage, and I don't care if people refuse to create content for marriages on the basis of such beliefs. I do care that people in the grips of isothymia engage in a power play demanding that people create such content in violation of their beliefs simply to make a point when there are many willing providers of such content.

It's a good point.

There is not just one designer out there.  Of course, we must acknowledge that this is easy to say when one is a member of the mainstream, someone who will probably not face exclusion, but that does not make your point less valid.

It would be different if one is excluded from supermarkets or restaurants or hospitals or other places where we get our daily necessities.  I do worry, however, that if the court allows "artists" to exclude a certain message or demographic then we are opening the door for chefs, also "artists," to begin catering to "white only" patrons.  Hopefully culture will react appropriately if that happens.

Do you really think that any business that catered to "white only" patrons would survive anywhere but the most isolated communities? The portion of the population who would approve of that would be tiny. (And in an isolated community with no non-white residents, people might roll their eyes but patronize the business because there's no alternative, and given that there is no-one actually being harmed currently.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 08, 2022, 10:12:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 08, 2022, 05:18:23 AM

Why isn't it? The question is whether a church is bigoted in refusing to marry people in a particular category.  Are you saying simply refusing to marry gay couples isn't by itself, bigotry?

Not sure what you are asking.

The denial of marriage rights is an acute symptom of bigotry.

Quote
And are the churches supporting "sister wives", aka polygamy, being "affirming", or are they being immoral?

I don't know about "affirming" in this context, but it is only "immoral" if people are abused.  If everybody is happy, what is the problem?



Quote
People who approve of any practice call a church who also approves "affirming" and a church that doesn't "bigoted". The label simply refers to which side the speaker is on.

That's Life 101, Marshy.  I'm sorry to be juvenile, but duh.

Society is increasingly on the side of LGBTQ.  And increasingly society sees conservative churches as harboring bigots.

Quote
Do you really think that any business that catered to "white only" patrons would survive anywhere but the most isolated communities? The portion of the population who would approve of that would be tiny. (And in an isolated community with no non-white residents, people might roll their eyes but patronize the business because there's no alternative, and given that there is no-one actually being harmed currently.)

Before the era of Donald Trump I would have said, "No restaurant which posts a 'whites only' sign would survive"....now I am not so sure.

But I was just using that to make a point that it is a slippery slope once one allows businesses and vendors to refuse service to a demographic then one has a precedent to deny other demographics service.  It is the same argument Kay uses above to point out that once the law forces expression on  dissenters there is no end to it. 

If you read my comment as a literal scenario (which apparently you did :)), sure, no restaurant with a "whites only" sign would survive for long; there would be the nightly news and protests etc.  There is the law, too, but that is another thing.

This is what should happen in society.  We should not have the government or corporate entities telling us what to think or say.  We should let public opprobrium drive our ethical expressions.  That includes your churches.  Say whatever you want, just get ready for the backlash.

This is, BTW, the process that is happening to anti-LGBTQ religious denominations.  Noticed the laws protecting same-sex marriage? (not expression, in case you are confused, but the legal right to marry)  Society is increasingly accepting of homosexuality.  Society increasingly views homophobia as a form of bigotry.  Slowly society is shunning conservative religion.  It's pretty simple, really.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 08, 2022, 10:36:59 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 08, 2022, 10:12:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 08, 2022, 05:18:23 AM

Why isn't it? The question is whether a church is bigoted in refusing to marry people in a particular category.  Are you saying simply refusing to marry gay couples isn't by itself, bigotry?

Not sure what you are asking.

The denial of marriage rights is an acute symptom of bigotry.

Quote
And are the churches supporting "sister wives", aka polygamy, being "affirming", or are they being immoral?

I don't know about "affirming" in this context, but it is only "immoral" if people are abused.  If everybody is happy, what is the problem?


The general argument against allowing polygamy is that the women are not really free to choose. So the "everybody is happy" criterion is the problem.

Quote

Quote
People who approve of any practice call a church who also approves "affirming" and a church that doesn't "bigoted". The label simply refers to which side the speaker is on.

That's Life 101, Marshy.  I'm sorry to be juvenile, but duh.

Society is increasingly on the side of LGBTQ.  And increasingly society sees conservative churches as harboring bigots.

So basically the church's value system should be determined by society at large. In which case it serves no useful purpose.

Quote
Quote
Do you really think that any business that catered to "white only" patrons would survive anywhere but the most isolated communities? The portion of the population who would approve of that would be tiny. (And in an isolated community with no non-white residents, people might roll their eyes but patronize the business because there's no alternative, and given that there is no-one actually being harmed currently.)

Before the era of Donald Trump I would have said, "No restaurant which posts a 'whites only' sign would survive"....now I am not so sure.

But I was just using that to make a point that it is a slippery slope once one allows businesses and vendors to refuse service to a demographic then one has a precedent to deny other demographics service.  It is the same argument Kay uses above to point out that once the law forces expression on  dissenters there is no end to it. 

If you read my comment as a literal scenario (which apparently you did :)), sure, no restaurant with a "whites only" sign would survive for long; there would be the nightly news and protests etc.  There is the law, too, but that is another thing.

This is what should happen in society.  We should not have the government or corporate entities telling us what to think or say.  We should let public opprobrium drive our ethical expressions.  That includes your churches.  Say whatever you want, just get ready for the backlash.

This is, BTW, the process that is happening to anti-LGBTQ religious denominations.  Noticed the laws protecting same-sex marriage? (not expression, in case you are confused, but the legal right to marry)  Society is increasingly accepting of homosexuality.  Society increasingly views homophobia as a form of bigotry.  Slowly society is shunning conservative religion.  It's pretty simple, really.

As I noted earlier, society is even more quickly shunning liberal religion. Where it all ends up in a decade or two will be interesting to see.
The trend is simple to observe; the end result is not at all obvious.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 08, 2022, 10:42:14 AM
Sure.  I believe people are also shunning liberal religion.  Are you talking about Unitarianism or universalist churches?  I hadn't heard that but I believe it.  Overall, the Christian demographic is in decline everywhere. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 08, 2022, 10:56:23 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 08, 2022, 10:36:59 AM
The general argument against allowing polygamy is that the women are not really free to choose. So the "everybody is happy" criterion is the problem.


Not all sister wives, certainly.  I think there's a TV show about that.  And one could say something similar about all marriages.

The controversies I am aware of involve cult scenarios and the marriage of adolescents to elders, which is not necessarily the same thing as sister wives.  You are confusing the controversies.

If sister wives are happy, which some are, I don't see what the problem is.

The answer might be to get rid, voluntarily, of essentialist religion. 

Quote
So basically the church's value system should be determined by society at large. In which case it serves no useful purpose.

Well, buddy...as I've said, the church seems to be dying a slow death.

Put into Google "Why are churches dying?"  It's really very interesting.  Of course, churches have always responded to the zeitgeist, so that is not it.

What's too bad is that the church has a great deal to offer, but so often the focus is on judgment, not succor.

I make none of this up, Marshy.  I know it is not what you want to hear, but as the kids say, "It is what it is."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 08, 2022, 11:24:40 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 08, 2022, 10:56:23 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 08, 2022, 10:36:59 AM
The general argument against allowing polygamy is that the women are not really free to choose. So the "everybody is happy" criterion is the problem.


Not all sister wives, certainly.  I think there's a TV show about that.  And one could say something similar about all marriages.

The controversies I am aware of involve cult scenarios and the marriage of adolescents to elders, which is not necessarily the same thing as sister wives.  You are confusing the controversies.

If sister wives are happy, which some are, I don't see what the problem is.

The answer might be to get rid, voluntarily, of essentialist religion. 

In any country that isn't a theocracy, that's what individuals are free to do.

Quote
Quote
So basically the church's value system should be determined by society at large. In which case it serves no useful purpose.

Well, buddy...as I've said, the church seems to be dying a slow death.

Put into Google "Why are churches dying?"  It's really very interesting.  Of course, churches have always responded to the zeitgeist, so that is not it.

What's too bad is that the church has a great deal to offer, but so often the focus is on judgment, not succor.

I make none of this up, Marshy.  I know it is not what you want to hear, but as the kids say, "It is what it is."

In parenting, education, healthcare, and numerous other things, those aren't mutually exclusive, and in fact, succour often requires some degree of "judgement" to keep people from doing things that harm themselves. Since none of us is God, none of us can be absolutely sure on any issue of what degree of "judgement" is optimal.

Over the years, I've tried various rules about late work, all the way from strict-no-excuses deadlines to no-penalty-until-the-term-is-over. No matter what the rules were, some students fell through the cracks. Strict deadlines (aka "judgment") forced some to get things done, while some gave up. Total leniency (aka "succour") meant that some eventually got it done, while others put it off and eventually gave up.

Without divine insight, no-one can forsee what level of support and/or intervention will be the best for anyone.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 08, 2022, 11:30:21 AM
Yeah...okay.

Do you have a point?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 08, 2022, 11:35:08 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 08, 2022, 11:30:21 AM
Yeah...okay.

Do you have a point?

Sure. "Warm and fuzzy to everyone" may sound great, but it's ultimately of very limited value. Real concern for people requires being willing to give unpleasant advice and/or instruction which will ultimately be in their best interest. And usually, they won't see at the moment why that would be the case. If they did, then they wouldn't need the involvement of anyone else.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 08, 2022, 11:41:35 AM
Yeah, I understood that.

Why are you saying that here?

Are you trying to justify a belief system by pointing out that morality is difficult and requires judgment that many people will object to?

Life 101, Marshy.

And dude, this is exactly what is happening to the church right now.  The church is receiving "unpleasant advice" and some people are upset about it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on December 08, 2022, 12:15:26 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 07, 2022, 11:29:48 AM
Quote from: apl68 on December 07, 2022, 10:58:59 AM
I'm not aware of any cases where anybody is trying to use the law to compel gay, atheist, agnostic, etc. to work on Christian-oriented web sites when they have said that they don't want to do so.  But there is a definite move to go to Christian vendors of various services and tell them, in effect, "You will do what we demand of you regardless of what you believe, or we will use the law to hound you out of business."  If the right to do this becomes enshrined in U.S. court precedent, then I predict a fast tumble down a very slippery slope that will force large numbers of Christians with biblical views on marriage to either go against their consciences or be effectively driven out of their chosen businesses or professions, as activists actively go after them.  Looks like a religious freedom issue to me.

I agree.  It's frightening to me. 

This whole culture of government and employers dictating our speech and our beliefs is extremely alarming, and that is why I keep this thread ticking.  I focus mostly on college campus issues, and the tower has a controversy or an action somewhere in North America almost every other week.  And these are just what make the news. 

I would much rather the church face the private, personal, vernacular, grass roots opprobrium that it  is already experiencing because it cannot reason its way out of our last acceptable prejudice.

Well, then I guess we'll just have to face society's opprobrium.  New Testament teachings on sexual morality are pretty clear in permitting sexual intimacy only within the context of marriage, which in turn is very clearly described as a monogamous, committed relationship between a woman and a man.  I grant you, we could do what the mainline churches have long since done and conclude that when it's a contest between what the New Testament says and what society says, then it's time to kick the Word of God to the curb.  Once a church has determined that its teachings should all follow the lead of whatever is currently accepted by society at any give time, then it no longer has anything distinctive to offer.  Hence the galloping decline we've seen in the mainline churches.

But some of us don't want to do that.  The first time Christians--Peter and John, to be specific--are recorded as being called on the carpet and told to shut up, they responded: "Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you be the judge.  We can only speak the things we have seen and heard." 

American churches have a long history of acquiescing to things that aren't compatible with New Testament teaching--the slave trade, warlike forms of nationalism, rapacious economic systems--the list could go on.  That willingness to trim sails to whatever was the going ideology in society is part of how we came, for a time at least, to have a society overwhelmingly made of professing Christians.  Society and the church made it easy to belong to the church.  The visible church, at least.  There has always been a true church of actual, serious followers of the New Testament within that.  Now that the broader society has given up even pretending to be on board with Christian teaching, the fact that some Christian churches are looking more and more out of step with society may we be a sign that they're doing something right.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 08, 2022, 12:39:25 PM
This is your right, Apl, and I celebrate it.

Freedom of religion is paramount. 

At the same time, I will also exercise my right to free speech in objecting to certain beliefs based on a series of mythological stories of great beauty and significance which, nevertheless, come from a time and place much different from our own.

I celebrate both our rights to believe.

And, again, I make nothing up about the decline in church membership.  It exists.  Make of that what you will.

The Bible DOES make very specific reference to the treatment of slaves and women, of course, which would not be acceptable at all in today's society.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on December 08, 2022, 12:45:16 PM
QuoteNow that the broader society has given up even pretending to be on board with Christian teaching, the fact that some Christian churches are looking more and more out of step with society may we be a sign that they're doing something right.

It must be recognized that the US is very religious compared to rich European countries.

https://thefora.org/index.php?action=post;topic=2202.870;last_msg=119218 (https://thefora.org/index.php?action=post;topic=2202.870;last_msg=119218)

In response to the question "Is religion important in your daily life?",

67% of Americans said yes, but only 54% of the Irish, 40% of Germans, 30% of the French, and 25% of the British.

The cause is clearly variety and competition of religious institutions in the US compared to state sanctioned or monopolistic churches. Religion is alive and well in the United States.

[Here in Northern Virginia there's a church every couple of blocks, or at least so it seems.]




Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on December 09, 2022, 06:52:41 AM
And the Methodists (the denomination I grew up in) are torn by the same societal issues: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/12/09/methodist-church-lgbtq-slavery-00073112
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 09, 2022, 06:53:26 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 08, 2022, 12:39:25 PM

The Bible DOES make very specific reference to the treatment of slaves and women, of course, which would not be acceptable at all in today's society.

Absolutely. In a similar way, it would be fascinating to see how "progressive" views today would (will) be viewed by people 2000 or more years in the future.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 09, 2022, 07:09:34 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 09, 2022, 06:53:26 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 08, 2022, 12:39:25 PM

The Bible DOES make very specific reference to the treatment of slaves and women, of course, which would not be acceptable at all in today's society.

Absolutely. In a similar way, it would be fascinating to see how "progressive" views today would (will) be viewed by people 2000 or more years in the future.

And "conservative" views----how do you suppose history will treat them?

2,000 years from now, provided the human species doesn't annihilate itself, culture will undoubtedly be so different that the future people will not be able to relate to our particular cultural confusion.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 09, 2022, 07:32:03 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 09, 2022, 07:09:34 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 09, 2022, 06:53:26 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 08, 2022, 12:39:25 PM

The Bible DOES make very specific reference to the treatment of slaves and women, of course, which would not be acceptable at all in today's society.

Absolutely. In a similar way, it would be fascinating to see how "progressive" views today would (will) be viewed by people 2000 or more years in the future.

And "conservative" views----how do you suppose history will treat them?

2,000 years from now, provided the human species doesn't annihilate itself, culture will undoubtedly be so different that the future people will not be able to relate to our particular cultural confusion.

And yet, we are perfectly able to relate to, and judge, the culture of equally far in the past. (Why can't those future people get a clue???)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 09, 2022, 10:05:02 AM
Certainly, Marshman, the future people will observe our essential humanity.  But there is no guarantee they will care or be able to comprehend our prejudices in the way we do any more than we can comprehend human sacrifices or burning someone at the stake (other than Foucault, that is).

But now you are just being contrarian.  Say something worthwhile or we should drop it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 09, 2022, 10:25:12 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 09, 2022, 10:05:02 AM
Certainly, Marshman, the future people will observe our essential humanity.  But there is no guarantee they will care or be able to comprehend our prejudices in the way we do any more than we can comprehend human sacrifices or burning someone at the stake (other than Foucault, that is).

But now you are just being contrarian.  Say something worthwhile or we should drop it.

The point is that if you evaluate people of any culture displaced sufficiently in time or space from the present by the standards of here and now, they will just be bizarre and/or evil. Doing so makes the study of history beyond a few decades ago totally pointless, since "progress" will only be recognizable when it is to more or less the status quo.  On the other hand, if you are going to acknowledge that change has happened over generations, then it only makes sense to view the actions of individuals and societies primarily in relation to their peers and/or to the generations immediately preceding or succeeding them, rather than to those centuries apart.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on December 09, 2022, 08:58:38 PM
Support for gay marriage, etc., is, ahem, an extremely novel view not only in this country, but more or less everywhere, for most places and times, throughout history.   Really, it is.   Back in the 90s, when the first stirrings of potentially legalizing it arose in the US, I, in grad school at the time, formulated my 'honest gay marriage supporters test', which goes like this: "you support the right of consenting adult homosexuals to contract lawful marriage-- therefore you also support the right of consenting adults to enter into polygamous marriages.   If not, *why not*?"   This test went over amongst my grad student peers more or less as well as you might have imagined.  I remain somewhat surprised that no case to overrule the 19th century prohibition on polygamy has even been accepted to be heard by SCOTUS, despite the reality that polygamy, quite unlike gay marriage, is long accepted throughout many cultures historically and even today, especially Islam.   Is it therefore not Islamophobic to continue to legally prohibit Muslims involved in polygamous unions to immigrate to this country?   Obviously I know why it is that gay marriage is celebrated by modern secular American (and Euro and Canadian) society, whereas polygamy isn't considered fit for acceptance or even toleration, but it does not make this dichotomy consistent, either.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 10, 2022, 06:52:47 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 09, 2022, 08:58:38 PM
Support for gay marriage, etc., is, ahem, an extremely novel view not only in this country, but more or less everywhere, for most places and times, throughout history.   Really, it is.   Back in the 90s, when the first stirrings of potentially legalizing it arose in the US, I, in grad school at the time, formulated my 'honest gay marriage supporters test', which goes like this: "you support the right of consenting adult homosexuals to contract lawful marriage-- therefore you also support the right of consenting adults to enter into polygamous marriages.   If not, *why not*?"   This test went over amongst my grad student peers more or less as well as you might have imagined.  I remain somewhat surprised that no case to overrule the 19th century prohibition on polygamy has even been accepted to be heard by SCOTUS, despite the reality that polygamy, quite unlike gay marriage, is long accepted throughout many cultures historically and even today, especially Islam.   Is it therefore not Islamophobic to continue to legally prohibit Muslims involved in polygamous unions to immigrate to this country?   Obviously I know why it is that gay marriage is celebrated by modern secular American (and Euro and Canadian) society, whereas polygamy isn't considered fit for acceptance or even toleration, but it does not make this dichotomy consistent, either.

You've made the point very well, but the answer that is traditionally given to that argument is "No-one's ever going to propose THAT, so it doesn't really count." Once someone does propose EXACTLY that, the people who said it would never happen will conveniently forget their earlier statement. (Or say that what's being proposed is TOTALLY different.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on December 10, 2022, 07:17:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 10, 2022, 06:52:47 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 09, 2022, 08:58:38 PM
Support for gay marriage, etc., is, ahem, an extremely novel view not only in this country, but more or less everywhere, for most places and times, throughout history.   Really, it is.   Back in the 90s, when the first stirrings of potentially legalizing it arose in the US, I, in grad school at the time, formulated my 'honest gay marriage supporters test', which goes like this: "you support the right of consenting adult homosexuals to contract lawful marriage-- therefore you also support the right of consenting adults to enter into polygamous marriages.   If not, *why not*?"   This test went over amongst my grad student peers more or less as well as you might have imagined.  I remain somewhat surprised that no case to overrule the 19th century prohibition on polygamy has even been accepted to be heard by SCOTUS, despite the reality that polygamy, quite unlike gay marriage, is long accepted throughout many cultures historically and even today, especially Islam.   Is it therefore not Islamophobic to continue to legally prohibit Muslims involved in polygamous unions to immigrate to this country?   Obviously I know why it is that gay marriage is celebrated by modern secular American (and Euro and Canadian) society, whereas polygamy isn't considered fit for acceptance or even toleration, but it does not make this dichotomy consistent, either.

You've made the point very well, but the answer that is traditionally given to that argument is "No-one's ever going to propose THAT, so it doesn't really count." Once someone does propose EXACTLY that, the people who said it would never happen will conveniently forget their earlier statement. (Or say that what's being proposed is TOTALLY different.)

Not quite sure what you mean by "novel" since the most recent national poll suggests 70% of US voters support legal same sex marriage, and 30 countries and territories have legalized it in the last 15 years? Unless you are simply pointing out that viewpoints on this topic have evolved quickly?

Frankly I have no issues with consensual adult polygamy either. The only real issue becomes that there are so many important entitlements that get tied in to legal marriage — tax status, health coverage, immigration status, parents rights, and inheritance rights being key among them, and we would need to figure out how to handle those if people could legally have more than one spouse.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 10, 2022, 09:17:29 AM
I can't imagine the demands of a polyamorous marriage----one spouse is enough work as it is----but why would I care if other people do it?  Plenty of married couples are already involved in illicit polyamorous relationships.  It is nothing new to humanity.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 10, 2022, 09:43:19 AM
And back to the original purpose of this thread, which never seems to end:

An oblique relationship to the topic of this thread.  But still... 

A UCSD professor was punished for working with Chinese scientists. Is it an ethics breach or discrimination? (https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/education/story/2022-12-07/uc-san-diego-professor-xiang-dong-fu-china)

Quote
Xiang-Dong Fu says he was forced to resign after UCSD investigated his ties to Chinese researchers, part of a controversial initiative that some say unfairly scrutinized Chinese professors at American universities.


IHE: Punished for Talking to the Press (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/12/08/two-tri-c-professors-sue-administrators-retaliation)

Quote
Two professors at Cuyahoga Community College are suing administrators, claiming they faced backlash for criticizing a discriminatory college policy to a local media outlet.

Reason Magazine: Court Upholds Discipline Imposed on Professors Who Called Fellow Professor "Racist" in Anonymous Flyer (https://reason.com/volokh/2022/12/08/court-upholds-discipline-imposed-on-professors-who-called-fellow-professor-racist-in-anonymous-flyer/)

Daily Citizen: University of Idaho Pays $90K to Three Christians and Professor Who Were Issued 'No Contact' Orders (https://dailycitizen.focusonthefamily.com/university-of-idaho-pays-90k-to-three-christians-and-professor-who-were-issued-no-contact-orders/)

Quote
The University of Idaho – a public school – is paying dearly for a First Amendment lesson it should already have known: you can't punish speech you don't like.

Last April, three Christian students of the university's law school who are members of the law school's chapter of the Christian Legal Society, along with a faculty member who served as an advisor to the club, sued the school's administration. The lawsuit stemmed from orders issued by the university to the three students and professor directing them to have "no contact" with a female, lesbian-identified student who was upset by the response she received when she asked the students why CLS required its officers to affirm that marriage is between one man and one woman.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 10, 2022, 02:43:04 PM
Quote from: onthefringe on December 10, 2022, 07:17:54 AM

Not quite sure what you mean by "novel" since the most recent national poll suggests 70% of US voters support legal same sex marriage, and 30 countries and territories have legalized it in the last 15 years? Unless you are simply pointing out that viewpoints on this topic have evolved quickly?

That's exactly the point.

Quote
Frankly I have no issues with consensual adult polygamy either. The only real issue becomes that there are so many important entitlements that get tied in to legal marriage — tax status, health coverage, immigration status, parents rights, and inheritance rights being key among them, and we would need to figure out how to handle those if people could legally have more than one spouse.

Yeah, like the only real issue with curing cancer is getting all of those mutated cells out of a person's body - easy peasy!
Seriously, all of the laws are procedures related to marriage have developed over decades, or centuries, even, and have changed as various situations arose. With polygamy or polyamorous relationships in general, all sorts of those rules become totally moot, for instance due to no specific limit on the number of people involved. (Can 100 people be "married" to each other? 1000?)

It's the principle of Chesterton's Fence (https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Chesterton%27s_Fence).

Building codes, safety procedures, and so on all exist because in the past people said "What could possibly go wrong?" when they did something.

Being too short-sighted to see potential problems isn't virtuous just because it's "open-minded". It's just intellectual laziness.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on December 10, 2022, 03:10:13 PM
QuoteSeriously, all of the laws are procedures related to marriage have developed over decades, or centuries ... .

Nay, Marsh, you're off by two orders of magnitude! Which religions have survived? Those that regulated marriage. The use of that was clear -- no kids with no two parent families. The kids had better survival chances that way. That's how we got here.

Because of our riches and technology allowing us to decouple reproduction from sexual activity, the passed down rules of marriage are no longer so useful. Indeed, anything goes.

My guess is that homosexual and other marriage is desired mostly for its economic benefits. After all, people can live together nowadays with 'nary an eyelid lifted.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 10, 2022, 06:23:48 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 10, 2022, 02:43:04 PM
Quote from: onthefringe on December 10, 2022, 07:17:54 AM

Not quite sure what you mean by "novel" since the most recent national poll suggests 70% of US voters support legal same sex marriage, and 30 countries and territories have legalized it in the last 15 years? Unless you are simply pointing out that viewpoints on this topic have evolved quickly?

That's exactly the point.

Quote
Frankly I have no issues with consensual adult polygamy either. The only real issue becomes that there are so many important entitlements that get tied in to legal marriage — tax status, health coverage, immigration status, parents rights, and inheritance rights being key among them, and we would need to figure out how to handle those if people could legally have more than one spouse.

Yeah, like the only real issue with curing cancer is getting all of those mutated cells out of a person's body - easy peasy!
Seriously, all of the laws are procedures related to marriage have developed over decades, or centuries, even, and have changed as various situations arose. With polygamy or polyamorous relationships in general, all sorts of those rules become totally moot, for instance due to no specific limit on the number of people involved. (Can 100 people be "married" to each other? 1000?)

It's the principle of Chesterton's Fence (https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Chesterton%27s_Fence).

Building codes, safety procedures, and so on all exist because in the past people said "What could possibly go wrong?" when they did something.

Being too short-sighted to see potential problems isn't virtuous just because it's "open-minded". It's just intellectual laziness.

So Marshy, let's say that you are you, the same person you are now, with the same impulses and hang-ups, in 1967.

Where do you stand on Loving vs. Virginia?

Be honest.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on December 10, 2022, 08:08:49 PM
Hmmmm.....

Is there any reason whatsoever that you have to suspect that marshy might possibly be opposed to interracial marriage?  Heck, he's Canadian, and mesuspects interracial marriage has been legal there much longer than it has in Virginia, and probably did not require court action to legalize either.   Your snide question to him is a strawman, falsely equating interracial heterosexual marriage, something that has only been opposed by racists and those who have bought into false views of history, false exegeses of scripture, etc., with homosexual marriage, which is novel, because, well, ahem, 15 years is a pinprick in the history of civilization.   More or less all world religions have always opposed it, though of course at various times and places sometimes there has been a wink-wink nod-nod approach taken.   And it is just not biologically the same as heterosexual marriage, and clearly is not in the best interests of children and families. 

That said, the real problem here is what I see as an ever-increasing anti-tolerance for any verbal or written expressions of traditional views of homosexuality/ homosexual marriage, esp when expressed by evangelicals.   I fear greatly that efforts will soon be made in the public sphere to interdict freedom of speech here.   I used to think, as recently as maybe 5 years ago, that this was paranoid thinking, and expressed my sentiments to people in my church, amongst others.  I was wrong.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 10, 2022, 08:49:06 PM
It is a hypothetical, Kay.  That should be pretty obvious.

No, as a matter of fact, I do NOT think the Marshman is opposed to interracial marriage.  In fact, I think Marshy is a very good, moral person who has been blinded by our culture's last acceptable prejudice (or 2nd to last, actually; "tranny" issues are the new goats of the hard right now that 70% of the American public, and most young people who will soon assume their responsibilities as adults, recognize gay marriage as legitimate).  I had hoped to point this out to him by an analogy.  There were many good, moral people who within living memory were openly opposed to interracial marriage and felt completely justified in doing so.  Most of these people seemed to have reversed gears by now. 

It is a legitimate challenge.

Reading your post above about "it is just not biologically the same as heterosexual marriage, and clearly is not in the best interests of children and families," I think you may have been blinded as well.  Most abusers in our society are straight men.  Heterosexual marriage is hardly a stable institution.  I'd be curious why you posted that.

Why would I care what "all world religions" have believed up until now?  I do not belong to any of them.  May I remind you of Stain Paul:

"Slaves, be subject to your masters with all reverence, not only to those who are good and equitable but also to those who are perverse."

I don't think we want to read this literally.  American slave owners did.

There are a great many things the religions of the world have done in the past that we have no part of now.  Don't be blind.

As for this----

Quote
the real problem here is what I see as an ever-increasing anti-tolerance for any verbal or written expressions of traditional views of homosexuality/ homosexual marriage, esp when expressed by evangelicals. 

I'm sorry, but I think homophobia is wrong, no matter who utters it.  Evangelicals or whoever should get used to the idea that someone like me will be out here to point out their bigotry.

That is my freedom of speech.

As for your second point:

Quote
I fear greatly that efforts will soon be made in the public sphere to interdict freedom of speech here.   I used to think, as recently as maybe 5 years ago, that this was paranoid thinking, and expressed my sentiments to people in my church, amongst others.  I was wrong.

That is precisely why I curate this thread.  I believe we disagree completely, but I absolutely support your right to express yourself.  We should be aware of the hysteria out there to curb expression in the pursuit of social justice and conformity. 

However, I do not think such a ban would withstand First Amendment challenges-----after all, we still have the KKK and the American Nazi parties frittering about at the fringes; I think your evangelicals will be okay. 

Try not to make your cause into martyrdom as a rationale. 

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 08:25:07 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 10, 2022, 08:49:06 PM
It is a hypothetical, Kay.  That should be pretty obvious.

No, as a matter of fact, I do NOT think the Marshman is opposed to interracial marriage.

My (non-white) wife would be pleased to hear that. She kind of rolls her eyes at terms like "raciallized" and "BIPOC".


Quote

In fact, I think Marshy is a very good, moral person who has been blinded by our culture's last acceptable prejudice (or 2nd to last, actually; "tranny" issues are the new goats of the hard right now that 70% of the American public, and most young people who will soon assume their responsibilities as adults, recognize gay marriage as legitimate).  I had hoped to point this out to him by an analogy.  There were many good, moral people who within living memory were openly opposed to interracial marriage and felt completely justified in doing so.  Most of these people seemed to have reversed gears by now. 


It is a legitimate challenge.

In a nutshell, in the Bible all prohibitions against interracial marriage basically come down to what we would call interfaith marriage. The issue was religious, not ethnic. (Examples like Ruth, the great-grandmother of King David, stand out.)
("Worshipping other gods" was the concern.)

Prohibitions on same-sex relationships are different. (Whether you agree with either of those restrictions or not, the point is that the passages relating to them are very different. So lots of Christians who have no problem with interracial marriage don't support same-sex marriage in the church.)

One more point to make is that all kinds of religious prohibitions exist for thing which do not cause "harm" to any identifiable person. The idea that the only reasonable basis for what should be prohibited is whether it "harms" someone is totally out of place in any major religion. (Most, if not all, have prohibitions against many things that do harm others, but just not harming others doesn't make something OK.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 08:51:31 AM
So are you opposed to interfaith marriages? Should there be a law prohibiting them?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 09:08:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 08:51:31 AM
So are you opposed to interfaith marriages? Should there be a law prohibiting them?

The government can regulate however it sees fit. Faith communities can make whatever restrictions they feel are appropriate.

(Personally, I think the government should not be in the "marriage" business.The government should regulate "domestic partnerships", like business partnerships, that affect things like pensions, benefits, etc. They can determine who can be in such a partnership, including how many people, and it doesn't necessarily have to have to require any sort of conjugal relationship. since it's not a religious "thing", faith communities don't have to be concerned about it. On the other hand faith communities should be free to make whatever restrictions on "marriage" they choose, and it's none of the government's business. This means that marriage and domestic partnerships will be overlapping but not concentric classes.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 09:22:17 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 09:08:24 AM
I think the government should not be in the "marriage" business.

So the government should not restrict interfaith, gay, or polyamorous marriages?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 09:30:07 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 09:22:17 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 09:08:24 AM
I think the government should not be in the "marriage" business.

So the government should not restrict interfaith, gay, or polyamorous marriages?

The government needs to make restrictions based on non-religious factors. And as long as they don't suggest that faith communities ought to abide by the same rules, I don't really have a problem. (Although, as I said, I'd give it a different name since it's about the government's concerns, which are primarily economic, and don't necessarily have anything to do with sex. Presumably no government wants to declare any sexual relationship a "marriage" regardless of whether the people in it want that. Similarly, the government probably doesn't want to demand that a certain relationship have a sexual component to have the economic benefits.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on December 11, 2022, 09:45:19 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 09:08:24 AM
I think the government should not be in the "marriage" business.

The government is in the "marriage" business because the people wanted a legal definition of marriage for purposes of inheritance, property rights and other factors.

If someone dies, what happens to their property if there is no will? What about the people living in their house? Are they a spouse or descendent? Roommates?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 09:50:20 AM
I think we have no conflicts!

People may have their prejudices but they will simply have to froth and vent as the rest of us go about our business.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 09:56:38 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on December 11, 2022, 09:45:19 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 09:08:24 AM
I think the government should not be in the "marriage" business.

The government is in the "marriage" business because the people wanted a legal definition of marriage for purposes of inheritance, property rights and other factors.

If someone dies, what happens to their property if there is no will? What about the people living in their house? Are they a spouse or descendent? Roommates?

Exactly. Issues with property are economic, not "romantic".  The government has not regulated sexual relationships between consenting adults for a long time, so the only concerns the government has with "marriage" are financial (inheritance, pension, benefits, etc.). The government has a completely legitimate interest in these, whether they call it "marriage" or not. If they didn't, it would make that distinction much more clear.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on December 11, 2022, 10:04:16 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 09:56:38 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on December 11, 2022, 09:45:19 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 09:08:24 AM
I think the government should not be in the "marriage" business.

The government is in the "marriage" business because the people wanted a legal definition of marriage for purposes of inheritance, property rights and other factors.

If someone dies, what happens to their property if there is no will? What about the people living in their house? Are they a spouse or descendent? Roommates?

Exactly. Issues with property are economic, not "romantic".  The government has not regulated sexual relationships between consenting adults for a long time, so the only concerns the government has with "marriage" are financial (inheritance, pension, benefits, etc.). The government has a completely legitimate interest in these, whether they call it "marriage" or not. If they didn't, it would make that distinction much more clear.

So, that's it. We are in "violent agreement," as they say. There is a legal definition of marriage, under which a whole range of rights and responsibilities are conferred.

Who can get married? Right now the legal definition is two consenting adults.

Some churches have different definitions, such as polygamy, but these are not considered to be legally enforceable. Maybe someone will decide the government has a compelling interest for defining these but so far, hasn't happened.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 10:07:30 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on December 11, 2022, 10:04:16 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 09:56:38 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on December 11, 2022, 09:45:19 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 09:08:24 AM
I think the government should not be in the "marriage" business.

The government is in the "marriage" business because the people wanted a legal definition of marriage for purposes of inheritance, property rights and other factors.

If someone dies, what happens to their property if there is no will? What about the people living in their house? Are they a spouse or descendent? Roommates?

Exactly. Issues with property are economic, not "romantic".  The government has not regulated sexual relationships between consenting adults for a long time, so the only concerns the government has with "marriage" are financial (inheritance, pension, benefits, etc.). The government has a completely legitimate interest in these, whether they call it "marriage" or not. If they didn't, it would make that distinction much more clear.

So, that's it. We are in "violent agreement," as they say. There is a legal definition of marriage, under which a whole range of rights and responsibilities are conferred.

Who can get married? Right now the legal definition is two consenting adults.

Some churches have different definitions, such as polygamy, but these are not considered to be legally enforceable. Maybe someone will decide the government has a compelling interest for defining these but so far, hasn't happened.

The two is going to be challenged in the courts soon, if it hasn't already. The government will have a hard time defending that one.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on December 11, 2022, 10:20:07 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 10:07:30 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on December 11, 2022, 10:04:16 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 09:56:38 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on December 11, 2022, 09:45:19 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 09:08:24 AM
I think the government should not be in the "marriage" business.

The government is in the "marriage" business because the people wanted a legal definition of marriage for purposes of inheritance, property rights and other factors.

If someone dies, what happens to their property if there is no will? What about the people living in their house? Are they a spouse or descendent? Roommates?

Exactly. Issues with property are economic, not "romantic".  The government has not regulated sexual relationships between consenting adults for a long time, so the only concerns the government has with "marriage" are financial (inheritance, pension, benefits, etc.). The government has a completely legitimate interest in these, whether they call it "marriage" or not. If they didn't, it would make that distinction much more clear.

So, that's it. We are in "violent agreement," as they say. There is a legal definition of marriage, under which a whole range of rights and responsibilities are conferred.

Who can get married? Right now the legal definition is two consenting adults.

Some churches have different definitions, such as polygamy, but these are not considered to be legally enforceable. Maybe someone will decide the government has a compelling interest for defining these but so far, hasn't happened.

The two is going to be challenged in the courts soon, if it hasn't already. The government will have a hard time defending that one.

Ha! I've been told that immigrants who apply for green cards and for naturalization here in the US have to raise their right hands and swear that they haven't committed polygamy, in addition to a laundry list of other "offenses".
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 10:22:52 AM
Quote
The two is going to be challenged in the courts soon, if it hasn't already. The government will have a hard time defending that one.

Why will the government have a hard time defending...what exactly?

Since government should be out of the marriage business, what is your feeling about this challenge?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 10:29:03 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 10:22:52 AM
Quote
The two is going to be challenged in the courts soon, if it hasn't already. The government will have a hard time defending that one.

Why will the government have a hard time defending...what exactly?

Since government should be out of the marriage business, what is your feeling about this challenge?

The only grounds for the government to stipulate that marriage is between two people is economic. (The government has not remotely suggested that sexual relationships must be restricted to two people.) On the other hand, the government is highly unlikely to argue that a relationship that has not been sexual for a certain period of time should automatically lose it's "marriage" status, so again it underlines the fact that the government's interest is essentially economic. Being explicit about that would be much more transparent.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 10:29:03 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 10:22:52 AM
Quote
The two is going to be challenged in the courts soon, if it hasn't already. The government will have a hard time defending that one.

Why will the government have a hard time defending...what exactly?

Since government should be out of the marriage business, what is your feeling about this challenge?

The only grounds for the government to stipulate that marriage is between two people is economic. (The government has not remotely suggested that sexual relationships must be restricted to two people.) On the other hand, the government is highly unlikely to argue that a relationship that has not been sexual for a certain period of time should automatically lose it's "marriage" status, so again it underlines the fact that the government's interest is essentially economic. Being explicit about that would be much more transparent.

Okay...but you are answering a question I did not ask.

I think most of us know what you just posted, anyway.

I was asking about this statement:

Quote
The two is going to be challenged in the courts soon, if it hasn't already. The government will have a hard time defending that one.

And I was asking how the government is going to "challenged in the courts soon" and why they will have a "hard time defending that one."

What are you talking about?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 10:57:52 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 10:29:03 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 10:22:52 AM
Quote
The two is going to be challenged in the courts soon, if it hasn't already. The government will have a hard time defending that one.

Why will the government have a hard time defending...what exactly?

Since government should be out of the marriage business, what is your feeling about this challenge?

The only grounds for the government to stipulate that marriage is between two people is economic. (The government has not remotely suggested that sexual relationships must be restricted to two people.) On the other hand, the government is highly unlikely to argue that a relationship that has not been sexual for a certain period of time should automatically lose it's "marriage" status, so again it underlines the fact that the government's interest is essentially economic. Being explicit about that would be much more transparent.

Okay...but you are answering a question I did not ask.

I think most of us know what you just posted, anyway.

I was asking about this statement:

Quote
The two is going to be challenged in the courts soon, if it hasn't already. The government will have a hard time defending that one.

And I was asking how the government is going to "challenged in the courts soon" and why they will have a "hard time defending that one."

What are you talking about?

Sooner or later, someone is going to go to court to argue that some number greater than 2, (perhaps 3, perhaps more), should be able to be "married" so that they are all eligible for each others' pensions, benefits, etc. (I'd suspect within 5 years; certainly within 10.)
The government will only be able to defend the limit on economic grounds; they don't really have any other basis to to argue why "marriage" should be restricted, as long as it's between consenting adults. And I don't think they'll even want to get into the sexual nature of the relationship part much, since they accept sexual relationships that they don't define as marriage, and they don't revoke marital status automatically for lack of sexual activity as I said above.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 11:02:17 AM
Okay.  I have not heard anything about that.  Certainly we can devise laws to accommodate more than one spouse.  I'm not sure I see the problem there.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 11:07:25 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 11:02:17 AM
Okay.  I have not heard anything about that.  Certainly we can devise laws to accommodate more than one spouse.  I'm not sure I see the problem there.
It will blow the social security system to high heaven! And every other *pension system! Suppose a bunch of people decide to create a "marriage" so they're all able to access each others' benefits. As each one dies off , all of the rest get survivor benefits until the last ones dies. If it's possible to add more people to the "marriage", then it could be a cash cow in perpetuity as everyone joining would be eligible for the benefits of everyone before them.

*and benefits, if everyone has to be covered by any one person's benefits.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on December 11, 2022, 11:13:56 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 11:07:25 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 11:02:17 AM
Okay.  I have not heard anything about that.  Certainly we can devise laws to accommodate more than one spouse.  I'm not sure I see the problem there.
It will blow the social security system to high heaven! And every other *pension system! Suppose a bunch of people decide to create a "marriage" so they're all able to access each others' benefits. As each one dies off , all of the rest get survivor benefits until the last ones dies. If it's possible to add more people to the "marriage", then it could be a cash cow in perpetuity as everyone joining would be eligible for the benefits of everyone before them.

*and benefits, if everyone has to be covered by any one person's benefits.

One straighforward way to handle it would be to say "spousal" benefits are "X" dollars and you can divide them up among however many eligible spouses there are.

Healthcare access could be fixed by disentangling insurance from employment.

Obviously there will be edge cases that challenge any model, but that's true now.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 11:24:56 AM
Quote from: onthefringe on December 11, 2022, 11:13:56 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 11, 2022, 11:07:25 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 11:02:17 AM
Okay.  I have not heard anything about that.  Certainly we can devise laws to accommodate more than one spouse.  I'm not sure I see the problem there.
It will blow the social security system to high heaven! And every other *pension system! Suppose a bunch of people decide to create a "marriage" so they're all able to access each others' benefits. As each one dies off , all of the rest get survivor benefits until the last ones dies. If it's possible to add more people to the "marriage", then it could be a cash cow in perpetuity as everyone joining would be eligible for the benefits of everyone before them.

*and benefits, if everyone has to be covered by any one person's benefits.

One straighforward way to handle it would be to say "spousal" benefits are "X" dollars and you can divide them up among however many eligible spouses there are.


So for survivor's pensions it becomes a tontine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tontine).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 11:48:46 AM
Well, again, I suspect we can figure out how to deal legally with such issues should polyamorous marriage actually become a thing (which doesn't seem to be happening).  I worked with the bank to make sure my parent's estate was divided equitably between my nieces and myself even though my nieces' mother, the second name on the will, had died.  These things can be done.

And in any event, the laws should adapt to peoples' lives, not the other way around. 

But why bring that up on a thread about cancel culture?  Are you suggesting we are opening a Pandora's jar?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on December 11, 2022, 03:00:27 PM
Two comments to kaysixteen. First, Heinlein wrote of multi-spouse families entering into marriage via contract, with the welfare of children a central tenet of the agreement.

Second, my sister and her wife have raised a beautiful, kind, extremely talented son. He was of the super AP test scorers, graduated from a school much like your dear alma mater, and is now in a fellowship year prior to graduate school. How on earth would you describe my sister's marriage as not being in "his best interest", or how their marriage in any way is harmful to society as a whole?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on December 11, 2022, 04:11:25 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 11:48:46 AM
Well, again, I suspect we can figure out how to deal legally with such issues should polyamorous marriage actually become a thing (which doesn't seem to be happening).  I worked with the bank to make sure my parent's estate was divided equitably between my nieces and myself even though my nieces' mother, the second name on the will, had died.  These things can be done.

Yes. One point to add:

QuoteIn 2016, a survey of nearly 9,000 single US adults showed that one in five had previously been in a consensually non-monogamous relationship. A Canadian survey came up with roughly the same numbers a year later.
https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20210326-ethical-non-monogamy-the-rise-of-multi-partner-relationships

I favor the use of legal contracts between n people for dealing with kids and inheritance money, and similar issues, for any n. For n>2, this may take some careful thought and creativity. For those who don't enter into contracts, issue may be messy, as they are for unmarried couples now.

We should transition to that use of legal contracts from existing marriage law. Then people can have marriage ceremonies in their personal life for any number of people.

Marriage does have a significant social function, which some people seem to value. But is isn't clear why it should be the state that handles it.

(It does seem that thread topic drift is becoming bigger. Sorry for contributing to it.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on December 11, 2022, 06:00:23 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 11:02:17 AM
Okay.  I have not heard anything about that.  Certainly we can devise laws to accommodate more than one spouse.  I'm not sure I see the problem there.

Exactly. Now, what is a legally defined "spouse?" Can it be someone of the same sex? Or a different race? Religion?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 06:12:53 PM
The internet is headed for a 'point of no return,' claims professor (https://techxplore.com/news/2022-12-internet-professor.html)

Quote
Eventually, the disadvantages of sharing your opinion online will become so great that people will turn away from the internet. This is the argument made by Geert Lovink, Professor at the Amsterdam University of Applied Science (AUAS) and University of Amsterdam in his new essay Extinction Internet. While Lovink's previous research focused on critical counterculture and possible alternatives, such as fairer social media platforms, he now sketches a future in which the internet (partially) disappears and we are forced to give up our tech addiction.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on December 11, 2022, 07:19:22 PM
1) exceptions prove rules.   There is no question that it is simply much better for a child to be raised with a married pair of heterosexuals, rather than any other 'alternative' arrangement.   
2) two homosexuals, of either gender, can not reproduce.   For them to 'have a child' requires technical innovations, unless they adopt.   Things like in vitro fertilization, sperm donorship, surrogate mothership, etc., are all not only wasteful of embryos (a big deal when one actually, ahem, views embryos as actual human beings with rights), and/or things that deprive a child of, ahem, its actual father.  (and, of course, the possibility of knowledge of blood kin, potential organ donorship later, etc,)
3) like it or not, when one decides to eliminate strict reliance on a one man-one woman only form of marriage (and legitimate form of sexual activity), the floodgate is opened to any and all other sexual actions, which, ahem, well...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 08:19:37 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 11, 2022, 07:19:22 PM
1) exceptions prove rules.   There is no question that it is simply much better for a child to be raised with a married pair of heterosexuals, rather than any other 'alternative' arrangement.   

There is a question. 

Or perhaps you can prove this somehow?

Or is this just plain old bigotry?

Quote
2) two homosexuals, of either gender, can not reproduce.   For them to 'have a child' requires technical innovations, unless they adopt.   Things like in vitro fertilization, sperm donorship, surrogate mothership, etc., are all not only wasteful of embryos (a big deal when one actually, ahem, views embryos as actual human beings with rights), and/or things that deprive a child of, ahem, its actual father.  (and, of course, the possibility of knowledge of blood kin, potential organ donorship later, etc,)

I have to ask, so what?

Every time we use birth control we risk losing an embryo.  Every time a woman avoids sex while ovulating an embryo is wasted.  Not very many of us consider embryos "people" unless we are looking for a reason to be self-righteous.

What difference does any of that make?  Certainly not enough to deny people the right to marry the person that they love and/or have children.

Bigotry, kay.  Very disappointing.

Quote
3) like it or not, when one decides to eliminate strict reliance on a one man-one woman only form of marriage (and legitimate form of sexual activity), the floodgate is opened to any and all other sexual actions, which, ahem, well...

Again, so what?

If someone wants to marry their car, why do we care?

You've got a series of confabulated complaints there, kay, that would never have affected you anyway.  Perhaps you should mind your own business.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on December 11, 2022, 08:44:16 PM
Define 'bigotry', and demonstrate why this is bad.

I could, moreover, hunt up a smallish legion of serious sociological studies regarding the utter superiority of married heterosexual parenting, but you know that these exist.

Abortion is the only reason I cannot actually join the Democratic party.  Babies' lives, born or preborn, are simply worth more than Britney Griner.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 09:22:14 PM
Hum.  We've now entered the stupid, stubborn, reactionary part of the debate.

Quote from: kaysixteen on December 11, 2022, 08:44:16 PM
Define 'bigotry', and demonstrate why this is bad.

I am not sure how you define it, kay, but I'll go with the generic dictionary definition.

Quote
big·ot·ry

noun
obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.

Are you saying the "bigotry" and "prejudice" are NOT bad?

Seriously?  Let's not play stupid here, okay?

Quote
I could, moreover, hunt up a smallish legion of serious sociological studies regarding the utter superiority of married heterosexual parenting, but you know that these exist.

I don't know anything about these.  Never looked into it.

Hunt them up.  Let's see them.

I did find this:

WaPo:  Children raised by same-sex couples do better in school, new study finds (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/02/06/children-raised-by-same-sex-couples-do-better-school-new-study-finds/)

Too mainstream media?

I found this:

APA on Children Raised by Gay and Lesbian Parents (https://www.apa.org/news/press/response/gay-parents)

Quote
On the basis of a remarkably consistent body of research on lesbian and gay parents and their children, the American Psychological Association (APA) and other health professional and scientific organizations have concluded that there is no scientific evidence that parenting effectiveness is related to parental sexual orientation. That is, lesbian and gay parents are as likely as heterosexual parents to provide supportive and healthy environments for their children. This body of research has shown that the adjustment, development and psychological well-being of children are unrelated to parental sexual orientation and that the children of lesbian and gay parents are as likely as those of heterosexual parents to flourish.

And this:

FactCheck: are children 'better off' with a mother and father than with same-sex parents? (https://theconversation.com/factcheck-are-children-better-off-with-a-mother-and-father-than-with-same-sex-parents-82313)

Quote
Kevin Andrews' assertion that children who are brought up with a mother and father are, "as a cohort, better off than those who are not" is not supported by research evidence.

The majority of research on this topic shows that children or adolescents raised by same-sex parents fare equally as well as those raised by opposite-sex parents on a wide range of social, emotional, health and academic outcomes.

And it goes on.

Quote
Abortion is the only reason I cannot actually join the Democratic party.  Babies' lives, born or preborn, are simply worth more than Britney Griner.

??????

Just when Mahagonny leaves...

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 12, 2022, 06:39:28 AM
Quote from: downer on December 11, 2022, 04:11:25 PM

Marriage does have a significant social function, which some people seem to value. But is isn't clear why it should be the state that handles it.

I think people believe that the social function (for non-religious people) is the conferring of social approval. The government can't really confer (or withhold) social approval; only a person's community can do that. But that's one of the reasons the state shouldn't really handle it.

Quote
(It does seem that thread topic drift is becoming bigger. Sorry for contributing to it.)

Fora tectonics is real and unavoidable. Same thing happens in face-to-face conversations.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 17, 2022, 06:00:53 PM
NBC News: Ohio teacher told principal using students' preferred pronouns violated her religion. She was forced to resign, lawsuit says (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ohio-teacher-told-principal-using-students-preferred-pronouns-violated-rcna62237)

Lower Deck:
Quote
The Alliance Defending Freedom said the teacher, Vivian Geraghty, should not have been put in a position to choose "between her faith and her job."

Quote
A former Ohio middle school teacher said she was forced to resign after she told her boss that she would not address students by their preferred pronouns because it violates her religious beliefs.

The teacher, Vivian Geraghty, is now suing Jackson Memorial Middle School's principal, the Board of Education, and two district employees.

Geraghty, a Christian, worked at the school in Massillon, Ohio, as an English language arts teacher up until her resignation on Aug. 26. Before her departure, she "taught her class while remaining consistent with her religious practices and scientific understanding concerning human identity, gender, and sex," states a federal lawsuit filed on Monday.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 17, 2022, 06:02:44 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 12, 2022, 06:39:28 AM
I think people believe that the social function (for non-religious people) is the conferring of social approval.

Not necessarily.

Some people simply see hypocrisy or prejudice and say so.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on December 17, 2022, 06:08:18 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 09:22:14 PM
Just when Mahagonny leaves...

Leaves? It was more of a defenestration.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 18, 2022, 06:37:38 AM
Quote from: downer on December 17, 2022, 06:08:18 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 11, 2022, 09:22:14 PM
Just when Mahagonny leaves...

Leaves? It was more of a defenestration.


Like when an employer "accepts" an employee's "resignation".
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 18, 2022, 06:50:47 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 17, 2022, 06:02:44 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 12, 2022, 06:39:28 AM
I think people believe that the social function (for non-religious people) is the conferring of social approval.

Not necessarily.

Some people simply see hypocrisy or prejudice and say so.

So non-religious people get married just to point out hypocrisy? Seems like a lot of effort and expense simply to make a point.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 18, 2022, 08:11:48 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 18, 2022, 06:50:47 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 17, 2022, 06:02:44 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 12, 2022, 06:39:28 AM
I think people believe that the social function (for non-religious people) is the conferring of social approval.

Not necessarily.

Some people simply see hypocrisy or prejudice and say so.

So non-religious people get married just to point out hypocrisy? Seems like a lot of effort and expense simply to make a point.

T'ain't nuthin' I said, hombre.  Strawman, my brother.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 18, 2022, 10:58:50 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 18, 2022, 08:11:48 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 18, 2022, 06:50:47 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 17, 2022, 06:02:44 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 12, 2022, 06:39:28 AM
I think people believe that the social function (for non-religious people) is the conferring of social approval.

Not necessarily.

Some people simply see hypocrisy or prejudice and say so.

So non-religious people get married just to point out hypocrisy? Seems like a lot of effort and expense simply to make a point.

T'ain't nuthin' I said, hombre.  Strawman, my brother.

I was trying to figure out what "Not necessarily" was referring to. Care to elaborate?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 20, 2022, 08:24:46 AM
NBC News: A Texas superintendent ordered school librarians to remove LGBTQ books. Now the federal government is investigating. (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/federal-investigation-school-library-books-texas-rcna61087)

Lower Deck:
Quote
The Education Department has opened what appears to be the first-of-its-kind investigation into Granbury Independent School District after it pulled library books dealing with sexuality and gender.

Quote
The U.S. Education Department's civil rights enforcement arm has launched an investigation into a North Texas school district whose superintendent was secretly recorded ordering librarians to remove LGBTQ-themed library books.

Education and legal experts say the federal probe of the Granbury Independent School District — which stemmed from a complaint by the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas and reporting by NBC News, ProPublica and The Texas Tribune — appears to be the first such investigation explicitly tied to the nationwide movement to ban school library books dealing with sexuality and gender.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on December 20, 2022, 09:57:25 AM
Irrespective of the ethics of ordering removal of gay-themed literature from school libraries, what exactly would the federal offense be in so doing, such that a US govt investigation would be warranted?  Think very carefully about the proper answer to this question...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 20, 2022, 10:54:23 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 20, 2022, 09:57:25 AM
Irrespective of the ethics of ordering removal of gay-themed literature from school libraries, what exactly would the federal offense be in so doing, such that a US govt investigation would be warranted?  Think very carefully about the proper answer to this question...

Well, according to the article which cited the ACLU...

Quote
...the district's subsequent decision to remove dozens of library books pending a review, fostered a "pervasively hostile" environment for LGBTQ students, the ACLU wrote in its complaint. Chloe Kempf, an ACLU attorney, said the Education Department's decision to open the investigation into Granbury ISD signals that the agency is concerned about what she described as "a wave" of anti-LGBTQ policies and book removals nationally.

<snip>

An Education Department spokesperson confirmed the investigation and said it was related to Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits schools from discriminating on the basis of sex, gender and sexual orientation.

Remember that many, perhaps most, of us are not alarmed by the presence of LGBTQ people-----and remembering that the vast majority of abusers are family members and straight men (a majority married men)----can you expound on what your issues with a federal investigation are?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on December 20, 2022, 11:32:04 AM
I read through some of the complaints linked to the article. These are depicting issues that happen in the real lives of young people! The way you protect young people is letting them know these things can happen, that they are not alone, and give them some anticipatory coping skills. Pretending they don't exist is what leaves them vulnerable.

Go Ask Alice is surprising. Yes, she is on drugs, and she enjoys it. But things don't end up so well for her so it's a good cautionary tale of what can happen when you have a little too much enjoyment of things you should stay away from.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on December 20, 2022, 09:17:52 PM
Random points:

1) On what planet is it a good idea to offer reading material depicting sexual material/ behavior, to elementary school children?
2) How is it discriminating against homosexuals to refuse to place homosexual literature (i.e., literature depicting homosexual sex acts/ sex dialog or commentary) in such a school library, esp if said library does not also include similar literature depicting heterosexual content?
3) 'Censorship' is the usual cry of libertarians, leftie and rightie, when things like this happen.   Sadly, however, censorship exists *all the time* in any library, and the only time librarians decry it is when they themselves do not get to do the censoring ( I had many discussions on this theme in library school myself).  IOW, what the librarians want is the sole right to decide what books and other materials to buy (or even accept as donations) and thus enter into their collections, and what not to so include.   When a librarian has a choice of books a and b, he can buy a but not be, buy both a and b, buy b and not a, or buy neither.   And whatever choice he makes, he is the one censoring out any books he does not choose to include.   For whatever reasons he decides to do so.  And school librarians are not public libraries either-- school librarians are like teachers, employed by a school under the overall authority of a school board, according to law.   Those librarians have no more absolute right to choose whatever books for their librarians they want than the Latin teacher has to choose whatever textbook he wants.
4) Now let'd discuss the actual percentage of contemporary American adults who favor active equality and social promotion of homosexuality.   I submit that this number is still very much lower, in reality, than the polling data suggests, simply because, well, ahem... people will lie in polls of this sort.  IOW, this seems to be a similar case to the fact that in both 2016 and 2020, Trump got more votes in many places than his polling data suggested he was going to get, because, esp in 2020, many (especially white working class flyover country Trump supporters, feared that the pollsters would look down on them, even in an anonymous polling situation, if they fessed up to voting for Trump, so they lied.  Similarly, until very recently (in historical terms) more or less all Americans were opposed to the equal promotion of homosexuality, but, for a whole host of reasons, this attitude has changed rapidly amongst our cultural elites, to the point where continuing to evince such opposition is increasingly seen as the mark of Neanderthal status, which many folks who still hold to such opposition, will not want to seem to be, even in anonymous situations, and certainly in situations where their names can be known, and, as such, will lie.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 20, 2022, 09:44:19 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 20, 2022, 09:17:52 PM
Random points:

1) On what planet is it a good idea to offer reading material depicting sexual material/ behavior, to elementary school children?

Do these books show sexual material to children?  Or did you make that up because it would be convenient for you?

Quote
2) How is it discriminating against homosexuals to refuse to place homosexual literature (i.e., literature depicting homosexual sex acts/ sex dialog or commentary) in such a school library, esp if said library does not also include similar literature depicting heterosexual content?

Ditto above.  What titles are you talking about?

Quote
3) 'Censorship' is the usual cry of libertarians, leftie and rightie, when things like this happen.   Sadly, however, censorship exists *all the time* in any library, and the only time librarians decry it is when they themselves do not get to do the censoring ( I had many discussions on this theme in library school myself).  IOW, what the librarians want is the sole right to decide what books and other materials to buy (or even accept as donations) and thus enter into their collections, and what not to so include.   When a librarian has a choice of books a and b, he can buy a but not be, buy both a and b, buy b and not a, or buy neither.   And whatever choice he makes, he is the one censoring out any books he does not choose to include.   For whatever reasons he decides to do so.  And school librarians are not public libraries either-- school librarians are like teachers, employed by a school under the overall authority of a school board, according to law.   Those librarians have no more absolute right to choose whatever books for their librarians they want than the Latin teacher has to choose whatever textbook he wants.

Well, apparently the librarians in question wants a certain number of titles, and bigots lost their minds.

Quote
4) Now let'd discuss the actual percentage of contemporary American adults who favor active equality and social promotion of homosexuality.   I submit that this number is still very much lower, in reality, than the polling data suggests, simply because, well, ahem... people will lie in polls of this sort.

Never heard that myself. 

Can you prove that?  Where do you get that information? 

Or do polls present a reality that you do not want to accept? 

Quote
IOW, this seems to be a similar case to the fact that in both 2016 and 2020, Trump got more votes in many places than his polling data suggested he was going to get, because, esp in 2020, many (especially white working class flyover country Trump supporters, feared that the pollsters would look down on them, even in an anonymous polling situation, if they fessed up to voting for Trump, so they lied. 

Where did you hear that?  Cite your source.  Most Trumpees I've known proudly beat their chests and howl about their Glorious Leader.

Quote
Similarly, until very recently (in historical terms) more or less all Americans were opposed to the equal promotion of homosexuality, but, for a whole host of reasons, this attitude has changed rapidly amongst our cultural elites,

The attitude toward homosexuality has changed in all American classes, further disenfranchising the bigots.  No wonder you are so mad.

Quote
to the point where continuing to evince such opposition is increasingly seen as the mark of Neanderthal status,

Who says Neanderthals were homophobic bigots?  As far as we know, they were cool with LGTBQ cave-people.   

Quote
which many folks who still hold to such opposition, will not want to seem to be, even in anonymous situations, and certainly in situations where their names can be known, and, as such, will lie.

Good.  Things are looking up.  Social justice works.  Someday America will be a place without mindless prejudice.  I really believe this.  Maybe the world will follow.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on December 20, 2022, 09:55:54 PM
I do not know what is in these books.  Neither do you.

What I do know is that the relevant authorities in the school districts in question, or the state supervisors thereof, who had he lawful authority to exclude such books, determined that they ought to be excluded because of inappropriate sexual content.  I suspect that people like you think that there really could not have been any such inappropriate content, because there is no such inappropriate content to possibly be had.  We, methinks, will just have to agree to disagree on this point.

Those mind-numbed bigots are the taxpayers who employ those librarians.   The bigots in question do not want sexual content, even innuendo, being fed to their children.   Tough.

You cannot possibly argue the point that people can and will lie in polls-- in the case of Trump supporters having done this two years ago, there seems to have been great evidence I have read about in various places, that this occurred.   And someone like you, an actual academic, knows that one cannot prove someone is lying in an opinion poll, and also knows that polls can be phrased or presented in such a way as to strongly lead the pollees into giving the answers sought by the pollsters or those paying them.   If you need a good laugh at showing how this can be done, fire up youtube and enter 'Sir Humphrey explains polling'...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 21, 2022, 08:07:15 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 20, 2022, 09:55:54 PM
I do not know what is in these books.  Neither do you.

Riiiiiiiight.  That's what I thought.  So you are just mad because...well, there is no "because" because you don't know what you are talking about.

Do you really, truly, honestly think there is "sex" in these books?  Or are you confabulating more problems to bolster your prejudices?

Quote
What I do know is that the relevant authorities in the school districts in question, or the state supervisors thereof, who had he lawful authority to exclude such books, determined that they ought to be excluded because of inappropriate sexual content. 

And those relevant authorities are now under investigation from more relevant authorities because it appears they may have broken the law.

Quote
I suspect that people like you think that there really could not have been any such inappropriate content, because there is no such inappropriate content to possibly be had.  We, methinks, will just have to agree to disagree on this point.

Methinks you need a reason to get mad and self-righteous.  I highly doubt that a school librarian in the Lone Star State stocked a book with overt sexual content.  So you confabulate.  What we know is that they are "LGBTQ-themed" books.  You don't think that our sensationalist press wouldn't jump on a book in a school library with naked boys having sex?

Oh, but wait!  With just a tiny bit of searching online we can find the actual ACLU complaint (http://chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.aclutx.org/sites/default/files/aclutx_granbury_isd_title_ix_complaint.pdf) with the list of banned books in it:

Quote
• Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe, by Benjamin Alire Sáenz (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12000020-aristotle-and-dante-discover-the-secrets-of-the-universe)
• Being Jazz: My Life as a (Transgender) Teen, by Jazz Jennings (https://www.amazon.com/Being-Jazz-Life-Transgender-Teen/dp/039955467X)
• In Our Mothers' House, by Patricia Polacco (https://www.amazon.com/Our-Mothers-House-Patricia-Polacco/dp/039925076X)
• Queer, There and Everywhere: 23 People Who Changed the World, by Sarah Prager  (https://www.amazon.com/Queer-There-Everywhere-People-Changed/dp/0062474316)

I suppose people like you would rather not know the facts of the matter.  That way you can stay mad.

Quote
Those mind-numbed bigots are the taxpayers who employ those librarians.   The bigots in question do not want sexual content, even innuendo, being fed to their children.   Tough.

Not sure that actually makes sense.  I think it is sarcasm.  But yeah, they are bigots who are perhaps obsessed with sex like some people we know and will not mention here.
Quote
You cannot possibly argue the point that people can and will lie in polls-- in the case of Trump supporters having done this two years ago, there seems to have been great evidence I have read about in various places, that this occurred.   

So?  Quote your sources.  What evidence do we have that "people can and will lie in polls?" 

Quote
And someone like you, an actual academic, knows that one cannot prove someone is lying in an opinion poll,

Sooooooooo no.  You have no proof.  You just don't want to accept what the polls, which reflects what society believes, tell you. 

Quote
and also knows that polls can be phrased or presented in such a way as to strongly lead the pollees into giving the answers sought by the pollsters or those paying them.   If you need a good laugh at showing how this can be done, fire up youtube and enter 'Sir Humphrey explains polling'...

Sorry Charlie, you are on the fringes now with your hate.   Rationalize however you will.

I predict that you will now disappear like you did last time.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on December 21, 2022, 08:25:01 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 20, 2022, 09:55:54 PM
I do not know what is in these books.  Neither do you.



Well, yes we do. I have read several of the books which were tossed out. They have been books that mentioned kids having gay parents, or books about being okay to be different. That was all the "evil" that was in the content.

If you want read the articles that mention titles (I've posted links to at least two) how can you possibly consider your opinion to be informed?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on December 22, 2022, 01:08:06 AM
If I wanted to go ahead and lose my lunch, I might read the homosexualist propaganda books in question.

But the question remaineth-- do parents, via their elected representatives and the educators hired thereby, have the right to prevent indoctrinative material fundamentally hostile to the values of said parents from appearing in their children's school library, or do they not?  Why or why not?

As to lying in polls, one would just have to be a dunce to disbelieve that such actions occur.  Hell, I read several articles in objective news sources just around this fall's elections, lamenting this problem, something which has apparently become increasingly problematic to pollsters, who do not know what if anything they could do about it.   If I knew the solution, I would share it... but perhaps the better solution is to eliminate polls altogether, which on a whole host of issues and political races really do not seem to do much good, to have anything worthwhile to offer.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on December 22, 2022, 07:07:02 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 22, 2022, 01:08:06 AM
If I wanted to go ahead and lose my lunch, I might read the homosexualist propaganda books in question.

Heather has Two Mommies will do that to you?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 22, 2022, 07:34:24 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on December 22, 2022, 07:07:02 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 22, 2022, 01:08:06 AM
If I wanted to go ahead and lose my lunch, I might read the homosexualist propaganda books in question.

Heather has Two Mommies will do that to you?

I think the bigger, and more important, issue is the casting of parents who don't have the same ideology as the educational decision-makers as hostile bigots. A decade or two back, there was a push to deal with school bullying, which was long overdue. It is appropriate for students to learn to treat everyone with respect.  This does not require any specific ideological view about all kinds of matters of personal identity. The change since then has been to try to root out wrongthink, rather than to regulate behaviour. This is not only worrying, but it is extremely arrogant to suggest that educators or administrators, who don't necessarily even have children of their own, know more about what is in childrens' best interests than their own parents.
Furthermore, given the less--than-stellar educational outcomes in schools, students need much more focus on academic skills as it is; time spent on political indoctrination is only going to make their academic development suffer.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on December 22, 2022, 07:43:10 AM
Please. It is a book. In the library. Not a curriculum, not required reading.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 22, 2022, 08:21:46 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on December 22, 2022, 07:43:10 AM
Please. It is a book. In the library. Not a curriculum, not required reading.

If teachers ever read to their classes, and anything in the library is fair game, then being in the library does, in effect, make it "required reading" or "curriculum".
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 22, 2022, 09:53:28 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 22, 2022, 01:08:06 AM
If I wanted to go ahead and lose my lunch, I might read the homosexualist propaganda books in question.

So the mask just slips.

Dude, get help.

Quote
But the question remaineth-- do parents, via their elected representatives and the educators hired thereby, have the right to prevent indoctrinative material fundamentally hostile to the values of said parents from appearing in their children's school library, or do they not?  Why or why not?

About the same proportion that parents have the right to remove books about Emmet Till or Martin Luther King.  About the same as we value the values of the KKK or Storm Front.

The librarians have a job.  We should respect their professional opinions as we hope people will respect ours in our own fields of expertise.  For some reason, certain people seem to think their own personal prejudices and religious values should dictate what other people think and do and then are hypocritically furious when their values are challenged.

About the same level of authority that any parent can break the law just because they don't like something.

About equal to the parents who actually DO WANT said material about same-parent households in the school library because it reflects their values and the lessons they want to inculcate in their children.

So no, your whackjob bigot parents cannot dictate what is in the school library.

Quote
As to lying in polls, one would just have to be a dunce to disbelieve that such actions occur. 

Prove it.  One would have to be a dunce to believe anything you say at this point.

Quote
Hell, I read several articles in objective news sources just around this fall's elections, lamenting this problem, something which has apparently become increasingly problematic to pollsters, who do not know what if anything they could do about it.   

Cite them.

And even if this is true, so what?  Why should we care what weak-minded, cowardly people think?

Quote
If I knew the solution, I would share it... but perhaps the better solution is to eliminate polls altogether, which on a whole host of issues and political races really do not seem to do much good, to have anything worthwhile to offer.

In other words, eliminate anything that tells you what you don't want to hear.  Typical.

It's time to go take a nap on your My Pillow.  You've lost this particular battle, kay.  You will have to find some other pathological hatred now.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 22, 2022, 10:00:08 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 22, 2022, 07:34:24 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on December 22, 2022, 07:07:02 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 22, 2022, 01:08:06 AM
If I wanted to go ahead and lose my lunch, I might read the homosexualist propaganda books in question.

Heather has Two Mommies will do that to you?

I think the bigger, and more important, issue is the casting of parents who don't have the same ideology as the educational decision-makers as hostile bigots.

You may call them whatever you like.  I call them hostile bigots.  That's a good way of putting it, actually.

Quote
A decade or two back, there was a push to deal with school bullying, which was long overdue. It is appropriate for students to learn to treat everyone with respect.  This does not require any specific ideological view about all kinds of matters of personal identity. The change since then has been to try to root out wrongthink, rather than to regulate behaviour. This is not only worrying, but it is extremely arrogant to suggest that educators or administrators, who don't necessarily even have children of their own, know more about what is in childrens' best interests than their own parents.

BTW, your parents and admin who are removing Queer, There and Everywhere-----that's not an attempt by Orwellian Ministers of Propaganda to remove "wrongthink?" 

Quote
Furthermore, given the less--than-stellar educational outcomes in schools, students need much more focus on academic skills as it is; time spent on political indoctrination is only going to make their academic development suffer.

We're talking four books, Marshy, in the library.  Kids should know about the world.  Keep your "political indoctrination" out of their lives.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 22, 2022, 10:06:34 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 22, 2022, 08:21:46 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on December 22, 2022, 07:43:10 AM
Please. It is a book. In the library. Not a curriculum, not required reading.

If teachers ever read to their classes, and anything in the library is fair game, then being in the library does, in effect, make it "required reading" or "curriculum".

No.

Now you are just looking for straws to justify your prejudice.

Imagine how people viewed interracial marriage seventy or even fifty years ago...or even now.  I am betting their are a number of people in Texas who view your marriage as illegitimate.  I know there would be everywhere I've ever lived, and that's a fair number of places by now.

Your head could also be on the chopping block, Marshy and Mrs. Marshy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on December 22, 2022, 01:16:09 PM
I am not sure that this is useful, but what the heck.

1) Not for the first time, Wahoo here has exhorted me to 'get help'.  Unless I greatly misinterpret his meaning, he is suggesting that my opposition to homosexuality is indicative of some sort of mental illness, for which the potential solution is some sort of psychotherapy.   Obviously if I have erred in so interpreting, I ask forgiveness and for an explanation correcting my error.   But assuming that I am not misinterpreting  here, I ask him to tell me a) what mental illness do I need help for, an b) what psychotherapeutic practices might provide such assistance?

2) Librarians working in schools are indeed school employees, and are not hired to simply be given carte blanche to choose (and to NOT choose) whatever books they do and do not want to choose.   So on what proper criteria, and by who/ what authority, can and should the selection decisions of such librarians be limited/ overseen/ controlled?   I again hearken back to the analogy of the Latin teacher, who does not get carte blanche to select whatever textbooks suit his fancy-- I have actually had to use *bad textbooks*, operating under bad pedagogical principles, and just have had to make do.

3) Unless Wahoo really is a dunce, he has to acknowledge that people can and do lie on polls, and, more importantly perhaps, that it is indeed impossible for any pollster or subsequent scholarly researcher, to demonstrate that any given pollee has actually lied in any given circumstance.   And, well, pollsters do recognize this difficulty but really cannot do anything about it.  And, as the 'Yes Prime Minister' snippet I referenced pointed out, polls can indeed be manipulated by the way one phrases the question, and/or, by the way one selects the pollees.   And, of course, even the best and most impartial polls that also reveal a clear polling preference for any particular viewpoint on any particular issue should not necessarily be used as a cudgel by any politicians to simply do in accordance with the majority viewpoint in said poll, but rather real statesmanship requires political leaders to act in accordance with best practices, regardless of the popularity of said actions.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 22, 2022, 01:27:04 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 22, 2022, 01:16:09 PM
I am not sure that this is useful, but what the heck.

Unless I greatly misinterpret his meaning, he is suggesting that my opposition to homosexuality is indicative of some sort of mental illness, for which the potential solution is some sort of psychotherapy....But assuming that I am not misinterpreting  here, I ask him to tell me a) what mental illness do I need help for, an b) what psychotherapeutic practices might provide such assistance?

Rage.  Obsession.  Repression perhaps?  Not sure.  You just come across as very unbalanced.

Quote
2) Librarians working in schools are indeed school employees, and are not hired to simply be given carte blanche to choose (and to NOT choose) whatever books they do and do not want to choose.   

None of us have carte blanche----even pornographers have to obey the law----but this is particularly  true for those of us in education.

But we are talking four books written for children and adolescents about important issues facing their world.  That is within school librarians' purview.  They were doing their jobs as they saw fit.

Quote
Unless Wahoo really is a dunce, he has to acknowledge that people can and do lie on polls,

You've tried the stupid "dunce" shtick once already.  It does not work.

A dunce comes to a message board, makes a claim, claims to have read evidence for the claim in  "objective" publications, cannot cite said publications, and then admits there is no way to prove hu's claim.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 22, 2022, 01:31:49 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 22, 2022, 10:00:08 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 22, 2022, 07:34:24 AM

I think the bigger, and more important, issue is the casting of parents who don't have the same ideology as the educational decision-makers as hostile bigots.

You may call them whatever you like.  I call them hostile bigots.  That's a good way of putting it, actually.

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 17, 2022, 10:05:47 AM
It seems to me that higher ed is really failing on many fronts, the adjunct army in particular.  And, as Big-D points out, there is no real fix for it.  America has the wealth (look at how much the new B-21 stealth bomber costs), it just wants to lowball education and then blame colleges for the rising costs of doing business. 

Is it possible there's some correlation between the support people have for funding of post-secondary education and their being identified as hostile bigots for their questions about public school?


Quote
Quote
A decade or two back, there was a push to deal with school bullying, which was long overdue. It is appropriate for students to learn to treat everyone with respect.  This does not require any specific ideological view about all kinds of matters of personal identity. The change since then has been to try to root out wrongthink, rather than to regulate behaviour. This is not only worrying, but it is extremely arrogant to suggest that educators or administrators, who don't necessarily even have children of their own, know more about what is in childrens' best interests than their own parents.

BTW, your parents and admin who are removing Queer, There and Everywhere-----that's not an attempt by Orwellian Ministers of Propaganda to remove "wrongthink?" 

Just to be clear; I never considered putting my kids in Christian school, since I had no interest in that kind of indoctrination from that side of the political spectrum either.

Busybodies who feel the need to try to tell children what to believe are dangerous, regardless of what specific ideology they espouse, because once they feel justified in doing it for some cause or other the bar is vastly lowered for the next "cause". Whatever hobby horse they have becomes something to pass on.


Quote
Quote
Furthermore, given the less--than-stellar educational outcomes in schools, students need much more focus on academic skills as it is; time spent on political indoctrination is only going to make their academic development suffer.

We're talking four books, Marshy, in the library.  Kids should know about the world.  Keep your "political indoctrination" out of their lives.

As I indicated earlier, I'm not too concerned about books being "in the library"; I'm much more concerned about books teachers read to their kids or require the kids to read.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on December 22, 2022, 01:37:19 PM
Almost all the books in the Texas Superintendent case were in the middle and high school collections. Kay keeps moving the goal post from what happened to the "sexual images" to elementary kids, and now his weak stomach for anything gay.

Kay: this was also one of the books that were removed. No sex at all, just good old fashioned bigotry: https://www.amazon.com/Michelle-Obama-Political-Alternator-Books/dp/1541597079
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 22, 2022, 01:45:32 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 22, 2022, 01:31:49 PM
Is it possible there's some correlation between the support people have for funding of post-secondary education and their being identified as hostile bigots for their questions about public school?

Ha!  Nice try.  Not.

We're just talking about prejudice here, plain and simple.

Quote
Busybodies who feel the need to try to tell children what to believe are dangerous, regardless of what specific ideology they espouse, because once they feel justified in doing it for some cause or other the bar is vastly lowered for the next "cause". Whatever hobby horse they have becomes something to pass on.

Been saying that all along.

Sure you want people weeding school libraries for wrongthink, Marshy?


Quote

As I indicated earlier, I'm not too concerned about books being "in the library"; I'm much more concerned about books teachers read to their kids or require the kids to read.

Okay.  So why are you posting on this thread?

What books are kids being forced to read that you object to?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on December 22, 2022, 06:36:29 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 22, 2022, 01:31:49 PM

Busybodies who feel the need to try to tell children what to believe are dangerous, regardless of what specific ideology they espouse, because once they feel justified in doing it for some cause or other the bar is vastly lowered for the next "cause". Whatever hobby horse they have becomes something to pass on.

Nobody is telling these kids to agree or disagree with what they are reading. They are just telling the stories of people whose experiences and lives vary from one another.

How is this a problem?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on December 22, 2022, 06:39:25 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 22, 2022, 01:16:09 PM
I am not sure that this is useful, but what the heck.

1) Not for the first time, Wahoo here has exhorted me to 'get help'.  Unless I greatly misinterpret his meaning, he is suggesting that my opposition to homosexuality is indicative of some sort of mental illness, for which the potential solution is some sort of psychotherapy.   Obviously if I have erred in so interpreting, I ask forgiveness and for an explanation correcting my error.   But assuming that I am not misinterpreting  here, I ask him to tell me a) what mental illness do I need help for, an b) what psychotherapeutic practices might provide such assistance?

Unless you plan on having sex with the person in question, what business of yours is their sexual orientation?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on December 22, 2022, 09:17:33 PM
What?   I have asked this, ahem, individual, who continues to avoid my arguments, and who has made the hideous claim that I am mentally ill, because I am evincing opposition to homosexuality.  I am opposed to homosexuality.   Just like most Americans, although these days many have largely been browbeaten into toleration for alternative marriage relationship schemes (just not ones liberals do not like, such as polygamy), and do not want to let anyone know that they still hold to views that folks like wahoo disapprove of.   Look what he has accused me of, mental illness resulting from my views here... it is no slippery slope argument to recognize that the potential misuse of mental health diagnoses to police what marshy rightly calls wrongthink is, beyond just being bad in and of itself, fraught with loads of potential extremely doubleplusungood outcomes.

Now I just have to reiterate that it is absolutely within the purview of educational admins and school boards to reflect the broad mores of their communities and prevent exposure of children to literature that those parents disapprove of on moral grounds, esp since those same librarians are almost without any question whatsover not stocking those school libraries with literature that actually, ahem, does advocate the sexual views of the parents in question.

The reluctance of this individual to acknowledge the obvious (but empirically unprovable) reality that people can and do lie on polls is just lame.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 22, 2022, 09:37:34 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 22, 2022, 09:17:33 PM
What?   I have asked this, ahem, individual, who continues to avoid my arguments, and who has made the hideous claim that I am mentally ill, because I am evincing opposition to homosexuality.

What arguments have I "avoided?"  I've actually quoted and responded to your posts point-by-point as I am now.

You're the one who ignored the articles I posted about children raised by same-sex parents who are as well-adjusted as children raised by traditional families. 

You ignored my challenge to you to post your reams of scholarship indicating that children raised by same-sex couples have social problems.

You are the one who pretended the excerpts I posted from the Bible were not there. 

You will ignore them again after I am done posting tonight.   Ignored all these.

Pretend you did not.

I told you why I suspect you are at least unhinged.

If you don't like something, you just pretend it is not there, huh?

Quote
I am opposed to homosexuality.   

You've got a screw loose about LGBTQ people.

Quote
Just like most Americans, although these days many have largely been browbeaten into toleration for alternative marriage relationship schemes

Prove it.

Cite your sources.

Quote
(just not ones liberals do not like, such as polygamy), and do not want to let anyone know that they still hold to views that folks like wahoo disapprove of.   

So conservatives are okay with polygamy? 

Personally, I'm not opposed to polygamy.  It's not for me, but as long as there are consenting adults, that is their business.

Homosexuality and polygamy are nothing new to humanity.  There is a fair amount of polygamy in the Bible.  And somehow the species has continued----no one is marrying llamas or basketballs or whatever. 

Quote
Look what he has accused me of, mental illness resulting from my views here...

Feeling victimized?  Don't like it when you are accused of being weird, outside the norm, or mentally ill?  Feel that I have "misused a mental health diagnosis?"  Taste of your own medicine bitter in your mouth?

Gosh, imagine who LGBTQ people feel when they listen to someone like you.

I sure touched a nerve with that one, didn't I?

Quote
it is no slippery slope argument to recognize that the potential misuse of mental health diagnoses to police what marshy rightly calls wrongthink is, beyond just being bad in and of itself, fraught with loads of potential extremely doubleplusungood outcomes.

So?  Stop trying to change the way people think.  I DO see a slippery slope. 

Quote
Now I just have to reiterate that it is absolutely within the purview of educational admins and school boards to reflect the broad mores of their communities and prevent exposure of children to literature that those parents disapprove of on moral grounds, esp since those same librarians are almost without any question whatsover not stocking those school libraries with literature that actually, ahem, does advocate the sexual views of the parents in question.

Now I just have to reiterate that the law applies to all communities in the United States no matter how narrow-minded the parents might be.  I also have to reiterate that the parents who WANT those books on the shelves have a right to have them on the selves, and I have to reiterate that it was the professional decision of the librarians, vested with the responsibility to stock the school library, to stock those books.

Go ahead and pretend I did not answer your arguments.

And, ahem, why are you so hung up on sex?  In your world, is that the only think that defines people?  Do you think that this is a normal, healthy, sane hang-up you've got here?

Quote
The reluctance of this individual to acknowledge the obvious (but empirically unprovable) reality that people can and do lie on polls is just lame.

And THIS is weird too.

Prove it.  I see nothing "obvious" about your very lame claim.  (This, BTW, clearly proves that I answered your arguments----I just don't buy that you've actually made any "arguments."  For instance, how can something be "obvious" but not "empirically provable?"  Think about it for just a second...and then admit that you made that up because you don't want to accept the changes in society.)

I think I am wasting my time on you.  You've already lost.  It will take a generation or so, but your prejudice is dying in the world.  Cling to your bigotry----it's not unhealthy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 23, 2022, 05:34:12 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 22, 2022, 01:45:32 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 22, 2022, 01:31:49 PM
Is it possible there's some correlation between the support people have for funding of post-secondary education and their being identified as hostile bigots for their questions about public school?

Ha!  Nice try.  Not.


Any commentary I've ever seen about controversy about things like CRT, gender theory, etc. in elementary schools ties those things back to humanities at universities, where the school teachers learned them. Nobody ever claims these were just ideas they picked up on Tik Tok.

The public (whether they agree with these ideas or not) understand where they came from.


Quote
Quote
Busybodies who feel the need to try to tell children what to believe are dangerous, regardless of what specific ideology they espouse, because once they feel justified in doing it for some cause or other the bar is vastly lowered for the next "cause". Whatever hobby horse they have becomes something to pass on.

Been saying that all along.

Sure you want people weeding school libraries for wrongthink, Marshy?


Quote

As I indicated earlier, I'm not too concerned about books being "in the library"; I'm much more concerned about books teachers read to their kids or require the kids to read.

Okay.  So why are you posting on this thread?


Because it is unlikely that many books will stay "in the library". There is a circular argument:
"Having books in the library isn't a problem because they're not being forced on children"
"Reading this book to children is OK because it's been approved for the library."

Quote from: ciao_yall on December 22, 2022, 06:36:29 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 22, 2022, 01:31:49 PM

Busybodies who feel the need to try to tell children what to believe are dangerous, regardless of what specific ideology they espouse, because once they feel justified in doing it for some cause or other the bar is vastly lowered for the next "cause". Whatever hobby horse they have becomes something to pass on.

Nobody is telling these kids to agree or disagree with what they are reading. They are just telling the stories of people whose experiences and lives vary from one another.

How is this a problem?

People who talk about things like "power imbalances" should be consistent, especially when talking about the education of children. A school teacher has a level of authority comparable to that of parents. Kids are not expected, and certainly not invited, to disagree with their teachers on anything. Any kid knows that challenging an authority figure is likely to have consequences. (And this is without even mentioning the huge imbalance in experience, background information, etc. which would give a teacher a ridiculous advantage in any debate with a child, even if the adult were to argue for something like the earth being flat.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 23, 2022, 09:56:20 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle link=topic=2202.msg120101#msg120101 date=1671802452
i]Any[/i] commentary I've ever seen about controversy about things like CRT, gender theory, etc. in elementary schools ties those things back to humanities at universities, where the school teachers learned them. Nobody ever claims these were just ideas they picked up on Tik Tok.

The public (whether they agree with these ideas or not) understand where they came from.

What have you seen?  Post them, please.  Let's see where this commentary comes from.

Does "the public understand where they came from," or do indoctrinated rightwingnuts think they know where these ideas come from? 

Remember that CRT has been around for decades but it only recently became an agitprop for rightwing media----so I would be hesitant to put too much stock on commentary at this point.

I would have thought you were smarter and better than to fall into the cliche 'they-are-indoctinating-our-children' ploy.  Liberal ideas about gender and sexuality have been gaining ground in all quarters of society for decades.

Quote

As I indicated earlier, I'm not too concerned about books being "in the library"; I'm much more concerned about books teachers read to their kids or require the kids to read.

Okay.  So why are you posting on this thread?

Quote

Because it is unlikely that many books will stay "in the library". There is a circular argument:
"Having books in the library isn't a problem because they're not being forced on children"
"Reading this book to children is OK because it's been approved for the library."

I hate to keep asking for evidence of these slippery slope arguments, but so often, as with this one, your rationale seems improvised.

Do you have examples of these books being taught in classrooms?

What is the problem with these books being taught in classrooms unless one has prejudicial pathologies?

As the husband in an interracial marriage, how would you feel if, say, Sean Hannity or a Texas school board decided it was immoral to be married to someone outside your race?  I see you want to ignore that question.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on December 23, 2022, 10:33:24 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 22, 2022, 09:17:33 PM
What?   I have asked this, ahem, individual, who continues to avoid my arguments, and who has made the hideous claim that I am mentally ill, because I am evincing opposition to homosexuality.  I am opposed to homosexuality. 

Again... why do you care? Unless you would like to have sex with a specific person, and they with you, how is it any of your business with which gender(s) they conduct such activities?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 23, 2022, 11:23:43 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on December 23, 2022, 10:33:24 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 22, 2022, 09:17:33 PM
What?   I have asked this, ahem, individual, who continues to avoid my arguments, and who has made the hideous claim that I am mentally ill, because I am evincing opposition to homosexuality.  I am opposed to homosexuality. 

Again... why do you care? Unless you would like to have sex with a specific person, and they with you, how is it any of your business with which gender(s) they conduct such activities?

What is too bad is that kay's posts going back are intelligent and insightful, if slightly prolix, about curriculum, Latin 101, and academia generally.  Then came this Ashley Griner business and something just exploded out of this dude/dudette. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 25, 2022, 02:04:56 PM
New Lines Magazine: An Academic Is Fired Over a Medieval Painting of the Prophet Muhammad (https://newlinesmag.com/argument/academic-is-fired-over-a-medieval-painting-of-the-prophet-muhammad/)

Lower Deck:
Quote
The dismissal of an instructor at Hamline University on baseless charges of 'Islamophobia' raises concerns about freedom on campus

Quote
The "Islamophobic incident" catalyzed plenty of administrative commentary and media coverage at the university. Among others, it formed the subject of a second Oracle article, which noted that a faculty member had included in their global survey of art history a session on Islamic art, which offered an optional visual analysis and discussion of a famous medieval Islamic painting of the Prophet Muhammad. A student complained about the image's inclusion in the course and led efforts to press administrators for a response. After that, the university's associate vice president of inclusive excellence (AVPIE) declared the classroom exercise "undeniably inconsiderate, disrespectful and Islamophobic."

Neither before nor after these declarations was the faculty member given a public platform or forum to explain the classroom lecture and activity. To fill in the gap, on Dec. 6, an essay written by a Hamline professor of religion who teaches Islam explaining the incident along with the historical context and aesthetic value of Islamic images of Muhammad was published on The Oracle's website. The essay was taken down two days later. One day after that, Hamline's president and AVPIE sent a message to all employees stating that "respect for the observant Muslim students in that classroom should have superseded academic freedom." The essay's censorship and the subsequent email by two top university administrators raise serious concerns about freedom of speech and academic freedom at the university.

The instructor was released from their spring term teaching at Hamline, and its AVPIE went on the record as stating: "It was decided it was best that this faculty member was no longer part of the Hamline community." In other words, an instructor who showed an Islamic painting during a visual analysis — a basic exercise for art history training — was publicly impugned for hate speech and dismissed thereafter, without access to due process.


The student newspaper, The Oracle, with its articles:

https://hamlineoracle.com/10750/news/who-belongs/

https://hamlineoracle.com/4293/news/conversation-combats-media-perpetuated-fear/


Another editorial on the event:

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2022/12/24/professor-fired-for-showing-art-class-image-of-muhammad-with-his-face-visible-something-not-unusual-in-the-history-of-islamic-art-students-and-university-go-wild-with-crazy-allegations-of-islamop/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 26, 2022, 07:14:58 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 25, 2022, 02:04:56 PM
New Lines Magazine: An Academic Is Fired Over a Medieval Painting of the Prophet Muhammad (https://newlinesmag.com/argument/academic-is-fired-over-a-medieval-painting-of-the-prophet-muhammad/)


Quote
Neither before nor after these declarations was the faculty member given a public platform or forum to explain the classroom lecture and activity. To fill in the gap, on Dec. 6, an essay written by a Hamline professor of religion who teaches Islam explaining the incident along with the historical context and aesthetic value of Islamic images of Muhammad was published on The Oracle's website. The essay was taken down two days later. One day after that, Hamline's president and AVPIE sent a message to all employees stating that "respect for the observant Muslim students in that classroom should have superseded academic freedom." The essay's censorship and the subsequent email by two top university administrators raise serious concerns about freedom of speech and academic freedom at the university.

The instructor was released from their spring term teaching at Hamline, and its AVPIE went on the record as stating: "It was decided it was best that this faculty member was no longer part of the Hamline community." In other words, an instructor who showed an Islamic painting during a visual analysis — a basic exercise for art history training — was publicly impugned for hate speech and dismissed thereafter, without access to due process.


Wahoo, since you posted this, I'd be fascinated to hear your take on what university administrators should have said publicly when this came up, to be both respectful of Muslim students and academic freedom. Should they have said that "respect for academic freedom should have superseded the wishes of observant Muslim students in that classroom" or something of that nature?


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: waterboy on December 26, 2022, 08:53:33 AM
For me, the professor did the correct thing in announcing this was going to happen and giving the students the opportunity to opt out. If we acceded to not talking about things that offended people, there probably wouldn't be much to discuss. I think the professor was treated terribly.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 26, 2022, 11:54:34 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 26, 2022, 07:14:58 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 25, 2022, 02:04:56 PM
New Lines Magazine: An Academic Is Fired Over a Medieval Painting of the Prophet Muhammad (https://newlinesmag.com/argument/academic-is-fired-over-a-medieval-painting-of-the-prophet-muhammad/)


Quote
Neither before nor after these declarations was the faculty member given a public platform or forum to explain the classroom lecture and activity. To fill in the gap, on Dec. 6, an essay written by a Hamline professor of religion who teaches Islam explaining the incident along with the historical context and aesthetic value of Islamic images of Muhammad was published on The Oracle's website. The essay was taken down two days later. One day after that, Hamline's president and AVPIE sent a message to all employees stating that "respect for the observant Muslim students in that classroom should have superseded academic freedom." The essay's censorship and the subsequent email by two top university administrators raise serious concerns about freedom of speech and academic freedom at the university.

The instructor was released from their spring term teaching at Hamline, and its AVPIE went on the record as stating: "It was decided it was best that this faculty member was no longer part of the Hamline community." In other words, an instructor who showed an Islamic painting during a visual analysis — a basic exercise for art history training — was publicly impugned for hate speech and dismissed thereafter, without access to due process.


Wahoo, since you posted this, I'd be fascinated to hear your take on what university administrators should have said publicly when this came up, to be both respectful of Muslim students and academic freedom. Should they have said that "respect for academic freedom should have superseded the wishes of observant Muslim students in that classroom" or something of that nature?

Well, firstly, I am simply cataloging these stories when I find them.  We have a form of hysteria banging around our schools right now coming from all angles.  Four innocuous books in a high school library ignite a federal investigation because some people cannot stand other people who are not like them, for instance.  Or the University of Idaho has to pay $90K to Christian students because admin panic over a peaceful and legitimate campus debate and issue a "no contact" order. 

But since you asked...

Admittedly, it is easy to armchair quarterback.  What would I, or any of us, do if we were an administrator who suddenly finds themselves confronted with the potential for protests and headlines and calls for my head because a minority student made a charge regarding racial or religious bias?  It would take a strong personality not to panic (which is what I suspect happened at the U of Idaho and Oberlin and countless other campuses); it would seem that the default is to leap dramatically to the defense of the complaining student and to thoroughly denounce the "offending" faculty member. 

And part of this gestalt is the reaction of students themselves.  I didn't much care for the Netflix series The Chair (predictable in many ways and then boringly unlikely in others), but I did like the subplot involving a professor who makes an ill-advised, off-the-cuff comment in class and is accused of being a Nazi.  No matter how the professor character tries to explain, the students insist on being outraged and the administration insists on extremes of damage control.  This seems like accurate satire to me.

So, I admit that, if I were in the captain's seat, I might do exactly what admin in this case did.

However!  I HOPE that I would have the strength of character not to ruin the career of an academic (not to mention exposing the school to a lawsuit----which is what I hope happens) over a perfectly legitimate, voluntary, and announced exercise appropriate for the subject matter of the class and supported by other academics and subject-matter experts because of a student's phobic hypersensitivity.  And I say "phobic hypersensitivity" realizing that I too might feel the same way as a Muslim growing up in the two decades since 9/11...but that does not change the dynamic.

That is a long way around saying that I would hope, if I were the provost (or whatever), that I would say something along the lines of

'While we realize and respect that images of the Prophet Mohammad are sacred and considered offensive to those who believe that the Prophet should not be portrayed, we also recognize that Persian paintings from the middle ages, created by practicing Muslims of the era, are also important and beautiful artifacts from art history.  In an effort to better understand cultures from around the world and from other ages, we support the academic freedom of our faculty to respectfully engage..." blah, blah, blah boilerplate, and then suggest a public forum in which to discuss the controversy, including the student who made the complaint.  Or something like that.  I hope. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on December 26, 2022, 08:48:09 PM
Awright I have been cogitatin' on it, and I guess, what the hey, I will answer the question as to why it is I have been so strident in my views here.  Put simply, there are several factors: 1) I believe that, irrespective of religious views on the matter, non-monogamous sexual relationships ,and indeed any sexual relationships outside of a one man-one woman marital one, are greatly injurious to public morality, the family, children, etc., and my religious views only intensify and solidify my thinking here, 2) I am concerned about the tendency amongst ostensibly bible-believing evangelicals to ignore scriptures that violate the trends and fashions of the day, and these not only including those concerning sexual mores, and, like it or not, well, ahem.... 3) I am concerned that our acceptance of alternative sexual mores (including abortion on demand) greatly risks our country being punished by God.  I get that this last thing is likely very strange to almost all of ye here, but it is what it is.   I read the scriptures, and I do not like what I find.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 26, 2022, 10:03:49 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 26, 2022, 08:48:09 PM
Awright I have been cogitatin' on it, and I guess, what the hey, I will answer the question as to why it is I have been so strident in my views here.  Put simply, there are several factors: 1) I believe that, irrespective of religious views on the matter, non-monogamous sexual relationships ,and indeed any sexual relationships outside of a one man-one woman marital one, are greatly injurious to public morality, the family, children, etc., and my religious views only intensify and solidify my thinking here, 2) I am concerned about the tendency amongst ostensibly bible-believing evangelicals to ignore scriptures that violate the trends and fashions of the day, and these not only including those concerning sexual mores, and, like it or not, well, ahem.... 3) I am concerned that our acceptance of alternative sexual mores (including abortion on demand) greatly risks our country being punished by God.  I get that this last thing is likely very strange to almost all of ye here, but it is what it is.   I read the scriptures, and I do not like what I find.

So, the long and short of it is that your Christian beliefs dictate your views regarding LGBTQ.  Yeah, okay.  You sure took a long way around finding that out.

As a classicist you know all about Gilgamesh, Zoroaster, the rebirth of Osiris, Deucalion, the Essenes, the Apocrypha, and the many, many revisions and translations of the Bible throughout millennia.  You understand metaphor, parable, and analog.  You must know a fair amount about ancient history.

Do you eat ham?

Do you bring two doves to a priest after the birth of a child?

Well, never mind.  The thing about religion is that it is often----not always, but often----insulated from these kinds of discussions.  Faith is nonempirical.  It does not require history or logic, it simply requires that you believe.  You can believe in UFOs in the tail of a comet if you want or the prophetic power of the Tarot deck-----and who can tell you differently?

Fair enough.  You read the scripture and it dictates your fear.

Your method of saving culture seems to be backfiring, however.

Specifically, 1) prove it.  Prove that homosexuality is bad for culture.  Infidelity, polyamory, abortion, and homosexuality have always been part of the human fabric, rightly or wrongly.  You seem most fixated on LGBTQ issues, or at least they sure fire you up.  You can "believe" whatever you want but that system no longer seems to be working.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on December 26, 2022, 10:28:53 PM
I suppose we could continue the discussion on the merits and effects of homosexuality later, but I am not sure anyone else here would want this.   But I do have to comment on your use of various Levitical laws, and how Christians do not follow these laws.   You do realize that things like the dietary laws and the OT animal sacrifice systems were specifically and unambuously repealed in the NT, right?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 27, 2022, 04:46:43 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 26, 2022, 11:54:34 AM

That is a long way around saying that I would hope, if I were the provost (or whatever), that I would say something along the lines of

'While we realize and respect that images of the Prophet Mohammad are sacred and considered offensive to those who believe that the Prophet should not be portrayed, we also recognize that Persian paintings from the middle ages, created by practicing Muslims of the era, are also important and beautiful artifacts from art history.  In an effort to better understand cultures from around the world and from other ages, we support the academic freedom of our faculty to respectfully engage..." blah, blah, blah boilerplate, and then suggest a public forum in which to discuss the controversy, including the student who made the complaint.  Or something like that.  I hope.

Thanks. That's a reasonable response.

A question I have for anyone in general, is this: When did we as a a society forget that young people have lots of passion but very little experience, so that what gets them upset and what they think needs to happen are understandably over-the-top?

In all of the "culture wars", the really disturbing part is that those who should be the "adults in the room", e.g. parents, academics, journalists, university administrators, etc. just automatically treat not only the emotional response of young people as genuine, but their specific demands for action as reasonable and even necessary. I am not remotely an expert on everything (or even anything) that I teach, but I know enough more than my students to be able to increase their knowledge. Admitting that is not arrogance; it's just the logical justification for why I was hired.

Maybe much of this will continue for another decade or so until enough millenials and Gen Z's have children of their own and realize their need to arbitrarily assert their own authority for their kids' benefit.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on December 27, 2022, 08:57:21 AM
I'd just like to give a shout out to promiscuous gay sex as a moral good.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on December 27, 2022, 09:07:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 25, 2022, 02:04:56 PM
New Lines Magazine: An Academic Is Fired Over a Medieval Painting of the Prophet Muhammad (https://newlinesmag.com/argument/academic-is-fired-over-a-medieval-painting-of-the-prophet-muhammad/)

Lower Deck:
Quote
The dismissal of an instructor at Hamline University on baseless charges of 'Islamophobia' raises concerns about freedom on campus

Quote
The "Islamophobic incident" catalyzed plenty of administrative commentary and media coverage at the university. Among others, it formed the subject of a second Oracle article, which noted that a faculty member had included in their global survey of art history a session on Islamic art, which offered an optional visual analysis and discussion of a famous medieval Islamic painting of the Prophet Muhammad. A student complained about the image's inclusion in the course and led efforts to press administrators for a response. After that, the university's associate vice president of inclusive excellence (AVPIE) declared the classroom exercise "undeniably inconsiderate, disrespectful and Islamophobic."

Neither before nor after these declarations was the faculty member given a public platform or forum to explain the classroom lecture and activity. To fill in the gap, on Dec. 6, an essay written by a Hamline professor of religion who teaches Islam explaining the incident along with the historical context and aesthetic value of Islamic images of Muhammad was published on The Oracle's website. The essay was taken down two days later. One day after that, Hamline's president and AVPIE sent a message to all employees stating that "respect for the observant Muslim students in that classroom should have superseded academic freedom." The essay's censorship and the subsequent email by two top university administrators raise serious concerns about freedom of speech and academic freedom at the university.

The instructor was released from their spring term teaching at Hamline, and its AVPIE went on the record as stating: "It was decided it was best that this faculty member was no longer part of the Hamline community." In other words, an instructor who showed an Islamic painting during a visual analysis — a basic exercise for art history training — was publicly impugned for hate speech and dismissed thereafter, without access to due process.


The student newspaper, The Oracle, with its articles:

https://hamlineoracle.com/10750/news/who-belongs/

https://hamlineoracle.com/4293/news/conversation-combats-media-perpetuated-fear/


Another editorial on the event:

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2022/12/24/professor-fired-for-showing-art-class-image-of-muhammad-with-his-face-visible-something-not-unusual-in-the-history-of-islamic-art-students-and-university-go-wild-with-crazy-allegations-of-islamop/
The prof gave a trigger warning and everything, and still ended up fired!  Without any sort of due process.  And it wasn't even an anti-Muslim image in any way--merely a product of a different tradition within Islam.  And most of the college's community seems afraid even to speak up in support of the prof.  This is pretty appalling.

I guess as a practical matter, other instructors in Islamic studies and religious studies courses going forward are going to have to content themselves with talking about the fact that some Islamic traditions had no problems with artistic depictions of The Prophet, without attempting actually to show any such images.  Even as an option.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 27, 2022, 10:31:26 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 26, 2022, 10:28:53 PM
I suppose we could continue the discussion on the merits and effects of homosexuality later, but I am not sure anyone else here would want this.   But I do have to comment on your use of various Levitical laws, and how Christians do not follow these laws.   You do realize that things like the dietary laws and the OT animal sacrifice systems were specifically and unambuously repealed in the NT, right?

No.  That is interesting.  Do you have a source that explains these changes?  What I find are atheists websites pointing out the contradictions or Christian apologists trying to justify the contradictions.

As far as a further conversation, I have no more really to say.  I grew up Episcopalian and considered becoming a priest, but in the end my faith was not that deep. 

My only problem with Christianity, contradictions and all, is when Christians attempt to foist their moral or religious views on other people or when Christians use the Bible to justify prejudice.   
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 27, 2022, 10:35:56 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 27, 2022, 04:46:43 AM

A question I have for anyone in general, is this: When did we as a a society forget that young people have lots of passion but very little experience, so that what gets them upset and what they think needs to happen are understandably over-the-top?


This is not necessarily true, Oh Mighty Marsh Beast.  Plenty of kids are perfectly rational beings, and more than plenty of adults are passionate in the idiotic sense.  Just look at the Trumpees.

You may just be observing the perennial generation gap in North American culture in which the kids appear "over-the-top" because they do not align with our own elder ideas and ideals.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 27, 2022, 03:11:00 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 27, 2022, 10:35:56 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 27, 2022, 04:46:43 AM

A question I have for anyone in general, is this: When did we as a a society forget that young people have lots of passion but very little experience, so that what gets them upset and what they think needs to happen are understandably over-the-top?


This is not necessarily true, Oh Mighty Marsh Beast.  Plenty of kids are perfectly rational beings, and more than plenty of adults are passionate in the idiotic sense.  Just look at the Trumpees.

You may just be observing the perennial generation gap in North American culture in which the kids appear "over-the-top" because they do not align with our own elder ideas and ideals.

But student newspapers, for instance, have forever been very easily enraged. Even if their cause is good, they are anything but measured in their response. Anyone here seen a student newspaper that was not extremely outspoken?
 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 27, 2022, 04:54:33 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 27, 2022, 03:11:00 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 27, 2022, 10:35:56 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 27, 2022, 04:46:43 AM

A question I have for anyone in general, is this: When did we as a a society forget that young people have lots of passion but very little experience, so that what gets them upset and what they think needs to happen are understandably over-the-top?


This is not necessarily true, Oh Mighty Marsh Beast.  Plenty of kids are perfectly rational beings, and more than plenty of adults are passionate in the idiotic sense.  Just look at the Trumpees.

You may just be observing the perennial generation gap in North American culture in which the kids appear "over-the-top" because they do not align with our own elder ideas and ideals.

But student newspapers, for instance, have forever been very easily enraged. Even if their cause is good, they are anything but measured in their response. Anyone here seen a student newspaper that was not extremely outspoken?


I find the teapot-tempests on FOX News, occasionally on CNN, and always on Newsmax, One American News and the like.  These are the publications driving the culture wars.

I have actually never seen a grenade in a student newspaper.

I hate to keep asking this (and usually no one answers), but what student newspapers are you talking about?  I'm just asking.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on December 27, 2022, 06:10:27 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on December 26, 2022, 08:48:09 PM
Awright I have been cogitatin' on it, and I guess, what the hey, I will answer the question as to why it is I have been so strident in my views here.  Put simply, there are several factors: 1) I believe that, irrespective of religious views on the matter, non-monogamous sexual relationships ,and indeed any sexual relationships outside of a one man-one woman marital one, are greatly injurious to public morality, the family, children, etc., and my religious views only intensify and solidify my thinking here, 2) I am concerned about the tendency amongst ostensibly bible-believing evangelicals to ignore scriptures that violate the trends and fashions of the day, and these not only including those concerning sexual mores, and, like it or not, well, ahem.... 3) I am concerned that our acceptance of alternative sexual mores (including abortion on demand) greatly risks our country being punished by God.  I get that this last thing is likely very strange to almost all of ye here, but it is what it is.   I read the scriptures, and I do not like what I find.

Thanks for further explanation. My sister and her wife are of completely monogamous and legally married. So in that case it would simply be that they are gay that is your issue, correct?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 28, 2022, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 27, 2022, 04:54:33 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 27, 2022, 03:11:00 PM


But student newspapers, for instance, have forever been very easily enraged. Even if their cause is good, they are anything but measured in their response. Anyone here seen a student newspaper that was not extremely outspoken?


I find the teapot-tempests on FOX News, occasionally on CNN, and always on Newsmax, One American News and the like.  These are the publications driving the culture wars.

I have actually never seen a grenade in a student newspaper.

I hate to keep asking this (and usually no one answers), but what student newspapers are you talking about?  I'm just asking.


How about "The Oracle", which you linked to, which was the voice of outrage in this story?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2022, 11:52:04 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 28, 2022, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 27, 2022, 04:54:33 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 27, 2022, 03:11:00 PM


But student newspapers, for instance, have forever been very easily enraged. Even if their cause is good, they are anything but measured in their response. Anyone here seen a student newspaper that was not extremely outspoken?


I find the teapot-tempests on FOX News, occasionally on CNN, and always on Newsmax, One American News and the like.  These are the publications driving the culture wars.

I have actually never seen a grenade in a student newspaper.

I hate to keep asking this (and usually no one answers), but what student newspapers are you talking about?  I'm just asking.


How about "The Oracle", which you linked to, which was the voice of outrage in this story?

??????????

I went back and reread the articles in question.  They are very straight forward news reporting.  They are actually well written.

An event happened on campus and they covered it objectively.

Specifically, what is "enraged" in either article?  Did I miss something?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 30, 2022, 07:29:23 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 28, 2022, 11:52:04 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 28, 2022, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 27, 2022, 04:54:33 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on December 27, 2022, 03:11:00 PM


But student newspapers, for instance, have forever been very easily enraged. Even if their cause is good, they are anything but measured in their response. Anyone here seen a student newspaper that was not extremely outspoken?


I find the teapot-tempests on FOX News, occasionally on CNN, and always on Newsmax, One American News and the like.  These are the publications driving the culture wars.

I have actually never seen a grenade in a student newspaper.

I hate to keep asking this (and usually no one answers), but what student newspapers are you talking about?  I'm just asking.


How about "The Oracle", which you linked to, which was the voice of outrage in this story?

??????????

I went back and reread the articles in question.  They are very straight forward news reporting.  They are actually well written.

An event happened on campus and they covered it objectively.

Specifically, what is "enraged" in either article?  Did I miss something?

How about the title of the first article?

"WHO BELONGS?
Classroom incident and administrative response raise questions for Muslim students."


The implication is that "belonging" in an institution implies never feeling uncomfortable. While the fact that the prof told people ahead of time, and gave them the option of not being there, the article assumes implicitly that the discomfort of students is the only important issue; whether or not the class was fulfilling the educational mission of the institution, or even whether the prof's actions were consistent with institutional policies were irrelevant.

How about the title of the second article:

"Conversation combats media perpetuated fear
American-Islamic Relations director challenges the hateful narrative of Islamophobia."


Given all of the reasons that the professor may have shown those images in the context of the class, the most likely interpretation assumed by the article is animosity to Muslims, including Muslim students in the class.

Objectivity? Not remotely.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 30, 2022, 11:08:48 AM
So that's it, huh? The headlines.  Bolded for emphasis, no less. 

Reeeeeeeaaaaally reaching buddy.

Again, those are pretty generic headlines that give a very basic overview of the articles (which it is not clear you actually read) and hopefully encourage patrons to read.

Not that it matters much anymore, but how should the headlines read? 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on December 30, 2022, 01:01:18 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 30, 2022, 11:08:48 AM
So that's it, huh? The headlines.  Bolded for emphasis, no less. 

Reeeeeeeaaaaally reaching buddy.

Again, those are pretty generic headlines that give a very basic overview of the articles (which it is not clear you actually read) and hopefully encourage patrons to read.

The tone of the first article, which is indicated by its title, is that there is no real question of whether or not the prof's actions were reasonable, and that the administration's response was not sufficiently quick or punitive.

Imagine there were conservative Christian students offended by an evolutionary biology class. Wouldn't it be legitimate to discuss when the educational goals of the institution ever supersede the religious sensibilities of some students?

There would be a lot of value in an objective article about how institutions have to approach issues like this, but this wasn't it.

Quote
Not that it matters much anymore, but how should the headlines read?

The headlines were an accurate representation of the tone of the articles; that's exactly the problem.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 30, 2022, 03:45:53 PM
Nah, Marshy.  The articles interviewed people from all angles and explained the situation in standard newspeak. 

You just made one of your typical dramatic blanket statements and, as usual, had nothing to back it up so you are pretending all sorts of things and throwing in a little martyrdom to cap it all off.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on December 30, 2022, 05:12:18 PM
I read the articles and don't understand the problem.

How is showing centuries-old paintings "Islamophobic?" Is talking about evolution "anti-Christian?"

This reminds me of the story of the USC linguistics professor accused of using the n-word. (https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/10/us/usc-chinese-professor-racism-intl-hnk-scli/index.html)

That said, both of these were in a virtual, rather than an in-person environment. I recall being in in-person class having lively discussions about potentially offensive topics and being able to read the room and manage the vibe. Yet in one online class, a student was very upset about the topic and when she finally shared, was audibly upset. I was supportive of her and think it calmed things down, still, had we been in the room I could have seen her reaction as it was happening.

Also it's a good things she spoke up in class rather than waiting for things to really build.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on December 31, 2022, 06:25:20 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on December 30, 2022, 05:12:18 PM
I read the articles and don't understand the problem.

How is showing centuries-old paintings "Islamophobic?" Is talking about evolution "anti-Christian?"

This reminds me of the story of the USC linguistics professor accused of using the n-word. (https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/10/us/usc-chinese-professor-racism-intl-hnk-scli/index.html)

That said, both of these were in a virtual, rather than an in-person environment. I recall being in in-person class having lively discussions about potentially offensive topics and being able to read the room and manage the vibe. Yet in one online class, a student was very upset about the topic and when she finally shared, was audibly upset. I was supportive of her and think it calmed things down, still, had we been in the room I could have seen her reaction as it was happening.

Also it's a good things she spoke up in class rather than waiting for things to really build.

That's a good point.  It's not only lab courses that just don't translate well to online.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on December 31, 2022, 07:55:49 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on December 30, 2022, 05:12:18 PM
I read the articles and don't understand the problem.

How is showing centuries-old paintings "Islamophobic?" Is talking about evolution "anti-Christian?"


I too don't understand the problem or even why the professor was fired. According to the Oracle article, as noted in "The New Lines Magazine",  https://newlinesmag.com/argument/academic-is-fired-over-a-medieval-painting-of-the-prophet-muhammad/
Quotea faculty member had included in their global survey of art history a session on Islamic art, which offered an optional visual analysis and discussion of a famous medieval Islamic painting of the Prophet Muhammad.
Quote...the university's associate vice president of inclusive excellence (AVPIE) declared the classroom exercise "undeniably inconsiderate, disrespectful and Islamophobic."

The painting in question, according to the article, is
Quote...is an authentic and irreplaceable work of art. It is included in one of the earliest Islamic illustrated histories, which often describe the biography of Muhammad and other historical events.

I have to agree with the article that
QuoteThe essay's censorship and the subsequent email by two top university administrators raise serious concerns about freedom of speech and academic freedom at the university.

What on earth is an associate vice president of inclusive excellence? Who comes up with such titles?!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Anon1787 on December 31, 2022, 01:23:19 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on December 31, 2022, 07:55:49 AM
What on earth is an associate vice president of inclusive excellence? Who comes up with such titles?!

The DEI Commissar has no particular expertise in the field and yet presumes to determine what is appropriate course content. I don't have much sympathy for overpaid, over-titled adminicritters who behave so cravenly.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on December 31, 2022, 01:45:59 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on December 31, 2022, 01:23:19 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on December 31, 2022, 07:55:49 AM
What on earth is an associate vice president of inclusive excellence? Who comes up with such titles?!

The DEI Commissar has no particular expertise in the field and yet presumes to determine what is appropriate course content. I don't have much sympathy for overpaid, over-titled adminicritters who behave so cravenly.

Christ! Even if the DEI Commissar had expertise in the field, his/her influence would be deadening to the knowledge finding and transmission enterprise, probably more so.

I am sorry to have to repeat the notion that it's best to let these places do whatever the hell they please. There are well over 3000 colleges and universities in the US and they can't all be crazy. For one thing, the more expensive the private, the crazier the policy. For another, public colleges are obliged to respect free speech. 

So, there's plenty of choice. If the rich want to dumb themselves down, let them. :-)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on December 31, 2022, 02:35:21 PM
Quote from: Anon1787 on December 31, 2022, 01:23:19 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on December 31, 2022, 07:55:49 AM
What on earth is an associate vice president of inclusive excellence? Who comes up with such titles?!

The DEI Commissar has no particular expertise in the field and yet presumes to determine what is appropriate course content. I don't have much sympathy for overpaid, over-titled adminicritters who behave so cravenly.

This is the sort of thing that pretty much does the critics of "woke" education's work for them.  With stuff like this happening, they really don't have to work that hard to try to paint a picture of "wokism" run amok.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on December 31, 2022, 04:33:25 PM
FIRE open call to Hamline to reinstate the instructor in question:

https://www.thefire.org/news/fire-calls-hamline-university-reinstate-art-history-instructor-dismissed-showing-medieval

The story is getting a fair amount of press.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 01, 2023, 08:02:23 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on December 31, 2022, 04:33:25 PM
FIRE open call to Hamline to reinstate the instructor in question:

https://www.thefire.org/news/fire-calls-hamline-university-reinstate-art-history-instructor-dismissed-showing-medieval

The story is getting a fair amount of press.

Unless it's possible to make administrators grow a spine, that's not going to happen. Even if it did, you can be darn sure that everyone who teaches there has been given a pretty clear idea of how heavy the bus is under which they will be thrown if/when the mob comes for them. The chill will remain, even if somehow the prof is rehired.

"Do it to Julia! Do it to Julia! Not me!"

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on January 01, 2023, 09:12:41 AM
NYT quiz on offensive words:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/12/22/opinion/words-you-cant-use-anymore.html?campaign_id=190&emc=edit_ufn_20230101&instance_id=81555&nl=from-the-times&regi_id=46382589&segment_id=121323&te=1&user_id=349c6abacc09730a88f6caaeae2eed71
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on January 02, 2023, 08:13:51 PM
Again, my apologies for more or less disappearing for several days....

As to sources to explain further the reasons why the NT overrides certain OT laws (essentially, two out of the three types of OT laws, namely the 'judicial laws' (think death penalty for a variety of offenses, but Christians disagree on this) and especially the 'ceremonial laws', such as dietary laws, laws about mixing cloth, and the animal sacrifices, )), I have no scholarly bibliography to cite, but that this is true is clear from any cursory reading of the NT, especially in Acts and several letters of Paul.  Certain Protestants have long used language like 'types and shadows' to describe why the OT laws were in force in the first place, but whatever one thinks of such exegesis, one just cannot avoid the NT texts involved and thereby call it 'contradictory' that Christians do not obey such laws.   OTOH, well, that homosexuality is part of the moral law, with its sinfulness as a malum in se clear from the text, even if the punishment for it does not have to be the same as in OT law, or, perhaps, even if it is no longer necessary for a secular state to criminalize it at all.

Now wrt the notion that Christians should not be enforcing/ forcing upon others, their morality, well... ok, but, ahem, well, the idea that 'you cannot legislate morality', well, that's sufficiently dumb as to not be worthy of the serious consideration of a bunch of academics.  All laws legislate someone's morality, and if we had no laws, well, that would be legislating a certain perverse version of morality as well.  Society has some rights-- all rights do not devolve on individuals.   Take abortion--- the only justification for opposition to it would be that the fetus to be aborted is in fact a human being, who deserves the protection of the state against its killing.   Even if, in doing so, this interferes with the woman's right to control what she does with her own body (which, of course, would be the reason why life of the mother abortion would be acceptable, if we believe that people have the right to kill in self-defense).  IOW, in every moral or ethical issue, as with other sorts of controversies, business, education, etc., sometimes hard choices have to be made, and some people will not end up getting their way.  I believe that God has ordained marriage only to be between a man and a woman, but there are loads of thoroughly secular reasons to oppose gay marriage as well, though some of these are much more solid than others.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on January 03, 2023, 08:45:51 AM
I've gotten to know a bit about the three kinds of Old Testament laws, and how what seems like mere picking-and-choosing has a point. I'm still skeptical about what seem to be some pretty elaborate rationalizations, and I still feel that musical comedy has the best answers for just about everything--here, a musical response to Proposition 8 some years back:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_hyT7_Bx9o

As for lying in polls, there's some research on the subject--one can look at "Bradley Effect" and "social desirability bias" as phenomena that social scientists look at (and disagree about) with regard to how much effect they actually have on results. (There are some that would argue for what is known as a "Shy Trump" effect with regard to the 2016 election, but that is also disputed.)

Finally, I think there's an interesting connection between a literal interpretation of the Bible and the this-is-what-happens-when-knuckleheads-try-to-be-woke response to the professor posting the Muhammad-themed art. Both the most literal and conservative of Christians and those who would speak on behalf of offended Muslims are espousing an extremely narrow and blinkered view of both Christianity and Islam. And, with regard to Paul, there's fascinating evidence that his own internal conflicts with his homosexuality (i.e., the "thorn" in his side) pretty much shaped both the inclusive love and the let's-condemn-the-gays aspects of Christianity. Seems to me, if we want to follow the New Testament, we could concentrate more on the inclusive love if we wanted to.  For more context:

https://qspirit.net/apostle-paul-homosexuality/

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 03, 2023, 09:17:40 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on January 02, 2023, 08:13:51 PM
Again, my apologies for more or less disappearing for several days....

It's kind of funny when you disappear, clearly to think through your response, and then pop back up with a somewhat prolix commentary full of your own subjective interpretations of culture and Scripture.

Quote
I have no scholarly bibliography to cite, but that this is true is clear from any cursory reading

So you looked, did not find anything, and came back here to try to make your case among academics who generally respect scholarly or at least thoughtful sources. 

This does make it appear that you've either been fed your beliefs in-person, possibly by a Baptist pastor, or that you have had to rationalize what you believe however you can.

Quote
Now wrt the notion that Christians should not be enforcing/ forcing upon others, their morality, well... ok, but, ahem, well,

Ok, ahem, well, believe whatever you want, attend your churches however you want, but leave your religion out of my life.  I have the Constitution on my side.

The world is perfectly capable of exploring morality without mythology and folktales from the Iron and Bronze Ages.

Quote
All laws legislate someone's morality, and if we had no laws, well, that would be legislating a certain perverse version of morality as well.  Society has some rights-- all rights do not devolve on individuals.   

Was never in contention.  This is a strawman.

Just don't expect to legislate morality based on your provincial and self-serving reading of the Scriptures.  Again, do whatever you want, but don't expect me or anyone else to follow simply because you believe God has spoken to you through an ancient book.

Quote
sometimes hard choices have to be made, and some people will not end up getting their way. 

I am afraid, in this era, this is you.  Gay marriage is now legally protected everywhere in the United States, and LGBTQ rights are being increasingly recognized all over the world.

Quote
I believe that God has ordained marriage only to be between a man and a woman,

This is your right.  It is also prejudice.  Go ahead and froth all you like about God's micromanagement of human sexuality while Putin fires missiles at the Ukraine. 

Quote
but there are loads of thoroughly secular reasons to oppose gay marriage as well, though some of these are much more solid than others.

You have yet to substantiate these "loads of thoroughly secular reasons."  Just saying something exists does not make it exist.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 03, 2023, 09:21:44 AM
CHE: Most of All, I am Offended as a Muslim (https://www.chronicle.com/article/most-of-all-i-am-offended-as-a-muslim)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 03, 2023, 10:00:37 AM
ProPublica: Muzzled by DeSantis, Critical Race Theory Professors Cancel Courses or Modify Their Teaching (https://www.propublica.org/article/desantis-critical-race-theory-florida-college-professors)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 07, 2023, 10:09:11 AM
A College Fired a Professor for Showing a Painting of Muhammad. Now, It Could Lose Its Accreditation. (https://reason.com/2023/01/05/a-college-fired-a-professor-for-showing-a-painting-of-muhammad-now-it-could-lose-its-accreditation/)

Quote
While the school was roundly criticized for its swift silencing of faculty academic freedom, the college is private, and thus largely protected from legal consequences.

However, one free speech group has found a way to penalize Hamline: filing a complaint with the school's accreditor, which explicitly requires that colleges receiving accreditation protect academic freedom.

This, BTW, is their "Learning Resources" page, make of it what you will:

https://www.hamline.edu/about/office-inclusive-excellence/resources
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 07, 2023, 11:50:12 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 07, 2023, 10:09:11 AM
A College Fired a Professor for Showing a Painting of Muhammad. Now, It Could Lose Its Accreditation. (https://reason.com/2023/01/05/a-college-fired-a-professor-for-showing-a-painting-of-muhammad-now-it-could-lose-its-accreditation/)

Quote
While the school was roundly criticized for its swift silencing of faculty academic freedom, the college is private, and thus largely protected from legal consequences.

However, one free speech group has found a way to penalize Hamline: filing a complaint with the school's accreditor, which explicitly requires that colleges receiving accreditation protect academic freedom.

This, BTW, is their "Learning Resources" page, make of it what you will:

https://www.hamline.edu/about/office-inclusive-excellence/resources

Hah! The first entry on the page:

Robin Diangelo workshop on white fragility

Pretty much clarifies their priorities.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 08, 2023, 07:12:55 AM
No groundbreaking new developments but a more in-depth news report from the good ol' NY Times:

A Lecturer Showed a Painting of the Prophet Muhammad. She Lost Her Job. (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/08/us/hamline-university-islam-prophet-muhammad.html)

Story is truly national now.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on January 08, 2023, 12:47:47 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 08, 2023, 07:12:55 AM
No groundbreaking new developments but a more in-depth news report from the good ol' NY Times:

A Lecturer Showed a Painting of the Prophet Muhammad. She Lost Her Job. (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/08/us/hamline-university-islam-prophet-muhammad.html)

Story is truly national now.

This one is incredibly stupid. Ugh. Despite their claims to the contrary, it sure seems to show that admin doesn't actually care about DEI considerations, except perhaps as a means of striking against faculty.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 09, 2023, 04:55:10 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on January 08, 2023, 12:47:47 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 08, 2023, 07:12:55 AM
No groundbreaking new developments but a more in-depth news report from the good ol' NY Times:

A Lecturer Showed a Painting of the Prophet Muhammad. She Lost Her Job. (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/08/us/hamline-university-islam-prophet-muhammad.html)

Story is truly national now.

This one is incredibly stupid. Ugh. Despite their claims to the contrary, it sure seems to show that admin doesn't actually care about DEI considerations, except perhaps as a means of striking against faculty.

Does it? Or does it rather show that they don't want to explicitly state what should happen when the academic enterprise requires facing sensitive topics with potential DEI implications?

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 11, 2023, 09:47:29 AM
IHE: Amid Backlash, Stanford Pulls 'Harmful Language' List (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2023/01/11/amid-backlash-stanford-removes-harmful-language-list)

Lower Deck:
Quote
The university's effort to remove racist, violent and biased language from its website morphed into a PR disaster. Other colleges' initiatives have fared better—perhaps because they are less transparent in their practices.

Quote
The university was swiftly criticized for suggesting the elimination of words like "American," "immigrant" and "grandfather," prompting it first to remove the list from public view and then, weeks later, to pull it from its website entirely.

Quote
The 13-page guide contained more than 150 words and phrases organized into 10 categories of harmful language: ableist, ageism, colonialism, culturally appropriative, gender-based, imprecise language, institutionalized racism, person-first, and violent words and phrases. Words and phrases such as "brave," "seminal," "American," "take a shot at," "no can do" and "submit" were deemed harmful.

Hilarious.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: FishProf on January 11, 2023, 12:02:47 PM
Grandfather? WTF?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Scout on January 11, 2023, 12:19:42 PM
Quote from: FishProf on January 11, 2023, 12:02:47 PM
Grandfather? WTF?

Likely referring to the phrase grandfather clause, which has its roots in voter suppression laws after emancipation, which allowed white people to be able to vote who would have been blocked by newly enacted  laws designed to keep newly freed Black people from voting.

https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2013/10/21/239081586/the-racial-history-of-the-grandfather-clause 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 11, 2023, 12:26:32 PM
Was "Slavic" on the list? Departments of Slavic languages will have a big problem.....
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on January 11, 2023, 12:34:19 PM
Some items on the list are such old figures of speech that it's a little surprising anybody would still be worried about them.  There are a couple of items that I thought had already been mostly banished from polite society in general.

In some cases involving items that refer to particular ethnicities, there's an admission that, uh, actually some members of the group in question prefer the term they're trying to get rid of.  So you might ask them what they prefer.  Which is meant to be polite, I'm sure, but sounds like a great way to make ordinary introductions into something fraught.

It can't be easy always to be chasing whatever is the most politically correct usage.  People who've trained themselves always to ask for "preferred pronouns"--another great way to make initial meetings potentially awkward--are now being told that they'd better drop the "preferred" part.  People who've labored to say "African American" instead of black, and given others a hard time for using the wrong term, are now told that they need to start saying black.  "Crippled"--one of those terms I would have thought so archaic that it wouldn't even be on their radar any longer--is out, but so is the formerly acceptable substitute "handicapped."  One reason why many complain so bitterly about this sort of language policing is that sense that the goalposts are always being moved on them.

I've never been one to gripe much about "politically correct" speech myself, but this sort of thing can be annoying, especially since the suggested superior terms are so often wordy doubletalk.  The Sanford list takes it to a new level.  There are some things that just parody themselves.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: MarathonRunner on January 11, 2023, 12:35:44 PM
In my field, perhaps because it is one of the few female-dominant in academia, we've moved away from "seminal" which can be considered sexist (non-males have written important works too) and moved to foundational, pioneering, or key, to describe such works.

I can see how "take a shot at" could be distressing for those whose communities have experienced gun violence, and therefore potentially problematic. The others have multiple meanings, and context is important.

Person-first language is interesting. We are taught to use it, but some communities or individuals (since people are not monolithic within a community) prefer to be called otherwise.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on January 11, 2023, 12:37:36 PM
Quote from: Scout on January 11, 2023, 12:19:42 PM
Quote from: FishProf on January 11, 2023, 12:02:47 PM
Grandfather? WTF?

Likely referring to the phrase grandfather clause, which has its roots in voter suppression laws after emancipation, which allowed white people to be able to vote who would have been blocked by newly enacted  laws designed to keep newly freed Black people from voting.

https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2013/10/21/239081586/the-racial-history-of-the-grandfather-clause

That was the rationale given in the guidance.  You can't say "grandfather something in."  That it's also gender-specific is I'm sure an additional problem with it.

Anything with the word "master" in it is also apparently out.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on January 11, 2023, 12:41:19 PM
Quote from: MarathonRunner on January 11, 2023, 12:35:44 PM
In my field, perhaps because it is one of the few female-dominant in academia, we've moved away from "seminal" which can be considered sexist (non-males have written important works too) and moved to foundational, pioneering, or key, to describe such works.

Can't say I'd miss "seminal," since it's always seemed like kind of a weird term. 

Now that you mention "pioneering," I'm rather surprised that wasn't on the list under "colonialist" terms.  Its use probably won't be encouraged for much longer.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Ruralguy on January 11, 2023, 12:54:15 PM
Some of these are very easy to replace. Its not that hard just to say "main bedroom" instead of "master bedroom."
For mechanics and electronics it might be harder to work around "master cylinder" and "male/female connector" but I am sure some creative inclusive engineer can think of something.

Sometimes, you just become all too aware of how someone can mis-hear a word, or imbue it with its most obscene meaning, such as "oral." So, you just start using some-what less potentially cringe-y words.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Puget on January 11, 2023, 01:22:25 PM
Quote from: MarathonRunner on January 11, 2023, 12:35:44 PM
Person-first language is interesting. We are taught to use it, but some communities or individuals (since people are not monolithic within a community) prefer to be called otherwise.

We always have an interesting discussion about this on the first day of my (psych) courses. There was a big push starting in the 90s for people-first language (promoted, e.g., by the APA style guide) that really came from a medical model (i.e., the assumption that people would not want to be defined by their "disease"), which has more recently gotten a lot of push-back from the disability/neurodivergent rights communities, who see, e.g., being autistic or Deaf as identities they embrace, and who find the person-first language actually stigmitizing. Its a complex and changing linguistic landscape, and it all comes down to trying to use the terms that the people being referred to prefer, and when you can't be sure (e.g., when writing) just acknowledging that different people have different preferences in that community.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on January 11, 2023, 03:18:12 PM
Quote from: Ruralguy on January 11, 2023, 12:54:15 PM

Sometimes, you just become all too aware of how someone can mis-hear a word, or imbue it with its most obscene meaning, such as "oral." So, you just start using some-what less potentially cringe-y words.

There's a somewhat archaic term synonymous with "stingy" that also sounds somewhat like a common racial slur.  I can remember some years ago reading about a few tempests in a teapot when somebody using the archaic word was blindsided by some quite fierce accusations of racism.  Pointing out that the word was a longstanding English word that had absolutely nothing to do with racial slurs only made the opposition fiercer.  Using a word deemed slur-adjacent was deemed the equivalent of using the actual slur. 

The word soon passed out of usage with no protests that I was ever made aware of.  It was evidently so old and little-loved that nobody found it worth defending.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 11, 2023, 04:41:19 PM
Quote from: apl68 on January 11, 2023, 03:18:12 PM
Quote from: Ruralguy on January 11, 2023, 12:54:15 PM

Sometimes, you just become all too aware of how someone can mis-hear a word, or imbue it with its most obscene meaning, such as "oral." So, you just start using some-what less potentially cringe-y words.

There's a somewhat archaic term synonymous with "stingy" that also sounds somewhat like a common racial slur.  I can remember some years ago reading about a few tempests in a teapot when somebody using the archaic word was blindsided by some quite fierce accusations of racism.  Pointing out that the word was a longstanding English word that had absolutely nothing to do with racial slurs only made the opposition fiercer.  Using a word deemed slur-adjacent was deemed the equivalent of using the actual slur. 

The word soon passed out of usage with no protests that I was ever made aware of.  It was evidently so old and little-loved that nobody found it worth defending.

Ha!  I had an elderly music professor use this term in regards to my playing, saying essentially "don't hold back!"  I was a little freaked since this fella was such a nice old guy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Juvenal on January 12, 2023, 07:59:37 AM
Thirty years on--longer?--I still cringe to recall I used that word while talking to a Black student!  Caught myself a moment too late.  Too late to salvage the moment.  The perils of a too-extensive vocabulary?  Foot-in-mouth disease?  I don't think I've spoken the word since.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on January 12, 2023, 10:39:49 PM
If my kid took a wipe-out on his bike, hurt himself, and I brought him to the hospital, and upon being x-rayed, the doc says to me, kid has a broken arm, and I am going to put a cast on it now.  If I say then, no, no cast, and the doc says, but you do not understand, the kid's arm is broken, and he needs a cast, and I respond, I get that the kid's arm is broken, but no cast.   What would the doc do?  He'd call the child welfare agency, which would immediately take custody of the kid over the phone and order the cast put on.  And none of us here would disagree with that action.

So what is my point?   One of the problems I have with the normalization of homosexuality and nowadays also transgenderism is the notion that soon enough, normalization and acceptance is likely to morph into forced acceptance.   I used to think this paranoid- a few years ago, in response to the gay marriage SCOTUS ruling, my pastor decided we needed to rewrite the church bylaws to explicitly forbid gay marriages within it, because he was concerned that soon enough the church might be sued by homosexual activists who wanted to force us to allow our facilities to be used for their weddings.   I thought that was crazy, and that the easy solution was simply to require any marriage held in the building to have at least one of the spouses be a church member.   But now I am not so sure that we will not see such activism, especially wrt transgenderism and children.  Consider this scenario-- instead of breaking his arm on his bike, my 8yo goes to school and for whatever reason(s) some teacher, counselor, nurse, etc., decides he's transgender, and calls me up to offer info as to where I could get him 'gender affirming care', whereupon I say, no thanks.   Not for my kid.   What then?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 12, 2023, 11:40:42 PM
Kay, forgive me, but you are such a bigot that you actually believe you can make an analogy between bodily harm and homosexuality.

Incredible.

If your kid wants to be transgender, do what you think is best for the kid.

At 18 years old your kid will be able to do whatever hu wants, so if you stand in the way of your kid transitioning at 13, hu will just have to wait 5 unhappy years until hu zips you out of hu's life forever and you can go on frothing all alone in your house until old age finally takes up to your heavenly (or hellish) reward.

Can you find one factual example of a teacher, counselor, nurse, etc. calling up a parent of an 8 yo out of the blue and advising transgender care?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 13, 2023, 05:10:12 AM

Can you find one factual example of a teacher, counselor, nurse, etc. calling up a parent of an 8 yo out of the blue and advising transgender care?
[/quote]

The scary part is that there are advocates of the teacher, counselor, etc. providing the "care" without even informing the parents.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Istiblennius on January 13, 2023, 09:02:04 AM
Gender affirming care includes a variety of options and the most significant options do require a prior series of steps. If the doctor in your weak sauce analogy failed to make an x-ray or went straight to amputation instead of first offering the appropriate care based on a thoughtful diagnosis and evidence, that would be a concern. And it would be of similar concern if gender affirming medical treatment took place without similar approach.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 13, 2023, 10:03:01 AM
Quote from: Istiblennius on January 13, 2023, 09:02:04 AM
Gender affirming care includes a variety of options and the most significant options do require a prior series of steps. If the doctor in your weak sauce analogy failed to make an x-ray or went straight to amputation instead of first offering the appropriate care based on a thoughtful diagnosis and evidence, that would be a concern. And it would be of similar concern if gender affirming medical treatment took place without similar approach.

"Gender-affirming" surgery is very unusual because it is not based on correcting any organ or system which is improperly functioning. It is surgery based on a psychological condition, namely, gender dysphoria.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 13, 2023, 11:15:27 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 13, 2023, 05:10:12 AM

Can you find one factual example of a teacher, counselor, nurse, etc. calling up a parent of an 8 yo out of the blue and advising transgender care?

The scary part is that there are advocates of the teacher, counselor, etc. providing the "care" without even informing the parents.
[/quote]

Where has this happened?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on January 13, 2023, 02:48:24 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 13, 2023, 11:15:27 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 13, 2023, 05:10:12 AM

Can you find one factual example of a teacher, counselor, nurse, etc. calling up a parent of an 8 yo out of the blue and advising transgender care?

The scary part is that there are advocates of the teacher, counselor, etc. providing the "care" without even informing the parents.

Where has this happened?
[/quote]

Define "care." If an 8-year-old child confides in a teacher, counselor, etc that they might be transgender, what is your definition of "care?"
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 14, 2023, 06:14:21 AM
NBC News: With over 100 anti-LGBTQ bills before state legislatures in 2023 so far, activists say they're 'fired up' (https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/100-anti-lgbtq-bills-state-legislatures-2023-far-activists-say-fired-rcna65349)

Lower Deck:
Quote
The bills continue to limit gender-affirming health care for minors, while a slate of newer bills target drag performers.

Quote
So far, Texas has taken the lead with 36 such bills, according to Equality Texas, a statewide LGBTQ advocacy group. Missouri is next with 26, then North Dakota with eight and Oklahoma with six.

The majority of these approximately 120 bills focus on transgender young people, continuing a trend that began about two years ago.

Can't win the hearts and minds of America? 

Have no real political agenda?

Legislate your prejudice!!!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 14, 2023, 06:57:43 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 13, 2023, 11:15:27 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 13, 2023, 05:10:12 AM
Quote
Can you find one factual example of a teacher, counselor, nurse, etc. calling up a parent of an 8 yo out of the blue and advising transgender care?

The scary part is that there are advocates of the teacher, counselor, etc. providing the "care" without even informing the parents.

Where has this happened?

Some Schools Won't Tell Parents When Their Kids Express Gender Confusion. Experts Say That's Illegal. (https://freebeacon.com/campus/some-schools-wont-tell-parents-when-their-kids-express-gender-confusion-experts-say-thats-illegal/)

Quote
Public schools nationwide are telling students they can assume different pronouns, have access to another sex's bathroom, and change their name without letting their parents know, a violation of federal law legal experts tell the Washington Free Beacon.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 14, 2023, 08:09:55 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 14, 2023, 06:57:43 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 13, 2023, 11:15:27 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 13, 2023, 05:10:12 AM
Quote
Can you find one factual example of a teacher, counselor, nurse, etc. calling up a parent of an 8 yo out of the blue and advising transgender care?

The scary part is that there are advocates of the teacher, counselor, etc. providing the "care" without even informing the parents.

Where has this happened?

Some Schools Won't Tell Parents When Their Kids Express Gender Confusion. Experts Say That's Illegal. (https://freebeacon.com/campus/some-schools-wont-tell-parents-when-their-kids-express-gender-confusion-experts-say-thats-illegal/)

Quote
Public schools nationwide are telling students they can assume different pronouns, have access to another sex's bathroom, and change their name without letting their parents know, a violation of federal law legal experts tell the Washington Free Beacon.

Did you actually read that article?

Is The Washington Free Beacon ("Covering the Enemies of Freedom the Way the Mainstream Media Won't") an objective source that we can trust?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on January 22, 2023, 10:01:08 AM
In today's NYT:

QuoteWhen Students Change Gender Identity, and Parents Don't Know
Educators are facing wrenching new tensions over whether they should tell parents when students socially transition at school.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/22/us/gender-identity-students-parents.html
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on January 22, 2023, 10:54:10 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on January 22, 2023, 10:01:08 AM
In today's NYT:

QuoteWhen Students Change Gender Identity, and Parents Don't Know
Educators are facing wrenching new tensions over whether they should tell parents when students socially transition at school.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/22/us/gender-identity-students-parents.html

Saw this.

While not a parent, I wouldn't really want to know all the details of what my child was doing unless they were having problems the school couldn't handle.

If my child was exploring being transgender and didn't want to tell me for whatever reason, I would like to respect their privacy in that case.

ETA: Glanced at the comments. People are freaking out that 16-year-olds are getting hormones at school. NO THEY ARE NOT! They are going by different names and pronouns... and maybe using different bathrooms. THAT'S IT!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 23, 2023, 06:45:37 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on January 22, 2023, 10:54:10 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on January 22, 2023, 10:01:08 AM
In today's NYT:

QuoteWhen Students Change Gender Identity, and Parents Don't Know
Educators are facing wrenching new tensions over whether they should tell parents when students socially transition at school.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/22/us/gender-identity-students-parents.html

Saw this.

While not a parent, I wouldn't really want to know all the details of what my child was doing unless they were having problems the school couldn't handle.

If my child was exploring being transgender and didn't want to tell me for whatever reason, I would like to respect their privacy in that case.


Do you seriously believe that your kids' teachers will know your kids that much better than you, when they have known the kid for probably a few months in a class of 20+, whereas you have literally known them since birth?

That is a serious abdication of parental responsibility. (Once they are legal adults, you can decide to not try to interfere in their decisions, but as long as they are legally (and morally) your responsibility, you need to be the most on top of things as you can possibly be. If you're not going to do that, you should never have kids.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 23, 2023, 07:21:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 23, 2023, 06:45:37 AM
Do you seriously believe that your kids' teachers will know your kids that much better than you, when they have known the kid for probably a few months in a class of 20+, whereas you have literally known them since birth?

Not all parents really "know" or understand their children, Marshy.  It's quite true.  Often parents are so ideological they cannot.  And some parents are just plain mean, even if they think they are doing the right thing for their child.  Many, many parents are just dumb.  We do not live in the kind of world in which parents are automatically right and are teachers automatically wrong. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 23, 2023, 07:29:29 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 23, 2023, 07:21:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 23, 2023, 06:45:37 AM
Do you seriously believe that your kids' teachers will know your kids that much better than you, when they have known the kid for probably a few months in a class of 20+, whereas you have literally known them since birth?

Not all parents really "know" or understand their children, Marshy.  It's quite true.  Often parents are so ideological they cannot.  And some parents are just plain mean, even if they think they are doing the right thing for their child.  We do not live in the kind of world in which parents are automatically right and are teachers automatically wrong.

No, we don't. But we'd be in a whole lot worse world if some arm of the state decided everything about what was "good" for children. (Lots of historical examples of that.)

Teachers should be knowledgeable about a child's educational performance, and how that child interacts with other children. (And of course, teachers can be ideological as well. There's no guarantee that the teacher's ideology is any better for the child in the long run than the parents'. Again, it's very bad news when the state starts to make those assumptions.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 23, 2023, 07:47:03 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 23, 2023, 07:29:29 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 23, 2023, 07:21:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 23, 2023, 06:45:37 AM
Do you seriously believe that your kids' teachers will know your kids that much better than you, when they have known the kid for probably a few months in a class of 20+, whereas you have literally known them since birth?

Not all parents really "know" or understand their children, Marshy.  It's quite true.  Often parents are so ideological they cannot.  And some parents are just plain mean, even if they think they are doing the right thing for their child.  We do not live in the kind of world in which parents are automatically right and are teachers automatically wrong.

No, we don't. But we'd be in a whole lot worse world if some arm of the state decided everything about what was "good" for children. (Lots of historical examples of that.)

Teachers should be knowledgeable about a child's educational performance, and how that child interacts with other children. (And of course, teachers can be ideological as well. There's no guarantee that the teacher's ideology is any better for the child in the long run than the parents'. Again, it's very bad news when the state starts to make those assumptions.)

Well, my friend, there is an arm of the state, several arms, actually, which decide what is "good" for children.  There are many, many assumptions in place already with the government of every civilized country about how parents should raise their children----these become laws, actually.  Just think about it, buddy.  Think about it just a second.

And, of course, sure, teachers may be weirdly ideological too.  What we cannot do is pretend that parenthood is a wholly right and rational mindset or that parents will axiomatically make the right choices. 

You have this hang up about competing "ideologies," don't you?

And older teenagers, while still not legally adults, should have some control of their own lives. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 23, 2023, 08:10:19 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 23, 2023, 07:47:03 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 23, 2023, 07:29:29 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 23, 2023, 07:21:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 23, 2023, 06:45:37 AM
Do you seriously believe that your kids' teachers will know your kids that much better than you, when they have known the kid for probably a few months in a class of 20+, whereas you have literally known them since birth?

Not all parents really "know" or understand their children, Marshy.  It's quite true.  Often parents are so ideological they cannot.  And some parents are just plain mean, even if they think they are doing the right thing for their child.  We do not live in the kind of world in which parents are automatically right and are teachers automatically wrong.

No, we don't. But we'd be in a whole lot worse world if some arm of the state decided everything about what was "good" for children. (Lots of historical examples of that.)

Teachers should be knowledgeable about a child's educational performance, and how that child interacts with other children. (And of course, teachers can be ideological as well. There's no guarantee that the teacher's ideology is any better for the child in the long run than the parents'. Again, it's very bad news when the state starts to make those assumptions.)

Well, my friend, there is an arm of the state, several arms, actually, which decide what is "good" for children.  There are many, many assumptions in place already with the government of every civilized country about how parents should raise their children----these become laws, actually.  Just think about it, buddy.  Think about it just a second.


And those laws have very specific limits on when and how they can be applied. For instance, children can't just be removed from a home on the whim of some bureaucrat; there are procedures that have to be followed, and which can be challenged in court, to assure that it is only done when there is clear danger to the children from remaining in the home.  A teacher choosing to intentionally not tell parents about something is akin to a bureaucrat arbitrarily removing a child. The lack of transparency is inappropriate in a democratic society. If a teacher believes there is a real danger to a child, as when the teacher suspects abuse, the teacher is legally required to report it, and then the justice system follows the process of investigation and possible further action. The teacher does not, and should not, have the power to unilaterally remove the child from the home.

If a teacher suspects actual harm to a child, related to the parents' religious beliefs, then they should report it like any other kind of danger. They should not simply surreptitiously try to subvert the parents' authority.

ETA: Google "Residential Schools" in Canada to get an insight into the benevolent state deciding what was good for children.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on January 23, 2023, 09:01:29 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 23, 2023, 08:10:19 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 23, 2023, 07:47:03 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 23, 2023, 07:29:29 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 23, 2023, 07:21:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 23, 2023, 06:45:37 AM
Do you seriously believe that your kids' teachers will know your kids that much better than you, when they have known the kid for probably a few months in a class of 20+, whereas you have literally known them since birth?

Not all parents really "know" or understand their children, Marshy.  It's quite true.  Often parents are so ideological they cannot.  And some parents are just plain mean, even if they think they are doing the right thing for their child.  We do not live in the kind of world in which parents are automatically right and are teachers automatically wrong.

No, we don't. But we'd be in a whole lot worse world if some arm of the state decided everything about what was "good" for children. (Lots of historical examples of that.)

Teachers should be knowledgeable about a child's educational performance, and how that child interacts with other children. (And of course, teachers can be ideological as well. There's no guarantee that the teacher's ideology is any better for the child in the long run than the parents'. Again, it's very bad news when the state starts to make those assumptions.)

Well, my friend, there is an arm of the state, several arms, actually, which decide what is "good" for children.  There are many, many assumptions in place already with the government of every civilized country about how parents should raise their children----these become laws, actually.  Just think about it, buddy.  Think about it just a second.


And those laws have very specific limits on when and how they can be applied. For instance, children can't just be removed from a home on the whim of some bureaucrat; there are procedures that have to be followed, and which can be challenged in court, to assure that it is only done when there is clear danger to the children from remaining in the home.  A teacher choosing to intentionally not tell parents about something is akin to a bureaucrat arbitrarily removing a child. The lack of transparency is inappropriate in a democratic society. If a teacher believes there is a real danger to a child, as when the teacher suspects abuse, the teacher is legally required to report it, and then the justice system follows the process of investigation and possible further action. The teacher does not, and should not, have the power to unilaterally remove the child from the home.

If a teacher suspects actual harm to a child, related to the parents' religious beliefs, then they should report it like any other kind of danger. They should not simply surreptitiously try to subvert the parents' authority.

ETA: Google "Residential Schools" in Canada to get an insight into the benevolent state deciding what was good for children.

You know there are situations where a teacher revealing the non-traditional gender identity of a child could lead to very poor outcomes for the youth at home though right?  It could lead to a child or teen being physically abused, disowned, etc. due to ideology.  In a situation where this is a possible outcome (probably based on the youth's opinion), do you think the teacher should be obligated to tell the parents? 

This is the reality of the situation.  Children come from all sorts of situations and in many cases need an adult that they can talk to.  One that will not be obligated or inclined to tell their parents.  The laws we are discussing are not some global conspiracy to transform your children, they are there to protect their interests.

   
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 23, 2023, 09:21:34 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 23, 2023, 08:10:19 AM
And those laws have very specific limits on when and how they can be applied. For instance, children can't just be removed from a home on the whim of some bureaucrat; there are procedures that have to be followed, and which can be challenged in court, to assure that it is only done when there is clear danger to the children from remaining in the home.

A teacher choosing to intentionally not tell parents about something is akin to a bureaucrat arbitrarily removing a child. The lack of transparency is inappropriate in a democratic society. If a teacher believes there is a real danger to a child, as when the teacher suspects abuse, the teacher is legally required to report it, and then the justice system follows the process of investigation and possible further action. The teacher does not, and should not, have the power to unilaterally remove the child from the home.

Um...yeah.  That's the way all laws work.  Did you have a point?

And I disagree: a teaching choosing to intentionally not tell a parent about something is a potential liability but also a professional choice.  The analogy to a "bureaucrat arbitrarily removing a child" is the gross, melodramatic hyperbole I see frequently with conservatives these days when they cannot make a real point.

And a transgender teen is not remotely the same thing as a mandatory reporter.  You, like some other posters, appear to equate transgender to bodily danger----incredible apples to oranges.  That's also a wee bit of prejudice, no matter how you sublimate it.

Quote
If a teacher suspects actual harm to a child, related to the parents' religious beliefs, then they should report it like any other kind of danger. They should not simply surreptitiously try to subvert the parents' authority.

Again, um...yeah.   

But respecting a student's rights and wishes is not the same thing as "surreptitiously try[ing] to subvert the parent's authority."  Sometimes it is perfectly reasonable to respect a young adult as an adult.  "I want to go to art school but my dad won't let me, so will you write me a letter of recommendation to Cal Arts?" and "My parents are physically abusive and threatened to kill me" are probably the two ends of the spectrum, but there is a great deal between that teachers may have to make choices about.

Quote
ETA: Google "Residential Schools" in Canada to get an insight into the benevolent state deciding what was good for children.

You mean Christian conservatives attempting to force First Nations children out of their culture and into a hegemonic and prejudicial mainstream?  Kind of like some conservatives are trying to do to transgender children?  Yeah, we had these schools in America too.  That is a good but oblique example of why some teachers may choose to remain silent about their non-mainstream students.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on January 23, 2023, 11:15:47 AM
Tucker Carlson has cancelled M&Ms for being "woke": https://www.nbcnews.com/news/maya-rudolph-replaces-mms-characters-rcna66994
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on January 23, 2023, 11:51:56 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 23, 2023, 06:45:37 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on January 22, 2023, 10:54:10 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on January 22, 2023, 10:01:08 AM
In today's NYT:

QuoteWhen Students Change Gender Identity, and Parents Don't Know
Educators are facing wrenching new tensions over whether they should tell parents when students socially transition at school.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/22/us/gender-identity-students-parents.html

Saw this.

While not a parent, I wouldn't really want to know all the details of what my child was doing unless they were having problems the school couldn't handle.

If my child was exploring being transgender and didn't want to tell me for whatever reason, I would like to respect their privacy in that case.


Do you seriously believe that your kids' teachers will know your kids that much better than you, when they have known the kid for probably a few months in a class of 20+, whereas you have literally known them since birth?

That is a serious abdication of parental responsibility. (Once they are legal adults, you can decide to not try to interfere in their decisions, but as long as they are legally (and morally) your responsibility, you need to be the most on top of things as you can possibly be. If you're not going to do that, you should never have kids.)

Well, I never did have kids. But I do know some parents who have taken that approach with their teachers. They don't want or need to hear from the school every time their child gets into a tiff with another kid, or forgets their homework. But if it's starting to happen more often, and the child isn't responding to the teacher's attempts to resolve the problem, then yes, let's talk.

And if my kid was choosing to use a different nickname or explore a different identity and didn't want to tell me about it yet, that's fine.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: MarathonRunner on January 23, 2023, 12:25:52 PM
Given that Indigenous children are still taken from their parents at much higher rates than non-Indigenous children in Canada, even when the parents' circumstances are similar, the laws aren't applied equally to all.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 23, 2023, 08:35:46 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on January 23, 2023, 11:15:47 AM
Tucker Carlson has cancelled M&Ms for being "woke": https://www.nbcnews.com/news/maya-rudolph-replaces-mms-characters-rcna66994

Bat shite crazy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on January 23, 2023, 09:52:38 PM
Awright I am going to reengage here, and ask several questions:

1) exactly what are 'parents' rights' wrt how their minor children are to be raised?   I get that it is possible that informing parent x that his kid has embraced trans identity might induce a violent reaction, but there is simply no widespread epidemic of parents killing trans children.   Really, there just ain't, and mandated reporter laws provide for quick contacting of the cops whenever real violence is observed.

2) if kid x confides in teacher that he wishes to be addressed by pronouns contrary to his birth identity, and his parents are told this and forbid it, is this not parental right-- kid cannot for instance change his name legally until he is of age.   If parent x says 'my son is not to be allowed to pretend to be a girl in your school', under what authority and right would the school ignore such wishes?

3) What other things might a teacher do, contrary to the wishes of the parents?   If a kid wishes to stop participating in his parents' family religion, and adopt another religion, should the school facilitate such changes?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 05:27:25 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on January 23, 2023, 09:52:38 PM

3) What other things might a teacher do, contrary to the wishes of the parents?   If a kid wishes to stop participating in his parents' family religion, and adopt another religion, should the school facilitate such changes?

This is one that I think makes a good example. For instance, if a girl from a Muslim family did not want to wear a hijab at school, I don't think the teacher should have to force her to wear one. On the other hand, I also don't think the teacher should refuse to answer if the parents ask if she wears the hijab at school, and I certainly think it's very bad for the teacher to lie about it to the parents. As previously stated, if the teacher expects actual abuse, it should be reported, but parents and children disagreeing about rules is about as universal an experience as possible, and people go on to live full and productive lives afterwards. (And have similar disagreements with their own children.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on January 24, 2023, 06:33:18 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 05:27:25 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on January 23, 2023, 09:52:38 PM

3) What other things might a teacher do, contrary to the wishes of the parents?   If a kid wishes to stop participating in his parents' family religion, and adopt another religion, should the school facilitate such changes?

This is one that I think makes a good example. For instance, if a girl from a Muslim family did not want to wear a hijab at school, I don't think the teacher should have to force her to wear one. On the other hand, I also don't think the teacher should refuse to answer if the parents ask if she wears the hijab at school, and I certainly think it's very bad for the teacher to lie about it to the parents. As previously stated, if the teacher expects actual abuse, it should be reported, but parents and children disagreeing about rules is about as universal an experience as possible, and people go on to live full and productive lives afterwards. (And have similar disagreements with their own children.)

There is a difference between the parents asking and the teacher proactively telling them.

If a student is doing something that is not contrary to school rules, such as wearing or not wearing a hijab, then it's really not the school's business.

If the school rule is officially that students use whatever nickname, pronouns, and bathroom they prefer, again, then the student is following school rules and it isn't their business. It's not their job to get involved in a family matter.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on January 24, 2023, 06:37:58 AM
https://hyperallergic.com/795118/university-shutters-exhibition-featuring-klan-figures-dominique-simmons-arkansas-tech/

I'm struck by the sentence "
QuoteLast week, the African American Student Association (AASA) took to Instagram to lambast the exhibition, stating that as a White woman, Simmons has "no place attempting to communicate the issues, struggles, trauma, and history that involve the black community."

"Took to Instragram"? I suspect the author could not resist rolling eyes while writing.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 06:47:42 AM
Quote from: downer on January 24, 2023, 06:37:58 AM
https://hyperallergic.com/795118/university-shutters-exhibition-featuring-klan-figures-dominique-simmons-arkansas-tech/

I'm struck by the sentence "
QuoteLast week, the African American Student Association (AASA) took to Instagram to lambast the exhibition, stating that as a White woman, Simmons has "no place attempting to communicate the issues, struggles, trauma, and history that involve the black community."

"Took to Instragram"? I suspect the author could not resist rolling eyes while writing.

Here's my favourite:
Quote
"Reading the artist statement didn't really explain the point of the art other than to express her personal/family heritage, which I felt was odd because personally, I wouldn't express my family's heritage if it was, you know, racist or had racial undertones."

So, "expressing one's family heritage", even when it involves taking issue with the unsavoury parts, is unacceptable.

If any of your ancestors did anything bad, they should never be mentioned again.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on January 24, 2023, 06:53:10 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on January 23, 2023, 09:52:38 PM
Awright I am going to reengage here, and ask several questions:

1) exactly what are 'parents' rights' wrt how their minor children are to be raised?   I get that it is possible that informing parent x that his kid has embraced trans identity might induce a violent reaction, but there is simply no widespread epidemic of parents killing trans children.   Really, there just ain't, and mandated reporter laws provide for quick contacting of the cops whenever real violence is observed.

2) if kid x confides in teacher that he wishes to be addressed by pronouns contrary to his birth identity, and his parents are told this and forbid it, is this not parental right-- kid cannot for instance change his name legally until he is of age.   If parent x says 'my son is not to be allowed to pretend to be a girl in your school', under what authority and right would the school ignore such wishes?

3) What other things might a teacher do, contrary to the wishes of the parents?   If a kid wishes to stop participating in his parents' family religion, and adopt another religion, should the school facilitate such changes?

1). There is a lot of space between doing nothing and killing someone.  As a teacher, if a child came to you and said they prefer to be referred to as she/he, but are concerned their parents would disown them (for example, which is a fairly common outcome), do you feel it would be appropriate to break their confidence? 

There are many levels of abuse and other forms of mistreatment that would not trigger any intervention.  Do you disagree that children/teens should have a safe space at school to discuss issues in confidence? 

What if this issue was reversed and the parents were forcing their little boy to use gender neutral pronouns and wear their hair in aponytail with a pink scrunchy despite that they didn't want to?  Do you feel the school should tell the parents and automatically enforce their wishes or let the boy use male pronouns and let their hair down?

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 07:03:11 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on January 24, 2023, 06:53:10 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on January 23, 2023, 09:52:38 PM
Awright I am going to reengage here, and ask several questions:

1) exactly what are 'parents' rights' wrt how their minor children are to be raised?   I get that it is possible that informing parent x that his kid has embraced trans identity might induce a violent reaction, but there is simply no widespread epidemic of parents killing trans children.   Really, there just ain't, and mandated reporter laws provide for quick contacting of the cops whenever real violence is observed.

2) if kid x confides in teacher that he wishes to be addressed by pronouns contrary to his birth identity, and his parents are told this and forbid it, is this not parental right-- kid cannot for instance change his name legally until he is of age.   If parent x says 'my son is not to be allowed to pretend to be a girl in your school', under what authority and right would the school ignore such wishes?

3) What other things might a teacher do, contrary to the wishes of the parents?   If a kid wishes to stop participating in his parents' family religion, and adopt another religion, should the school facilitate such changes?

1). There is a lot of space between doing nothing and killing someone.  As a teacher, if a child came to you and said they prefer to be referred to as she/he, but are concerned their parents would disown them (for example, which is a fairly common outcome), do you feel it would be appropriate to break their confidence? 

There are many levels of abuse and other forms of mistreatment that would not trigger any intervention.  Do you disagree that children/teens should have a safe space at school to discuss issues in confidence?

We tell children not to get into strangers' cars, and not to take candy from strangers, etc. This is not because most strangers are evil, but because the few who are could employ tactics like that to take advantage of a child. Similarly, it is not a good precedent to get children to have secrets with adults that they keep from their parents, because there  are people who will use that to take advantage of children.

Furthermore, teachers are not trained counselors, either for medical or mental health matters. If a teacher feels a child needs professional counseling, then the child should be referred to a qualified professional. (Just like if a teacher suspects abuse, they should report it.)  Teachers who see themselves as more knowledgeable and/or more sympathetic than a child's parents, AND qualified to counsel on serious issues have a huge ego problem.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on January 24, 2023, 07:21:08 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on January 23, 2023, 09:52:38 PM
Awright I am going to reengage here, and ask several questions:

1) exactly what are 'parents' rights' wrt how their minor children are to be raised?   I get that it is possible that informing parent x that his kid has embraced trans identity might induce a violent reaction, but there is simply no widespread epidemic of parents killing trans children.   Really, there just ain't, and mandated reporter laws provide for quick contacting of the cops whenever real violence is observed.

Up until the point at which a child can think for himself/herself and negotiate those differences.

As far as taking on a "trans idenity," where is the line in your mind? A girl named Jessica wants to be called "Jess." A boy named Nicholas wants to be called "Nicki." Kids role-playing the opposite gender in a game. Dressing in clothing that might be considered appropriate for the opposite gender.

Again, if the other students don't mind, aren't bullying, and the student isn't otherwise disrupting school operations, don't the schools have more important things to worry about? Like... school shootings?
Quote

2) if kid x confides in teacher that he wishes to be addressed by pronouns contrary to his birth identity, and his parents are told this and forbid it, is this not parental right-- kid cannot for instance change his name legally until he is of age.   If parent x says 'my son is not to be allowed to pretend to be a girl in your school', under what authority and right would the school ignore such wishes?

"Mr. Parent, our school rules are that students can choose their own nicknames, pronouns and gender identities. At school we have a lot of students who need active monitoring for their own health and safety and that of others. This issue does not rise to that level of concern for the school so we will focus on students who have more pressing problems.

"What happens at home is your business. We hope you and your child can come to an agreement."

Quote
3) What other things might a teacher do, contrary to the wishes of the parents?   If a kid wishes to stop participating in his parents' family religion, and adopt another religion, should the school facilitate such changes?

Does a school worry about which kids eat ham sandwiches or roast beef on Friday or whose parents are vegan and wouldn't want them to eat pepperoni pizza? Unless it's a life-threatening allergy, I can't imagine schools worrying about whether a student's ordinary activities violate some family's personal practices.

Same with socializing with other children of different religions, races, or "enemy" nationalities. If the kids are happily playing peacefully, why would the teachers try to stir up trouble with the parents?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on January 24, 2023, 07:53:35 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 07:03:11 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on January 24, 2023, 06:53:10 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on January 23, 2023, 09:52:38 PM
Awright I am going to reengage here, and ask several questions:

1) exactly what are 'parents' rights' wrt how their minor children are to be raised?   I get that it is possible that informing parent x that his kid has embraced trans identity might induce a violent reaction, but there is simply no widespread epidemic of parents killing trans children.   Really, there just ain't, and mandated reporter laws provide for quick contacting of the cops whenever real violence is observed.

2) if kid x confides in teacher that he wishes to be addressed by pronouns contrary to his birth identity, and his parents are told this and forbid it, is this not parental right-- kid cannot for instance change his name legally until he is of age.   If parent x says 'my son is not to be allowed to pretend to be a girl in your school', under what authority and right would the school ignore such wishes?

3) What other things might a teacher do, contrary to the wishes of the parents?   If a kid wishes to stop participating in his parents' family religion, and adopt another religion, should the school facilitate such changes?

1). There is a lot of space between doing nothing and killing someone.  As a teacher, if a child came to you and said they prefer to be referred to as she/he, but are concerned their parents would disown them (for example, which is a fairly common outcome), do you feel it would be appropriate to break their confidence? 

There are many levels of abuse and other forms of mistreatment that would not trigger any intervention.  Do you disagree that children/teens should have a safe space at school to discuss issues in confidence?

We tell children not to get into strangers' cars, and not to take candy from strangers, etc. This is not because most strangers are evil, but because the few who are could employ tactics like that to take advantage of a child. Similarly, it is not a good precedent to get children to have secrets with adults that they keep from their parents, because there  are people who will use that to take advantage of children.

Furthermore, teachers are not trained counselors, either for medical or mental health matters. If a teacher feels a child needs professional counseling, then the child should be referred to a qualified professional. (Just like if a teacher suspects abuse, they should report it.)  Teachers who see themselves as more knowledgeable and/or more sympathetic than a child's parents, AND qualified to counsel on serious issues have a huge ego problem.

So what is with confession at church then! 

My high school had councilors and that would indeed be the appropriate response.  The teacher should send them to the councilor, who is trained in these matters, and keep what was disclosed to them by the student in confidence.  If there are no councilors, I feel the teacher should still provide an ear as the student may have nowhere else to turn.  I guess I feel the risk of children being taken advantage of is greater without this outlet (most cases of abuse (sexual and otherwise) are from relatives).       
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 08:09:08 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on January 24, 2023, 07:53:35 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 07:03:11 AM

Furthermore, teachers are not trained counselors, either for medical or mental health matters. If a teacher feels a child needs professional counseling, then the child should be referred to a qualified professional. (Just like if a teacher suspects abuse, they should report it.)  Teachers who see themselves as more knowledgeable and/or more sympathetic than a child's parents, AND qualified to counsel on serious issues have a huge ego problem.

So what is with confession at church then! 


Hearing "confession" would count as a form of spiritual counseling, and a member of the clergy would be the person with the appropriate training to provide spiritual counseling.

Quote
My high school had councilors and that would indeed be the appropriate response.  The teacher should send them to the councilor, who is trained in these matters, and keep what was disclosed to them by the student in confidence.  If there are no councilors, I feel the teacher should still provide an ear as the student may have nowhere else to turn.  I guess I feel the risk of children being taken advantage of is greater without this outlet (most cases of abuse (sexual and otherwise) are from relatives).     

If a teacher were only listening, that wouldn't be a big problem. However, many (if not most) would feel the need to actually provide advice, including advice which conflicts with the parents' wishes.

Considering the example of the girl who doesn't want to wear a hijab; simply listening to her struggles is not a problem. Encouraging her to take off her hijab at school is implicitly undermining her parents' authority. (This doesn't mean the teacher has to nag her to wear the hijab, either. The teacher should be neutral by default.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on January 24, 2023, 08:59:32 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 08:09:08 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on January 24, 2023, 07:53:35 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 07:03:11 AM

Furthermore, teachers are not trained counselors, either for medical or mental health matters. If a teacher feels a child needs professional counseling, then the child should be referred to a qualified professional. (Just like if a teacher suspects abuse, they should report it.)  Teachers who see themselves as more knowledgeable and/or more sympathetic than a child's parents, AND qualified to counsel on serious issues have a huge ego problem.

So what is with confession at church then! 


Hearing "confession" would count as a form of spiritual counseling, and a member of the clergy would be the person with the appropriate training to provide spiritual counseling.

Quote
My high school had councilors and that would indeed be the appropriate response.  The teacher should send them to the councilor, who is trained in these matters, and keep what was disclosed to them by the student in confidence.  If there are no councilors, I feel the teacher should still provide an ear as the student may have nowhere else to turn.  I guess I feel the risk of children being taken advantage of is greater without this outlet (most cases of abuse (sexual and otherwise) are from relatives).     

If a teacher were only listening, that wouldn't be a big problem. However, many (if not most) would feel the need to actually provide advice, including advice which conflicts with the parents' wishes.

Considering the example of the girl who doesn't want to wear a hijab; simply listening to her struggles is not a problem. Encouraging her to take off her hijab at school is implicitly undermining her parents' authority. (This doesn't mean the teacher has to nag her to wear the hijab, either. The teacher should be neutral by default.)

Qualified or not, there are problems afoot with the Priest-alter boy relationship.

As for the teachers, we seem to agree for the most part as weird as that is.  I suppose my concern is that many schools do not have guidance councilors , which forces teachers to step into this role.  It is not ideal, but better than leaving children without any resources outside of their family.  I also assume teachers do have some rudimentary training on what to do in these situations. 


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 24, 2023, 09:48:13 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on January 23, 2023, 09:52:38 PM
Awright I am going to reengage here, and ask several questions:

1) exactly what are 'parents' rights' wrt how their minor children are to be raised?   I get that it is possible that informing parent x that his kid has embraced trans identity might induce a violent reaction, but there is simply no widespread epidemic of parents killing trans children.   Really, there just ain't, and mandated reporter laws provide for quick contacting of the cops whenever real violence is observed.

This is one of those incredible strawmen arguments that doesn't really deserve a response.

I've never heard of this claim about parents killing trans kids.  Has anyone?  Are hardcore social conservatives incapable of sticking to the facts?  Or, in order to virtue signal, must they go all reductio ad absurdum on us?

And again, trans is not violence or attempts at bodily injury, so don't try to compare them in an attempt to construct an  argument.

But there are other kinds of damage done from parents who cannot beat their own prejudices.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 24, 2023, 09:52:49 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 08:09:08 AM
If a teacher were only listening, that wouldn't be a big problem. However, many (if not most) would feel the need to actually provide advice, including advice which conflicts with the parents' wishes.

As always, Marshyman, I think you just make things up in order to have a point to argue.

Either that, or you seem to take one or a handful of incidents and make rather propagandistic blanket statements out of them.

What teacher(s) have done this?  Is this a trend?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on January 24, 2023, 10:11:58 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 08:09:08 AM

If a teacher were only listening, that wouldn't be a big problem. However, many (if not most) would feel the need to actually provide advice, including advice which conflicts with the parents' wishes.

Considering the example of the girl who doesn't want to wear a hijab; simply listening to her struggles is not a problem. Encouraging her to take off her hijab at school is implicitly undermining her parents' authority. (This doesn't mean the teacher has to nag her to wear the hijab, either. The teacher should be neutral by default.)

There is no neutral stance in this case. The teacher listens to the student's concerns and asks what she is concluding. Regardless of what the student decides (I should keep wearing the hijab vs. I will not wear it in school) silence and support implies agreement.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 24, 2023, 11:29:00 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 08:09:08 AM

If a teacher were only listening, that wouldn't be a big problem. However, many (if not most) would feel the need to actually provide advice, including advice which conflicts with the parents' wishes.

Considering the example of the girl who doesn't want to wear a hijab; simply listening to her struggles is not a problem. Encouraging her to take off her hijab at school is implicitly undermining her parents' authority. (This doesn't mean the teacher has to nag her to wear the hijab, either. The teacher should be neutral by default.)

Are there specific topics the teacher should be "neutral" about, or is it just any issue that the student has that a teacher should be "neutral" about?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on January 24, 2023, 11:04:00 PM
There is of course no epidemic of trans identifying kids being offed by their parents, but various posters here have raised concerns for what might happen in terms of physical violence, should teacher/ school inform parents of a kids' choice to id as trans.   If any concrete threats are made, call cops or social services.   But this would of course be the case for any potential thing a teacher might tell parent about, concerning kid, that parent does not like: I had a headmaster rescind a (justly deserved) punishment he had decided to impose on a kid, for repeated misbehavior in my class, because he told me he feared what the child's father would do to her when he was informed.  It was probably a bad decision on my part not to do something concrete in this situation, ten years ago.  'Disowning' is another issue entirely.. there are consequences of actions, and if a parent 'disowns' a kid in this situation (BTW, what exactly does it mean to 'disown' an underage kid anyhow?), and what would end up happening would almost certainly end up worse, should parent not be told.

Now are we all in agreement that if a (likely mentally ill) parent attempted to force trans behavior choices on a child who did not self-id as trans, that this would be child abuse which should be reported to child services?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 25, 2023, 07:52:16 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on January 24, 2023, 11:04:00 PM
Now are we all in agreement that if a (likely mentally ill) parent attempted to force trans behavior choices on a child who did not self-id as trans, that this would be child abuse which should be reported to child services?

Just remember that your got'cha moments tend to fall flat, my friend.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 26, 2023, 05:03:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on January 24, 2023, 10:11:58 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 08:09:08 AM

If a teacher were only listening, that wouldn't be a big problem. However, many (if not most) would feel the need to actually provide advice, including advice which conflicts with the parents' wishes.

Considering the example of the girl who doesn't want to wear a hijab; simply listening to her struggles is not a problem. Encouraging her to take off her hijab at school is implicitly undermining her parents' authority. (This doesn't mean the teacher has to nag her to wear the hijab, either. The teacher should be neutral by default.)

There is no neutral stance in this case. The teacher listens to the student's concerns and asks what she is concluding. Regardless of what the student decides (I should keep wearing the hijab vs. I will not wear it in school) silence and support implies agreement.

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 24, 2023, 11:29:00 AM

Are there specific topics the teacher should be "neutral" about, or is it just any issue that the student has that a teacher should be "neutral" about?

The primary responsibility of the teachers is students' education. Furthermore, the teacher should be concerned with the education of all of the students. Anything which distracts students in the classroom from focus on their education is bad.

Whenever a teacher is "non-neutral" about any topic on which students may have varying opinions, and varying degrees of passion, the issue will become more of a distraction for those students who are passionate about it, regardless of their opinion on it.

So, for the hijab example. By the teacher taking a side, either supporting the student's not wearing the hijab, or by trying to support the parents' expectation that she wear it,  other students observing will be encouraged to speculate.

If the teacher supports the student in not wearing it.

If the teacher supports the parents' wish that the student wear it.

These speculations are going to distract students, regardless of whether they actually reflect the teacher's views or not.

By taking an explicitly and intentionally *neutral stance, the teacher reinforces the idea that her priority (and the priority of the students in the classroom) is their education.

(Sample response: "The school dress code doesn't require or forbid hijabs, so anything not part of the school dress code is not my business." Note that response is equally valid whatever "side" of the issue the teacher is on.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on January 26, 2023, 06:08:49 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on January 24, 2023, 11:04:00 PM
There is of course no epidemic of trans identifying kids being offed by their parents, but various posters here have raised concerns for what might happen in terms of physical violence, should teacher/ school inform parents of a kids' choice to id as trans.   If any concrete threats are made, call cops or social services.   But this would of course be the case for any potential thing a teacher might tell parent about, concerning kid, that parent does not like: I had a headmaster rescind a (justly deserved) punishment he had decided to impose on a kid, for repeated misbehavior in my class, because he told me he feared what the child's father would do to her when he was informed.  It was probably a bad decision on my part not to do something concrete in this situation, ten years ago.  'Disowning' is another issue entirely.. there are consequences of actions, and if a parent 'disowns' a kid in this situation (BTW, what exactly does it mean to 'disown' an underage kid anyhow?), and what would end up happening would almost certainly end up worse, should parent not be told.

Now are we all in agreement that if a (likely mentally ill) parent attempted to force trans behavior choices on a child who did not self-id as trans, that this would be child abuse which should be reported to child services?

Yes, I agree that a parent forcing their prefered gender identity on their child is in appropriate and should not be supported.  Thanks for your support.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on January 26, 2023, 06:13:14 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 26, 2023, 05:03:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on January 24, 2023, 10:11:58 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 08:09:08 AM

If a teacher were only listening, that wouldn't be a big problem. However, many (if not most) would feel the need to actually provide advice, including advice which conflicts with the parents' wishes.

Considering the example of the girl who doesn't want to wear a hijab; simply listening to her struggles is not a problem. Encouraging her to take off her hijab at school is implicitly undermining her parents' authority. (This doesn't mean the teacher has to nag her to wear the hijab, either. The teacher should be neutral by default.)

There is no neutral stance in this case. The teacher listens to the student's concerns and asks what she is concluding. Regardless of what the student decides (I should keep wearing the hijab vs. I will not wear it in school) silence and support implies agreement.

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 24, 2023, 11:29:00 AM

Are there specific topics the teacher should be "neutral" about, or is it just any issue that the student has that a teacher should be "neutral" about?

The primary responsibility of the teachers is students' education. Furthermore, the teacher should be concerned with the education of all of the students. Anything which distracts students in the classroom from focus on their education is bad.

Whenever a teacher is "non-neutral" about any topic on which students may have varying opinions, and varying degrees of passion, the issue will become more of a distraction for those students who are passionate about it, regardless of their opinion on it.

So, for the hijab example. By the teacher taking a side, either supporting the student's not wearing the hijab, or by trying to support the parents' expectation that she wear it,  other students observing will be encouraged to speculate.

If the teacher supports the student in not wearing it.

  • Does this mean she thinks Islam (or perhaps all organized religion) is ridiculous and/or oppressive?
  • Does this mean she thinks parents are generally out of touch, and (most?) teenage rebellion is good?

If the teacher supports the parents' wish that the student wear it.

  • Does this mean she thinks society is missing the authority of  organized religion?
  • Does this mean she thinks parents should always be obeyed, and (most?) teenage rebellion is bad?

These speculations are going to distract students, regardless of whether they actually reflect the teacher's views or not.

By taking an explicitly and intentionally *neutral stance, the teacher reinforces the idea that her priority (and the priority of the students in the classroom) is their education.

(Sample response: "The school dress code doesn't require or forbid hijabs, so anything not part of the school dress code is not my business." Note that response is equally valid whatever "side" of the issue the teacher is on.)

As you say, it is not the teachers job to enforce the child's parents wishes at school.  For the Hijab, there is no code at school stating you need to wear one, so the teacher should allow the student to take it off if they wish.  The parents would see this as being against them.

Likewise, if a child wants to us a different pronoun (which is compliant with most school policies), who is the teacher to deny them? 

I also think some nuance is being missed here when we talk about children in general based on child age.  If a 17 year old wants to go by they/them, I feel they should have the agency.  The black and white 18 yo line is bizarre.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: waterboy on January 26, 2023, 10:18:41 AM
Whether or not a teacher supports or doesn't support - how about the simple statement that it's not the teacher's business - that rests with the parents. If that leads to a ruckus, pass it up the chain of command.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 26, 2023, 10:44:07 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 26, 2023, 05:03:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on January 24, 2023, 10:11:58 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 24, 2023, 08:09:08 AM

If a teacher were only listening, that wouldn't be a big problem. However, many (if not most) would feel the need to actually provide advice, including advice which conflicts with the parents' wishes.

Considering the example of the girl who doesn't want to wear a hijab; simply listening to her struggles is not a problem. Encouraging her to take off her hijab at school is implicitly undermining her parents' authority. (This doesn't mean the teacher has to nag her to wear the hijab, either. The teacher should be neutral by default.)

There is no neutral stance in this case. The teacher listens to the student's concerns and asks what she is concluding. Regardless of what the student decides (I should keep wearing the hijab vs. I will not wear it in school) silence and support implies agreement.

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 24, 2023, 11:29:00 AM

Are there specific topics the teacher should be "neutral" about, or is it just any issue that the student has that a teacher should be "neutral" about?

The primary responsibility of the teachers is students' education. Furthermore, the teacher should be concerned with the education of all of the students. Anything which distracts students in the classroom from focus on their education is bad.

Whenever a teacher is "non-neutral" about any topic on which students may have varying opinions, and varying degrees of passion, the issue will become more of a distraction for those students who are passionate about it, regardless of their opinion on it.

So, for the hijab example. By the teacher taking a side, either supporting the student's not wearing the hijab, or by trying to support the parents' expectation that she wear it,  other students observing will be encouraged to speculate.

If the teacher supports the student in not wearing it.

  • Does this mean she thinks Islam (or perhaps all organized religion) is ridiculous and/or oppressive?
  • Does this mean she thinks parents are generally out of touch, and (most?) teenage rebellion is good?

If the teacher supports the parents' wish that the student wear it.

  • Does this mean she thinks society is missing the authority of  organized religion?
  • Does this mean she thinks parents should always be obeyed, and (most?) teenage rebellion is bad?

These speculations are going to distract students, regardless of whether they actually reflect the teacher's views or not.

By taking an explicitly and intentionally *neutral stance, the teacher reinforces the idea that her priority (and the priority of the students in the classroom) is their education.

(Sample response: "The school dress code doesn't require or forbid hijabs, so anything not part of the school dress code is not my business." Note that response is equally valid whatever "side" of the issue the teacher is on.)

So, if the student comes to the teacher and says, "My parents make me to wear a hijab, but I am not a Muslim, and I am self-conscious wearing it around other students because I am worried they might make fun of me or even attack me.  So please don't tell my parents that I take it off when I am at school.  I also want an Anglicized name, please call me 'Amy' not 'Amara'"  The teacher is "neutral."  What is the teacher supposed to do?

And what is it that you think teachers are doing that would require them to be "neutral?"  You realize that education is a long time scapegoat for arch conservatives.  Your commentary sounds a bit like parroting.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 26, 2023, 11:04:18 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 26, 2023, 10:44:07 AM

So, if the student comes to the teacher and says, "My parents make me to wear a hijab, but I am not a Muslim, and I am self-conscious wearing it around other students because I am worried they might make fun of me or even attack me.  So please don't tell my parents that I take it off when I am at school.  I also want an Anglicized name, please call me 'Amy' not 'Amara'"  The teacher is "neutral."  What is the teacher supposed to do?

Since the school has no policy specifically around hijabs, then the student doesn't need the teacher's approval, so the teacher can honestly say "It's none of my business." If there's no school policy about nicknames, then again the teacher should follow whatever the practice is with students' names in general. The fact that the hijab (and possibly the name) have something to do with the student being a Muslim has no bearing at all on what dress or name is allowed in the school, and the teacher should explicitly confirm that.

Similarly, the teacher is not going to go through the lunch room to make sure the student's food is halal, because the school has no rules about that.

Quote
And what is it that you think teachers are doing that would require them to be "neutral?"  You realize that education is a long time scapegoat for arch conservatives.  Your commentary sounds a bit like parroting.

Teachers should avoid slogans, political party identification, etc. so that what they reinforce to students is that in the classroom, students' education is the focus. Period.

(I really don't want my financial advisor to explain the benefits (or liabilities) of cannabis legalization. I don't want my lawyer spouting about the merits (or evils) of veganism. Professional settings should focus on the business at hand; I can choose who I want to socialize with, which may include those kinds of discussions. But I don't want to have to think about what ideas or opinions I should or should not express so that the professional relationship will be smooth. )

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 26, 2023, 11:27:41 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 26, 2023, 11:04:18 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 26, 2023, 10:44:07 AM

So, if the student comes to the teacher and says, "My parents make me to wear a hijab, but I am not a Muslim, and I am self-conscious wearing it around other students because I am worried they might make fun of me or even attack me.  So please don't tell my parents that I take it off when I am at school.  I also want an Anglicized name, please call me 'Amy' not 'Amara'"  The teacher is "neutral."  What is the teacher supposed to do?

Since the school has no policy specifically around hijabs, then the student doesn't need the teacher's approval, so the teacher can honestly say "It's none of my business." If there's no school policy about nicknames, then again the teacher should follow whatever the practice is with students' names in general. The fact that the hijab (and possibly the name) have something to do with the student being a Muslim has no bearing at all on what dress or name is allowed in the school, and the teacher should explicitly confirm that.

Similarly, the teacher is not going to go through the lunch room to make sure the student's food is halal, because the school has no rules about that.

Okay.  So the teacher just shrugs and lets it go.  Earlier your commentary was this:

Quote
On the other hand, I also don't think the teacher should refuse to answer if the parents ask if she wears the hijab at school, and I certainly think it's very bad for the teacher to lie about it to the parents. As previously stated, if the teacher expects actual abuse, it should be reported, but parents and children disagreeing about rules is about as universal an experience as possible, and people go on to live full and productive lives afterwards. (And have similar disagreements with their own children.)

And:

Quote
Do you seriously believe that your kids' teachers will know your kids that much better than you, when they have known the kid for probably a few months in a class of 20+, whereas you have literally known them since birth?

And:

Quote
it is not a good precedent to get children to have secrets with adults that they keep from their parents, because there  are people who will use that to take advantage of children.

Now, what happens when the parents call the teacher and ask if their daughter is wearing the hijab and using the name they gave her?   

Quote
Teachers should avoid slogans, political party identification, etc. so that what they reinforce to students is that in the classroom, students' education is the focus. Period.

There will always be some outlier somewhere, but is there evidence enough to warrant this concern about teachers trying to influence their students' political beliefs?  I'll say it again, a little more strongly: This is a longtime propagandistic ploy of the hard right to demonize public schools with very scant evidence that this happens at all.  Have you fallen into the propaganda morass?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 26, 2023, 11:55:25 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 26, 2023, 11:27:41 AM

Now, what happens when the parents call the teacher and ask if their daughter is wearing the hijab and using the name they gave her?   


As I said earlier
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 26, 2023, 11:04:18 AM
Quote
On the other hand, I also don't think the teacher should refuse to answer if the parents ask if she wears the hijab at school, and I certainly think it's very bad for the teacher to lie about it to the parents. As previously stated, if the teacher expects actual abuse, it should be reported, but parents and children disagreeing about rules is about as universal an experience as possible, and people go on to live full and productive lives afterwards. (And have similar disagreements with their own children.)

I'll amend that and say that if the teacher wants to state the school dress code and confirm that their daughter was not in violation of the dress code, and leave it at that, then that would also be OK. The point is that it's the same message for the student AND the parents; as long as it complies with the dress code, it's the student's business and the teacher has nothing to say about it.


Quote
Quote
Teachers should avoid slogans, political party identification, etc. so that what they reinforce to students is that in the classroom, students' education is the focus. Period.

There will always be some outlier somewhere, but is there evidence enough to warrant this concern about teachers trying to influence their students' political beliefs?  I'll say it again, a little more strongly: This is a longtime propagandistic ploy of the hard right to demonize public schools with very scant evidence that this happens at all.  Have you fallen into the propaganda morass?

Let's put it another way. Do you want conservative teachers trying to influence their students' beliefs? Or would you rather they stuck to the program of teaching the subject matter? I don't care what their specific beliefs are; we don't need schools to be one more place where everyone has to make sure they don't say the "wrong" thing about something which has nothing to do with school.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 26, 2023, 12:21:52 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 26, 2023, 11:55:25 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 26, 2023, 11:27:41 AM

Now, what happens when the parents call the teacher and ask if their daughter is wearing the hijab and using the name they gave her?   


As I said earlier
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 26, 2023, 11:04:18 AM
Quote
On the other hand, I also don't think the teacher should refuse to answer if the parents ask if she wears the hijab at school, and I certainly think it's very bad for the teacher to lie about it to the parents. As previously stated, if the teacher expects actual abuse, it should be reported, but parents and children disagreeing about rules is about as universal an experience as possible, and people go on to live full and productive lives afterwards. (And have similar disagreements with their own children.)

I'll amend that and say that if the teacher wants to state the school dress code and confirm that their daughter was not in violation of the dress code, and leave it at that, then that would also be OK. The point is that it's the same message for the student AND the parents; as long as it complies with the dress code, it's the student's business and the teacher has nothing to say about it.

Hmmmmmm...Now it is "amended" to simply recite policy.  Well, okay, I think we should extend that to trans students, no? 


Quote
Let's put it another way. Do you want conservative teachers trying to influence their students' beliefs? Or would you rather they stuck to the program of teaching the subject matter? I don't care what their specific beliefs are; we don't need schools to be one more place where everyone has to make sure they don't say the "wrong" thing about something which has nothing to do with school.

Again, Marshy, that's not the question.  Is there any widespread evidence that teachers-----conservative, liberal, Christian, Muslim, Satanic, or Cthulian-----have been trying to influence their students' political views?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Istiblennius on January 26, 2023, 01:50:04 PM
"Teachers should avoid slogans"

The problem here is that statements reflecting good professional practice of teachers like "everyone is welcome here" or "science is real" are viewed by some people (they tend to regularly view a news channel named after a caniform carnivore) as a politicized slogan.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on January 26, 2023, 02:09:13 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 26, 2023, 11:55:25 AM

Let's put it another way. Do you want conservative teachers trying to influence their students' beliefs? Or would you rather they stuck to the program of teaching the subject matter? I don't care what their specific beliefs are; we don't need schools to be one more place where everyone has to make sure they don't say the "wrong" thing about something which has nothing to do with school.

I'm not sure what this means. The vast majority of research around science, sociology, economics, history, you-name-it tends to be "liberal."

Which is why "conservatives" hate the idea of evolution as an accepted phenomenon; equality as being best for a productive society; appropriate government macroeconomic involvement to ensure smoothly moving free markets; that ugly things have happened...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on January 26, 2023, 02:33:45 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on January 26, 2023, 02:09:13 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 26, 2023, 11:55:25 AM

Let's put it another way. Do you want conservative teachers trying to influence their students' beliefs? Or would you rather they stuck to the program of teaching the subject matter? I don't care what their specific beliefs are; we don't need schools to be one more place where everyone has to make sure they don't say the "wrong" thing about something which has nothing to do with school.

I'm not sure what this means. The vast majority of research around science, sociology, economics, history, you-name-it tends to be "liberal."

Which is why "conservatives" hate the idea of evolution as an accepted phenomenon; equality as being best for a productive society; appropriate government macroeconomic involvement to ensure smoothly moving free markets; that ugly things have happened...

Rather than regaling us with an enlightening and revealing disquisition on the history and philosophy of science, let me say that the sociology of science is far more interesting than the philosophy of science!

Take an outstanding example, the science of climate change. It is a very challenging subject. Nevertheless,

Q: What do you call a situation in which a small group of researchers make bold predictions but won't share their data, try to get contradictory articles blackballed from journals, lash out at critics with lawsuits, and see most of their predictions fall by the way side?

A: Settled science.

That's a network of people living off the fat of the land of government money, research grants!

There's no such thing as settled science. There are only settled scientists.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: waterboy on January 26, 2023, 02:48:19 PM
When 98% of climate scientists state there's human caused climate change, that's a close to "settled" as you'll ever get.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 26, 2023, 02:54:38 PM
Quote from: Istiblennius on January 26, 2023, 01:50:04 PM
"Teachers should avoid slogans"

The problem here is that statements reflecting good professional practice of teachers like "everyone is welcome here" or "science is real" are viewed by some people (they tend to regularly view a news channel named after a caniform carnivore) as a politicized slogan.

And dismalist posts:

Quote
Q: What do you call a situation in which a small group of researchers make bold predictions but won't share their data, try to get contradictory articles blackballed from journals, lash out at critics with lawsuits, and see most of their predictions fall by the way side?

A: Settled science.

That's a network of people living off the fat of the land of government money, research grants!

There's no such thing as settled science. There are only settled scientists.

Big-D, you just did the thing.  Without an ounce of irony.

Hilarious.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on January 26, 2023, 03:10:54 PM
Quote from: waterboy on January 26, 2023, 02:48:19 PM
When 98% of climate scientists state there's human caused climate change, that's a close to "settled" as you'll ever get.

It is not at all clear what those 98% agreed to, and what they are 98% of. Just repeating that number is uncritical.

But this is just another example of the fact that the sociology of science is more interesting than the philosophy of science.

Reminds me of Einstein's reaction to multitudinous physicists opposing his views. A letter against him was signed by many, the previously successful physicists. Einstein said words to the effect that one signature would have been enough, implying one correct person would have done the trick!

Science is not a democracy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on January 26, 2023, 05:21:13 PM
Quote from: dismalist on January 26, 2023, 02:33:45 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on January 26, 2023, 02:09:13 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 26, 2023, 11:55:25 AM

Let's put it another way. Do you want conservative teachers trying to influence their students' beliefs? Or would you rather they stuck to the program of teaching the subject matter? I don't care what their specific beliefs are; we don't need schools to be one more place where everyone has to make sure they don't say the "wrong" thing about something which has nothing to do with school.

I'm not sure what this means. The vast majority of research around science, sociology, economics, history, you-name-it tends to be "liberal."

Which is why "conservatives" hate the idea of evolution as an accepted phenomenon; equality as being best for a productive society; appropriate government macroeconomic involvement to ensure smoothly moving free markets; that ugly things have happened...

Rather than regaling us with an enlightening and revealing disquisition on the history and philosophy of science, let me say that the sociology of science is far more interesting than the philosophy of science!

Take an outstanding example, the science of climate change. It is a very challenging subject. Nevertheless,

Q: What do you call a situation in which a small group of researchers make bold predictions but won't share their data, try to get contradictory articles blackballed from journals, lash out at critics with lawsuits, and see most of their predictions fall by the way side?

A: Settled science.

That's a network of people living off the fat of the land of government money, research grants!

There's no such thing as settled science. There are only settled scientists.

Climate science has published lots of data and research demonstrating the impact of greenhouse gases. Even oil companies were aware of the issue and decided not to do anything.

Who and what has been "blackballed" if it was otherwise good science?

Not sure what you mean by "bold predictions" that have "fallen by the wayside" because most are out into the future, still, current activity seems to be pointing to these trends.

If you can share specifics from reasonable sources I'd be happy to get more information. Or even unreasonable sources - why not?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 26, 2023, 05:25:29 PM
Climate denialists are not going to be rational.  There is no point in debating.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on January 26, 2023, 06:06:56 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on January 26, 2023, 05:21:13 PM
Quote from: dismalist on January 26, 2023, 02:33:45 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on January 26, 2023, 02:09:13 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 26, 2023, 11:55:25 AM

Let's put it another way. Do you want conservative teachers trying to influence their students' beliefs? Or would you rather they stuck to the program of teaching the subject matter? I don't care what their specific beliefs are; we don't need schools to be one more place where everyone has to make sure they don't say the "wrong" thing about something which has nothing to do with school.

I'm not sure what this means. The vast majority of research around science, sociology, economics, history, you-name-it tends to be "liberal."

Which is why "conservatives" hate the idea of evolution as an accepted phenomenon; equality as being best for a productive society; appropriate government macroeconomic involvement to ensure smoothly moving free markets; that ugly things have happened...

Rather than regaling us with an enlightening and revealing disquisition on the history and philosophy of science, let me say that the sociology of science is far more interesting than the philosophy of science!

Take an outstanding example, the science of climate change. It is a very challenging subject. Nevertheless,

Q: What do you call a situation in which a small group of researchers make bold predictions but won't share their data, try to get contradictory articles blackballed from journals, lash out at critics with lawsuits, and see most of their predictions fall by the way side?

A: Settled science.

That's a network of people living off the fat of the land of government money, research grants!

There's no such thing as settled science. There are only settled scientists.

Climate science has published lots of data and research demonstrating the impact of greenhouse gases. Even oil companies were aware of the issue and decided not to do anything.

Who and what has been "blackballed" if it was otherwise good science?

Not sure what you mean by "bold predictions" that have "fallen by the wayside" because most are out into the future, still, current activity seems to be pointing to these trends.

If you can share specifics from reasonable sources I'd be happy to get more information. Or even unreasonable sources - why not?

I am certainly not trying to convince anyone that the mean temperature is not rising! It fell from ca. 1944 to ca. 1980, and has risen since, ca. one degree C per century. That's the mean prediction of the ICCP, too. [That's the average prediction of current climate science.]  What the consequences are for us, climate scientists are the last to know. I have no skin in this game because I think warming has trivial consequences. Everybody do his own research. I do hope that climate science is on the straight and narrow. 

What I do wish to emphasize is that 98% accordance is meaningless, and that the effect of interest in climate has been religious rather than scientific. Not different from apocalyptic fears repeated in human history.

This gets us into the nature of science after all.

What is missing [to differing degrees] in the social sciences and in a field like climate science is sharp and temporarily convincing tests. Law of gravity can be tested quite convincingly by jumping off my 25th story balcony. [Yes, I know these are all joint hypotheses.] There is a joke in psychology that your results apply only to the group you have studied! Economics -- well -- the micro part, the part everybody hates, is 98% correct. The macro part -- the part everybody loves --  is 50% correct. We just don't know which 50%. So, climate science is just like these.

Sociologically, follow the money. Epistemologically, humility is in order.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 26, 2023, 07:14:46 PM
Quote from: dismalist on January 26, 2023, 06:06:56 PM
I am certainly not trying to convince anyone that the mean temperature is not rising! It fell from ca. 1944 to ca. 1980, and has risen since, ca. one degree C per century. That's the mean prediction of the ICCP, too.


Quote
Earth's temperature has risen by an average of 0.14° Fahrenheit (0.08° Celsius) per decade since 1880, or about 2° F in total.

The rate of warming since 1981 is more than twice as fast: 0.32° F (0.18° C) per decade.

2022 was the sixth-warmest year on record based on NOAA's temperature data.

The 2022 surface temperature was 1.55 °F (0.86 °Celsius) warmer than the 20th-century average of 57.0 °F (13.9 °C) and 1.90 ˚F (1.06 ˚C) warmer than the pre-industrial period (1880-1900).

The 10 warmest years in the historical record have all occurred since 2010.

U.S. Gov: Climate Change: Global Temperature (https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature#:~:text=Earth's%20temperature%20has%20risen%20by,0.18%C2%B0%20C)%20per%20decade.)

I cannot think of any other sphere of science in which scientists are challenged by politically motivated nonscientists.  Like some other posters, what you say comes right out of the wingnut playbook, Big-D. 

I'll go with what the actual scientist are saying.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on January 27, 2023, 05:16:02 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on January 26, 2023, 02:09:13 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on January 26, 2023, 11:55:25 AM

Let's put it another way. Do you want conservative teachers trying to influence their students' beliefs? Or would you rather they stuck to the program of teaching the subject matter? I don't care what their specific beliefs are; we don't need schools to be one more place where everyone has to make sure they don't say the "wrong" thing about something which has nothing to do with school.

I'm not sure what this means. The vast majority of research around science, sociology, economics, history, you-name-it tends to be "liberal."

Which is why "conservatives" hate the idea of evolution as an accepted phenomenon; equality as being best for a productive society; appropriate government macroeconomic involvement to ensure smoothly moving free markets; that ugly things have happened...

That biological sex is real?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on January 27, 2023, 07:14:33 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on January 26, 2023, 07:14:46 PM
Quote from: dismalist on January 26, 2023, 06:06:56 PM
I am certainly not trying to convince anyone that the mean temperature is not rising! It fell from ca. 1944 to ca. 1980, and has risen since, ca. one degree C per century. That's the mean prediction of the ICCP, too.


Quote
Earth's temperature has risen by an average of 0.14° Fahrenheit (0.08° Celsius) per decade since 1880, or about 2° F in total.

The rate of warming since 1981 is more than twice as fast: 0.32° F (0.18° C) per decade.

2022 was the sixth-warmest year on record based on NOAA's temperature data.

The 2022 surface temperature was 1.55 °F (0.86 °Celsius) warmer than the 20th-century average of 57.0 °F (13.9 °C) and 1.90 ˚F (1.06 ˚C) warmer than the pre-industrial period (1880-1900).

The 10 warmest years in the historical record have all occurred since 2010.

U.S. Gov: Climate Change: Global Temperature (https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature#:~:text=Earth's%20temperature%20has%20risen%20by,0.18%C2%B0%20C)%20per%20decade.)

I cannot think of any other sphere of science in which scientists are challenged by politically motivated nonscientists.  Like some other posters, what you say comes right out of the wingnut playbook, Big-D. 

I'll go with what the actual scientist are saying.

This sounds so much like the antivax rhetoric of late. 

Dismaliat does have a point that the sociology of science is I retesting, but I think it is the denialists that make it so.  I know so many people who may not have even completed high school that know better than the epidemiologists and climate scientists that is is not funny. 

His whole post echos the main talking points, including the whole not having a horse in the race and just being curious etc.  Other people are also curious, have spent their careers evaluating the evidence, and largely agree, but go ahead and stay curious.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on January 27, 2023, 12:51:01 PM


QuoteThis sounds so much like the antivax rhetoric of late. 

Dismaliat does have a point that the sociology of science is I retesting, but I think it is the denialists that make it so.  I know so many people who may not have even completed high school that know better than the epidemiologists and climate scientists that is is not funny. 

His whole post echos the main talking points, including the whole not having a horse in the race and just being curious etc.  Other people are also curious, have spent their careers evaluating the evidence, and largely agree, but go ahead and stay curious.

There is indeed a telling parallel between climate change and epidemiology.

From what I can tell, warming is real and Covid is real. :-) That is one hell of a distance from being able to promulgate proper policy!

The temperature of the earth has varied widely. We are actually in a cool period. I am happy to let climate scientists sort out the causes. The average of IPCC 6 [2022] prediction of about 1° C per century increase looks like a good thing! More CO2 in the air means better plant growth and higher agricultural yields. Less water needed for plants. Deserts can be pushed back. The North becomes more productive and habitable. The warmer regions are not expected to rise in temperature as much as the colder regions. As there is a higher death rate from the cold than from heat, humans will flourish. Onward to Canada!

Similarly with epidemics. I am happy to let biologists sort out the source of Covid and why it kills. I think epidemiology in response to Covid was seriously misguided, and has been captured by bureaucrats pursuing their own agenda, and this almost world wide, Sweden being a notable exception. [Sociology again, + money]. The public health issue here is lockdowns. [The anti-vaxxers are a private problem, not a public problem.]

Before the advent of vaccines, three epidemiologists published the Great Barrington Declaration https://gbdeclaration.org/ (https://gbdeclaration.org/)  which argued for protecting the vulnerable [the old and infirm] and letting everybody else do what they wanted. All based on theretofore standard epidemiology founded on costs and benefits. Now, one may disagree with the declaration, but the point is sociology -- the authors were smeared by the powers that be, specifically including government bureaucrats, not argued against, but smeared and deprived of funding. In my opinion, at least after vaccines were available, there was no need for lockdowns as the probability of serious illness and death among the non-elederly was trivial.

Thus, there are all   kinds of opinions that are viable on these two subjects. Not engaging with alternate views in these two cases is politics, not science.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on January 27, 2023, 01:28:01 PM
Quote from: dismalist on January 27, 2023, 12:51:01 PM

Similarly with epidemics. I am happy to let biologists sort out the source of Covid and why it kills. I think epidemiology in response to Covid was seriously misguided, and has been captured by bureaucrats pursuing their own agenda, and this almost world wide, Sweden being a notable exception.

Yet again, Sweden. Sweden's death rate per capita was far worse than the surrounding countries of Finland, Denmark and Norway who all locked down. If Sweden's response was so appropriate, why is that?

Deaths per million from COVID:

USA- 3,381
Sweden- 2,275
Finland- 1,555
Denmark- 1,392
Norway- 928
World- 867
Iceland- 553
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on January 27, 2023, 01:59:00 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on January 27, 2023, 01:28:01 PM
Quote from: dismalist on January 27, 2023, 12:51:01 PM

Similarly with epidemics. I am happy to let biologists sort out the source of Covid and why it kills. I think epidemiology in response to Covid was seriously misguided, and has been captured by bureaucrats pursuing their own agenda, and this almost world wide, Sweden being a notable exception.

Yet again, Sweden. Sweden's death rate per capita was far worse than the surrounding countries of Finland, Denmark and Norway who all locked down. If Sweden's response was so appropriate, why is that?

An example of testing hypotheses that is hard. Sweden had a particularly low death rate the year before Covid, it has been said. So, catch-up deaths. Excess mortality in Sweden  is sometimes higher, sometimes lower than in Denmark or Norway.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores-projected-baseline?country=SWE~USA~DNK~NOR (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores-projected-baseline?country=SWE~USA~DNK~NOR)

There are other hypotheses. I'm not doing the work of listing them or testing them here.

The point is less who did it correctly, though I think Sweden [and Florida] did it better, but rather these are all things that should be talked about, not assumed one way or the other.

I know what interests bureaucrats have, but the politicians may have just been following the fear and terror of the voting population. But Swedes are smart!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on January 27, 2023, 02:07:46 PM
Quote from: dismalist on January 27, 2023, 01:59:00 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on January 27, 2023, 01:28:01 PM
Quote from: dismalist on January 27, 2023, 12:51:01 PM

Similarly with epidemics. I am happy to let biologists sort out the source of Covid and why it kills. I think epidemiology in response to Covid was seriously misguided, and has been captured by bureaucrats pursuing their own agenda, and this almost world wide, Sweden being a notable exception.

Yet again, Sweden. Sweden's death rate per capita was far worse than the surrounding countries of Finland, Denmark and Norway who all locked down. If Sweden's response was so appropriate, why is that?

An example of testing hypotheses that is hard. Sweden had a particularly low death rate the year before Covid, it has been said. So, catch-up deaths. Excess mortality in Sweden  is sometimes higher, sometimes lower than in Denmark or Norway.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores-projected-baseline?country=SWE~USA~DNK~NOR (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores-projected-baseline?country=SWE~USA~DNK~NOR)

There are other hypotheses. I'm not doing the work of listing them or testing them here.

The point is less who did it correctly, though I think Sweden [and Florida] did it better, but rather these are all things that should be talked about, not assumed one way or the other.

I know what interests bureaucrats have, but the politicians may have just been following the fear and terror of the voting population. But Swedes are smart!

I chose the surrounding countries for several reasons. Similar weather, similar population density, similar cultures. That seems sorta like science. Way more than than "I think Florida and Sweden did it better".

Sweden has been discussed constantly, not just an assumption about the response, so I'm not sure about your point.  Sweden provides a case study, and I provided some data that are really reasonable when discussing its response.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on January 27, 2023, 02:21:23 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on January 27, 2023, 02:07:46 PM
Quote from: dismalist on January 27, 2023, 01:59:00 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on January 27, 2023, 01:28:01 PM
Quote from: dismalist on January 27, 2023, 12:51:01 PM

Similarly with epidemics. I am happy to let biologists sort out the source of Covid and why it kills. I think epidemiology in response to Covid was seriously misguided, and has been captured by bureaucrats pursuing their own agenda, and this almost world wide, Sweden being a notable exception.

Yet again, Sweden. Sweden's death rate per capita was far worse than the surrounding countries of Finland, Denmark and Norway who all locked down. If Sweden's response was so appropriate, why is that?

An example of testing hypotheses that is hard. Sweden had a particularly low death rate the year before Covid, it has been said. So, catch-up deaths. Excess mortality in Sweden  is sometimes higher, sometimes lower than in Denmark or Norway.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores-projected-baseline?country=SWE~USA~DNK~NOR (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores-projected-baseline?country=SWE~USA~DNK~NOR)

There are other hypotheses. I'm not doing the work of listing them or testing them here.

The point is less who did it correctly, though I think Sweden [and Florida] did it better, but rather these are all things that should be talked about, not assumed one way or the other.

I know what interests bureaucrats have, but the politicians may have just been following the fear and terror of the voting population. But Swedes are smart!

I chose the surrounding countries for several reasons. Similar weather, similar population density, similar cultures. That seems sorta like science. Way more than than "I think Florida and Sweden did it better".

Sweden has been discussed constantly, not just an assumption about the response, so I'm not sure about your point.  Sweden provides a case study, and I provided some data that are really reasonable when discussing its response.

The actual testing of the various hypotheses has been done poorly, not to say not at all, I think. But I am  not inclined to do this work. Again, my main point is that there is no reason to stop discussing rather than politically ending discussion.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 27, 2023, 02:59:17 PM
Quote from: dismalist on January 27, 2023, 12:51:01 PM
Thus, there are all   kinds of opinions that are viable on these two subjects. Not engaging with alternate views in these two cases is politics, not science.

My doctor this morning was pretty stern with me.  Lose weight.  Exercise, fatass.  I'm going to call in a prescription.

I tend to listen to my doctor, particularly when he is mad that I did not follow his directives last time.  I listen to him because he is an expert at medicine.

But maybe, even though the doctor's diagnosis is pretty standard for a middle aged American and there is a fair amount of empirical science to back up his professional judgment, I should seek a second opinion? 

Should my second opinion come from, say, a climatologist, an engineer, a park manager, a mechanic, or a professor of English?

Maybe, you know, there are some alternative facts.  Maybe I see a particular political orientation who repeatedly questions the expertise of doctors.  I probably shouldn't take those into account, huh?

You know, I don't want to shut down the conversation, particularly with non-doctors and people who accuse medical personnel of gouging the insurance companies and leading a liberal crusade against Americans' rights to be weight challenged.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Juvenal on January 28, 2023, 12:36:38 PM
Maybe a little less "in the cup"?  Or wait for the (combustible of lipid) "fires of spring"?  Me, "Lard Ass," my first-semester  (Spring, 1968) colleague called me, later a very firm friend, not much my senior, now underground (unfiltered "Luckies"), makes me wonder how the precepts of then/now PCPs count in "the end"?  I've always been a "fattie," with a few struggled interludes.  But I here I am, retired, close to eighty, and wondering, "What comes next?"  Yes, yes...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on January 28, 2023, 06:12:03 PM
Maybe a little less "in the cup"? 
Or wait for the        (combustible of lipid)
     "fires of spring"?

Me, "Lard Ass,"
                        my first-semester 
(Spring, 1968) colleague called me,

later a very firm friend,
not much my senior,
now underground     (unfiltered "Luckies"),
makes me wonder how

the precepts of then/now
PCPs count in "the end"? 

I've always been a "fattie,"
with a few struggled interludes. 

But I here I am, retired,      close
to eighty,
                and wondering,             "What comes next?" 

Yes, yes...


Colorado baker loses appeal over transgender birthday cake (https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/colorado-baker-loses-appeal-transgender-birthday-cake-rcna67833)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on January 30, 2023, 10:35:16 AM
Should be able to go past the paywall...

To Understand Why Republicans Are Divided on the Debt Ceiling, Consider Dr. Seuss (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/30/upshot/republicans-debt-ceiling-polling.html?unlocked_article_code=AYCpXfW2Cb4qHCrXncYJGSAe3T46PZP-6clijNjgxMPRSlyIeDsRMquv7FgaFRkOlitkrwV5psWHckXi59FWLTpUVXx9oKkU7zCmzT9E4nFg2V7nmDG1sYtHw5-U6c1XbFYyON1grz6ppXX-kh1-g_oVJxerUMXlygjxfmNPh47kHcEqIHc5RINr1wuj3Ik8c1nbiHJ2_FLzz3x8l7q-5fqA-AITkBfHWabttQmhu4dHrXB_JnRO-qSFUWRJ0KPos4vhhGqUZh65FisRpsGIqiGcse9sWXw5Gd601YoYuLhNHfQObJrmdmGxBwVJH_YqfaQHSNhiFNPWyJAJFUaYA-Sbfgxbq3KeoA&smid=share-url)

LMK if it blocks you and I'll copy/paste the text.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 03, 2023, 11:58:32 AM
The Spokesman Review: Eastern Washington University professor questions university's move to block him after critical tweets (https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2023/jan/31/eastern-washington-university-professor-questions-/)

Quote
An Eastern Washington University professor was blocked by his employer on social media for nearly a year after making critical statements about the school.

History professor Larry Cebula said he believes he was blocked by the official EWU Twitter account for criticizing the school's Athletics Department spending, which he says comes at the cost of academic programs.

University officials say Cebula was blocked last spring after making statements the school considered defamatory. As an example, David Meany, director of Communications and Media Relations, pointed to a May tweet.
[/url]
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on February 03, 2023, 02:52:15 PM
Yikes!  Those are certainly some...unflattering opinions to air publicly about one's employer.  If his Twitter feed contained very much stuff like that, I can see how they might want to block it.    Seems like an overreaction, though.  He didn't libel or insult anybody in particular, or threaten anybody. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on February 03, 2023, 03:13:28 PM
Wait, blocking someone on Twitter is a "cancellation"?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 03, 2023, 03:25:07 PM
"Non-disparagement" clauses can be put into employment contracts. And it cannot be otherwise. You don't like your employer, work someplace else.

That's the least cost solution. The disparager hurts many people's incomes. The disparagee is only one person's income.

Here are some legal explanations https://www.contractscounsel.com/g/44/us/non-disparagement-clause (https://www.contractscounsel.com/g/44/us/non-disparagement-clause)

Looks like the university was nice not to terminate the disparager, but I don't really know that.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on February 03, 2023, 10:28:54 PM
[snip]
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 04, 2023, 08:58:15 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on February 03, 2023, 03:13:28 PM
Wait, blocking someone on Twitter is a "cancellation"?

Yeah, I wasn't even sure what that means. Does that in any way prevent anyone else from seeing his tweets? If not, then it seems pretty pointless.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on February 04, 2023, 09:58:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 04, 2023, 08:58:15 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on February 03, 2023, 03:13:28 PM
Wait, blocking someone on Twitter is a "cancellation"?

Yeah, I wasn't even sure what that means. Does that in any way prevent anyone else from seeing his tweets? If not, then it seems pretty pointless.

Name one college where the academic faculty think that athletics gets a fair portion of the budget, resources and attention. Bonus points for cheerfully and vocally advocating that these are sent over to the reasonably-well-compensated-for-what-he-does coach.

Go ahead. I'll wait.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on February 04, 2023, 10:35:03 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 04, 2023, 08:58:15 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on February 03, 2023, 03:13:28 PM
Wait, blocking someone on Twitter is a "cancellation"?

Yeah, I wasn't even sure what that means. Does that in any way prevent anyone else from seeing his tweets? If not, then it seems pretty pointless.

Other than the fact that it was linked in a thread with "canceling" in the title, I don't see any claims anywhere that Cebula was "canceled". He accurately reports that EWU blocked him from following their official twitter account, and his belief that it was because he said negative things about the football program seems to be supported by the fact that he was unblocked when they couldn't find the tweet in question.

Nobody seems to be canceling anyone or claiming that they are being canceled, though Cebula is presumably taking advantage of a bit of coverage to amplify his concerns about spending decisions by his employer.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on February 04, 2023, 11:21:31 AM
Quote from: onthefringe on February 04, 2023, 10:35:03 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 04, 2023, 08:58:15 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on February 03, 2023, 03:13:28 PM
Wait, blocking someone on Twitter is a "cancellation"?

Yeah, I wasn't even sure what that means. Does that in any way prevent anyone else from seeing his tweets? If not, then it seems pretty pointless.

Other than the fact that it was linked in a thread with "canceling" in the title, I don't see any claims anywhere that Cebula was "canceled". He accurately reports that EWU blocked him from following their official twitter account, and his belief that it was because he said negative things about the football program seems to be supported by the fact that he was unblocked when they couldn't find the tweet in question.

Nobody seems to be canceling anyone or claiming that they are being canceled, though Cebula is presumably taking advantage of a bit of coverage to amplify his concerns about spending decisions by his employer.

I'm questioning its presence in this thread. As you probably know, I think most of what is called 'cancel culture' is just a moral panic (on the right and in the centre). But even by those standards, this case seems like weak tea.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on February 04, 2023, 11:41:37 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on February 04, 2023, 11:21:31 AM
Quote from: onthefringe on February 04, 2023, 10:35:03 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 04, 2023, 08:58:15 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on February 03, 2023, 03:13:28 PM
Wait, blocking someone on Twitter is a "cancellation"?

Yeah, I wasn't even sure what that means. Does that in any way prevent anyone else from seeing his tweets? If not, then it seems pretty pointless.

Other than the fact that it was linked in a thread with "canceling" in the title, I don't see any claims anywhere that Cebula was "canceled". He accurately reports that EWU blocked him from following their official twitter account, and his belief that it was because he said negative things about the football program seems to be supported by the fact that he was unblocked when they couldn't find the tweet in question.

Nobody seems to be canceling anyone or claiming that they are being canceled, though Cebula is presumably taking advantage of a bit of coverage to amplify his concerns about spending decisions by his employer.

I'm questioning its presence in this thread. As you probably know, I think most of what is called 'cancel culture' is just a moral panic (on the right and in the centre). But even by those standards, this case seems like weak tea.

Fair. I agree that most people who actually claim that they are being "cancelled" are merely experiencing the completely predictable consequences of their actions. I just wanted to make it clear that in this particular case, the faculty in question had not even claimed that they were canceled.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on February 04, 2023, 12:03:08 PM
Quote from: onthefringe on February 04, 2023, 11:41:37 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on February 04, 2023, 11:21:31 AM
Quote from: onthefringe on February 04, 2023, 10:35:03 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 04, 2023, 08:58:15 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on February 03, 2023, 03:13:28 PM
Wait, blocking someone on Twitter is a "cancellation"?

Yeah, I wasn't even sure what that means. Does that in any way prevent anyone else from seeing his tweets? If not, then it seems pretty pointless.

Other than the fact that it was linked in a thread with "canceling" in the title, I don't see any claims anywhere that Cebula was "canceled". He accurately reports that EWU blocked him from following their official twitter account, and his belief that it was because he said negative things about the football program seems to be supported by the fact that he was unblocked when they couldn't find the tweet in question.

Nobody seems to be canceling anyone or claiming that they are being canceled, though Cebula is presumably taking advantage of a bit of coverage to amplify his concerns about spending decisions by his employer.

I'm questioning its presence in this thread. As you probably know, I think most of what is called 'cancel culture' is just a moral panic (on the right and in the centre). But even by those standards, this case seems like weak tea.

Fair. I agree that most people who actually claim that they are being "cancelled" are merely experiencing the completely predictable consequences of their actions. I just wanted to make it clear that in this particular case, the faculty in question had not even claimed that they were canceled.

This seems like it's bringing more negative attention to the issue for the college and making them look bad.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 04, 2023, 01:07:44 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2023, 03:25:07 PM
"Non-disparagement" clauses can be put into employment contracts. And it cannot be otherwise. You don't like your employer, work someplace else.

That's the least cost solution. The disparager hurts many people's incomes. The disparagee is only one person's income.

Here are some legal explanations https://www.contractscounsel.com/g/44/us/non-disparagement-clause (https://www.contractscounsel.com/g/44/us/non-disparagement-clause)

Looks like the university was nice not to terminate the disparager, but I don't really know that.

You seriously think calling the place a dumpster fire is grounds for being fired?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 04, 2023, 01:13:20 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 04, 2023, 01:07:44 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 03, 2023, 03:25:07 PM
"Non-disparagement" clauses can be put into employment contracts. And it cannot be otherwise. You don't like your employer, work someplace else.

That's the least cost solution. The disparager hurts many people's incomes. The disparagee is only one person's income.

Here are some legal explanations https://www.contractscounsel.com/g/44/us/non-disparagement-clause (https://www.contractscounsel.com/g/44/us/non-disparagement-clause)

Looks like the university was nice not to terminate the disparager, but I don't really know that.

You seriously think calling the place a dumpster fire is grounds for being fired?

Don't ask me. Ask a lawyer.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 04, 2023, 01:44:17 PM
If you all recall EWU is one of the places that cried financial issues while cutting faculty and combining departments, even while spending large amounts to maintain a football program that brings in little to no revenue. History was one of the departments that was combined with two others.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 05, 2023, 03:13:12 PM
FIRE: LAWSUIT: Professor suspended for redacted slurs in law school exam sues University of Illinois Chicago (https://www.thefire.org/news/lawsuit-professor-suspended-redacted-slurs-law-school-exam-sues-university-illinois-chicago)

Quote
However, in November, under pressure from UIC's Black Law Students Association and Jesse Jackson, UIC reneged on its agreement with Kilborn and is now requiring him to participate in months-long "training on classroom conversations that address racism" and compelling him to write reflection papers before he can return to the classroom. In a stunning display of unintended irony, the individualized training materials include the same redacted slur that Kilborn used in his test question (see page 5 for the redacted slur). 

You can't make this stuff up.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 06, 2023, 05:18:53 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 05, 2023, 03:13:12 PM
FIRE: LAWSUIT: Professor suspended for redacted slurs in law school exam sues University of Illinois Chicago (https://www.thefire.org/news/lawsuit-professor-suspended-redacted-slurs-law-school-exam-sues-university-illinois-chicago)

Quote
However, in November, under pressure from UIC's Black Law Students Association and Jesse Jackson, UIC reneged on its agreement with Kilborn and is now requiring him to participate in months-long "training on classroom conversations that address racism" and compelling him to write reflection papers before he can return to the classroom. In a stunning display of unintended irony, the individualized training materials include the same redacted slur that Kilborn used in his test question (see page 5 for the redacted slur). 

You can't make this stuff up.

The fact that a law school didn't see how this was going to bite them is hilarious.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on February 06, 2023, 06:31:15 AM
This isn't the first time law students have been overly sensitive to words used in legal contexts:
QuoteDebate Erupts at N.J. Law School After White Student Quotes Racial Slur
A Rutgers Law student repeated an epithet from a legal case, and now Black students at the New Jersey school are calling for a policy on slurs — and apologies.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/03/nyregion/Rutgers-law-school-n-word.html
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 06, 2023, 10:29:09 AM
National Arts Centre's 1st 'Black Out' night sparks debate — and backlash (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/national-arts-centre-ottawa-play-black-audience-theatre-1.6735929)

Quote
The website for the Canadian Stage theatre in Toronto states its May 2022 hosting of Is God Is was "an evening exclusive to the Afro/Black community," while the Black Out website says the New York theatre that kicked off the trend three years earlier had all 804 of its seats occupied by "Black-identifying" theatre-goers.

A Jan. 16 release about the NAC's "Black Out" night before the text was changed. (National Arts Centre website/Twitter)

A news release last month from the NAC initially used similar language, stating the Feb. 17 performance would welcome "an all-Black identifying audience." Ticketmaster's website said the night was "exclusively" for Black audience members.

Note:The National Arts Centre is a federal Crown corporation with a mandate under the National Arts Centre Act to develop the performing arts in the National Capital Region and to assist the Canada Council for the Arts in developing the performing arts elsewhere in Canada.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 06, 2023, 05:18:30 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on February 06, 2023, 06:31:15 AM
This isn't the first time law students have been overly sensitive to words used in legal contexts:
QuoteDebate Erupts at N.J. Law School After White Student Quotes Racial Slur
A Rutgers Law student repeated an epithet from a legal case, and now Black students at the New Jersey school are calling for a policy on slurs — and apologies.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/03/nyregion/Rutgers-law-school-n-word.html

How can people who are this delicate become lawyers?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ohnoes on February 07, 2023, 01:44:00 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 04, 2023, 01:07:44 PM
You seriously think calling the place a dumpster fire is grounds for being fired?

That's not fair.  It was a floating dumpster fire.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 07, 2023, 02:28:45 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 06, 2023, 10:29:09 AM
National Arts Centre's 1st 'Black Out' night sparks debate — and backlash (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/national-arts-centre-ottawa-play-black-audience-theatre-1.6735929)

Quote
The website for the Canadian Stage theatre in Toronto states its May 2022 hosting of Is God Is was "an evening exclusive to the Afro/Black community," while the Black Out website says the New York theatre that kicked off the trend three years earlier had all 804 of its seats occupied by "Black-identifying" theatre-goers.

A Jan. 16 release about the NAC's "Black Out" night before the text was changed. (National Arts Centre website/Twitter)

A news release last month from the NAC initially used similar language, stating the Feb. 17 performance would welcome "an all-Black identifying audience." Ticketmaster's website said the night was "exclusively" for Black audience members.

Note:The National Arts Centre is a federal Crown corporation with a mandate under the National Arts Centre Act to develop the performing arts in the National Capital Region and to assist the Canada Council for the Arts in developing the performing arts elsewhere in Canada.

This is one of those conundrums which will not generate much conversation here but does over on Reddit. 

It is also a conundrum which changes based upon one's orientation.

Nothing good will come from this attempt, and that's too bad because I bet the play itself is great.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 08, 2023, 05:06:11 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 07, 2023, 02:28:45 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 06, 2023, 10:29:09 AM
National Arts Centre's 1st 'Black Out' night sparks debate — and backlash (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/national-arts-centre-ottawa-play-black-audience-theatre-1.6735929)

Quote
The website for the Canadian Stage theatre in Toronto states its May 2022 hosting of Is God Is was "an evening exclusive to the Afro/Black community," while the Black Out website says the New York theatre that kicked off the trend three years earlier had all 804 of its seats occupied by "Black-identifying" theatre-goers.

A Jan. 16 release about the NAC's "Black Out" night before the text was changed. (National Arts Centre website/Twitter)

A news release last month from the NAC initially used similar language, stating the Feb. 17 performance would welcome "an all-Black identifying audience." Ticketmaster's website said the night was "exclusively" for Black audience members.

Note:The National Arts Centre is a federal Crown corporation with a mandate under the National Arts Centre Act to develop the performing arts in the National Capital Region and to assist the Canada Council for the Arts in developing the performing arts elsewhere in Canada.

This is one of those conundrums which will not generate much conversation here but does over on Reddit. 

It is also a conundrum which changes based upon one's orientation.

Nothing good will come from this attempt, and that's too bad because I bet the play itself is great.

The idea that "having THOSE people here will lessen the experience for US" has a very bad history, which should be blindingly obvious. Maybe they should "let" those people come, but have them use separate washrooms, drinking fountains, etc. We'll see how that turns out.....


Quote
The Feb. 17 "Black Out" performance borrows its name from a recent movement to create spaces where Black audience members can — as the movement's website states — experience Black culture "free from the white gaze."

As the preschooler would say, " HE'S LOOKING AT ME!"

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 08, 2023, 06:11:52 AM
Well, in all fairness, "the gaze" is a specific philosophy having to do most often with authorship and presentation, so it is not just looking at someone but stereotyping them and placing them in a position where they must see themselves from the perspective of their judges' "gaze."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 08, 2023, 10:12:29 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 08, 2023, 06:11:52 AM
Well, in all fairness, "the gaze" is a specific philosophy having to do most often with authorship and presentation, so it is not just looking at someone but stereotyping them and placing them in a position where they must see themselves from the perspective of their judges' "gaze."

Two problems with this:

First of all, the creators of the performance, and the performers themselves, are non-white. So it's not clear how in any way white audience members would be "judges" of anything.

Second, and much bigger, is that by doing all of this segregation, regardless of the justification, it implicitly supports the idea that segregation is, in principle, a legitimate thing to do. (Basically, the bigots are right about the idea, just wrong about the reason. Not a good road to go down.)


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on February 08, 2023, 10:22:22 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 08, 2023, 06:11:52 AM
Well, in all fairness, "the gaze" is a specific philosophy having to do most often with authorship and presentation, so it is not just looking at someone but stereotyping them and placing them in a position where they must see themselves from the perspective of their judges' "gaze."

Is it that the performers want their audiences to be free of White audience members asking dumb questions after? "So... random stranger. You are Black, I see. Did you understand the play?"

That said, last night I dreamed I was watching a performance of Peter Pan in which all the characters were Black and/or Bi-racial. Not sure why.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on February 08, 2023, 02:45:56 PM
Quote from: ohnoes on February 07, 2023, 01:44:00 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 04, 2023, 01:07:44 PM
You seriously think calling the place a dumpster fire is grounds for being fired?

That's not fair.  It was a floating dumpster fire.

Like the Cuyahoga River?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 08, 2023, 02:52:03 PM
Quote from: apl68 on February 08, 2023, 02:45:56 PM
Quote from: ohnoes on February 07, 2023, 01:44:00 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 04, 2023, 01:07:44 PM
You seriously think calling the place a dumpster fire is grounds for being fired?

That's not fair.  It was a floating dumpster fire.

Like the Cuyahoga River?

"Burn on, big river, burn on"
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 08, 2023, 04:04:02 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 06, 2023, 10:29:09 AM
National Arts Centre's 1st 'Black Out' night sparks debate — and backlash (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/national-arts-centre-ottawa-play-black-audience-theatre-1.6735929)

Quote
The website for the Canadian Stage theatre in Toronto states its May 2022 hosting of Is God Is was "an evening exclusive to the Afro/Black community," while the Black Out website says the New York theatre that kicked off the trend three years earlier had all 804 of its seats occupied by "Black-identifying" theatre-goers.

A Jan. 16 release about the NAC's "Black Out" night before the text was changed. (National Arts Centre website/Twitter)

A news release last month from the NAC initially used similar language, stating the Feb. 17 performance would welcome "an all-Black identifying audience." Ticketmaster's website said the night was "exclusively" for Black audience members.

Note:The National Arts Centre is a federal Crown corporation with a mandate under the National Arts Centre Act to develop the performing arts in the National Capital Region and to assist the Canada Council for the Arts in developing the performing arts elsewhere in Canada.

My question would be: Are they hurting anyone? I looked up the website for the play, and it claims they do not turn anyone away. So far, so good.

I'm trying to think of analogies. Some come to mind, but only from the past. Would I have gone into a black bar in Harlem? Yes, when I was young and not so risk averse. I never did, but someone older I know did ca. 1970. He was looked at funny, not too aggressively, but left in peace, presumably because he looked so vulnerable! He was not perceived as a threat. It was not too different in Irish bars, by the way. Anything local, really, this was pretty normal.

To look at a very different analogy: The Apollo Theater at 125th Street during the Harlem Renaissance! That declared itself open to black audiences in 1934 and presented what was thought to be desirable by the local black population. That's where black entertainment was created and found. However, whites were welcomed, and whites went uptown to the Apollo for entertainment. The declaration of integration and the finding and promoting of black artists was enabled and promoted by the lure of profits.

I have grave doubts that the play will produce another Harlem Renaissance no matter how it is financed. But segregation must not be mandated and paid for by governments. That's how the original segregation post-emancipation came to last so long.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 13, 2023, 05:03:43 PM
Duval County concerned about bios on the Queen of Salsa, Henry Aaron and Roberto Clemente: https://abcnews.go.com/US/thousands-books-including-black-hispanic-historical-titles-review/story?id=97082518
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 13, 2023, 06:57:01 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 13, 2023, 05:03:43 PM
Duval County concerned about bios on the Queen of Salsa, Henry Aaron and Roberto Clemente: https://abcnews.go.com/US/thousands-books-including-black-hispanic-historical-titles-review/story?id=97082518

Yup.  Some posters have opined that our libraries should be hypersensitive to the caprices of hypersensitive individuals who have problems with books about people who, say, are not like them.

Well, here ya'go. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 15, 2023, 05:40:22 PM
IHE: In Austin, Alleged Threats for Criticizing DEI (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2023/02/13/ut-austin-professor-alleges-threats-over-conversative-views)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 16, 2023, 05:56:35 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 15, 2023, 05:40:22 PM
IHE: In Austin, Alleged Threats for Criticizing DEI (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2023/02/13/ut-austin-professor-alleges-threats-over-conversative-views)

Quote
Lowery is also a senior fellow at the business school's Salem Center for Policy. In March, The Austin-American Statesman wrote that the Salem Center hosted Atlas.

At the event, Atlas, a former COVID-19 adviser to President Trump, "falsely told a small crowd that COVID-19 vaccines present serious safety concerns and advocated against inoculating children," the paper reported.

It's really unfortunate that covid became so politicized in the US compared to other places, so that anti-vax sentiment can be assumed to accompany any non-progressive views. In lots of other countries, anti-vaxxers represented a much smaller proportion of conservatives. It seems like Lowery's views on all kinds of other things can be dismissed as a consequence of that, even if they're unrelated (and would be in most parts of the world).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on February 17, 2023, 07:46:31 AM
QuoteA Left-Leaning College Didn't Want to Offend, So It Closed Down Her Art Show

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/13/opinion/censorship-iranian-artist-macalester.html

QuoteST. PAUL, Minn. — The work of the Iranian American artist Taravat Talepasand is cheeky, erotic and defiantly anticlerical. One painting in her new midcareer survey, "Taravat," incorporates Iranian bank notes whose images of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini have been dosed with LSD. A graphite drawing, titled "Blasphemy X," depicts a veiled woman giving the finger while lifting her robe to reveal high heels and a flash of underwear. There are sculptures of women in niqab face coverings with enormous exposed breasts. On a gallery wall, "Woman, Life, Freedom," the slogan of Iran's recent nationwide protests against the morality police, is written in neon in English and Persian.

When "Taravat" opened late last month at Macalester College, a left-leaning school in St. Paul, Minn., with a focus on internationalism, some Muslim students felt it made a mockery of modest Islamic dress, and thus of them. They expressed their outrage, and this month Macalester responded by temporarily closing Talepasand's show, and then, apparently unaware of the irony, surrounding the gallery windows with black curtains.

Those curtains astonished Talepasand, an assistant professor of art practice at Portland State University. "To literally veil a 'Woman, Life, Freedom' exhibition?" she exclaimed to me.

The uproar over "Taravat" was directly connected to a recent controversy at Hamline University, a few minutes' drive away from Macalester, where an adjunct art history professor named Erika López Prater was fired for showing a 14th-century painting of Muhammad in an art history class. In late January, Macalester — where, as it happens, Prater now teaches — hosted a discussion between faculty and students, most of them Muslim, to address issues raised by the Hamline incident. There, some students described being upset by "Taravat."

"I invited them to share what emotions they were holding in their bodies," one faculty member wrote in an email, part of which was shared with Talepasand. "They named 'undervalued, frustrated, surprised, disrespected, ignored, and it felt like hit after hit.'"

Ultimately, Macalester handled the student complaints better than Hamline did. No one was fired, and after being closed for a few days, "Taravat" reopened. But the administration's response was still distinctly apologetic, demonstrating the anxious philistinism that can result when bureaucratic cowardice meets maximalist ideas about safety.

In a message to campus, the provost, Lisa Anderson-Levy, said that Macalester understands "that pieces in the exhibition have caused harm to members of our Muslim community." The black curtains came down, but they were replaced with purple construction paper on the gallery's glass entrance and frosted glass panels on its mezzanine windows, protecting passers-by from "unintentional or nonconsensual viewing," in the words of the administration. A content warning is affixed to the door. Next to it, some students put up a yellow sign asking potential visitors to show solidarity with them by not going in.

"There's a lot of nuance and complexity in these kinds of situations," Anderson-Levy said in a statement when I reached out to talk. "We believe that taking time to slow down and listen carefully to the diverse perspectives across our campus community allowed us to create space for conversation and learning."

At least some students seemed to be learning to approach contentious art cautiously. A senior sociology major who'd visited the gallery with their sculpture class when Talepasand was still assembling the exhibition told me they were thinking of returning to see what had changed. But they worried that could be an act of entitlement, and felt the need to reflect "on my place as a white person" who is "not affected by the harms as much as others."

Some readers might object to dwelling on one instance of misguided sensitivity at one small college when the country is in the midst of a nationwide frenzy of right-wing book bans, public school speech restrictions, and wild attempts to curtail drag performances. But I think this moment, when we're facing down a wave of censorship inspired by religious fervor, is a good time to quash the notion that people have a right to be shielded from discomfiting art. If progressive ideas can be harnessed to censor feminist work because it offends religious sensibilities, perhaps those ideas bear rethinking.

In her excellent 2021 book "On Freedom," the poet and critic Maggie Nelson described how, in the 20th century, the avant-garde imagined its audience as numb, repressed and in need of being shocked awake. The 21st-century model, by contrast, "presumes the audience to be damaged, in need of healing, aid, and protection."

There is value in this approach. Mary Gaitskill recently published a captivating essay about two writing classes that she taught 25 years apart. Each included a menacing male student obsessed with sadistic violence against women. In 1997, the guy was named Don, and Gaitskill was struck by how enthusiastically his female classmates seemed to respond to his imagined scenes of torture and murder. It is only toward the end of the semester, after another student's outburst, that the young women express their fear of Don. Until then, surrounded by a culture that valorized shock and darkness, they demonstrated a "seemingly bizarre forbearance" that blunted their authentic reactions.

"But these days that breed of forbearance is looking like an indulgence that we cannot afford," Gaitskill writes. "These days, niceness is looking pretty damn good; these days, the darkness is just too overwhelming." In her 2022 class, she writes, almost half the class had spent time in mental institutions. Relentless demands for safety can simply be a sign of how vulnerable people feel.

Still, to automatically give in to those demands is to suffocate the arts. This becomes especially clear when you see how easily the language of trauma and harm can serve reactionary ends. Just last week, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported on a school district in New Jersey that removed Toni Morrison's "The Bluest Eye," a frequent target of conservative censorship, from the freshman honors curriculum. A parent had complained that exposure to the book's "graphic images of sexual violence" could be "emotionally traumatizing." This, said Talepasand, "is where the far left and the far right look very similar."

I'm not naïve enough to believe that if the left rediscovered a passionate commitment to free speech, the right would give up its furious campaign against what it calls wokeness. But I do think that if the left is to mount a convincing response to what has become a wholesale assault on intellectual liberty and free expression, it needs to be able to defend challenging and provocative work. Art need not defer to religion. If that's no longer obvious, we've gone astray.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 17, 2023, 12:09:21 PM
Like Hamline, this is going to create a beautiful Streisand Effect.  It already is. 

And censorship cuts both ways.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 17, 2023, 01:14:01 PM
This is from last summer, but I want to highlight (again) what can happen with anti-CRT madness: https://www.propublica.org/article/georgia-dei-crt-schools-parents
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 17, 2023, 01:16:56 PM
Double posting on this. dismalist, here is a look at Christopher Rufo from two summers ago. And yes, I don't like him.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-inquiry/how-a-conservative-activist-invented-the-conflict-over-critical-race-theory
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 17, 2023, 02:16:51 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 17, 2023, 01:16:56 PM
Double posting on this. dismalist, here is a look at Christopher Rufo from two summers ago. And yes, I don't like him.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-inquiry/how-a-conservative-activist-invented-the-conflict-over-critical-race-theory

As I said, I didn't know who he was. The article makes me agree with him. :-)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 18, 2023, 07:38:13 AM
Quote from: dismalist on February 17, 2023, 02:16:51 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 17, 2023, 01:16:56 PM
Double posting on this. dismalist, here is a look at Christopher Rufo from two summers ago. And yes, I don't like him.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-inquiry/how-a-conservative-activist-invented-the-conflict-over-critical-race-theory

As I said, I didn't know who he was. The article makes me agree with him. :-)

From the article:
Quote
As Crenshaw recently explained, critical race theory found that "the so-called American dilemma was not simply a matter of prejudice but a matter of structured disadvantages that stretched across American society."

The writer automatically accepts claims as though they are incontrovertible facts. That illustrates the problem pretty well.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on February 18, 2023, 08:51:02 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 18, 2023, 07:38:13 AM
Quote from: dismalist on February 17, 2023, 02:16:51 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 17, 2023, 01:16:56 PM
Double posting on this. dismalist, here is a look at Christopher Rufo from two summers ago. And yes, I don't like him.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-inquiry/how-a-conservative-activist-invented-the-conflict-over-critical-race-theory

As I said, I didn't know who he was. The article makes me agree with him. :-)

From the article:
Quote
As Crenshaw recently explained, critical race theory found that "the so-called American dilemma was not simply a matter of prejudice but a matter of structured disadvantages that stretched across American society."

The writer automatically accepts claims as though they are incontrovertible facts. That illustrates the problem pretty well.

Do you have a better explanation?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 19, 2023, 11:01:25 AM
CNN: English professor in Florida says university is reviewing his employment following complaint over racial justice unit (https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/18/us/palm-beach-atlantic-university-professor-racial-justice-unit/index.html)

Quote
Joeckel said he has been teaching a unit on racial justice in classes for many years without complaints until his provost and dean said Wednesday they needed to talk to him "privately" at the end of a class.

The two told him his contract renewal for next year would be on hold as they investigated the materials used in the racial justice unit, he said.

Joeckel was given a letter from the university, which he shared with CNN, informing him a decision about his employment would be made by March 15.

"The told me they had concerns that I was indoctrinating students. That was the exact word they used: indoctrinating," Joeckel said. "I had no idea this was coming."

Joeckel said his conversation with his employers indicated the investigation was prompted by a complaint from a parent.

<snip>

The institution does not offer tenure...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Cheerful on February 19, 2023, 11:43:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 19, 2023, 11:01:25 AM
Joeckel was given a letter from the university, which he shared with CNN, informing him a decision about his employment would be made by March 15.

Some share with CNN, some share with FoxNews.  Once you have that info, you can predict the story.  Rinse, repeat.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on February 19, 2023, 12:49:23 PM
Quote from: Cheerful on February 19, 2023, 11:43:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 19, 2023, 11:01:25 AM
Joeckel was given a letter from the university, which he shared with CNN, informing him a decision about his employment would be made by March 15.

Some share with CNN, some share with FoxNews.  Once you have that info, you can predict the story.  Rinse, repeat.

Waiting for a parent to complain in Biology that their student is being "indoctrinated" to believe in evolution.

I thought Academic Freedom was tied to the First Amendment right to free speech, which leads to freedom of inquiry and the right to speak the truth.

Silly me.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 19, 2023, 01:29:02 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on February 19, 2023, 12:49:23 PM

...

Waiting for a parent to complain in Biology that their student is being "indoctrinated" to believe in evolution.

I thought Academic Freedom was tied to the First Amendment right to free speech, which leads to freedom of inquiry and the right to speak the truth.

Silly me.

Academic Freedom and the Right to Free Speech are two separate kettles of fish. The Supreme Court has never directly and specifically addressed Academic Freedom. [If it did, it would only apply to public institutions through the First Amendment, which is binding on States.]

Here is a longish assembly of facts on the two subjects by the Organization of American Historians. [I don't know who they are, but I can't imagine they're a bunch of right wingers. :-)]

https://www.oah.org/about/governance/policies/academic-freedom-guidelines-and-best-practices/ (https://www.oah.org/about/governance/policies/academic-freedom-guidelines-and-best-practices/)

The section on the Courts says, inter alia

QuoteIn Garcetti v. Ceballos, [2006] the Supreme Court allowed a Los Angeles district attorney's office to discipline a deputy district attorney for having criticized his supervisors' actions; the Court ruled that when public employees speak "pursuant to their official duties, the employees are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline." Although the majority expressly left open whether its ruling should apply to "speech related to scholarship and teaching" in public colleges and universities, subsequent decisions in the lower federal courts concerning faculty speech have disregarded this reservation and now threaten to diminish severely the constitutional protection of the academic freedom of professors whose engagement in governance, as well as their teaching and research, is considered part of their "official duties." ... In Hong v. Grant (2007), a district judge, citing Garcetti ... ruled that the University of California "is entitled to unfettered discretion when it restricts statements an employee makes on the job and according to his professional responsibilities." Such responsibilities included participation in institutional governance.

Thus, I have no clue how a SCOTUS case would turn out.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 20, 2023, 10:48:15 AM
NBC News: Critics blast 'absurd' rewrites to Roald Dahl's children's books (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/roald-dahls-children-books-matilda-charlie-and-the-chocolate-factory-rcna71427)

Lower Deck
Quote
Half-century-old characters are no longer "fat" or "idiots" after a slew of changes by the publisher to make Dahl's works more in tune with modern times.

Quote
Some words related to weight, gender and race were omitted or replaced.

The "enormously fat" 9-year-old boy in "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" became "enormous," and the "Cloud-Men" from "James and the Giant Peach" became "Cloud-People."

Miss Trunchbull, the principal in "Matilda," no longer has a "horsey" face, and "eight nutty little idiots" are now just "eight nutty little boys."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on February 20, 2023, 10:58:29 AM
From The Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2023/02/19/roald-dahl-books-revisions-salman-rushdie/
QuoteSalman Rushdie calls revisions to Roald Dahl books 'absurd censorship'

QuoteLONDON — A decision to change hundreds of words in Roald Dahl's children's books has drawn condemnation from author Salman Rushdie, who called it "absurd censorship."

His is the latest prominent voice in the heated debate sparked after a report Friday in Britain's Telegraph detailed a litany of changes by Dahl's publisher and the Roald Dahl Story Co., which manages the works' copyright and trademarks, that were designed to make the famous books more inclusive and accessible for today's readers.

"Roald Dahl was no angel but this is absurd censorship," Rushdie, a Booker Prize-winning author, wrote on Twitter, calling out the children's imprint of the British publisher Penguin Books. "Puffin Books and the Dahl estate should be ashamed."

Rushdie is one of the most famous authors in the world. His novel "The Satanic Verses" prompted Iran's Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1989 to issue a religious decree calling for Muslims anywhere in the world to assassinate Rushdie and anyone else involved in the publication of the book.

In August, Rushdie was stabbed multiple times by an assailant at an event in Chautauqua, N.Y. He survived, and his latest novel was published this month.

The changes in Dahl's children's books were done in partnership with Inclusive Minds, a collective for people who are passionate about inclusion, diversity and accessibility in children's literature, according to the Roald Dahl Story Co.

Among the changes, according to the Telegraph: The character of Augustus Gloop from "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" is no longer described as "fat." Now he is referred to as "enormous." What was described as a "weird African language" in the book "The Twits" is no longer weird. In "The BFG," a reference to the character of the "Bloodbottler" having skin that was "reddish-brown" has been removed.

Some characters are now gender-neutral. The singing and dancing Oompa Loompas from "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" were once described as "small men"; now they are "small people." In "James and the Giant Peach," the Cloud-Men — mysterious figures who live in the sky — are now known as Cloud-People.

In some cases, new lines were added. In "The Witches," a paragraph that explains that the witches are bald underneath their wigs has a new sentence: "There are plenty of other reasons why women might wear wigs and there is certainly nothing wrong with that."

The Roald Dahl Story Co. said in an emailed statement Sunday that the review of Dahl's writing began in 2020 — before the works were acquired by streaming giant Netflix — and that tweaks were "small and carefully considered."

The company said that it wanted "to ensure that Roald Dahl's wonderful stories and characters continue to be enjoyed by all children today" and that the review was standard process. "When publishing new print runs of books written years ago, it's not unusual to review the language used alongside updating other details including a book's cover and page layout," the statement said.

Suzanne Nossel, chief executive of PEN America, said the organization, a nonprofit that works to defend and celebrate free expression through the advancement of literature and human rights, was "alarmed at news" of the changes to Dahl's works, calling the move "a purported effort to scrub the books of that which might offend someone." On Twitter, Nossel wrote that "literature is meant to be surprising and provocative" and that efforts to erase words that might cause offense only "dilute the power of storytelling."

"If we start down the path of trying to correct for perceived slights instead of allowing readers to receive and react to books as written, we risk distorting the work of great authors and clouding the essential lens that literature offers on society," she said.

Nossel suggested that instead of revising literature and "playing around" with text, publishers and editors could perhaps offer "introductory context that prepares people for what they are about to read, and helps them understand the setting in which it was written."

Others on social media warned of a dangerous precedent. "You edit a couple of books with outdated attitudes, now there's only 400 years of literature left to go," one user tweeted. "Where do you draw the line here?"

Critics say that Dahl's books are bigoted, racist, sexist and larded with gratuitous violence. And some writers say the reaction to the latest changes is overblown.

"It's good to evolve with the times," tweeted Ashley Esqueda, a writer and pop culture expert, adding: "Very tired of people demanding we remain locked into their childhoods."

One social media user said they were "quite happy to have more inclusive versions to read to my little one. I've been horrified at the content of some of the things I read as a child, having revisited them as an adult."

Although Dahl's writing is globally famous — with at least 300 million books sold in 58 languages, according to the British journal Bookseller — Dahl himself is a polarizing figure who left a complicated legacy. In 1990, months before his death, he called himself antisemitic after years of hostile public comments about Jewish people in interviews.

In 2020, Dahl's family issued an apology for the writer's antisemitic, "prejudiced remarks," calling some of his language "incomprehensible." Relatives said Dahl's offensive comments stood in "marked contrast to the man we knew."

Ron Charles in Washington contributed to this report.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on February 20, 2023, 11:02:53 AM
Apologies for the double post, but just saw this in the NYT:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/20/books/roald-dahl-books-changes.html

QuoteRoald Dahl's Books Are Rewritten to Cut Potentially Offensive Language

New editions of the best-selling author's children's classics, including "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory," have been altered to eliminate words deemed inappropriate. A backlash ensued.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 20, 2023, 02:13:57 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on February 20, 2023, 11:02:53 AM
Apologies for the double post, but just saw this in the NYT:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/20/books/roald-dahl-books-changes.html

QuoteRoald Dahl's Books Are Rewritten to Cut Potentially Offensive Language

New editions of the best-selling author's children's classics, including "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory," have been altered to eliminate words deemed inappropriate. A backlash ensued.

Soon there'll be some enterprising business on the internet selling "original" books; i.e. old versions of books that haven't been edited. It'll have great appeal to people who see themselves as intellectual rebels.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 20, 2023, 02:44:31 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 20, 2023, 02:13:57 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on February 20, 2023, 11:02:53 AM
Apologies for the double post, but just saw this in the NYT:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/20/books/roald-dahl-books-changes.html

QuoteRoald Dahl's Books Are Rewritten to Cut Potentially Offensive Language

New editions of the best-selling author's children's classics, including "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory," have been altered to eliminate words deemed inappropriate. A backlash ensued.

Soon there'll be some enterprising business on the internet selling "original" books; i.e. old versions of books that haven't been edited. It'll have great appeal to people who see themselves as intellectual rebels.

One can still get the original Charlie and the Chocolate Factory on Amazon, used, unused, whatever. I was tempted to buy a dozen copies as a speculative investment, reselling it to intellectual rebels at a higher price later! :-)

Keeping one for myself, of course.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 24, 2023, 04:35:41 PM
NBC News: The first Latina queen at a historically Black university drew online backlash. But she didn't back down. (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/first-latina-queen-historically-black-university-draws-backlash-rcna71763)

Lower Deck:
Quote
After a TikTok video featuring Miss Coppin State Keylin Perez went viral, dozens of posts questioned representation, race and legacy. But at the school, the reality is different.

Quote
When Keylin Perez became the first Latina to be crowned Miss Coppin State University in Baltimore, she was thrilled. She had been named the university's Miss Sophomore and Miss Junior previously and was eager to continue representing the school with pride as the 91st Miss Coppin State University queen.

But after a TikTok video she posted went viral, she received backlash, including harassment, from online critics who said the role should be given to a Black woman, since Coppin State University is a historically Black university, known as an HBCU.

<snip>

Kelaina Slaughter, 20, a junior majoring in English at the University of Louisville in Kentucky, first learned about the controversy surrounding Perez from a different TikTok video.

Slaughter explained why she thinks a role like Miss Coppin State University should go to a Black person.

She said roles like the Royal Court positions at HBCUs are crucial in representing students who have been historically underserved at predominantly white institutions.

"The reason why these people are so important for them to be Black is so that they can have Black voices in spaces where they were historically not allowed. They're trying to show that we are educated, that we can hold these positions, that we can have the same thing as white people — anybody else," Slaughter said.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 25, 2023, 09:52:01 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 24, 2023, 04:35:41 PM
NBC News: The first Latina queen at a historically Black university drew online backlash. But she didn't back down. (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/first-latina-queen-historically-black-university-draws-backlash-rcna71763)

Lower Deck:
Quote
After a TikTok video featuring Miss Coppin State Keylin Perez went viral, dozens of posts questioned representation, race and legacy. But at the school, the reality is different.

Quote
When Keylin Perez became the first Latina to be crowned Miss Coppin State University in Baltimore, she was thrilled. She had been named the university's Miss Sophomore and Miss Junior previously and was eager to continue representing the school with pride as the 91st Miss Coppin State University queen.

But after a TikTok video she posted went viral, she received backlash, including harassment, from online critics who said the role should be given to a Black woman, since Coppin State University is a historically Black university, known as an HBCU.

<snip>

Kelaina Slaughter, 20, a junior majoring in English at the University of Louisville in Kentucky, first learned about the controversy surrounding Perez from a different TikTok video.

Slaughter explained why she thinks a role like Miss Coppin State University should go to a Black person.

She said roles like the Royal Court positions at HBCUs are crucial in representing students who have been historically underserved at predominantly white institutions.

"The reason why these people are so important for them to be Black is so that they can have Black voices in spaces where they were historically not allowed. They're trying to show that we are educated, that we can hold these positions, that we can have the same thing as white people — anybody else," Slaughter said.

A truly bizarre element of the story:
Quote
"I never considered stepping down," Perez told NBC News. She applied for the high-profile role knowing she might face some backlash, but ran unopposed and was officially crowned in October. "I stayed firm in my decision of continuing to serve my institution that has poured so much into me the past four years," she said.

So people are outraged that she achieved something that no-one else wanted enough to attempt.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 25, 2023, 10:47:10 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 24, 2023, 04:35:41 PM
NBC News: The first Latina queen at a historically Black university drew online backlash. But she didn't back down. (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/first-latina-queen-historically-black-university-draws-backlash-rcna71763)

Lower Deck:
Quote
After a TikTok video featuring Miss Coppin State Keylin Perez went viral, dozens of posts questioned representation, race and legacy. But at the school, the reality is different.

Quote
When Keylin Perez became the first Latina to be crowned Miss Coppin State University in Baltimore, she was thrilled. She had been named the university's Miss Sophomore and Miss Junior previously and was eager to continue representing the school with pride as the 91st Miss Coppin State University queen.

But after a TikTok video she posted went viral, she received backlash, including harassment, from online critics who said the role should be given to a Black woman, since Coppin State University is a historically Black university, known as an HBCU.

<snip>

Kelaina Slaughter, 20, a junior majoring in English at the University of Louisville in Kentucky, first learned about the controversy surrounding Perez from a different TikTok video.

Slaughter explained why she thinks a role like Miss Coppin State University should go to a Black person.

She said roles like the Royal Court positions at HBCUs are crucial in representing students who have been historically underserved at predominantly white institutions.

"The reason why these people are so important for them to be Black is so that they can have Black voices in spaces where they were historically not allowed. They're trying to show that we are educated, that we can hold these positions, that we can have the same thing as white people — anybody else," Slaughter said.

Ha!  I missed that.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 25, 2023, 06:50:48 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 25, 2023, 09:52:01 AM
...

A truly bizarre element of the story:
Quote
"I never considered stepping down," Perez told NBC News. She applied for the high-profile role knowing she might face some backlash, but ran unopposed and was officially crowned in October. "I stayed firm in my decision of continuing to serve my institution that has poured so much into me the past four years," she said.

So people are outraged that she achieved something that no-one else wanted enough to attempt.

This is sheer envy.

You have one cow. I have no cow. Lord, please take away his cow. Without the risk, in this case, of my not winning a cow! Risk bad, your cow bad.

It's probably part of evolutionary biology: If you have more than me, it must be due to your theft and my risk aversion, probably efficient forty thousand years ago in our bands of 40.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 25, 2023, 11:05:47 PM
Having listened to this clown, I don't have much sympathy----his commentary is simply stupid.  And I support private corporations refusing speech they don't want to be associated with.

Still, once again:

NBC News: Media publishers drop Dilbert comic strip after creator's Black 'hate group' remark (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/media-publishers-drop-dilbert-comic-strip-creators-black-hate-group-re-rcna72349)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 26, 2023, 08:03:46 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 25, 2023, 11:05:47 PM
Having listened to this clown, I don't have much sympathy----his commentary is simply stupid.  And I support private corporations refusing speech they don't want to be associated with.

Still, once again:

NBC News: Media publishers drop Dilbert comic strip after creator's Black 'hate group' remark (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/media-publishers-drop-dilbert-comic-strip-creators-black-hate-group-re-rcna72349)

Here are the actual comments. Orders of magnitude different than the imo bizarre edits to Roald Dahl or dropping some Seuss books: https://twitter.com/LyfeIzWeerd/status/1628661410678079491?cxt=HHwWhoDUrZG7lZotAAAA
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on February 26, 2023, 10:10:24 AM
This is probably behind a paywall, so here's the article:

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-daily-news-dropping-dilbert-comic-scott-adams-20230225-ovdmgwy26bgjvicujjcr7e2o7e-story.html

QuoteNew York Daily News is dropping 'Dilbert': a note from the editor
By Andrew Julien
New York Daily News

Feb 25, 2023 at 3:45 pm

The Daily News is dumping "Dilbert."

Earlier this week, the strip's creator, Scott Adams, launched into a hateful tirade on a YouTube video show saying Black people are a hate group that white people should stay away from.

There's no need to repeat his exact words, which have been widely reported elsewhere. But they crossed a line that has made it impossible for The News to continue running his content and underwriting his work, a conclusion a growing number of newspapers across the nation have reached.

At a time when America is becoming increasingly defined by its divisions, Adams' comments fueled racial antipathy in a mean-spirited and ugly way.

New York Daily News, seen here rolling off the presses, has decided to dump the comic "Dilbert" due to creator Scott Adams' racist comments. 
[New York Daily News, seen here rolling off the presses, has decided to dump the comic "Dilbert" due to creator Scott Adams' racist comments. (Gardiner Anderson/for New York Daily News)]
The News covers New York, among the most diverse cities in the world. And just as we celebrate the diversity of people, faiths and cultures that shape our community, we welcome diversity of informed thought and opinion.

But this isn't about tolerance of diverse views. It's about making clear there's a bright line between what's acceptable and what's not, and that hate should not and cannot be tolerated. And that it certainly will not be endorsed.

You're going to see "Dilbert" for a few more days on the pages of The News, despite this decision. That's because the comics are prepared for publication in advance. We will be working with the syndicates that supply our comics in the coming days to remove "Dilbert" as expeditiously as possible and find a replacement you will enjoy.


Some might ask what any given cartoonist's statements have to do with the strip that appears in the newspaper. "Dilbert" gained popularity as a satirical look at the inner workings of an office. But while Adams' content is in the form of a comic strip, he is nonetheless a daily contributor to The News and the report we put in front of our readers.

We understand some readers may disagree with this decision, but be assured we are not trying to make a partisan statement here. We are saying there's a line that can't be crossed and that Scott Adams crossed it. And that when you cross that line, you no longer get to be part of the Daily News.

Andrew Julien is executive editor of the Daily News.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on February 26, 2023, 10:14:44 AM
Apologies for the double post, but as for Roald Dahl, money speaks--
https://www.npr.org/2023/02/24/1159224907/roald-dahls-publisher-responds-to-backlash-by-keeping-classic-texts-in-print

QuoteRoald Dahl's publisher responds to backlash by keeping 'classic' texts in print

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/roald-dahl-penguin-original-books-censorship-backlash/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on February 26, 2023, 10:59:05 AM
Pardon the triple post, but now it's James Bond who's on the chopping block.

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/james-bond-ian-fleming-books-rewritten-b2289747.html

https://variety.com/2023/film/news/james-bond-novels-edited-racism-1235536164/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on February 26, 2023, 12:46:00 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on February 26, 2023, 10:59:05 AM
Pardon the triple post, but now it's James Bond who's on the chopping block.

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/james-bond-ian-fleming-books-rewritten-b2289747.html

https://variety.com/2023/film/news/james-bond-novels-edited-racism-1235536164/

The things they've left in are... Wow. If you're going to rewrite, commit to it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 26, 2023, 01:22:16 PM
As long as both the originals and the rewritten are readily available, there is no censorship problem. We have the used book market and libraries. There is, however, an information problem that honest labeling would solve, but that publishers have no interest in or obligation to provide.

The publishers that re-write want to make money. A rewritten Goldfinger, written by Puffin Penner, would not sell nearly as much as a rewritten version with Ian Fleming as author.

The source of the problem is copyright protection. It lasts too long, far too long [70 years after the author's death or 95 years after publication]. In 1790 it started off at 14 years, renewable once. Thus the owner of the copyright can re-write a book [under the right to derivative works] and keep the original name and author, although s/he is deceased!  That's misleading advertising. And we can't get reprinting of the original until the copyright runs out.

The publishers are exploiting an information asymmetry, made possible by a bad law.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 26, 2023, 05:31:58 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 26, 2023, 01:22:16 PM
As long as both the originals and the rewritten are readily available, there is no censorship problem. We have the used book market and libraries.

Well Big-D (ye who have no problem with anything as long as there is "competition"), you are right, of course. 

But it is always the same dynamic with free speech: sure, do whatever you want within the confines of the law (just ask Tucker Carlson about Dominion right now) but expect to face the consequences of the free market and the other people who also have free speech.  In other words, don't be a nincompoop and make bad business decisions thru de facto private censorship (as Scott Adams knows and Elon Musk will soon find out).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 27, 2023, 05:53:55 AM
IHE: Stanford Faculty Concerned About Bias Reporting System (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2023/02/27/stanford-faculty-concerned-about-bias-reporting-system)

Quote
Russell Berman, a comparative literature professor, told The Wall Street Journal the system "reminds me of McCarthyism," referring to an era of U.S. politics when many were blacklisted and had careers ruined because of thinly sourced accusations that they were Communist sympathizers or otherwise disloyal.

National Review: Stanford Faculty Demand End to Anonymous Student Bias Reports (https://www.nationalreview.com/news/stanford-faculty-demand-end-to-anonymous-student-bias-reports/)

Quote
he inciting incident was a "Protected Identity Harm" report filed to Stanford last month against a student who was photographed reading Mein Kampf. This reporting mechanism is Stanford's system to address incidents where a student or community member feels attacked due to their identity.

<snip>

When a report is filed, an inquiry is triggered within 48 hours. Both parties are contacted, and though participation in the inquiry is voluntary, professors argued it might not feel that way to accused students.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 27, 2023, 06:45:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 27, 2023, 05:53:55 AM
IHE: Stanford Faculty Concerned About Bias Reporting System (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2023/02/27/stanford-faculty-concerned-about-bias-reporting-system)

Quote
Russell Berman, a comparative literature professor, told The Wall Street Journal the system "reminds me of McCarthyism," referring to an era of U.S. politics when many were blacklisted and had careers ruined because of thinly sourced accusations that they were Communist sympathizers or otherwise disloyal.

National Review: Stanford Faculty Demand End to Anonymous Student Bias Reports (https://www.nationalreview.com/news/stanford-faculty-demand-end-to-anonymous-student-bias-reports/)

Quote
he inciting incident was a "Protected Identity Harm" report filed to Stanford last month against a student who was photographed reading Mein Kampf. This reporting mechanism is Stanford's system to address incidents where a student or community member feels attacked due to their identity.

<snip>

When a report is filed, an inquiry is triggered within 48 hours. Both parties are contacted, and though participation in the inquiry is voluntary, professors argued it might not feel that way to accused students.

Yeah, the "option" of being tried "in absentia" probably isn't really comforting to most people.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on February 27, 2023, 07:28:31 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 27, 2023, 05:53:55 AM
IHE: Stanford Faculty Concerned About Bias Reporting System (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2023/02/27/stanford-faculty-concerned-about-bias-reporting-system)

Quote
Russell Berman, a comparative literature professor, told The Wall Street Journal the system "reminds me of McCarthyism," referring to an era of U.S. politics when many were blacklisted and had careers ruined because of thinly sourced accusations that they were Communist sympathizers or otherwise disloyal.

National Review: Stanford Faculty Demand End to Anonymous Student Bias Reports (https://www.nationalreview.com/news/stanford-faculty-demand-end-to-anonymous-student-bias-reports/)

Quote
he inciting incident was a "Protected Identity Harm" report filed to Stanford last month against a student who was photographed reading Mein Kampf. This reporting mechanism is Stanford's system to address incidents where a student or community member feels attacked due to their identity.

<snip>

When a report is filed, an inquiry is triggered within 48 hours. Both parties are contacted, and though participation in the inquiry is voluntary, professors argued it might not feel that way to accused students.

Well, with student shootings now being a thing on our college campuses, I can see wanting to keep an eye out for potential threats.  But reporting somebody merely for being spotted reading a controversial (to put it mildly) book--which might well have been part of an assignment of some sort?  Far too hair-trigger response there. I can see myself getting reported at Stanford for being so bold as to be caught reading a New Testament in public.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: waterboy on February 27, 2023, 09:59:00 AM
I consider myself an old-school liberal, but the crazies on both side of the political spectrum are infuriating.  Is there no common sense middle anymore?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 27, 2023, 12:08:53 PM
Quote from: waterboy on February 27, 2023, 09:59:00 AM
I consider myself an old-school liberal, but the crazies on both side of the political spectrum are infuriating.  Is there no common sense middle anymore?

It cannot speak its name, since now you're either a <whatever>-ist or an anti-<whatever>-ist. The ideas that there are any statements, ideas, policies, etc. that are not clearly "good" or "bad", but have positive and negative elements, is heresy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 27, 2023, 12:10:31 PM
Quote from: waterboy on February 27, 2023, 09:59:00 AM
I consider myself an old-school liberal, but the crazies on both side of the political spectrum are infuriating.  Is there no common sense middle anymore?

I consider myself old-old, very old school liberal -- classical liberal. :-)

Much has been written about the causes of political polarization, everything from more homogeneous neighborhoods to more homogeneous Supreme Courts. That's all true, though of course its endogenous. It's equally true that little of the population watches Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN, the former Clinton News Network. Maybe 1.6 million for Fox and 1.3 million for MSNBC + CNN. Under three million total out of a population of over 330 million, less than one per cent of the population. Not even worth thinking about.

I think the most powerful hypothesis is the attempted democratization of elections, especially but not only for President, that commenced in 1968. Used to be there were a few primaries to select candidates. But these were not determinative. Rather, they gave information to the back room old boys in smoke filled rooms who decided upon the candidates. And those old boys, political hacks, really, wanted only one thing -- to win. They were picking winners.

Since 1968 primaries have become determinative. Who votes in primaries? Only ideologues care enough! A few extremists. The poor candidates: Appeal to the madmen voting in the primary, then try to stay sane for the general. Then support the madmen once elected to get re-elected. A hard act. Much easier to let the courts do stuff, e.g. Then get the right people onto the courts. Another example is ruling by decree, or trying to. In the US ruling by decree is called Executive Order, which binds bureaucrats only but of course can spill out to the rest of the society. But that can stop at the Supreme Court, so get the Court on your side for that reason as well.

On balance, it seems that an effort to democratize has led to the opposite result, with lots of casualties along the way.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on February 27, 2023, 12:28:25 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 27, 2023, 12:10:31 PM
Quote from: waterboy on February 27, 2023, 09:59:00 AM
I consider myself an old-school liberal, but the crazies on both side of the political spectrum are infuriating.  Is there no common sense middle anymore?

I consider myself old-old, very old school liberal -- classical liberal. :-)

Much has been written about the causes of political polarization, everything from more homogeneous neighborhoods to more homogeneous Supreme Courts. That's all true, though of course its endogenous. It's equally true that little of the population watches Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN, the former Clinton News Network. Maybe 1.6 million for Fox and 1.3 million for MSNBC + CNN. Under three million total out of a population of over 330 million, less than one per cent of the population. Not even worth thinking about.

I think the most powerful hypothesis is the attempted democratization of elections, especially but not only for President, that commenced in 1968. Used to be there were a few primaries to select candidates. But these were not determinative. Rather, they gave information to the back room old boys in smoke filled rooms who decided upon the candidates. And those old boys, political hacks, really, wanted only one thing -- to win. They were picking winners.

Since 1968 primaries have become determinative. Who votes in primaries? Only ideologues care enough! A few extremists. The poor candidates: Appeal to the madmen voting in the primary, then try to stay sane for the general. Then support the madmen once elected to get re-elected. A hard act. Much easier to let the courts do stuff, e.g. Then get the right people onto the courts. Another example is ruling by decree, or trying to. In the US ruling by decree is called Executive Order, which binds bureaucrats only but of course can spill out to the rest of the society. But that can stop at the Supreme Court, so get the Court on your side for that reason as well.

On balance, it seems that an effort to democratize has led to the opposite result, with lots of casualties along the way.

What do you think of the law in Australia that requires everyone to vote?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 27, 2023, 12:50:49 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on February 27, 2023, 12:28:25 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 27, 2023, 12:10:31 PM
Quote from: waterboy on February 27, 2023, 09:59:00 AM
I consider myself an old-school liberal, but the crazies on both side of the political spectrum are infuriating.  Is there no common sense middle anymore?

I consider myself old-old, very old school liberal -- classical liberal. :-)

Much has been written about the causes of political polarization, everything from more homogeneous neighborhoods to more homogeneous Supreme Courts. That's all true, though of course its endogenous. It's equally true that little of the population watches Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN, the former Clinton News Network. Maybe 1.6 million for Fox and 1.3 million for MSNBC + CNN. Under three million total out of a population of over 330 million, less than one per cent of the population. Not even worth thinking about.

I think the most powerful hypothesis is the attempted democratization of elections, especially but not only for President, that commenced in 1968. Used to be there were a few primaries to select candidates. But these were not determinative. Rather, they gave information to the back room old boys in smoke filled rooms who decided upon the candidates. And those old boys, political hacks, really, wanted only one thing -- to win. They were picking winners.

Since 1968 primaries have become determinative. Who votes in primaries? Only ideologues care enough! A few extremists. The poor candidates: Appeal to the madmen voting in the primary, then try to stay sane for the general. Then support the madmen once elected to get re-elected. A hard act. Much easier to let the courts do stuff, e.g. Then get the right people onto the courts. Another example is ruling by decree, or trying to. In the US ruling by decree is called Executive Order, which binds bureaucrats only but of course can spill out to the rest of the society. But that can stop at the Supreme Court, so get the Court on your side for that reason as well.

On balance, it seems that an effort to democratize has led to the opposite result, with lots of casualties along the way.

What do you think of the law in Australia that requires everyone to vote?

Good question.

I don't think the problem is with the general, so there is no need to require voting. If people don't vote, they're equally happy with any candidate or are pissed off with all candidates! [We might want to know why election participation is low, i.e is which of these reasons apply. :-)]

There is a more general reason to not vote: Probability I can determine the outcome is effectively zero. Therefore it does not pay to become expert on the issues. And I do not vote. Requiring voting will bring in more of such uninformed voters. I don't think we want that.

Political parties know this and that's why they turn to emotion rather than reason. For an individual, voting is expressive, not determinative.

Still, my problem is not with voting in general, but with the use of primaries to determine candidates. I don't think this problem can be overcome by requiring people to vote in primaries, for all the reasons above. It seems a less democratic method of determining candidates, not victors, is better than  what we do now.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on February 27, 2023, 01:19:32 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 27, 2023, 12:10:31 PM

Much has been written about the causes of political polarization, everything from more homogeneous neighborhoods to more homogeneous Supreme Courts. That's all true, though of course its endogenous. It's equally true that little of the population watches Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN, the former Clinton News Network. Maybe 1.6 million for Fox and 1.3 million for MSNBC + CNN. Under three million total out of a population of over 330 million, less than one per cent of the population. Not even worth thinking about.

I think the most powerful hypothesis is the attempted democratization of elections, especially but not only for President, that commenced in 1968. Used to be there were a few primaries to select candidates. But these were not determinative. Rather, they gave information to the back room old boys in smoke filled rooms who decided upon the candidates. And those old boys, political hacks, really, wanted only one thing -- to win. They were picking winners.


If political polarization was only a problem in the US, this might be the case. To the extent that it's a global phenomenon, it can't be entirely due to something so specific to the US.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 27, 2023, 02:01:55 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 27, 2023, 01:19:32 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 27, 2023, 12:10:31 PM

Much has been written about the causes of political polarization, everything from more homogeneous neighborhoods to more homogeneous Supreme Courts. That's all true, though of course its endogenous. It's equally true that little of the population watches Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN, the former Clinton News Network. Maybe 1.6 million for Fox and 1.3 million for MSNBC + CNN. Under three million total out of a population of over 330 million, less than one per cent of the population. Not even worth thinking about.

I think the most powerful hypothesis is the attempted democratization of elections, especially but not only for President, that commenced in 1968. Used to be there were a few primaries to select candidates. But these were not determinative. Rather, they gave information to the back room old boys in smoke filled rooms who decided upon the candidates. And those old boys, political hacks, really, wanted only one thing -- to win. They were picking winners.


If political polarization was only a problem in the US, this might be the case. To the extent that it's a global phenomenon, it can't be entirely due to something so specific to the US.

I knew that should be addressed, and am glad you did, Marsh. Political polarization is not a global phenomenon. It's restricted to the northwest European democracies, perhaps without France, plus the United States, and perhaps Australia and New Zealand, and a country of which I know little, Canada. It doesn't seem to be true in the Nordic democracies, a nice test case therefore.

I think the source of the problem -- democratize everything in sight -- is broadly true across northwest European democracies and the rest of the white West. Willy Brandt explicitly: Wir wollen mehr Demokratie wagen! [Let's dare more democracy.] Such ideas captured voters from 1968 onwards all over the white West.

My guess at the broader intermediate cause is that democratization opened universities, and ideology was propagated from there to the rest of society. But look, polarization, and indeed, violence, between opposing factions in the political spectrum used to be common. Why are we so squeamish?

How these ideas affected practice in different places would require a dissertation to enumerate and explain, something I am not prepared to undertake. Instead, people can suggest competing hypotheses and we can have fun dissecting them. :-)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: spork on February 27, 2023, 03:04:15 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 27, 2023, 02:01:55 PM

[. . . ]
I think the source of the problem -- democratize everything in sight -- is broadly true across northwest European democracies and the rest of the white West.

[. . . ]

A summary of Karen Stenner's research on the authoritarian predisposition: https://hopenothate.org.uk/2020/11/01/authoritarianism/ (https://hopenothate.org.uk/2020/11/01/authoritarianism/).

Related: Lily Tsai's work on authoritarian leaders gaining popularity by punishing perceived wrongdoers.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 27, 2023, 03:23:36 PM
Quote from: spork on February 27, 2023, 03:04:15 PM
Quote from: dismalist on February 27, 2023, 02:01:55 PM

[. . . ]
I think the source of the problem -- democratize everything in sight -- is broadly true across northwest European democracies and the rest of the white West.

[. . . ]

A summary of Karen Stenner's research on the authoritarian predisposition: https://hopenothate.org.uk/2020/11/01/authoritarianism/ (https://hopenothate.org.uk/2020/11/01/authoritarianism/).

Related: Lily Tsai's work on authoritarian leaders gaining popularity by punishing perceived wrongdoers.

Yes, Spork, I know I need therapy! :-)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 27, 2023, 04:41:03 PM
dismalist, extreme right wing parties are growing in Nordic countries, and in fact becoming players in political coalitions.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on February 27, 2023, 05:04:43 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 27, 2023, 04:41:03 PM
dismalist, extreme right wing parties are growing in Nordic countries, and in fact becoming players in political coalitions.

Yeah, I hoid. My take is that the cause is a policy that many people didn't like -- immigration policy. That policy was adopted by Group X. A different group emerged called Group Y. Group X is rhetorically combating Group Y. In contrast, Ukrainian refugees seem to be welcomed everywhere. There is no news here. People disagree, and "extreme right wing" is a point of rhetoric, not of substance.

I think the northwestern European democracies have this politically under control by now. People may disagree about the policy, but the noise will quiet down. The Left moves Right if that's where the votes are. There really is no problem so long as there is peaceful competition among potential rulers, the political parties, though all kinds of representative government rules have their own problems.

No worries.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on February 27, 2023, 08:12:30 PM
i think you're channeling Alfred E. Newman. When you have ties to neo-Nazism you fit my definition of extreme right wing.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on February 28, 2023, 09:15:03 AM
Polarization, whether political, religious, or otherwise, is human nature. We define ourselves by what we ARE, in part by what we are NOT.

IMHO, lack of voting leads to worse polarization because politicians only need to appeal to "likely voters" who eat up whatever chum they are throwing out. The average voter can't stand the noise, becomes overwhelmed, and shuts it out.

At least being required to vote encourages the average voter to pay some attention, and encourages the politicians to broaden their message and appeal.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: FishProf on February 28, 2023, 11:27:09 AM
George Santos is an example of how getting elected is all that matters.  There are quite a few dissatisfied voters who feel duped, and apparently nothing that can be done about it.

That'll depress the desire to vote in future elections.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 28, 2023, 02:50:06 PM
Quote from: FishProf on February 28, 2023, 11:27:09 AM
George Santos is an example of how getting elected is all that matters.  There are quite a few dissatisfied voters who feel duped, and apparently nothing that can be done about it.

That'll depress the desire to vote in future elections.

On the other hand, part of the record-breaking turnout in 2020 was disgust and fear of the sitting president.  Anger is also a catalyst for voter turnout.  I hope this is the case in 2024.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on February 28, 2023, 03:07:28 PM
Santos seems intent to dig a bigger hole for himself every week. NY03 is also the richest congressional district in NY, according to Wikipedia, though it normally votes Democrat for president. The population may well be suffering from embarrassment at constantly being in the news in such a poor light. I like to believe they will not only vote Santos out when they can, but also punish the Republicans for poor vetting of candidates.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on February 28, 2023, 03:11:40 PM
NBC News: Tennessee governor appears to have dressed in drag, an art form he wants to restrict (https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/tennessee-governor-appears-dressed-drag-art-form-wants-restrict-rcna72569)

Lower Deck:
Quote
Gov. Bill Lee, a Republican, is set to sign a bill limiting where and in front of whom drag performances can take place.

Looks like Lee cross-dressed for a high school prank day (the women dressed as men).

I can't imagine this would pass a First Amendment challenge. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Anselm on March 01, 2023, 09:09:28 AM
I heard that George Santos shot down that Chinese weather balloon.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: FishProf on March 01, 2023, 10:32:41 AM
Quote from: Anselm on March 01, 2023, 09:09:28 AM
I heard that George Santos shot down that Chinese weather balloon.

Did you hear it from him?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 01, 2023, 12:32:50 PM
Quote from: FishProf on March 01, 2023, 10:32:41 AM
Quote from: Anselm on March 01, 2023, 09:09:28 AM
I heard that George Santos shot down that Chinese weather balloon.

Did you hear it from him?

There's a proverb that says "Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; a stranger and not your own lips."  George Santos seems never to have put much stock in that one.  I guess he got tired of waiting.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 06, 2023, 09:48:06 AM
Texas Tech suspends basketball coach over racially insensitive comment (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/sports/texas-tech-suspends-basketball-coach-racially-insensitive-comment-rcna73495?cid=referral_taboolafeed)

Lower Deck
Quote
Coach Mark Adams received a written reprimand before he was suspended while an investigation takes place.

Quote
The incident occurred in a meeting between Adams and a player, who wasn't identified, the school said in a news release.

"Adams was encouraging the student-athlete to be more receptive to coaching and referenced Bible verses about workers, teachers, parents, and slaves serving their masters," the statement said. "Adams immediately addressed this with the team and apologized."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 06, 2023, 10:58:30 AM
Of course, the guy was not saying the player was a slave, and he was quoting a bible verse.   Should he have been punished merely because someone took offense?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 06, 2023, 11:20:03 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 06, 2023, 10:58:30 AM
Of course, the guy was not saying the player was a slave, and he was quoting a bible verse.   Should he have been punished merely because someone took offense?

In my opinion, yes. He is in a position of authority over mostly young Black men, yet he quoted a verse that was widely used in the South to justify slavery. Not cool.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 06, 2023, 12:05:43 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 06, 2023, 11:20:03 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 06, 2023, 10:58:30 AM
Of course, the guy was not saying the player was a slave, and he was quoting a bible verse.   Should he have been punished merely because someone took offense?

In my opinion, yes. He is in a position of authority over mostly young Black men, yet he quoted a verse that was widely used in the South to justify slavery. Not cool.

Why don't we have similar outrage by descendants of Holocaust survivors over the causal use of "Nazi", such as "grammar Nazi"? That was less than a century ago, and there are still living Holocaust survivors, while slavery ended several decades before that so there probably aren't even any living people whose parents were slaves.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 06, 2023, 12:49:35 PM
marshwiggle: because of Chaney, Goodman and Schwerner (1960s Mississippi), Emmit Till (late 1950s). In Indiana, a public lynching in Marion in 1930 (yes, I know how long ago that was).

And, survivors of the Holocaust along with their kids and grandkids DO get angry about indiscriminate references to Nazis and the Holocaust.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 06, 2023, 01:02:00 PM
There's no such thing as a free speech!

Once upon a time, lots of self restraint was exercised even in private speech. At the dinner table one wasn't supposed to talk about sex, money, or religion. [What else is there to talk about, I asked myself in my yute.] Anyway, it wasn't done.

Now that it is done, the question is remedies. Tell the misuser of scripture to STFU! That one has to report all this to the kindergarten monitors in a university where the students are grownups who can vote is of course weird. And to suspend somebody for saying something without thinking is of course overkill. The whole human race could be suspended for that offense.

This is not to say that all offenses should be self-suppressed at all universities. But if they are at some, there is no problem.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 06, 2023, 01:07:26 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 06, 2023, 01:02:00 PM
There's no such thing as a free speech!

Once upon a time, lots of self restraint was exercised even in private speech. At the dinner table one wasn't supposed to talk about sex, money, or religion. [What else is there to talk about, I asked myself in my yute.] Anyway, it wasn't done.

Now that it is done, the question is remedies. Tell the misuser of scripture to STFU! That one has to report all this to the kindergarten monitors in a university where the students are grownups who can vote is of course weird. And to suspend somebody for saying something without thinking is of course overkill. The whole human race could be suspended for that offense.

This is not to say that all offenses should be self-suppressed at all universities. But if they are at some, there is no problem.

I'm sorry, but a D1 basketball player does not have the liberty to tell their coach to STFU. The alternatives are quit, keep quiet and take it, or do something about it.

Athletic scholarships are at will employment, or close to it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 06, 2023, 01:07:46 PM
He apparently recognized immediately that he had accidentally given offense and apologized on his own.  Suspending somebody from work over something that was clearly not driven by malice is excessive.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 06, 2023, 01:12:09 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 06, 2023, 01:07:26 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 06, 2023, 01:02:00 PM
There's no such thing as a free speech!

Once upon a time, lots of self restraint was exercised even in private speech. At the dinner table one wasn't supposed to talk about sex, money, or religion. [What else is there to talk about, I asked myself in my yute.] Anyway, it wasn't done.

Now that it is done, the question is remedies. Tell the misuser of scripture to STFU! That one has to report all this to the kindergarten monitors in a university where the students are grownups who can vote is of course weird. And to suspend somebody for saying something without thinking is of course overkill. The whole human race could be suspended for that offense.

This is not to say that all offenses should be self-suppressed at all universities. But if they are at some, there is no problem.

I'm sorry, but a D1 basketball player does not have the liberty to tell their coach to STFU. The alternatives are quit, keep quiet and take it, or do something about it.

Athletic scholarships are at will employment, or close to it.

That's one helluva strong basketball player with spine who takes risks! If his game were like that he'd be out in a day. "Mommy, he hurted my feelings." Kindergarten.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 06, 2023, 01:39:16 PM
dismalist, we actually do not know who reported it to the AD. And yes, the coach apologized, which is the right and sober response. Should he have been suspended? I still think so, and would accept a suspension if I were in his shoes. I have done at least three similar things in classrooms, and apologized. I was not suspended, but easily could have been.

I do think you all are mistaken in thinking that these are one time things with coaches. We older (I'm 70) people have imo an obligation to make sure that our upbringings do not reflexively exhibit in our speech, especially when considering our audiences.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 06, 2023, 01:59:16 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 06, 2023, 01:39:16 PM
dismalist, we actually do not know who reported it to the AD. And yes, the coach apologized, which is the right and sober response. Should he have been suspended? I still think so, and would accept a suspension if I were in his shoes. I have done at least three similar things in classrooms, and apologized. I was not suspended, but easily could have been.

I do think you all are mistaken in thinking that these are one time things with coaches. We older (I'm 70) people have imo an obligation to make sure that our upbringings do not reflexively exhibit in our speech, especially when considering our audiences.

Good, glad to hear about the sportsman that he may not have reported the incident himself. But the institution is still a kindergarten!

We have an obligation... . sure, that's what I was driving at with self-restraint at the dinner table. This sort of thing has never happened to me while teaching, perhaps because of having internalized certain self-restraint, but I have never associated an individual with a group. That made it easy. Be that as it may, while I find the social aspect of apologizing for everything in sight abhorrent, because almost always disingenuous, in a personal case like this it is perfectly fine, especially if spontaneous.

If not, have universities with different degrees of skin thickness, some for kindergartners, some for adults.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 06, 2023, 05:25:30 PM
Random observations:

1) I get that some Southern whites have traditionally used this verse to justify slavery, but read clearly, it merely recognizes the existence of slavery, a ubiquitous fact in antiquity.  The verse is however regularly used in evangelical circles to mean essentially that people in subordinate relationships are to obey their superiors-- we have no slaves today, of course, but we do have employers, and what-not, and evangelicals traditionally teach that employees have to obey the boss or quit.   Unless,  of course, they can show, following Peter, that they had to 'obey God rather than man', as God is the only one whose authority is absolute and unconditional.

2) Basketball coaches probably do not have the same level of academic freedom that profs have, but any teacher of any sort cannot always be able to prevent any words that might conceivably cause any offense to someone from coming out of their mouths.  It is unjust to hold educators to this sort of standard.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 06, 2023, 05:42:49 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 06, 2023, 05:25:30 PM
Random observations:

1) I get that some Southern whites have traditionally used this verse to justify slavery, but read clearly, it merely recognizes the existence of slavery, a ubiquitous fact in antiquity.  The verse is however regularly used in evangelical circles to mean essentially that people in subordinate relationships are to obey their superiors-- we have no slaves today, of course, but we do have employers, and what-not, and evangelicals traditionally teach that employees have to obey the boss or quit.   Unless,  of course, they can show, following Peter, that they had to 'obey God rather than man', as God is the only one whose authority is absolute and unconditional.

2) Basketball coaches probably do not have the same level of academic freedom that profs have, but any teacher of any sort cannot always be able to prevent any words that might conceivably cause any offense to someone from coming out of their mouths.  It is unjust to hold educators to this sort of standard.

It was unjust to hold me to the standard to not talk about sex, money and religion at the dinner table in my yute. But it made living together easier.

This discussion reminded me of a baseball card I had when I was a kid, naming the lake in the US with the longest American Indian name:

This is Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg in Connecticut. Light heartedly translated, it means: You fish on your side. I fish on my side. Nobody fish in the middle. We got 3500+ colleges and universities. It's easy to live and let live with that number. Educators can be held to all kinds of different standards.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 06, 2023, 06:45:52 PM
kay, i think you are correct on both counts. But, asking young kids to correctly understand the scripture is not feasible (we haven't addressed the issue of justifying your coaching decisions at a public university via scripture).

I just read a follow up article, and he clarified that he did not in fact apologize to the team. He also is alleged to have spit on a player, and said "I can spit on you any time I please", which he denies.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 07, 2023, 05:29:23 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 06, 2023, 06:45:52 PM
kay, i think you are correct on both counts. But, asking young kids to correctly understand the scripture is not feasible (we haven't addressed the issue of justifying your coaching decisions at a public university via scripture).

I just read a follow up article, and he clarified that he did not in fact apologize to the team. He also is alleged to have spit on a player, and said "I can spit on you any time I please", which he denies.

This is bizarre. Spitting on someone is a form of physical assault, and is vastly more serious than use of language. It's a testimony to how upside-down culture has become that this would be a footnote, rather than the main issue.

A question that has occurred to me regarding the familiar biblical passage.
In a society where slavery was deeply rooted and endemic, what sort of moral instruction would a progressive approve being given to enslaved people? Does an enslaved person have a moral imperative to try and rebel or escape? Even if that may bring retribution on their families? Or should there be no specific advice addressed to enslaved people? Should they be glossed over? (Just to be clear; advising the powers-that-be about the immorality of slavery is a completely different issue. Giving moral advice to enslaved people themselves is independent of that.)
(And given that there are still places in the world with forms of indentured servitude, this is still relevant.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 07, 2023, 09:51:08 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 06, 2023, 05:25:30 PM
Random observations:

1) I get that some Southern whites have traditionally used this verse to justify slavery, but read clearly, it merely recognizes the existence of slavery, a ubiquitous fact in antiquity.  The verse is however regularly used in evangelical circles to mean essentially that people in subordinate relationships are to obey their superiors-- we have no slaves today, of course, but we do have employers, and what-not, and evangelicals traditionally teach that employees have to obey the boss or quit.   Unless,  of course, they can show, following Peter, that they had to 'obey God rather than man', as God is the only one whose authority is absolute and unconditional.

2) Basketball coaches probably do not have the same level of academic freedom that profs have, but any teacher of any sort cannot always be able to prevent any words that might conceivably cause any offense to someone from coming out of their mouths.  It is unjust to hold educators to this sort of standard.

If he quoted a bible verse stating that slaves should serve their masters better to a black player, he miss read the room.  Whether he meant offense or not, he owes the student an apology IMO.  If he did that, I dont feel a suspension or further punishment would be in order, but if he failed to do so I could see further consequences being warranted.

It dosn't really matter how it is used in evangelical circles, that is not how it is heard in the general public and it dosnt make it any less offensive.  My friends and I used to use terms that were routed in racism without knowing it.  Just because we didnt know, dosnt mean the terms are not offensive.  Now that I know, I do not use them and hope others would follow suite.  I dont think it takes a rock scientist to know that telling a black student that he should act more slave-like would be offensive.     

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 07, 2023, 02:58:46 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 06, 2023, 05:25:30 PM
Random observations:

1) I get that some Southern whites have traditionally used this verse to justify slavery, but read clearly, it merely recognizes the existence of slavery, a ubiquitous fact in antiquity.  The verse is however regularly used in evangelical circles to mean essentially that people in subordinate relationships are to obey their superiors-- we have no slaves today, of course, but we do have employers, and what-not, and evangelicals traditionally teach that employees have to obey the boss or quit.   Unless,  of course, they can show, following Peter, that they had to 'obey God rather than man', as God is the only one whose authority is absolute and unconditional.

I thought that we should read the Bible literally.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 07, 2023, 10:39:39 PM
Oh never mind.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 08, 2023, 04:51:57 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 07, 2023, 02:58:46 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 06, 2023, 05:25:30 PM
Random observations:

1) I get that some Southern whites have traditionally used this verse to justify slavery, but read clearly, it merely recognizes the existence of slavery, a ubiquitous fact in antiquity.  The verse is however regularly used in evangelical circles to mean essentially that people in subordinate relationships are to obey their superiors-- we have no slaves today, of course, but we do have employers, and what-not, and evangelicals traditionally teach that employees have to obey the boss or quit.   Unless,  of course, they can show, following Peter, that they had to 'obey God rather than man', as God is the only one whose authority is absolute and unconditional.

I thought that we should read the Bible literally.

Basically the essential 'variable' on the Christian theological spectrum from conservative to liberal is about how to read the Bible.
There are a large portion of Christians in between those extremes who believe that Scripture can't just be ignored or read blindly, but must be read with as much context as possible. That is much harder than either of the extreme positions, since it means that you can't decide on the answer before you ask the question.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 08, 2023, 08:56:43 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 07, 2023, 10:39:39 PM
Oh never mind.

Seriously, I remember a discussion not that long ago regarding...what was it?  Oh yeah, homosexuality, and in that case we had not right to contradict the Word.  Am I getting that wrong?

But apparently, "Slaves" in the Bible does not mean 'slaves.'
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 08, 2023, 10:42:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 07, 2023, 02:58:46 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 06, 2023, 05:25:30 PM
Random observations:

1) I get that some Southern whites have traditionally used this verse to justify slavery, but read clearly, it merely recognizes the existence of slavery, a ubiquitous fact in antiquity.  The verse is however regularly used in evangelical circles to mean essentially that people in subordinate relationships are to obey their superiors-- we have no slaves today, of course, but we do have employers, and what-not, and evangelicals traditionally teach that employees have to obey the boss or quit.   Unless,  of course, they can show, following Peter, that they had to 'obey God rather than man', as God is the only one whose authority is absolute and unconditional.

I thought that we should read the Bible literally.

I don't see where kay is failing to read the Bible literally here.  The point of the passage is about obedience to authority.  It's part of a broader section about what people owe to each other as part of their wider service to God.  Paul, the author of this letter says "Whatever you do, in word or deed, do all in the Name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him."  This is followed by instructions to wives to submit themselves to their husbands, to husbands to love their wives and not be bitter toward them, to children to obey their parents, to parents to avoid provoking their children through excessive harshness, so as not to discourage them. 

Then comes the part about slaves obeying their masters, serving them as if serving God himself.  Finally, masters of slaves are told to "give to your slaves what is just and fair, knowing that you also have a Master in heaven."  Whatever roles we are assigned on earth, we all have the same Master to answer to.  We submit to each other and seek to do right by each other as part of our submission to God.  Our pastor just spent several Sundays on this very passage in Colossians.

It doesn't take any far-out interpretation to see that the general principles given in the passage are applicable to modern employer-employee relations.  Especially since fair treatment of wage-laborers is specifically mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament.  Like marshwiggle said, it's generally understood by Christians who spend much time actually studying Scripture that interpretation of any given passage involves awareness of the greater context of Scripture.

That's part of where the coach went wrong.  He quoted the passage to players who were unaware of the context, without it apparently occurring to him that some of them might hear something entirely different from what he meant.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on March 08, 2023, 10:55:00 AM
I think the main takeaway relates to Marshwiggle's divisions of Christianity. It's not that some eliminate everything unpleasant and some go completely literal, and some struggle in-between. It's that everybody eliminates everything unpleasant, including the literalists. Everyone has their "unpleasant" limit, so we tap-dance, we play loosey-goosey, we finesse. We "fix" it until it sounds right to us.

The fact that the verse mentions slavery as an example for appropriate behavior is not merely an acknowledgment of slavery; it constitutes approval.

That's why our relationship (if we choose to have one) with scripture, verses, God and/or gods is just that: our relationship. It's pointless to dictate what works for us to anyone else. (It is not necessarily pointless, however, to talk about it together, and when appropriate, celebrate it together with those who wish to share.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Scout on March 08, 2023, 11:40:05 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 06, 2023, 12:05:43 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 06, 2023, 11:20:03 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 06, 2023, 10:58:30 AM
Of course, the guy was not saying the player was a slave, and he was quoting a bible verse.   Should he have been punished merely because someone took offense?

In my opinion, yes. He is in a position of authority over mostly young Black men, yet he quoted a verse that was widely used in the South to justify slavery. Not cool.

Why don't we have similar outrage by descendants of Holocaust survivors over the causal use of "Nazi", such as "grammar Nazi"? That was less than a century ago, and there are still living Holocaust survivors, while slavery ended several decades before that so there probably aren't even any living people whose parents were slaves.

Daughter of holocaust survivors here and I absolutely do get angry at it. It's so normalized (Soup Nazi anyone) that no one seems to care or take our complaints seriously, but hell yes, it outrages me.  It's hard enough getting antisemitism taken seriously...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 08, 2023, 02:27:56 PM
https://medium.com/@stevesan/faculty-leaders-criticized-abortion-law-indiana-u-told-them-they-violated-policy-1f23591f10e5
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 08, 2023, 05:33:55 PM
Quote from: apl68 on March 08, 2023, 10:42:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 07, 2023, 02:58:46 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 06, 2023, 05:25:30 PM
Random observations:

1) I get that some Southern whites have traditionally used this verse to justify slavery, but read clearly, it merely recognizes the existence of slavery, a ubiquitous fact in antiquity.  The verse is however regularly used in evangelical circles to mean essentially that people in subordinate relationships are to obey their superiors-- we have no slaves today, of course, but we do have employers, and what-not, and evangelicals traditionally teach that employees have to obey the boss or quit.   Unless,  of course, they can show, following Peter, that they had to 'obey God rather than man', as God is the only one whose authority is absolute and unconditional.

I thought that we should read the Bible literally.

I don't see where kay is failing to read the Bible literally here.  The point of the passage is about obedience to authority.  It's part of a broader section about what people owe to each other as part of their wider service to God. 

The passage kind of specifically says "slaves," nevertheless.  We can't really pretend it doesn't.  Being a slave serves God.  I don't think this contradicts what you and kay just posted.  God wants slaves to obey their masters.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 09, 2023, 05:04:30 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 08, 2023, 05:33:55 PM
Quote from: apl68 on March 08, 2023, 10:42:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 07, 2023, 02:58:46 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 06, 2023, 05:25:30 PM
Random observations:

1) I get that some Southern whites have traditionally used this verse to justify slavery, but read clearly, it merely recognizes the existence of slavery, a ubiquitous fact in antiquity.  The verse is however regularly used in evangelical circles to mean essentially that people in subordinate relationships are to obey their superiors-- we have no slaves today, of course, but we do have employers, and what-not, and evangelicals traditionally teach that employees have to obey the boss or quit.   Unless,  of course, they can show, following Peter, that they had to 'obey God rather than man', as God is the only one whose authority is absolute and unconditional.

I thought that we should read the Bible literally.

I don't see where kay is failing to read the Bible literally here.  The point of the passage is about obedience to authority.  It's part of a broader section about what people owe to each other as part of their wider service to God. 

The passage kind of specifically says "slaves," nevertheless.  We can't really pretend it doesn't.  Being a slave serves God.  I don't think this contradicts what you and kay just posted.  God wants slaves to obey their masters.

You'd make a good ultra-conservative, Wahoo.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 09, 2023, 11:16:22 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 09, 2023, 05:04:30 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 08, 2023, 05:33:55 PM
Quote from: apl68 on March 08, 2023, 10:42:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 07, 2023, 02:58:46 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 06, 2023, 05:25:30 PM
Random observations:

1) I get that some Southern whites have traditionally used this verse to justify slavery, but read clearly, it merely recognizes the existence of slavery, a ubiquitous fact in antiquity.  The verse is however regularly used in evangelical circles to mean essentially that people in subordinate relationships are to obey their superiors-- we have no slaves today, of course, but we do have employers, and what-not, and evangelicals traditionally teach that employees have to obey the boss or quit.   Unless,  of course, they can show, following Peter, that they had to 'obey God rather than man', as God is the only one whose authority is absolute and unconditional.

I thought that we should read the Bible literally.

I don't see where kay is failing to read the Bible literally here.  The point of the passage is about obedience to authority.  It's part of a broader section about what people owe to each other as part of their wider service to God. 

The passage kind of specifically says "slaves," nevertheless.  We can't really pretend it doesn't.  Being a slave serves God.  I don't think this contradicts what you and kay just posted.  God wants slaves to obey their masters.

You'd make a good ultra-conservative, Wahoo.

Who's to say I'm not an ultra-conservative already?

But just out of curiosity, I think what I have posted comes pretty squarely from the heathen liberal camp.  Why do you think I'd be a good U.C.?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 10, 2023, 05:18:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 09, 2023, 11:16:22 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 09, 2023, 05:04:30 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 08, 2023, 05:33:55 PM

The passage kind of specifically says "slaves," nevertheless.  We can't really pretend it doesn't.  Being a slave serves God.  I don't think this contradicts what you and kay just posted.  God wants slaves to obey their masters.

You'd make a good ultra-conservative, Wahoo.

Who's to say I'm not an ultra-conservative already?

But just out of curiosity, I think what I have posted comes pretty squarely from the heathen liberal camp.  Why do you think I'd be a good U.C.?

Both ultra-conservatives and ultra-liberals think that advice should be given for an ideal world. Moderates believe advice should take into account the world as it exists. For a current example,

What advice should be given to women in Afghanistan? Should they

The first one is likely to place women and their families at great risk, even though for women in the West the second would be completely normal. Ultraconservatives and ultraliberals may disagree on what advice they would give, but they will agree that the same advice should be given at all times and places.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 10, 2023, 12:54:18 PM
"Saving" kids from Holocaust stories in Florida: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/03/10/ron-desantis-book-bans-martin-county-jodi-picoult/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 10, 2023, 02:47:35 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 10, 2023, 05:18:24 AM
Both ultra-conservatives and ultra-liberals think that advice should be given for an ideal world.

Hmmmmm.  Very wise and insightful. 

I don't think I was working towards an "ideal world" when I asked about the rubric for reading the Bible literally.  Sometimes readers are very certain of the message, sometimes readers rationalize or modulate the message.

That strikes me as pretty "real world," wouldn't you say?

Nice try, however.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 10, 2023, 02:51:12 PM
Don't know don't if this fits here exactly.

IHE: $4.175M Settlement in Iowa Football Racial Bias Suit (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2023/03/08/4175m-settlement-iowa-football-racial-bias-suit)

Hawk Central: $4M to be paid in Iowa football discrimination suit; Kirk Ferentz 'disappointed' in result (https://www.hawkcentral.com/story/sports/college/iowa/football/2023/03/06/4m-settlement-reached-in-iowa-football-racial-discrimination-lawsuit/69790418007/)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 10, 2023, 02:57:13 PM
This one definitely belongs here:

IHE: Idaho College Rejects Artist's Work That Mentions Abortions (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2023/03/08/idaho-college-rejects-artist%E2%80%99s-work-mentions-abortions)

Quote
Lydia Nobel, a New York artist, told the news outlet she was surprised to learn her piece, "As I Sit Waiting," a series of four interviews—three on video and one on audio—with women discussing reproductive health care, including abortions, would not be included in the "Unconditional Care" exhibition about women's health.

College officials removed her work and those of other artists from the lineup, citing Idaho's No Public Funds for Abortion Act, which "prohibits the use of public funds for abortion, including speech that would 'promote abortion' or 'counsel in favor of abortion.'"

Idaho Statesman:  'Art is being censored.' Parts of exhibit at Idaho college removed for abortion messaging (https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article272875130.html)



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 11, 2023, 06:56:31 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 10, 2023, 02:47:35 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 10, 2023, 05:18:24 AM
Both ultra-conservatives and ultra-liberals think that advice should be given for an ideal world.

Hmmmmm.  Very wise and insightful. 

I don't think I was working towards an "ideal world" when I asked about the rubric for reading the Bible literally.  Sometimes readers are very certain of the message, sometimes readers rationalize or modulate the message.


Nobody has said that advice in the Bible for "slaves" wasn't actually directed at people who were literally slaves. The question is what that tells us about the institution of slavery.

It was you who said:
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 08, 2023, 05:33:55 PM

The passage kind of specifically says "slaves," nevertheless.  We can't really pretend it doesn't.  Being a slave serves God.  I don't think this contradicts what you and kay just posted.  God wants slaves to obey their masters.

Your interpretation is not the only one available. By similar logic, one could argue that a doctor's recommendation that a limb be amputated due to cancer or something else implies that limbs being amputated is good, rather than the best compromise out of a bad situation that cannot be made into what it should have been in the first place.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 11, 2023, 11:01:57 AM
Random points:

1) Accepting the Bible 'literally' does not ignore that a) there are various literary genres in the Scriptures that must be read 'literally' in different ways, not all being mere 'as it actually was' historical analysis, and b) the Bible, like, ahem, more or less any ancient literature, often uses some words metonymally, i.e., to mean more than just what is said directly, i.e, the idea that slaves should obey their masters is one aspect taught here of the general principle that human authorities should be obeyed (unless, of course, doing so commands disobedience to God).

2) The Bible accepts the institution of slavery, and does not call Christians to rebel against it.  This does not mean that it does not exhort Christians to free slaves they do own (see Philemon), nor that it approves of manstealing people into slavery (see the OT law commanding death for that action).  Nor would it forbid the magistrate from seeking to outlaw it, but the magistrate's authority ain't the same as the individual private citizen's. 

3) Christianity has different views wrt how rebellious or combative a Christian ought properly to be.   I confess that my latent Anabaptist tendencies shine forth here.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 11, 2023, 02:09:50 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 11, 2023, 06:56:31 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 10, 2023, 02:47:35 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 10, 2023, 05:18:24 AM
Both ultra-conservatives and ultra-liberals think that advice should be given for an ideal world.

Hmmmmm.  Very wise and insightful. 

I don't think I was working towards an "ideal world" when I asked about the rubric for reading the Bible literally.  Sometimes readers are very certain of the message, sometimes readers rationalize or modulate the message.


Nobody has said that advice in the Bible for "slaves" wasn't actually directed at people who were literally slaves. The question is what that tells us about the institution of slavery.

It was you who said:
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 08, 2023, 05:33:55 PM

The passage kind of specifically says "slaves," nevertheless.  We can't really pretend it doesn't.  Being a slave serves God.  I don't think this contradicts what you and kay just posted.  God wants slaves to obey their masters.

Your interpretation is not the only one available. By similar logic, one could argue that a doctor's recommendation that a limb be amputated due to cancer or something else implies that limbs being amputated is good, rather than the best compromise out of a bad situation that cannot be made into what it should have been in the first place.

I repeat: some people try to rationalize or modulate the clear messages in the Bible to fit a certain end.

Or one could just admit that the Bible has some horrific dictates and is, in fact, wrong, that the Bible is not, in fact, in infallible document.  Killed any witches lately?

And then ask yourself, who is working toward the "ideal world?"
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 11, 2023, 02:11:36 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 11, 2023, 11:01:57 AM
2) The Bible accepts the institution of slavery, and does not call Christians to rebel against it.  This does not mean that it does not exhort Christians to free slaves they do own

It plainly tells salves to obey their masters.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 11, 2023, 09:58:33 PM
Yes, it does.   What's your point?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 12, 2023, 08:33:43 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 11, 2023, 09:58:33 PM
Yes, it does.   What's your point?

I would think this should be obvious within the context of the discussion.

You have done some work there to rationalize the presence of this passage in the Bible.  But the Bible, as translated, does none of the things you suggest it does...

Quote
This does not mean that it does not exhort Christians to free slaves they do own (see Philemon), nor that it approves of manstealing people into slavery (see the OT law commanding death for that action).  Nor would it forbid the magistrate from seeking to outlaw it, but the magistrate's authority ain't the same as the individual private citizen's.

...but clearly tells slaves to be subservient.  Your commentary is very nondiegetic.  It implies none of those things.  There is no evidence of it being a metonym which is a form of metaphor and thus must imply both the tenor (the slave) and the vehicle (the thing compared).  This is very clearly an imperative.  Apparently slave owning among the early Christians was not unusual. 

I find the "manstealing" passage in Exodus 21:16.  Is that about kidnapping and selling a free person into slavery?  Seems like it.  Or it seems like a clear contradiction within the document.   (I thought Christ nullified the laws of the OT anyway.) 

In other words, you are trying hard to not believe what the oft-translated Bible clearly says.  In other instances you seem bound to the very literal translation of the Bible. 

It looks a little like cherrypicked hermeneutics to me.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 12, 2023, 08:53:09 PM
None of your innovative interpretation is true.   What is true, is, of course:

1) Christianity is responsible for the elimination of slavery in the western world

2) The Bible acknowledges the existence of slavery and tells slaves not to rebel, as it similarly tells Christians to submit to other authority structures, save only when such obedience compels disobedience to God.   So I ask again, what is your point?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 05:43:21 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 11, 2023, 02:09:50 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 11, 2023, 06:56:31 AM

It was you who said:
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 08, 2023, 05:33:55 PM

The passage kind of specifically says "slaves," nevertheless.  We can't really pretend it doesn't.  Being a slave serves God.  I don't think this contradicts what you and kay just posted.  God wants slaves to obey their masters.

Your interpretation is not the only one available. By similar logic, one could argue that a doctor's recommendation that a limb be amputated due to cancer or something else implies that limbs being amputated is good, rather than the best compromise out of a bad situation that cannot be made into what it should have been in the first place.

I repeat: some people try to rationalize or modulate the clear messages in the Bible to fit a certain end.

Or one could just admit that the Bible has some horrific dictates and is, in fact, wrong, that the Bible is not, in fact, in infallible document.  Killed any witches lately?

And then ask yourself, who is working toward the "ideal world?"

I'm still waiting to hear what advice you would give to women in Afghanistan today, that will make sense for the next 2000 years to all of the people who read it regardless of the context in which they live.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 06:18:12 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 05:43:21 AM
I'm still waiting to hear what advice you would give to women in Afghanistan today, that will make sense for the next 2000 years to all of the people who read it regardless of the context in which they live.


??????

EDIT: Wait, I get it.  You want me to put myself in the place of early Christians 2,000 years ago.  The issue is drafting a sacred text that would be resonant now and equally resonant and practical to culture 2,000 years from now, right?  Yeah, that would be virtually impossible for a human being to do, huh?

However, if we are dealing with the infallible Word of God that we base our lives and beliefs around, that is a different story.  God should be able to tell us what to do 2,000 years ago and that same revelation should be perfectly relevant today.

So, if you tell me the Bible was written by fallible people, I would say, sure, that makes sense, and the Bible it is still a beautiful work of literature.

But if you tell me we should follow the precepts laid out in the Bible because it is the Word of God as recorded by Moses and the Apostles, well, then it's a problem unless God deliberately wants to confuse and confound us.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 06:22:29 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 12, 2023, 08:53:09 PM
None of your innovative interpretation is true.   What is true, is, of course:

1) Christianity is responsible for the elimination of slavery in the western world

How do you figure?

The Yankees ended slavery in America.  Most civilized countries had already repudiated slavery.   

https://time.com/5171819/christianity-slavery-book-excerpt/

And anyway, that changes nothing that is written in the Bible.

Quote
2) The Bible acknowledges the existence of slavery and tells slaves not to rebel, as it similarly tells Christians to submit to other authority structures, save only when such obedience compels disobedience to God.   So I ask again, what is your point?

Don't pretend to be obtuse.

I explained my "point" pretty clearly, I think.

This is the first time you have acknowledged that. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 06:58:56 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 06:18:12 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 05:43:21 AM
I'm still waiting to hear what advice you would give to women in Afghanistan today, that will make sense for the next 2000 years to all of the people who read it regardless of the context in which they live.


??????

EDIT: Wait, I get it.  You want me to put myself in the place of early Christians 2,000 years ago.  The issue is drafting a sacred text that would be resonant now and equally resonant and practical to culture 2,000 years from now, right?  Yeah, that would be virtually impossible for a human being to do, huh?

However, if we are dealing with the infallible Word of God that we base our lives and beliefs around, that is a different story.  God should be able to tell us what to do 2,000 years ago and that same revelation should be perfectly relevant today.

So, if you tell me the Bible was written by fallible people, I would say, sure, that makes sense, and the Bible it is still a beautiful work of literature.

But if you tell me we should follow the precepts laid out in the Bible because it is the Word of God as recorded by Moses and the Apostles, well, then it's a problem unless God deliberately wants to confuse and confound us.

So how, exactly, would the distinction between being written by fallible human beings versus being written by God change what could be expressed for posterity, given the limitations of the human language that would have to be used in any case? Presumably the words that God could use would be the same words that fallible human beings could use. (Especially since no-one disputes the fact that the Bible was actually written by fallible human beings, whether is was inspired by God or not.) Why should God's "inspiration" somehow result in the impossibility of anything other than a single, timeless, context-insensitive interpretation?

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: FishProf on March 13, 2023, 07:15:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 06:58:56 AM
(Especially since no-one disputes the fact that the Bible was actually written by fallible human beings, whether is was inspired by God or not.)

You MUST be joking.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 07:59:10 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 06:58:56 AM
So how, exactly, would the distinction between being written by fallible human beings versus being written by God change what could be expressed for posterity, given the limitations of the human language that would have to be used in any case? Presumably the words that God could use would be the same words that fallible human beings could use. (Especially since no-one disputes the fact that the Bible was actually written by fallible human beings, whether is was inspired by God or not.) Why should God's "inspiration" somehow result in the impossibility of anything other than a single, timeless, context-insensitive interpretation?

That's some tortuous prose there, my friend.  Can you make your thoughts a little clearer?

Are you talking about the "impossibility" of language to accurately relay the Word?

I was saying we either consider the Bible is a work of fallible humans with all their prejudices and mistakes----and thus we admit that we cannot necessarily accept as law what is in it-----or we concede that God was very contradictory and His messages are very confusing.  We either take the Bible as the Word of God, therefore reading literally, or we accept that we have a human artifact with typical human blunders in it, therefore we take into consideration culture and context, including our own culture and context and what is important to us now.



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 08:32:59 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 07:59:10 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 06:58:56 AM
So how, exactly, would the distinction between being written by fallible human beings versus being written by God change what could be expressed for posterity, given the limitations of the human language that would have to be used in any case? Presumably the words that God could use would be the same words that fallible human beings could use. (Especially since no-one disputes the fact that the Bible was actually written by fallible human beings, whether is was inspired by God or not.) Why should God's "inspiration" somehow result in the impossibility of anything other than a single, timeless, context-insensitive interpretation?

That's some tortuous prose there, my friend.  Can you make your thoughts a little clearer?

Are you talking about the "impossibility" of language to accurately relay the Word?

I was saying we either consider the Bible is a work of fallible humans with all their prejudices and mistakes----and thus we admit that we cannot necessarily accept as law what is in it

That would be the ultra-liberal position.

Quote

-----or we concede that God was very contradictory and His messages are very confusing.  We either take the Bible as the Word of God, therefore reading literally

That would be the ultra-conservative position.

Quote
, or we accept that we have a human artifact with typical human blunders in it, therefore we take into consideration culture and context, including our own culture and context and what is important to us now.

That would be the atheistic position.

Many, if not most, Christians would disagree with both the ultra-conservative and ultra-liberal positions, and would say something more along the lines of "The Bible was written over centuries in different geographical and cultural contexts, and so explanations, instructions, and advice given in any of those contexts would have been clear to those people *in those contexts. The best way for us to determine how they are relevant to us is to look at them in the context of all the rest of the Bible to see what seems to be universal and what seems to be culturally-specific." (Note: This differs from the ultra-liberal position because it doesn't assume our current culture as somehow of greater importance than Scripture. Where the consistent message of Scripture contradicts things in our culture, then our culture is wrong.)

*Even at those times, it's clear that prophets and Jesus himself said things that many or most people misinterpreted because they did not want to consider the implications of certain interpretations. When Jesus' own words to people in person could be misinterpreted, it's ridiculous to suggest that at great historical, linguistic, geographical, and cultural remove there should be no possibility for confusion.)


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 09:07:24 AM
Are you sure you are using "ultra-liberal" and "ultra-conservative" correctly?  I think of the Duggars as "ultra-conservative" and "ultra-liberal" as, I dunno, name someone----I'm not sure who.  Jerry Garcia?

And I think what you are arguing is the "atheistic position" is pretty much the same thing as your definition of the "ultra-liberal" position.  It is more or less what I said.  Atheists just pretty much denounce the whole shebang, however; that is their position, generally speaking.

Oh well, it doesn't really matter.  I think you pretty much agree that the Bible is very open to interpretation, so when it comes to things like, say, oh I don't know, sexual orientation (which comes up sometimes) we cannot simply denounce them because of the OT anymore than we can kill witches.  If we can deny that God wants slaves, we can deny that God disowns gays.   
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on March 13, 2023, 09:27:36 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 09:07:24 AM
Oh well, it doesn't really matter.  I think you pretty much agree that the Bible is very open to interpretation, so when it comes to things like, say, oh I don't know, sexual orientation (which comes up sometimes) we cannot simply denounce them because of the OT anymore than we can kill witches.  If we can deny that God wants slaves, we can deny that God disowns gays. 

And we have bingo. Not for the first time, either. I admire Wahoo's stamina and patience--can't be easy maintaining a discussion where you're the only participant who can put two and two together and come up with four. It's a shame we can't apply a virtual frying pan to some virtual heads.

In other words, if you like yourself some shrimp but hate yourself some gays, you can make the Bible work for you, with an "innovative" interpretation.

If you're gay and find guidance and wisdom in the Bible, you can also make the Bible work for you with an "innovative" interpretation.

And yes, if you're an atheist who appreciates the Bible as ancient literature, you can make the Bible work for you with an "innovative" interpretation.

Anyone who uses, reads, and/or worships with the Bible must be in some way "innovative"--nobody necessarily more so than less. Being clear and honest about that is helpful.

Which, again, is why dictating the way the Bible works for you to other people is at best annoying, and at worst really dangerous. And also why discussing, perhaps arguing about, and perhaps celebrating what you love and what most moves you about the Bible in a community setting COULD be valuable and uplifting.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 13, 2023, 09:46:59 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 08:32:59 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 07:59:10 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 06:58:56 AM
So how, exactly, would the distinction between being written by fallible human beings versus being written by God change what could be expressed for posterity, given the limitations of the human language that would have to be used in any case? Presumably the words that God could use would be the same words that fallible human beings could use. (Especially since no-one disputes the fact that the Bible was actually written by fallible human beings, whether is was inspired by God or not.) Why should God's "inspiration" somehow result in the impossibility of anything other than a single, timeless, context-insensitive interpretation?

That's some tortuous prose there, my friend.  Can you make your thoughts a little clearer?

Are you talking about the "impossibility" of language to accurately relay the Word?

I was saying we either consider the Bible is a work of fallible humans with all their prejudices and mistakes----and thus we admit that we cannot necessarily accept as law what is in it

That would be the ultra-liberal position.

Quote

-----or we concede that God was very contradictory and His messages are very confusing.  We either take the Bible as the Word of God, therefore reading literally

That would be the ultra-conservative position.

Quote
, or we accept that we have a human artifact with typical human blunders in it, therefore we take into consideration culture and context, including our own culture and context and what is important to us now.

That would be the atheistic position.

Many, if not most, Christians would disagree with both the ultra-conservative and ultra-liberal positions, and would say something more along the lines of "The Bible was written over centuries in different geographical and cultural contexts, and so explanations, instructions, and advice given in any of those contexts would have been clear to those people *in those contexts. The best way for us to determine how they are relevant to us is to look at them in the context of all the rest of the Bible to see what seems to be universal and what seems to be culturally-specific." (Note: This differs from the ultra-liberal position because it doesn't assume our current culture as somehow of greater importance than Scripture. Where the consistent message of Scripture contradicts things in our culture, then our culture is wrong.)

*Even at those times, it's clear that prophets and Jesus himself said things that many or most people misinterpreted because they did not want to consider the implications of certain interpretations. When Jesus' own words to people in person could be misinterpreted, it's ridiculous to suggest that at great historical, linguistic, geographical, and cultural remove there should be no possibility for confusion.)

I think your "atheistic" interpretation is actually any non-christian, not just atheists.  One of the funniest parts of the religious is how christians think the bible is above reproach, while viewing other religious documents as a farce and abomination, and vice versa.  The saddest part of this, is how it is used to wage war, genocide, and other ungodly acts. 

I forget who said it, but I always liked the statement that the only difference between a christian and an atheist is that the atheist believe in one less god out of thousands. 


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on March 13, 2023, 09:53:28 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 13, 2023, 09:46:59 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 08:32:59 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 07:59:10 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 06:58:56 AM
So how, exactly, would the distinction between being written by fallible human beings versus being written by God change what could be expressed for posterity, given the limitations of the human language that would have to be used in any case? Presumably the words that God could use would be the same words that fallible human beings could use. (Especially since no-one disputes the fact that the Bible was actually written by fallible human beings, whether is was inspired by God or not.) Why should God's "inspiration" somehow result in the impossibility of anything other than a single, timeless, context-insensitive interpretation?

That's some tortuous prose there, my friend.  Can you make your thoughts a little clearer?

Are you talking about the "impossibility" of language to accurately relay the Word?

I was saying we either consider the Bible is a work of fallible humans with all their prejudices and mistakes----and thus we admit that we cannot necessarily accept as law what is in it

That would be the ultra-liberal position.

Quote

-----or we concede that God was very contradictory and His messages are very confusing.  We either take the Bible as the Word of God, therefore reading literally

That would be the ultra-conservative position.

Quote
, or we accept that we have a human artifact with typical human blunders in it, therefore we take into consideration culture and context, including our own culture and context and what is important to us now.

That would be the atheistic position.

Many, if not most, Christians would disagree with both the ultra-conservative and ultra-liberal positions, and would say something more along the lines of "The Bible was written over centuries in different geographical and cultural contexts, and so explanations, instructions, and advice given in any of those contexts would have been clear to those people *in those contexts. The best way for us to determine how they are relevant to us is to look at them in the context of all the rest of the Bible to see what seems to be universal and what seems to be culturally-specific." (Note: This differs from the ultra-liberal position because it doesn't assume our current culture as somehow of greater importance than Scripture. Where the consistent message of Scripture contradicts things in our culture, then our culture is wrong.)

*Even at those times, it's clear that prophets and Jesus himself said things that many or most people misinterpreted because they did not want to consider the implications of certain interpretations. When Jesus' own words to people in person could be misinterpreted, it's ridiculous to suggest that at great historical, linguistic, geographical, and cultural remove there should be no possibility for confusion.)

I think your "atheistic" interpretation is actually any non-christian, not just atheists.  One of the funniest parts of the religious is how christians think the bible is above reproach, while viewing other religious documents as a farce and abomination, and vice versa.  The saddest part of this, is how it is used to wage war, genocide, and other ungodly acts. 

I forget who said it, but I always liked the statement that the only difference between a christian and an atheist is that the atheist believe in one less god out of thousands.

When Fringehusband and I met he described himself as an agnostic, feeling that as a scientist he couldn't rule out the possibility of a god of some kind. While I ageed with him on some levels, I told him I used "atheist" because a) when many people hear "agnostic" they understand it to mean that you think it's a 50:50 chance that there's a god and b) that I was sure I didn't believe in any of the gods described by existing religions so I am an atheist for all practical purposes.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 10:12:21 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 09:07:24 AM
Are you sure you are using "ultra-liberal" and "ultra-conservative" correctly?  I think of the Duggars as "ultra-conservative" and "ultra-liberal" as, I dunno, name someone----I'm not sure who.  Jerry Garcia?

And I think what you are arguing is the "atheistic position" is pretty much the same thing as your definition of the "ultra-liberal" position.  It is more or less what I said.  Atheists just pretty much denounce the whole shebang, however; that is their position, generally speaking.

Absolutely! You get a gold star. The churches in the steepest decline are the ultra-liberal ones since they don't really have anything to offer that isn't just normal (non-religious) culture.

Quote
Oh well, it doesn't really matter.  I think you pretty much agree that the Bible is very open to interpretation, so when it comes to things like, say, oh I don't know, sexual orientation (which comes up sometimes) we cannot simply denounce them because of the OT anymore than we can kill witches.  If we can deny that God wants slaves, we can deny that God disowns gays.

Don't forget liars, adulterers, gossips, people who don't respect their parents, and so on. No-one* gets a free pass.
(*except Jesus)

Quote from: Kron3007 on March 13, 2023, 09:46:59 AM

I think your "atheistic" interpretation is actually any non-christian, not just atheists. 


Sure. Any religious people will make a similar distinction between their own sacred texts and anything else.

Quote
One of the funniest parts of the religious is how christians think the bible is above reproach, while viewing other religious documents as a farce and abomination, and vice versa. 

That's kind of how any ideology works, religious or otherwise. By definition, some principle(s), document(s), or whatever are used as the basis for evaluating anything else. So even if one  claims to use the "principles of science" as fundamental, that takes those principles or ideas as axiomatic.


Quote
The saddest part of this, is how it is used to wage war, genocide, and other ungodly acts. 

All kids of horrific things have been blamed on love, freedom, and any other idea that people value. Psychology has shown that human reasoning is often post-hoc; i.e. we do things and then rationalize them. So we rarely even understand our own motivations, much less correctly determine other peoples' motivations.


Quote
I forget who said it, but I always liked the statement that the only difference between a christian and an atheist is that the atheist believe in one less god out of thousands.

And many (most?) Christians don't believe in the God the atheist thinks they do either.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 13, 2023, 10:21:12 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 10:12:21 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 09:07:24 AM
Are you sure you are using "ultra-liberal" and "ultra-conservative" correctly?  I think of the Duggars as "ultra-conservative" and "ultra-liberal" as, I dunno, name someone----I'm not sure who.  Jerry Garcia?

And I think what you are arguing is the "atheistic position" is pretty much the same thing as your definition of the "ultra-liberal" position.  It is more or less what I said.  Atheists just pretty much denounce the whole shebang, however; that is their position, generally speaking.

Absolutely! You get a gold star. The churches in the steepest decline are the ultra-liberal ones since they don't really have anything to offer that isn't just normal (non-religious) culture.

Quote
Oh well, it doesn't really matter.  I think you pretty much agree that the Bible is very open to interpretation, so when it comes to things like, say, oh I don't know, sexual orientation (which comes up sometimes) we cannot simply denounce them because of the OT anymore than we can kill witches.  If we can deny that God wants slaves, we can deny that God disowns gays.

Don't forget liars, adulterers, gossips, people who don't respect their parents, and so on. No-one* gets a free pass.
(*except Jesus)

Quote from: Kron3007 on March 13, 2023, 09:46:59 AM

I think your "atheistic" interpretation is actually any non-christian, not just atheists. 


Sure. Any religious people will make a similar distinction between their own sacred texts and anything else.

Quote
One of the funniest parts of the religious is how christians think the bible is above reproach, while viewing other religious documents as a farce and abomination, and vice versa. 

That's kind of how any ideology works, religious or otherwise. By definition, some principle(s), document(s), or whatever are used as the basis for evaluating anything else. So even if one  claims to use the "principles of science" as fundamental, that takes those principles or ideas as axiomatic.


Quote
The saddest part of this, is how it is used to wage war, genocide, and other ungodly acts. 

All kids of horrific things have been blamed on love, freedom, and any other idea that people value. Psychology has shown that human reasoning is often post-hoc; i.e. we do things and then rationalize them. So we rarely even understand our own motivations, much less correctly determine other peoples' motivations.


Quote
I forget who said it, but I always liked the statement that the only difference between a christian and an atheist is that the atheist believe in one less god out of thousands.

And many (most?) Christians don't believe in the God the atheist thinks they do either.

There is a big difference between science and religion as an ideology.  One who follow science as an ideology readily accepts new ideas and incorporates them into their world view.  Christians only have the bible, which dosnt change, and do not need to change their view despite "evidence".   In fact, that is really just a test of their faith or something.

This is a pretty old straw man argument.  There are some superficial similarities, but with closer inspection the parallels crumble.  It's kind of like when people say "athiests believe....".  The reality is that athiests have no guiding document and only definitely agree on one thing. 

   
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 13, 2023, 10:23:12 AM
Quote from: onthefringe on March 13, 2023, 09:53:28 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 13, 2023, 09:46:59 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 08:32:59 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 07:59:10 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 06:58:56 AM
So how, exactly, would the distinction between being written by fallible human beings versus being written by God change what could be expressed for posterity, given the limitations of the human language that would have to be used in any case? Presumably the words that God could use would be the same words that fallible human beings could use. (Especially since no-one disputes the fact that the Bible was actually written by fallible human beings, whether is was inspired by God or not.) Why should God's "inspiration" somehow result in the impossibility of anything other than a single, timeless, context-insensitive interpretation?

That's some tortuous prose there, my friend.  Can you make your thoughts a little clearer?

Are you talking about the "impossibility" of language to accurately relay the Word?

I was saying we either consider the Bible is a work of fallible humans with all their prejudices and mistakes----and thus we admit that we cannot necessarily accept as law what is in it

That would be the ultra-liberal position.

Quote

-----or we concede that God was very contradictory and His messages are very confusing.  We either take the Bible as the Word of God, therefore reading literally

That would be the ultra-conservative position.

Quote
, or we accept that we have a human artifact with typical human blunders in it, therefore we take into consideration culture and context, including our own culture and context and what is important to us now.

That would be the atheistic position.

Many, if not most, Christians would disagree with both the ultra-conservative and ultra-liberal positions, and would say something more along the lines of "The Bible was written over centuries in different geographical and cultural contexts, and so explanations, instructions, and advice given in any of those contexts would have been clear to those people *in those contexts. The best way for us to determine how they are relevant to us is to look at them in the context of all the rest of the Bible to see what seems to be universal and what seems to be culturally-specific." (Note: This differs from the ultra-liberal position because it doesn't assume our current culture as somehow of greater importance than Scripture. Where the consistent message of Scripture contradicts things in our culture, then our culture is wrong.)

*Even at those times, it's clear that prophets and Jesus himself said things that many or most people misinterpreted because they did not want to consider the implications of certain interpretations. When Jesus' own words to people in person could be misinterpreted, it's ridiculous to suggest that at great historical, linguistic, geographical, and cultural remove there should be no possibility for confusion.)

I think your "atheistic" interpretation is actually any non-christian, not just atheists.  One of the funniest parts of the religious is how christians think the bible is above reproach, while viewing other religious documents as a farce and abomination, and vice versa.  The saddest part of this, is how it is used to wage war, genocide, and other ungodly acts. 

I forget who said it, but I always liked the statement that the only difference between a christian and an atheist is that the atheist believe in one less god out of thousands.

When Fringehusband and I met he described himself as an agnostic, feeling that as a scientist he couldn't rule out the possibility of a god of some kind. While I ageed with him on some levels, I told him I used "atheist" because a) when many people hear "agnostic" they understand it to mean that you think it's a 50:50 chance that there's a god and b) that I was sure I didn't believe in any of the gods described by existing religions so I am an atheist for all practical purposes.

I am in a similar boat.  I would not rule out some sort of higher power/connection/something, but dont think God as we know it would be the right term.  More importantly, I know for a factthat I dont believe any of the organized religions I am familiar with.  So, it is generally easier to say I am an athiest (except when I lived in the deep South, then I tried to avoid it in general....).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 13, 2023, 10:26:52 AM
QuoteOne who follows science as an ideology readily accepts new ideas and incorporates them into their world view.

Nay. The German physicist Max Planck said that science advances one funeral at a time. Or more precisely: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 13, 2023, 10:36:32 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 13, 2023, 10:26:52 AM
QuoteOne who follows science as an ideology readily accepts new ideas and incorporates them into their world view.

Nay. The German physicist Max Planck said that science advances one funeral at a time. Or more precisely: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

Well, I think that is a little melodramatic.  I do take his point, but I have seen the position of science slowly change during my lifetime on several topics so I dont think it is so dire.  I suppose during this time there were many deaths, so he still could have a point, but the point remains that science is not static and adjusts over time based on new information (as intended)

Regardless, you are referring to the scientific community, whereas I am discussing it as a personal ideology, which is different.  If you structure your beliefs around science and the scientific method, and someone comes to you with new evidence that conflicts with your existing belief, you would review the new information and adjust your beliefs accordingly.  I'm not saying that people are good at doing that in practice, but from an ideological standpoint I feel that is very different than people who will not, and cannot, change their opinion because something is clearly stated in a/the bible.   
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 10:48:00 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 10:12:21 AM
The churches in the steepest decline are the ultra-liberal ones since they don't really have anything to offer that isn't just normal (non-religious) culture.

What I find is that Protestant churches are seeing the most decline, (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/22/us-churches-closing-religion-covid-christianity) but that all denominations are losing membership.  The decline seems to have more to do with generational perceptions of the church. (https://news.gallup.com/poll/341963/church-membership-falls-below-majority-first-time.aspx)  It is actually difficult to find numbers of decline by denomination.  And it is interesting how conservatives are fascinated by "liberals."  I think this is a bit of false dichotomy.  I see articles with this angle in religiously affiliated magazines back in 2011.

Southern Baptists lost over a million attendees between 2018-2021. (https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2022/may/southern-baptist-membership-decline-covid-pandemic-baptisms.html) ---they were at their lowest point in 40 years----while Episcopalian churches are at half their numbers since 2010. (https://covenant.livingchurch.org/2022/12/16/facing-episcopal-church-decline-after-covid/)

Catholic attendance had declined by 20% by 2021 (https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/247102/report-church-membership-among-catholics-declined-nearly-20-since-2000).

Church decline has been going on for generations, but it has apparently been hastened by, you guessed it!, COVID. 

In some ways, the problems facing churches in the United States mirror the problems facing colleges.  Societal upheaval, anyone?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 10:49:34 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 13, 2023, 10:26:52 AM
QuoteOne who follows science as an ideology readily accepts new ideas and incorporates them into their world view.

Nay. The German physicist Max Planck said that science advances one funeral at a time. Or more precisely: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

I know you enjoy being a contrarian, but if Planck said that he was full of toro pucky.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 10:56:21 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 13, 2023, 10:36:32 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 13, 2023, 10:26:52 AM
QuoteOne who follows science as an ideology readily accepts new ideas and incorporates them into their world view.

Nay. The German physicist Max Planck said that science advances one funeral at a time. Or more precisely: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

Well, I think that is a little melodramatic.  I do take his point, but I have seen the position of science slowly change during my lifetime on several topics so I dont think it is so dire.  I suppose during this time there were many deaths, so he still could have a point, but the point remains that science is not static and adjusts over time based on new information (as intended)

Regardless, you are referring to the scientific community, whereas I am discussing it as a personal ideology, which is different.  If you structure your beliefs around science and the scientific method, and someone comes to you with new evidence that conflicts with your existing belief, you would review the new information and adjust your beliefs accordingly.  I'm not saying that people are good at doing that in practice, but from an ideological standpoint I feel that is very different than people who will not, and cannot, change their opinion because something is clearly stated in a/the bible.

In fact, most religious people generally accept widely-accepted results of scientific investigation. The biggest areas of disagreement tend to be around perceived moral implications of scientific results. For instance, religious people don't dispute scientific research regarding the human reproductive system. They will likely have strong opinions about moral issues related to sexual behaviour. Strictly speaking, science has nothing to say about morality; at most it illuminates probabilities of different consequences of various choices and actions.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 13, 2023, 11:00:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 06:18:12 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 05:43:21 AM
I'm still waiting to hear what advice you would give to women in Afghanistan today, that will make sense for the next 2000 years to all of the people who read it regardless of the context in which they live.


??????

EDIT: Wait, I get it.  You want me to put myself in the place of early Christians 2,000 years ago.  The issue is drafting a sacred text that would be resonant now and equally resonant and practical to culture 2,000 years from now, right?  Yeah, that would be virtually impossible for a human being to do, huh?

However, if we are dealing with the infallible Word of God that we base our lives and beliefs around, that is a different story.  God should be able to tell us what to do 2,000 years ago and that same revelation should be perfectly relevant today.

So, if you tell me the Bible was written by fallible people, I would say, sure, that makes sense, and the Bible it is still a beautiful work of literature.

But if you tell me we should follow the precepts laid out in the Bible because it is the Word of God as recorded by Moses and the Apostles, well, then it's a problem unless God deliberately wants to confuse and confound us.

I see marshwiggle's point.  Taking the New Testament to task or writing it off as irrelevant because it fails to lay out a program for a society that we today would regard as ideal in today's world situation both judges it by an entirely anachronistic standard and completely misses the point of what it's trying to say.  Jesus and his early followers wielded no political power in their world.  They had no expectation of being able to do so.  Christians wouldn't come to wield such power until centuries later--by which time the church had mutated into something very different from what Jesus originally established. 

Jesus' teachings and the rest of the New Testament were never about starting a program to transform society and try to fix what was wrong with the world.  Jesus said quite plainly that the world  would not be fixed until he, himself, comes back someday to fix it.  The world is evil, and it's going to remain evil for the foreseeable future.  Following Jesus is about living for God in the midst of a world that doesn't want to do that. 

Part of following Jesus and living for God involves living in a body of Christian believers.  Which is what the section of Colossians we've been discussing is all about.  Colossians chapter 3 begins with a reminder that followers of Christ are now dead as far as this world is concerned and waiting for Christ's return.  While we're waiting here, we are to put to death in our own lives the sorts of attitudes and actions that govern life in this world--things like sexual immorality, greed, anger, malice toward others, lying, etc. 

Then Paul says, in verse 10, "You have put off the old self with his deeds, and have put on the new self, which is renewed in the knowledge of the Creator, where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcised nor uncircumcised, Barbarian, Scythian, slave or free; but Christ is all, and in all."  And then we have the passages about what husbands and wives, and parents and children, and masters and slaves owe each other.

Colossians chapter 3 isn't about whether slavery is right or wrong.  It was a fact of life that the original hearers of the letter had to live with.  And Paul is saying here that as far as Christ is concerned these roles in society aren't what's important.  There are no slaves or free, or different races or nations, as far as Christ is concerned.  There are only those who have either chosen to follow him, or chosen not to.  And among those who have chosen to follow Christ, those distinctions shouldn't matter the way they do to everybody else.  The idea of a fellowship of believers who had that kind of recognition of commonality among themselves, as expressed in the bolded part above, was hugely radical in the first century.  It still is. 

I'm going into all this to say that using this New Testament passage to make arguments about slavery or whether the Bible accepts or condemns it is completely missing what it's all about.  It's completely missing what makes the New Testament meaningful and relevant to Christians.  It's easy to get into controversies like this over particular passages.  That's why marshwiggle said what he did about contexts.  It's why I'd encourage anybody to actually read (or if one read it long ago, to re-read) the whole New Testament to see what it says, instead of merely searching it for proof texts to prove this or that.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 13, 2023, 11:01:29 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 13, 2023, 10:56:21 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 13, 2023, 10:36:32 AM
Quote from: dismalist on March 13, 2023, 10:26:52 AM
QuoteOne who follows science as an ideology readily accepts new ideas and incorporates them into their world view.

Nay. The German physicist Max Planck said that science advances one funeral at a time. Or more precisely: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

Well, I think that is a little melodramatic.  I do take his point, but I have seen the position of science slowly change during my lifetime on several topics so I dont think it is so dire.  I suppose during this time there were many deaths, so he still could have a point, but the point remains that science is not static and adjusts over time based on new information (as intended)

Regardless, you are referring to the scientific community, whereas I am discussing it as a personal ideology, which is different.  If you structure your beliefs around science and the scientific method, and someone comes to you with new evidence that conflicts with your existing belief, you would review the new information and adjust your beliefs accordingly.  I'm not saying that people are good at doing that in practice, but from an ideological standpoint I feel that is very different than people who will not, and cannot, change their opinion because something is clearly stated in a/the bible.

In fact, most religious people generally accept widely-accepted results of scientific investigation. The biggest areas of disagreement tend to be around perceived moral implications of scientific results. For instance, religious people don't dispute scientific research regarding the human reproductive system. They will likely have strong opinions about moral issues related to sexual behaviour. Strictly speaking, science has nothing to say about morality; at most it illuminates probabilities of different consequences of various choices and actions.

Depending on the topic....

When I lived in the deep South, they very much disagreed with some scientific findings.  They just like to cherry pick.

Regarding morality, you are right, science isn't a great oracle of wisdom for that.  However, in many ways, neither is religion.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 11:33:45 AM
Quote from: apl68 on March 13, 2023, 11:00:24 AM
There are no slaves or free, or different races or nations, as far as Christ is concerned.  There are only those who have either chosen to follow him, or chosen not to. 

Respectfully apl, this is easy to say when one is not a slave. The acceptance is laudable, but it would have been much better if Christ had plainly said, "No person should ever own another person, and the slave has the right to refuse the master" as a good Christian should do.  If the Bible is the Word of God, who could see all time and space, then the Bible should have freed the salves as a moral imperative at least equivalent to coveting thy neighbor's wife.  And churches have used this argument to whitewash the relationship that Christians and Americans used to have toward slavery and, more recently, institutionalized racism.

Quote
I'm going into all this to say that using this New Testament passage to make arguments about slavery or whether the Bible accepts or condemns it is completely missing what it's all about.  It's completely missing what makes the New Testament meaningful and relevant to Christians.  It's easy to get into controversies like this over particular passages.  That's why marshwiggle said what he did about contexts.  It's why I'd encourage anybody to actually read (or if one read it long ago, to re-read) the whole New Testament to see what it says, instead of merely searching it for proof texts to prove this or that.

My point was that even the most devout people rationalize, contextualize, deny, and interpret the Bible to mean what they want it to mean.  I have read the NT and most of the OT.  I am a former acolyte and have gone through Confirmation and the whole lot.  The "once you read the whole thing it makes sense" doctrine is not necessarily true.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 13, 2023, 12:30:49 PM
 
QuoteStrictly speaking, science has nothing to say about morality... .

Absolutely: David Hume: You can't get from an is to an ought by logic alone!

Our morality comes from tradition -- what has worked in the past, worked to have us prosper. It is somewhat malleable, of course., as it must be. Its evolution is Darwinian.

Religion of course embodies somebody's tradition, hence multiple religions. One can look upon religion as an enforcement mechanism, from times in which getting thrown out of a community, even if only figuratively, usually resulted in death.

Our morality will continue to evolve, perhaps guided less by religions. But there's still a Darwinian process going on.

Best of luck, everybody. :-)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 13, 2023, 12:57:42 PM
Cause begets effect begets cause begets effect ad infinitim.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 13, 2023, 02:03:22 PM
Darn it! That was supposed to be on the Inflation thread!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on March 13, 2023, 02:17:10 PM
Quote from: apl68 on March 13, 2023, 11:00:24 AM
Jesus' teachings and the rest of the New Testament were never about starting a program to transform society and try to fix what was wrong with the world.  Jesus said quite plainly that the world  would not be fixed until he, himself, comes back someday to fix it.  The world is evil, and it's going to remain evil for the foreseeable future.  Following Jesus is about living for God in the midst of a world that doesn't want to do that. 


Which is why Jews do not accept Jesus as the Messiah. Jews were supposed to show the world how to live, achieve a perfect world tikkun olam, and then the Messiah would come back.

Since Jesus did not achieve this goal, he was not the Messiah.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: FishProf on March 13, 2023, 02:23:51 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 13, 2023, 10:26:52 AM
QuoteOne who follows science as an ideology readily accepts new ideas and incorporates them into their world view.

Nay. The German physicist Max Planck said that science advances one funeral at a time. Or more precisely: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

That quotation is only true to the extent that the scientists in question are NOT acting scientifically.  Max Plank was one of the few scientists who immediately recognized the importance of Einstein's work and was a major influence on its acceptance in German physics.   He doesn't fit his own quotation.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 13, 2023, 02:42:36 PM
Quote from: FishProf on March 13, 2023, 02:23:51 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 13, 2023, 10:26:52 AM
QuoteOne who follows science as an ideology readily accepts new ideas and incorporates them into their world view.

Nay. The German physicist Max Planck said that science advances one funeral at a time. Or more precisely: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

That quotation is only true to the extent that the scientists in question are NOT acting scientifically.  Max Plank was one of the few scientists who immediately recognized the importance of Einstein's work and was a major influence on its acceptance in German physics.   He doesn't fit his own quotation.

A scientist not acting scientifically? True by definition at best.

Paul Samuelson reported that Keynes' views were accepted  in 1936 upon receipt of the General Theory only by those under 35 years of age, and those over 50 years of age were immune! That's a lot of deaths that have to occur to get acceptance of a new, at least in part, superior theory. :-)

It's a probabilistic thing!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: FishProf on March 13, 2023, 03:08:59 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 13, 2023, 02:42:36 PM
It's a probabilistic thing!

What do you mean by that?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: waterboy on March 13, 2023, 03:21:56 PM
Apologies for likely starting more trouble - but can we admit (maybe) that the bible is more of a literary work edited by man rather than anything else?  The various pieces were written down centuries (or more) after the events were to have occurred. That's the classic "telephone" game. Then (forgetting which emperor did this), several were thrown out by a bunch of men because they didn't like what was written? And as we keep trying to interpret things without being in the century when they were put down, that just leads to more confusion. I'm not dissing the message of the bible, but when humans begin to edit the written word, well, you know...Roald Dahl...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 13, 2023, 03:22:45 PM
Quote from: FishProf on March 13, 2023, 03:08:59 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 13, 2023, 02:42:36 PM
It's a probabilistic thing!

What do you mean by that?

Of a hundred live scientists in a given field, a new superior theory will be accepted by some fraction whose size is subject to chance. Planck's statement can be interpreted as that fraction will vary, but will be small.

Anyway, lot's of deaths as science marches on!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: FishProf on March 13, 2023, 06:31:13 PM
I suspect Plank was talking about a specific scientist when he said that.

However, my own experience as a Geology major supports the concept.  I had a professor in 1993 who was sure plate tectonics and continental drift were passing fads.  I even kept the textbook which had the now ridiculous sounding explanations that have been replaced.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 06:51:45 PM
Forbes: A Harvard Astronomer Is More Confident Than Ever That An Alien Probe Visited Us In 2017 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericmack/2021/01/04/a-harvard-astronomer-is-more-confident-than-ever-that-an-alien-probe-visited-us-in-2017/?sh=312e5b395722)

Quote
Since then, Loeb has garnered worldwide media attention while others in the science community have been critical of his potentially revolutionary conclusion.

"It's a shocking example of sensationalist, ill-motivated science," fellow Forbes contributor and astrophysicist Ethan Siegel wrote in 2018.

In the new book, Loeb addresses some of the criticism:

"To be clear, although I made myself as available as my commitments allowed, I neither sought the limelight nor particularly enjoyed it."

He also accuses some of his critics of a sort of overly-conservative "group-think" when it comes to considering more exotic explanations for the anomaly that is Oumuamua.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 06:53:21 PM
Quote from: waterboy on March 13, 2023, 03:21:56 PM
Apologies for likely starting more trouble - but can we admit (maybe) that the bible is more of a literary work edited by man rather than anything else?  The various pieces were written down centuries (or more) after the events were to have occurred. That's the classic "telephone" game. Then (forgetting which emperor did this), several were thrown out by a bunch of men because they didn't like what was written? And as we keep trying to interpret things without being in the century when they were put down, that just leads to more confusion. I'm not dissing the message of the bible, but when humans begin to edit the written word, well, you know...Roald Dahl...

Yes.

It is the greatest, most complex, world-changing mythology.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 07:48:36 PM
NY Times: UPenn Accuses a Law Professor of Racist Statements. Should She Be Fired? (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/13/us/upenn-law-professor-racism-freedom-speech.html)

The Amy Wax controversy resurfaces.  The university seems to be taking action.

The article also discusses academic freedom.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 13, 2023, 08:16:10 PM
OK:

1) Marshy is obviously right-- science is not where one goes to ascertain morality, and moral claims cannot be adjudicated scientifically.  The Bible is but one source of claimed spiritual (or philosophical) wisdom that attempts to make such moral absolute claims, and of course it is also possible to  assert that no moral absolutes exist. 

2) The fact that not *all Christians* were opposed to slavery, esp in the 19th c. American South, does nothing whatsoever to obviate the unambiguous reality that the abolitionist movement was entirely created by and driven by Christian believers, whose religious convictions motivated their actions. 

3) apl makes excellent points, of course, though he and I clearly disagree  at least somewhat wrt the extent that 'socal Gospel' activism should be an integral part of the Christian's daily walk, and esp wrt the actual extent that this was intended to be the case for Christians right from the beginning of the Church.   Almost all of the, ahem, distinctive evils we think of as commonplace in ancient pagan Greco-Roman society, from exposure of unwanted infants, to gladiatorial conquests, yes, even to ancient European slavery, were in fact eliminated by the activism of Christians.   Heck, even old Julian the Apostate, keen to reestablish paganism in his empire, decided he had to mimic for paganism certain innovations of the Christians, such as hospitals for the indigent and the diseased, innovations which he knew had motivated many pagans to convert to Christianity over the years.   It did not work.

4) The fact that Jesus and His disciples did not decide to order, or even allow, slaves to rebel, is what it is, and whether you like it or not, it is not any evidence that the Bible is wrong, Jesus was a bad moral teacher, etc., any more than the fact that both testaments of Scripture unambiguously discountenance homosexuality makes Jesus wrong.   To say otherwise implies that those claiming such have a source of moral absolutes that override the Bible's.   It would be best if they say what that source is.   
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 08:35:15 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 13, 2023, 08:16:10 PM
4) The fact that Jesus and His disciples did not decide to order, or even allow, slaves to rebel, is what it is, and whether you like it or not, it is not any evidence that the Bible is wrong, Jesus was a bad moral teacher, etc., any more than the fact that both testaments of Scripture unambiguously discountenance homosexuality makes Jesus wrong.  To say otherwise implies that those claiming such have a source of moral absolutes that override the Bible's.   It would be best if they say what that source is.

Human compassion.

Methinks you'll just have to deal with the fact that your Prince of Peace failed a very fundamental aspect of a moral universe-----freedom-----which sure makes the Bible sound wrong.

And sure, your abolitionists were Christian.  Virtually everyone in America at that time was Christian by default if for no other reasons, so it makes sense your abolitionists were also.  But don't cherry-pick.  Acknowledge that your slave owners were also Christians who used the Bible verse often under discussion here to justify owning slaves.

BTW, what is your source for the assertion that "Almost all of the, ahem, distinctive evils we think of as commonplace in ancient pagan Greco-Roman society, from exposure of unwanted infants, to gladiatorial conquests, yes, even to ancient European slavery, were in fact eliminated by the activism of Christians?"
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 13, 2023, 08:39:50 PM
Jesus Christ teaches humility, submission to stated authority, and nonresistance to oppression, no private violence, etc.  I suppose I could say that I am sorry that you think less of him because of this, but I would probably be lying if I said that.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 08:46:23 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 13, 2023, 08:39:50 PM
Jesus Christ teaches humility, submission to stated authority, and nonresistance to oppression, no private violence, etc.  I suppose I could say that I am sorry that you think less of him because of this, but I would probably be lying if I said that.

Yes, I know these things. 

I do not think less of Him.  I do not think more of Him.  As soon as I started to think for myself I formed my views of the man, and they have remained fairly constant throughout my life.

What I approach are the people who refuse to acknowledge the obvious problems with Biblical teachings-----although I am sure you will argue that you do-----but seek ways around them. 

Blind submission to a cause, any cause, is not a good thing.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 14, 2023, 05:47:32 AM
Quote from: waterboy on March 13, 2023, 03:21:56 PM
Apologies for likely starting more trouble - but can we admit (maybe) that the bible is more of a literary work edited by man rather than
anything else?

Um, that's kind of the basic distinction between accepting *Christianity or not. By definition, essentially "admitting" that is rejecting Christianity.




*a simplification, realizing that Jews and Muslims also view the Old Testament as something other than "a literary work edited by man rather than anything else".



Quote
The various pieces were written down centuries (or more) after the events were to have occurred. That's the classic "telephone" game. Then (forgetting which emperor did this), several were thrown out by a bunch of men because they didn't like what was written? And as we keep trying to interpret things without being in the century when they were put down, that just leads to more confusion. I'm not dissing the message of the bible, but when humans begin to edit the written word, well, you know...Roald Dahl...

This is part of the whole idea of "inspiration" of Scripture. If the process of writing Biblical texts was somehow under the influence of God, then it is similarly possible for subsequent things (like  the selection of the canon) to be under the influence of God. (One principle in various Christian denominations is that the ongoing interpretation of Scripture is a process under the influence of God.)

The above is obviously not "proof" of anything; it is presented as an explanation for a logically consistent position. The "game of telephone" analogy it a tautology- it assumes the thing it's claiming to prove.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on March 14, 2023, 10:22:12 AM
If the process of writing Biblical texts          Texts could not have been written Biblically, as there was no Bible when they were written.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 14, 2023, 10:32:35 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on March 14, 2023, 10:22:12 AM
If the process of writing Biblical texts          Texts could not have been written Biblically, as there was no Bible when they were written.

So if someone referred to "the process of writing *geographical texts" that would mean that there was no geography when they were written?

*or historical, or ....
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2023, 10:47:53 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 14, 2023, 10:32:35 AM
So if someone referred to "the process of writing *geographical texts" that would mean that there was no geography when they were written?

*or historical, or ....

But there was geography.  There was geography long before we invented the word.  History too.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 14, 2023, 11:00:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2023, 10:47:53 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 14, 2023, 10:32:35 AM
So if someone referred to "the process of writing *geographical texts" that would mean that there was no geography when they were written?

*or historical, or ....

But there was geography.  There was geography long before we invented the word.  History too.

Obviously. And so texts that were eventually collected into "the Bible" weren't called "biblical" when they were written. (Duh!) Just like the recipes in "Grandma Smith's Cookbook" weren't created as "Grandma Smith's Cookbook Chicken Dumplings", for instance. They were just "Chicken and Dumplings" on a piece of paper in Grandma's cupboard.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2023, 12:38:42 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 14, 2023, 11:00:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2023, 10:47:53 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 14, 2023, 10:32:35 AM
So if someone referred to "the process of writing *geographical texts" that would mean that there was no geography when they were written?

*or historical, or ....

But there was geography.  There was geography long before we invented the word.  History too.

Obviously. And so texts that were eventually collected into "the Bible" weren't called "biblical" when they were written. (Duh!) Just like the recipes in "Grandma Smith's Cookbook" weren't created as "Grandma Smith's Cookbook Chicken Dumplings", for instance. They were just "Chicken and Dumplings" on a piece of paper in Grandma's cupboard.

So, semantics considered, we have a series of texts which became numinous and "biblical" only after they were edited into a volume called "The Bible," at which point biblical is codified.  "Biblical" could not have existed beforehand.  We have a human industry, again, just like Grandma Smith's Cookbook, at which point Smithian (?) could be codified if we wanted.  That's not a bad analogy. 

The Bible and "biblical" did not exist until we glommed them into existence.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 14, 2023, 12:46:15 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2023, 12:38:42 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 14, 2023, 11:00:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2023, 10:47:53 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 14, 2023, 10:32:35 AM
So if someone referred to "the process of writing *geographical texts" that would mean that there was no geography when they were written?

*or historical, or ....

But there was geography.  There was geography long before we invented the word.  History too.

Obviously. And so texts that were eventually collected into "the Bible" weren't called "biblical" when they were written. (Duh!) Just like the recipes in "Grandma Smith's Cookbook" weren't created as "Grandma Smith's Cookbook Chicken Dumplings", for instance. They were just "Chicken and Dumplings" on a piece of paper in Grandma's cupboard.

So, semantics considered, we have a series of texts which became numinous and "biblical" only after they were edited into a volume called "The Bible," at which point biblical is codified.  "Biblical" could not have existed beforehand.  We have a human industry, again, just like Grandma Smith's Cookbook, at which point Smithian (?) could be codified if we wanted.  That's not a bad analogy. 

The Bible and "biblical" did not exist until we glommed them into existence.

Uh, yes-  the Christian position is that God guided the "glomming" process along with the original writing. A God who was capable of one would obviously be capable of the other. This ridiculous semantic game is like talking about why no WWI artifacts were engraved with something like "WWI" on them. (Until WWII, WWI was called "the Great War". Again, Duh!)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2023, 01:00:51 PM
So, the title comes in posterity.  Just as nebo posited.

But the point being that we are going to have to admit some problems with Biblical exegesis, at least involving truth and morality, if we acknowledge the nature of how it was constructed.  "Guided" is not the same thing as the Word of God.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 14, 2023, 01:04:20 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2023, 01:00:51 PM
So, the title comes in posterity.  Just as nebo posited.

But the point being that we are going to have to admit some problems with Biblical exegesis, at least involving truth and morality, if we acknowledge the nature of how it was constructed.  "Guided" is not the same thing as the Word of God.

So what is the "God-approved(TM)" meaning of Word of God, and where did you get it?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 14, 2023, 03:25:58 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 13, 2023, 02:03:22 PM
Darn it! That was supposed to be on the Inflation thread!

Well...it does have a way of inflating.  Over 80 pages and counting!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 14, 2023, 03:30:31 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 07:48:36 PM
NY Times: UPenn Accuses a Law Professor of Racist Statements. Should She Be Fired? (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/13/us/upenn-law-professor-racism-freedom-speech.html)

The Amy Wax controversy resurfaces.  The university seems to be taking action.

The article also discusses academic freedom.

What's the gist of the article?  Our print copy of yesterday's NYT may take anywhere from a couple more days, to a couple of weeks, to never to get here.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 14, 2023, 03:41:36 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 06:51:45 PM
Forbes: A Harvard Astronomer Is More Confident Than Ever That An Alien Probe Visited Us In 2017 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericmack/2021/01/04/a-harvard-astronomer-is-more-confident-than-ever-that-an-alien-probe-visited-us-in-2017/?sh=312e5b395722)

Quote
Since then, Loeb has garnered worldwide media attention while others in the science community have been critical of his potentially revolutionary conclusion.

"It's a shocking example of sensationalist, ill-motivated science," fellow Forbes contributor and astrophysicist Ethan Siegel wrote in 2018.

In the new book, Loeb addresses some of the criticism:

"To be clear, although I made myself as available as my commitments allowed, I neither sought the limelight nor particularly enjoyed it."

He also accuses some of his critics of a sort of overly-conservative "group-think" when it comes to considering more exotic explanations for the anomaly that is Oumuamua.

I'm embarrassed that I managed to miss this book when it came out.  Wonder if I could justify ordering it for the library?  Probably not without actual patron demand.  Loeb can't be written off as a mere crackpot, but this is a little far out of the mainstream to make a good choice for a small library with limited collection development bucks.  We have to stick with more core-collection type materials.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2023, 03:42:40 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 14, 2023, 01:04:20 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2023, 01:00:51 PM
So, the title comes in posterity.  Just as nebo posited.

But the point being that we are going to have to admit some problems with Biblical exegesis, at least involving truth and morality, if we acknowledge the nature of how it was constructed.  "Guided" is not the same thing as the Word of God.

So what is the "God-approved(TM)" meaning of Word of God, and where did you get it?

I never said I got the meaning of the Word.  I don't know the meaning of the Word.  I am not convinced there is one past the beauty of the King James and the complexity of the mythology.  You are trying to change what I said.

I am saying that we have some problems if we argue, which some do, that we have the Word inscribed in the Bible given that is, admittedly, a construct. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 14, 2023, 04:04:18 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 14, 2023, 05:47:32 AM
Quote
The various pieces were written down centuries (or more) after the events were to have occurred. That's the classic "telephone" game. Then (forgetting which emperor did this), several were thrown out by a bunch of men because they didn't like what was written? And as we keep trying to interpret things without being in the century when they were put down, that just leads to more confusion. I'm not dissing the message of the bible, but when humans begin to edit the written word, well, you know...Roald Dahl...

This is part of the whole idea of "inspiration" of Scripture. If the process of writing Biblical texts was somehow under the influence of God, then it is similarly possible for subsequent things (like  the selection of the canon) to be under the influence of God. (One principle in various Christian denominations is that the ongoing interpretation of Scripture is a process under the influence of God.)

The above is obviously not "proof" of anything; it is presented as an explanation for a logically consistent position. The "game of telephone" analogy it a tautology- it assumes the thing it's claiming to prove.

I'd second that it's possible to be well aware of the various controversies regarding the dating and authorship of Scripture and still regard it as divinely inspired.  There's quite a bit of the Old Testament where it's pretty clear to a trained historian that older oral accounts were incorporated by much later editors (The New Testament's another matter.  Even secular scholars generally agree that it was written within less than a century after the time of Jesus--and one can make a fair case that it was written within a few decades).  Which can be understood as showing that divine inspiration worked in different ways.

It doesn't have to be an "either-or" proposition--that the Bible was either written by human beings or is the Word of God.  It can be both at the same time. 

That's part of the fascination of it.  God works with people.  He is not impossibly remote.  It is possible for people, in some limited (in this life at least) manner to gain insight into the mind of God.  People can know God.  We see examples of it in the Old Testament.  The New Testament is about how anybody can know God--regardless of whether they're men, women, Jews, Gentiles, members of this or that nation, or the most downtrodden members of human society.  What's important is not who or what we are to start with, it's whether we're prepared to get over ourselves and admit that it's we who have to answer to God, and not God who has to answer to us.  Often it is the people least respected by society who have the humility to do this.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2023, 04:32:41 PM
Quote from: apl68 on March 14, 2023, 03:30:31 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 13, 2023, 07:48:36 PM
NY Times: UPenn Accuses a Law Professor of Racist Statements. Should She Be Fired? (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/13/us/upenn-law-professor-racism-freedom-speech.html)

The Amy Wax controversy resurfaces.  The university seems to be taking action.

The article also discusses academic freedom.

What's the gist of the article?  Our print copy of yesterday's NYT may take anywhere from a couple more days, to a couple of weeks, to never to get here.

Well, part of it is old news.  Wax is a frothing bigot and probably has some pretty acute mental health issues.  She vents her spleen in exclusively extracurricular settings, however, and at first UPenn supported her "academic freedom" to be a complete jackass, but the tide has turned.  Students have made accusations about on-campus behavior, although nothing can be substantiated.  UPenn is not talking firing, but "severe censure." 

Wax has support, both internally and externally, from free speech and academic freedom advocates.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2023, 04:47:49 PM
Quote from: apl68 on March 14, 2023, 04:04:18 PM
I'd second that it's possible to be well aware of the various controversies regarding the dating and authorship of Scripture and still regard it as divinely inspired.  There's quite a bit of the Old Testament where it's pretty clear to a trained historian that older oral accounts were incorporated by much later editors (The New Testament's another matter.  Even secular scholars generally agree that it was written within less than a century after the time of Jesus--and one can make a fair case that it was written within a few decades).  Which can be understood as showing that divine inspiration worked in different ways.

It doesn't have to be an "either-or" proposition--that the Bible was either written by human beings or is the Word of God.  It can be both at the same time. 

That's part of the fascination of it.  God works with people.  He is not impossibly remote.  It is possible for people, in some limited (in this life at least) manner to gain insight into the mind of God.  People can know God.  We see examples of it in the Old Testament.  The New Testament is about how anybody can know God--regardless of whether they're men, women, Jews, Gentiles, members of this or that nation, or the most downtrodden members of human society.  What's important is not who or what we are to start with, it's whether we're prepared to get over ourselves and admit that it's we who have to answer to God, and not God who has to answer to us.  Often it is the people least respected by society who have the humility to do this.

Sure. There's some happy dogma in there, but that's a good explanation.

You must understand, however, how this history is problematic if Christians expect culture to adhere to its tenets (which is very often the case) because of the notion of divine intervention----which is how this whole mess got started.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 15, 2023, 04:10:20 AM
Discussing the bible with Christians is like arguing conspiracy theories with truthers.  Any logical argument you can make is simply deflected as part of gods plan or part of the conspiracy.  Both are excellent mental gymnasts that can rationalize fundamental contradictions and massive holes in the story. 

Once someone decides the earth is flat, it is hard to convince them otherwise.  They would have to betray themselves...

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 15, 2023, 05:26:43 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2023, 04:47:49 PM
Quote from: apl68 on March 14, 2023, 04:04:18 PM
I'd second that it's possible to be well aware of the various controversies regarding the dating and authorship of Scripture and still regard it as divinely inspired.  There's quite a bit of the Old Testament where it's pretty clear to a trained historian that older oral accounts were incorporated by much later editors (The New Testament's another matter.  Even secular scholars generally agree that it was written within less than a century after the time of Jesus--and one can make a fair case that it was written within a few decades).  Which can be understood as showing that divine inspiration worked in different ways.

It doesn't have to be an "either-or" proposition--that the Bible was either written by human beings or is the Word of God.  It can be both at the same time. 

That's part of the fascination of it.  God works with people.  He is not impossibly remote.  It is possible for people, in some limited (in this life at least) manner to gain insight into the mind of God.  People can know God.  We see examples of it in the Old Testament.  The New Testament is about how anybody can know God--regardless of whether they're men, women, Jews, Gentiles, members of this or that nation, or the most downtrodden members of human society.  What's important is not who or what we are to start with, it's whether we're prepared to get over ourselves and admit that it's we who have to answer to God, and not God who has to answer to us.  Often it is the people least respected by society who have the humility to do this.

Sure. There's some happy dogma in there, but that's a good explanation.

You must understand, however, how this history is problematic if Christians expect culture to adhere to its tenets (which is very often the case) because of the notion of divine intervention----which is how this whole mess got started.

There's lots of examples in the Bible of how a theocracy doesn't work well. (Jesus himself said "My kingdom is not of this world.") Most Christians don't advocate for some Christian version of Sharia Law. At the same time, as members of a democratic society, Christians have the same right as anyone else to vote for the policies of which they approve.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2023, 10:28:19 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 15, 2023, 05:26:43 AM
There's lots of examples in the Bible of how a theocracy doesn't work well. (Jesus himself said "My kingdom is not of this world.") Most Christians don't advocate for some Christian version of Sharia Law. At the same time, as members of a democratic society, Christians have the same right as anyone else to vote for the policies of which they approve.

Fair enough.

Again, take into account the alt right Christian zealots as well as the more mainstream Christian views----there are lots who call for an American (and world) theocracy.  Don't pretend it is not there.  Those are probably the people who make your life and ours more difficult in this matter.

And this digression in the thread started in large part because some posters were citing Scripture for the purpose of proving a prejudice, and the resulting commentary points out why many of us reject this view.  We don't want Christianity used as a bully pulpit for bigotry.  Sit down at the table with Caesar and you are going to have an argument.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 16, 2023, 11:21:52 AM
If Christians say publicly that the Bible teaches against homosexuality, and that abortion is murder, what do you suggest doing about it?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 16, 2023, 12:05:13 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 16, 2023, 11:21:52 AM
If Christians say publicly that the Bible teaches against homosexuality, and that abortion is murder, what do you suggest doing about it?

As voters, Christians have the same right as anyone to vote according to their own principles, whatever they are.

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 15, 2023, 10:28:19 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 15, 2023, 05:26:43 AM
There's lots of examples in the Bible of how a theocracy doesn't work well. (Jesus himself said "My kingdom is not of this world.") Most Christians don't advocate for some Christian version of Sharia Law. At the same time, as members of a democratic society, Christians have the same right as anyone else to vote for the policies of which they approve.

Fair enough.

Again, take into account the alt right Christian zealots as well as the more mainstream Christian views----there are lots who call for an American (and world) theocracy.  Don't pretend it is not there.  Those are probably the people who make your life and ours more difficult in this matter.

And this digression in the thread started in large part because some posters were citing Scripture for the purpose of proving a prejudice, and the resulting commentary points out why many of us reject this view.  We don't want Christianity used as a bully pulpit for bigotry.  Sit down at the table with Caesar and you are going to have an argument.

I admit it's kind of odd for people with any religion or ideology to expect that appeals to that religion or ideology should somehow sway people who don't share that religion or ideology. In a pluralistic democracy, everyones' votes are their own business, both in what they are  and why they are.

There is one caveat to this, especially in the US. Lots of politicians and leaders of corporations and other organizations including universities feel the need to appear to subscribe to certain beliefs. For instance, every president in decades has made some kind of claim to being "Christian", including those who probably haven't darkened a church's door in decades. (Jimmy Carter was the one memorable exception. His actions in office and subsequently suggested he was the real deal- whatever you think of his beliefs and/or his politics, he did seem to be consistent in following them.) For this reason, I'd say the apparent influence of religion in American political life is larger than the actual importance of peoples' faith in their lives. (It's more of a proxy for a certain community membership than deeply-held principle.)




Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 16, 2023, 12:05:39 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 16, 2023, 11:21:52 AM
If Christians say publicly that the Bible teaches against homosexuality, and that abortion is murder, what do you suggest doing about it?

Nothing, as long as said Christians don't pack the Supreme Court and enact laws making them illegal.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2023, 12:15:16 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 16, 2023, 11:21:52 AM
If Christians say publicly that the Bible teaches against homosexuality, and that abortion is murder, what do you suggest doing about it?

I would do what I do here: express my opinion.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2023, 12:16:41 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2023, 12:05:13 PM
I'd say the apparent influence of religion in American political life is larger than the actual importance of peoples' faith in their lives. (It's more of a proxy for a certain community membership than deeply-held principle.)

That's a good comment.  I would agree.

And I think the point is to keep it that way.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 16, 2023, 12:20:14 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2023, 12:15:16 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 16, 2023, 11:21:52 AM
If Christians say publicly that the Bible teaches against homosexuality, and that abortion is murder, what do you suggest doing about it?

I would do what I do here: express my opinion.

Exactly. And this is one of the reasons that I'm intrigued by discussion of a Universal Basic Income. There are both liberals and conservatives who think it's a good idea, for different reasons, so it's one of those rare issues that could potentially build a coalition for some version of it that would reflect a lot of different values.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: FishProf on March 16, 2023, 12:39:54 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 16, 2023, 11:21:52 AM
If Christians say publicly that the Bible teaches against homosexuality, and that abortion is murder, what do you suggest doing about it?

I do what I always do such statements - I ignore it.  What you believe isn't my business, nor do I care.

But if you try to FORCE others to follow your beliefs, I'll fight you on that.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2023, 01:32:41 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 16, 2023, 12:20:14 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 16, 2023, 12:15:16 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 16, 2023, 11:21:52 AM
If Christians say publicly that the Bible teaches against homosexuality, and that abortion is murder, what do you suggest doing about it?

I would do what I do here: express my opinion.

Exactly. And this is one of the reasons that I'm intrigued by discussion of a Universal Basic Income. There are both liberals and conservatives who think it's a good idea, for different reasons, so it's one of those rare issues that could potentially build a coalition for some version of it that would reflect a lot of different values.

Start a thread.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on March 17, 2023, 08:02:33 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 15, 2023, 05:26:43 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 14, 2023, 04:47:49 PM
Quote from: apl68 on March 14, 2023, 04:04:18 PM
I'd second that it's possible to be well aware of the various controversies regarding the dating and authorship of Scripture and still regard it as divinely inspired.  There's quite a bit of the Old Testament where it's pretty clear to a trained historian that older oral accounts were incorporated by much later editors (The New Testament's another matter.  Even secular scholars generally agree that it was written within less than a century after the time of Jesus--and one can make a fair case that it was written within a few decades).  Which can be understood as showing that divine inspiration worked in different ways.

It doesn't have to be an "either-or" proposition--that the Bible was either written by human beings or is the Word of God.  It can be both at the same time. 

That's part of the fascination of it.  God works with people.  He is not impossibly remote.  It is possible for people, in some limited (in this life at least) manner to gain insight into the mind of God.  People can know God.  We see examples of it in the Old Testament.  The New Testament is about how anybody can know God--regardless of whether they're men, women, Jews, Gentiles, members of this or that nation, or the most downtrodden members of human society.  What's important is not who or what we are to start with, it's whether we're prepared to get over ourselves and admit that it's we who have to answer to God, and not God who has to answer to us.  Often it is the people least respected by society who have the humility to do this.

Sure. There's some happy dogma in there, but that's a good explanation.

You must understand, however, how this history is problematic if Christians expect culture to adhere to its tenets (which is very often the case) because of the notion of divine intervention----which is how this whole mess got started.

There's lots of examples in the Bible of how a theocracy doesn't work well. (Jesus himself said "My kingdom is not of this world.") Most Christians don't advocate for some Christian version of Sharia Law. At the same time, as members of a democratic society, Christians have the same right as anyone else to vote for the policies of which they approve.

Rushdooney.  Christian Reconstructionism.  Biblical justification for SCOTUS decisions.  Catholic bishop applies for religious charter school in Oklahoma.  Feel free to add to the list.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 17, 2023, 08:17:12 AM
Do you know what Rushdoony and his Recons taught?  Sharia ain't it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 17, 2023, 10:47:38 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 17, 2023, 08:17:12 AM
Do you know what Rushdoony and his Recons taught?  Sharia ain't it.

Tell us.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 17, 2023, 11:05:14 AM
Fla.'s Stop WOKE Act Remains Stymied (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2023/03/17/floridas-stop-woke-act-continues-be-blocked-colleges)

Lower Deck:
Quote
A panel of federal judges is keeping in place a block on Florida's Stop WOKE Act while appeals progress.

Of course, this is probably just what DeSantis intended to have happen...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 17, 2023, 11:52:18 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 17, 2023, 08:17:12 AM
Do you know what Rushdoony and his Recons taught?  Sharia ain't it.

Dominion Theology would beg to differ.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on March 17, 2023, 04:12:27 PM
Tabia Lee lost her job because of pronouns. Despite being a black woman.

The Daily Mail has a fair and balanced account (just kidding):
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11849241/Dr-Tabia-Lee-fired-woke-California-college-asking-anti-racism-definition.html
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on March 17, 2023, 06:00:18 PM
Quote from: downer on March 17, 2023, 04:12:27 PM
Tabia Lee lost her job because of pronouns. Despite being a black woman.

The Daily Mail has a fair and balanced account (just kidding):
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11849241/Dr-Tabia-Lee-fired-woke-California-college-asking-anti-racism-definition.html

Saw this. She sounded like a complete nutcase.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on March 17, 2023, 06:46:58 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on March 17, 2023, 06:00:18 PM
Quote from: downer on March 17, 2023, 04:12:27 PM
Tabia Lee lost her job because of pronouns. Despite being a black woman.

The Daily Mail has a fair and balanced account (just kidding):
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11849241/Dr-Tabia-Lee-fired-woke-California-college-asking-anti-racism-definition.html

Saw this. She sounded like a complete nutcase.
It is a good look calling a black woman crazy with no evidence. Don't let me hold you back.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 17, 2023, 07:04:58 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on March 17, 2023, 06:00:18 PM
Quote from: downer on March 17, 2023, 04:12:27 PM
Tabia Lee lost her job because of pronouns. Despite being a black woman.

The Daily Mail has a fair and balanced account (just kidding):
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11849241/Dr-Tabia-Lee-fired-woke-California-college-asking-anti-racism-definition.html

Saw this. She sounded like a complete nutcase.

Quote
Lee, a graduate of the University of Phoenix with a doctorate from the University of California Irvine

Irvine takes UOP credits?

This says she has an EdD.

https://www.deanza.edu/faculty/leetabia/

Bet TDM got it backwards. 

Gotta say, her website looks a little weird to me.  She has made and posted a biography video on YouTube.  She has a cartoon down that the bottom of the page----check it out.  And what's up with that headshot?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 17, 2023, 10:57:06 PM
Dominion theology is more problematic, but it is not the same as Christian Reconstructionism.

I was rather involved with the Recons in the 90s, and wrote an essay about them in 2000 which is online.  I will send the URL in private to anyone who asks, even though it will out me.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 18, 2023, 08:01:52 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 17, 2023, 10:57:06 PM
Dominion theology is more problematic, but it is not the same as Christian Reconstructionism.

I was rather involved with the Recons in the 90s, and wrote an essay about them in 2000 which is online.  I will send the URL in private to anyone who asks, even though it will out me.

Kay, are you a proponent of theocracy?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 18, 2023, 10:56:52 PM
You are going to dislike this response, but I need to get you to define your terms, what you are asking me if I am a proponent of.... what is 'theocracy'?

Of course, in any case, I did not say I am a Christian Reconstructionist, and I note that you did not ask me for the URL of the blog I wrote.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on March 19, 2023, 05:39:47 AM
https://erlc.com/resource-library/articles/understanding-the-christian-reconstruction-movement/

it's a social theory that argues that modern societies should be reorganized in terms of biblical law.

Guess we should start stoning sinners.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 19, 2023, 09:26:16 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 18, 2023, 10:56:52 PM
You are going to dislike this response, but I need to get you to define your terms, what you are asking me if I am a proponent of.... what is 'theocracy'?

Of course, in any case, I did not say I am a Christian Reconstructionist, and I note that you did not ask me for the URL of the blog I wrote.

Who says I will dislike your response?  And that was an honest question, so please don't play the obtuse game.  A "Theocracy," as I understand the term, is a government with a stated religious orientation.  What nebo said.

And I am sorry I did not ask for your blog.  I literally have a bookshelf of unread material and a hard drive full of pilfered PDFs, and I bought a book on Modernism and 1,001 Nights yesterday.  However, I will send a PM now.  I will not out you.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 19, 2023, 09:15:55 PM
Nebo's link, and her brief summation of the Recon view, is accurate.

I did not say I was one, however.  I am however at pains to point out that all law is based on someone's standards, based on some underlying/ undergirding philosophy.  I will send along the link to wahoo and to anyone else who wants it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 19, 2023, 09:54:55 PM
That is quite the document.  Will take me a bit to read as I work on other things.

So your "undergirding philosophy"-----is that overtly based on Judeo-Christian principles?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 19, 2023, 10:19:15 PM
Obviously, as a (hopefully) sincere Christian, I would have to say yes.   That said, there are a lot of so-called 'Christian worldview' questionnaires, tests, surveys, assertions, etc., out there, and there is precious little that can clearly and unambigiously be stated as 'biblical', without at least some sincere Christians rejecting, rightly or wrongly.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 20, 2023, 09:41:22 AM
NPR: A Florida professor says his contract was terminated for teaching about racial justice (https://www.npr.org/2023/03/18/1164530319/florida-professor-fired-racial-justice-woke#:~:text=Sam%20Joeckel%2C%20a%20longtime%20English,justice%20were%20%22indoctrinating%22%20students.)

Quote
For years, Joeckel's class included a unit on the Black experience in the U.S., where he touched on the work of historic figures such as W.E.B. Du Bois and Booker T. Washington, as well as long-standing racial disparities in mass incarceration and educational attainment, as WLRN previously reported.

But recently, administrators took issue with Joeckel's curriculum, saying that they received a complaint from a student's parent about his lessons related to race, the professor said. Joeckel's contract was subsequently put under review last month. A few days ago, the instructor learned his contract would be terminated early.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 20, 2023, 10:00:38 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 20, 2023, 09:41:22 AM
NPR: A Florida professor says his contract was terminated for teaching about racial justice (https://www.npr.org/2023/03/18/1164530319/florida-professor-fired-racial-justice-woke#:~:text=Sam%20Joeckel%2C%20a%20longtime%20English,justice%20were%20%22indoctrinating%22%20students.)

Quote
For years, Joeckel's class included a unit on the Black experience in the U.S., where he touched on the work of historic figures such as W.E.B. Du Bois and Booker T. Washington, as well as long-standing racial disparities in mass incarceration and educational attainment, as WLRN previously reported.

But recently, administrators took issue with Joeckel's curriculum, saying that they received a complaint from a student's parent about his lessons related to race, the professor said. Joeckel's contract was subsequently put under review last month. A few days ago, the instructor learned his contract would be terminated early.

From the article:
Quote
The school did not immediately respond to NPR's request for comment on Joeckel's contract. But in an internal memo written last month and obtained by The Palm Beach Post, Provost Chelly Templeton said the school was investigating Joeckel's curriculum to "better understand the pedagogical rationale for including these extensive lectures in a Composition II class."

She added, "It is important that the Composition II objectives remain the focus of the course."

Whether this is the primary issue or just window dressing, it does raise a valid question. To what extent can an instructor inject any particular ideology into a course where that isn't the focus of the course in question. (To give an example from the other end of the political spectrum, in a biology class about the reproductive system, how much freedom should a pro-life instructor have to raise the *morality of abortion?)

*Taking an approach of "studying" the biological dangers of abortion would be a way to push a viewpoint without technically raising it. I'd imagine "studying" wrtings about racial inequality in an English class would similarly be a way to push a viewpoint without technically doing so.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on March 20, 2023, 11:05:40 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 20, 2023, 09:41:22 AM
NPR: A Florida professor says his contract was terminated for teaching about racial justice (https://www.npr.org/2023/03/18/1164530319/florida-professor-fired-racial-justice-woke#:~:text=Sam%20Joeckel%2C%20a%20longtime%20English,justice%20were%20%22indoctrinating%22%20students.)

Quote
For years, Joeckel's class included a unit on the Black experience in the U.S., where he touched on the work of historic figures such as W.E.B. Du Bois and Booker T. Washington, as well as long-standing racial disparities in mass incarceration and educational attainment, as WLRN previously reported.

But recently, administrators took issue with Joeckel's curriculum, saying that they received a complaint from a student's parent about his lessons related to race, the professor said. Joeckel's contract was subsequently put under review last month. A few days ago, the instructor learned his contract would be terminated early.

He may be an English professor, but what course was he teaching. There are no ENG courses listed on their website.
http://catalog.pba.edu/content.php?catoid=43&catoid=43&navoid=3079&filter%5Bitem_type%5D=3&filter%5Bonly_active%5D=1&filter%5B3%5D=1&filter%5Bcpage%5D=4#acalog_template_course_filter

Looking over student reviews at Niche.com, I found this:
QuoteIf you are not a conservative Christian, I urge you not to go here. You will be judged and ridiculed beyond comparison. Students here seemingly never outgrow the "high school" mentality. I was outcasted and didn't feel safe voicing my opinion or my work. While many students who go to PBA claim to not have any religious affiliations, they still lack the critical thinking skills required to show empathy and respect to others. Staff and faculty are great people and very supportive. Everything else will make you question your entire education.

Sounds like the kind of school that will be struggling in today's climate -- a small religious school. The administration is probably keen to keep the religious parents happy. Talking about the racist history of the USA is not likely to keep them happy.

But it is right next to the sea. I'm ready for a day on a beach. Let's go and show our support for the Prof.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 20, 2023, 12:38:50 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 20, 2023, 10:00:38 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 20, 2023, 09:41:22 AM
NPR: A Florida professor says his contract was terminated for teaching about racial justice (https://www.npr.org/2023/03/18/1164530319/florida-professor-fired-racial-justice-woke#:~:text=Sam%20Joeckel%2C%20a%20longtime%20English,justice%20were%20%22indoctrinating%22%20students.)

Quote
For years, Joeckel's class included a unit on the Black experience in the U.S., where he touched on the work of historic figures such as W.E.B. Du Bois and Booker T. Washington, as well as long-standing racial disparities in mass incarceration and educational attainment, as WLRN previously reported.

But recently, administrators took issue with Joeckel's curriculum, saying that they received a complaint from a student's parent about his lessons related to race, the professor said. Joeckel's contract was subsequently put under review last month. A few days ago, the instructor learned his contract would be terminated early.

From the article:
Quote
The school did not immediately respond to NPR's request for comment on Joeckel's contract. But in an internal memo written last month and obtained by The Palm Beach Post, Provost Chelly Templeton said the school was investigating Joeckel's curriculum to "better understand the pedagogical rationale for including these extensive lectures in a Composition II class."

She added, "It is important that the Composition II objectives remain the focus of the course."

Whether this is the primary issue or just window dressing, it does raise a valid question. To what extent can an instructor inject any particular ideology into a course where that isn't the focus of the course in question. (To give an example from the other end of the political spectrum, in a biology class about the reproductive system, how much freedom should a pro-life instructor have to raise the *morality of abortion?)

*Taking an approach of "studying" the biological dangers of abortion would be a way to push a viewpoint without technically raising it. I'd imagine "studying" wrtings about racial inequality in an English class would similarly be a way to push a viewpoint without technically doing so.

Kind'a right.

Many comp classes are structured around a "theme."  I never taught that way, and it has its pros and cons, but the point is to engage students with "real world" issues and to task theme with writing sourced arguments.  I instituted the "real world" dictum after 9/11 when I was getting papers on "we should have an extra taco night in the cafeteria" or "the dorms need carpeting."

Several things get me about this.  The prof in question has taught this course for 20 years already.  We suspect parents complained----and when did Christians become such snowflakes (rhetorical)?  And when did the concept of racial equality become taboo, particularly among Christians?...that is only partly rhetorical.  I understand the frustrations that lead to demands for equity, I am frustrated too, but I am tired of feeling attacked.  The liberal talkers will need to modulate and refashion their message if they are going to reach these obdurate, blindered conservative reactionaries.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 20, 2023, 07:13:20 PM
Two things here, perhaps:

1) It is without any question that we have experienced vast cultural changes in this country, and those changes are more or less all in the direction of vastly altering the prevalence of Christianity and mainstream normativity of traditional Christian values and behavior.   It is just not reasonable to expect no blowback to these changes, even though we here recognize that blowback in the area of criticizing critiques of racism is not a good idea (nor defensible biblically, for that matter, either).

2) Like it or not, most colleges nowadays are almost parallel universe environments compared to the attitudes and experiences of conservative, mostly rural/ Bible belt evangelicals.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 20, 2023, 07:22:43 PM
WTAMU President provides reasoning on canceling on-campus drag show in letter to students, staff, faculty (https://www.myhighplains.com/news/local-news/wtamu-president-provides-reasoning-on-canceling-on-campus-drag-show-in-letter-to-students-staff-faculty/)

Quote
In a letter sent to students, faculty and staff at West Texas A&M University on Monday that was obtained by MyHighPlains.com, West Texas A&M University President Walter Wendler announced that a planned drag show for later this month will not happen, stating his view that drag shows exaggerate and stereotype women in "cartoon-like extremes."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 20, 2023, 07:46:47 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 20, 2023, 07:13:20 PM
Two things here, perhaps:

1) It is without any question that we have experienced vast cultural changes in this country, and those changes are more or less all in the direction of vastly altering the prevalence of Christianity and mainstream normativity of traditional Christian values and behavior.   It is just not reasonable to expect no blowback to these changes, even though we here recognize that blowback in the area of criticizing critiques of racism is not a good idea (nor defensible biblically, for that matter, either).

2) Like it or not, most colleges nowadays are almost parallel universe environments compared to the attitudes and experiences of conservative, mostly rural/ Bible belt evangelicals.

I've been fascinated with this blowback since I was a little kid.  The blowback is having a reverse effect, I think, from what it is meant to enact. 

And blowback is fine, but the problem arrives when Christians expect heathens such as myself to follow their moral precepts.  Be mad all ye want, but don't expect me to cowtow to your sense of morality.

And I think it is not just college which is a parallel universe to the Evangelical experience.  I expect it is a good deal that comes before and after that is a parallel universe.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 20, 2023, 08:46:33 PM
1)I get that most non-evangelicals do not necessarily want to have evangelical mores rule society.   Problem is, some morality has to be the ruling legal and moral ethos of society, nonetheless.

2) There are other parallel universe areas, to be certain, but college is pretty darn near the top of the heap here, and academia is, like it or not, more or less run by people whose views are essentially secular and lefty, vastly different from many areas where one can find many secular lefties, but these lefties do not run the show with no checks and balances.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 20, 2023, 09:31:31 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 20, 2023, 08:46:33 PM
1)I get that most non-evangelicals do not necessarily want to have evangelical mores rule society.   Problem is, some morality has to be the ruling legal and moral ethos of society, nonetheless.

True.  But who says the Christians get to decide what this moral ethos is?  The Christian moral ethos I am familiar with is often extremely judgmental and narrow, even hateful, predicated upon damaging anyone outside their limited scope of belief.  And we see a good deal of hypocrisy and extremism in Christianity broadly defined (Catholic sexual abuse, multi-million dollar megachurches, firearm obsession, and Mormon cults, for instance).  I'm not sure organized religion of any stripe is good for the philosophic undergirding of society, just ask Iran.

And we have a moral ethos already.  It may or may not coincide with Christian moral ethos, although usually it does.  Importantly, our moral ethos is evolving and investigating what is best for a just and free society.  I'm not sure I see Christians actually doing this if it conflicts with ancient dogma.

Quote
2) There are other parallel universe areas, to be certain, but college is pretty darn near the top of the heap here, and academia is, like it or not, more or less run by people whose views are essentially secular and lefty, vastly different from many areas where one can find many secular lefties, but these lefties do not run the show with no checks and balances.

Agree with all of that.  And I think "lefty and secular" is the way to go.  The conservatives have worked very hard to turn "left" into a pejorative, so hard, in fact, that they actually believe their own  hatemongering and now use it as their moral base.  The right these days really only has hatred of the nebulous concept of "left," personified in their minds with "wokism" at the moment (later it will be something else), as a philosophy.  So give me well-educated, thinking, left-leaning (not left-extremist!) adults.  Most of the rest of the world is okay with "lefty and secular"----how long has it been since the Republicans have won a popular election?  What is Donald Trump's reputation around the world?

I sometimes think the evangelicals should actually withdraw from culture instead of pretending in the style of "The Duggars" that they are part of it.  The retreat will turn out horribly for them as they become more and more extremist, but they will have brought it upon themselves.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 21, 2023, 05:14:37 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 20, 2023, 09:31:31 PM
The conservatives have worked very hard to turn "left" into a pejorative, so hard, in fact, that they actually believe their own  hatemongering and now use it as their moral base.  The right these days really only has hatred of the nebulous concept of "left," personified in their minds with "wokism" at the moment (later it will be something else), as a philosophy.  So give me well-educated, thinking, left-leaning (not left-extremist!) adults. 

The sad irony is that the extremists feed off each other. The more extreme one side gets, the more that fuels extremism at the opposite pole, which pushes the first group farther away, ad nauseum.....

(And I really blame the media and academia for giving so much more attention to the extremists on both ends than on the vastly more sane positions nearer the centre.)

Quote
Most of the rest of the world is okay with "lefty and secular"----how long has it been since the Republicans have won a popular election? 


The US. is kind of unique in this. While the number of people identifying as religious in the US may be somewhat higher than in many other countries, the issue is more that explicitly religious language is more prevalent in the US. (Which is, of course, also fed (see above) by the explicit emphasis on "separation of church and state".) Lots of people in other countries have strong religious principles, and consider them important for society, but they realize that a pluralistic society will have people with lots of different viewpoints, and arguments will have to be made that will appeal to a broad range of people beyond their own ideological bubble.
Just to clarify: It's not that people feel they have no right to win people over to their way of thinking, but that they have to do it by appealing to values of the other people.



Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 20, 2023, 12:38:50 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 20, 2023, 10:00:38 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 20, 2023, 09:41:22 AM
NPR: A Florida professor says his contract was terminated for teaching about racial justice (https://www.npr.org/2023/03/18/1164530319/florida-professor-fired-racial-justice-woke#:~:text=Sam%20Joeckel%2C%20a%20longtime%20English,justice%20were%20%22indoctrinating%22%20students.)

Quote
For years, Joeckel's class included a unit on the Black experience in the U.S., where he touched on the work of historic figures such as W.E.B. Du Bois and Booker T. Washington, as well as long-standing racial disparities in mass incarceration and educational attainment, as WLRN previously reported.

But recently, administrators took issue with Joeckel's curriculum, saying that they received a complaint from a student's parent about his lessons related to race, the professor said. Joeckel's contract was subsequently put under review last month. A few days ago, the instructor learned his contract would be terminated early.

From the article:
Quote
The school did not immediately respond to NPR's request for comment on Joeckel's contract. But in an internal memo written last month and obtained by The Palm Beach Post, Provost Chelly Templeton said the school was investigating Joeckel's curriculum to "better understand the pedagogical rationale for including these extensive lectures in a Composition II class."

She added, "It is important that the Composition II objectives remain the focus of the course."

Whether this is the primary issue or just window dressing, it does raise a valid question. To what extent can an instructor inject any particular ideology into a course where that isn't the focus of the course in question. (To give an example from the other end of the political spectrum, in a biology class about the reproductive system, how much freedom should a pro-life instructor have to raise the *morality of abortion?)

*Taking an approach of "studying" the biological dangers of abortion would be a way to push a viewpoint without technically raising it. I'd imagine "studying" writings about racial inequality in an English class would similarly be a way to push a viewpoint without technically doing so.

Kind'a right.

Many comp classes are structured around a "theme."  I never taught that way, and it has its pros and cons, but the point is to engage students with "real world" issues and to task theme with writing sourced arguments.  I instituted the "real world" dictum after 9/11 when I was getting papers on "we should have an extra taco night in the cafeteria" or "the dorms need carpeting."


The sad thing here is that it's precisely (in my opinion) the move to "activism" that has made these opportunities to raise important issues so divisive. I remember early in COVID there was an unusual article in the news that actually pointed out a few people with specific medical conditions that prevented them getting vaccinated. As someone who has always been firmly in favour of vaccinations, I was impressed that the article actually injected some legitimate nuance into the discussion.

Activism, on the other hand, abhors nuance.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on March 21, 2023, 05:21:39 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 20, 2023, 07:13:20 PM
Two things here, perhaps:

1) It is without any question that we have experienced vast cultural changes in this country, and those changes are more or less all in the direction of vastly altering the prevalence of Christianity and mainstream normativity of traditional Christian values and behavior.   It is just not reasonable to expect no blowback to these changes, even though we here recognize that blowback in the area of criticizing critiques of racism is not a good idea (nor defensible biblically, for that matter, either).

2) Like it or not, most colleges nowadays are almost parallel universe environments compared to the attitudes and experiences of conservative, mostly rural/ Bible belt evangelicals.

Is stoning a traditional Christian value?  Slavery.  Wife + concubine?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 21, 2023, 06:43:10 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on March 21, 2023, 05:21:39 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 20, 2023, 07:13:20 PM
Two things here, perhaps:

1) It is without any question that we have experienced vast cultural changes in this country, and those changes are more or less all in the direction of vastly altering the prevalence of Christianity and mainstream normativity of traditional Christian values and behavior.   It is just not reasonable to expect no blowback to these changes, even though we here recognize that blowback in the area of criticizing critiques of racism is not a good idea (nor defensible biblically, for that matter, either).

2) Like it or not, most colleges nowadays are almost parallel universe environments compared to the attitudes and experiences of conservative, mostly rural/ Bible belt evangelicals.

Is stoning a traditional Christian value?  Slavery.  Wife + concubine?

While those were all Old Testament practices, they had all pretty much gone by the early church. (And yes, centuries later in the US and other places people brought back the idea of slavery for commercial purposes. In the vast majority of Christendom through the centuries, slavery was not practiced. So it's not a "traditional" Christian practice.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Larimar on March 21, 2023, 06:53:54 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on March 21, 2023, 05:21:39 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 20, 2023, 07:13:20 PM
Two things here, perhaps:

1) It is without any question that we have experienced vast cultural changes in this country, and those changes are more or less all in the direction of vastly altering the prevalence of Christianity and mainstream normativity of traditional Christian values and behavior.   It is just not reasonable to expect no blowback to these changes, even though we here recognize that blowback in the area of criticizing critiques of racism is not a good idea (nor defensible biblically, for that matter, either).

2) Like it or not, most colleges nowadays are almost parallel universe environments compared to the attitudes and experiences of conservative, mostly rural/ Bible belt evangelicals.

Is stoning a traditional Christian value?  Slavery.  Wife + concubine?

No, those are not traditional Christian values. Jesus prevented the people from stoning a woman caught in adultery. He never said anything supporting slavery and advocated treating everyone well. And Paul declared that any leader in the early church had to have only one wife. (At that time, some converts already had more than one wife.) Real Christian values do not include judgmentalism and hypocrisy. Those are the characteristics that Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees "a nest of vipers" and "whitewashed tombs" for. I am Christian but not evangelical. It really grieves me that people think that Christian equals judgmental hypocrite. Those are traits of Christianity gone off the rails and not following Jesus. Christianity is about love, not judgement. Jesus said that he did not come into the world to condemn it but to save it.

Larimar

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 21, 2023, 08:44:43 AM
Quote from: Larimar on March 21, 2023, 06:53:54 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on March 21, 2023, 05:21:39 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 20, 2023, 07:13:20 PM
Two things here, perhaps:

1) It is without any question that we have experienced vast cultural changes in this country, and those changes are more or less all in the direction of vastly altering the prevalence of Christianity and mainstream normativity of traditional Christian values and behavior.   It is just not reasonable to expect no blowback to these changes, even though we here recognize that blowback in the area of criticizing critiques of racism is not a good idea (nor defensible biblically, for that matter, either).

2) Like it or not, most colleges nowadays are almost parallel universe environments compared to the attitudes and experiences of conservative, mostly rural/ Bible belt evangelicals.

Is stoning a traditional Christian value?  Slavery.  Wife + concubine?

No, those are not traditional Christian values. Jesus prevented the people from stoning a woman caught in adultery. He never said anything supporting slavery and advocated treating everyone well. And Paul declared that any leader in the early church had to have only one wife. (At that time, some converts already had more than one wife.) Real Christian values do not include judgmentalism and hypocrisy. Those are the characteristics that Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees "a nest of vipers" and "whitewashed tombs" for. I am Christian but not evangelical. It really grieves me that people think that Christian equals judgmental hypocrite. Those are traits of Christianity gone off the rails and not following Jesus. Christianity is about love, not judgement. Jesus said that he did not come into the world to condemn it but to save it.

Larimar

The issue is that many do use Christianity to defend/justify their bigotry.  Many Christians may not agree with this, but they are generally not very vocal about their disagreement (with some exceptions of course).  As a result, the loud (hopefully) minority seem to speak for Christians.

It also dosn't help that the pope and catholic church have long promoted all sorts of bigotry and anti-science stances.  I realize he dosnt speak for all christians, but he has the biggest soap box.   
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2023, 10:13:59 AM
Quote from: Larimar on March 21, 2023, 06:53:54 AM
Real Christian values do not include judgmentalism and hypocrisy. Those are the characteristics that Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees "a nest of vipers" and "whitewashed tombs" for. I am Christian but not evangelical. It really grieves me that people think that Christian equals judgmental hypocrite. Those are traits of Christianity gone off the rails and not following Jesus. Christianity is about love, not judgement. Jesus said that he did not come into the world to condemn it but to save it.

Larimar

This is generally the argument, and it is valid, of course. 

The trouble is that people DO use Christianity for all sorts of things.  Often they have support from other Christians.  So if we view this debate in purely practical terms, you are correct, but that does not stop the weirdos from thinking they are doing Christ's work by claiming allegiance to some Biblical tenet. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 21, 2023, 10:34:30 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2023, 10:13:59 AM
Quote from: Larimar on March 21, 2023, 06:53:54 AM
Real Christian values do not include judgmentalism and hypocrisy. Those are the characteristics that Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees "a nest of vipers" and "whitewashed tombs" for. I am Christian but not evangelical. It really grieves me that people think that Christian equals judgmental hypocrite. Those are traits of Christianity gone off the rails and not following Jesus. Christianity is about love, not judgement. Jesus said that he did not come into the world to condemn it but to save it.

Larimar

This is generally the argument, and it is valid, of course. 

The trouble is that people DO use Christianity for all sorts of things.  Often they have support from other Christians.  So if we view this debate in purely practical terms, you are correct, but that does not stop the weirdos from thinking they are doing Christ's work by claiming allegiance to some Biblical tenet.

Putin claims he is protecting ethnic Russians in Ukraine. People will use all kinds of justifications for their actions; that doesn't mean that others will think those justifications are sufficient or even rational. Some of my ancestors came from Northern Ireland. That doesn't make me agree with everything done by either "side" during The Troubles.Not remotely.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 21, 2023, 10:53:10 AM
Quote from: Larimar on March 21, 2023, 06:53:54 AM
Christianity is about love, not judgement. Jesus said that he did not come into the world to condemn it but to save it.

Larimar

Well...the New Testament message contains both the good news of love and the bad news of coming judgement.  Summed up pretty concisely in John 3:16-19:

QuoteFor God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.  For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved.  He who believes on him is not condemned.  He who does not believe stands condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.  And this is the condemnation:  the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness, rather than the light, because their deeds were evil.

It's a pretty stark choice--believe that Jesus was who he said he was and commit to following him and living according to his teachings, or decide we'd rather not and face the consequences.  And trying to follow Jesus + X isn't going to work either, whether X is one's own nation or race (Christian Nationalism), money (Prosperity Gospel), or the idea that it's okay to shag whomever or whatever one pleases as long as one is "in love."  Every time I see a "God, guns, and Trump" sign (Which fortunately isn't too often around here, contrary to what some might assume about our neck of the woods) I'm reminded of how God made a point of saying "You shall have no other gods but me." 

I mean, it's not popular, and it sounds judgmental, but it's the basic New Testament message.  We all have things in our lives we need to put aside if we're going to follow Jesus.  Maybe this sounds arrogant from the outside looking in, but I promise you that anybody who has truly committed to a Christian life has had to adopt an attitude of great humility.  Because becoming a Christian means accepting that we, personally, have messed up and have only God's mercy to appeal to.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Diogenes on March 21, 2023, 03:20:30 PM
Is a President of a publicly funded college front-loading Christianity as their reason for banning a drag show from campus "Cancel Culture"?
Asking for a friend who wants to know if this guy is also a "Snowflake" and if we should be worried about his "Political Correctness."

https://twitter.com/TheFIREorg/status/1637997742617251845?

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 22, 2023, 03:59:25 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 21, 2023, 10:34:30 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2023, 10:13:59 AM
Quote from: Larimar on March 21, 2023, 06:53:54 AM
Real Christian values do not include judgmentalism and hypocrisy. Those are the characteristics that Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees "a nest of vipers" and "whitewashed tombs" for. I am Christian but not evangelical. It really grieves me that people think that Christian equals judgmental hypocrite. Those are traits of Christianity gone off the rails and not following Jesus. Christianity is about love, not judgement. Jesus said that he did not come into the world to condemn it but to save it.

Larimar

This is generally the argument, and it is valid, of course. 

The trouble is that people DO use Christianity for all sorts of things.  Often they have support from other Christians.  So if we view this debate in purely practical terms, you are correct, but that does not stop the weirdos from thinking they are doing Christ's work by claiming allegiance to some Biblical tenet.

Putin claims he is protecting ethnic Russians in Ukraine. People will use all kinds of justifications for their actions; that doesn't mean that others will think those justifications are sufficient or even rational. Some of my ancestors came from Northern Ireland. That doesn't make me agree with everything done by either "side" during The Troubles.Not remotely.

And yet, enough Russians agree that it is reasonable to say that Russia supports his actions.  I'm sure many don't, but as a group, they are sanctioning it and supporting it.

In the.case of the church, there are many examples of this.  Manifest destiny and the doctrine of discovery are a couple good examples.  Perhaps not all Christians believed they had the right to evict people from their land, but it was/is official church policy and was used to justify all sorts of atteocities.  These likely would have happened with or without the church, but it was used as a tool to justify and legitimise it
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 22, 2023, 05:03:43 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 22, 2023, 03:59:25 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 21, 2023, 10:34:30 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2023, 10:13:59 AM
Quote from: Larimar on March 21, 2023, 06:53:54 AM
Real Christian values do not include judgmentalism and hypocrisy. Those are the characteristics that Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees "a nest of vipers" and "whitewashed tombs" for. I am Christian but not evangelical. It really grieves me that people think that Christian equals judgmental hypocrite. Those are traits of Christianity gone off the rails and not following Jesus. Christianity is about love, not judgement. Jesus said that he did not come into the world to condemn it but to save it.

Larimar

This is generally the argument, and it is valid, of course. 

The trouble is that people DO use Christianity for all sorts of things.  Often they have support from other Christians.  So if we view this debate in purely practical terms, you are correct, but that does not stop the weirdos from thinking they are doing Christ's work by claiming allegiance to some Biblical tenet.

Putin claims he is protecting ethnic Russians in Ukraine. People will use all kinds of justifications for their actions; that doesn't mean that others will think those justifications are sufficient or even rational. Some of my ancestors came from Northern Ireland. That doesn't make me agree with everything done by either "side" during The Troubles.Not remotely.

And yet, enough Russians agree that it is reasonable to say that Russia supports his actions.  I'm sure many don't, but as a group, they are sanctioning it and supporting it.

In the.case of the church, there are many examples of this.  Manifest destiny and the doctrine of discovery are a couple good examples.  Perhaps not all Christians believed they had the right to evict people from their land, but it was/is official church policy and was used to justify all sorts of attrocities.  These likely would have happened with or without the church, but it was used as a tool to justify and legitimise it

So by that logic, Russia is a bad country, and Russians are bad people, and the world would be better off if Russia had never existed or ceased to exist.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on March 22, 2023, 05:30:00 AM
The NYC Audubon just erased Audubon, who died before the Civil War, from their organization. I'm not sure how erasing the name of someone who lived in an era when most affluent people had slaves would further the stated cause of supporting birds and their environment.

QuoteAt a time when birds are threatened by climate change, habitat loss, and the risks of built infrastructure in urban environments, it is more vital than ever that we enlist support from allies, partners, and the public.

The email sent to members had a 5 AM timestamp.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on March 22, 2023, 05:35:31 AM
From Marshwiggle:  While those were all Old Testament practices, they had all pretty much gone by the early church. To what extent then, does the NT supercede the OT? If the NT takes precedence, does that suggest that the OT is not truly the Word of God?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 22, 2023, 05:42:48 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on March 22, 2023, 05:35:31 AM
From Marshwiggle:  While those were all Old Testament practices, they had all pretty much gone by the early church. To what extent then, does the NT supercede the OT? If the NT takes precedence, does that suggest that the OT is not truly the Word of God?

Since this has been discussed for centuries, and by people with far more insight than I have, I'll just give the brief synopsis of the idea of ongoing revelation. To put it in relation to the discussion here, the idea is that as the society changed, God's message and actions changed. The world at the time of the Pharaohs was a lot different than the world at the time of the Roman empire, (which are both very different than our world now), so reading everything while ignoring the context of the audience at the time it was written is either disingenuous or stupid.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 22, 2023, 06:35:37 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 22, 2023, 05:03:43 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 22, 2023, 03:59:25 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 21, 2023, 10:34:30 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 21, 2023, 10:13:59 AM
Quote from: Larimar on March 21, 2023, 06:53:54 AM
Real Christian values do not include judgmentalism and hypocrisy. Those are the characteristics that Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees "a nest of vipers" and "whitewashed tombs" for. I am Christian but not evangelical. It really grieves me that people think that Christian equals judgmental hypocrite. Those are traits of Christianity gone off the rails and not following Jesus. Christianity is about love, not judgement. Jesus said that he did not come into the world to condemn it but to save it.

Larimar

This is generally the argument, and it is valid, of course. 

The trouble is that people DO use Christianity for all sorts of things.  Often they have support from other Christians.  So if we view this debate in purely practical terms, you are correct, but that does not stop the weirdos from thinking they are doing Christ's work by claiming allegiance to some Biblical tenet.

Putin claims he is protecting ethnic Russians in Ukraine. People will use all kinds of justifications for their actions; that doesn't mean that others will think those justifications are sufficient or even rational. Some of my ancestors came from Northern Ireland. That doesn't make me agree with everything done by either "side" during The Troubles.Not remotely.

And yet, enough Russians agree that it is reasonable to say that Russia supports his actions.  I'm sure many don't, but as a group, they are sanctioning it and supporting it.

In the.case of the church, there are many examples of this.  Manifest destiny and the doctrine of discovery are a couple good examples.  Perhaps not all Christians believed they had the right to evict people from their land, but it was/is official church policy and was used to justify all sorts of attrocities.  These likely would have happened with or without the church, but it was used as a tool to justify and legitimise it

So by that logic, Russia is a bad country, and Russians are bad people, and the world would be better off if Russia had never existed or ceased to exist.

No, but it may indicate that the current Russian leadership is rotten and should ideally be replaced.  I suppose a major difference is that the Pope/church is the direct spokesman for God and have moral authority over their members, so it is pretty hard to disagree.  Modern Russia accomplishes a similar feat through law and censorship, but it is much easier if you can just play the God card.

I don't think many people here have been arguing that religion (or Russia asa whole) is evil and should be abolished, just that it can, and has, been used for nefarious purposes and should not be involved in creating or enforcing law. 

Also worth noting that Putin has indeed used these Russian Church to validate his actions.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 22, 2023, 06:40:49 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 22, 2023, 05:03:43 AM
So by that logic, Russia is a bad country, and Russians are bad people, and the world would be better off if Russia had never existed or ceased to exist.

At this point in time...if Russia ceased to exist we could all breathe a sigh of relief.

I'm sure glad we have Tchaikovsky and Russian realism in literature.  I'm glad the Russians were there to beat down Napoleon and Hitler.  But now Russia is a rogue nation bringing us closer to the brink of world war. 

The point is, however (as Kron says), that we shouldn't have the Russians or the church making rules for everyone----neither can be trusted.  We need not destroy the church or ignore all it has given us, but we should also acknowledge the dark side of religion. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 22, 2023, 06:49:16 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on March 22, 2023, 05:30:00 AM
The NYC Audubon just erased Audubon, who died before the Civil War, from their organization. I'm not sure how erasing the name of someone who lived in an era when most affluent people had slaves would further the stated cause of supporting birds and their environment.

QuoteAt a time when birds are threatened by climate change, habitat loss, and the risks of built infrastructure in urban environments, it is more vital than ever that we enlist support from allies, partners, and the public.

The email sent to members had a 5 AM timestamp.

Well, the mission of the Audobon societies goes far beyond what he did back in the day, so I guess there's no compelling reason to keep his name, pioneering figure or not.  The emerging consensus that we see to the effect that anybody who ever owned slaves or voiced support for slavery was unspeakably evil and must be erased from historical memory as anything other than a despicable enslaver bears careful consideration.  Many of the same people who are calling for this sort of re-evaluation of white historical figures have a soft spot for the cultures and rulers of pre-colonial Africa, India, Mesoamerica, etc.  And yet these were slave societies whose rulers often exercised the power of life and death over their subjects. 

Was a black African ruler who conquered his neighbors and enslaved others more acceptable than a white ruler who did the same sorts of things?  If so, what made him or her so?  If we of today are entitled to judge and condemn the people of the past for not being us, then I doubt there's much of anybody, of any culture or color or gender, who would ultimately hold up to scrutiny.  And if the people of the past are to be written off as wicked, then how is it that we of today are so certain that we are more righteous than they were?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 22, 2023, 07:11:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 22, 2023, 06:40:49 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 22, 2023, 05:03:43 AM
So by that logic, Russia is a bad country, and Russians are bad people, and the world would be better off if Russia had never existed or ceased to exist.

At this point in time...if Russia ceased to exist we could all breathe a sigh of relief.

I'm sure glad we have Tchaikovsky and Russian realism in literature.  I'm glad the Russians were there to beat down Napoleon and Hitler.  But now Russia is a rogue nation bringing us closer to the brink of world war. 

The point is, however (as Kron says), that we shouldn't have the Russians or the church making rules for everyone----neither can be trusted.  We need not destroy the church or ignore all it has given us, but we should also acknowledge the dark side of religion.

"The church" doesn't make rules for everyone. Except maybe just after the time of Jesus when "the church" consisted of a small number of people who knew him personally, there hasn't been any time when "the church" has had a completely unified voice. All through church history there have been various groups who disagreed with each other over things major or minor. Since "the church" is always made up of fallible human beings, it will always fall far short of what it aspires to be. (And that's not even counting people who are actually fraudulently claiming some sort of religious affiliation to try to trick people into something.)

The easiest place to find people who can tell you about awful things that Christians (or "the church") have done is in church. Just like the easiest place to find people who know all of my flaws is in my family.

"The church", like every individual within it, is implicitly a work in progress. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't really understand what Christianity is about.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 22, 2023, 07:59:56 AM
You do realize, Marshy, that Christians with your beliefs are not the ones we are worried about, right?  Although I don't know that what you say there is necessarily what past comments reflect.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 22, 2023, 08:18:05 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 22, 2023, 07:59:56 AM
You do realize, Marshy, that Christians with your beliefs are not the ones we are worried about, right?  Although I don't know that what you say there is necessarily what past comments reflect.

Given the high percentage of people who identify as Christian in the US, if most of them ascribed to the very conservative views that people worry about they would have a massively bigger effect than they do. Just goes to show that "Christians" like "white people" or "black people" is a much more diverse group than many suggest, and treating them as monolithic is similarly unproductive.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 22, 2023, 11:27:44 AM
I've been doin' some cogitatin' on this, and it is clear that most American non-Christians should acknowledge a couple of things, namely that Christianity is largely the basis for the tradiitonal morality/ mores of America, things that differentiate us say from India or Oman, and that most of said non-believers largely would agree with most of those distinctively Christian, or Christianity-based, mores, *with the current main exceptions more or less only being in the areas of sexuality and abortion.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 22, 2023, 02:49:45 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 22, 2023, 11:27:44 AM
I've been doin' some cogitatin' on this, and it is clear that most American non-Christians should acknowledge a couple of things, namely that Christianity is largely the basis for the tradiitonal morality/ mores of America, things that differentiate us say from India or Oman, and that most of said non-believers largely would agree with most of those distinctively Christian, or Christianity-based, mores, *with the current main exceptions more or less only being in the areas of sexuality and abortion.

Sure, just as Christians should acknowledge that the majority of their Christian values are derived from previous religious/pagan and other sources.  It is a continuum, and our society is constantly evolving.  Just as Christians shed some of the more perverse practices of their predecessors, secular society is doing the same with what we inherited. We don't need to throw out the baby with the bath water.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 22, 2023, 03:00:18 PM
Note: I believe (personally) that the judge was the one cancelled.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/standford-dei-dean-on-leave-interrupting-confronting-federal-judge-campus-event
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 22, 2023, 03:07:10 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 22, 2023, 08:18:05 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 22, 2023, 07:59:56 AM
You do realize, Marshy, that Christians with your beliefs are not the ones we are worried about, right?  Although I don't know that what you say there is necessarily what past comments reflect.

Given the high percentage of people who identify as Christian in the US, if most of them ascribed to the very conservative views that people worry about they would have a massively bigger effect than they do. Just goes to show that "Christians" like "white people" or "black people" is a much more diverse group than many suggest, and treating them as monolithic is similarly unproductive.

I treat no one as monomythic.  I point out the problems.  I am a lapsed Episcopalian who grew up in a very decorous, extremely moderate, modern, reasonably open, non-evangelical church.  As a teenager I actually thought about becoming a minister.  Then I realized I was mistaking the personal affection I held for the people in the church with faith, which faltered as soon as I was out of this little community.

My sister married into a devout, politicized Catholic family.  There were some problems.

My first wife was a non-practicing Catholic.

I spent a fair amount of my youth in Salt Lake City because we had non-Mormon family there.

So no, my friend, I understand a lot about denominations, at least as much as most laypeople do, perhaps as much as you do.

I refer to the people who are deeply ensconced in prejudices and hypocrisy who use Christianity as their aegis or the people who are fundamentalist zealots.  And there are enough of these people to have an effect.  That's the problem. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 22, 2023, 03:07:32 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 22, 2023, 03:00:18 PM
Note: I believe (personally) that the judge was the one cancelled.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/standford-dei-dean-on-leave-interrupting-confronting-federal-judge-campus-event

You beat me to it!!!!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 22, 2023, 09:53:52 PM
Actually no.   Christianity did not inherit its specific, distinctive morality from its Greco-Roman pagan milieu.   Really, it didn't.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 23, 2023, 02:47:53 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 22, 2023, 09:53:52 PM
Actually no.   Christianity did not inherit its specific, distinctive morality from its Greco-Roman pagan milieu.   Really, it didn't.

Whatever.  I think the majority of pre-christian cultures agreed that theft and murder are bad.  I'm sure there are some aspects that are different, but I believe most of our shared core morality predates Jesus.  This is even more evident since Christianity is built around the old testament, but the new testament rejects much of it, showing a natural evolution derived from previous cultures. I don't see how you can deny that Christian morals were built around previous cultures.

Heck, many of the stories in the Bible itself are "borrowed" from Greek and other mythologies.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: FishProf on March 23, 2023, 03:48:40 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 22, 2023, 09:53:52 PM
Actually no.   Christianity did not inherit its specific, distinctive morality from its Greco-Roman pagan milieu.   Really, it didn't.

What is Christianity's "specific, distinctive morality" of which you speak?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 23, 2023, 05:26:36 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 23, 2023, 02:47:53 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 22, 2023, 09:53:52 PM
Actually no.   Christianity did not inherit its specific, distinctive morality from its Greco-Roman pagan milieu.   Really, it didn't.

Whatever.  I think the majority of pre-christian cultures agreed that theft and murder are bad.  I'm sure there are some aspects that are different, but I believe most of our shared core morality predates Jesus.  This is even more evident since Christianity is built around the old testament, but the new testament rejects much of it, showing a natural evolution derived from previous cultures. I don't see how you can deny that Christian morals were built around previous cultures.

Heck, many of the stories in the Bible itself are "borrowed" from Greek and other mythologies.

If there is a God, and all human beings have a built-in desire for deeper meaning and transcendence, then it is completely natural that there should be all kinds of moral impulses that are not bound by geography, history, etc. The idea of a "God-shaped void" is ancient, and itself not limited to a single culture. (In case it isn't obvious, this isn't a proof that God exists; it is a clarification of how the same fact can have different interpretations based on different underlying assumptions.  Facts by themselves rarely "prove" anything. The motion of the inner planets were explained by Ptolemy, but the Copernican system had a much simpler explanation that had much more predictive value.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 23, 2023, 05:49:49 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 22, 2023, 03:07:10 PM
I refer to the people who are deeply ensconced in prejudices and hypocrisy who use Christianity as their aegis or the people who are fundamentalist zealots.  And there are enough of these people to have an effect.  That's the problem.

Sure. And there are people who have broken up their marriages and families for "love", because they "have to be with the one they love". And people have killed their teenage daughters for "honour". The list of supposedly good reasons people have had for atrocious acts is endless. I too (like many Christians) am appalled by many things that are done in the name of "Christianity", but just like the above examples of "love" and "honour", it doesn't take a very deep look to realize that the impulses driving the behaviour have much less to do with the stated principle than with some very basic human flaws and vices. It's a ridiculous red herring to discuss the "official" cause because it fails to address the real issue.

The way to evaluate someone's principles is to watch for when it costs them, rather than when it conveniently suits them.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 23, 2023, 06:22:05 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 23, 2023, 05:26:36 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 23, 2023, 02:47:53 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 22, 2023, 09:53:52 PM
Actually no.   Christianity did not inherit its specific, distinctive morality from its Greco-Roman pagan milieu.   Really, it didn't.

Whatever.  I think the majority of pre-christian cultures agreed that theft and murder are bad.  I'm sure there are some aspects that are different, but I believe most of our shared core morality predates Jesus.  This is even more evident since Christianity is built around the old testament, but the new testament rejects much of it, showing a natural evolution derived from previous cultures. I don't see how you can deny that Christian morals were built around previous cultures.

Heck, many of the stories in the Bible itself are "borrowed" from Greek and other mythologies.

If there is a God, and all human beings have a built-in desire for deeper meaning and transcendence, then it is completely natural that there should be all kinds of moral impulses that are not bound by geography, history, etc. The idea of a "God-shaped void" is ancient, and itself not limited to a single culture. (In case it isn't obvious, this isn't a proof that God exists; it is a clarification of how the same fact can have different interpretations based on different underlying assumptions.  Facts by themselves rarely "prove" anything. The motion of the inner planets were explained by Ptolemy, but the Copernican system had a much simpler explanation that had much more predictive value.)

Sure, so you agree that most of the core morality is not unique or derived specifically from Christianity.  That is exactly what I was saying.

However, I would also add that morality and such could just as easily be derived through evolution without the hand or belief in God.  It is beneficial for a social animal not to murder and such.  As society becomes more complex, these rules become more complex and nuanced.  Even godless animals have moral codes, which sometimes align with our own.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 23, 2023, 07:32:33 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 23, 2023, 06:22:05 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 23, 2023, 05:26:36 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 23, 2023, 02:47:53 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 22, 2023, 09:53:52 PM
Actually no.   Christianity did not inherit its specific, distinctive morality from its Greco-Roman pagan milieu.   Really, it didn't.

Whatever.  I think the majority of pre-christian cultures agreed that theft and murder are bad.  I'm sure there are some aspects that are different, but I believe most of our shared core morality predates Jesus.  This is even more evident since Christianity is built around the old testament, but the new testament rejects much of it, showing a natural evolution derived from previous cultures. I don't see how you can deny that Christian morals were built around previous cultures.

Heck, many of the stories in the Bible itself are "borrowed" from Greek and other mythologies.

If there is a God, and all human beings have a built-in desire for deeper meaning and transcendence, then it is completely natural that there should be all kinds of moral impulses that are not bound by geography, history, etc. The idea of a "God-shaped void" is ancient, and itself not limited to a single culture. (In case it isn't obvious, this isn't a proof that God exists; it is a clarification of how the same fact can have different interpretations based on different underlying assumptions.  Facts by themselves rarely "prove" anything. The motion of the inner planets were explained by Ptolemy, but the Copernican system had a much simpler explanation that had much more predictive value.)

Sure, so you agree that most of the core morality is not unique or derived specifically from Christianity.  That is exactly what I was saying.

The trick comes in defining what is "core". Since slavery has existed for most of human history in all kinds of cultures, is the rejection of slavery a non-core value?

Quote
However, I would also add that morality and such could just as easily be derived through evolution without the hand or belief in God.  It is beneficial for a social animal not to murder and such.  As society becomes more complex, these rules become more complex and nuanced.  Even godless animals have moral codes, which sometimes align with our own.

Sure.The simple fact that something is apparently "universal" can't definitively *establish why it is universal. It's an inconvenient truth for people bent "proving" their view of the world is the correct one, whatever that view is.


(*However, it does require an intellectually honest person to show how their view makes that outcome plausible.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 23, 2023, 07:32:42 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 22, 2023, 03:00:18 PM
Note: I believe (personally) that the judge was the one cancelled.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/standford-dei-dean-on-leave-interrupting-confronting-federal-judge-campus-event

I was wondering whether anybody would get around to posting this story on this thread.  It's a pretty appalling incident.  This is supposed to be an elite law school!  If any body of students should be comfortable with hearing and debating--as opposed to merely shouting down--controversial opinions, it should be they.  Also, that DEI officer's conduct tends to confirm skeptics of DEI officers' worst suspicions about them.  It's going to intensify opposition to DEI.  DEI advocates couldn't afford to have something like this happen.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 23, 2023, 07:39:24 AM
Quote from: apl68 on March 23, 2023, 07:32:42 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 22, 2023, 03:00:18 PM
Note: I believe (personally) that the judge was the one cancelled.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/standford-dei-dean-on-leave-interrupting-confronting-federal-judge-campus-event

I was wondering whether anybody would get around to posting this story on this thread.  It's a pretty appalling incident.  This is supposed to be an elite law school!  If any body of students should be comfortable with hearing and debating--as opposed to merely shouting down--controversial opinions, it should be they.  Also, that DEI officer's conduct tends to confirm skeptics of DEI officers' worst suspicions about them.  It's going to intensify opposition to DEI.  DEI advocates couldn't afford to have something like this happen.

And she was the " associate dean of diversity, equity and inclusion" at the Stanford Law School ! So not just some functionary from the wider university. I'm truly baffled by law schools doing all of this cancelling over language given that they're (supposedly) preparing students to be in courtrooms, where by definition all kinds of things will have to be presented and stated as evidence and testimony, and in an intentionally adversarial context. These graduates are likely to crumple the first time they encounter the necessary environment of a courtroom.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 23, 2023, 08:42:17 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 23, 2023, 05:49:49 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 22, 2023, 03:07:10 PM
I refer to the people who are deeply ensconced in prejudices and hypocrisy who use Christianity as their aegis or the people who are fundamentalist zealots.  And there are enough of these people to have an effect.  That's the problem.

Sure. And there are people who have broken up their marriages and families for "love", because they "have to be with the one they love". And people have killed their teenage daughters for "honour". The list of supposedly good reasons people have had for atrocious acts is endless. I too (like many Christians) am appalled by many things that are done in the name of "Christianity", but just like the above examples of "love" and "honour", it doesn't take a very deep look to realize that the impulses driving the behaviour have much less to do with the stated principle than with some very basic human flaws and vices. It's a ridiculous red herring to discuss the "official" cause because it fails to address the real issue.

The way to evaluate someone's principles is to watch for when it costs them, rather than when it conveniently suits them.

Not sure what your point is, my friend.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 23, 2023, 08:59:53 AM
The Latest from IHE:

Stanford DEI Dean on Leave After Disrupted Event (https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2023/03/23/stanford-law-dei-dean-leave-after-disrupted-event)

DEI Statement Nixed After Professor Complains, Links to Racist Article (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2023/03/23/dei-statement-nixed-after-professor-complains-links-racist-article)

Lower Deck:
Quote
An English professor wrote in a conservative media outlet, opposing his department's new "anti-racist statement." The next month, the statement was gone. His own statement of protest linked to a racist column.

House Panel Targets Universities, Scholars (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2023/03/23/house-weaponization-subcommittee-seeks-records-universities)

Lower Deck:
Quote
House Republicans investigating the "weaponization of the federal government" want information from several disinformation researchers who were recently accused of being part of the "censorship industrial complex."
[/url]
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 23, 2023, 12:04:31 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 23, 2023, 08:42:17 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 23, 2023, 05:49:49 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 22, 2023, 03:07:10 PM
I refer to the people who are deeply ensconced in prejudices and hypocrisy who use Christianity as their aegis or the people who are fundamentalist zealots.  And there are enough of these people to have an effect.  That's the problem.

Sure. And there are people who have broken up their marriages and families for "love", because they "have to be with the one they love". And people have killed their teenage daughters for "honour". The list of supposedly good reasons people have had for atrocious acts is endless. I too (like many Christians) am appalled by many things that are done in the name of "Christianity", but just like the above examples of "love" and "honour", it doesn't take a very deep look to realize that the impulses driving the behaviour have much less to do with the stated principle than with some very basic human flaws and vices. It's a ridiculous red herring to discuss the "official" cause because it fails to address the real issue.

The way to evaluate someone's principles is to watch for when it costs them, rather than when it conveniently suits them.

Not sure what your point is, my friend.

For just about any issue, you will probably find Christians on both sides. So, for instance, you will probably find people who are pro-choice who will argue that it is their faith that is responsible. There are lots of Christians who vote Democrat, who would say it is for reasons of faith. If you're going to suggest people shouldn't vote a certain way based on their faith, then that should apply to people all over the political spectrum. Rejecting faith-based arguments only when they give the "wrong" answer is no better than those who selectively use faith-based arguments on the other side on any issue.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 23, 2023, 03:23:09 PM
To think about Christianity, we should first think about the Romans, according to the life of Brian:

"All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?"

Turning to Christianity: The cultural influence of Christianity includes social welfare,[80] founding hospitals,[81] economics (as the Protestant work ethic),[82][83] natural law (which would later influence the creation of international law),[84] politics,[85] architecture,[86] literature,[87] personal hygiene (ablution),[88][89][90][91] and family life.[92][93] Historically, extended families were the basic family unit in the Christian culture and countries.[94]

Christianity played a role in ending practices common among pagan societies, such as human sacrifice, slavery,[95] infanticide and polygamy.[96] Scientists such as Newton and Galileo believed that God would be better understood if God's creation was better understood.[97]
From the Wikipedia article on Christian culture.

And that ain't the half of it!

Being against Christianity is being against the West, and indeed against modernity, for Christianity got us here.

I eventually sent our daughter to Catholic school, though I am not attached to any Christian denomination. I am merely culturally a Christian.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 23, 2023, 04:16:19 PM
https://slate.com/human-interest/2023/03/florida-principal-fired-michelangelo-david-statue.html
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on March 23, 2023, 04:28:16 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 23, 2023, 04:16:19 PM
https://slate.com/human-interest/2023/03/florida-principal-fired-michelangelo-david-statue.html

A CLASSICAL PUBLIC charter school sends out notices to parents that kidlets will see a classical penis.  A classical education involves "moral values, civic values, personal responsibility...." but "We don't have any problem showing David. You have to tell the parents ahead of time, and they can decide whether it is appropriate for their child to see it."   Do boys in Florida not have penises?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 23, 2023, 05:18:39 PM
Quote from: nebo113 on March 23, 2023, 04:28:16 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 23, 2023, 04:16:19 PM
https://slate.com/human-interest/2023/03/florida-principal-fired-michelangelo-david-statue.html

A CLASSICAL PUBLIC charter school sends out notices to parents that kidlets will see a classical penis.  A classical education involves "moral values, civic values, personal responsibility...." but "We don't have any problem showing David. You have to tell the parents ahead of time, and they can decide whether it is appropriate for their child to see it."   Do boys in Florida not have penises?

ironically, the school is one of at least seven stated by Hillsdale. while Hillsdale is no longer associated with it, the school states it still uses the Hillsdale curriculum by an agreement with the college.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 23, 2023, 05:38:08 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 23, 2023, 12:04:31 PM
For just about any issue, you will probably find Christians on both sides.

Well...yeah.  I don't remember anyone arguing this...

Quote
Rejecting faith-based arguments only when they give the "wrong" answer is no better than those who selectively use faith-based arguments on the other side on any issue.

Let me get this straight: I should not reject a faith based argument when it is "wrong" unless I also reject faith based arguments when they are "right?"

Don't think that holds water.

There is much to praise in the Bible. There are lots of "right" lessons.  It is when people misuse the Bible or cite the Bible as a means to justify bigotries or violations of civil rights that I object to.  So no, I will support those Biblical lessons that I feel are "right" (usually dealing with some version of love thy neighbor) and oppose those Biblical lessons that I feel are "wrong" (having to do with prejudice or violence).  Since I do not consider the Bible a holy article, I feel free to pick and choose from its wisdom.

How about we just leave faith based arguments out of the public sector?  That would solve the needs for these debates.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 23, 2023, 05:42:23 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 23, 2023, 03:23:09 PM
To think about Christianity, we should first think about the Romans, according to the life of Brian:

"All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?"

Turning to Christianity: The cultural influence of Christianity includes social welfare,[80] founding hospitals,[81] economics (as the Protestant work ethic),[82][83] natural law (which would later influence the creation of international law),[84] politics,[85] architecture,[86] literature,[87] personal hygiene (ablution),[88][89][90][91] and family life.[92][93] Historically, extended families were the basic family unit in the Christian culture and countries.[94]

Christianity played a role in ending practices common among pagan societies, such as human sacrifice, slavery,[95] infanticide and polygamy.[96] Scientists such as Newton and Galileo believed that God would be better understood if God's creation was better understood.[97]
From the Wikipedia article on Christian culture.

And that ain't the half of it!

Being against Christianity is being against the West, and indeed against modernity, for Christianity got us here.

I eventually sent our daughter to Catholic school, though I am not attached to any Christian denomination. I am merely culturally a Christian.

I am surprised this strawman took this long to show up.

No one is "against Christianity."

I've already thanked the Medieval Christians for saving Classical learning.

People are against the misuse of Christian doctrines in the public sphere.  People are against a purely white knight version of Christianity.

So let us take the good with the bad: Crusades, anyone?  Pope Urban helped set up 9/11.  Let's not forget that in our list.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 23, 2023, 09:10:40 PM
dismalist actually gave a decent summation of the many things that Christianity gave to civilization.   It is impossible to overemphasize just how different the ancient pagan Greco-Roman world was, prior to the adoption of Christianity, and how many things we would consider unambiguous benefits, good things, the Christians brought to the empire, and from there to the rest of the world.   Much of these things were in embryo seen in OT-era Judaism, but not all-- sexual mores were strengthened by the church, as well as peripheral aspects thereof, such as the (near)-elimination of divorce.   To the extent that we have decided to dispense with these many distinctive Christian developments in our increasingly post-Christian modern society, we have mostly taken a retrograde step that is bad for most people, and for society as a whole-- no one, for instance, who looks at the accumulation of 50 years of evidence in the no-fault divorce era, would be able to really argue that single parenthood is good for children, or at all as good as married two parent homes, unless one is a zealot, or a bad actor.

Now I might well engender howls of outrage here, by saying a few positive things about the Crusades, which were certainly not the unalloyed Christians-bad, Muslims-good thing their detractors suggest.   They were problematic, of course, and the religious motivations undergirding them, especially the 'Deus vult' notions the Popes promulgated suggesting openly that participation therein would earn pardon from God, a place in Heaven, etc., are notoriously unbiblical, but that said, putting oneself in the shoes of an 11th c. Christian, one can clearly see how he might have decided to undertake a Crusade, in order to expel the Islamic invaders from the Holy Land, and restore Christian sovereignty to the place, freeing the oppressed Christian minority there from the rule of said Islamic invaders.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 24, 2023, 03:11:19 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 23, 2023, 09:10:40 PM
dismalist actually gave a decent summation of the many things that Christianity gave to civilization.   It is impossible to overemphasize just how different the ancient pagan Greco-Roman world was, prior to the adoption of Christianity, and how many things we would consider unambiguous benefits, good things, the Christians brought to the empire, and from there to the rest of the world.   Much of these things were in embryo seen in OT-era Judaism, but not all-- sexual mores were strengthened by the church, as well as peripheral aspects thereof, such as the (near)-elimination of divorce.   To the extent that we have decided to dispense with these many distinctive Christian developments in our increasingly post-Christian modern society, we have mostly taken a retrograde step that is bad for most people, and for society as a whole-- no one, for instance, who looks at the accumulation of 50 years of evidence in the no-fault divorce era, would be able to really argue that single parenthood is good for children, or at all as good as married two parent homes, unless one is a zealot, or a bad actor.

Now I might well engender howls of outrage here, by saying a few positive things about the Crusades, which were certainly not the unalloyed Christians-bad, Muslims-good thing their detractors suggest.   They were problematic, of course, and the religious motivations undergirding them, especially the 'Deus vult' notions the Popes promulgated suggesting openly that participation therein would earn pardon from God, a place in Heaven, etc., are notoriously unbiblical, but that said, putting oneself in the shoes of an 11th c. Christian, one can clearly see how he might have decided to undertake a Crusade, in order to expel the Islamic invaders from the Holy Land, and restore Christian sovereignty to the place, freeing the oppressed Christian minority there from the rule of said Islamic invaders.

Many of the things listed are not unique to Christianity at all.  Hospitals predate Christianity for example.  Surez they built many, but so have Muslims, Hindus, etc.

Regarding Divorce, it is more complex than your version.  How many women were stuck in abusive relationships due to the essential ban on divorce?  Perhaps we are now too quick to divorce, but it is not a black and white issue.

I also remember my father telling me that he was not allowed to play with Bastard children when he was young.  Those children suffered because of their parents choices and your lovely Christian mores.  Just lovely.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 24, 2023, 05:34:57 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 23, 2023, 05:42:23 PM

People are against the misuse of Christian doctrines in the public sphere. 


During covid, people were misusing science to argue against masking, vaccinations, etc. No-one suggested that science itself should not be used because of that, In fact, they argued that the public needed a better understanding of science to refute the misuse.

The implication that Christianity should be avoided in the public sphere because of misuses suggests that the overall effect of Christianity on the world has been negative. We might as well bring up Hiroshima every time science is mentioned.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 24, 2023, 06:23:31 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 24, 2023, 03:11:19 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 23, 2023, 09:10:40 PM
dismalist actually gave a decent summation of the many things that Christianity gave to civilization.   It is impossible to overemphasize just how different the ancient pagan Greco-Roman world was, prior to the adoption of Christianity, and how many things we would consider unambiguous benefits, good things, the Christians brought to the empire, and from there to the rest of the world.   Much of these things were in embryo seen in OT-era Judaism, but not all-- sexual mores were strengthened by the church, as well as peripheral aspects thereof, such as the (near)-elimination of divorce.   To the extent that we have decided to dispense with these many distinctive Christian developments in our increasingly post-Christian modern society, we have mostly taken a retrograde step that is bad for most people, and for society as a whole-- no one, for instance, who looks at the accumulation of 50 years of evidence in the no-fault divorce era, would be able to really argue that single parenthood is good for children, or at all as good as married two parent homes, unless one is a zealot, or a bad actor.

Now I might well engender howls of outrage here, by saying a few positive things about the Crusades, which were certainly not the unalloyed Christians-bad, Muslims-good thing their detractors suggest.   They were problematic, of course, and the religious motivations undergirding them, especially the 'Deus vult' notions the Popes promulgated suggesting openly that participation therein would earn pardon from God, a place in Heaven, etc., are notoriously unbiblical, but that said, putting oneself in the shoes of an 11th c. Christian, one can clearly see how he might have decided to undertake a Crusade, in order to expel the Islamic invaders from the Holy Land, and restore Christian sovereignty to the place, freeing the oppressed Christian minority there from the rule of said Islamic invaders.

Many of the things listed are not unique to Christianity at all.  Hospitals predate Christianity for example.  Surez they built many, but so have Muslims, Hindus, etc.

Regarding Divorce, it is more complex than your version.  How many women were stuck in abusive relationships due to the essential ban on divorce?  Perhaps we are now too quick to divorce, but it is not a black and white issue.

I also remember my father telling me that he was not allowed to play with Bastard children when he was young.  Those children suffered because of their parents choices and your lovely Christian mores.  Just lovely.

Also, from the stats I have seen, divorce rates are actually higher in the Christian population than the non religious in the USA.  You say divorce is against Christian values, yet they are leading the charge, with more than 30% divorce rates (including evangelicals) and supported by the church .  So, it would seem that divorce is not against Christina values, just your interpretation of them. 

It is ironic that you have a book from God outlining your code, yet there is no agreement within your community on some of the more fundamental aspects.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 24, 2023, 06:32:23 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 24, 2023, 06:23:31 AM

Also, from the stats I have seen, divorce rates are actually higher in the Christian population than the non religious in the USA.  You say divorce is against Christian values, yet they are leading the charge, with more than 30% divorce rates (including evangelicals) and supported by the church .  So, it would seem that divorce is not against Christina values, just your interpretation of them. 


Not sure about the statistic, but that's not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison. Since living together unmarried is much less acceptable in Christian circles, then the real question is about how many conjugal relationships break up in both groups. Otherwise it's like discussing gun crime and only referring to legally-owned guns. "Divorce" in religious terms isn't merely a moral issue for legally-married people.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: FishProf on March 24, 2023, 06:49:17 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 24, 2023, 05:34:57 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 23, 2023, 05:42:23 PM

People are against the misuse of Christian doctrines in the public sphere. 


During covid, people were misusing science to argue against masking, vaccinations, etc. No-one suggested that science itself should not be used because of that, In fact, they argued that the public needed a better understanding of science to refute the misuse.

Note that during Covid, SCIENCE and SCIENTISTS were visible, vocally fighting against that misuse.  It is all to common for someone to act based on their religious motivation and to hear essentially crickets from co-religionists.

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
― Mahatma Gandhi
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 24, 2023, 06:59:02 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 24, 2023, 06:32:23 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 24, 2023, 06:23:31 AM

Also, from the stats I have seen, divorce rates are actually higher in the Christian population than the non religious in the USA.  You say divorce is against Christian values, yet they are leading the charge, with more than 30% divorce rates (including evangelicals) and supported by the church .  So, it would seem that divorce is not against Christina values, just your interpretation of them. 


Not sure about the statistic, but that's not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison. Since living together unmarried is much less acceptable in Christian circles, then the real question is about how many conjugal relationships break up in both groups. Otherwise it's like discussing gun crime and only referring to legally-owned guns. "Divorce" in religious terms isn't merely a moral issue for legally-married people.

Sure, you cant make a direct comparison, but if a group has a divorce rate of over 30%, it is hard to claim divorce is against their moral code or that the increase in divorce is from the non-Christian sector.  It appears that at least a third of them disagree, and likely more than half (some people who did not divorce are likely not against it in principle).  I also know many "Christians" that co-habit, so I dont know how much water that argument really holds anyway.

This leads to the obvious argument that they are not "real" Christians and that they are not living by Christian moral codes, but therein lies the problem.  If Christians cant agree on a core moral code, how can you claim that they even have one?  Even "though shalt not kill" is up for grabs with the relatively large support for capital punishment and war-mongering among many Christian circles.

 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 24, 2023, 07:11:17 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on March 23, 2023, 04:28:16 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 23, 2023, 04:16:19 PM
https://slate.com/human-interest/2023/03/florida-principal-fired-michelangelo-david-statue.html

A CLASSICAL PUBLIC charter school sends out notices to parents that kidlets will see a classical penis.  A classical education involves "moral values, civic values, personal responsibility...." but "We don't have any problem showing David. You have to tell the parents ahead of time, and they can decide whether it is appropriate for their child to see it."   Do boys in Florida not have penises?

From the article:
Quote
We have a practice. Last year, the school sent out an advance notice about it. Parents should know: In class, students are going to see or hear or talk about this. This year, we didn't send out that notice.

This year, we made an egregious mistake. We didn't send that notice. Look, we're not a public school. We're a public charter.

Parents will decide.

Parents don't decide what is taught. But parents know what that curriculum is. And parents are entitled to know anytime their child is being taught a controversial topic and picture.


Parents choose this school because they want a certain kind of education.

The rights of parents, that trumps the rights of kids.


I've edited out lots, but the point seems to be that this charter school basically has a policy to run everything potentially controversial past parents. Not doing that violates their own policy. Whether that's a good idea or not, if it's their policy, then they need to abide by it.

(While that's not a bad idea in principle, it seems it will be impossible to identify every potentially controversial topic, so I don't see how it's workable. It is a definite improvement on a system where parents are intentionally kept in the dark about what their kids are going to be exposed to.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 24, 2023, 08:46:56 AM
Don't you find it at all ironic that a charter school that advertises that it uses a classical curriculum would consider a picture of a classic piece of art controversial?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: MarathonRunner on March 24, 2023, 08:51:37 AM
Politics, architecture, and literature were produced by Christianity, really? The Parthenon is an example of amazing architecture, using imperfections to provide the appearance of perfection due to optical illusions. Definitely the ancient Greeks were supreme architects (as were the ancient Egyptians - look at the pyramids, the Valley of the Kings, and the temples that have survived, as were the ancient Romans - the Colosseum, the numerous Roman baths that still survive, the ruins in Trier, etc.). Ancient Rome provided us with amazing literature, as did ancient Greece. As for politics, weren't the ancient Greeks the first people who had a democracy? To assign these things to Christianity shows a profound ignorance of ancient cultures and their accomplishments.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 24, 2023, 09:14:23 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 24, 2023, 05:34:57 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 23, 2023, 05:42:23 PM

People are against the misuse of Christian doctrines in the public sphere. 


During covid, people were misusing science to argue against masking, vaccinations, etc. No-one suggested that science itself should not be used because of that, In fact, they argued that the public needed a better understanding of science to refute the misuse.

The implication that Christianity should be avoided in the public sphere because of misuses suggests that the overall effect of Christianity on the world has been negative. We might as well bring up Hiroshima every time science is mentioned.

I return again to "misuse" and the notion that Christine doctrine should be foisted on non-Christians.  This is not the same thing as a public health emergency at all. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 24, 2023, 09:21:18 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 23, 2023, 09:10:40 PM
a few positive things about the Crusades, which were certainly not the unalloyed Christians-bad, Muslims-good thing their detractors suggest.   They were problematic, of course, and the religious motivations undergirding them, especially the 'Deus vult' notions the Popes promulgated suggesting openly that participation therein would earn pardon from God, a place in Heaven, etc., are notoriously unbiblical, but that said, putting oneself in the shoes of an 11th c. Christian, one can clearly see how he might have decided to undertake a Crusade, in order to expel the Islamic invaders from the Holy Land, and restore Christian sovereignty to the place, freeing the oppressed Christian minority there from the rule of said Islamic invaders.

I don't see where you've said anything "positive" about the Crusades there.  EVERYONE who has an untenable cause claims "oppression" of some kind.  Where do you get that particular historical claim anyway?  Many of your claims in this arena you cannot back up.  I'm just curious.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 24, 2023, 09:39:25 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 24, 2023, 08:46:56 AM
Don't you find it at all ironic that a charter school that advertises that it uses a classical curriculum would consider a picture of a classic piece of art controversial?

My point is, that from what was said, the school's policy is to automatically run anything by parents. So it's about what parents might find controversial, not what the school think s is controversial. (And it's premised on the idea that the school operates on a principal that parents' views matter, even when they conflict with the school's, and that parents aren't just a nuisance to be worked around as much as possible.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 24, 2023, 10:15:22 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 24, 2023, 09:39:25 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 24, 2023, 08:46:56 AM
Don't you find it at all ironic that a charter school that advertises that it uses a classical curriculum would consider a picture of a classic piece of art controversial?

My point is, that from what was said, the school's policy is to automatically run anything by parents. So it's about what parents might find controversial, not what the school think s is controversial. (And it's premised on the idea that the school operates on a principal that parents' views matter, even when they conflict with the school's, and that parents aren't just a nuisance to be worked around as much as possible.)

Yes, I understand. And yet, the parents CHOSE to send their kids to a school with a classical curriculum.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 24, 2023, 10:21:54 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 24, 2023, 10:15:22 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 24, 2023, 09:39:25 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 24, 2023, 08:46:56 AM
Don't you find it at all ironic that a charter school that advertises that it uses a classical curriculum would consider a picture of a classic piece of art controversial?

My point is, that from what was said, the school's policy is to automatically run anything by parents. So it's about what parents might find controversial, not what the school think s is controversial. (And it's premised on the idea that the school operates on a principal that parents' views matter, even when they conflict with the school's, and that parents aren't just a nuisance to be worked around as much as possible.)

Yes, I understand. And yet, the parents CHOSE to send their kids to a school with a classical curriculum.

Well, now THAT's perhaps the odder part.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 24, 2023, 11:25:22 AM
Lotsa stuff here, so random responsa and observations in no necessary particular order of  importance:

1) 'classical' means different things... most of the schools in the 'classical' and especially the 'classical Christian' k12 school orbit do not really consider the Renaissance, and esp Renaissance art, the sort of 'classical' stuff they are emphasizing.  Some do not even do much art at all.   They rather consider things like ancient language study, rhetoric, logic, and the medieval Trivium to be of much greater import. 

2) I get that Michelangelo is not some scumbag perv on the net proffering kiddie porn.  Obviously.   That said, exactly what educational objective would be furthered by showing prepubescent children art that depicts full-on nudity in people, esp children?   There certainly is no tradition amongst evangelical protestantism for showing such images, or even for artists within these movements, for making them.

3) It is simply beyond any historical question whatsoever that the area of the world we loosely refer to as 'The Holy Land' used to be run by, and populated in the majority by, Christians, prior to the 7th c Islamic invasion.  Who would argue this?  (Who not wanting to appear to be an idiot or a liar, of course?).  It took centuries after the Arabs came for the place to come to be predominantly Arabized in speech and Islamicized in religion, further, and those locals remaining Christians did suffer at best second-class citizenship status in their own countries.  Therefore, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out why a Christian in Europe might well have concluded it was a good idea, perhaps even a mandate from God (esp if he was encouraged by his religious leaders to think this) to go to the Holy Land and try to expel said Muslim invaders.

4)Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater-- restricting divorce can trap women in abusive marriages, but the better solution would be to actually do something, legally and culturally, about domestic abuse (we have been beginning to do this in recent decades).   Divorce harms children.   Really, it does.  (So, of course, does being parented by never-married folks as well).  And the fact that wrt the issue of divorce, as wrt a whole plethora of issues, there are many professed Christians who disagree  with each other does not actually alter what the Bible says, whenever it is clear, as it unambiguously does concerning divorce.  Hypocrisy and lukewarm fealty to core doctrines and practices of one's professed faith does not alter these things.

5)Where does the bible teach that a Christian should forbid his children from playing with the children of unmarried parents?   Nowhere.  It is of course certainly true that any wise parent would prevent his children from close and sustained interactions with families where bad behavior is common, behavior such as drug use, sexual promiscuity, disgusting actions, etc.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: MarathonRunner on March 24, 2023, 12:21:04 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 24, 2023, 11:25:22 AM


2) I get that Michelangelo is not some scumbag perv on the net proffering kiddie porn.  Obviously.   That said, exactly what educational objective would be furthered by showing prepubescent children art that depicts full-on nudity in people, esp children?   There certainly is no tradition amongst evangelical protestantism for showing such images, or even for artists within these movements, for making them.

Perhaps to demonstrate their is nothing inherently shameful about a naked human body. Not all countries are as uptight about nudity as the USA. Here in Germany, women regularly sunbathe topless in public parks where there are playgrounds, people go nude in places in other public parks, and many saunas don't allow clothing. The human body is accepted for being a body. It's not sexualized. Children learn that bodies come in all shapes and sizes, and that their bodies are nothing shameful. They learn how to appreciate art, even if it depicts nudity, because nudity just is, it's not in any way sexualized.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: MarathonRunner on March 24, 2023, 12:27:04 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 24, 2023, 11:25:22 AM

3) It is simply beyond any historical question whatsoever that the area of the world we loosely refer to as 'The Holy Land' used to be run by, and populated in the majority by, Christians, prior to the 7th c Islamic invasion.  Who would argue this?  (Who not wanting to appear to be an idiot or a liar, of course?).  It took centuries after the Arabs came for the place to come to be predominantly Arabized in speech and Islamicized in religion, further, and those locals remaining Christians did suffer at best second-class citizenship status in their own countries.  Therefore, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out why a Christian in Europe might well have concluded it was a good idea, perhaps even a mandate from God (esp if he was encouraged by his religious leaders to think this) to go to the Holy Land and try to expel said Muslim invaders.

The Egyptians, Israelites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, etc. were Christian? I think not. They all inhabited the area of "The Holy Land" well before Christianity even existed.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 24, 2023, 12:37:33 PM
Quote from: MarathonRunner on March 24, 2023, 12:27:04 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 24, 2023, 11:25:22 AM

3) It is simply beyond any historical question whatsoever that the area of the world we loosely refer to as 'The Holy Land' used to be run by, and populated in the majority by, Christians, prior to the 7th c Islamic invasion.  Who would argue this?  (Who not wanting to appear to be an idiot or a liar, of course?).  It took centuries after the Arabs came for the place to come to be predominantly Arabized in speech and Islamicized in religion, further, and those locals remaining Christians did suffer at best second-class citizenship status in their own countries.  Therefore, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out why a Christian in Europe might well have concluded it was a good idea, perhaps even a mandate from God (esp if he was encouraged by his religious leaders to think this) to go to the Holy Land and try to expel said Muslim invaders.

The Egyptians, Israelites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, etc. were Christian? I think not. They all inhabited the area of "The Holy Land" well before Christianity even existed.

Our friend key is being an apologist for the European Christians of the 11th century who undertook the Crusades for a variety of reasons, including just regular Janes and Joes from the countryside, and even children if the folks tales are to be believed.  Sure, these people were easy to stir up, but that is no sort of justification. Overall, Kay is trying to be an apologist for all sorts of Christian hegemony, which is his right.

I find that Jerusalem fell to the Muslims in 637 A.D. and that Urban called for holy war in 1095 A.D.  That means that the Holy Land----which was holy to the Muslims as well----was established as a Muslim territory for longer than the United States has existed at this point.  You are welcome to point out that I have simplified this complicated and only distantly understood history, but still, one could understand why the Crusaders were seen as the "invaders," not the Muslims.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 24, 2023, 12:40:14 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 24, 2023, 11:25:22 AM

4)Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater-- restricting divorce can trap women in abusive marriages, but the better solution would be to actually do something, legally and culturally, about domestic abuse (we have been beginning to do this in recent decades).   Divorce harms children.   Really, it does.  (So, of course, does being parented by never-married folks as well).  And the fact that wrt the issue of divorce, as wrt a whole plethora of issues, there are many professed Christians who disagree  with each other does not actually alter what the Bible says, whenever it is clear, as it unambiguously does concerning divorce.  Hypocrisy and lukewarm fealty to core doctrines and practices of one's professed faith does not alter these things.

5)Where does the bible teach that a Christian should forbid his children from playing with the children of unmarried parents?   Nowhere.  It is of course certainly true that any wise parent would prevent his children from close and sustained interactions with families where bad behavior is common, behavior such as drug use, sexual promiscuity, disgusting actions, etc.

4) Are you saying that women should be forced to stay with an abusive husband and sort it out? Really?

5)  It dosnt say this directly, but it does say some disparaging things about bastards (could be old testament).  Perhaps it is not that direct, but it was the result of a stigma directly derived from Christian values.  In my secular world, marriage is not important (many of my friends with children are not married) and the bastardness of children is a moot point. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 24, 2023, 12:43:14 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 24, 2023, 12:37:33 PM
Quote from: MarathonRunner on March 24, 2023, 12:27:04 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 24, 2023, 11:25:22 AM

3) It is simply beyond any historical question whatsoever that the area of the world we loosely refer to as 'The Holy Land' used to be run by, and populated in the majority by, Christians, prior to the 7th c Islamic invasion.  Who would argue this?  (Who not wanting to appear to be an idiot or a liar, of course?).  It took centuries after the Arabs came for the place to come to be predominantly Arabized in speech and Islamicized in religion, further, and those locals remaining Christians did suffer at best second-class citizenship status in their own countries.  Therefore, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out why a Christian in Europe might well have concluded it was a good idea, perhaps even a mandate from God (esp if he was encouraged by his religious leaders to think this) to go to the Holy Land and try to expel said Muslim invaders.

The Egyptians, Israelites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, etc. were Christian? I think not. They all inhabited the area of "The Holy Land" well before Christianity even existed.

Our friend key is being an apologist for the European Christians of the 11th century who undertook the Crusades for a variety of reasons, including just regular Janes and Joes from the countryside, and even children if the folks tales are to be believed.  Sure, these people were easy to stir up, but that is no sort of justification. Overall, Kay is trying to be an apologist for all sorts of Christian hegemony, which is his right.

I find that Jerusalem fell to the Muslims in 637 A.D. and that Urban called for holy war in 1095 A.D.  That means that the Holy Land----which was holy to the Muslims as well----was established as a Muslim territory for longer than the United States has existed at this point.  You are welcome to point out that I have simplified this complicated and only distantly understood history, but still, one could understand why the Crusaders were seen as the "invaders," not the Muslims.

The best part is that he writes this without a hint of irony from his home/office on ill-gotten lands.   
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 24, 2023, 01:05:05 PM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 24, 2023, 06:59:02 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 24, 2023, 06:32:23 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 24, 2023, 06:23:31 AM

Also, from the stats I have seen, divorce rates are actually higher in the Christian population than the non religious in the USA.  You say divorce is against Christian values, yet they are leading the charge, with more than 30% divorce rates (including evangelicals) and supported by the church .  So, it would seem that divorce is not against Christina values, just your interpretation of them. 


Not sure about the statistic, but that's not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison. Since living together unmarried is much less acceptable in Christian circles, then the real question is about how many conjugal relationships break up in both groups. Otherwise it's like discussing gun crime and only referring to legally-owned guns. "Divorce" in religious terms isn't merely a moral issue for legally-married people.

Sure, you cant make a direct comparison, but if a group has a divorce rate of over 30%, it is hard to claim divorce is against their moral code or that the increase in divorce is from the non-Christian sector.  It appears that at least a third of them disagree, and likely more than half (some people who did not divorce are likely not against it in principle).  I also know many "Christians" that co-habit, so I dont know how much water that argument really holds anyway.

This leads to the obvious argument that they are not "real" Christians and that they are not living by Christian moral codes, but therein lies the problem.  If Christians cant agree on a core moral code, how can you claim that they even have one?  Even "though shalt not kill" is up for grabs with the relatively large support for capital punishment and war-mongering among many Christian circles.



A few thoughts on Christians and divorce:

There are legitimate grounds for divorce given in the New Testament.  There's adultery, and there are situations where a non-Christian spouse--one who never converted, or who abandoned the faith--abandons the believing spouse.  The latter happened to me.  The separation and divorce were not what I wanted.  But they happened, and so I'm included in those divorce statistics.  My family and fellow church members understand.  They don't hold me responsible for what my wife did to me.

There are also people who divorced at an earlier stage of their lives, but later converted.  The past is past.  How do they live now is the big question.  I know many people in my own church and others who have all sorts of things in their past that they recognize are wrong.  Now they are changed people, which is what the expression "born again" refers to.  A church is a collection of redeemed sinners who've admitted it, not a bunch of people who've been righteous all of their lives.

I also know a lot of professing Christians who, as you note, take a rather casual approach to things like divorce, remarriage/serial polygamy, and cohabitation.  In my experience, they also tend to be very casual in church attendance and other aspects of Christian practice.  I've watched the incidence of this sort of thing grow enormously in my lifetime.  In a society where there's little or no religious persecution and a long tradition of church membership, it's the easiest thing in the world to profess to be a Christian.  But how many of these dedicate their lives to actually following the teachings of Jesus and the New Testament?  How many show evidence of living transformed lives?  How many professing Christians ever have, throughout history?

Jesus recognized from the start that this would happen.  Several of his parables spoke of how many who claimed to follow him would in the end be revealed as false followers.  There's quite a bit in the Gospels and elsewhere in the New Testament about the need to live a holy life, one that goes beyond mere outward ritual observance and respectability.  Nobody is going to be perfect in this life, but Jesus' followers are supposed to be marked by progress in that direction.  A failure to progress spiritually and ethically is either a sign of a dead profession of faith, or of a believer who is not spiritually healthy.  Only God ultimately knows who belongs to him and who's just faking it.  But there's no question that we have an awful lot of professing Christians whose lives don't give much reason for confidence.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 24, 2023, 01:21:14 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 23, 2023, 09:10:40 PM
Now I might well engender howls of outrage here, by saying a few positive things about the Crusades, which were certainly not the unalloyed Christians-bad, Muslims-good thing their detractors suggest.   They were problematic, of course, and the religious motivations undergirding them, especially the 'Deus vult' notions the Popes promulgated suggesting openly that participation therein would earn pardon from God, a place in Heaven, etc., are notoriously unbiblical, but that said, putting oneself in the shoes of an 11th c. Christian, one can clearly see how he might have decided to undertake a Crusade, in order to expel the Islamic invaders from the Holy Land, and restore Christian sovereignty to the place, freeing the oppressed Christian minority there from the rule of said Islamic invaders.

In my secular historian role I can see making some apology for the Crusaders, understood as people acting in the context of their times.  Read the literature on the Crusades and you'll see all sorts of pro-and-con viewpoints expressed about them, and most of these interpretations make at least a few fair points.

Evaluating the Crusaders and the Crusades from a New Testament perspective, there's just really not anything good to say about them.  Sure they called Jesus Lord and had rituals honoring him.  But when they launched their campaigns of conquest or reconquest, whichever one calls it, they were modelling themselves after Muhammad and his jihadis, not after anything that Jesus taught.  Likewise today the "guns and Trump" types are taking their cues from something very different from Jesus, whatever some of them might claim about being Christians.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 24, 2023, 03:50:57 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 24, 2023, 11:25:22 AM
Lotsa stuff here, so random responsa and observations in no necessary particular order of  importance:

1) 'classical' means different things... most of the schools in the 'classical' and especially the 'classical Christian' k12 school orbit do not really consider the Renaissance, and esp Renaissance art, the sort of 'classical' stuff they are emphasizing.  Some do not even do much art at all.   They rather consider things like ancient language study, rhetoric, logic, and the medieval Trivium to be of much greater import. 

2) I get that Michelangelo is not some scumbag perv on the net proffering kiddie porn.  Obviously.   That said, exactly what educational objective would be furthered by showing prepubescent children art that depicts full-on nudity in people, esp children?   There certainly is no tradition amongst evangelical protestantism for showing such images, or even for artists within these movements, for making them.



Here is a link to an overview of the Hillsdale 5th grade curriculum. For art, please see the focus topics for Fall months: https://k12.hillsdale.edu/getmedia/0fb481ce-812e-4830-a094-002e5222273f/5th-Grade-Map.pdf
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 24, 2023, 03:55:05 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 24, 2023, 03:50:57 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 24, 2023, 11:25:22 AM
Lotsa stuff here, so random responsa and observations in no necessary particular order of  importance:

1) 'classical' means different things... most of the schools in the 'classical' and especially the 'classical Christian' k12 school orbit do not really consider the Renaissance, and esp Renaissance art, the sort of 'classical' stuff they are emphasizing.  Some do not even do much art at all.   They rather consider things like ancient language study, rhetoric, logic, and the medieval Trivium to be of much greater import. 

2) I get that Michelangelo is not some scumbag perv on the net proffering kiddie porn.  Obviously.   That said, exactly what educational objective would be furthered by showing prepubescent children art that depicts full-on nudity in people, esp children?   There certainly is no tradition amongst evangelical protestantism for showing such images, or even for artists within these movements, for making them.



Here is a link to an overview of the Hillsdale 5th grade curriculum. For art, please see the focus topics for Fall months: https://k12.hillsdale.edu/getmedia/0fb481ce-812e-4830-a094-002e5222273f/5th-Grade-Map.pdf

I gotta say, that curriculum looks pretty good.  I can't speak to anything but literature and literacy, really, and the reading list is solid, full of classics, and includes Frederick Douglas.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on March 25, 2023, 06:16:05 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 24, 2023, 03:55:05 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 24, 2023, 03:50:57 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 24, 2023, 11:25:22 AM
Lotsa stuff here, so random responsa and observations in no necessary particular order of  importance:

1) 'classical' means different things... most of the schools in the 'classical' and especially the 'classical Christian' k12 school orbit do not really consider the Renaissance, and esp Renaissance art, the sort of 'classical' stuff they are emphasizing.  Some do not even do much art at all.   They rather consider things like ancient language study, rhetoric, logic, and the medieval Trivium to be of much greater import. 

2) I get that Michelangelo is not some scumbag perv on the net proffering kiddie porn.  Obviously.   That said, exactly what educational objective would be furthered by showing prepubescent children art that depicts full-on nudity in people, esp children?   There certainly is no tradition amongst evangelical protestantism for showing such images, or even for artists within these movements, for making them.



Here is a link to an overview of the Hillsdale 5th grade curriculum. For art, please see the focus topics for Fall months: https://k12.hillsdale.edu/getmedia/0fb481ce-812e-4830-a094-002e5222273f/5th-Grade-Map.pdf

I gotta say, that curriculum looks pretty good.  I can't speak to anything but literature and literacy, really, and the reading list is solid, full of classics, and includes Frederick Douglas.

If they're that solid, then a controversial, perhaps overzealous "trigger warning" about Renaissance nudity isn't going to hurt anything.  Sounds like a tempest in a teapot.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 25, 2023, 11:14:30 AM
Quote from: apl68 on March 25, 2023, 06:16:05 AM

If they're that solid, then a controversial, perhaps overzealous "trigger warning" about Renaissance nudity isn't going to hurt anything.  Sounds like a tempest in a teapot.

I think the Principal who had to resign might disagree? They were the canceled one.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 11:36:24 AM
I'm often on the side of the cancellers when it allows or enhances competition. The case of this Florida charter school shares many of the characteristics of the other cancellation items in this thread. It all boils down to the question: Who owns the school?

If I understand the rules here correctly, the school's board owns the school. The board decides. So long as that board doesn't decide for the whole country, there is no problem. Any criteria or standards suggested here or elsewhere are irrelevant except insofar as the board chooses to consider them.

When I go food shopping I don't need to defend my choices about what items to buy, and no one can tell me what to consume. Choices for one' childrens' education are no different. Father and mother know best.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 25, 2023, 11:46:25 AM
Alexandra Petri again. BTW, you can get WaPo cheaply if you are an Amazon prime person.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/03/24/tallahassee-principal-fired-david-art-controversy/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on March 25, 2023, 12:29:00 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 11:36:24 AM
I'm often on the side of the cancellers when it allows or enhances competition. The case of this Florida charter school shares many of the characteristics of the other cancellation items in this thread. It all boils down to the question: Who owns the school?

If I understand the rules here correctly, the school's board owns the school. The board decides. So long as that board doesn't decide for the whole country, there is no problem. Any criteria or standards suggested here or elsewhere are irrelevant except insofar as the board chooses to consider them.

When I go food shopping I don't need to defend my choices about what items to buy, and no one can tell me what to consume. Choices for one' childrens' education are no different. Father and mother know best.

It is my understanding that it is a PUBLIC charter school, therefore it receives public funding.  While many charter schools are to be commended, they are too often exempt from protections offered in non-charter public schools.  Moreover, charter schools can be selective in admissions.  It is also my understanding that this charter school is modeled on Hillsdale College, which is quite troublesome.  And deSantis has been very, very clear that he wants to destroy New College and turn it into the Hillsdale of the south.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on March 25, 2023, 12:37:15 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 25, 2023, 11:46:25 AM
Alexandra Petri again. BTW, you can get WaPo cheaply if you are an Amazon prime person.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/03/24/tallahassee-principal-fired-david-art-controversy/

I think the Amazon prime cheap access to WaPo now $8 per month, rather than $4.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 12:51:48 PM
Quote from: nebo113 on March 25, 2023, 12:29:00 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 11:36:24 AM
I'm often on the side of the cancellers when it allows or enhances competition. The case of this Florida charter school shares many of the characteristics of the other cancellation items in this thread. It all boils down to the question: Who owns the school?

If I understand the rules here correctly, the school's board owns the school. The board decides. So long as that board doesn't decide for the whole country, there is no problem. Any criteria or standards suggested here or elsewhere are irrelevant except insofar as the board chooses to consider them.

When I go food shopping I don't need to defend my choices about what items to buy, and no one can tell me what to consume. Choices for one' childrens' education are no different. Father and mother know best.

It is my understanding that it is a PUBLIC charter school, therefore it receives public funding.  While many charter schools are to be commended, they are too often exempt from protections offered in non-charter public schools.  Moreover, charter schools can be selective in admissions.  It is also my understanding that this charter school is modeled on Hillsdale College, which is quite troublesome.  And deSantis has been very, very clear that he wants to destroy New College and turn it into the Hillsdale of the south.

If it's all wrong, competition will show what's better. The efficient need not fear competition.

Who owns the money? Public funding is a technicality. Borrowing from a film we watched when our daughter was very young -- Miss Congeniality (2000) -- "This is Texas. My florist receives public funding".

Let the money follow the child. It's happening in at least six states already.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 25, 2023, 02:26:59 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 12:51:48 PM
If it's all wrong, competition will show what's better. The efficient need not fear competition.

The invisible hand writes,
and having writ, moves on.

I'm not saying this is a good analogy, but the Branch Davidian had a lot of competition, was pretty efficient and competent, and had buy-in from the parents involved.  They were not publicly funded, however.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 02:35:31 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 25, 2023, 02:26:59 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 12:51:48 PM
If it's all wrong, competition will show what's better. The efficient need not fear competition.

The invisible hand writes,
and having writ, moves on.

I'm not saying this is a good analogy, but the Branch Davidian had a lot of competition, was pretty efficient and competent, and had buy-in from the parents involved.  They were not publicly funded, however.

"Publicly funded" is a name for a convention. Politics is about who owns the money. Parents are allowed to vote.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 25, 2023, 03:10:58 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 11:36:24 AM

When I go food shopping I don't need to defend my choices about what items to buy, and no one can tell me what to consume. Choices for one' childrens' education are no different. Father and mother know best.

No, often they really don't.  By definition, half of all people are below average intelligence.  We have some very smart people dedicating their lives to education and pedogodgy, who may actually know something about it.

Regarding food, there are some parents feeding babies cola...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 03:25:40 PM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 25, 2023, 03:10:58 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 11:36:24 AM

When I go food shopping I don't need to defend my choices about what items to buy, and no one can tell me what to consume. Choices for one' childrens' education are no different. Father and mother know best.

No, often they really don't.  By definition, half of all people are below average intelligence.  We have some very smart people dedicating their lives to education and pedogodgy, who may actually know something about it.

Regarding food, there are some parents feeding babies cola...

QuoteWe have some very smart people dedicating their lives to education and pedagogy, who may actually know something about it.

Then competition will not be a problem for those smart people.

If the consumers of education are deemed too stupid to recognize the quality, then take away the right to vote.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 25, 2023, 03:35:42 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 03:25:40 PM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 25, 2023, 03:10:58 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 11:36:24 AM

When I go food shopping I don't need to defend my choices about what items to buy, and no one can tell me what to consume. Choices for one' childrens' education are no different. Father and mother know best.

No, often they really don't.  By definition, half of all people are below average intelligence.  We have some very smart people dedicating their lives to education and pedogodgy, who may actually know something about it.

Regarding food, there are some parents feeding babies cola...

QuoteWe have some very smart people dedicating their lives to education and pedagogy, who may actually know something about it.

Then competition will not be a problem for those smart people.

If the consumers of education are deemed too stupid to recognize the quality, then take away the right to vote.

Leaving the asides. The parents chose the school (of course that is their right!), but then they were outraged that the students were shown exactly what the school promised. I simply do not understand your points.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 03:50:35 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 25, 2023, 03:35:42 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 03:25:40 PM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 25, 2023, 03:10:58 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 11:36:24 AM

When I go food shopping I don't need to defend my choices about what items to buy, and no one can tell me what to consume. Choices for one' childrens' education are no different. Father and mother know best.

No, often they really don't.  By definition, half of all people are below average intelligence.  We have some very smart people dedicating their lives to education and pedogodgy, who may actually know something about it.

Regarding food, there are some parents feeding babies cola...

QuoteWe have some very smart people dedicating their lives to education and pedagogy, who may actually know something about it.

Then competition will not be a problem for those smart people.

If the consumers of education are deemed too stupid to recognize the quality, then take away the right to vote.

Leaving the asides. The parents chose the school (of course that is their right!), but then they were outraged that the students were shown exactly what the school promised. I simply do not understand your points.

Nay, nay, nay. Whatever happened or didn't happen at the school doesn't matter except to the school. It worries me not.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 25, 2023, 03:50:48 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 02:35:31 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 25, 2023, 02:26:59 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 12:51:48 PM
If it's all wrong, competition will show what's better. The efficient need not fear competition.

The invisible hand writes,
and having writ, moves on.

I'm not saying this is a good analogy, but the Branch Davidian had a lot of competition, was pretty efficient and competent, and had buy-in from the parents involved.  They were not publicly funded, however.

"Publicly funded" is a name for a convention. Politics is about who owns the money. Parents are allowed to vote.

??
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 25, 2023, 04:01:30 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 03:50:35 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 25, 2023, 03:35:42 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 03:25:40 PM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 25, 2023, 03:10:58 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 25, 2023, 11:36:24 AM

When I go food shopping I don't need to defend my choices about what items to buy, and no one can tell me what to consume. Choices for one' childrens' education are no different. Father and mother know best.

No, often they really don't.  By definition, half of all people are below average intelligence.  We have some very smart people dedicating their lives to education and pedogodgy, who may actually know something about it.

Regarding food, there are some parents feeding babies cola...

QuoteWe have some very smart people dedicating their lives to education and pedagogy, who may actually know something about it.

Then competition will not be a problem for those smart people.

If the consumers of education are deemed too stupid to recognize the quality, then take away the right to vote.

Leaving the asides. The parents chose the school (of course that is their right!), but then they were outraged that the students were shown exactly what the school promised. I simply do not understand your points.

Nay, nay, nay. Whatever happened or didn't happen at the school doesn't matter except to the school. It worries me not.

I'm not worried either. I am mocking though. I wish I were better than that, but alas, I am not.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 26, 2023, 10:59:37 AM
CHE: The Real Source of Self-Censorship:  Free-speech issues on campus might be a matter of peer pressure, according to several high-profile surveys. (https://www.chronicle.com/article/the-real-source-of-self-censorship)

Quote
...a national survey from Heterodox Academy, a nonprofit membership organization that promotes viewpoint diversity in higher education, became the latest piece of research to shed light on the state of campus discourse, which is typically the stuff of newsmaking incidents or opinion pieces. The results of the surveys are consistent. Contrary to the fears expressed by Rodrigues, which implicitly affix blame to a liberal professoriate, students are more concerned with their peers' judgment than with their professors'.

Quote
The North Carolina results also found that students were more concerned about their fellow students' opinions than about those of their instructors. The survey additionally showed that faculty members weren't pushing political agendas in class and that most students didn't significantly change their political views throughout college. (It's more difficult to draw conclusions from the Florida survey, given its 2.4-percent response rate among students, but a majority of respondents there agreed that their campus fostered free expression.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 27, 2023, 07:06:57 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 26, 2023, 10:59:37 AM
CHE: The Real Source of Self-Censorship:  Free-speech issues on campus might be a matter of peer pressure, according to several high-profile surveys. (https://www.chronicle.com/article/the-real-source-of-self-censorship)

Quote
...a national survey from Heterodox Academy, a nonprofit membership organization that promotes viewpoint diversity in higher education, became the latest piece of research to shed light on the state of campus discourse, which is typically the stuff of newsmaking incidents or opinion pieces. The results of the surveys are consistent. Contrary to the fears expressed by Rodrigues, which implicitly affix blame to a liberal professoriate, students are more concerned with their peers' judgment than with their professors'.

Quote
The North Carolina results also found that students were more concerned about their fellow students' opinions than about those of their instructors. The survey additionally showed that faculty members weren't pushing political agendas in class and that most students didn't significantly change their political views throughout college. (It's more difficult to draw conclusions from the Florida survey, given its 2.4-percent response rate among students, but a majority of respondents there agreed that their campus fostered free expression.)

A few further notes:
Quote
And in Wisconsin, just 34.6 percent of students who identified as very conservative said instructors "often" or "extremely often" encourage students to explore a wide variety of viewpoints; more than double that share of very liberal students — 73.8 percent — said the same. Conservative students were also significantly more likely than their liberal counterparts to report having felt pressured by an instructor to agree with a particular opinion — 91.3 percent of self-identified conservative and very conservative students reported as much, as opposed to 30.5 percent of their liberal counterparts. And conservatives were less likely than their liberal peers to feel comfortable speaking up on hot-button topics like transgender issues and abortion.

Asking administrators to intercede against troubling speech was more common among liberal students than conservative ones. Liberal students in Wisconsin were much more likely to favor administrators' banning the expression of harmful views and to advocate for disinviting controversial speakers — 40.9 and 58 percent of liberal or very liberal students, respectively, favored disinviting speakers from campus if some found their message offensive, while only a quarter of moderates, 13 percent of somewhat conservative students, and 9 percent of very conservative students said they'd do so.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on March 27, 2023, 08:01:13 AM
May be behind paywall....

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/04/03/how-christian-is-christian-nationalism

"Many Americans who advocate it have little interest in religion and an aversion to American culture as it currently exists. What really defines the movement?"
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 27, 2023, 02:41:28 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 27, 2023, 07:06:57 AM
A few further notes:
Quote
And in Wisconsin, just 34.6 percent of students who identified as very conservative said instructors "often" or "extremely often" encourage students to explore a wide variety of viewpoints; more than double that share of very liberal students — 73.8 percent — said the same. Conservative students were also significantly more likely than their liberal counterparts to report having felt pressured by an instructor to agree with a particular opinion — 91.3 percent of self-identified conservative and very conservative students reported as much, as opposed to 30.5 percent of their liberal counterparts. And conservatives were less likely than their liberal peers to feel comfortable speaking up on hot-button topics like transgender issues and abortion.

Asking administrators to intercede against troubling speech was more common among liberal students than conservative ones. Liberal students in Wisconsin were much more likely to favor administrators' banning the expression of harmful views and to advocate for disinviting controversial speakers — 40.9 and 58 percent of liberal or very liberal students, respectively, favored disinviting speakers from campus if some found their message offensive, while only a quarter of moderates, 13 percent of somewhat conservative students, and 9 percent of very conservative students said they'd do so.

These are good notes, Marshy.  I haven't finished reading the article yet.

Does anyone remember this little fracas? (https://www.calfac.org/cfa-long-beach/)

Dr. Osuna, who is a scholar of minority issues (what some dismiss as "grievance studies"), still charges "racial profiling" because a CSULB police officer would not unlock Osuna's office door without an I.D. 

In both his case and the responses of students above, I suspect a clear prevalence of subjectivity.  I wish we had more data on how conservative students "report having felt pressured by an instructor to agree with a particular opinion."  Do we have a specific examples of this?  Could the students or Osuna prove their charges in a court of law?  Very often we see what we expect to see.

Those of us who are "leftist" or left-leaning really need to stop trying to censor other people, no matter what kind of idiot that are.  It does nothing to stop the "wrong ideas" from spreading, is hypocritical, and simply gives ammunition to the ideologues.  No more disinviting.  Counter with fact and thought-out opinion----exercise free speech.  We need to get this across to students too.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 27, 2023, 07:07:34 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 27, 2023, 02:41:28 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 27, 2023, 07:06:57 AM
A few further notes:
Quote
And in Wisconsin, just 34.6 percent of students who identified as very conservative said instructors "often" or "extremely often" encourage students to explore a wide variety of viewpoints; more than double that share of very liberal students — 73.8 percent — said the same. Conservative students were also significantly more likely than their liberal counterparts to report having felt pressured by an instructor to agree with a particular opinion — 91.3 percent of self-identified conservative and very conservative students reported as much, as opposed to 30.5 percent of their liberal counterparts. And conservatives were less likely than their liberal peers to feel comfortable speaking up on hot-button topics like transgender issues and abortion.

Asking administrators to intercede against troubling speech was more common among liberal students than conservative ones. Liberal students in Wisconsin were much more likely to favor administrators' banning the expression of harmful views and to advocate for disinviting controversial speakers — 40.9 and 58 percent of liberal or very liberal students, respectively, favored disinviting speakers from campus if some found their message offensive, while only a quarter of moderates, 13 percent of somewhat conservative students, and 9 percent of very conservative students said they'd do so.

These are good notes, Marshy.  I haven't finished reading the article yet.

Does anyone remember this little fracas? (https://www.calfac.org/cfa-long-beach/)

Dr. Osuna, who is a scholar of minority issues (what some dismiss as "grievance studies"), still charges "racial profiling" because a CSULB police officer would not unlock Osuna's office door without an I.D. 

In both his case and the responses of students above, I suspect a clear prevalence of subjectivity.  I wish we had more data on how conservative students "report having felt pressured by an instructor to agree with a particular opinion."  Do we have a specific examples of this?  Could the students or Osuna prove their charges in a court of law?  Very often we see what we expect to see.

Those of us who are "leftist" or left-leaning really need to stop trying to censor other people, no matter what kind of idiot that are.  It does nothing to stop the "wrong ideas" from spreading, is hypocritical, and simply gives ammunition to the ideologues.  No more disinviting.  Counter with fact and thought-out opinion----exercise free speech.  We need to get this across to students too.

For all we know the conservative students who felt pressured to agree with their professors were learning about evolution or how old the earth is.  I spent some time in the deep South and met plenty of people in my STEM field who did not believe in evolution and would have checked that box.

Without more details, who knows what significance these surveys have. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 27, 2023, 07:33:53 PM
For all we know the students who felt pressured to agree with their professors were learning that

--all of history is the history of struggle between classes;

--all of history is the history of struggle between races;

--all of history is the history of struggle between the sexes.



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on March 27, 2023, 07:49:03 PM
OK, but surveys like this demonstrate what I have asserted here before, something which admittedly cannot be proved, namely that people will not want to publicly evince opinions that they fear will be politically unacceptable, and may well lie, even in anonymous polls, lest they expose themselves to judgmental reactions.   This would certainly be magnified in power relationship situations, such as professor-student (here,  in the academic context, I am mostly referring to conservative attitudes towards various issues of sexuality and abortion, including, like it or not, the question of whether transitioning post-pubescent birth males should be allowed to compete with biological women).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on March 27, 2023, 07:56:54 PM
Conservatism could be a psychological disease, perhaps caused by the F-factor [F for fascism], which may be treatable psychoanalytically.

Of course, it could also be that people disagree with each other.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 27, 2023, 08:13:08 PM
Quote from: dismalist on March 27, 2023, 07:33:53 PM
For all we know

But we don't know. 

Quote from: kaysixteen on March 27, 2023, 07:49:03 PM
something which admittedly cannot be proved

Which is a big problem with your theory.

Quote from: dismalist on March 27, 2023, 07:56:54 PM
Of course, it could also be that people disagree with each other.

Was that ever in question?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on March 28, 2023, 03:28:40 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 27, 2023, 07:49:03 PM
OK, but surveys like this demonstrate what I have asserted here before, something which admittedly cannot be proved, namely that people will not want to publicly evince opinions that they fear will be politically unacceptable, and may well lie, even in anonymous polls, lest they expose themselves to judgmental reactions.   This would certainly be magnified in power relationship situations, such as professor-student (here,  in the academic context, I am mostly referring to conservative attitudes towards various issues of sexuality and abortion, including, like it or not, the question of whether transitioning post-pubescent birth males should be allowed to compete with biological women).

Likewise, if one believes the world is flat, they may also be reluctant to express their thoughts on the matter.   Deep down, they know their stance defies logic and reason, so they understandably don't want to make a public stance where they are not surrounded by like minded people.

If you are against gay marriage, you deep down likely know you are a bigot and would not want to be confronted with this fact, especially in front of a group that almost definitely includes some LGBT people.  Sometimes, peer pressure can be good I suppose.

As for your example, I am very much a lefty but I don't think post-pubescent transitioning trans women should be able to compete in sports in the women's category.  Not even all trans women would support this.  It is a strawman.

What would be more interesting is to have more details on the specifics of how they feel pressured.  Without that the survey isn't very helpful.  It is also interesting that about a third of the liberal students also felt this way, despite being in the liberal bastion. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 28, 2023, 05:19:19 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on March 28, 2023, 03:28:40 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on March 27, 2023, 07:49:03 PM
OK, but surveys like this demonstrate what I have asserted here before, something which admittedly cannot be proved, namely that people will not want to publicly evince opinions that they fear will be politically unacceptable, and may well lie, even in anonymous polls, lest they expose themselves to judgmental reactions.   This would certainly be magnified in power relationship situations, such as professor-student (here,  in the academic context, I am mostly referring to conservative attitudes towards various issues of sexuality and abortion, including, like it or not, the question of whether transitioning post-pubescent birth males should be allowed to compete with biological women).

Likewise, if one believes the world is flat, they may also be reluctant to express their thoughts on the matter.   Deep down, they know their stance defies logic and reason, so they understandably don't want to make a public stance where they are not surrounded by like minded people.

If you are against gay marriage, you deep down likely know you are a bigot and would not want to be confronted with this fact, especially in front of a group that almost definitely includes some LGBT people.  Sometimes, peer pressure can be good I suppose.

As for your example, I am very much a lefty but I don't think post-pubescent transitioning trans women should be able to compete in sports in the women's category.  Not even all trans women would support this.  It is a strawman.

What would be more interesting is to have more details on the specifics of how they feel pressured.  Without that the survey isn't very helpful.  It is also interesting that about a third of the liberal students also felt this way, despite being in the liberal bastion.

A bit more interesting stuff from the survey:
Quote
But there's also nuance that those numbers can't capture. In her interview-based research, Binder has found progressive students to be more ambivalent on the matter, often making what she described as "contradictory back-and-forth comments about administrators' responsibility to protect vulnerable students." A student might start a conversation with Binder by stating adamantly that administrators should ban controversial speakers, she explained. "Then we'd say, 'Really? There's no place for that person to speak on campus?'" The student might then backtrack and suggest that perhaps instead of banning a speaker, a university leader should make a statement about how the speaker "is not in keeping with the principles of community on our campus." In general, Binder said, progressive students in her research hesitate to give definitive answers on whether speakers should be banned.

If the students who are most driven by how they think others will see them think a "progressive" view is the popular one, it makes sense that their views won't be very deeply-held (or consistent). They'll be constantly trying to figure out which way the wind blows.


Quote
Students in the Heterodox survey identified a larger, and increasing, source of concern about where self-censorship occurs — on the campus itself. Just over 63 percent of respondents somewhat or strongly agreed that the climate on their campus prevents people from saying things they believe because others might find those views offensive, marking a nearly 10-point growth since 2019 and 2020 in the percentage of students who said so.

That's puzzling, the Heterodox report points out, because "there are frequent top-down reminders from institutions for students to consider varying perspectives," but such administrative messaging doesn't penetrate students' perceptions of campus climate.

This segues directly (and insightfully) into this:
Quote
One possible explanation for the disconnection might be seen in Binder's research, which finds that administrators are perceived by conservative students as "always falling on the side of progressive issues," particularly as they send out community emails about topics like police shootings, global warming, and anti-Asian hate. "It's easier to characterize them as hopelessly, consistently on the side of progressive issues, whereas if you have more face-to-face time with people, i.e. your professors, then you don't have that same sense of it all being the same," she said.

She said it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 29, 2023, 10:15:52 PM
This guy is just plain stupid. 

Professor suspended after saying it would be 'more admirable to kill' racist speakers than protest (https://nypost.com/2023/03/28/wayne-state-professor-steven-shaviro-suspended-for-facebook-post/)

This sort of rhetoric is dangerous and viable grounds for dismissal. 

The kicker is that he was worried that right-wing speakers only come to campus to provoke a reaction to discredit the left----which is largely true.

Go job on proving the right right, bucko.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 30, 2023, 05:32:10 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 29, 2023, 10:15:52 PM
This guy is just plain stupid. 

Professor suspended after saying it would be 'more admirable to kill' racist speakers than protest (https://nypost.com/2023/03/28/wayne-state-professor-steven-shaviro-suspended-for-facebook-post/)

This sort of rhetoric is dangerous and viable grounds for dismissal. 

The kicker is that he was worried that right-wing speakers only come to campus to provoke a reaction to discredit the left----which is largely true.


Seriously? That's the only reason they speak? I guess we might as well stop all public talks if nobody ever comes to them with their minds not already made up.
If all public "discourse" is really just preaching to the appropriate choir, (including, presumably, discussions here), then we might as well just all shut up and go home.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 30, 2023, 10:59:36 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 30, 2023, 05:32:10 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 29, 2023, 10:15:52 PM
This guy is just plain stupid. 

Professor suspended after saying it would be 'more admirable to kill' racist speakers than protest (https://nypost.com/2023/03/28/wayne-state-professor-steven-shaviro-suspended-for-facebook-post/)

This sort of rhetoric is dangerous and viable grounds for dismissal. 

The kicker is that he was worried that right-wing speakers only come to campus to provoke a reaction to discredit the left----which is largely true.


Seriously? That's the only reason they speak? I guess we might as well stop all public talks if nobody ever comes to them with their minds not already made up.
If all public "discourse" is really just preaching to the appropriate choir, (including, presumably, discussions here), then we might as well just all shut up and go home.

Yeah, I think the main reason that conservative provocateurs target college campuses is for the headlines.  It is certainly what you find on YouTube and the agitprop websites.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 30, 2023, 11:11:05 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 30, 2023, 10:59:36 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 30, 2023, 05:32:10 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on March 29, 2023, 10:15:52 PM
This guy is just plain stupid. 

Professor suspended after saying it would be 'more admirable to kill' racist speakers than protest (https://nypost.com/2023/03/28/wayne-state-professor-steven-shaviro-suspended-for-facebook-post/)

This sort of rhetoric is dangerous and viable grounds for dismissal. 

The kicker is that he was worried that right-wing speakers only come to campus to provoke a reaction to discredit the left----which is largely true.


Seriously? That's the only reason they speak? I guess we might as well stop all public talks if nobody ever comes to them with their minds not already made up.
If all public "discourse" is really just preaching to the appropriate choir, (including, presumably, discussions here), then we might as well just all shut up and go home.

Yeah, I think the main reason that conservative provocateurs target college campuses is for the headlines.  It is certainly what you find on YouTube and the agitprop websites.

In every case I've heard of, they were invited to speak by some group on campus. Of course, you can say that the groups who invited them are just trying to get headlines, (and which may be true in some cases), but that's different than speakers inviting themselves to campuses. (And from many of the accounts I've read, getting yelled at and shouted down was not a fun experience for most of them, who are usually academics. There might be a few shock jocks, who enjoy the rage, but they're a minority.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 30, 2023, 12:42:00 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 30, 2023, 11:11:05 AM
In every case I've heard of, they were invited to speak by some group on campus. Of course, you can say that the groups who invited them are just trying to get headlines, (and which may be true in some cases), but that's different than speakers inviting themselves to campuses. (And from many of the accounts I've read, getting yelled at and shouted down was not a fun experience for most of them, who are usually academics. There might be a few shock jocks, who enjoy the rage, but they're a minority.)

Why not invite P. J. O'Rourke (when he was alive)?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 30, 2023, 01:16:17 PM
Maybe prisms are next?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/wisconsin-school-district-bans-first-grade-class-singing-controversial-rcna77145
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on March 31, 2023, 06:03:34 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 30, 2023, 01:16:17 PM
Maybe prisms are next?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/wisconsin-school-district-bans-first-grade-class-singing-controversial-rcna77145

Will Noah's rainbow be excised from the Bible....or should the Bible be banned altogether?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 31, 2023, 06:13:56 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on March 31, 2023, 06:03:34 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 30, 2023, 01:16:17 PM
Maybe prisms are next?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/wisconsin-school-district-bans-first-grade-class-singing-controversial-rcna77145

Will Noah's rainbow be excised from the Bible....or should the Bible be banned altogether?

It's clear from the article that the rainbow was being used for a specific purpose.

Quote
Tempel said the controversy over the song was much bigger than her classroom.

"The Rainbowland story is about much more than a banned song. The result of the political pushback on LGBTQ+ inclusivity and rights in schools is unfolding and it's tragic," she tweeted.

Whenever some image, concept, song, etc. gets co-opted for a specific message, its use will decline unless it's for that purpose. It's a natural consequence- if using the symbol is supposed to show support for <X>, then anyone who doesn't support <X> will avoid using the symbol for anything else.

People don't like to be railroaded into any sort of cause, and they also don't like being considered too stupid to catch on that they're unconsciously supporting a cause by using some supposedly innocuous symbol.
 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2023, 06:43:48 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 31, 2023, 06:13:56 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on March 31, 2023, 06:03:34 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 30, 2023, 01:16:17 PM
Maybe prisms are next?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/wisconsin-school-district-bans-first-grade-class-singing-controversial-rcna77145

Will Noah's rainbow be excised from the Bible....or should the Bible be banned altogether?

It's clear from the article that the rainbow was being used for a specific purpose.

Quote
Tempel said the controversy over the song was much bigger than her classroom.

"The Rainbowland story is about much more than a banned song. The result of the political pushback on LGBTQ+ inclusivity and rights in schools is unfolding and it's tragic," she tweeted.

Whenever some image, concept, song, etc. gets co-opted for a specific message, its use will decline unless it's for that purpose. It's a natural consequence- if using the symbol is supposed to show support for <X>, then anyone who doesn't support <X> will avoid using the symbol for anything else.

People don't like to be railroaded into any sort of cause, and they also don't like being considered too stupid to catch on that they're unconsciously supporting a cause by using some supposedly innocuous symbol.

Read the lyrics and then judge.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 31, 2023, 09:41:20 AM
Living in a Rainbowland
Where everything goes as planned
And I smile
'Cause I know if we try, we could really make a difference in this world
I won't give up, I'll sleep a wink
It's the only thought I think, you know where I stand
I believe we can start living in a Rainbowland
Living in a Rainbowland
Where you and I go hand in hand
Oh, I'd be lying if I said this was fine
All the hurt and the hate going on here
We are rainbows, me and you
Every color, every hue
Let's shine on through
Together, we can start living in a Rainbowland
Living in a Rainbowland
The skies are blue and things are grand
Wouldn't it be nice to live in paradise
Where we're free to be exactly who we are
Let's all dig down deep inside
Brush the judgment and fear aside
Make wrong things right
And end the fight
'Cause I promise ain't nobody gonna win (come on)
Living in a Rainbowland
Where you and I go hand in hand
Oh, I'd be lying if I said this was fine
All the hurt and the hate going on here
We are rainbows, me and you
Every color, every hue
Let's shine on through
Together, we can start living in a Rainbowland
Living in a Rainbowland
Where you and I go hand in hand together (let's do it together)
Chase dreams forever
I know there's gonna be a greener land
We are rainbows, me and you
Every color, every hue
Let's shine on
Together, we can start living in a Rainbowland

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: waterboy on March 31, 2023, 09:51:36 AM
Ahhh.....subversive!  Deeply subversive!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 31, 2023, 10:08:37 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2023, 06:43:48 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 31, 2023, 06:13:56 AM

Whenever some image, concept, song, etc. gets co-opted for a specific message, its use will decline unless it's for that purpose. It's a natural consequence- if using the symbol is supposed to show support for <X>, then anyone who doesn't support <X> will avoid using the symbol for anything else.

People don't like to be railroaded into any sort of cause, and they also don't like being considered too stupid to catch on that they're unconsciously supporting a cause by using some supposedly innocuous symbol.

Read the lyrics and then judge.

That totally misses my point.

How about something like this, from the "other side"?
Signs of hate: Parental guide to far-right codes, symbols and acronyms (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/04/signs-of-hate-parental-guide-to-far-right-codes-symbols-acronyms-uk)

People from all over the political spectrum are concerned about symbols which may imply support for causes with which they don't agree, regardless of the explicit context in which the symbol is used.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2023, 10:23:36 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 31, 2023, 10:08:37 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2023, 06:43:48 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 31, 2023, 06:13:56 AM

Whenever some image, concept, song, etc. gets co-opted for a specific message, its use will decline unless it's for that purpose. It's a natural consequence- if using the symbol is supposed to show support for <X>, then anyone who doesn't support <X> will avoid using the symbol for anything else.

People don't like to be railroaded into any sort of cause, and they also don't like being considered too stupid to catch on that they're unconsciously supporting a cause by using some supposedly innocuous symbol.

Read the lyrics and then judge.

That totally misses my point.

How about something like this, from the "other side"?
Signs of hate: Parental guide to far-right codes, symbols and acronyms (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/04/signs-of-hate-parental-guide-to-far-right-codes-symbols-acronyms-uk)

People from all over the political spectrum are concerned about symbols which may imply support for causes with which they don't agree, regardless of the explicit context in which the symbol is used.

No, I got you point. But if you mean any symbol that might stand for something, then the world is now officially mad. They almost wouldn't let them perform Rainbow Connection. Somewhere Over the Rainbow under suspicion maybe? I mean, it was Judy Garland, and those gays sure like her, so yeah, let's ban it?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on March 31, 2023, 10:37:45 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2023, 10:23:36 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 31, 2023, 10:08:37 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on March 31, 2023, 06:43:48 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on March 31, 2023, 06:13:56 AM

Whenever some image, concept, song, etc. gets co-opted for a specific message, its use will decline unless it's for that purpose. It's a natural consequence- if using the symbol is supposed to show support for <X>, then anyone who doesn't support <X> will avoid using the symbol for anything else.

People don't like to be railroaded into any sort of cause, and they also don't like being considered too stupid to catch on that they're unconsciously supporting a cause by using some supposedly innocuous symbol.

Read the lyrics and then judge.

That totally misses my point.

How about something like this, from the "other side"?
Signs of hate: Parental guide to far-right codes, symbols and acronyms (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/04/signs-of-hate-parental-guide-to-far-right-codes-symbols-acronyms-uk)

People from all over the political spectrum are concerned about symbols which may imply support for causes with which they don't agree, regardless of the explicit context in which the symbol is used.

No, I got you point. But if you mean any symbol that might stand for something, then the world is now officially mad. They almost wouldn't let them perform Rainbow Connection. Somewhere Over the Rainbow under suspicion maybe? I mean, it was Judy Garland, and those gays sure like her, so yeah, let's ban it?

I doubt they would object to a performance of the Wizard of Oz. However, it was obvious that they had to have a song about rainbows specifically. The teacher even stated why. So any mention of rainbows would have been about the symbolic meaning, rather than just the atmospheric phenomenon.

FWIW, I tend to agree with you that trying to root out any possible symbol is hopeless.  Nevertheless when a symbol is being employed on purpose, it's not ridiculous for people to object to it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on March 31, 2023, 10:41:07 AM
Zealotry generally requires a very simple answer to controversy.  Unless, of course, one talks about conservative speakers on college campuses.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on April 01, 2023, 06:22:50 AM
Quote from: waterboy on March 31, 2023, 09:51:36 AM
Ahhh.....subversive!  Deeply subversive!

Definitely subversive!   All that talk about getting along!  Dreadful, I tell you, dreadful.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 01, 2023, 11:45:05 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on April 01, 2023, 06:22:50 AM
Quote from: waterboy on March 31, 2023, 09:51:36 AM
Ahhh.....subversive!  Deeply subversive!

Definitely subversive!   All that talk about getting along!  Dreadful, I tell you, dreadful.

What specific kinds of failure to "get along" are happening now that singing the song will fix?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 01, 2023, 01:50:06 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 01, 2023, 11:45:05 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on April 01, 2023, 06:22:50 AM
Quote from: waterboy on March 31, 2023, 09:51:36 AM
Ahhh.....subversive!  Deeply subversive!

Definitely subversive!   All that talk about getting along!  Dreadful, I tell you, dreadful.

What specific kinds of failure to "get along" are happening now that singing the song will fix?

Well, probably it will help fix the sort of ugly bigotry we see in some adults.  I mean, people are tying to ban it because its message is so powerful it will alter children's psychosexual development, right?

But they are wrong.  This is a song that empowers healthy self-esteem.

Better yet, let's just get real: no song will fix people not getting along.  The kids who would have sung this song would have forgotten about it two minutes after the show was over.  Nevertheless, it is a basically simplistic, affirmative ditty with lots of healthy messages for little kids.  The rainbow has always been a happy symbol because they are just cool. 

Or let's put it this way: the song is not dangerous for the psychosexual development of children unless the parents are hysterical bigots.  Reminds me a bit of the Tellytubby controversy.

I suppose we should remove God's covenant to Noah in the Bible then, huh? That might confuse kids who think that all the people and animals went all gay and stuff after that long confinement on a boat.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 02, 2023, 10:55:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 01, 2023, 01:50:06 PM

Or let's put it this way: the song is not dangerous for the psychosexual development of children unless the parents are hysterical bigots.  Reminds me a bit of the Tellytubby controversy.


So is it dangerous for someone to want to "Make America Great *Again"? Is it dangerous for someone to wear a red baseball cap with that on it?

Like rainbows and other things, the symbol is intended to stand for a lot more than it explicitly suggests,  and for that reason people will avoid it when they don't want to be assumed to support everything the people using it want it to implicitly suggest.


(*The idea that it was "great" at some time in the past that it isn't now may be misinformed, but in that case is the idea of aiming for "great"ness inherently evil?)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 02, 2023, 01:59:26 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 02, 2023, 10:55:17 AM
So is it dangerous for someone to want to "Make America Great *Again"? Is it dangerous for someone to wear a red baseball cap with that on it?

Like rainbows and other things, the symbol is intended to stand for a lot more than it explicitly suggests,  and for that reason people will avoid it when they don't want to be assumed to support everything the people using it want it to implicitly suggest.

Hey!  I agree with you.  Remove the rainbow from Genesis 9:8-17. The rainbow used to stand for God's promise that He would never wreck global havoc on the world----but not anymore!!!  God approves of the trans agenda!!!!!   Apparently the symbol of the rainbow----which I've seen in a lot of places and been used for, say, forever (as opposed to "Make America Great Again")----has been completely coopted and can mean nothing except acceptance of people who are different than you are, and we can't have that!!!!  Bigotry rules!!!  Down with the rainbow!!!!

You and this guy can get together are have all sorts of rainbow flavored conniptions. (https://www.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/comments/129pt1l/to_look_for_signs_of_trans_agenda_in_children/)

As someone in the comments points out, away with Lucky Charms and leprechauns!!!  The pot at the end of the rainbow is full of trans gold!!!!!!

Good thinking there, buddy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 07:47:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 02, 2023, 01:59:26 PM
Apparently the symbol of the rainbow----which I've seen in a lot of places and been used for, say, forever (as opposed to "Make America Great Again")----has been completely coopted and can mean nothing except acceptance of people who are different than you are, and we can't have that!!!!  Bigotry rules!!!  Down with the rainbow!!!!


If avoiding the use of the rainbow can be interpreted as "transphobic bigotry" because I don't support
then I'll accept the label.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 08:04:27 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 07:47:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 02, 2023, 01:59:26 PM
Apparently the symbol of the rainbow----which I've seen in a lot of places and been used for, say, forever (as opposed to "Make America Great Again")----has been completely coopted and can mean nothing except acceptance of people who are different than you are, and we can't have that!!!!  Bigotry rules!!!  Down with the rainbow!!!!


If avoiding the use of the rainbow can be interpreted as "transphobic bigotry" because I don't support

  • Sending convicted (biologically male) rapists to women's prison because they identify as women (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-64729029)
  • Biological males competing in women's sports, including contact sports (https://www.sportskeeda.com/mma/news-when-transgender-fighter-fallon-fox-broke-opponent-s-skull-mma-fight)
then I'll accept the label.

I love these tortuous attempts at legitimacy, particularly since you are referring to a very, very few people in the world who would be affected by these things vs. the millions of people affected by our culture's prejudices.  That's a fair tradeoff.

At least you accept the label and can stop pretending.

My favorite is that the little kids in Wisconsin ended up singing "Rainbow Connection":

Rainbows are visions, but only illusions
And rainbows have nothing to hide
... So we've been told, and some choose to believe it
I know they're wrong, wait and see
Someday we'll find it, the rainbow connection
The lovers, the dreamers, and me

Uh oh, Marshy.  I'm seeing some homoerotic DACA who "have nothing to hide" implications there!!!!!  Quick, protect your restrooms, Marshhero!!!   Let "contact sports" define your entire worldview!!!  More good thinking!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 08:07:09 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 08:04:27 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 07:47:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 02, 2023, 01:59:26 PM
Apparently the symbol of the rainbow----which I've seen in a lot of places and been used for, say, forever (as opposed to "Make America Great Again")----has been completely coopted and can mean nothing except acceptance of people who are different than you are, and we can't have that!!!!  Bigotry rules!!!  Down with the rainbow!!!!


If avoiding the use of the rainbow can be interpreted as "transphobic bigotry" because I don't support

  • Sending convicted (biologically male) rapists to women's prison because they identify as women (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-64729029)
  • Biological males competing in women's sports, including contact sports (https://www.sportskeeda.com/mma/news-when-transgender-fighter-fallon-fox-broke-opponent-s-skull-mma-fight)
then I'll accept the label.

I love these tortuous attempts at legitimacy, particularly since you are referring to a very, very few people in the world who would be affected by these things vs. the millions of people affected by our culture's prejudices.  That's a fair tradeoff.


So you agree that the label fits for opposing those things?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 08:13:44 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 08:07:09 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 08:04:27 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 07:47:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 02, 2023, 01:59:26 PM
Apparently the symbol of the rainbow----which I've seen in a lot of places and been used for, say, forever (as opposed to "Make America Great Again")----has been completely coopted and can mean nothing except acceptance of people who are different than you are, and we can't have that!!!!  Bigotry rules!!!  Down with the rainbow!!!!


If avoiding the use of the rainbow can be interpreted as "transphobic bigotry" because I don't support

  • Sending convicted (biologically male) rapists to women's prison because they identify as women (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-64729029)
  • Biological males competing in women's sports, including contact sports (https://www.sportskeeda.com/mma/news-when-transgender-fighter-fallon-fox-broke-opponent-s-skull-mma-fight)
then I'll accept the label.

I love these tortuous attempts at legitimacy, particularly since you are referring to a very, very few people in the world who would be affected by these things vs. the millions of people affected by our culture's prejudices.  That's a fair tradeoff.


So you agree that the label fits for opposing those things?

The label fits when one tries to "oppose" those things as an excuse for prejudicial thinking for an entire group of people.

If that were a valid approach----trying to diminish an entire group of people to a few odd outliers----the Catholics (and perhaps Christians) should be banned as pedophiles.  And Christians of all denominations are flush with pedophiles, not a couple of weird scenarios.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 08:31:35 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 08:13:44 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 08:07:09 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 08:04:27 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 07:47:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 02, 2023, 01:59:26 PM
Apparently the symbol of the rainbow----which I've seen in a lot of places and been used for, say, forever (as opposed to "Make America Great Again")----has been completely coopted and can mean nothing except acceptance of people who are different than you are, and we can't have that!!!!  Bigotry rules!!!  Down with the rainbow!!!!


If avoiding the use of the rainbow can be interpreted as "transphobic bigotry" because I don't support

  • Sending convicted (biologically male) rapists to women's prison because they identify as women (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-64729029)
  • Biological males competing in women's sports, including contact sports (https://www.sportskeeda.com/mma/news-when-transgender-fighter-fallon-fox-broke-opponent-s-skull-mma-fight)
then I'll accept the label.

I love these tortuous attempts at legitimacy, particularly since you are referring to a very, very few people in the world who would be affected by these things vs. the millions of people affected by our culture's prejudices.  That's a fair tradeoff.


So you agree that the label fits for opposing those things?

The label fits when one tries to "oppose" those things as an excuse for prejudicial thinking for an entire group of people.

You do know that those things happened because activists advocated for them (and still do). These aren't theoretical issues; they are things that are currently happening.

Those aren't "an excuse for prejudicial thinking"; they're examples of very negative consequences of some of the absolutely mainstream ideas of "rainbow advocates" being put into practice. ("TRANS WOMEN ARE WOMEN." "SELF IDENTIFICATION IS ALL THAT IS REQUIRED.")

People who want to unequivocally oppose those things may  feel the only way to do so is to avoid any vague symbols of "support".

It's the same reason many people (including me) have never, and will never, become a member of any political party. Even if t a party has some policies I support, I don't want them claiming my membership implies my support for everything they propose.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 09:37:11 AM
Again, my friend, you are simply lumping disparate people together under an umbrella because of two strange instances that do not reflect the reality for the large majority of any particular people or the work of advocates.

Why do you care if people self-identify as "a woman?"  So what?  A SINGLE MMA bout nine years ago?   A SINGLE weird event in Scotland??  And from these two events you conclude activists are...what, exactly?

What does either of those have to do with the symbol of "rainbow" anyway?

You never answered if we should remove the rainbow from Genesis. 

Who is hurt by a guy self-identifying as "a woman?"  I would have thought you would've been smarter than to be manipulated by the rightwing hate machine.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 09:57:19 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 09:37:11 AM
Again, my friend, you are simply lumping disparate people together under an umbrella because of two strange instances that do not reflect the reality for the large majority of any particular people or the work of advocates.

Why do you care if people self-identify as "a woman?"  So what?  A SINGLE MMA bout nine years ago?   A SINGLE weird event in Scotland??  And from these two events you conclude activists are...what, exactly?

What does either of those have to do with the symbol of "rainbow" anyway?

You never answered if we should remove the rainbow from Genesis. 

Who is hurt by a guy self-identifying as "a woman?"  I would have thought you would've been smarter than to be manipulated by the rightwing hate machine.

The underlying assumption in all of this is that the only views possible on issues like this are represented by the two extremes. Like the idea that one is either a racist or an *anti-racist.  The is a lot of effort to exclude the middle in order to try and get support for one extreme position or the other.

As I have said before, since things like sexual orientation and/or trans status are invisible and irrelevant in the vast majority of casual interactions people will have, anyone who attempts to treat everyone with dignity and respect regardless of all kinds of identity factors doesn't need to "identify" as some sort of "ally", since they don't see being enemies as any sort of normal alternative. And people who do that can rightfully take offense at being accused of mistreating people, not because of what they have done, but simply because they have refused to virtue-signal.

Someone who refuses to answer the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" should not automatically be assumed to be an abusive spouse. Trying to imply otherwise is just being disingenuous.


(*In the case of being an "anti-racist", a lot of it just comes down to virtue-signalling. What isn't virtue signalling is just normal decent behaviour.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 10:06:49 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 09:57:19 AM
all kinds of identity factors doesn't need to "identify" as some sort of "ally", since they don't see being enemies as any sort of normal alternative. And people who do that can rightfully take offense at being accused of mistreating people, not because of what they have done, but simply because they have refused to virtue-signal.

There ARE enemies.

We need to be allies to help defend good people from bigots.

You are not refusing to "virtue signal" (which is more empty conservative propaganda jargon), you are defending the people who seek to justify their bigotry.

You resent the label "bigot" and you don't like to be called "prejudicial"-----who would?----because you seem to think that innocent Christian conservatives are being railroaded, but then you post bigoted, prejudicial stuff and try to justify the hysteria over "rainbows."

Should the rainbow be edited out of Genesis?   

Quote
Someone who refuses to answer the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" should not automatically be assumed to be an abusive spouse. Trying to imply otherwise is just being disingenuous.

This totally depends on if the "Someone" has actually beaten his wife before.  If he has, then the question is legitimate.  If someone acts like a bigot, then the bigot label fits.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 12:44:38 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 10:06:49 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 09:57:19 AM
all kinds of identity factors doesn't need to "identify" as some sort of "ally", since they don't see being enemies as any sort of normal alternative. And people who do that can rightfully take offense at being accused of mistreating people, not because of what they have done, but simply because they have refused to virtue-signal.

There ARE enemies.

We need to be allies to help defend good people from bigots.



Let's try an analogy.

I would guess that everyone on here is against cheaters. (Or against cheating.)

However, when the topic is discussed, there are always a range of opinions on what to do about specific cases. This is for at least 2 reasons:

Probably everyone would agree that someone sitting down and directly copying the work of another person and submitting it under their own name with no indication of its origin would count as cheating. But there are lots of less obvious things.

For instance, suppose a person wrote a paper entirely on their own, and then ran it through some sort of thing like ChatGPT to clean up the language. Some instructors would be adamant that it was cheating, while others would be equally adamant that it wasn't, especially if the person was a non-native English speaker, and depending on the discipline.

People have often asked what percentage similarity on a TurnItIn report should be automatically treated as cheating. The easiest way to reduce cheating as much as possible would be to prosecute every case of suspected cheating. That would certainly reduce cheating, but it would also foster an extremely adversarial and paranoid atmosphere, and would drive away even many non-cheating students who didn't want to live under that level of suspicion.

There are behaviours that would pretty universally be identified as bigotry, but there are all kinds of things that are open to interpretation. Probably most people would be "allies" when it comes to the universally-identified bigotry, but like the case for cheating, where there is no clear consensus many people would rather avoid the hostile atmosphere of hyper-vigilance.

Quote
Should the rainbow be edited out of Genesis?   

No, and neither should the word "gay" be edited out of old books when it meant happy. Whether someone chooses to quote from an old book which uses the word in its earlier sense is up to them.

You know that the crop which is now called "canola" used to be called "rape seed"? I don't think the change is a bad thing, even though no-one has suggested people growing it are potential sex offenders.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 01:31:23 PM
A bigot is a bigot is a bigot.

I don't see how your analogy means anything remotely associated with anything.  "Interpretation" is simply a masking word for hysterical bigotry.

So, the rainbow is not necessary a gay symbol.  So if silly pop stars make a superficial song including a "rainbow" it is a little hysterical to be seeing an "agenda" or whatever the newest buzz word is.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on April 03, 2023, 05:13:41 PM
Random thoughts:

1) Christian denoms are 'flush with pedophiles'?  Really?   As you are wont to say, Wahoo: what's your evidence?  Prove it.

2) 'Hysterical bigot'?  Opposition to moral choices is not at all always, or even often, 'hysterical', and it is often explicitly rational.

3) Do you really think that it is a moral, or pragmatically justified, choice, to incarcerate in a women's prison a rapist, just because that rapist is pretending to be a woman (which pretence did not prevent *him* from, ahem, raping women)?   Is that action consonant with the right (and responsibility) of fellow (female) inmates there to be rehabilitated in a safe and ethical environment?

4) Now one of the things I have regularly said here is that people will lie in polls-- the Bradley effect is a well-noted phenomenon, for instance.  Put simply, this is something, in any given case, that is almost impossible to prove, but such inability ought not to dissuade one from accepting obvious reality.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 07:17:58 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on April 03, 2023, 05:13:41 PM
Random thoughts:

1) Christian denoms are 'flush with pedophiles'?  Really?   As you are wont to say, Wahoo: what's your evidence?  Prove it.

Really!?  Okay, you asked for it:

Catholic Church Sexual Abuse Cases (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_sexual_abuse_cases)

French Catholic Church inquiry finds 216,000 paedophilia cases since 1950 (https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20211005-french-catholic-church-inquiry-finds-at-least-216-000-paedophilia-cases-between-1950-and-2020)

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/03/europe/france-catholic-church-pedophilia-abuse-intl/index.html

Josh Duggar's Child Pornography Case: Everything We Know About the Trial (https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/pictures/josh-duggar-child-pornography-charges-trial-everything-we-know/)

Sexual abuse cases in Southern Baptist Churches (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_abuse_cases_in_Southern_Baptist_churches)

Southern Baptist Convention Pledges to Release Secret Database (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/religion/southern-baptist-convention-pledges-release-secret-database-accused-se-rcna30360)

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/religion/article/southern-baptist-convention-sex-abuse-report-17192138.php

Lutheran Church Abuse Victims Receive $69 Million Settlement (https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/aprilweb-only/4-19-51.0.html)

https://www.latimes.com/local/la-xpm-2011-jun-23-la-me-0623-lutheran-abuse-lawsuit-20110623-story.html

https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/religious-affiliations-among-adult-sexual-offenders

Quote
Contrary to findings of previous research regarding the influence of religion on nonsexual criminality, for this sample of sex offenders, religiosity was linked to a higher number of sex offense victims and more convictions for sex offenses. Those sex offenders who reported regular church attendance, a belief in supernatural punishment, and religion as important in their daily lives had more known victims, younger victims, and more convictions for sex offenses than the sex offenders who reported irregular or no church attendance and no or less intense allegiance to religious beliefs and practices.

https://ffrf.org/component/k2/item/18500-the-scandal-of-pedophilia-in-the-church

And that is enough for now.  It goes on a long, long way.  That was a dumb thing to call, Kay.

Quote
2) 'Hysterical bigot'?  Opposition to moral choices is not at all always, or even often, 'hysterical', and it is often explicitly rational.

If one sees a "rainbow" in a silly country pop song about self-esteem as a danger to children's psychosexual development, one is hysterical.

Quote
3) Do you really think that it is a moral, or pragmatically justified, choice, to incarcerate in a women's prison a rapist, just because that rapist is pretending to be a woman (which pretence did not prevent *him* from, ahem, raping women)?   Is that action consonant with the right (and responsibility) of fellow (female) inmates there to be rehabilitated in a safe and ethical environment?

Nope.  Send him to a male prison and keep him in isolation.

What I was saying is that using this ONE SINGUAL and weird scenario to prove anything about a world-wide demographic is an attempt at prejudice.

Reading comprehension, K16.  You are a very smart man.  Use those brains.

Quote
4) Now one of the things I have regularly said here is that people will lie in polls-- the Bradley effect is a well-noted phenomenon, for instance.  Put simply, this is something, in any given case, that is almost impossible to prove, but such inability ought not to dissuade one from accepting obvious reality.

Yeah, this is one of your tentpoles.  But ya'can't prove it, so it is worthless as a debate point.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on April 04, 2023, 03:19:32 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 09:57:19 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 09:37:11 AM
Again, my friend, you are simply lumping disparate people together under an umbrella because of two strange instances that do not reflect the reality for the large majority of any particular people or the work of advocates.

Why do you care if people self-identify as "a woman?"  So what?  A SINGLE MMA bout nine years ago?   A SINGLE weird event in Scotland??  And from these two events you conclude activists are...what, exactly?

What does either of those have to do with the symbol of "rainbow" anyway?

You never answered if we should remove the rainbow from Genesis. 

Who is hurt by a guy self-identifying as "a woman?"  I would have thought you would've been smarter than to be manipulated by the rightwing hate machine.

The underlying assumption in all of this is that the only views possible on issues like this are represented by the two extremes. Like the idea that one is either a racist or an *anti-racist.  The is a lot of effort to exclude the middle in order to try and get support for one extreme position or the other.

As I have said before, since things like sexual orientation and/or trans status are invisible and irrelevant in the vast majority of casual interactions people will have, anyone who attempts to treat everyone with dignity and respect regardless of all kinds of identity factors doesn't need to "identify" as some sort of "ally", since they don't see being enemies as any sort of normal alternative. And people who do that can rightfully take offense at being accused of mistreating people, not because of what they have done, but simply because they have refused to virtue-signal.

Someone who refuses to answer the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" should not automatically be assumed to be an abusive spouse. Trying to imply otherwise is just being disingenuous.


(*In the case of being an "anti-racist", a lot of it just comes down to virtue-signalling. What isn't virtue signalling is just normal decent behaviour.)

That is your underlying assumption that there are only the two extremes, no one else's.

I very much support the LGBT community, which includes friends, relatives, and current/previous grad students.  I have no issues with rainbows.

Despite this, I don't think trans women that went through male puberty should compete in sports with women or necessarily go to women's prison (although I would also be concerned about sending them to a men's prison for their safety).  I really doubt there is even consensus on these items within the LGBT community.

You are the only one making this black and white, I suppose because it helps you justify your bigoted stance.  You suggest you are not a bigot, and somewhere in the middle, yet here you are online arguing in support of bigotry because you have declared it is all or nothing.  You avoid addressing any of the "middle" questions and only raise the extremes.  Very classic strawman tactics. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 04, 2023, 04:53:40 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 04, 2023, 03:19:32 AM

I very much support the LGBT community, which includes friends, relatives, and current/previous grad students.  I have no issues with rainbows.

Despite this, I don't think trans women that went through male puberty should compete in sports with women or necessarily go to women's prison (although I would also be concerned about sending them to a men's prison for their safety).  I really doubt there is even consensus on these items within the LGBT community.

You are the only one making this black and white, I suppose because it helps you justify your bigoted stance.  You suggest you are not a bigot, and somewhere in the middle, yet here you are online arguing in support of bigotry because you have declared it is all or nothing.  You avoid addressing any of the "middle" questions and only raise the extremes.  Very classic strawman tactics.

How have I argued "in support of bigotry"? I have said that I understand why some people would not want to use rainbow symbolism. If you think that's some how "dangerous" to LGBTQ people, then I'd say that's an "all or nothing" stance.

Do you think those people would object to a song about people getting along with each other but without the rainbow symbolism? If they really don't like the "getting along" message then they should be equally opposed to that. I would guess there are countless songs with a similar message but without the symbolism that would be perfectly acceptable. However, the people who want the rainbow symbolism wouldn't want those songs because they lack the rainbow symbolism.

What both sides implicitly agree on is that the rainbow symbolism is not there by accident, and the same explicit message without the symbolism wouldn't be any problem at all.



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on April 04, 2023, 06:08:14 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 04, 2023, 04:53:40 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 04, 2023, 03:19:32 AM

I very much support the LGBT community, which includes friends, relatives, and current/previous grad students.  I have no issues with rainbows.

Despite this, I don't think trans women that went through male puberty should compete in sports with women or necessarily go to women's prison (although I would also be concerned about sending them to a men's prison for their safety).  I really doubt there is even consensus on these items within the LGBT community.

You are the only one making this black and white, I suppose because it helps you justify your bigoted stance.  You suggest you are not a bigot, and somewhere in the middle, yet here you are online arguing in support of bigotry because you have declared it is all or nothing.  You avoid addressing any of the "middle" questions and only raise the extremes.  Very classic strawman tactics.

How have I argued "in support of bigotry"? I have said that I understand why some people would not want to use rainbow symbolism. If you think that's some how "dangerous" to LGBTQ people, then I'd say that's an "all or nothing" stance.

Do you think those people would object to a song about people getting along with each other but without the rainbow symbolism? If they really don't like the "getting along" message then they should be equally opposed to that. I would guess there are countless songs with a similar message but without the symbolism that would be perfectly acceptable. However, the people who want the rainbow symbolism wouldn't want those songs because they lack the rainbow symbolism.

What both sides implicitly agree on is that the rainbow symbolism is not there by accident, and the same explicit message without the symbolism wouldn't be any problem at all.

Perhaps that was hyperbolic, but being against inclusivity (that is the meaning of the rainbow), is by definition bigoted.  By framing this as an all or nothing belief, you justify being against inclusivity because it would mean you want trans women competing in the Olympics in the women's category.  This is obviously false (as it doesn't apply to me or most people), and only serves to excuse bigotry.

It is one thing not to fly the flag, it is quite different (and bigoted) to ban shows (and books) that have it included.  Ironically, this loops back to the original post about cancel culture.  Conservatives are happy to cancel rainbows yet decry so called cancel culture.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 04, 2023, 06:35:03 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 04, 2023, 06:08:14 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 04, 2023, 04:53:40 AM

How have I argued "in support of bigotry"? I have said that I understand why some people would not want to use rainbow symbolism. If you think that's some how "dangerous" to LGBTQ people, then I'd say that's an "all or nothing" stance.

Do you think those people would object to a song about people getting along with each other but without the rainbow symbolism? If they really don't like the "getting along" message then they should be equally opposed to that. I would guess there are countless songs with a similar message but without the symbolism that would be perfectly acceptable. However, the people who want the rainbow symbolism wouldn't want those songs because they lack the rainbow symbolism.

What both sides implicitly agree on is that the rainbow symbolism is not there by accident, and the same explicit message without the symbolism wouldn't be any problem at all.

Perhaps that was hyperbolic, but being against inclusivity (that is the meaning of the rainbow), is by definition bigoted.  By framing this as an all or nothing belief, you justify being against inclusivity because it would mean you want trans women competing in the Olympics in the women's category.  This is obviously false (as it doesn't apply to me or most people), and only serves to excuse bigotry.

For the vast majority of interactions between people, "inclusivity" comes down to normal human courtesy. Only a very small portion of people would consider rudeness an appropriate general response to someone who is "different". That has nothing to do with rainbows, and it has nothing to do with government policies and rules about things like Olympic competition.

The only reason there is such a push for "inclusivity" is because of these sorts of situations where there is a genuine difference of opinion that often has nothing to do with "bigotry" but often is due to things like protecting women (such a sports and prisons).

"Be polite to everyone by default" isn't likely to get any serious pushback from anyone.


Quote
It is one thing not to fly the flag, it is quite different (and bigoted) to ban shows (and books) that have it included.  Ironically, this loops back to the original post about cancel culture.  Conservatives are happy to cancel rainbows yet decry so called cancel culture.

I'm more of a middle-of-the-road person than a conservative, and both sides do their share of cancelling. My approach is to try and avoid as many of the "symbols" used by both sides because reality is much more nuanced than the loud people at either extreme would like to admit.
(So, if a school were singing "Rainbowland" I wouldn't refuse to sing it, but I'd rather they just have something with the same theme minus the specific symbolism.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 04, 2023, 09:04:24 AM
You're much less middle-of-the-road then you think, Marshy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on April 04, 2023, 09:28:03 AM
MTG might not agree.  "Be polite to everyone by default" isn't likely to get any serious pushback from anyone.   

According to her, "...Democrats are "pedophiles." On "60 Minutes," Stahl pressed Greene on her use of the slur, and the Georgia Republican defiantly responded that it's the truth: "They support grooming children."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 04, 2023, 10:44:41 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on April 04, 2023, 09:28:03 AM
MTG might not agree.  "Be polite to everyone by default" isn't likely to get any serious pushback from anyone.   

According to her, "...Democrats are "pedophiles." On "60 Minutes," Stahl pressed Greene on her use of the slur, and the Georgia Republican defiantly responded that it's the truth: "They support grooming children."

Do her kids go to the school that wanted to sing "Rainbowland"?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: MarathonRunner on April 04, 2023, 11:40:13 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 12:44:38 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 10:06:49 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 09:57:19 AM
all kinds of identity factors doesn't need to "identify" as some sort of "ally", since they don't see being enemies as any sort of normal alternative. And people who do that can rightfully take offense at being accused of mistreating people, not because of what they have done, but simply because they have refused to virtue-signal.

There ARE enemies.

We need to be allies to help defend good people from bigots.



Let's try an analogy.

I would guess that everyone on here is against cheaters. (Or against cheating.)

However, when the topic is discussed, there are always a range of opinions on what to do about specific cases. This is for at least 2 reasons:

  • Cheating requires intent, and without looking inside someone's head that's often impossible to establish.
  • Even when a person's intentions are clear, what constitutes cheating is a matter of debate.

Probably everyone would agree that someone sitting down and directly copying the work of another person and submitting it under their own name with no indication of its origin would count as cheating. But there are lots of less obvious things.

For instance, suppose a person wrote a paper entirely on their own, and then ran it through some sort of thing like ChatGPT to clean up the language. Some instructors would be adamant that it was cheating, while others would be equally adamant that it wasn't, especially if the person was a non-native English speaker, and depending on the discipline.

People have often asked what percentage similarity on a TurnItIn report should be automatically treated as cheating. The easiest way to reduce cheating as much as possible would be to prosecute every case of suspected cheating. That would certainly reduce cheating, but it would also foster an extremely adversarial and paranoid atmosphere, and would drive away even many non-cheating students who didn't want to live under that level of suspicion.

There are behaviours that would pretty universally be identified as bigotry, but there are all kinds of things that are open to interpretation. Probably most people would be "allies" when it comes to the universally-identified bigotry, but like the case for cheating, where there is no clear consensus many people would rather avoid the hostile atmosphere of hyper-vigilance.

Quote
Should the rainbow be edited out of Genesis?   

No, and neither should the word "gay" be edited out of old books when it meant happy. Whether someone chooses to quote from an old book which uses the word in its earlier sense is up to them.

You know that the crop which is now called "canola" used to be called "rape seed"? I don't think the change is a bad thing, even though no-one has suggested people growing it are potential sex offenders.

It's still called rape seed in Germany. Canola came about in Canada, hence the Can at the start of the word. Rapeseed and rapeseed oil are the terms still used in much of Europe, at least the countries I've lived in and/or visited. Rapsöl is the name for Canola oil in Germany.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 04, 2023, 12:43:03 PM
Quote from: MarathonRunner on April 04, 2023, 11:40:13 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 12:44:38 PM

You know that the crop which is now called "canola" used to be called "rape seed"? I don't think the change is a bad thing, even though no-one has suggested people growing it are potential sex offenders.

It's still called rape seed in Germany. Canola came about in Canada, hence the Can at the start of the word. Rapeseed and rapeseed oil are the terms still used in much of Europe, at least the countries I've lived in and/or visited. Rapsöl is the name for Canola oil in Germany.

Interesting. From a quick google search, it seems the German word for "rape" is not at all similar, so there wouldn't be the same problem with its use (as far as I can tell).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 04, 2023, 12:58:12 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 04, 2023, 12:43:03 PM
Quote from: MarathonRunner on April 04, 2023, 11:40:13 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 12:44:38 PM

You know that the crop which is now called "canola" used to be called "rape seed"? I don't think the change is a bad thing, even though no-one has suggested people growing it are potential sex offenders.

It's still called rape seed in Germany. Canola came about in Canada, hence the Can at the start of the word. Rapeseed and rapeseed oil are the terms still used in much of Europe, at least the countries I've lived in and/or visited. Rapsöl is the name for Canola oil in Germany.

Interesting. From a quick google search, it seems the German word for "rape" is not at all similar, so there wouldn't be the same problem with its use (as far as I can tell).

It's a silly example, Marshseed, and not at all the issue at hand.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on April 04, 2023, 01:47:58 PM
Quote from: MarathonRunner on April 04, 2023, 11:40:13 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 12:44:38 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 03, 2023, 10:06:49 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 03, 2023, 09:57:19 AM
all kinds of identity factors doesn't need to "identify" as some sort of "ally", since they don't see being enemies as any sort of normal alternative. And people who do that can rightfully take offense at being accused of mistreating people, not because of what they have done, but simply because they have refused to virtue-signal.

There ARE enemies.

We need to be allies to help defend good people from bigots.



Let's try an analogy.

I would guess that everyone on here is against cheaters. (Or against cheating.)

However, when the topic is discussed, there are always a range of opinions on what to do about specific cases. This is for at least 2 reasons:

  • Cheating requires intent, and without looking inside someone's head that's often impossible to establish.
  • Even when a person's intentions are clear, what constitutes cheating is a matter of debate.

Probably everyone would agree that someone sitting down and directly copying the work of another person and submitting it under their own name with no indication of its origin would count as cheating. But there are lots of less obvious things.

For instance, suppose a person wrote a paper entirely on their own, and then ran it through some sort of thing like ChatGPT to clean up the language. Some instructors would be adamant that it was cheating, while others would be equally adamant that it wasn't, especially if the person was a non-native English speaker, and depending on the discipline.

People have often asked what percentage similarity on a TurnItIn report should be automatically treated as cheating. The easiest way to reduce cheating as much as possible would be to prosecute every case of suspected cheating. That would certainly reduce cheating, but it would also foster an extremely adversarial and paranoid atmosphere, and would drive away even many non-cheating students who didn't want to live under that level of suspicion.

There are behaviours that would pretty universally be identified as bigotry, but there are all kinds of things that are open to interpretation. Probably most people would be "allies" when it comes to the universally-identified bigotry, but like the case for cheating, where there is no clear consensus many people would rather avoid the hostile atmosphere of hyper-vigilance.

Quote
Should the rainbow be edited out of Genesis?   

No, and neither should the word "gay" be edited out of old books when it meant happy. Whether someone chooses to quote from an old book which uses the word in its earlier sense is up to them.

You know that the crop which is now called "canola" used to be called "rape seed"? I don't think the change is a bad thing, even though no-one has suggested people growing it are potential sex offenders.

It's still called rape seed in Germany. Canola came about in Canada, hence the Can at the start of the word. Rapeseed and rapeseed oil are the terms still used in much of Europe, at least the countries I've lived in and/or visited. Rapsöl is the name for Canola oil in Germany.

Canola refers to a specific type of rape seed that was bred (in Canada) to have better qualities as a cooking oil.  Traditional rape seed is used for industrial applications and is thought to be somewhat toxic.  The re-branding as Canola was in part for marketing, but also to differentiate it from the industrial version.  You will not sell much oil if people think it is toxic, or perhaps if it is called rape seed?.

The terms may be used interchangeably in some regions, but they are two different things, or rather one is a specific type of the other.  All canola is rape seed, but not all rape seed is canola I suppose.  You could still grow and process rape seed in Canada, and refer to it as such, we just grow a lot more canola than rape seed.
   
Now back to your regularly scheduled programming...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on April 04, 2023, 03:33:54 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 04, 2023, 10:44:41 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on April 04, 2023, 09:28:03 AM
MTG might not agree.  "Be polite to everyone by default" isn't likely to get any serious pushback from anyone.   

According to her, "...Democrats are "pedophiles." On "60 Minutes," Stahl pressed Greene on her use of the slur, and the Georgia Republican defiantly responded that it's the truth: "They support grooming children."

Do her kids go to the school that wanted to sing "Rainbowland"?

Rainbows equal pedophiles to you?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on April 05, 2023, 12:13:43 AM
I'm here on vacation during Semana Santa where people process through the street wearing medieval costumes dating back several centuries. (https://www.elmundo.es/metropoli/otros-planes/2022/04/10/624c09b1e4d4d8bc568b45b7.html) These have been co-opted for the past 100 years or so by a group in the United States.

So, what if, at an American university, a group of Spanish Catholic students wanted to share their culture with their new friends by having a procession, with traditional costumes, to show the joy and solemnity of Semana Santa?

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 05, 2023, 04:56:40 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on April 04, 2023, 03:33:54 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 04, 2023, 10:44:41 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on April 04, 2023, 09:28:03 AM
MTG might not agree.  "Be polite to everyone by default" isn't likely to get any serious pushback from anyone.   

According to her, "...Democrats are "pedophiles." On "60 Minutes," Stahl pressed Greene on her use of the slur, and the Georgia Republican defiantly responded that it's the truth: "They support grooming children."

Do her kids go to the school that wanted to sing "Rainbowland"?

Rainbows equal pedophiles to you?

Not at all. I just wasn't sure how her statements have any relevance to the parents at the school in question.

Quote from: ciao_yall on April 05, 2023, 12:13:43 AM
I'm here on vacation during Semana Santa where people process through the street wearing medieval costumes dating back several centuries. (https://www.elmundo.es/metropoli/otros-planes/2022/04/10/624c09b1e4d4d8bc568b45b7.html) These have been co-opted for the past 100 years or so by a group in the United States.

So, what if, at an American university, a group of Spanish Catholic students wanted to share their culture with their new friends by having a procession, with traditional costumes, to show the joy and solemnity of Semana Santa?

Wow! I did not know about that. It would indeed be interesting to see how that would be received.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 10, 2023, 03:26:21 PM
Illustrated Anne Frank book removed by Florida school (https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/graphic-version-anne-frank-book-removed-florida-school-98478411)

Quote
ORLANDO, Fla. -- A high school along Florida's Atlantic Coast has removed a graphic novel based on the diary of Anne Frank after a leader of a conservative advocacy group challenged it, claiming it minimized the Holocaust.

"Anne Frank's Diary: The Graphic Adaptation" was removed from a library at Vero Beach High School after a leader of Moms for Liberty in Indian River County raised an objection. The school's principal agreed with the objection, and the book was removed last month.

The book at one point shows the protagonist walking in a park, enchanted by female nude statues, and later proposing to a friend that they show each other their breasts.

*****

Besides the Anne Frank graphic novel, Moms for Liberty in Indian River County objected to three books in the "Assassination Classroom" series, and they also were removed.

Moms for Liberty leader Jennifer Pippin said the Anne Frank graphic novel violated state standards to teach the Holocaust accurately.

*****

The American Library Association reported last month that there were more than 1,200 demands to censor library books last year in the U.S., the highest number since the association began tracking more than 20 years ago.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Anselm on April 10, 2023, 03:45:05 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 05, 2023, 12:13:43 AM
I'm here on vacation during Semana Santa where people process through the street wearing medieval costumes dating back several centuries. (https://www.elmundo.es/metropoli/otros-planes/2022/04/10/624c09b1e4d4d8bc568b45b7.html) These have been co-opted for the past 100 years or so by a group in the United States.

So, what if, at an American university, a group of Spanish Catholic students wanted to share their culture with their new friends by having a procession, with traditional costumes, to show the joy and solemnity of Semana Santa?

Good question and this reminds me of the historically peaceful use of the swastika by many cultures.  I would advise people to avoid doing it out in public because of the confusion it will certainly create.   According to this source, the pointed hood was a creation of Hollywood and not borrowed from Spaniards.

https://newrepublic.com/article/127242/klan-got-hood
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on April 10, 2023, 05:54:10 PM
Quote from: Anselm on April 10, 2023, 03:45:05 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 05, 2023, 12:13:43 AM
I'm here on vacation during Semana Santa where people process through the street wearing medieval costumes dating back several centuries. (https://www.elmundo.es/metropoli/otros-planes/2022/04/10/624c09b1e4d4d8bc568b45b7.html) These have been co-opted for the past 100 years or so by a group in the United States.

So, what if, at an American university, a group of Spanish Catholic students wanted to share their culture with their new friends by having a procession, with traditional costumes, to show the joy and solemnity of Semana Santa?

Good question and this reminds me of the historically peaceful use of the swastika by many cultures.  I would advise people to avoid doing it out in public because of the confusion it will certainly create.   According to this source, the pointed hood was a creation of Hollywood and not borrowed from Spaniards.
https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20210816-the-ancient-symbol-that-was-hijacked-by-evil
https://newrepublic.com/article/127242/klan-got-hood

The Nazis appropriated the swastika from a religion that was and continues to be in practice.
From Britannica https://www.britannica.com/topic/swastika
Quoteswastika, equilateral cross with arms bent at right angles, all in the same rotary direction, usually clockwise. The swastika as a symbol of prosperity and good fortune is widely distributed throughout the ancient and modern world. The word is derived from the Sanskrit svastika, meaning "conducive to well-being." It was a favourite symbol on ancient Mesopotamian coinage. In Scandinavia the left-hand swastika was the sign for the god Thor's hammer. The swastika also appeared in early Christian and Byzantine art (where it became known as the gammadion cross, or crux gammata, because it could be constructed from four Greek gammas [ Γ ] attached to a common base), and it occurred in South and Central America (among the Maya) and in North America (principally among the Navajo).

In India the swastika continues to be the most widely used auspicious symbol of Hindus, Jainas, and Buddhists. Among the Jainas it is the emblem of their seventh Tirthankara (saint) and is also said to remind the worshiper by its four arms of the four possible places of rebirth—in the animal or plant world, in hell, on Earth, or in the spirit world.

See also the BBC article: https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20210816-the-ancient-symbol-that-was-hijacked-by-evil

As for the etymology of rapeseed, upthread, see below:

QuoteThe name for rapeseed comes from the Latin word rapum meaning turnip. Turnip, rutabaga (swede), cabbage, Brussels sprouts, and mustard are related to rapeseed.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 11, 2023, 10:09:15 PM
NBC News: Texas county weighs closing local library after federal judge orders banned books returned to circulation (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/llano-county-texas-weighs-closing-local-library-federal-judge-orders-b-rcna79173)

Quote
A small Texas county is weighing whether to shut down its public library system after a federal judge ruled the commissioners violated the constitution by banning a dozen mostly children's books and ordered that they be put back in circulation.

The Llano County commissioners have scheduled for Thursday a special meeting in which the first item on the agenda is whether to "continue or cease operations" at the library.

While Texas is clearly bat **** crazy, what's with all the farts in children's books?

Quote
The books that Llano County officials removed from the library shelves include Isabel Wilkerson's "Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents"; "They Called Themselves the K.K.K.: The Birth of an American Terrorist Group" by Susan Campbell Bartoletti; the graphic novel "Spinning" by Tillie Walden; and three books from Dawn McMillan's "I Need a New Butt!" series.

Last year, an assistant principal at a Mississippi elementary school was fired after he read "I Need a New Butt!" to a second-grade class. The reason? Because the book used words like "butt" and "fart" and included cartoon images of a child's butt.

Also removed from the library were Maurice Sendak's "In the Night Kitchen"; Robie H. Harris' "It's Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex, and Sexual Health"; and four other children's picture books with "silly themes and rhymes," like "Larry the Farting Leprechaun," "Gary the Goose and His Gas on the Loose"; "Freddie the Farting Snowman" and "Harvey the Heart Has Too Many Farts," according to the complaint.

I guess the authors just know their audience.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ergative on April 12, 2023, 01:47:00 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 11, 2023, 10:09:15 PM
NBC News: Texas county weighs closing local library after federal judge orders banned books returned to circulation (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/llano-county-texas-weighs-closing-local-library-federal-judge-orders-b-rcna79173)

Quote
A small Texas county is weighing whether to shut down its public library system after a federal judge ruled the commissioners violated the constitution by banning a dozen mostly children's books and ordered that they be put back in circulation.

The Llano County commissioners have scheduled for Thursday a special meeting in which the first item on the agenda is whether to "continue or cease operations" at the library.

While Texas is clearly bat **** crazy, what's with all the farts in children's books?

Quote
The books that Llano County officials removed from the library shelves include Isabel Wilkerson's "Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents"; "They Called Themselves the K.K.K.: The Birth of an American Terrorist Group" by Susan Campbell Bartoletti; the graphic novel "Spinning" by Tillie Walden; and three books from Dawn McMillan's "I Need a New Butt!" series.

Last year, an assistant principal at a Mississippi elementary school was fired after he read "I Need a New Butt!" to a second-grade class. The reason? Because the book used words like "butt" and "fart" and included cartoon images of a child's butt.

Also removed from the library were Maurice Sendak's "In the Night Kitchen"; Robie H. Harris' "It's Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex, and Sexual Health"; and four other children's picture books with "silly themes and rhymes," like "Larry the Farting Leprechaun," "Gary the Goose and His Gas on the Loose"; "Freddie the Farting Snowman" and "Harvey the Heart Has Too Many Farts," according to the complaint.

I guess the authors just know their audience.

Farts are to children's books what sad boner professors are to Great Literature.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 12, 2023, 11:11:19 AM
Boston Globe: New faculty-led organization at Harvard will defend academic freedom (https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/04/12/opinion/harvard-council-academic-freedom/#:~:text=The%20new%20Council%20on%20Academic,their%20concern%20for%20academic%20freedom.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on April 13, 2023, 08:25:06 AM
Quote from: ergative on April 12, 2023, 01:47:00 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 11, 2023, 10:09:15 PM
NBC News: Texas county weighs closing local library after federal judge orders banned books returned to circulation (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/llano-county-texas-weighs-closing-local-library-federal-judge-orders-b-rcna79173)

Quote
A small Texas county is weighing whether to shut down its public library system after a federal judge ruled the commissioners violated the constitution by banning a dozen mostly children's books and ordered that they be put back in circulation.

The Llano County commissioners have scheduled for Thursday a special meeting in which the first item on the agenda is whether to "continue or cease operations" at the library.

While Texas is clearly bat **** crazy, what's with all the farts in children's books?

Quote
The books that Llano County officials removed from the library shelves include Isabel Wilkerson's "Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents"; "They Called Themselves the K.K.K.: The Birth of an American Terrorist Group" by Susan Campbell Bartoletti; the graphic novel "Spinning" by Tillie Walden; and three books from Dawn McMillan's "I Need a New Butt!" series.

Last year, an assistant principal at a Mississippi elementary school was fired after he read "I Need a New Butt!" to a second-grade class. The reason? Because the book used words like "butt" and "fart" and included cartoon images of a child's butt.

Also removed from the library were Maurice Sendak's "In the Night Kitchen"; Robie H. Harris' "It's Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex, and Sexual Health"; and four other children's picture books with "silly themes and rhymes," like "Larry the Farting Leprechaun," "Gary the Goose and His Gas on the Loose"; "Freddie the Farting Snowman" and "Harvey the Heart Has Too Many Farts," according to the complaint.

I guess the authors just know their audience.

Farts are to children's books what sad boner professors are to Great Literature.

"For as in this world, head winds are far more prevalent than winds from astern (that is, if you never violate the Pythagorean maxim), so for the most part the Commodore on the quarter-deck gets his atmosphere at second hand from the sailors on the forecastle."

Hard to top Melville and Moby-Dick when it comes to fart jokes.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on April 13, 2023, 08:56:19 AM
Quote from: little bongo on April 13, 2023, 08:25:06 AM
Quote from: ergative on April 12, 2023, 01:47:00 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 11, 2023, 10:09:15 PM
NBC News: Texas county weighs closing local library after federal judge orders banned books returned to circulation (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/llano-county-texas-weighs-closing-local-library-federal-judge-orders-b-rcna79173)

Quote
A small Texas county is weighing whether to shut down its public library system after a federal judge ruled the commissioners violated the constitution by banning a dozen mostly children's books and ordered that they be put back in circulation.

The Llano County commissioners have scheduled for Thursday a special meeting in which the first item on the agenda is whether to "continue or cease operations" at the library.

While Texas is clearly bat **** crazy, what's with all the farts in children's books?

Quote
The books that Llano County officials removed from the library shelves include Isabel Wilkerson's "Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents"; "They Called Themselves the K.K.K.: The Birth of an American Terrorist Group" by Susan Campbell Bartoletti; the graphic novel "Spinning" by Tillie Walden; and three books from Dawn McMillan's "I Need a New Butt!" series.

Last year, an assistant principal at a Mississippi elementary school was fired after he read "I Need a New Butt!" to a second-grade class. The reason? Because the book used words like "butt" and "fart" and included cartoon images of a child's butt.

Also removed from the library were Maurice Sendak's "In the Night Kitchen"; Robie H. Harris' "It's Perfectly Normal: Changing Bodies, Growing Up, Sex, and Sexual Health"; and four other children's picture books with "silly themes and rhymes," like "Larry the Farting Leprechaun," "Gary the Goose and His Gas on the Loose"; "Freddie the Farting Snowman" and "Harvey the Heart Has Too Many Farts," according to the complaint.

I guess the authors just know their audience.

Farts are to children's books what sad boner professors are to Great Literature.

"For as in this world, head winds are far more prevalent than winds from astern (that is, if you never violate the Pythagorean maxim), so for the most part the Commodore on the quarter-deck gets his atmosphere at second hand from the sailors on the forecastle."

Hard to top Melville and Moby-Dick when it comes to fart jokes.

Isaiah 16:11....among several
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on April 13, 2023, 05:14:29 PM
White due says slavery's good side must be taught in ....Oh never mind.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2021/04/27/louisiana-lawmaker-argues-schools-must-teach-good-of-slavery/?sh=651b7da28cf0
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 16, 2023, 05:31:29 PM
A colleague / friend just posted this on Facebook----I'm not sure exactly why.  First published in 2018, it refers to an article published in 2015, both are very prescient. 

The Atlantic: The Coddling of the American Mind 'Is Speeding Up' (https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2018/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind-is-speeding-up/570505/?fbclid=IwAR2L4kVGD6VTcrOqcYDfQOCU7TVBycEiSED3QsuZzkwJkDWyz5kZ6f5i5QE)

Quote
In that story, "The Coddling of the American Mind," Lukianoff, a First Amendment lawyer and the president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (fire), and Haidt, a social psychologist at New York University, observed that "in the name of emotional well-being, college students are increasingly demanding protection from words and ideas they don't like," and argued that capitulating to requests to banish certain ideas from classrooms and campus events would likely increase student anxiety and depression, rather than ameliorate it.

Three years later, political polarization has only increased, as has anxiety among young people. And unrest on college campuses continues. "Everything's speeding up," Lukianoff says. Haidt and Lukianoff recently published a book, also titled The Coddling of the American Mind, where they go into more detail about the three "Great Untruths" they believe are behind free-speech controversies at America's universities:

THE CODDLING OF THE AMERICAN MIND (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/)

Quote
Something strange is happening at America's colleges and universities. A movement is arising, undirected and driven largely by students, to scrub campuses clean of words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense. Last December, Jeannie Suk wrote in an online article for The New Yorker about law students asking her fellow professors at Harvard not to teach rape law—or, in one case, even use the word violate (as in "that violates the law") lest it cause students distress. In February, Laura Kipnis, a professor at Northwestern University, wrote an essay in The Chronicle of Higher Education describing a new campus politics of sexual paranoia—and was then subjected to a long investigation after students who were offended by the article and by a tweet she'd sent filed Title IX complaints against her. In June, a professor protecting himself with a pseudonym wrote an essay for Vox describing how gingerly he now has to teach. "I'm a Liberal Professor, and My Liberal Students Terrify Me," the headline said. A number of popular comedians, including Chris Rock, have stopped performing on college campuses (see Caitlin Flanagan's article in this month's issue). Jerry Seinfeld and Bill Maher have publicly condemned the oversensitivity of college students, saying too many of them can't take a joke.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 16, 2023, 08:38:24 PM
Yeah, it sure did anticipate that politicians would ban entire fields of study and seek to rewrite history.

But I guess a student at Oberlin objected to Sodexho calling a pastrami and miracle whip sub a banh mi, so it's a wash or whatever.

Glad we've got our free speech priorities straight!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 09:12:14 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 16, 2023, 05:31:29 PM
A colleague / friend just posted this on Facebook----I'm not sure exactly why.  First published in 2018, it refers to an article published in 2015, both are very prescient. 

The Atlantic: The Coddling of the American Mind 'Is Speeding Up' (https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2018/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind-is-speeding-up/570505/?fbclid=IwAR2L4kVGD6VTcrOqcYDfQOCU7TVBycEiSED3QsuZzkwJkDWyz5kZ6f5i5QE)

Quote
In that story, "The Coddling of the American Mind," Lukianoff, a First Amendment lawyer and the president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (fire), and Haidt, a social psychologist at New York University, observed that "in the name of emotional well-being, college students are increasingly demanding protection from words and ideas they don't like," and argued that capitulating to requests to banish certain ideas from classrooms and campus events would likely increase student anxiety and depression, rather than ameliorate it.

Three years later, political polarization has only increased, as has anxiety among young people. And unrest on college campuses continues. "Everything's speeding up," Lukianoff says. Haidt and Lukianoff recently published a book, also titled The Coddling of the American Mind, where they go into more detail about the three "Great Untruths" they believe are behind free-speech controversies at America's universities:

THE CODDLING OF THE AMERICAN MIND (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/)

Quote
Something strange is happening at America's colleges and universities. A movement is arising, undirected and driven largely by students, to scrub campuses clean of words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense. Last December, Jeannie Suk wrote in an online article for The New Yorker about law students asking her fellow professors at Harvard not to teach rape law—or, in one case, even use the word violate (as in "that violates the law") lest it cause students distress. In February, Laura Kipnis, a professor at Northwestern University, wrote an essay in The Chronicle of Higher Education describing a new campus politics of sexual paranoia—and was then subjected to a long investigation after students who were offended by the article and by a tweet she'd sent filed Title IX complaints against her. In June, a professor protecting himself with a pseudonym wrote an essay for Vox describing how gingerly he now has to teach. "I'm a Liberal Professor, and My Liberal Students Terrify Me," the headline said. A number of popular comedians, including Chris Rock, have stopped performing on college campuses (see Caitlin Flanagan's article in this month's issue). Jerry Seinfeld and Bill Maher have publicly condemned the oversensitivity of college students, saying too many of them can't take a joke.

One interesting thing from the book is that
Lukianoff himself benefitted fom cognitive behavioral therapy, and so he was concerned that "safety" culture teaches exactly the opposite of CBT so it increases anxiety rather than  alleviating it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Diogenes on April 17, 2023, 10:46:19 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 16, 2023, 05:31:29 PM
A colleague / friend just posted this on Facebook----I'm not sure exactly why.  First published in 2018, it refers to an article published in 2015, both are very prescient. 

The Atlantic: The Coddling of the American Mind 'Is Speeding Up' (https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2018/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind-is-speeding-up/570505/?fbclid=IwAR2L4kVGD6VTcrOqcYDfQOCU7TVBycEiSED3QsuZzkwJkDWyz5kZ6f5i5QE)

Quote
In that story, "The Coddling of the American Mind," Lukianoff, a First Amendment lawyer and the president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (fire), and Haidt, a social psychologist at New York University, observed that "in the name of emotional well-being, college students are increasingly demanding protection from words and ideas they don't like," and argued that capitulating to requests to banish certain ideas from classrooms and campus events would likely increase student anxiety and depression, rather than ameliorate it.

Three years later, political polarization has only increased, as has anxiety among young people. And unrest on college campuses continues. "Everything's speeding up," Lukianoff says. Haidt and Lukianoff recently published a book, also titled The Coddling of the American Mind, where they go into more detail about the three "Great Untruths" they believe are behind free-speech controversies at America's universities:

THE CODDLING OF THE AMERICAN MIND (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/)

Quote
Something strange is happening at America's colleges and universities. A movement is arising, undirected and driven largely by students, to scrub campuses clean of words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense. Last December, Jeannie Suk wrote in an online article for The New Yorker about law students asking her fellow professors at Harvard not to teach rape law—or, in one case, even use the word violate (as in "that violates the law") lest it cause students distress. In February, Laura Kipnis, a professor at Northwestern University, wrote an essay in The Chronicle of Higher Education describing a new campus politics of sexual paranoia—and was then subjected to a long investigation after students who were offended by the article and by a tweet she'd sent filed Title IX complaints against her. In June, a professor protecting himself with a pseudonym wrote an essay for Vox describing how gingerly he now has to teach. "I'm a Liberal Professor, and My Liberal Students Terrify Me," the headline said. A number of popular comedians, including Chris Rock, have stopped performing on college campuses (see Caitlin Flanagan's article in this month's issue). Jerry Seinfeld and Bill Maher have publicly condemned the oversensitivity of college students, saying too many of them can't take a joke.


The Podcast "If Books Could Kill" eviscerated many of the claims made in the original Atlantic piece and subsequent book. It's got a lot of profanity but worth listening to https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/id1651876897?i=1000603422829
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Diogenes on April 17, 2023, 10:50:07 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 09:12:14 AM

One interesting thing from the book is that
Lukianoff himself benefitted fom cognitive behavioral therapy, and so he was concerned that "safety" culture teaches exactly the opposite of CBT so it increases anxiety rather than  alleviating it.

That's a wild bit of speculation on his part. Apples and Oranges. Controlled CBT is not the same as making people hear things randomly out in the world. Form one psych prof to another, the co-author of the book, I'm shocked Haidt would let that slide.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 11:03:23 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on April 17, 2023, 10:50:07 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 09:12:14 AM

One interesting thing from the book is that
Lukianoff himself benefitted fom cognitive behavioral therapy, and so he was concerned that "safety" culture teaches exactly the opposite of CBT so it increases anxiety rather than  alleviating it.

That's a wild bit of speculation on his part. Apples and Oranges. Controlled CBT is not the same as making people hear things randomly out in the world. Form one psych prof to another, the co-author of the book, I'm shocked Haidt would let that slide.

Whatever one thinks of the book, there's lots of evidence of increased anxiety among Millenials and Gen Z. Given that some previous generations actually grew up in wartime, society is doing worse at preparing young people for adult life than previous generations did.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 17, 2023, 11:25:18 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 11:03:23 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on April 17, 2023, 10:50:07 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 09:12:14 AM

One interesting thing from the book is that
Lukianoff himself benefitted fom cognitive behavioral therapy, and so he was concerned that "safety" culture teaches exactly the opposite of CBT so it increases anxiety rather than  alleviating it.

That's a wild bit of speculation on his part. Apples and Oranges. Controlled CBT is not the same as making people hear things randomly out in the world. Form one psych prof to another, the co-author of the book, I'm shocked Haidt would let that slide.

Whatever one thinks of the book, there's lots of evidence of increased anxiety among Millenials and Gen Z. Given that some previous generations actually grew up in wartime, society is doing worse at preparing young people for adult life than previous generations did.

Not sure that that's true, Marshy.

There were plenty of neurosis, addictions, sexual and other deviances, wealth gaps, familial dysfunction, not to mention overt institutional sexism and racism, and all that other crap to go around back in the day.  Find out anything about your grandparents and great grandparents and their people and you will see.  I certainly witnessed it on both sides of my family line.  The difference is that our predecessors didn't talk about these things in the same manner and measure that we do.  Perhaps we discuss too much, actually, and this is creating the paranoia and over-sensitivity on our college campuses.  Still, there is nothing new under the sun.

The current generation grew up after 9/11, the introduction of meth, 2008, now COVID and the Floyd murder, and many have served overseas in one of our various military campaigns.  They are certainly tougher than our generation, Marshman.

Just don't fall into the curmudgeon trap.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 11:40:38 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 17, 2023, 11:25:18 AM

The current generation grew up after 9/11, the introduction of meth, 2008, now COVID and the Floyd murder, and many have served overseas in one of our various military campaigns.  They are certainly tougher than our generation, Marshman.

Just don't fall into the curmudgeon trap.

Since there are young people who are refugees, and actually grew up in war zones, they should be way more stressed out than native- born youth. That doesn't seem to be the case. Also, the most "snowflakey" campuses tend to be ones primarily serving rich white kids.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 17, 2023, 12:14:51 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 11:40:38 AM
Since there are young people who are refugees, and actually grew up in war zones, they should be way more stressed out than native- born youth. That doesn't seem to be the case. Also, the most "snowflakey" campuses tend to be ones primarily serving rich white kids.

Can you quantify either of those claims?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 01:04:10 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 17, 2023, 12:14:51 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 11:40:38 AM
Since there are young people who are refugees, and actually grew up in war zones, they should be way more stressed out than native- born youth. That doesn't seem to be the case. Also, the most "snowflakey" campuses tend to be ones primarily serving rich white kids.

Can you quantify either of those claims?

Study finds racial and ethnic identity plays a role in mental health of Gen Z (https://baptistnews.com/article/study-finds-racial-and-ethnic-identity-plays-a-role-in-mental-health-of-gen-z/)
Quote
Young Americans of color are slightly more religious and enjoy better mental health than their white Generation Z counterparts, according to a new study by Springtide Research Institute.

These findings were quantified in spite of the intense racial prejudice and social injustices faced by Black, indigenous and people of color, or BIPOC in the study's terminology.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 01:12:34 PM
Prevalence of Mental Health Disorders Among Immigrant, Refugee, and Nonimmigrant Children and Youth in British Columbia, Canada (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2789061)

Quote
Findings  In this cohort study that included 470 464 children and youth in British Columbia, Canada, children and youth from immigrant and refugee backgrounds (both first- and second-generation) had a significantly lower diagnostic prevalence of conduct disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and mood/anxiety disorders than their nonimmigrant counterparts, with few exceptions.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 17, 2023, 01:45:24 PM
Loyola student journalist disciplined for recording interview with campus police (https://www.nola.com/news/loyola-student-journalist-disciplined-for-recording-interview-with-campus-police/article_7707b2e6-dc9e-11ed-a943-0f3bdb3817b6.html?utm_source=reddit.com)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 17, 2023, 02:08:09 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 01:12:34 PM
Prevalence of Mental Health Disorders Among Immigrant, Refugee, and Nonimmigrant Children and Youth in British Columbia, Canada (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2789061)

Quote
Findings  In this cohort study that included 470 464 children and youth in British Columbia, Canada, children and youth from immigrant and refugee backgrounds (both first- and second-generation) had a significantly lower diagnostic prevalence of conduct disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and mood/anxiety disorders than their nonimmigrant counterparts, with few exceptions.

Interesting, but part of the issue is that immigrant and refugee kids don't have access to services, so we are not sure of their overall mental health status.

While this seems to indicate that, yeah, these people from highly stressful environments do, in fact, have the trauma we would expect:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9094640/

And before you go talking about "snowflakery rich white kids," consider that probably the biggest snowflakes in the universe are Bud Light drinkers.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 02:28:09 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 17, 2023, 02:08:09 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 01:12:34 PM
Prevalence of Mental Health Disorders Among Immigrant, Refugee, and Nonimmigrant Children and Youth in British Columbia, Canada (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2789061)

Quote
Findings  In this cohort study that included 470 464 children and youth in British Columbia, Canada, children and youth from immigrant and refugee backgrounds (both first- and second-generation) had a significantly lower diagnostic prevalence of conduct disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and mood/anxiety disorders than their nonimmigrant counterparts, with few exceptions.

Interesting, but part of the issue is that immigrant and refugee kids don't have access to services, so we are not sure of their overall mental health status.

While this seems to indicate that, yeah, these people from highly stressful environments do, in fact, have the trauma we would expect:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9094640/

And before you go talking about "snowflakery rich white kids," consider that probably the biggest snowflakes in the universe are Bud Light drinkers.

You mean the ones who are still Bud Light drinkers?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 17, 2023, 03:46:39 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 02:28:09 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 17, 2023, 02:08:09 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 17, 2023, 01:12:34 PM
Prevalence of Mental Health Disorders Among Immigrant, Refugee, and Nonimmigrant Children and Youth in British Columbia, Canada (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2789061)

Quote
Findings  In this cohort study that included 470 464 children and youth in British Columbia, Canada, children and youth from immigrant and refugee backgrounds (both first- and second-generation) had a significantly lower diagnostic prevalence of conduct disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and mood/anxiety disorders than their nonimmigrant counterparts, with few exceptions.

Interesting, but part of the issue is that immigrant and refugee kids don't have access to services, so we are not sure of their overall mental health status.

While this seems to indicate that, yeah, these people from highly stressful environments do, in fact, have the trauma we would expect:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9094640/

And before you go talking about "snowflakery rich white kids," consider that probably the biggest snowflakes in the universe are Bud Light drinkers.

You mean the ones who are still Bud Light drinkers?

I mean the ones having the snowflakey temper tantrums because they are so insecure and vapid that they find beer a cultural touchstone.  It's hilarious.

In the meantime...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 17, 2023, 03:48:11 PM
TN bill that allows students to report professors who teach 'divisive concepts' passes House and Senate (https://www.wbir.com/article/news/education/new-bill-would-strengthen-rules-over-what-can-be-taught-in-classrooms/51-ddd267e4-3d98-4de0-bb2e-3284740b4cb7)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on April 17, 2023, 04:32:24 PM
Yes, there is no question that Millennials and Zers have had (and almost certainly will continue to have) things much rougher than the average Boomer or Xer, and, of course, it has been Boomers and Xers who have parented the young'uns, and not exactly done a bang-up job of it, either.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 17, 2023, 05:53:52 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 17, 2023, 03:48:11 PM
TN bill that allows students to report professors who teach 'divisive concepts' passes House and Senate (https://www.wbir.com/article/news/education/new-bill-would-strengthen-rules-over-what-can-be-taught-in-classrooms/51-ddd267e4-3d98-4de0-bb2e-3284740b4cb7)

Wow

Looks to me like biologists are screwed, because the bill requires them to teach creationism:

Quote[Forbidden from teaching that] all Americans are not created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 17, 2023, 06:28:05 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on April 17, 2023, 04:32:24 PM
Yes, there is no question that Millennials and Zers have had (and almost certainly will continue to have) things much rougher than the average Boomer or Xer, and, of course, it has been Boomers and Xers who have parented the young'uns, and not exactly done a bang-up job of it, either.

We aaaaalways think that about the younger generations.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on April 17, 2023, 07:00:18 PM
No, we don't always think that the younger gens have had it objectively rougher than we and our parents had it.   That has not at all always been the case historically, but it certainly is now.   The list of things the Mills and Zers have had to deal with, just in the 21st c, simply cannot compare to anything that burdened Xers or most Boomers (excepting those who went to Vietnam).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 18, 2023, 06:17:43 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on April 17, 2023, 07:00:18 PM
No, we don't always think that the younger gens have had it objectively rougher than we and our parents had it.   That has not at all always been the case historically, but it certainly is now.   The list of things the Mills and Zers have had to deal with, just in the 21st c, simply cannot compare to anything that burdened Xers or most Boomers (excepting those who went to Vietnam).

The Myth of the Broke Millennial (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/05/millennial-generation-financial-issues-income-homeowners/673485/)

Quote
The Millennial income rebound has been broad as well as steep. The income of young adults across racial groups has risen since 2014. By my analysis, Black and Latino Americans ages 25 to 44 in 2021 were making more money than Black and Latino Silents, Boomers, and Gen Xers at the same age. The U.S. is not without economic inequities, many of them racial. But Black and Latino Millennials are not falling behind previous generations when it comes to their income. Instead, most are getting ahead.

...
Fewer Millennials were in poverty in 2019 than were Boomers and Gen Xers at the same age (in 1987 and 2004, years in which the economy was likewise strong).

You're right. Millenials and Gen Z haven't had to contend with a 10% inflation rate, and over 20% car loan rates, like I did in 1982.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 18, 2023, 07:07:08 AM
Ah yes, those horrible days when you didn't try to hop onto the labour market during the worst recession since the Great Depression, and when my mother bought a house for one year's income (the same house today would have cost her nine years' income, and that's the cheap part of the country; here, today, a house is at least 42 times what her income was). It sure was tough back then! Especially considering inflation fell to 5.86% in 1983, then kept falling for the next ten years, at which point it remained more or less steady until last year and this year, when it's peaked again.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 18, 2023, 07:23:48 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 18, 2023, 07:07:08 AM
Ah yes, those horrible days when you didn't try to hop onto the labour market during the worst recession since the Great Depression, and when my mother bought a house for one year's income (the same house today would have cost her nine years' income, and that's the cheap part of the country; here, today, a house is at least 42 times what her income was). It sure was tough back then! Especially considering inflation fell to 5.86% in 1983, then kept falling for the next ten years, at which point it remained more or less steady until last year and this year, when it's peaked again.

The one thing that has steadily increased is expectations. In 1982 I had a small black and white TV, basic cable, and a single landline phone (and of course, no computer of any sort). I never had a cell phone until a couple of years ago. A 20 year old living in their parents' basement today has way more creature comforts (smart phone, computer, internet, streaming services,  etc.) than his/her parents ever dreamed of.  So the lifestyle a young person expects to have on their own was unthinkable to those previous generations at that stage of life.
Professionally, many young people expect to have jobs which will give great work-life balance and promotions within 6 months. Many in tech do a lot of monkey-branching from job to job expecting to get higher pay and status. Ask Boomers how many figured they'd be in management by age 25, or even 30.

Every generation has had challenges; it's just self-absorbed to believe nobody had it worse than you. (And since my parents grew up in the Depression, and went through WWII, I wouldn't pretend to have had a a life even remotely as difficult as theirs.)

More from the article:
Quote
Millennials' homeownership rates in 2020 were only slightly behind Boomers' and Gen Xers' at the same age: 50 percent of Boomers owned their own home as 25-to-39-year-olds, compared with 48 percent of Millennials
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on April 18, 2023, 09:16:11 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 18, 2023, 07:23:48 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 18, 2023, 07:07:08 AM
Ah yes, those horrible days when you didn't try to hop onto the labour market during the worst recession since the Great Depression, and when my mother bought a house for one year's income (the same house today would have cost her nine years' income, and that's the cheap part of the country; here, today, a house is at least 42 times what her income was). It sure was tough back then! Especially considering inflation fell to 5.86% in 1983, then kept falling for the next ten years, at which point it remained more or less steady until last year and this year, when it's peaked again.

The one thing that has steadily increased is expectations. In 1982 I had a small black and white TV, basic cable, and a single landline phone (and of course, no computer of any sort). I never had a cell phone until a couple of years ago. A 20 year old living in their parents' basement today has way more creature comforts (smart phone, computer, internet, streaming services,  etc.) than his/her parents ever dreamed of.  So the lifestyle a young person expects to have on their own was unthinkable to those previous generations at that stage of life.
Professionally, many young people expect to have jobs which will give great work-life balance and promotions within 6 months. Many in tech do a lot of monkey-branching from job to job expecting to get higher pay and status. Ask Boomers how many figured they'd be in management by age 25, or even 30.

Every generation has had challenges; it's just self-absorbed to believe nobody had it worse than you. (And since my parents grew up in the Depression, and went through WWII, I wouldn't pretend to have had a a life even remotely as difficult as theirs.)

More from the article:
Quote
Millennials' homeownership rates in 2020 were only slightly behind Boomers' and Gen Xers' at the same age: 50 percent of Boomers owned their own home as 25-to-39-year-olds, compared with 48 percent of Millennials

Yes, they have cell phones and creature comforts, just can't afford a house. 

I don't think anyone has ever said no one has ever had it this tough, but the previous couple generations had it easier in  many ways.   Not in all ways, but many.

It is simply unimaginable to support a family on a single blue collared job now.  This was the norm in my grandparents era.  Cutting your cell phone and Netflix plans will not change this math.

When I was a child, we literally lost the farm in the 80s crisis.  Through gard work, my parents were able to recover and buy a new house several years later.  The difference is I cannot afford the first hone to lose, let alone recover to purchase a second, and I make much more than my parents did at that point. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 18, 2023, 09:46:05 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 18, 2023, 09:16:11 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 18, 2023, 07:23:48 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 18, 2023, 07:07:08 AM
Ah yes, those horrible days when you didn't try to hop onto the labour market during the worst recession since the Great Depression, and when my mother bought a house for one year's income (the same house today would have cost her nine years' income, and that's the cheap part of the country; here, today, a house is at least 42 times what her income was). It sure was tough back then! Especially considering inflation fell to 5.86% in 1983, then kept falling for the next ten years, at which point it remained more or less steady until last year and this year, when it's peaked again.

The one thing that has steadily increased is expectations. In 1982 I had a small black and white TV, basic cable, and a single landline phone (and of course, no computer of any sort). I never had a cell phone until a couple of years ago. A 20 year old living in their parents' basement today has way more creature comforts (smart phone, computer, internet, streaming services,  etc.) than his/her parents ever dreamed of.  So the lifestyle a young person expects to have on their own was unthinkable to those previous generations at that stage of life.
Professionally, many young people expect to have jobs which will give great work-life balance and promotions within 6 months. Many in tech do a lot of monkey-branching from job to job expecting to get higher pay and status. Ask Boomers how many figured they'd be in management by age 25, or even 30.

Every generation has had challenges; it's just self-absorbed to believe nobody had it worse than you. (And since my parents grew up in the Depression, and went through WWII, I wouldn't pretend to have had a a life even remotely as difficult as theirs.)

More from the article:
Quote
Millennials' homeownership rates in 2020 were only slightly behind Boomers' and Gen Xers' at the same age: 50 percent of Boomers owned their own home as 25-to-39-year-olds, compared with 48 percent of Millennials

Yes, they have cell phones and creature comforts, just can't afford a house. 

I don't think anyone has ever said no one has ever had it this tough, but the previous couple generations had it easier in  many ways.   Not in all ways, but many.

One of the things that does make it tougher now is the benchmarks. For Boomers, and probably Gen X, our bosses when we started work were all in their 40's and 50's. Newscasters, company founders, etc. as well. Now we have all of these stupid "Top 40 under 40" lists and things of that nature. Most of the anchors and broadcasters on the news are in their 30's, if not 20's, so the idea of how soon you should be "successful" has been ratcheted up incredibly.
That makes all of the challenges of the moment seem more serious.

Quote
It is simply unimaginable to support a family on a single blue collared job now.  This was the norm in my grandparents era.  Cutting your cell phone and Netflix plans will not change this math.


That's true, but also the proportion of jobs that are blue collar is much lower now. And, not many couples "aspire" to a single income household with a full-time stay-at-home spouse.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on April 18, 2023, 12:07:56 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 18, 2023, 09:46:05 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 18, 2023, 09:16:11 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 18, 2023, 07:23:48 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 18, 2023, 07:07:08 AM
Ah yes, those horrible days when you didn't try to hop onto the labour market during the worst recession since the Great Depression, and when my mother bought a house for one year's income (the same house today would have cost her nine years' income, and that's the cheap part of the country; here, today, a house is at least 42 times what her income was). It sure was tough back then! Especially considering inflation fell to 5.86% in 1983, then kept falling for the next ten years, at which point it remained more or less steady until last year and this year, when it's peaked again.

The one thing that has steadily increased is expectations. In 1982 I had a small black and white TV, basic cable, and a single landline phone (and of course, no computer of any sort). I never had a cell phone until a couple of years ago. A 20 year old living in their parents' basement today has way more creature comforts (smart phone, computer, internet, streaming services,  etc.) than his/her parents ever dreamed of.  So the lifestyle a young person expects to have on their own was unthinkable to those previous generations at that stage of life.
Professionally, many young people expect to have jobs which will give great work-life balance and promotions within 6 months. Many in tech do a lot of monkey-branching from job to job expecting to get higher pay and status. Ask Boomers how many figured they'd be in management by age 25, or even 30.

Every generation has had challenges; it's just self-absorbed to believe nobody had it worse than you. (And since my parents grew up in the Depression, and went through WWII, I wouldn't pretend to have had a a life even remotely as difficult as theirs.)

More from the article:
Quote
Millennials' homeownership rates in 2020 were only slightly behind Boomers' and Gen Xers' at the same age: 50 percent of Boomers owned their own home as 25-to-39-year-olds, compared with 48 percent of Millennials

Yes, they have cell phones and creature comforts, just can't afford a house. 

I don't think anyone has ever said no one has ever had it this tough, but the previous couple generations had it easier in  many ways.   Not in all ways, but many.

One of the things that does make it tougher now is the benchmarks. For Boomers, and probably Gen X, our bosses when we started work were all in their 40's and 50's. Newscasters, company founders, etc. as well. Now we have all of these stupid "Top 40 under 40" lists and things of that nature. Most of the anchors and broadcasters on the news are in their 30's, if not 20's, so the idea of how soon you should be "successful" has been ratcheted up incredibly.
That makes all of the challenges of the moment seem more serious.

Quote
It is simply unimaginable to support a family on a single blue collared job now.  This was the norm in my grandparents era.  Cutting your cell phone and Netflix plans will not change this math.


That's true, but also the proportion of jobs that are blue collar is much lower now. And, not many couples "aspire" to a single income household with a full-time stay-at-home spouse.

It's not about whether they aspire to do it, it is about if they would be able if they wanted.  It has a lot of implications for earning power more broadly etc.  It should also be noted that you are pretty unlikely to be able to do this with 90% of current jobs, not just blue collar ones.  The reference to blue collar jobs was just to emphasize the point.

Regarding home ownership rates, the real pain will be in the next generation.  Millennials were about 30 or so when housing exploded....
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: secundem_artem on April 18, 2023, 04:20:01 PM
My father sold the family home about 20 odd years ago for $135,000.  I saw it listed today on a real estate site.  Asking price is $1 million.  It's nice to have Netflix and a smart phone - they are pretty much universally affordable.  But finding a place to live - that's a much harder problem and I have no idea how some new college graduate can afford a house - at least not without the Bank of Dad chipping in a hundred thou for the down payment.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 18, 2023, 05:14:01 PM
I tried to get a mortgage a couple years ago and was denied. The monthly payments would have been significantly less than my rent.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 03:16:35 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 18, 2023, 05:14:01 PM
I tried to get a mortgage a couple years ago and was denied. The monthly payments would have been significantly less than my rent.

Yeah, I contacted a bank a while ago to get assessed for a mortgage.  They told me they would approve a 400k mortgage.  Great, except that you can't by a house here for 400k and I don't happen to have hundreds of thousands in down payment to offset the payments.  That being said, I think their assessment was about right as I don't think I really could carry higher payments. The problem isn't that they wouldn't give me more money, it is that houses are just out of reach for me.

The real point here is t to whine about it, just to use this example to point out that it has gotten out of control.  I say this because I make good money, much more than the median Canadian family income, but can't afford a house (not even a condo anymore).  So, it is pretty clear that most young families can no longer afford to own a home. If you happened to enter the workforce now, you are basically screwed.

To make matters worse, rent is not far behind, so average families can barely afford reasonable shelter.  This is a major problem that having a cell and Netflix plan doesn't resolve.  Even cutting out my avocado toast wouldn't resolve this problem.

Lately, they have been going on about how our farmers are aging and don't have succession plans, so we need young farmers.  It is laughable to think people can consider becoming a farmer around here (plenty of people would like to).  A small hobby farm with a Dilapidated home would costs you at least a million, a real farm would be many million.   Pretty hard to carry these costs farming, if you could even get financing.  I feel we are on a path to corporate homes, corporate farms, and a corporate world.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 05:18:58 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 03:16:35 AM

Lately, they have been going on about how our farmers are aging and don't have succession plans, so we need young farmers.  It is laughable to think people can consider becoming a farmer around here (plenty of people would like to).  A small hobby farm with a Dilapidated home would costs you at least a million, a real farm would be many million.   Pretty hard to carry these costs farming, if you could even get financing.  I feel we are on a path to corporate homes, corporate farms, and a corporate world.

The thing that I have yet to see anyone explain is how this is supposed to be sustainable. There have been lots of articles about housing being bought up by investors who raise prices and rents. But, unless there are people who can buy or rent at those rates, the prices will eventually collapse. By definition, the more people who can't afford them, the closer the system is to a "correction".

I've never seen any article address this. All I've seen is that immigration (and region--to-region migration) means that places with growing populations have rising prices, but that doesn't really cover places with stable (or declining) populations, and there's still a ceiling to how many skilled immigrants making big bucks are going to be able to fuel prices rising faster than inflation.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 06:47:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 05:18:58 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 03:16:35 AM

Lately, they have been going on about how our farmers are aging and don't have succession plans, so we need young farmers.  It is laughable to think people can consider becoming a farmer around here (plenty of people would like to).  A small hobby farm with a Dilapidated home would costs you at least a million, a real farm would be many million.   Pretty hard to carry these costs farming, if you could even get financing.  I feel we are on a path to corporate homes, corporate farms, and a corporate world.

The thing that I have yet to see anyone explain is how this is supposed to be sustainable. There have been lots of articles about housing being bought up by investors who raise prices and rents. But, unless there are people who can buy or rent at those rates, the prices will eventually collapse. By definition, the more people who can't afford them, the closer the system is to a "correction".


You would think so, but housing prices in Canada have increased something like 16-20% every year for something like 20+ years--far and away the highest rate in the OECD. Rental increases have been about the same or worse, if memory serves.

I recently saw an apartment I nearly rented go back up for rent. Four years ago, it was advertised for $1800. Now it's $2800. And as soon as I moved here six years ago, my grocery bill more than doubled.

Like Kron, my salary is not bad (it's even high compared to the local average). But it's not good enough. I just don't get it, or see our way out; another twenty years and things will be pretty brutal.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 07:26:15 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 06:47:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 05:18:58 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 03:16:35 AM

Lately, they have been going on about how our farmers are aging and don't have succession plans, so we need young farmers.  It is laughable to think people can consider becoming a farmer around here (plenty of people would like to).  A small hobby farm with a Dilapidated home would costs you at least a million, a real farm would be many million.   Pretty hard to carry these costs farming, if you could even get financing.  I feel we are on a path to corporate homes, corporate farms, and a corporate world.

The thing that I have yet to see anyone explain is how this is supposed to be sustainable. There have been lots of articles about housing being bought up by investors who raise prices and rents. But, unless there are people who can buy or rent at those rates, the prices will eventually collapse. By definition, the more people who can't afford them, the closer the system is to a "correction".


You would think so, but housing prices in Canada have increased something like 16-20% every year for something like 20+ years--far and away the highest rate in the OECD. Rental increases have been about the same or worse, if memory serves.


That's impossible. A 16 % annual increase for 20 years would mean an increase of 19x over that period. That would mean a million dollar home now would have cost $51K  in 2003. That's not REMOTELY close. There are lots of million dollar homes now, but none of there were under $100K just 20 years ago. That sort of rise happened during covid, but it was way above normal when it happened, and the prices dropped off last spring.

See the graph (https://www.globalpropertyguide.com/North-America/Canada/Home-Price-Trends):

From 2000 to 2022, unadjusted for inflation they've gone from 71 to 298, an increase of 4.1x, which amounts to an annual increase of 7%.
Adjusted for inflation, it goes from 71 to 185, an increase of 2.6x, which amounts to an annual increase of 4.9%.

5% above inflation is significant, but it's nowhere near 16%.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 07:53:25 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 07:26:15 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 06:47:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 05:18:58 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 03:16:35 AM

Lately, they have been going on about how our farmers are aging and don't have succession plans, so we need young farmers.  It is laughable to think people can consider becoming a farmer around here (plenty of people would like to).  A small hobby farm with a Dilapidated home would costs you at least a million, a real farm would be many million.   Pretty hard to carry these costs farming, if you could even get financing.  I feel we are on a path to corporate homes, corporate farms, and a corporate world.

The thing that I have yet to see anyone explain is how this is supposed to be sustainable. There have been lots of articles about housing being bought up by investors who raise prices and rents. But, unless there are people who can buy or rent at those rates, the prices will eventually collapse. By definition, the more people who can't afford them, the closer the system is to a "correction".


You would think so, but housing prices in Canada have increased something like 16-20% every year for something like 20+ years--far and away the highest rate in the OECD. Rental increases have been about the same or worse, if memory serves.


That's impossible. A 16 % annual increase for 20 years would mean an increase of 19x over that period. That would mean a million dollar home now would have cost $51K  in 2003. That's not REMOTELY close. There are lots of million dollar homes now, but none of there were under $100K just 20 years ago. That sort of rise happened during covid, but it was way above normal when it happened, and the prices dropped off last spring.

See the graph (https://www.globalpropertyguide.com/North-America/Canada/Home-Price-Trends):

From 2000 to 2022, unadjusted for inflation they've gone from 71 to 298, an increase of 4.1x, which amounts to an annual increase of 7%.
Adjusted for inflation, it goes from 71 to 185, an increase of 2.6x, which amounts to an annual increase of 4.9%.

5% above inflation is significant, but it's nowhere near 16%.

Yes, I must have been misremembering something. 16% every year for ten years works, though, and is consistent with the market taking off after the Great Recession.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 08:00:23 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 07:53:25 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 07:26:15 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 06:47:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 05:18:58 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 03:16:35 AM

Lately, they have been going on about how our farmers are aging and don't have succession plans, so we need young farmers.  It is laughable to think people can consider becoming a farmer around here (plenty of people would like to).  A small hobby farm with a Dilapidated home would costs you at least a million, a real farm would be many million.   Pretty hard to carry these costs farming, if you could even get financing.  I feel we are on a path to corporate homes, corporate farms, and a corporate world.

The thing that I have yet to see anyone explain is how this is supposed to be sustainable. There have been lots of articles about housing being bought up by investors who raise prices and rents. But, unless there are people who can buy or rent at those rates, the prices will eventually collapse. By definition, the more people who can't afford them, the closer the system is to a "correction".


You would think so, but housing prices in Canada have increased something like 16-20% every year for something like 20+ years--far and away the highest rate in the OECD. Rental increases have been about the same or worse, if memory serves.


That's impossible. A 16 % annual increase for 20 years would mean an increase of 19x over that period. That would mean a million dollar home now would have cost $51K  in 2003. That's not REMOTELY close. There are lots of million dollar homes now, but none of there were under $100K just 20 years ago. That sort of rise happened during covid, but it was way above normal when it happened, and the prices dropped off last spring.

See the graph (https://www.globalpropertyguide.com/North-America/Canada/Home-Price-Trends):

From 2000 to 2022, unadjusted for inflation they've gone from 71 to 298, an increase of 4.1x, which amounts to an annual increase of 7%.
Adjusted for inflation, it goes from 71 to 185, an increase of 2.6x, which amounts to an annual increase of 4.9%.

5% above inflation is significant, but it's nowhere near 16%.

Yes, I must have been misremembering something. 16% every year for ten years works, though, and is consistent with the market taking off after the Great Recession.

If we start at the dip in 2009, the unadjusted figure goes from 122 to a peak of 322 in 2022, for an increase of 2.6x. That still works out to an annualized rate of 8.4%. Still not close to 16%, and that's taking the maximum range, and ignoring inflation.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 08:20:40 AM
Inflation adjusted house prices in Canada started taking off after the year 2000. They increased about fourfold, with a recent decline.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS)

The question is why. If we see a relative price rise this must be due to increased demand, reduced supply or both.

Bubbles, which burst, aside, the cause of the price rise is a growing population that is getting richer, with no growth, even declines, of new housing construction.

See Table five, page six: https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf (https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf)

Restrictive zoning laws, more generally nimbyism, prevent or make new construction too costly. As I've said before, this is a political problem.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 08:27:48 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 08:00:23 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 07:53:25 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 07:26:15 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 06:47:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 05:18:58 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 03:16:35 AM

Lately, they have been going on about how our farmers are aging and don't have succession plans, so we need young farmers.  It is laughable to think people can consider becoming a farmer around here (plenty of people would like to).  A small hobby farm with a Dilapidated home would costs you at least a million, a real farm would be many million.   Pretty hard to carry these costs farming, if you could even get financing.  I feel we are on a path to corporate homes, corporate farms, and a corporate world.

The thing that I have yet to see anyone explain is how this is supposed to be sustainable. There have been lots of articles about housing being bought up by investors who raise prices and rents. But, unless there are people who can buy or rent at those rates, the prices will eventually collapse. By definition, the more people who can't afford them, the closer the system is to a "correction".


You would think so, but housing prices in Canada have increased something like 16-20% every year for something like 20+ years--far and away the highest rate in the OECD. Rental increases have been about the same or worse, if memory serves.


That's impossible. A 16 % annual increase for 20 years would mean an increase of 19x over that period. That would mean a million dollar home now would have cost $51K  in 2003. That's not REMOTELY close. There are lots of million dollar homes now, but none of there were under $100K just 20 years ago. That sort of rise happened during covid, but it was way above normal when it happened, and the prices dropped off last spring.

See the graph (https://www.globalpropertyguide.com/North-America/Canada/Home-Price-Trends):

From 2000 to 2022, unadjusted for inflation they've gone from 71 to 298, an increase of 4.1x, which amounts to an annual increase of 7%.
Adjusted for inflation, it goes from 71 to 185, an increase of 2.6x, which amounts to an annual increase of 4.9%.

5% above inflation is significant, but it's nowhere near 16%.

Yes, I must have been misremembering something. 16% every year for ten years works, though, and is consistent with the market taking off after the Great Recession.

If we start at the dip in 2009, the unadjusted figure goes from 122 to a peak of 322 in 2022, for an increase of 2.6x. That still works out to an annualized rate of 8.4%. Still not close to 16%, and that's taking the maximum range, and ignoring inflation.


Am I using the wrong formula?

For ten years, 16% gets us 51 000(1+.16/1)^10 = $224 983.19; compounded over 14 gets us to $407 363.42.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 08:34:19 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 08:27:48 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 08:00:23 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 07:53:25 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 07:26:15 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 06:47:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 05:18:58 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 03:16:35 AM

Lately, they have been going on about how our farmers are aging and don't have succession plans, so we need young farmers.  It is laughable to think people can consider becoming a farmer around here (plenty of people would like to).  A small hobby farm with a Dilapidated home would costs you at least a million, a real farm would be many million.   Pretty hard to carry these costs farming, if you could even get financing.  I feel we are on a path to corporate homes, corporate farms, and a corporate world.

The thing that I have yet to see anyone explain is how this is supposed to be sustainable. There have been lots of articles about housing being bought up by investors who raise prices and rents. But, unless there are people who can buy or rent at those rates, the prices will eventually collapse. By definition, the more people who can't afford them, the closer the system is to a "correction".


You would think so, but housing prices in Canada have increased something like 16-20% every year for something like 20+ years--far and away the highest rate in the OECD. Rental increases have been about the same or worse, if memory serves.


That's impossible. A 16 % annual increase for 20 years would mean an increase of 19x over that period. That would mean a million dollar home now would have cost $51K  in 2003. That's not REMOTELY close. There are lots of million dollar homes now, but none of there were under $100K just 20 years ago. That sort of rise happened during covid, but it was way above normal when it happened, and the prices dropped off last spring.

See the graph (https://www.globalpropertyguide.com/North-America/Canada/Home-Price-Trends):

From 2000 to 2022, unadjusted for inflation they've gone from 71 to 298, an increase of 4.1x, which amounts to an annual increase of 7%.
Adjusted for inflation, it goes from 71 to 185, an increase of 2.6x, which amounts to an annual increase of 4.9%.

5% above inflation is significant, but it's nowhere near 16%.

Yes, I must have been misremembering something. 16% every year for ten years works, though, and is consistent with the market taking off after the Great Recession.

If we start at the dip in 2009, the unadjusted figure goes from 122 to a peak of 322 in 2022, for an increase of 2.6x. That still works out to an annualized rate of 8.4%. Still not close to 16%, and that's taking the maximum range, and ignoring inflation.


Am I using the wrong formula?

For ten years, 16% gets us 51 000(1+.16/1)^10 = $224 983.19; compounded over 14 gets us to $407 363.42.

That's the right formula. The point is the prices haven't changed by a factor of 8 in 14 years. From the peak value in 2022 of 322, that would require a starting value of 40, but the lowest value on the graph is 70. There's no interval with an 8x increase.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 09:42:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 08:20:40 AM
Inflation adjusted house prices in Canada started taking off after the year 2000. They increased about fourfold, with a recent decline.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS)

The question is why. If we see a relative price rise this must be due to increased demand, reduced supply or both.

Bubbles, which burst, aside, the cause of the price rise is a growing population that is getting richer, with no growth, even declines, of new housing construction.

See Table five, page six: https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf (https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf)

Restrictive zoning laws, more generally nimbyism, prevent or make new construction too costly. As I've said before, this is a political problem.

I feel we have already discussed this, but the data I have seen shows that new housing construction has kept pace with population growth during this period so is not the primary driving factor.  Sure, it must be related to supply and demand, but not due to population growth alone, or even primarily.  It seems to me that the real change, or driving force, is speculation and using realestate as an investment driving up demand. 

While we agree that this is a political problem, I doubt we agree on the correct path forward.  I would argue the answer is in addressing speculation rather than loosening zoning (taxation on multiple home owners, regulating foreign buyers, evaluating the impacts and rules around air BnB, etc.).  Loosening zoning rules etc. could be part of the solution, but needs to be balanced with preserving agricultural and natural lands.  Otherwise, we will simply (continue to) destroy what we have.   
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 10:07:02 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 09:42:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 08:20:40 AM
Inflation adjusted house prices in Canada started taking off after the year 2000. They increased about fourfold, with a recent decline.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS)

The question is why. If we see a relative price rise this must be due to increased demand, reduced supply or both.

Bubbles, which burst, aside, the cause of the price rise is a growing population that is getting richer, with no growth, even declines, of new housing construction.

See Table five, page six: https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf (https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf)

Restrictive zoning laws, more generally nimbyism, prevent or make new construction too costly. As I've said before, this is a political problem.

I feel we have already discussed this, but the data I have seen shows that new housing construction has kept pace with population growth during this period so is not the primary driving factor.  Sure, it must be related to supply and demand, but not due to population growth alone, or even primarily.  It seems to me that the real change, or driving force, is speculation and using realestate as an investment driving up demand. 


But for anything to be an investment, there has to be a way to realize that value in the future. Specifically, real estate bought now has to be able to be sold later for a higher price. If it rises faster than inflation, then over time there will be a smaller and smaller potential market for it. People who can't afford something don't contribute to its rising price. So again it's not at all clear to me who will be able to buy it later at an even higher price.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 10:15:00 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 09:42:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 08:20:40 AM
Inflation adjusted house prices in Canada started taking off after the year 2000. They increased about fourfold, with a recent decline.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS)

The question is why. If we see a relative price rise this must be due to increased demand, reduced supply or both.

Bubbles, which burst, aside, the cause of the price rise is a growing population that is getting richer, with no growth, even declines, of new housing construction.

See Table five, page six: https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf (https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf)

Restrictive zoning laws, more generally nimbyism, prevent or make new construction too costly. As I've said before, this is a political problem.

I feel we have already discussed this, but the data I have seen shows that new housing construction has kept pace with population growth during this period so is not the primary driving factor.  Sure, it must be related to supply and demand, but not due to population growth alone, or even primarily.  It seems to me that the real change, or driving force, is speculation and using realestate as an investment driving up demand. 

While we agree that this is a political problem, I doubt we agree on the correct path forward.  I would argue the answer is in addressing speculation rather than loosening zoning (taxation on multiple home owners, regulating foreign buyers, evaluating the impacts and rules around air BnB, etc.).  Loosening zoning rules etc. could be part of the solution, but needs to be balanced with preserving agricultural and natural lands.  Otherwise, we will simply (continue to) destroy what we have.

We have indeed already discussed this. But it bears emphasis! :-)

I've googled around for data on growth of the housing stock and the best I could come up with is that Fraser report which says declining additions to the housing stock in the face of population growth, and I add that Canadians are getting richer.

Speculation is a demand side phenomenon. It creates bubbles, and bubbles burst. One can get cyclicality from speculation, but not trend price increases. As for the other demand side phenomena -- multiple homes, foreigners -- sure, you can get prices down by forbidding purchase of homes! So, a ration ticket in addition to money. Who is going to ration? How about me?

The puzzle is that all the demand side stuff pushing up prices has not resulted in more building. But supply side deregulation balanced with other stuff just means the high price of housing isn't all that bad. Tradeoffs where ever one looks.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 10:22:03 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 10:07:02 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 09:42:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 08:20:40 AM
Inflation adjusted house prices in Canada started taking off after the year 2000. They increased about fourfold, with a recent decline.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS)

The question is why. If we see a relative price rise this must be due to increased demand, reduced supply or both.

Bubbles, which burst, aside, the cause of the price rise is a growing population that is getting richer, with no growth, even declines, of new housing construction.

See Table five, page six: https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf (https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf)

Restrictive zoning laws, more generally nimbyism, prevent or make new construction too costly. As I've said before, this is a political problem.

I feel we have already discussed this, but the data I have seen shows that new housing construction has kept pace with population growth during this period so is not the primary driving factor.  Sure, it must be related to supply and demand, but not due to population growth alone, or even primarily.  It seems to me that the real change, or driving force, is speculation and using realestate as an investment driving up demand. 


But for anything to be an investment, there has to be a way to realize that value in the future. Specifically, real estate bought now has to be able to be sold later for a higher price. If it rises faster than inflation, then over time there will be a smaller and smaller potential market for it. People who can't afford something don't contribute to its rising price. So again it's not at all clear to me who will be able to buy it later at an even higher price.

That's why bubbles burst. They start on the expectation of future price increases. Everybody believes this. You get loans, including from your grandmother. At some stage the expectations of future price increases stop -- for any reason. Here, a rise in interest rates makes is more expensive to get the loan with which to speculate. Prices plunge. That's already happening with house prices in the US and Canada.

Think tulip mania: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania)
Quote
At the peak of tulip mania, in February 1637, some single tulip bulbs sold for more than 10 times the annual income of a skilled artisan.

Again, speculation makes for cyclicality, but not trend price rises.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 10:27:51 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 10:22:03 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 10:07:02 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 09:42:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 08:20:40 AM
Inflation adjusted house prices in Canada started taking off after the year 2000. They increased about fourfold, with a recent decline.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS)

The question is why. If we see a relative price rise this must be due to increased demand, reduced supply or both.

Bubbles, which burst, aside, the cause of the price rise is a growing population that is getting richer, with no growth, even declines, of new housing construction.

See Table five, page six: https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf (https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf)

Restrictive zoning laws, more generally nimbyism, prevent or make new construction too costly. As I've said before, this is a political problem.

I feel we have already discussed this, but the data I have seen shows that new housing construction has kept pace with population growth during this period so is not the primary driving factor.  Sure, it must be related to supply and demand, but not due to population growth alone, or even primarily.  It seems to me that the real change, or driving force, is speculation and using realestate as an investment driving up demand. 


But for anything to be an investment, there has to be a way to realize that value in the future. Specifically, real estate bought now has to be able to be sold later for a higher price. If it rises faster than inflation, then over time there will be a smaller and smaller potential market for it. People who can't afford something don't contribute to its rising price. So again it's not at all clear to me who will be able to buy it later at an even higher price.

That's why bubbles burst. They start on the expectation of future price increases. Everybody believes this. You get loans, including from your grandmother. At some stage the expectations of future price increases stop -- for any reason. Here, a rise in interest rates makes is more expensive to get the loan with which to speculate. Prices plunge. That's already happening with house prices in the US and Canada.

Think tulip mania: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania)
Quote
At the peak of tulip mania, in February 1637, some single tulip bulbs sold for more than 10 times the annual income of a skilled artisan.

Again, speculation makes for cyclicality, but not trend price rises.


And tulips were a "luxury" good; no-one needed them to survive. Housing is essential, so prices need to be what the masses can afford for there to be a market. So the bubble shouldn't be able to get nearly as big as for something esoteric that will be sold to the rich who have much more flexibility in pricing.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 10:43:27 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 10:27:51 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 10:22:03 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 10:07:02 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 09:42:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 08:20:40 AM
Inflation adjusted house prices in Canada started taking off after the year 2000. They increased about fourfold, with a recent decline.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS)

The question is why. If we see a relative price rise this must be due to increased demand, reduced supply or both.

Bubbles, which burst, aside, the cause of the price rise is a growing population that is getting richer, with no growth, even declines, of new housing construction.

See Table five, page six: https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf (https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf)

Restrictive zoning laws, more generally nimbyism, prevent or make new construction too costly. As I've said before, this is a political problem.

I feel we have already discussed this, but the data I have seen shows that new housing construction has kept pace with population growth during this period so is not the primary driving factor.  Sure, it must be related to supply and demand, but not due to population growth alone, or even primarily.  It seems to me that the real change, or driving force, is speculation and using realestate as an investment driving up demand. 


But for anything to be an investment, there has to be a way to realize that value in the future. Specifically, real estate bought now has to be able to be sold later for a higher price. If it rises faster than inflation, then over time there will be a smaller and smaller potential market for it. People who can't afford something don't contribute to its rising price. So again it's not at all clear to me who will be able to buy it later at an even higher price.

That's why bubbles burst. They start on the expectation of future price increases. Everybody believes this. You get loans, including from your grandmother. At some stage the expectations of future price increases stop -- for any reason. Here, a rise in interest rates makes is more expensive to get the loan with which to speculate. Prices plunge. That's already happening with house prices in the US and Canada.

Think tulip mania: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania)
Quote
At the peak of tulip mania, in February 1637, some single tulip bulbs sold for more than 10 times the annual income of a skilled artisan.

Again, speculation makes for cyclicality, but not trend price rises.


And tulips were a "luxury" good; no-one needed them to survive. Housing is essential, so prices need to be what the masses can afford for there to be a market. So the bubble shouldn't be able to get nearly as big as for something esoteric that will be sold to the rich who have much more flexibility in pricing.

It hasn't. So far. :-)

Anyway, its burst for now.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 10:47:13 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 10:15:00 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 09:42:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 08:20:40 AM
Inflation adjusted house prices in Canada started taking off after the year 2000. They increased about fourfold, with a recent decline.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS)

The question is why. If we see a relative price rise this must be due to increased demand, reduced supply or both.

Bubbles, which burst, aside, the cause of the price rise is a growing population that is getting richer, with no growth, even declines, of new housing construction.

See Table five, page six: https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf (https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf)

Restrictive zoning laws, more generally nimbyism, prevent or make new construction too costly. As I've said before, this is a political problem.

I feel we have already discussed this, but the data I have seen shows that new housing construction has kept pace with population growth during this period so is not the primary driving factor.  Sure, it must be related to supply and demand, but not due to population growth alone, or even primarily.  It seems to me that the real change, or driving force, is speculation and using realestate as an investment driving up demand. 

While we agree that this is a political problem, I doubt we agree on the correct path forward.  I would argue the answer is in addressing speculation rather than loosening zoning (taxation on multiple home owners, regulating foreign buyers, evaluating the impacts and rules around air BnB, etc.).  Loosening zoning rules etc. could be part of the solution, but needs to be balanced with preserving agricultural and natural lands.  Otherwise, we will simply (continue to) destroy what we have.

We have indeed already discussed this. But it bears emphasis! :-)

I've googled around for data on growth of the housing stock and the best I could come up with is that Fraser report which says declining additions to the housing stock in the face of population growth, and I add that Canadians are getting richer.

Speculation is a demand side phenomenon. It creates bubbles, and bubbles burst. One can get cyclicality from speculation, but not trend price increases. As for the other demand side phenomena -- multiple homes, foreigners -- sure, you can get prices down by forbidding purchase of homes! So, a ration ticket in addition to money. Who is going to ration? How about me?

The puzzle is that all the demand side stuff pushing up prices has not resulted in more building. But supply side deregulation balanced with other stuff just means the high price of housing isn't all that bad. Tradeoffs where ever one looks.

The devil is in the details.  The Frazer institute (a conservative thinktank with an agenda) shows data from the 70s and draws the trend.  That is fine, but from what I have seen leads to false conclusions.  If you look at the trends more recently, it is a different picture.  Data I saw from BMO showed that since 2016, the number of residences per 1000 Canadians has actually increased.  Despite this, during the same period, housing prices have grown dramatically.  So, I just don't see how population growth is to blame, and long term trends since the 70s do not really explain what has happened in the last few years.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 11:09:09 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 10:47:13 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 10:15:00 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on April 19, 2023, 09:42:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 08:20:40 AM
Inflation adjusted house prices in Canada started taking off after the year 2000. They increased about fourfold, with a recent decline.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QCAR628BIS)

The question is why. If we see a relative price rise this must be due to increased demand, reduced supply or both.

Bubbles, which burst, aside, the cause of the price rise is a growing population that is getting richer, with no growth, even declines, of new housing construction.

See Table five, page six: https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf (https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/canadas-housing-mismatch.pdf)

Restrictive zoning laws, more generally nimbyism, prevent or make new construction too costly. As I've said before, this is a political problem.

I feel we have already discussed this, but the data I have seen shows that new housing construction has kept pace with population growth during this period so is not the primary driving factor.  Sure, it must be related to supply and demand, but not due to population growth alone, or even primarily.  It seems to me that the real change, or driving force, is speculation and using realestate as an investment driving up demand. 

While we agree that this is a political problem, I doubt we agree on the correct path forward.  I would argue the answer is in addressing speculation rather than loosening zoning (taxation on multiple home owners, regulating foreign buyers, evaluating the impacts and rules around air BnB, etc.).  Loosening zoning rules etc. could be part of the solution, but needs to be balanced with preserving agricultural and natural lands.  Otherwise, we will simply (continue to) destroy what we have.

We have indeed already discussed this. But it bears emphasis! :-)

I've googled around for data on growth of the housing stock and the best I could come up with is that Fraser report which says declining additions to the housing stock in the face of population growth, and I add that Canadians are getting richer.

Speculation is a demand side phenomenon. It creates bubbles, and bubbles burst. One can get cyclicality from speculation, but not trend price increases. As for the other demand side phenomena -- multiple homes, foreigners -- sure, you can get prices down by forbidding purchase of homes! So, a ration ticket in addition to money. Who is going to ration? How about me?

The puzzle is that all the demand side stuff pushing up prices has not resulted in more building. But supply side deregulation balanced with other stuff just means the high price of housing isn't all that bad. Tradeoffs where ever one looks.

The devil is in the details.  The Frazer institute (a conservative thinktank with an agenda) shows data from the 70s and draws the trend.  That is fine, but from what I have seen leads to false conclusions.  If you look at the trends more recently, it is a different picture.  Data I saw from BMO showed that since 2016, the number of residences per 1000 Canadians has actually increased.  Despite this, during the same period, housing prices have grown dramatically.  So, I just don't see how population growth is to blame, and long term trends since the 70s do not really explain what has happened in the last few years.

Oh, if that's the problem, that's fine: Houses are long lived, so to get an idea of the change in stock [I would prefer counting] you want to go back at least 50 years, 75 are better to look at new construction. I'm finding it difficult to get a time series of number of residences per Canadian on the Statistics Canada website, otherwise I would have used that. Please provide a link to BMO if you can.

Frasers Table has sources given. One can always check if they did what they said what they did..

Again, the last few years are tulip mania, and that bubble has burst. House prices in Canada are coming down.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 12:11:43 PM
Back to Florida: https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/19/politics/florida-bans-teaching-gender-identity-sexual-orientation/index.html
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 12:34:35 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 12:11:43 PM
Back to Florida: https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/19/politics/florida-bans-teaching-gender-identity-sexual-orientation/index.html

Quote
The decision Wednesday by the State Board of Education clarified that outside of health or reproductive courses, such instruction is not appropriate at any grade level.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 01:02:38 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 12:34:35 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 12:11:43 PM
Back to Florida: https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/19/politics/florida-bans-teaching-gender-identity-sexual-orientation/index.html

Quote
The decision Wednesday by the State Board of Education clarified that outside of health or reproductive courses, such instruction is not appropriate at any grade level.

Not at any grade level?

Regardless, what counts as 'instruction' about gender identity or sexual orientation? I rather suspect we'll find that it's a broad list, and utterly ignores parallel instruction in the cis- and heteronormative realms (for lack of a better word for boyness, girlness, manness, womanness, and heterosexualness).

And what counts as a 'health or reproductive course' in Florida?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 01:04:51 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 12:34:35 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 12:11:43 PM
Back to Florida: https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/19/politics/florida-bans-teaching-gender-identity-sexual-orientation/index.html

Quote
The decision Wednesday by the State Board of Education clarified that outside of health or reproductive courses, such instruction is not appropriate at any grade level.

Yes, and your point? In the article  teacher(?) pointed out that discussing Supreme Court decisions in Government could now be dicey.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on April 19, 2023, 01:20:28 PM
There are probably not many people who object to adults who have a strong desire to change their sex to allow them to do so.

Exposing kids to this stuff merely makes kids who have the infrequent uncertainties associated with puberty, gender dysphoria, more uncertain. Virtually all kids who are uncertain will outgrow this stuff. The rest can change their sex when they're adults.

What is going on? Teaching about gender dysphoria is a recruiting device.

Identity politics has become the standard way to get benefits from the political system. So, form a new identity group and join the coalition of beneficiaries! Non-binary, gender this, gender that -- blah, blah, blah -- is not a question of science and biology, 'ya know this XX and XY stuff, but is best looked at as ethnogenisis.

This is active ethnogenisis, some are creating the new identity. What better way than to rope in children. This active ethnogenisis is politics and it will be combated by political means. He who sows the wind reaps the whirlwind.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 01:33:16 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 01:04:51 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 12:34:35 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 12:11:43 PM
Back to Florida: https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/19/politics/florida-bans-teaching-gender-identity-sexual-orientation/index.html

Quote
The decision Wednesday by the State Board of Education clarified that outside of health or reproductive courses, such instruction is not appropriate at any grade level.

Yes, and your point? In the article  teacher(?) pointed out that discussing Supreme Court decisions in Government could now be dicey.

It's not obvious what "instruction" would need to be done to discuss Supreme Court decisions. Give an example.

I'm a Christian, but never seriously considered sending my kids to a Christian school, largely because of "ideological mission creep". People who have a political or ideological viewpoint they want to "share" with others have a tendency to try to shoehorn it in to all kinds of places in direct proportion to how strongly they feel about the topic.
STUDENTS ARE NOT PLACED IN SCHOOLS SO THAT TEACHERS CAN MAKE THEM INTO THEIR IDEOLOGICAL ACOLYTES.

Like my example of Christian schools, even for viewpoints I agree with, I disagree strongly with teachers using their position of authority to promote them.

Emphasis in school should be on giving students the skills and knowledge they need to function in society, and where they are going to address issues of ethics and morality they should fundamentally be introduced to the complexity of moral decisions to develop their ability to think carefully (which is a sign of maturity) rather than jump to a simple conclusion (which is a sign of immaturity).


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 01:50:58 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 01:33:16 PM

Emphasis in school should be on giving students the skills and knowledge they need to function in society, and where they are going to address issues of ethics and morality they should fundamentally be introduced to the complexity of moral decisions to develop their ability to think carefully (which is a sign of maturity) rather than jump to a simple conclusion (which is a sign of immaturity).

The real world is a place with queer people in it. Learning about them isn't any different from learning about the cis or hetero world. Which you do every time you use pronouns, read about mommies and daddies, etc. Pretending queer people don't exist doesn't equip children for success.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 06:39:49 PM
Branches of government are major topics in US History and Government courses, especially AP. Two cases that would not be allowed to be discussed that are topical involve same sex marriage and abortion access. The current case under consideration involving the abortion drug access will be a discussion point in high school upper level classes throughout the US.

That's off the top of my head. It is also unclear whether or not Florida students will be able to discuss Loving v Virginia next year due to other new legislation (which appears to be in conflict with existing Florida law.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 19, 2023, 06:59:19 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 01:33:16 PM
STUDENTS ARE NOT PLACED IN SCHOOLS SO THAT TEACHERS CAN MAKE THEM INTO THEIR IDEOLOGICAL ACOLYTES.

This is a common conservative melodrama.  I love the ALL CAPS for emphasis.  Very EMOTIONAL.

I've asked before and will ask again, who does this? 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 05:58:23 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 19, 2023, 01:50:58 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 19, 2023, 01:33:16 PM

Emphasis in school should be on giving students the skills and knowledge they need to function in society, and where they are going to address issues of ethics and morality they should fundamentally be introduced to the complexity of moral decisions to develop their ability to think carefully (which is a sign of maturity) rather than jump to a simple conclusion (which is a sign of immaturity).

The real world is a place with queer people in it. Learning about them isn't any different from learning about the cis or hetero world.

There is no "cis or hetero world"; there is only the world. In the world, for a baby to be produced it requires an ovum and a sperm. The biological female who produces the ovum is referred to as the baby's "mother" and the biological male who provides the sperm is referred to as the baby's "father". The legal system provides for someone who did not provide the ovum to be designated the baby's "mother", and for someone who did not provide the sperm to be designated the baby's "father".


Quote
Which you do every time you use pronouns, read about mommies and daddies, etc. Pretending queer people don't exist doesn't equip children for success.

I haven't the slightest idea how many of the people I encounter on a daily basis are queer. I can no more pretend they don't exist than I can pretend I can fly by jumping out of a plane. Similarly, I don't know which of the people I encounter on a daily basis who

I don't pretend any of those people don't exist; but in daily interactions it is absolutely irrelevant. I have no idea of the sexual orientation of 99% of my students, and it makes absolutely no difference. I don't even know that about my TAs that I've had for several courses except in rare circumstances (like boyfriend/girlfriend coming to meet them at the end of a lab).

What topics get introduced in school, and when, should be determined on the basis of what is pedagogically relevant. Topics around human reproduction are relevant in biology and health classes. Topics around legal definitions of parenthood are relevant in a civics class. In the proper context, discussions can get the appropriate framing for a meaningful investigation. Out of context, there's no guarantee of any sort of appropriate framework.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on April 20, 2023, 08:55:09 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 05:58:23 AM

  • have eczema (about 10% of the population)
  • have O-negative blood (about 7% of the population)
  • are tone deaf (about 4% of the population)

====

What topics get introduced in school, and when, should be determined on the basis of what is pedagogically relevant. Topics around human reproduction are relevant in biology and health classes. Topics around legal definitions of parenthood are relevant in a civics class. In the proper context, discussions can get the appropriate framing for a meaningful investigation. Out of context, there's no guarantee of any sort of appropriate framework.

The context is the world, so when they see people, or wonder about themselves, they are prepared to handle those situations.

Otherwise you might have assumed

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 09:05:06 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 20, 2023, 08:55:09 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 05:58:23 AM

  • have eczema (about 10% of the population)
  • have O-negative blood (about 7% of the population)
  • are tone deaf (about 4% of the population)

====

What topics get introduced in school, and when, should be determined on the basis of what is pedagogically relevant. Topics around human reproduction are relevant in biology and health classes. Topics around legal definitions of parenthood are relevant in a civics class. In the proper context, discussions can get the appropriate framing for a meaningful investigation. Out of context, there's no guarantee of any sort of appropriate framework.

The context is the world, so when they see people, or wonder about themselves, they are prepared to handle those situations.

Otherwise you might have assumed

  • someone with eczema was possessed by the devil and needed to be burned at the stake.
  • Or that someone injected with the blood of a random priest and died was also actually a witch.
  • Or you would have been depressed that you didn't "get it" in choir and wondered what was wrong with you instead of realizing that hey, you are just different in an okay way.

The point is that those are similarly uncommon, but no-one is lobbying to make sure school children are taught about them. They only need to be discussed in the context where they will have material consequences. So, for instance, until students are becoming sexually active, sexual *orientation isn't something which has any particular relevance and doesn't need to be discussed.


*including heterosexual
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 20, 2023, 09:30:04 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 05:58:23 AM

There is no "cis or hetero world"; there is only the world. In the world, for a baby to be produced it requires an ovum and a sperm.

I'm (obviously?) talking about the social world, which is characterized by different sets of norms and conventions depending on which tranche you look at, and which takes certain things for granted as a kind of default setting. Including things such as that every girl will grow up to fall in love with a boy, that families are composed of either one mother or one mother and one father, that makeup and long hair are only for girls, that blue and pants and ties are for boys, etc. And, unfortunately, the reality is that people who don't conform to these defaults are typically punished for it. As this divergence from the norm is normalized, however, the social sanctions for divergence are likewise reduced.


QuoteThe biological female who produces the ovum is referred to as the baby's "mother" and the biological male who provides the sperm is referred to as the baby's "father". The legal system provides for someone who did not provide the ovum to be designated the baby's "mother", and for someone who did not provide the sperm to be designated the baby's "father".

The social world likewise provides for people whose genetic material is not involved to be designated 'mothers', 'fathers', etc. The legal system codifies certain relationships in order to confer certain rights, but it's hardly necessary for the concept's application-conditions. Indeed, in many cultures--including some quite nearby--terms such as 'aunt' or 'uncle' are honorifics which typically don't track biological descent.

Nor, crucially, are concepts such as those of men, women, males, and females necessarily tied to reproductive capacity.


Quote

I don't pretend any of those people don't exist; but in daily interactions it is absolutely irrelevant. I have no idea of the sexual orientation of 99% of my students, and it makes absolutely no difference. I don't even know that about my TAs that I've had for several courses except in rare circumstances (like boyfriend/girlfriend coming to meet them at the end of a lab).

Sure, you don't know about most strangers or even acquaintances. But you do know about the people close to you, because you're a significant part of their lives--so you meet their partners, go to their weddings and funerals, etc. That's not irrelevant. It's important to your social life that you be able to properly class the people in it, so as to make yourself understood, avoid causing offence, etc. It's also important that you know something about them when, say, their rights are under public discussion. It would also be pretty relevant if you were dating.

I don't think it would be a good thing for a child's first exposure to the existence of queer people to come as an adult, or when they first look at porn, or whatever. Luckily, that's not the case; children meet queer people in the course of their daily lives, including their peers at school. Speaking of which, homophobia has been a significant component of bullying at school for quite some time. Again, that's an encounter children are having at school. Staying mum about it isn't going to make it go away, regardless of whether you think it's appropriate. If a ten year-old calls another 'gay' or 'faggot', or attacks them in addition to calling them such names... well, that's a clear instance where a conversation about sexual orientation is important, even though the kids are pre-pubescent. Scrubbing the homophobia away doesn't get at what's problematic about the behaviour, and why. Similarly, you can't have an adequate conversation about the harms of sextortion and revenge porn if you abstract away from the sexual content that one kid has made available concerning another.

Just talking about "bullying" in the abstract doesn't cut it. You have to address what's actually being said and done--and that includes a whole lot of gendered and sexual content.




Quote from: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 09:05:06 AM


The point is that those are similarly uncommon, but no-one is lobbying to make sure school children are taught about them. They only need to be discussed in the context where they will have material consequences. So, for instance, until students are becoming sexually active, sexual *orientation isn't something which has any particular relevance and doesn't need to be discussed.


*including heterosexual

Yes, but children start to become sexually active in high school, and the ban is for all grades.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on April 20, 2023, 09:40:48 AM
I learned some trigonometry before it had material consequences.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 09:51:37 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 20, 2023, 09:30:04 AM
Just talking about "bullying" in the abstract doesn't cut it. You have to address what's actually being said and done--and that includes a whole lot of gendered and sexual content.

But seriously, what motivations for bullying are somehow acceptable? Why is being bullied for being gay worse than being bullied for being a ginger? (Or disabled, or whatever)?
This is the insidious problem of jumping on the "hate crime" bandwagon; it implies that certain kinds of behaviour aren't so egregious as long as they're motivated by some "acceptable" class of ill-will. Presumably by that logic, someone who flipped a coin to decide whether to attack the next person who walks by isn't as bad as someone who attacks the next person because of some specific characteristic.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 20, 2023, 12:41:00 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 09:05:06 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 20, 2023, 08:55:09 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 05:58:23 AM

  • have eczema (about 10% of the population)
  • have O-negative blood (about 7% of the population)
  • are tone deaf (about 4% of the population)

====

What topics get introduced in school, and when, should be determined on the basis of what is pedagogically relevant. Topics around human reproduction are relevant in biology and health classes. Topics around legal definitions of parenthood are relevant in a civics class. In the proper context, discussions can get the appropriate framing for a meaningful investigation. Out of context, there's no guarantee of any sort of appropriate framework.

The context is the world, so when they see people, or wonder about themselves, they are prepared to handle those situations.

Otherwise you might have assumed

  • someone with eczema was possessed by the devil and needed to be burned at the stake.
  • Or that someone injected with the blood of a random priest and died was also actually a witch.
  • Or you would have been depressed that you didn't "get it" in choir and wondered what was wrong with you instead of realizing that hey, you are just different in an okay way.

The point is that those are similarly uncommon, but no-one is lobbying to make sure school children are taught about them. They only need to be discussed in the context where they will have material consequences. So, for instance, until students are becoming sexually active, sexual *orientation isn't something which has any particular relevance and doesn't need to be discussed.


*including heterosexual

People with eczema are never challenged when they want to get married, for instance, or if they can get a wedding cake made.  Eczema suffers are rarely assaulted because someone is offended by their skin.  People with eczema do not have a history of having to go underground to express who they really are or banned by GOP bigots from holding a story book hour at the local public library.

You are a master of apples and oranges, Marshmellow. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 01:25:21 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 20, 2023, 12:41:00 PM

People with eczema are never challenged when they want to get married, for instance, or if they can get a wedding cake made.  Eczema suffers are rarely assaulted because someone is offended by their skin.  People with eczema do not have a history of having to go underground to express who they really are or banned by GOP bigots from holding a story book hour at the local public library.

You are a master of apples and oranges, Marshmellow.

None of those things are likely to be in the experience of an elementary school student. Some of those things would be completely reasonable to discuss in a high school civics class.

"Because ... reasons" shouldn't be the basis for introducing all kinds of messaging that isn't germane to the curriculum. (Or, as Dismalist might point out, it won't be a surprise if parents who have the resources decide to look for a school that focuses on the curriculum and minimizes the moralizing. Pretty much like why many people would avoid religious schools.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on April 20, 2023, 01:34:37 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 09:05:06 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 20, 2023, 08:55:09 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 05:58:23 AM

  • have eczema (about 10% of the population)
  • have O-negative blood (about 7% of the population)
  • are tone deaf (about 4% of the population)

====

What topics get introduced in school, and when, should be determined on the basis of what is pedagogically relevant. Topics around human reproduction are relevant in biology and health classes. Topics around legal definitions of parenthood are relevant in a civics class. In the proper context, discussions can get the appropriate framing for a meaningful investigation. Out of context, there's no guarantee of any sort of appropriate framework.

The context is the world, so when they see people, or wonder about themselves, they are prepared to handle those situations.

Otherwise you might have assumed

  • someone with eczema was possessed by the devil and needed to be burned at the stake.
  • Or that someone injected with the blood of a random priest and died was also actually a witch.
  • Or you would have been depressed that you didn't "get it" in choir and wondered what was wrong with you instead of realizing that hey, you are just different in an okay way.

The point is that those are similarly uncommon, but no-one is lobbying to make sure school children are taught about them. They only need to be discussed in the context where they will have material consequences. So, for instance, until students are becoming sexually active, sexual *orientation isn't something which has any particular relevance and doesn't need to be discussed.


*including heterosexual

School kids are learning about them, anyway. Many children go through a phase of pretending to be the opposite sex (as did I) as a part of exploring their identity.

They probably are seeing teens and adults in their lives identifying as LGBTQ+. LGBTQ+ people are all over the media, even if they are not talking about sexuality they are presenting with their own preferred clothing and behavior.

So, yes, we should start talking to kids about the fact that there are different ways to be, whether it is having a skin condition or their religion, gender expression, ethnicity, and it's nothing to be afraid of. And being "different" is no reason to bully, call names, harass, whatever.

I'm at the airport and saw a Muslim man create a space for himself for his prayers. There is a man in a hot pink and black suit. There is a man with an eye patch. A woman in a wheelchair. A woman with purple hair. Nobody in my line of sight is obviously LGBTQ+ but it wouldn't surprise me to see a same-sex couple holding hands or someone whose gender appears unclear.

I don't have a kid with me but I'm sure if I did I'd like to think I can answer their questions thoughtfully and have those answers mirrored by the other adults in their lives such as teachers, other parents, and so forth.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 20, 2023, 01:40:44 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 09:51:37 AM

But seriously, what motivations for bullying are somehow acceptable? Why is being bullied for being gay worse than being bullied for being a ginger? (Or disabled, or whatever)?
This is the insidious problem of jumping on the "hate crime" bandwagon; it implies that certain kinds of behaviour aren't so egregious as long as they're motivated by some "acceptable" class of ill-will. Presumably by that logic, someone who flipped a coin to decide whether to attack the next person who walks by isn't as bad as someone who attacks the next person because of some specific characteristic.

Although I disagree, that's beside the point. If you're talking to the child being bullied, you need to be able to explain what was wrong about the other person's behaviour and reassure the bullied child that there's nothing wrong with them. Since so much bullying is about non-conformity, you need to be able to address that. If you simply say "Stevie shouldn't have called you names", you're just saying that Stevie's words are bad; it should be obvious that saying "Not only shouldn't Stevie have called you names, but there's nothing wrong with liking boys in the first place" is far more effective, because it directly addresses what Stevie was saying, and what he was trying to do to the kid. One of those strategies is going to be a lot more comforting than the other.

If you're talking to the bully, you need to be able to show them why what they did was wrong. And you can't do that without addressing the content of their actions, and why it is that they think the names they called the other child are bad, etc. You want to address the roots of the bully's behaviour, not just the way it manifests itself.



Quote from: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 01:25:21 PM

None of those things are likely to be in the experience of an elementary school student. Some of those things would be completely reasonable to discuss in a high school civics class.


Except that after the passage of this legislation you can't discuss that in a high school civics class in Florida.


Meanwhile, they're busy banning perfectly age-appropriate books like Tango Makes Three or Perfectly Norman from classrooms and library shelves because they have the temerity to introduce queerness as perfectly okay. Note, however, that they aren't considering banning Romeo and Juliet, despite all of its sexual content. I read it in grade eight; following the letter of the proposed legislation, nobody should read it in school, ever.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on April 20, 2023, 01:54:11 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 01:25:21 PM

None of those things are likely to be in the experience of an elementary school student. Some of those things would be completely reasonable to discuss in a high school civics class.

"Because ... reasons" shouldn't be the basis for introducing all kinds of messaging that isn't germane to the curriculum. (Or, as Dismalist might point out, it won't be a surprise if parents who have the resources decide to look for a school that focuses on the curriculum and minimizes the moralizing. Pretty much like why many people would avoid religious schools.)

As I said, the teaching of the stuff talked about is a political question, not a biological or scientific question, nor even a question of rights. It's active ethnogenesis, propagated by a small minority in this identitarian democracy.

Of course people with the resources will put their kids into schools they like. They always have. But the recognition that this is politics helps us understand that the Rubicon has been crossed. Forcing kids to learn what parents don't want is igniting a political response to increase school choice, and for everybody, not just the ricci. I live in Virginia and I happened to hear Terry McAuliffe, running as the Democratic candidate for governor say "I don't think parents should be telling schools what they should teach." I saw that on TV and knew right away that he had just tossed out his own election, though he was leading in the polls.

More school choice is being implemented in many states, and the beat goes on. Understand that this is a solution to disagreements: Everybody can determine what their own kids will learn, but not what others' kids will learn. Problems arise when some tell others what to believe, for whatever reason.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 20, 2023, 02:17:17 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 20, 2023, 01:25:21 PM
"Because ... reasons" shouldn't be the basis for introducing all kinds of messaging that isn't germane to the curriculum.

What are you talking about?

We do all sorts of things because of "because."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on April 20, 2023, 02:19:43 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 06:39:49 PM
Branches of government are major topics in US History and Government courses, especially AP. Two cases that would not be allowed to be discussed that are topical involve same sex marriage and abortion access. The current case under consideration involving the abortion drug access will be a discussion point in high school upper level classes throughout the US.

That's off the top of my head. It is also unclear whether or not Florida students will be able to discuss Loving v Virginia next year due to other new legislation (which appears to be in conflict with existing Florida law.

I'll ask. dismalist, what are your thoughts on this post? I already know marshwiggle won't respond, but do you have any concerns about high school government classes being barred from discussing the court cases? I don't mean from  right or wrong perspective, rather from a perspective of the opinions reasoning of the court and the basis for the suit in the first place.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on April 20, 2023, 02:27:35 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 20, 2023, 02:19:43 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 06:39:49 PM
Branches of government are major topics in US History and Government courses, especially AP. Two cases that would not be allowed to be discussed that are topical involve same sex marriage and abortion access. The current case under consideration involving the abortion drug access will be a discussion point in high school upper level classes throughout the US.

That's off the top of my head. It is also unclear whether or not Florida students will be able to discuss Loving v Virginia next year due to other new legislation (which appears to be in conflict with existing Florida law.

I'll ask. dismalist, what are your thoughts on this post? I already know marshwiggle won't respond, but do you have any concerns about high school government classes being barred from discussing the court cases? I don't mean from  right or wrong perspective, rather from a perspective of the opinions reasoning of the court and the basis for the suit in the first place.

I'd love them to be discussed! I would have sent my daughter to a school in which such is discussed.

But I don't care to impose my views on other parents. If they don't want something discussed, hell, if they want creationism taught and evolution not taught, let them have their way!

As I said, this is a political question, it's about interests, not about truth or falsehood, science or anything else, nothing more. Thus, a political solution is called for, namely school choice.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on April 20, 2023, 02:44:26 PM
Quote from: dismalist on April 20, 2023, 02:27:35 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 20, 2023, 02:19:43 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 06:39:49 PM
Branches of government are major topics in US History and Government courses, especially AP. Two cases that would not be allowed to be discussed that are topical involve same sex marriage and abortion access. The current case under consideration involving the abortion drug access will be a discussion point in high school upper level classes throughout the US.

That's off the top of my head. It is also unclear whether or not Florida students will be able to discuss Loving v Virginia next year due to other new legislation (which appears to be in conflict with existing Florida law.

I'll ask. dismalist, what are your thoughts on this post? I already know marshwiggle won't respond, but do you have any concerns about high school government classes being barred from discussing the court cases? I don't mean from  right or wrong perspective, rather from a perspective of the opinions reasoning of the court and the basis for the suit in the first place.

I'd love them to be discussed! I would have sent my daughter to a school in which such is discussed.

But I don't care to impose my views on other parents. If they don't want something discussed, hell, if they want creationism taught and evolution not taught, let them have their way!

As I said, this is a political question, it's about interests, not about truth or falsehood, science or anything else, nothing more. Thus, a political solution is called for, namely school choice.

So, in your opinion the concept of an electorate which learns certain basic facts and principles of US government and laws in all public schooling is unnecessary? I consider that to be part of the bedrock of our country, and not a matter to be decided in public school choice.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on April 20, 2023, 02:55:39 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 20, 2023, 02:44:26 PM
Quote from: dismalist on April 20, 2023, 02:27:35 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 20, 2023, 02:19:43 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 06:39:49 PM
Branches of government are major topics in US History and Government courses, especially AP. Two cases that would not be allowed to be discussed that are topical involve same sex marriage and abortion access. The current case under consideration involving the abortion drug access will be a discussion point in high school upper level classes throughout the US.

That's off the top of my head. It is also unclear whether or not Florida students will be able to discuss Loving v Virginia next year due to other new legislation (which appears to be in conflict with existing Florida law.

I'll ask. dismalist, what are your thoughts on this post? I already know marshwiggle won't respond, but do you have any concerns about high school government classes being barred from discussing the court cases? I don't mean from  right or wrong perspective, rather from a perspective of the opinions reasoning of the court and the basis for the suit in the first place.

I'd love them to be discussed! I would have sent my daughter to a school in which such is discussed.

But I don't care to impose my views on other parents. If they don't want something discussed, hell, if they want creationism taught and evolution not taught, let them have their way!

As I said, this is a political question, it's about interests, not about truth or falsehood, science or anything else, nothing more. Thus, a political solution is called for, namely school choice.

So, in your opinion the concept of an electorate which learns certain basic facts and principles of US government and laws in all public schooling is unnecessary? I consider that to be part of the bedrock of our country, and not a matter to be decided in public school choice.

Relax, Jimbo!

I'm not insisting anything be taught because it's probably done wrong.

I doubt many teachers appreciate the principles of the US government and laws. If some parents do, the schools they send their kids to will survive.

Take climate change. I'm quite certain the consequences of climate change are not properly appreciated. So, I don't care to have it talked about by teachers following the crowds.

I don't even care to have economics taught in High School. Someone else may heartily disagree.

But this can always happen. Therefore, it can never be about what's scientifically right and what's wrong, or the bedrock du jour.

What we do have is pressure to teach a secular religion in schools and even in colleges. Choice will put paid to universalizing that.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on April 20, 2023, 04:54:13 PM
I've been in Cabo for a week, so actually am pretty chill.

I don't really want econ or psych taught in hs as the teachers don't have a good grounding in the subjects. Government and History are very different in terms of teacher prep, and especially if they happen to be AP subjects. I further see those two subjects as much more fundamental in nature to US schooling than subjects (even thing as important as) climate change.

Guess we'll have tp disagree.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on April 20, 2023, 05:42:08 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 20, 2023, 04:54:13 PM
I've been in Cabo for a week, so actually am pretty chill.

I don't really want econ or psych taught in hs as the teachers don't have a good grounding in the subjects. Government and History are very different in terms of teacher prep, and especially if they happen to be AP subjects. I further see those two subjects as much more fundamental in nature to US schooling than subjects (even thing as important as) climate change.

Guess we'll have tp disagree.

The issue is never the issue. The issue is the revolution.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 21, 2023, 05:48:18 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 20, 2023, 01:40:44 PM
If you're talking to the child being bullied, you need to be able to explain what was wrong about the other person's behaviour and reassure the bullied child that there's nothing wrong with them.

OK, we have a fundamental disagreement here. The value of a democratic society is that, as long as we can agree on rules of how we interact with one another, we are all free to believe whatever we want. This is vitally important for young people to learn; there will always be people you disagree with, but as long as you treat each other civilly, no-one has to try and force the other to change.

It's vastly more important for students to understand the importance of civil behaviour in society than it is for them to try and figure out what they're supposed to believe about everything under the sun.


Quote
Since so much bullying is about non-conformity, you need to be able to address that. If you simply say "Stevie shouldn't have called you names", you're just saying that Stevie's words are bad; it should be obvious that saying "Not only shouldn't Stevie have called you names, but there's nothing wrong with liking boys in the first place" is far more effective, because it directly addresses what Stevie was saying, and what he was trying to do to the kid. One of those strategies is going to be a lot more comforting than the other.

As above, "comfort" isn't as important as insisting on the kind of civil behaviour that allows everyone to peacefully coexist, despite their differences.

Quote
If you're talking to the bully, you need to be able to show them why what they did was wrong. And you can't do that without addressing the content of their actions, and why it is that they think the names they called the other child are bad, etc. You want to address the roots of the bully's behaviour, not just the way it manifests itself.

Ibid. There may be all kinds of different reasons for a bully's bad behaviour. (Among others, the bully could have questions about his own orientation.) But, the behaviour is the problem, regardless of the motivation. (By focusing on the motivation, it's entirely possible that the bully, knowing that his motivation in this case is not what you think, wil be able to ignore all you say because you don't understand.)

Quote from: dismalist on April 20, 2023, 02:27:35 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 20, 2023, 02:19:43 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 06:39:49 PM
Branches of government are major topics in US History and Government courses, especially AP. Two cases that would not be allowed to be discussed that are topical involve same sex marriage and abortion access. The current case under consideration involving the abortion drug access will be a discussion point in high school upper level classes throughout the US.

That's off the top of my head. It is also unclear whether or not Florida students will be able to discuss Loving v Virginia next year due to other new legislation (which appears to be in conflict with existing Florida law.

I'll ask. dismalist, what are your thoughts on this post? I already know marshwiggle won't respond, but do you have any concerns about high school government classes being barred from discussing the court cases? I don't mean from  right or wrong perspective, rather from a perspective of the opinions reasoning of the court and the basis for the suit in the first place.

I'd love them to be discussed! I would have sent my daughter to a school in which such is discussed.


Actually, I agree with Dismalist. Discussion in that objective context would be welcome! (Unfortunately, many teachers would be unable to do that.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on April 21, 2023, 07:14:44 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 21, 2023, 05:48:18 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 20, 2023, 01:40:44 PM
If you're talking to the child being bullied, you need to be able to explain what was wrong about the other person's behaviour and reassure the bullied child that there's nothing wrong with them.

OK, we have a fundamental disagreement here. The value of a democratic society is that, as long as we can agree on rules of how we interact with one another, we are all free to believe whatever we want. This is vitally important for young people to learn; there will always be people you disagree with, but as long as you treat each other civilly, no-one has to try and force the other to change.

It's vastly more important for students to understand the importance of civil behaviour in society than it is for them to try and figure out what they're supposed to believe about everything under the sun.


Quote
Since so much bullying is about non-conformity, you need to be able to address that. If you simply say "Stevie shouldn't have called you names", you're just saying that Stevie's words are bad; it should be obvious that saying "Not only shouldn't Stevie have called you names, but there's nothing wrong with liking boys in the first place" is far more effective, because it directly addresses what Stevie was saying, and what he was trying to do to the kid. One of those strategies is going to be a lot more comforting than the other.

As above, "comfort" isn't as important as insisting on the kind of civil behaviour that allows everyone to peacefully coexist, despite their differences.

Quote
If you're talking to the bully, you need to be able to show them why what they did was wrong. And you can't do that without addressing the content of their actions, and why it is that they think the names they called the other child are bad, etc. You want to address the roots of the bully's behaviour, not just the way it manifests itself.

Ibid. There may be all kinds of different reasons for a bully's bad behaviour. (Among others, the bully could have questions about his own orientation.) But, the behaviour is the problem, regardless of the motivation. (By focusing on the motivation, it's entirely possible that the bully, knowing that his motivation in this case is not what you think, wil be able to ignore all you say because you don't understand.)

Quote from: dismalist on April 20, 2023, 02:27:35 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 20, 2023, 02:19:43 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 06:39:49 PM
Branches of government are major topics in US History and Government courses, especially AP. Two cases that would not be allowed to be discussed that are topical involve same sex marriage and abortion access. The current case under consideration involving the abortion drug access will be a discussion point in high school upper level classes throughout the US.

That's off the top of my head. It is also unclear whether or not Florida students will be able to discuss Loving v Virginia next year due to other new legislation (which appears to be in conflict with existing Florida law.

I'll ask. dismalist, what are your thoughts on this post? I already know marshwiggle won't respond, but do you have any concerns about high school government classes being barred from discussing the court cases? I don't mean from  right or wrong perspective, rather from a perspective of the opinions reasoning of the court and the basis for the suit in the first place.

I'd love them to be discussed! I would have sent my daughter to a school in which such is discussed.


Actually, I agree with Dismalist. Discussion in that objective context would be welcome! (Unfortunately, many teachers would be unable to do that.)

And so we end up with a bunch of adults who know what the rules are, but not why they are what they are, who can name rules but not deliberate about their actions, who cannot identify the consequences of their actions beyond their direct impact on them, who cannot deliberate about conflicting rules, and who believe that moral relativism is coherent. Great.

I see hundreds of adults like this in my intro ethics classes every year. It's both profoundly sad and terrifying that they have never bothered to reflect on why the rules we have are the rules we have, and whether they're just, how their actions impact people other than themselves, or what consistently applying their avowed standards entails. My stupid elective should not be the first and only time they're asked to do so.

Their evaluations regularly report that their minds were blown. But that really shouldn't be the case. (And it's certainly not down to my piss-poor teaching skills!)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on April 21, 2023, 07:31:47 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 21, 2023, 05:48:18 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 20, 2023, 01:40:44 PM
If you're talking to the child being bullied, you need to be able to explain what was wrong about the other person's behaviour and reassure the bullied child that there's nothing wrong with them.

OK, we have a fundamental disagreement here. The value of a democratic society is that, as long as we can agree on rules of how we interact with one another, we are all free to believe whatever we want. This is vitally important for young people to learn; there will always be people you disagree with, but as long as you treat each other civilly, no-one has to try and force the other to change.

It's vastly more important for students to understand the importance of civil behaviour in society than it is for them to try and figure out what they're supposed to believe about everything under the sun.


Quote
Since so much bullying is about non-conformity, you need to be able to address that. If you simply say "Stevie shouldn't have called you names", you're just saying that Stevie's words are bad; it should be obvious that saying "Not only shouldn't Stevie have called you names, but there's nothing wrong with liking boys in the first place" is far more effective, because it directly addresses what Stevie was saying, and what he was trying to do to the kid. One of those strategies is going to be a lot more comforting than the other.

As above, "comfort" isn't as important as insisting on the kind of civil behaviour that allows everyone to peacefully coexist, despite their differences.

Quote
If you're talking to the bully, you need to be able to show them why what they did was wrong. And you can't do that without addressing the content of their actions, and why it is that they think the names they called the other child are bad, etc. You want to address the roots of the bully's behaviour, not just the way it manifests itself.

Ibid. There may be all kinds of different reasons for a bully's bad behaviour. (Among others, the bully could have questions about his own orientation.) But, the behaviour is the problem, regardless of the motivation. (By focusing on the motivation, it's entirely possible that the bully, knowing that his motivation in this case is not what you think, wil be able to ignore all you say because you don't understand.)

Quote from: dismalist on April 20, 2023, 02:27:35 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 20, 2023, 02:19:43 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on April 19, 2023, 06:39:49 PM
Branches of government are major topics in US History and Government courses, especially AP. Two cases that would not be allowed to be discussed that are topical involve same sex marriage and abortion access. The current case under consideration involving the abortion drug access will be a discussion point in high school upper level classes throughout the US.

That's off the top of my head. It is also unclear whether or not Florida students will be able to discuss Loving v Virginia next year due to other new legislation (which appears to be in conflict with existing Florida law.

I'll ask. dismalist, what are your thoughts on this post? I already know marshwiggle won't respond, but do you have any concerns about high school government classes being barred from discussing the court cases? I don't mean from  right or wrong perspective, rather from a perspective of the opinions reasoning of the court and the basis for the suit in the first place.

I'd love them to be discussed! I would have sent my daughter to a school in which such is discussed.


Actually, I agree with Dismalist. Discussion in that objective context would be welcome! (Unfortunately, many teachers would be unable to do that.)

At the same time, what behavior can appear "civil" but really should be called out, even rudely? When I was in college we had an obscene phone caller to my sorority house. The other girls didn't want to answer the phone. I finally answered it and chewed the guy out.

The others said "OMG that's so ruuuuudeee! What if he was someone's friend?"  I responded "You don't have to be polite to an obscene phone caller."

So to say we should always behave civilly and ignore or otherwise let others be, even when it apparently shouldn't bother us, may not be the answer either.

We should discuss what differences are okay, and which need to be addressed as a sign of abuse or mental, physical or other illness.

Someone being gay or wearing a headscarf is none of my business. Someone walking around naked is kind of a problem.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 21, 2023, 08:18:34 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 21, 2023, 07:14:44 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 21, 2023, 05:48:18 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on April 20, 2023, 01:40:44 PM
If you're talking to the child being bullied, you need to be able to explain what was wrong about the other person's behaviour and reassure the bullied child that there's nothing wrong with them.

OK, we have a fundamental disagreement here. The value of a democratic society is that, as long as we can agree on rules of how we interact with one another, we are all free to believe whatever we want. This is vitally important for young people to learn; there will always be people you disagree with, but as long as you treat each other civilly, no-one has to try and force the other to change.

It's vastly more important for students to understand the importance of civil behaviour in society than it is for them to try and figure out what they're supposed to believe about everything under the sun.


Quote
Since so much bullying is about non-conformity, you need to be able to address that. If you simply say "Stevie shouldn't have called you names", you're just saying that Stevie's words are bad; it should be obvious that saying "Not only shouldn't Stevie have called you names, but there's nothing wrong with liking boys in the first place" is far more effective, because it directly addresses what Stevie was saying, and what he was trying to do to the kid. One of those strategies is going to be a lot more comforting than the other.

As above, "comfort" isn't as important as insisting on the kind of civil behaviour that allows everyone to peacefully coexist, despite their differences.

Quote
If you're talking to the bully, you need to be able to show them why what they did was wrong. And you can't do that without addressing the content of their actions, and why it is that they think the names they called the other child are bad, etc. You want to address the roots of the bully's behaviour, not just the way it manifests itself.

Ibid. There may be all kinds of different reasons for a bully's bad behaviour. (Among others, the bully could have questions about his own orientation.) But, the behaviour is the problem, regardless of the motivation. (By focusing on the motivation, it's entirely possible that the bully, knowing that his motivation in this case is not what you think, wil be able to ignore all you say because you don't understand.)



And so we end up with a bunch of adults who know what the rules are, but not why they are what they are, who can name rules but not deliberate about their actions, who cannot identify the consequences of their actions beyond their direct impact on them, who cannot deliberate about conflicting rules, and who believe that moral relativism is coherent. Great.

I see hundreds of adults like this in my intro ethics classes every year. It's both profoundly sad and terrifying that they have never bothered to reflect on why the rules we have are the rules we have, and whether they're just, how their actions impact people other than themselves, or what consistently applying their avowed standards entails. My stupid elective should not be the first and only time they're asked to do so.


This is like the "excused absences" issue that comes up a lot. Vetting every proferred excuse for an absence is exhausting; having uniform objective rules for everyone simplifies things.

Furthermore, if the person rejects your basis for moral choice, then they can completely sidestep the discussion about their behaviour. Having objective, universal rules cuts to the chase. If someone wants to delve into the morality behind the rules, that's fine, but making it the focus of the discussion is time-consuming and potentially fruitless.

Also, it's much easier to get broad buy-in for rules than it is to get agreement on all of the justification for the rules. Probably just about all parents will agree about what kind of bullying behaviour is unacceptable, regardless of how they feel about all kinds of social issues.

Quote from: ciao_yall on April 21, 2023, 07:31:47 AM

At the same time, what behavior can appear "civil" but really should be called out, even rudely? When I was in college we had an obscene phone caller to my sorority house. The other girls didn't want to answer the phone. I finally answered it and chewed the guy out.

I can't see how an obscene phone call is "civil". If it was a call that was intended for a specific individual, who would have appreciated it, then that doesn't make it OK to be directed to anyone. Civil behaviour is precisely what is within the bounds of acceptable to basically everyone.


Quote
The others said "OMG that's so ruuuuudeee! What if he was someone's friend?"  I responded "You don't have to be polite to an obscene phone caller."

So to say we should always behave civilly and ignore or otherwise let others be, even when it apparently shouldn't bother us, may not be the answer either.

So is this to suggest that bullying might be OK sometimes? This is kind of turning the bullying discussion upside down.

Quote
We should discuss what differences are okay, and which need to be addressed as a sign of abuse or mental, physical or other illness.

Someone being gay or wearing a headscarf is none of my business. Someone walking around naked is kind of a problem.

Even for the person walking around naked, spraying them with a fire hose is probably pretty uncivil. The point of "civil" behaviour is that it, like the assumption of innocence in court, prevents having to establish cause for behaviour in order to deal with it.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on April 21, 2023, 08:43:37 AM
"Furthermore, if the person rejects your basis for moral choice, then they can completely sidestep the discussion about their behaviour. Having objective, universal rules cuts to the chase. If someone wants to delve into the morality behind the rules, that's fine, but making it the focus of the discussion is time-consuming and potentially fruitless."

They might reject your basis for moral choice. they could sidestep the discussion about their behavior. And they might not. Welcome to teaching.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 21, 2023, 07:25:31 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 21, 2023, 08:18:34 AM
This is like the "excused absences" issue that comes up a lot. Vetting every proferred excuse for an absence is exhausting; having uniform objective rules for everyone simplifies things.

Furthermore, if the person rejects your basis for moral choice, then they can completely sidestep the discussion about their behaviour. Having objective, universal rules cuts to the chase. If someone wants to delve into the morality behind the rules, that's fine, but making it the focus of the discussion is time-consuming and potentially fruitless.

"fruitless"??

At one point it was a universal rule that women not own property or be allowed to vote.

Who makes up these "objective, universal rules" that cut to the chase, anyway?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 22, 2023, 08:22:11 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 21, 2023, 07:25:31 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 21, 2023, 08:18:34 AM
This is like the "excused absences" issue that comes up a lot. Vetting every proferred excuse for an absence is exhausting; having uniform objective rules for everyone simplifies things.

Furthermore, if the person rejects your basis for moral choice, then they can completely sidestep the discussion about their behaviour. Having objective, universal rules cuts to the chase. If someone wants to delve into the morality behind the rules, that's fine, but making it the focus of the discussion is time-consuming and potentially fruitless.

"fruitless"??

At one point it was a universal rule that women not own property or be allowed to vote.

Who makes up these "objective, universal rules" that cut to the chase, anyway?

So you don't think it's possible to come up with rules about what kind of behaviour constitutes bullying that would be widely accepted?  (That's what I mean by "objective, universal rules"; ones that are easy to get broad consensus on that are a vast improvement on no rules and/or ad hoc reactions.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on April 22, 2023, 08:24:34 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 22, 2023, 08:22:11 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 21, 2023, 07:25:31 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 21, 2023, 08:18:34 AM
This is like the "excused absences" issue that comes up a lot. Vetting every proferred excuse for an absence is exhausting; having uniform objective rules for everyone simplifies things.

Furthermore, if the person rejects your basis for moral choice, then they can completely sidestep the discussion about their behaviour. Having objective, universal rules cuts to the chase. If someone wants to delve into the morality behind the rules, that's fine, but making it the focus of the discussion is time-consuming and potentially fruitless.

"fruitless"??

At one point it was a universal rule that women not own property or be allowed to vote.

Who makes up these "objective, universal rules" that cut to the chase, anyway?

So you don't think it's possible to come up with rules about what kind of behaviour constitutes bullying that would be widely accepted?  (That's what I mean by "objective, universal rules"; ones that are easy to get broad consensus on that are a vast improvement on no rules and/or ad hoc reactions.)

Define "bullying."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 22, 2023, 10:16:32 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 22, 2023, 08:22:11 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 21, 2023, 07:25:31 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 21, 2023, 08:18:34 AM
This is like the "excused absences" issue that comes up a lot. Vetting every proferred excuse for an absence is exhausting; having uniform objective rules for everyone simplifies things.

Furthermore, if the person rejects your basis for moral choice, then they can completely sidestep the discussion about their behaviour. Having objective, universal rules cuts to the chase. If someone wants to delve into the morality behind the rules, that's fine, but making it the focus of the discussion is time-consuming and potentially fruitless.

"fruitless"??

At one point it was a universal rule that women not own property or be allowed to vote.

Who makes up these "objective, universal rules" that cut to the chase, anyway?

So you don't think it's possible to come up with rules about what kind of behaviour constitutes bullying that would be widely accepted?  (That's what I mean by "objective, universal rules"; ones that are easy to get broad consensus on that are a vast improvement on no rules and/or ad hoc reactions.)

We do have rules against bullying.  They are not necessarily enforced.

And the problem with "broad consensus" is that this is where we end up with institutionalized prejudice. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 22, 2023, 04:36:24 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 22, 2023, 10:16:32 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 22, 2023, 08:22:11 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 21, 2023, 07:25:31 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 21, 2023, 08:18:34 AM
This is like the "excused absences" issue that comes up a lot. Vetting every proferred excuse for an absence is exhausting; having uniform objective rules for everyone simplifies things.

Furthermore, if the person rejects your basis for moral choice, then they can completely sidestep the discussion about their behaviour. Having objective, universal rules cuts to the chase. If someone wants to delve into the morality behind the rules, that's fine, but making it the focus of the discussion is time-consuming and potentially fruitless.

"fruitless"??

At one point it was a universal rule that women not own property or be allowed to vote.

Who makes up these "objective, universal rules" that cut to the chase, anyway?

So you don't think it's possible to come up with rules about what kind of behaviour constitutes bullying that would be widely accepted?  (That's what I mean by "objective, universal rules"; ones that are easy to get broad consensus on that are a vast improvement on no rules and/or ad hoc reactions.)

We do have rules against bullying.  They are not necessarily enforced.

And the problem with "broad consensus" is that this is where we end up with institutionalized prejudice.

So would the rules be sufficient if they were consistently enforced?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 22, 2023, 07:25:30 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 22, 2023, 04:36:24 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 22, 2023, 10:16:32 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 22, 2023, 08:22:11 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 21, 2023, 07:25:31 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 21, 2023, 08:18:34 AM
This is like the "excused absences" issue that comes up a lot. Vetting every proferred excuse for an absence is exhausting; having uniform objective rules for everyone simplifies things.

Furthermore, if the person rejects your basis for moral choice, then they can completely sidestep the discussion about their behaviour. Having objective, universal rules cuts to the chase. If someone wants to delve into the morality behind the rules, that's fine, but making it the focus of the discussion is time-consuming and potentially fruitless.

"fruitless"??

At one point it was a universal rule that women not own property or be allowed to vote.

Who makes up these "objective, universal rules" that cut to the chase, anyway?

So you don't think it's possible to come up with rules about what kind of behaviour constitutes bullying that would be widely accepted?  (That's what I mean by "objective, universal rules"; ones that are easy to get broad consensus on that are a vast improvement on no rules and/or ad hoc reactions.)

We do have rules against bullying.  They are not necessarily enforced.

And the problem with "broad consensus" is that this is where we end up with institutionalized prejudice.

So would the rules be sufficient if they were consistently enforced?

Dunno.  But it would certainly help.  And in any event, rules against intimidation and violence are the not rules I worry about----these are good rules.

Rules against belief systems, personal choices, free speech, dress, sexual orientation and the like are the ones I worry about.  "Bullying" in this context is a red herring.

As caio said:

Quote
We should discuss what differences are okay, and which need to be addressed as a sign of abuse or mental, physical or other illness.

Someone being gay or wearing a headscarf is none of my business. Someone walking around naked is kind of a problem.

So crack down on bullying all you like.  That makes sense.  Leave the trans-people alone.  That also makes sense.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on April 27, 2023, 03:30:07 PM
Not sure where to put this, so here it is.

One of my hiking groups has been valiantly trying to prove that it is non-discriminatory. Some excerpts from their latest posting:

QuoteSuitable for: This hike is rated as moderate on the [Organization] hiking scale. This will be an all-day hike. Persons who are in marginalized communities i.e. BIPOC, LGBTQ+, neurodivergent - are especially encouraged to participate, including those in MI/SU Recovery AND having the fitness to participate.

QuoteFitness: Open to those with hiking experience and those who can scramble short distances and navigate rocky terrain. This hike is not suitable for beginners, easy hikers or trail runners. Leader sets the pace.

I have no idea what MI/SU means.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: namazu on April 27, 2023, 06:02:43 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on April 27, 2023, 03:30:07 PM
I have no idea what MI/SU means.
From context, I'd guess "mental illness / subtance use".
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Puget on April 27, 2023, 06:39:14 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on April 27, 2023, 03:30:07 PM
Leader sets the pace.

Maybe this should go in "asides" but having lead many hikes and had wilderness safety instruction,  "leader sets the pace" is NOT how you safely lead a hike. The entire party travels at the pace that is sustainable for the slowest member, unless the party is large enough to be safely broken into smaller groups. You NEVER leave someone trailing behind, leave them to wait for the party on the way back, or leave them to return to the trailhead alone. Yes to screening for ability level ahead of time, but once underway the slowest member sets the pace, always. /rant
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on April 27, 2023, 07:51:22 PM
AMC generally has a sweep. The point about the leader setting the pace is to stop people rushing ahead.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on April 28, 2023, 05:18:44 AM
Quote from: downer on April 27, 2023, 07:51:22 PM
AMC generally has a sweep. The point about the leader setting the pace is to stop people rushing ahead.

Hikes are categorized as easy, medium, strenuous, vigorous, etc. in order to weed out slow as well as fast hikers. Leaders in my hiking organizations are required to set the pace and also announce it in the hike descriptions. In addition, leaders have to make sure that people can get to the train station in time to catch the once-an-hour train back to Manhattan. Participants have to sign a page-long waiver for at least one of these organizations, acknowledging that they fully understand the risks associated with these hikes.

QuoteYou NEVER leave someone trailing behind, leave them to wait for the party on the way back, or leave them to return to the trailhead alone. Yes to screening for ability level ahead of time, but once underway the slowest member sets the pace, always. /rant

The slowest member never ever sets the pace because given the terrain and the scrambling involved in many of these hikes that I consider too strenuous for my ability, the entire group would be forced to spend the night in the wilderness or even give up the hike that they had signed up for, because one or more of the members decide to join a hike that was far too difficult for them. Hike leaders usually send these hikers back to the trailhead/starting point so that they can get back to the parking lot/train station.

I posted the paragraphs from the hike description here because of the ludicrousness of the long list of categories invited to join the hike. Are people supposed to introduce themselves as, for example, such-and-such ethnicity/skin color, neurodivergent, sexual orientation, recovering from something, and the like? As a hike leader and hiker, all that matters is that participants can keep up with the pace listed, are friendly, and most important, don't keep b!tching about the weather, the location, the trails, etc during the hike.

Thanks, namazu for the MI/SU explanation.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on April 28, 2023, 05:27:57 AM
I used to do AMC hikes and I may well do so again. Once you have done a few, you get to know the leaders and you know who you like and who to avoid. I have occasionally seen noobs who turn up to a hike wearing inadequate sneakers and without appropriate gear. Often they turn back after the first big hill.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on April 28, 2023, 07:33:30 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on April 28, 2023, 05:18:44 AM
I posted the paragraphs from the hike description here because of the ludicrousness of the long list of categories invited to join the hike. Are people supposed to introduce themselves as, for example, such-and-such ethnicity/skin color, neurodivergent, sexual orientation, recovering from something, and the like? As a hike leader and hiker, all that matters is that participants can keep up with the pace listed, are friendly, and most important, don't keep b!tching about the weather, the location, the trails, etc during the hike.

It does seem like somebody is either trying too hard or protesting too much.  Or maybe both.  Are they adding all this verbiage and jargon on their own, or have they been pushed into it by pressure from activists?

I usually just hike by myself.  But I've got a fair amount of experience, and only hike on well-marked trails in reasonable weather.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Puget on April 28, 2023, 07:52:50 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on April 28, 2023, 05:18:44 AM


QuoteYou NEVER leave someone trailing behind, leave them to wait for the party on the way back, or leave them to return to the trailhead alone. Yes to screening for ability level ahead of time, but once underway the slowest member sets the pace, always. /rant

The slowest member never ever sets the pace because given the terrain and the scrambling involved in many of these hikes that I consider too strenuous for my ability, the entire group would be forced to spend the night in the wilderness or even give up the hike that they had signed up for, because one or more of the members decide to join a hike that was far too difficult for them. Hike leaders usually send these hikers back to the trailhead/starting point so that they can get back to the parking lot/train station.



If they send them back *with* someone else who is a strong hiker, then fine. Otherwise, nope, not safe and not following mountaineer rules. They shouldn't be on the hike in the first place, but once they are, it is the leader's responsibility to ensure they return safely, even if that means everyone going back to the trailhead early. And yes, I have turned back before many summits because someone was not in good shape to continue safely.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on April 28, 2023, 10:38:29 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on April 27, 2023, 03:30:07 PM
Not sure where to put this, so here it is.

One of my hiking groups has been valiantly trying to prove that it is non-discriminatory. Some excerpts from their latest posting:

QuoteSuitable for: This hike is rated as moderate on the [Organization] hiking scale. This will be an all-day hike. Persons who are in marginalized communities i.e. BIPOC, LGBTQ+, neurodivergent - are especially encouraged to participate, including those in MI/SU Recovery AND having the fitness to participate.

QuoteFitness: Open to those with hiking experience and those who can scramble short distances and navigate rocky terrain. This hike is not suitable for beginners, easy hikers or trail runners. Leader sets the pace.

I have no idea what MI/SU means.

Hiking does tend to be very white/anglo. Well, not sure which category the Koreans come in, but they show up in strength.

Or course, the phrase "marginalized communities" is a red flag for bullshit. One aspect of being marginalized is precisely the lack of community.

Nevertheless, I like the idea of opening hiking groups up to people who might not be sure if they are welcome. I'm sure lots of hikers already fit in one or more of those categories listed but never mention it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on April 28, 2023, 03:52:41 PM
QuoteIt does seem like somebody is either trying too hard or protesting too much.  Or maybe both.  Are they adding all this verbiage and jargon on their own, or have they been pushed into it by pressure from activists?

It's the activists/organizations virtue signaling with a vengeance. We get a diverse group of people in our walks/hikes/bird outings and other activities especially in the city, so there is no need to advertise that organizations are "diverse". The so-called marginalized groups also participate in these outings, and should feel free to participate without needing to disclose their recovery/neurodivergence/and other issues that most of us would consider private. I think these organizations mean well, but just the thought of needing to proclaim one's marginalized status would be a disincentive for most hikers.

QuoteThey shouldn't be on the hike in the first place, but once they are, it is the leader's responsibility to ensure they return safely, even if that means everyone going back to the trailhead early. And yes, I have turned back before many summits because someone was not in good shape to continue safely.

@puget, this is a valid concern; when I lived/hiked in the midwest decades ago, hikes would be limited to 25 or fewer participants, with a leader and co-leader who would be the sweep. These hikes would be in nature preserves and similar areas far away from civilization, so the hike leaders would ensure that everyone stayed together and got back to the parking lot as a group.

In the city however, the hike descriptions note the bus/train schedule for the hikes and make it very clear that the participants need to keep up with the group (hikes have to include information regarding the mileage, terrain, pace, etc.). Hike leaders who are all volunteers have lives too, and do need to return to the train or bus station/parking lot at the scheduled time. Neither the hike leader nor the group can afford to be stranded overnight without proper clothing, food, or shelter because of a hiker who didn't bother to read the hike description. Hikers are given the usual speil at the beginning of the hike about the terrain, need to keep up with the group and related information so that they can take the bus/train back to the city.

Apologies for going off tangent/topic, but we could start a thread on hiking if anyone is interested.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on April 28, 2023, 03:58:24 PM
I'd like a hiking thread.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on April 28, 2023, 04:36:17 PM
Quote from: downer on April 28, 2023, 03:58:24 PM
I'd like a hiking thread.

Go right ahead, you can do the honors. I'll pitch in after that.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on April 28, 2023, 09:13:19 PM
IHE: A Free Speech Violation or Overdue Discipline? (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/faculty-issues/academic-freedom/2023/04/28/free-speech-violation-or-overdue-discipline)

Quote
A tenured history professor at Bakersfield College in California who founded a controversial, conservative-leaning faculty group received notice earlier this month that the Kern Community College District Board had voted to fire him. The professor, Matthew Garrett, says administrators are penalizing him for exercising his free speech. College leaders say the decision has nothing to do with his conservative views and have charged him with a litany of offenses.

****

The report alleges Garrett defended vandalism on campus by the Hundred Handers, described as a white supremacist group by the Anti-Defamation League; publicly accused colleagues of using grant funds to advance a partisan agenda; held an in-person event against COVID-19 protocols on Sept. 8, 2021; filed 36 "baseless" complaints against colleagues that resulted in 23 third-party investigations; and sent a threatening email to Trustee John Corkins claiming to possess documents that showed "past indiscretions," among other accusations.

****

"If you read the charges against me, there's not a whiff of anything about immorality, unless immorality is questioning social justice and the new-age DEI stuff, which I would hope that as academics we could have thoughtful discussion about these things, that we could have disagreed opinions and we could debate and we could have discourse," he said.

****

"Garrett has been repeatedly warned that some of his actions, including unprofessional conduct and persistent violations of district rules and California Education Code regulations, were seriously disrupting the ongoing activities of the college and hindering our mission to educate students," the statement continued. "In accordance with our rules, as he refused to cease this disruptive activity, we had no choice but to move forward with action, which has all been done in accordance with legal policies and procedures and contract rights.
[/url]
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on April 29, 2023, 06:07:54 AM
Sounds like he was something of a lunatic whose mad delusions came to be channeled into partisan politics.  Which perhaps explains quite a bit of what we see nowadays.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 08:20:04 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on April 28, 2023, 09:13:19 PM
IHE: A Free Speech Violation or Overdue Discipline? (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/faculty-issues/academic-freedom/2023/04/28/free-speech-violation-or-overdue-discipline)

Quote
A tenured history professor at Bakersfield College in California who founded a controversial, conservative-leaning faculty group received notice earlier this month that the Kern Community College District Board had voted to fire him. The professor, Matthew Garrett, says administrators are penalizing him for exercising his free speech. College leaders say the decision has nothing to do with his conservative views and have charged him with a litany of offenses.

****

The report alleges Garrett defended vandalism on campus by the Hundred Handers, described as a white supremacist group by the Anti-Defamation League; publicly accused colleagues of using grant funds to advance a partisan agenda; held an in-person event against COVID-19 protocols on Sept. 8, 2021; filed 36 "baseless" complaints against colleagues that resulted in 23 third-party investigations; and sent a threatening email to Trustee John Corkins claiming to possess documents that showed "past indiscretions," among other accusations.

****

"If you read the charges against me, there's not a whiff of anything about immorality, unless immorality is questioning social justice and the new-age DEI stuff, which I would hope that as academics we could have thoughtful discussion about these things, that we could have disagreed opinions and we could debate and we could have discourse," he said.

****

"Garrett has been repeatedly warned that some of his actions, including unprofessional conduct and persistent violations of district rules and California Education Code regulations, were seriously disrupting the ongoing activities of the college and hindering our mission to educate students," the statement continued. "In accordance with our rules, as he refused to cease this disruptive activity, we had no choice but to move forward with action, which has all been done in accordance with legal policies and procedures and contract rights.

Not much to add on this specific case, but I do work in the California Community College system. Like the K-12 system, we all have our own locally elected governing boards. We have generally been immune from most of the K-12 testing, etc drama because we are considered to be part of the higher education system, so more akin to CSU and UC in terms of academic freedom.

Still, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light. Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

Because they also approve our curriculum which is again, just a rubber stamp of a long list of course numbers and titles, I have not yet heard of any board member making a stink about a particular course or its content.

Is it coming?

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 29, 2023, 11:46:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 08:20:04 AM

Still, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light.

If both the "woke" and "anti-woke" types could be weeded out, so that boards consisted of people focused on education, it would be a big win for all.

Quote
Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

Including "dismantling racism" in a mission statement is like including "dismantling use of child labour" or "dismantling production of child pornography"; if the institution ever was doing those things, they presumably have already stopped doing them since they are admitting they shouldn't be. Or else the definitions of those things are just ridiculously vague so it doesn't mean anything specific.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 12:31:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 29, 2023, 11:46:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 08:20:04 AM

Still, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light.

If both the "woke" and "anti-woke" types could be weeded out, so that boards consisted of people focused on education, it would be a big win for all.

Quote
Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

Including "dismantling racism" in a mission statement is like including "dismantling use of child labour" or "dismantling production of child pornography"; if the institution ever was doing those things, they presumably have already stopped doing them since they are admitting they shouldn't be. Or else the definitions of those things are just ridiculously vague so it doesn't mean anything specific.

This reminded me of Vaclav Havel's essay The Power of the Powerless, parable really, about the greengrocer who puts signs of loyalty to the regime into his shop window -- by pressure if no longer by violent coercion -- forced speech in contemporary parlance.

QuoteLet us now imagine that one day something in our greengrocer snaps and he stops putting up the slogans merely to ingratiate himself. He stops voting in elections he knows are a farce. He begins to say what he really thinks at political meetings. And he even finds the strength in himself to express solidarity with those whom his conscience commands him to support. In this revolt the greengrocer steps out of living within the lie. He rejects the ritual and breaks the rules of the game. He discovers once more his suppressed identity and dignity. He gives his freedom a concrete significance. His revolt is an attempt to live within the truth.

This is something the regime cannot tolerate.

QuoteThus the power structure, through the agency of those who carry out the sanctions, those anonymous components of the system, will spew the greengrocer from its mouth. The system, through its alienating presence in people, will punish him for his rebellion. It must do so because the logic of its automatism and self-defense dictate it. The greengrocer has not committed a simple, individual offense, isolated in its own uniqueness, but something incomparably more serious. By breaking the rules of the game, he has disrupted the game as such. He has exposed it as a mere game. He has shattered the world of appearances, the fundamental pillar of the system. He has upset the power structure by tearing apart what holds it together. He has demonstrated that living a lie is living a lie. He has broken through the exalted facade of the system and exposed the real, base foundations of power. He has said that the emperor is naked. And because the emperor is in fact naked, something extremely dangerous has happened: by his action, the greengrocer has addressed the world. He has enabled everyone to peer behind the curtain. He has shown everyone that it is possible to live within the truth. Living within the lie can constitute the system only if it is universal. The principle must embrace and permeate everything. There are no terms whatsoever on which it can co-exist with living within the truth, and therefore everyone who steps out of line denies it in principle and threatens it in its entirety.

And the lie explains why the regime cannot tolerate alternatives, even thinking about alternatives, and those who think about alternatives.

QuoteThis is understandable: as long as appearance is not confronted with reality, it does not seem to be appearance. As long as living a lie is not confronted with living the truth, the perspective needed to expose its mendacity is lacking. As soon as the alternative appears, however, it threatens the very existence of appearance and living a lie in terms of what they are, both their essence and their all-inclusiveness.

Forced speech is forced conformism, an attempt to show far more support than there actually is and to break independent thought.

On average, we are still far from the regime in pre-1990 Czecho, but some of higher ed in some places is close to it, without the guns so far. What makes pre-1990 Czecho unlikely here is economic and political competition which will be difficult to snuff out.

This, too, shall pass.

https://hac.bard.edu/amor-mundi/the-power-of-the-powerless-vaclav-havel-2011-12-23 (https://hac.bard.edu/amor-mundi/the-power-of-the-powerless-vaclav-havel-2011-12-23)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 01:37:37 PM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 12:31:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 29, 2023, 11:46:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 08:20:04 AM

Still, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light.

If both the "woke" and "anti-woke" types could be weeded out, so that boards consisted of people focused on education, it would be a big win for all.

Quote
Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

Including "dismantling racism" in a mission statement is like including "dismantling use of child labour" or "dismantling production of child pornography"; if the institution ever was doing those things, they presumably have already stopped doing them since they are admitting they shouldn't be. Or else the definitions of those things are just ridiculously vague so it doesn't mean anything specific.

This reminded me of Vaclav Havel's essay The Power of the Powerless, parable really, about the greengrocer who puts signs of loyalty to the regime into his shop window -- by pressure if no longer by violent coercion -- forced speech in contemporary parlance.

Not sure who is being forced to say/do what in the CCC board scenario?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 01:47:24 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 01:37:37 PM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 12:31:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 29, 2023, 11:46:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 08:20:04 AM

Still, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light.

If both the "woke" and "anti-woke" types could be weeded out, so that boards consisted of people focused on education, it would be a big win for all.

Quote
Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

Including "dismantling racism" in a mission statement is like including "dismantling use of child labour" or "dismantling production of child pornography"; if the institution ever was doing those things, they presumably have already stopped doing them since they are admitting they shouldn't be. Or else the definitions of those things are just ridiculously vague so it doesn't mean anything specific.

This reminded me of Vaclav Havel's essay The Power of the Powerless, parable really, about the greengrocer who puts signs of loyalty to the regime into his shop window -- by pressure if no longer by violent coercion -- forced speech in contemporary parlance.

Not sure who is being forced to say/do what in the CCC board scenario?

QuoteStill, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light. Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

There is no reason to rubber stamp "equity" and "dismantling racism" in mission statements. The greengrocer is removing the picture of Stalin from the shop window.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on April 30, 2023, 09:36:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 01:47:24 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 01:37:37 PM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 12:31:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 29, 2023, 11:46:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 08:20:04 AM

Still, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light.

If both the "woke" and "anti-woke" types could be weeded out, so that boards consisted of people focused on education, it would be a big win for all.

Quote
Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

Including "dismantling racism" in a mission statement is like including "dismantling use of child labour" or "dismantling production of child pornography"; if the institution ever was doing those things, they presumably have already stopped doing them since they are admitting they shouldn't be. Or else the definitions of those things are just ridiculously vague so it doesn't mean anything specific.

This reminded me of Vaclav Havel's essay The Power of the Powerless, parable really, about the greengrocer who puts signs of loyalty to the regime into his shop window -- by pressure if no longer by violent coercion -- forced speech in contemporary parlance.

Not sure who is being forced to say/do what in the CCC board scenario?

QuoteStill, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light. Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

There is no reason to rubber stamp "equity" and "dismantling racism" in mission statements. The greengrocer is removing the picture of Stalin from the shop window.

Not sure I would equate a brutal dictator with making sure an educational environment is inclusive and supportive of a diverse student body.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on April 30, 2023, 09:55:08 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 30, 2023, 09:36:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 01:47:24 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 01:37:37 PM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 12:31:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 29, 2023, 11:46:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 08:20:04 AM

Still, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light.

If both the "woke" and "anti-woke" types could be weeded out, so that boards consisted of people focused on education, it would be a big win for all.

Quote
Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

Including "dismantling racism" in a mission statement is like including "dismantling use of child labour" or "dismantling production of child pornography"; if the institution ever was doing those things, they presumably have already stopped doing them since they are admitting they shouldn't be. Or else the definitions of those things are just ridiculously vague so it doesn't mean anything specific.

This reminded me of Vaclav Havel's essay The Power of the Powerless, parable really, about the greengrocer who puts signs of loyalty to the regime into his shop window -- by pressure if no longer by violent coercion -- forced speech in contemporary parlance.

Not sure who is being forced to say/do what in the CCC board scenario?

QuoteStill, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light. Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

There is no reason to rubber stamp "equity" and "dismantling racism" in mission statements. The greengrocer is removing the picture of Stalin from the shop window.

Not sure I would equate a brutal dictator with making sure an educational environment is inclusive and supportive of a diverse student body.

In a world where "inclusion" really means "exclusion", "diverse" really means "uniform", and "equitable" really means "inequitable". Some are against the actual meaning of those words, like Havel's greengrocer, and don't genuflect before them.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on April 30, 2023, 09:56:52 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 30, 2023, 09:36:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 01:47:24 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 01:37:37 PM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 12:31:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 29, 2023, 11:46:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 08:20:04 AM

Still, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light.

If both the "woke" and "anti-woke" types could be weeded out, so that boards consisted of people focused on education, it would be a big win for all.

Quote
Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

Including "dismantling racism" in a mission statement is like including "dismantling use of child labour" or "dismantling production of child pornography"; if the institution ever was doing those things, they presumably have already stopped doing them since they are admitting they shouldn't be. Or else the definitions of those things are just ridiculously vague so it doesn't mean anything specific.

This reminded me of Vaclav Havel's essay The Power of the Powerless, parable really, about the greengrocer who puts signs of loyalty to the regime into his shop window -- by pressure if no longer by violent coercion -- forced speech in contemporary parlance.

Not sure who is being forced to say/do what in the CCC board scenario?

QuoteStill, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light. Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

There is no reason to rubber stamp "equity" and "dismantling racism" in mission statements. The greengrocer is removing the picture of Stalin from the shop window.

Not sure I would equate a brutal dictator with making sure an educational environment is inclusive and supportive of a diverse student body.

How exactly is putting language in a mission statement "making sure an educational environment is inclusive and supportive of a diverse student body"? And how is not putting it there indicative of an educational environment that isn't inclusive and supportive of a diverse student body?

All kinds of people who have abused or murdered family members have claimed to love them, and all kinds of people who avoided explicitly expressing love have sacrificed everything for others.

(For a good historical example of virtue-signalling, see the Apostle Peter, who vowed he would never deny Jesus. That didn't turn out so well. Was he sincere? Undoubtedly. The problem was that how he imagined his loyalty would be tested was nothing like what actually happened. Humility is vastly superior to virtue-signalling.)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on May 01, 2023, 09:09:51 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 30, 2023, 09:55:08 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 30, 2023, 09:36:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 01:47:24 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 01:37:37 PM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 12:31:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 29, 2023, 11:46:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 08:20:04 AM

Still, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light.

If both the "woke" and "anti-woke" types could be weeded out, so that boards consisted of people focused on education, it would be a big win for all.

Quote
Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

Including "dismantling racism" in a mission statement is like including "dismantling use of child labour" or "dismantling production of child pornography"; if the institution ever was doing those things, they presumably have already stopped doing them since they are admitting they shouldn't be. Or else the definitions of those things are just ridiculously vague so it doesn't mean anything specific.

This reminded me of Vaclav Havel's essay The Power of the Powerless, parable really, about the greengrocer who puts signs of loyalty to the regime into his shop window -- by pressure if no longer by violent coercion -- forced speech in contemporary parlance.

Not sure who is being forced to say/do what in the CCC board scenario?

QuoteStill, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light. Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

There is no reason to rubber stamp "equity" and "dismantling racism" in mission statements. The greengrocer is removing the picture of Stalin from the shop window.

Not sure I would equate a brutal dictator with making sure an educational environment is inclusive and supportive of a diverse student body.

In a world where "inclusion" really means "exclusion", "diverse" really means "uniform", and "equitable" really means "inequitable". Some are against the actual meaning of those words, like Havel's greengrocer, and don't genuflect before them.

Sure, if you change the meaning of all the words to their opposites it is pretty easy to be against the statement. 

Ironically, the "anti-woke" crowd who are against this forced speech of tolerance and acceptance are often very supportive of forced recitation of the national anthem, the pledge of allegiance, etc.  Funny how morals are so fickle. 

     
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 09:51:06 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on May 01, 2023, 09:09:51 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 30, 2023, 09:55:08 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 30, 2023, 09:36:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 01:47:24 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 01:37:37 PM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 12:31:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 29, 2023, 11:46:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 08:20:04 AM

Still, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light.

If both the "woke" and "anti-woke" types could be weeded out, so that boards consisted of people focused on education, it would be a big win for all.

Quote
Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

Including "dismantling racism" in a mission statement is like including "dismantling use of child labour" or "dismantling production of child pornography"; if the institution ever was doing those things, they presumably have already stopped doing them since they are admitting they shouldn't be. Or else the definitions of those things are just ridiculously vague so it doesn't mean anything specific.

This reminded me of Vaclav Havel's essay The Power of the Powerless, parable really, about the greengrocer who puts signs of loyalty to the regime into his shop window -- by pressure if no longer by violent coercion -- forced speech in contemporary parlance.

Not sure who is being forced to say/do what in the CCC board scenario?

QuoteStill, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light. Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

There is no reason to rubber stamp "equity" and "dismantling racism" in mission statements. The greengrocer is removing the picture of Stalin from the shop window.

Not sure I would equate a brutal dictator with making sure an educational environment is inclusive and supportive of a diverse student body.

In a world where "inclusion" really means "exclusion", "diverse" really means "uniform", and "equitable" really means "inequitable". Some are against the actual meaning of those words, like Havel's greengrocer, and don't genuflect before them.

Sure, if you change the meaning of all the words to their opposites it is pretty easy to be against the statement. 

Ironically, the "anti-woke" crowd who are against this forced speech of tolerance and acceptance are often very supportive of forced recitation of the national anthem, the pledge of allegiance, etc.  Funny how morals are so fickle. 

     

The point is that it's forced speech of intolerance and rejection. I wouldn't sign off on that stuff even if the words had their original meaning.

And nobody has to sing the national anthem or pledge allegiance to the flag [West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943 -- in the middle of a damned war.]

Justice Robert Jackson said, "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

Put simply: the government can't tell you what to say or think.

I also don't want the educational establishment to tell me what to say or think.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 10:27:40 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 09:51:06 AM

The point is that it's forced speech of intolerance and rejection. I wouldn't sign off on that stuff even if the words had their original meaning.

And nobody has to sing the national anthem or pledge allegiance to the flag [West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943 -- in the middle of a damned war.]

Justice Robert Jackson said, "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

Put simply: the government can't tell you what to say or think.

I also don't want the educational establishment to tell me what to say or think.

You mean like this? https://news.stlpublicradio.org/education/2023-04-28/kirkwood-sexualized-my-identity-3-trans-educators-claim-discrimination-say-they-were-forced-out
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 10:47:24 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 10:27:40 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 09:51:06 AM

The point is that it's forced speech of intolerance and rejection. I wouldn't sign off on that stuff even if the words had their original meaning.

And nobody has to sing the national anthem or pledge allegiance to the flag [West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943 -- in the middle of a damned war.]

Justice Robert Jackson said, "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

Put simply: the government can't tell you what to say or think.

I also don't want the educational establishment to tell me what to say or think.

You mean like this? https://news.stlpublicradio.org/education/2023-04-28/kirkwood-sexualized-my-identity-3-trans-educators-claim-discrimination-say-they-were-forced-out

I was thinking of higher ed. State governmenst control K-12 education. They can legislate what they want as far as content is concerned. The solution to the trans ethnogenisis more generally is to let states do it how they want.

As for higher ed, it occurs to me that state schools may not force speech, based on Barnette. I expect there will be lawsuits.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on May 01, 2023, 11:06:23 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 09:51:06 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on May 01, 2023, 09:09:51 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 30, 2023, 09:55:08 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 30, 2023, 09:36:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 01:47:24 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 01:37:37 PM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 12:31:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 29, 2023, 11:46:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 08:20:04 AM

Still, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light.

If both the "woke" and "anti-woke" types could be weeded out, so that boards consisted of people focused on education, it would be a big win for all.

Quote
Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

Including "dismantling racism" in a mission statement is like including "dismantling use of child labour" or "dismantling production of child pornography"; if the institution ever was doing those things, they presumably have already stopped doing them since they are admitting they shouldn't be. Or else the definitions of those things are just ridiculously vague so it doesn't mean anything specific.

This reminded me of Vaclav Havel's essay The Power of the Powerless, parable really, about the greengrocer who puts signs of loyalty to the regime into his shop window -- by pressure if no longer by violent coercion -- forced speech in contemporary parlance.

Not sure who is being forced to say/do what in the CCC board scenario?

QuoteStill, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light. Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

There is no reason to rubber stamp "equity" and "dismantling racism" in mission statements. The greengrocer is removing the picture of Stalin from the shop window.

Not sure I would equate a brutal dictator with making sure an educational environment is inclusive and supportive of a diverse student body.

In a world where "inclusion" really means "exclusion", "diverse" really means "uniform", and "equitable" really means "inequitable". Some are against the actual meaning of those words, like Havel's greengrocer, and don't genuflect before them.

Sure, if you change the meaning of all the words to their opposites it is pretty easy to be against the statement. 

Ironically, the "anti-woke" crowd who are against this forced speech of tolerance and acceptance are often very supportive of forced recitation of the national anthem, the pledge of allegiance, etc.  Funny how morals are so fickle. 

     

The point is that it's forced speech of intolerance and rejection. I wouldn't sign off on that stuff even if the words had their original meaning.

And nobody has to sing the national anthem or pledge allegiance to the flag [West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943 -- in the middle of a damned war.]

Justice Robert Jackson said, "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

Put simply: the government can't tell you what to say or think.

I also don't want the educational establishment to tell me what to say or think.

I don't think anyone is forced to recite that mission statement either.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 11:21:13 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on May 01, 2023, 11:06:23 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 09:51:06 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on May 01, 2023, 09:09:51 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 30, 2023, 09:55:08 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 30, 2023, 09:36:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 01:47:24 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 01:37:37 PM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 12:31:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 29, 2023, 11:46:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 08:20:04 AM

Still, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light.

If both the "woke" and "anti-woke" types could be weeded out, so that boards consisted of people focused on education, it would be a big win for all.

Quote
Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

Including "dismantling racism" in a mission statement is like including "dismantling use of child labour" or "dismantling production of child pornography"; if the institution ever was doing those things, they presumably have already stopped doing them since they are admitting they shouldn't be. Or else the definitions of those things are just ridiculously vague so it doesn't mean anything specific.

This reminded me of Vaclav Havel's essay The Power of the Powerless, parable really, about the greengrocer who puts signs of loyalty to the regime into his shop window -- by pressure if no longer by violent coercion -- forced speech in contemporary parlance.

Not sure who is being forced to say/do what in the CCC board scenario?

QuoteStill, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light. Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

There is no reason to rubber stamp "equity" and "dismantling racism" in mission statements. The greengrocer is removing the picture of Stalin from the shop window.

Not sure I would equate a brutal dictator with making sure an educational environment is inclusive and supportive of a diverse student body.

In a world where "inclusion" really means "exclusion", "diverse" really means "uniform", and "equitable" really means "inequitable". Some are against the actual meaning of those words, like Havel's greengrocer, and don't genuflect before them.

Sure, if you change the meaning of all the words to their opposites it is pretty easy to be against the statement. 

Ironically, the "anti-woke" crowd who are against this forced speech of tolerance and acceptance are often very supportive of forced recitation of the national anthem, the pledge of allegiance, etc.  Funny how morals are so fickle. 

     

The point is that it's forced speech of intolerance and rejection. I wouldn't sign off on that stuff even if the words had their original meaning.

And nobody has to sing the national anthem or pledge allegiance to the flag [West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943 -- in the middle of a damned war.]

Justice Robert Jackson said, "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

Put simply: the government can't tell you what to say or think.

I also don't want the educational establishment to tell me what to say or think.

I don't think anyone is forced to recite that mission statement either.

Maybe not, but to accept it. Tells me what to think.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 11:38:38 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 10:47:24 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 10:27:40 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 09:51:06 AM

The point is that it's forced speech of intolerance and rejection. I wouldn't sign off on that stuff even if the words had their original meaning.

And nobody has to sing the national anthem or pledge allegiance to the flag [West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943 -- in the middle of a damned war.]

Justice Robert Jackson said, "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

Put simply: the government can't tell you what to say or think.

I also don't want the educational establishment to tell me what to say or think.

You mean like this? https://news.stlpublicradio.org/education/2023-04-28/kirkwood-sexualized-my-identity-3-trans-educators-claim-discrimination-say-they-were-forced-out

I was thinking of higher ed. State governmenst control K-12 education. They can legislate what they want as far as content is concerned. The solution to the trans ethnogenisis more generally is to let states do it how they want.

As for higher ed, it occurs to me that state schools may not force speech, based on Barnette. I expect there will be lawsuits.

Yes, but in this case the teachers were told that simply telling the class that they (the teacher) were non-binary was sex education. That a personal statement of identity could be construed as curriculum related is bizarre.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 11:45:31 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 11:38:38 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 10:47:24 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 10:27:40 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 09:51:06 AM

The point is that it's forced speech of intolerance and rejection. I wouldn't sign off on that stuff even if the words had their original meaning.

And nobody has to sing the national anthem or pledge allegiance to the flag [West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943 -- in the middle of a damned war.]

Justice Robert Jackson said, "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

Put simply: the government can't tell you what to say or think.

I also don't want the educational establishment to tell me what to say or think.

You mean like this? https://news.stlpublicradio.org/education/2023-04-28/kirkwood-sexualized-my-identity-3-trans-educators-claim-discrimination-say-they-were-forced-out

I was thinking of higher ed. State governmenst control K-12 education. They can legislate what they want as far as content is concerned. The solution to the trans ethnogenisis more generally is to let states do it how they want.

As for higher ed, it occurs to me that state schools may not force speech, based on Barnette. I expect there will be lawsuits.

Yes, but in this case the teachers were told that simply telling the class that they (the teacher) were non-binary was sex education. That a personal statement of identity could be construed as curriculum related is bizarre.

What's bizarre to some is fine to others, and what's bizarre to others is fine for some. People differ in their preferences. Decentralize, decentralize.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 12:17:50 PM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 11:45:31 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 11:38:38 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 10:47:24 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 10:27:40 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 09:51:06 AM

The point is that it's forced speech of intolerance and rejection. I wouldn't sign off on that stuff even if the words had their original meaning.

And nobody has to sing the national anthem or pledge allegiance to the flag [West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943 -- in the middle of a damned war.]

Justice Robert Jackson said, "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

Put simply: the government can't tell you what to say or think.

I also don't want the educational establishment to tell me what to say or think.

You mean like this? https://news.stlpublicradio.org/education/2023-04-28/kirkwood-sexualized-my-identity-3-trans-educators-claim-discrimination-say-they-were-forced-out

I was thinking of higher ed. State governmenst control K-12 education. They can legislate what they want as far as content is concerned. The solution to the trans ethnogenisis more generally is to let states do it how they want.

As for higher ed, it occurs to me that state schools may not force speech, based on Barnette. I expect there will be lawsuits.

Yes, but in this case the teachers were told that simply telling the class that they (the teacher) were non-binary was sex education. That a personal statement of identity could be construed as curriculum related is bizarre.

What's bizarre to some is fine to others, and what's bizarre to others is fine for some. People differ in their preferences. Decentralize, decentralize.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits an employer from treating you differently, or less favorably, because of your sex, which is defined to include pregnancy, sexual orientation, and gender identity.

Sex Discrimination | U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity ...

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 01:03:21 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 12:17:50 PM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 11:45:31 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 11:38:38 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 10:47:24 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 10:27:40 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 09:51:06 AM

The point is that it's forced speech of intolerance and rejection. I wouldn't sign off on that stuff even if the words had their original meaning.

And nobody has to sing the national anthem or pledge allegiance to the flag [West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943 -- in the middle of a damned war.]

Justice Robert Jackson said, "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

Put simply: the government can't tell you what to say or think.

I also don't want the educational establishment to tell me what to say or think.

You mean like this? https://news.stlpublicradio.org/education/2023-04-28/kirkwood-sexualized-my-identity-3-trans-educators-claim-discrimination-say-they-were-forced-out

I was thinking of higher ed. State governmenst control K-12 education. They can legislate what they want as far as content is concerned. The solution to the trans ethnogenisis more generally is to let states do it how they want.

As for higher ed, it occurs to me that state schools may not force speech, based on Barnette. I expect there will be lawsuits.

Yes, but in this case the teachers were told that simply telling the class that they (the teacher) were non-binary was sex education. That a personal statement of identity could be construed as curriculum related is bizarre.

What's bizarre to some is fine to others, and what's bizarre to others is fine for some. People differ in their preferences. Decentralize, decentralize.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits an employer from treating you differently, or less favorably, because of your sex, which is defined to include pregnancy, sexual orientation, and gender identity.

Sex Discrimination | U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity ...

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Sure. Now determine if control of a k-12 teacher's speech is consistent or not with the Civil rights Act. I think it is consistent. Nobody is being treated differently. All teachers' speech is prescribed.

[By the way, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 also prohibits "diversity" as a criterion in college admissions, but SCOTUS [Bakke, 1978], well a single justice  (Lewis F. Powell, Jr.) who sided with four others claiming overt discrimination was OK decided the CRA didn't apply.]
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on May 01, 2023, 02:01:00 PM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 11:21:13 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on May 01, 2023, 11:06:23 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 09:51:06 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on May 01, 2023, 09:09:51 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 30, 2023, 09:55:08 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 30, 2023, 09:36:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 01:47:24 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 01:37:37 PM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 12:31:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 29, 2023, 11:46:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 08:20:04 AM

Still, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light.

If both the "woke" and "anti-woke" types could be weeded out, so that boards consisted of people focused on education, it would be a big win for all.

Quote
Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

Including "dismantling racism" in a mission statement is like including "dismantling use of child labour" or "dismantling production of child pornography"; if the institution ever was doing those things, they presumably have already stopped doing them since they are admitting they shouldn't be. Or else the definitions of those things are just ridiculously vague so it doesn't mean anything specific.

This reminded me of Vaclav Havel's essay The Power of the Powerless, parable really, about the greengrocer who puts signs of loyalty to the regime into his shop window -- by pressure if no longer by violent coercion -- forced speech in contemporary parlance.

Not sure who is being forced to say/do what in the CCC board scenario?

QuoteStill, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light. Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

There is no reason to rubber stamp "equity" and "dismantling racism" in mission statements. The greengrocer is removing the picture of Stalin from the shop window.

Not sure I would equate a brutal dictator with making sure an educational environment is inclusive and supportive of a diverse student body.

In a world where "inclusion" really means "exclusion", "diverse" really means "uniform", and "equitable" really means "inequitable". Some are against the actual meaning of those words, like Havel's greengrocer, and don't genuflect before them.

Sure, if you change the meaning of all the words to their opposites it is pretty easy to be against the statement. 

Ironically, the "anti-woke" crowd who are against this forced speech of tolerance and acceptance are often very supportive of forced recitation of the national anthem, the pledge of allegiance, etc.  Funny how morals are so fickle. 

     

The point is that it's forced speech of intolerance and rejection. I wouldn't sign off on that stuff even if the words had their original meaning.

And nobody has to sing the national anthem or pledge allegiance to the flag [West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943 -- in the middle of a damned war.]

Justice Robert Jackson said, "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

Put simply: the government can't tell you what to say or think.

I also don't want the educational establishment to tell me what to say or think.

I don't think anyone is forced to recite that mission statement either.

Maybe not, but to accept it. Tells me what to think.

Same with the constitution and your countriy's laws.  Obviously the government can and does enforce some level of thought policing.  You are just picking and choosing.

And who is making anyone accept the mission. Statement.  I see all sorts of mission statements that are just stupid, including my own institutions.  No one has arrested me yet.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 02:37:23 PM
Quote from: Kron3007 on May 01, 2023, 02:01:00 PM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 11:21:13 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on May 01, 2023, 11:06:23 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 09:51:06 AM
Quote from: Kron3007 on May 01, 2023, 09:09:51 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 30, 2023, 09:55:08 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 30, 2023, 09:36:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 01:47:24 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 01:37:37 PM
Quote from: dismalist on April 29, 2023, 12:31:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on April 29, 2023, 11:46:36 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on April 29, 2023, 08:20:04 AM

Still, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light.

If both the "woke" and "anti-woke" types could be weeded out, so that boards consisted of people focused on education, it would be a big win for all.

Quote
Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

Including "dismantling racism" in a mission statement is like including "dismantling use of child labour" or "dismantling production of child pornography"; if the institution ever was doing those things, they presumably have already stopped doing them since they are admitting they shouldn't be. Or else the definitions of those things are just ridiculously vague so it doesn't mean anything specific.

This reminded me of Vaclav Havel's essay The Power of the Powerless, parable really, about the greengrocer who puts signs of loyalty to the regime into his shop window -- by pressure if no longer by violent coercion -- forced speech in contemporary parlance.

Not sure who is being forced to say/do what in the CCC board scenario?

QuoteStill, in the same way local K-12 boards have been dealing with "anti-woke" types, these folks are finding their way onto our local College boards at times. From what I hear from colleagues, so far they are generating more heat than light. Yet issues that used to be rubber stamps, like including "equity" and "dismantling racism" in our mission statements have occasionally led to tantrums.

There is no reason to rubber stamp "equity" and "dismantling racism" in mission statements. The greengrocer is removing the picture of Stalin from the shop window.

Not sure I would equate a brutal dictator with making sure an educational environment is inclusive and supportive of a diverse student body.

In a world where "inclusion" really means "exclusion", "diverse" really means "uniform", and "equitable" really means "inequitable". Some are against the actual meaning of those words, like Havel's greengrocer, and don't genuflect before them.

Sure, if you change the meaning of all the words to their opposites it is pretty easy to be against the statement. 

Ironically, the "anti-woke" crowd who are against this forced speech of tolerance and acceptance are often very supportive of forced recitation of the national anthem, the pledge of allegiance, etc.  Funny how morals are so fickle. 

     

The point is that it's forced speech of intolerance and rejection. I wouldn't sign off on that stuff even if the words had their original meaning.

And nobody has to sing the national anthem or pledge allegiance to the flag [West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943 -- in the middle of a damned war.]

Justice Robert Jackson said, "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

Put simply: the government can't tell you what to say or think.

I also don't want the educational establishment to tell me what to say or think.

I don't think anyone is forced to recite that mission statement either.

Maybe not, but to accept it. Tells me what to think.

Same with the constitution and your countriy's laws.  Obviously the government can and does enforce some level of thought policing.  You are just picking and choosing.

And who is making anyone accept the mission. Statement.  I see all sorts of mission statements that are just stupid, including my own institutions.  No one has arrested me yet.

Of course I'm picking and choosing! I'm picking and choosing stuff that has been or largely was uncontroversial. If it's controversial, decentralize, decentralize. Then we don't have to live close to each other. People differ in their preferences.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on May 01, 2023, 04:53:50 PM
Given that k12 ed teaches minor children, exactly what level of moral and behavioral standards ought a community, via its elected  school board reps, be able to impose upon teachers (who are not draftees, and have no sovereign right to their employment)?   Why or why not?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on May 01, 2023, 06:44:36 PM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 11:21:13 AM

Maybe not, but to accept it. Tells me what to think.

Mission statements don't tell you what to think. They do tell you what the institution values, such as... student success. And the success of students from diverse backgrounds.

So if you don't think student success is important or valuable, then you are probably in the wrong field. Or at least in the wrong institution. And... it's a free country.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 01, 2023, 07:00:47 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on May 01, 2023, 04:53:50 PM
Given that k12 ed teaches minor children, exactly what level of moral and behavioral standards ought a community, via its elected  school board reps, be able to impose upon teachers (who are not draftees, and have no sovereign right to their employment)?   Why or why not?

One assumes there is a background check.

One assumes that there is some oversight on the job.

I think legal charges of pedophilia and drug peddling might disqualify one for a teaching job.

What else are you suggesting, Kay?

(Remember, before you go there, most abusers are straight men and someone that the child already knows, frequently a family member.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on May 01, 2023, 07:01:42 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on May 01, 2023, 04:53:50 PM
Given that k12 ed teaches minor children, exactly what level of moral and behavioral standards ought a community, via its elected  school board reps, be able to impose upon teachers (who are not draftees, and have no sovereign right to their employment)?   Why or why not?

Well, for starters, we do have Federal and State employment laws so public K-12 institutions cannot discriminate hiring on the basis of race, ethnicity, disability... and often gender and sexuality as well.

So, we know we have a diverse corps of teachers and other school employees, as well as parents who live in the district. It makes sense we should support their teaching of their history and community contributions, as well as that of their local environs, in a respectful and thoughtful way.

Define "age-appropriate?" If a child asks how babies are born, or why Heather has two daddies, it's the same strategy. Answer basically and let the kid ask further if they want to know more. "They grow inside their mommies until they are ready to come out." Or, "Bruce and Stephen fell in love and got married, like your parents did. That's what love is about."

As a teacher, as when I was a babysitter or day care worker, at some point I would say "That might be a good question for your parents." And give the parents a heads up that the kid wanted to know how the daddy planted his seed inside the mommy, or how Heather's two daddies "made" her if there were two daddies.

Depending on the age of the child, I might have clarified their question. Maybe they wanted to double check what they had been told... or see if I knew this fascinating information. So I might have asked them what they knew. Or asked what they thought. And tried to walk that line between validating what a child knew and adding from that place, versus going a bit farther than I thought the parents might be comfortable.

(ETA - fixing typos and ^^What Wahoo said.^^)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 07:06:34 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 01, 2023, 06:44:36 PM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 11:21:13 AM

Maybe not, but to accept it. Tells me what to think.

Mission statements don't tell you what to think. They do tell you what the institution values, such as... student success. And the success of students from diverse backgrounds.

So if you don't think student success is important or valuable, then you are probably in the wrong field. Or at least in the wrong institution. And... it's a free country.

But that's the first thing we're arguing about [not the only thing]: Diversity means uniformity!

Free country?

"When words lose their meaning, people lose their freedom."
-- attributed to Confucius


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 01, 2023, 07:14:41 PM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 07:06:34 PM
Diversity means uniformity!

Positively Orwellian!!!

Completely and totally disagree.

In fact, that sounds like typical wingnut propaganda, which is usually composed of just such uncited, oxymoronic sentiments.

Can you explain further what you mean?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on May 01, 2023, 08:43:04 PM
Obviously criminal conduct is out, but do not parents and their larger community have some right to see to it that those tasked with teaching their children do not provide examples of behavior that are quite frankly explicitly contrary to their values?   Think very carefully about your answer...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 01, 2023, 09:14:54 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on May 01, 2023, 08:43:04 PM
Obviously criminal conduct is out, but do not parents and their larger community have some right to see to it that those tasked with teaching their children do not provide examples of behavior that are quite frankly explicitly contrary to their values?   Think very carefully about your answer...

Sure.

Given the propensity for Catholic priests to abuse children, I do not think Catholics should be allowed to teach children of any age.

The rest of the time we have to protect kids from bigotry and prejudice, and we have federal laws to help with that.

If parents do not like their public school system, they may put their kids in private schools or homeschool them.

Think carefully about your questions...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 05:17:43 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 12:17:50 PM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 11:45:31 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 11:38:38 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 10:47:24 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 01, 2023, 10:27:40 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 09:51:06 AM

The point is that it's forced speech of intolerance and rejection. I wouldn't sign off on that stuff even if the words had their original meaning.

And nobody has to sing the national anthem or pledge allegiance to the flag [West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943 -- in the middle of a damned war.]

Justice Robert Jackson said, "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion, or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

Put simply: the government can't tell you what to say or think.

I also don't want the educational establishment to tell me what to say or think.

You mean like this? https://news.stlpublicradio.org/education/2023-04-28/kirkwood-sexualized-my-identity-3-trans-educators-claim-discrimination-say-they-were-forced-out

I was thinking of higher ed. State governmenst control K-12 education. They can legislate what they want as far as content is concerned. The solution to the trans ethnogenisis more generally is to let states do it how they want.

As for higher ed, it occurs to me that state schools may not force speech, based on Barnette. I expect there will be lawsuits.

Yes, but in this case the teachers were told that simply telling the class that they (the teacher) were non-binary was sex education. That a personal statement of identity could be construed as curriculum related is bizarre.

What's bizarre to some is fine to others, and what's bizarre to others is fine for some. People differ in their preferences. Decentralize, decentralize.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits an employer from treating you differently, or less favorably, because of your sex, which is defined to include pregnancy, sexual orientation, and gender identity.


So does that include requiring students and parents to use the person's chosen pronouns; in this case "they/them"? If so, would that also apply if the person's chosen pronouns were "YourMajesty" (or something like "killalll<whatver>")?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on May 02, 2023, 05:22:21 AM
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/marissa-barnwell-pledge-of-allegiance-lawsuit_n_640ba123e4b01ea51226d419
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on May 02, 2023, 06:33:29 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 05:17:43 AM

So does that include requiring students and parents to use the person's chosen pronouns; in this case "they/them"? If so, would that also apply if the person's chosen pronouns were "YourMajesty" (or something like "killalll<whatver>")?

It's, at a bare minimum, polite to use one's chosen pronouns.

One could attempt to change one's pronouns to something offensive and try to run it up the court system to see what happens.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 06:48:27 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 02, 2023, 06:33:29 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 05:17:43 AM

So does that include requiring students and parents to use the person's chosen pronouns; in this case "they/them"? If so, would that also apply if the person's chosen pronouns were "YourMajesty" (or something like "killalll<whatver>")?

It's, at a bare minimum, polite to use one's chosen pronouns.

One could attempt to change one's pronouns to something offensive and try to run it up the court system to see what happens.

Not specifically about pronouns, but something similar may already be happening.
School board where trans teacher wears huge fake breasts will order dress code for staff  (https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/halton-district-school-board-oakville-trafalgar-high-school-transgender-teacher-dress-code)

What's really fascinating is that it's not clear whether this is a "genuine" trans person, or whether it's someone trying to push the boundaries to get a reaction. The irony is that requiring nothing more than self-identification implicitly forbids actually even raising the question of whether this is "legitimate" or not.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on May 02, 2023, 07:02:00 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 06:48:27 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 02, 2023, 06:33:29 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 05:17:43 AM

So does that include requiring students and parents to use the person's chosen pronouns; in this case "they/them"? If so, would that also apply if the person's chosen pronouns were "YourMajesty" (or something like "killalll<whatver>")?

It's, at a bare minimum, polite to use one's chosen pronouns.

One could attempt to change one's pronouns to something offensive and try to run it up the court system to see what happens.

Not specifically about pronouns, but something similar may already be happening.
School board where trans teacher wears huge fake breasts will order dress code for staff  (https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/halton-district-school-board-oakville-trafalgar-high-school-transgender-teacher-dress-code)

What's really fascinating is that it's not clear whether this is a "genuine" trans person, or whether it's someone trying to push the boundaries to get a reaction. The irony is that requiring nothing more than self-identification implicitly forbids actually even raising the question of whether this is "legitimate" or not.

What if someone were obese and had real, large breasts? And preferred to not wear a bra for whatever reason?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 07:07:47 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 02, 2023, 07:02:00 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 06:48:27 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 02, 2023, 06:33:29 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 05:17:43 AM

So does that include requiring students and parents to use the person's chosen pronouns; in this case "they/them"? If so, would that also apply if the person's chosen pronouns were "YourMajesty" (or something like "killalll<whatver>")?

It's, at a bare minimum, polite to use one's chosen pronouns.

One could attempt to change one's pronouns to something offensive and try to run it up the court system to see what happens.

Not specifically about pronouns, but something similar may already be happening.
School board where trans teacher wears huge fake breasts will order dress code for staff  (https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/halton-district-school-board-oakville-trafalgar-high-school-transgender-teacher-dress-code)

What's really fascinating is that it's not clear whether this is a "genuine" trans person, or whether it's someone trying to push the boundaries to get a reaction. The irony is that requiring nothing more than self-identification implicitly forbids actually even raising the question of whether this is "legitimate" or not.

What if someone were obese and had real, large breasts? And preferred to not wear a bra for whatever reason?

I believe the original class (as shown in some of the pictures) was a shop class, i.e. with power tools so that there was even a question of whether safety protocols were violated. (And implicitly there's the question of whether there is any limit to what might be considered reasonable in prosthetics, for any reason.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on May 02, 2023, 08:20:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 07:06:34 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 01, 2023, 06:44:36 PM
Quote from: dismalist on May 01, 2023, 11:21:13 AM

Maybe not, but to accept it. Tells me what to think.

Mission statements don't tell you what to think. They do tell you what the institution values, such as... student success. And the success of students from diverse backgrounds.

So if you don't think student success is important or valuable, then you are probably in the wrong field. Or at least in the wrong institution. And... it's a free country.

But that's the first thing we're arguing about [not the only thing]: Diversity means uniformity!

Free country?

"When words lose their meaning, people lose their freedom."
-- attributed to Confucius

You are the one losing the meaning of the words here.  When I say diversity, that is actually what I mean diversity.  It would even include people like you who disagree with the wording of the mission statement (since I suspect you actually don't encourage racism or prejudice, and actually do support the intent of the statement).     

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 09:12:46 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 06:48:27 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 02, 2023, 06:33:29 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 05:17:43 AM

So does that include requiring students and parents to use the person's chosen pronouns; in this case "they/them"? If so, would that also apply if the person's chosen pronouns were "YourMajesty" (or something like "killalll<whatver>")?

It's, at a bare minimum, polite to use one's chosen pronouns.

One could attempt to change one's pronouns to something offensive and try to run it up the court system to see what happens.

Not specifically about pronouns, but something similar may already be happening.
School board where trans teacher wears huge fake breasts will order dress code for staff  (https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/halton-district-school-board-oakville-trafalgar-high-school-transgender-teacher-dress-code)

What's really fascinating is that it's not clear whether this is a "genuine" trans person, or whether it's someone trying to push the boundaries to get a reaction. The irony is that requiring nothing more than self-identification implicitly forbids actually even raising the question of whether this is "legitimate" or not.

Why do you need to know if she is "legitimate," Marshy?  Why not mind your own business?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 09:22:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 09:12:46 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 06:48:27 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 02, 2023, 06:33:29 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 05:17:43 AM

So does that include requiring students and parents to use the person's chosen pronouns; in this case "they/them"? If so, would that also apply if the person's chosen pronouns were "YourMajesty" (or something like "killalll<whatver>")?

It's, at a bare minimum, polite to use one's chosen pronouns.

One could attempt to change one's pronouns to something offensive and try to run it up the court system to see what happens.

Not specifically about pronouns, but something similar may already be happening.
School board where trans teacher wears huge fake breasts will order dress code for staff  (https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/halton-district-school-board-oakville-trafalgar-high-school-transgender-teacher-dress-code)

What's really fascinating is that it's not clear whether this is a "genuine" trans person, or whether it's someone trying to push the boundaries to get a reaction. The irony is that requiring nothing more than self-identification implicitly forbids actually even raising the question of whether this is "legitimate" or not.

Why do you need to know if she is "legitimate," Marshy?  Why not mind your own business?

I don't need to know if she is "legitimate". The school board is in a difficult spot, and if this is just someone trying to push the boundaries, it could be only the beginning of progressively more outrageous attempts. By following an implicit principle that people should be able to present themselves however they want, this is simply one illustration of how awkward things could get.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 09:29:00 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 09:22:24 AM
By following an implicit principle that people should be able to present themselves however they want, this is simply one illustration of how awkward things could get.

Absolutely.  Who says we should "be able to present" ourselves however we want!?  What an outrageous proposition in a free country bound by the First Amendment!!!!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 10:04:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 09:29:00 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 09:22:24 AM
By following an implicit principle that people should be able to present themselves however they want, this is simply one illustration of how awkward things could get.

Absolutely.  Who says we should "be able to present" ourselves however we want!?  What an outrageous proposition in a free country bound by the First Amendment!!!!

Yeah, I'm pretty much an enemy of freedom on this, since I think coming to work in Nazi regalia or Klan robes shouldn't be allowed.
Heck, I even think coming to work stark naked shouldn't be allowed. I guess I'm an authoritarian zealot.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on May 02, 2023, 10:24:38 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 10:04:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 09:29:00 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 09:22:24 AM
By following an implicit principle that people should be able to present themselves however they want, this is simply one illustration of how awkward things could get.

Absolutely.  Who says we should "be able to present" ourselves however we want!?  What an outrageous proposition in a free country bound by the First Amendment!!!!

Yeah, I'm pretty much an enemy of freedom on this, since I think coming to work in Nazi regalia or Klan robes shouldn't be allowed.
Heck, I even think coming to work stark naked shouldn't be allowed. I guess I'm an authoritarian zealot.



You've just equated what a transgender teacher decides to wear with Nazis, the Klan, and someone committing indecent exposure. The quote above is where you did so. Any response that begins, "I'm not saying transgender people are like Nazis or the Klan..." is not going to sound terribly convincing.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 11:04:53 AM
Quote from: little bongo on May 02, 2023, 10:24:38 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 10:04:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 09:29:00 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 09:22:24 AM
By following an implicit principle that people should be able to present themselves however they want, this is simply one illustration of how awkward things could get.

Absolutely.  Who says we should "be able to present" ourselves however we want!?  What an outrageous proposition in a free country bound by the First Amendment!!!!

Yeah, I'm pretty much an enemy of freedom on this, since I think coming to work in Nazi regalia or Klan robes shouldn't be allowed.
Heck, I even think coming to work stark naked shouldn't be allowed. I guess I'm an authoritarian zealot.



You've just equated what a transgender teacher decides to wear with Nazis, the Klan, and someone committing indecent exposure. The quote above is where you did so. Any response that begins, "I'm not saying transgender people are like Nazis or the Klan..." is not going to sound terribly convincing.

This is always the tactic when we want to censor a group of people, right along with "For God's sake, won't someone think of the children!" kind of rhetoric, both of which the current Republican movement is rife with.  Mind you, it is not just conservatives who do this----plenty of liberal-minded people go this same route.

When one cannot come up with an actual objection to a belief or behavior, equate it to the Nazis or Klan or some such. 

No one is dressing like a Nazi, Marshy.  People just want to dress as they see fit in safety.

At his height, Jon Stewart brilliantly satirizes this trend in political discourse:

https://www.cc.com/video/xrdazj/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-a-relatively-closer-look-hitler-reference
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on May 02, 2023, 11:11:31 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 09:22:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 09:12:46 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 06:48:27 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 02, 2023, 06:33:29 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 05:17:43 AM

So does that include requiring students and parents to use the person's chosen pronouns; in this case "they/them"? If so, would that also apply if the person's chosen pronouns were "YourMajesty" (or something like "killalll<whatver>")?

It's, at a bare minimum, polite to use one's chosen pronouns.

One could attempt to change one's pronouns to something offensive and try to run it up the court system to see what happens.

Not specifically about pronouns, but something similar may already be happening.
School board where trans teacher wears huge fake breasts will order dress code for staff  (https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/halton-district-school-board-oakville-trafalgar-high-school-transgender-teacher-dress-code)

What's really fascinating is that it's not clear whether this is a "genuine" trans person, or whether it's someone trying to push the boundaries to get a reaction. The irony is that requiring nothing more than self-identification implicitly forbids actually even raising the question of whether this is "legitimate" or not.

Why do you need to know if she is "legitimate," Marshy?  Why not mind your own business?

I don't need to know if she is "legitimate". The school board is in a difficult spot, and if this is just someone trying to push the boundaries, it could be only the beginning of progressively more outrageous attempts. By following an implicit principle that people should be able to present themselves however they want, this is simply one illustration of how awkward things could get.

I recall hearing similar slippery slope arguments about gay marriage.  Essentially, if we allow gay marriage, the next thing you know people will want to marry chickens etc.  I have yet to see anyone marry a chicken.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 12:08:49 PM
Quote from: little bongo on May 02, 2023, 10:24:38 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 10:04:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 09:29:00 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 09:22:24 AM
By following an implicit principle that people should be able to present themselves however they want, this is simply one illustration of how awkward things could get.

Absolutely.  Who says we should "be able to present" ourselves however we want!?  What an outrageous proposition in a free country bound by the First Amendment!!!!

Yeah, I'm pretty much an enemy of freedom on this, since I think coming to work in Nazi regalia or Klan robes shouldn't be allowed.
Heck, I even think coming to work stark naked shouldn't be allowed. I guess I'm an authoritarian zealot.



You've just equated what a transgender teacher decides to wear with Nazis, the Klan, and someone committing indecent exposure.

Just like people advocating gun control are equating police and military personnel with mass murderers.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 01:29:34 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 12:08:49 PM
Quote from: little bongo on May 02, 2023, 10:24:38 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 10:04:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 09:29:00 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 09:22:24 AM
By following an implicit principle that people should be able to present themselves however they want, this is simply one illustration of how awkward things could get.

Absolutely.  Who says we should "be able to present" ourselves however we want!?  What an outrageous proposition in a free country bound by the First Amendment!!!!

Yeah, I'm pretty much an enemy of freedom on this, since I think coming to work in Nazi regalia or Klan robes shouldn't be allowed.
Heck, I even think coming to work stark naked shouldn't be allowed. I guess I'm an authoritarian zealot.



You've just equated what a transgender teacher decides to wear with Nazis, the Klan, and someone committing indecent exposure.

Just like people advocating gun control are equating police and military personnel with mass murderers.

And these people are using the same sort of hysterical hyperbole that the [some] conservatives use when knitting their pantaloons into knots over things like transgendered teachers.

Is there a reason you bring the peaceniks up?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Kron3007 on May 02, 2023, 01:48:58 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 01:29:34 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 12:08:49 PM
Quote from: little bongo on May 02, 2023, 10:24:38 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 10:04:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 09:29:00 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 09:22:24 AM
By following an implicit principle that people should be able to present themselves however they want, this is simply one illustration of how awkward things could get.

Absolutely.  Who says we should "be able to present" ourselves however we want!?  What an outrageous proposition in a free country bound by the First Amendment!!!!

Yeah, I'm pretty much an enemy of freedom on this, since I think coming to work in Nazi regalia or Klan robes shouldn't be allowed.
Heck, I even think coming to work stark naked shouldn't be allowed. I guess I'm an authoritarian zealot.



You've just equated what a transgender teacher decides to wear with Nazis, the Klan, and someone committing indecent exposure.

Just like people advocating gun control are equating police and military personnel with mass murderers.

And these people are using the same sort of hysterical hyperbole that the [some] conservatives use when knitting their pantaloons into knots over things like transgendered teachers.

Is there a reason you bring the peaceniks up?

I think it was meant as some sort of "gotcha" moment, but falls flat since no one here has supported equating cops with mass murderers.  Suggesting the police service needs reform and oversight is a far cry from equating  them with mass murderers...

 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on May 02, 2023, 03:22:24 PM
But also, the comment is ostensibly about gun control...

When I advocate for very strict gun control, it's definitely not on the grounds that cops and soldiers are mass murderers.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 02, 2023, 04:59:15 PM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on May 02, 2023, 03:22:24 PM
But also, the comment is ostensibly about gun control...

When I advocate for very strict gun control, it's definitely not on the grounds that cops and soldiers are mass murderers.

And that's the point; the fact that a small portion of people will take advantage of lax gun laws to do horrible things doesn't imply that most gun owners (including people who carry guns for their jobs) are responsible for the problems. Similarly, rules about examinations do not imply all or even most students are cheaters, but that some students will use the lack of rules to cheat. So, things like dress codes don't imply everyone affected by them needs to be prevented from running around naked in public, but that some people will choose to do whatever they can get away with to get attention and/or annoy people.

Rules that affect everyone exist because of the minority of people who would do extreme things without them; they in no way suggest that everyone would do so otherwise.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 06:36:18 PM
It is very hard to commit mass murder with fake boobs, Marshy.

As is so often the case, you have apples and oranges there, my friend.

We have licenses to drive a car, reams of paperwork to buy a house, I.D.s to vote, and you can't change your name legally without court approval.

But regulating guns during the era of random mass killings and nation-wide gun violence (worse in red states)? 

I know you are striving for a "gotcha" that lays bare the hypocrisy of all these liberal-types and their attempts at outraging parents, but come on.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on May 02, 2023, 08:49:59 PM
Are you just trying to be an annoyance?   The fact that many RC priests have molested kids does not mean all Catholics should be excluded from anything, and nothing I said remotely could legitimately be interpreted as suggesting such.

So let's now try a different tack, or perhaps two:

1) trying to create dress codes to punish trans teachers is one thing, and we could discuss the merits thereof elsewhere, but are there no legitimate reasons for public schools to impose reasonable dress codes on faculty, who are, like it or not, shepherding children.   If you come to school with a Judas Priest concert shirt, and have not bathed recently, is there no legitimate reason that the principal oughtn't be able to send you home to clean up and change into appropriate attire?

2) Who properly gets to decide what is 'age-appropriate' material to be taught to children, esp pre-pubescent ones?   Should parents and their elected representatives have a say, according to the predominant values and expectations of their community, or is perhaps the deep wisdom of a 23yo fresh from an education program to be considered dispositive, even all that matters?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 03, 2023, 05:19:42 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 06:36:18 PM
It is very hard to commit mass murder with fake boobs, Marshy.

As is so often the case, you have apples and oranges there, my friend.

We have licenses to drive a car, reams of paperwork to buy a house, I.D.s to vote, and you can't change your name legally without court approval.

But regulating guns during the era of random mass killings and nation-wide gun violence (worse in red states)? 

In Canada, we have strict regulations on gun ownership. They are enforced at the border since there are many obnoxious idiots uninformed visitors who expect to be able to bring their arsenals with them. The vast majority of Canadians are perfectly happy with the rules, (and many think the rules should be tightened further), because restricting the actions of all for the sake of the few who would grossly abuse their freedom if the rules didn't exist is a worthwhile compromise.


Quote
I know you are striving for a "gotcha" that lays bare the hypocrisy of all these liberal-types and their attempts at outraging parents, but come on.

No, I'm saying that the arguments from extremists from either end of the political spectrum that it's all-or-nothing are bogus. Think of all of the calls for regulations on the Internet, and ask anyone from 40 or 50 *years ago how that would have been imagined then. In any area of human endeavour, in the absence of rules there will eventually be some who will engage in totally unexpected and shocking behaviour, which will be copied and amplified by others, until there will be widespread agreement that rules are necessary.


*before the World Wide Web, when the only people using the Internet were basically academics and government employees.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 03, 2023, 07:00:14 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 03, 2023, 05:19:42 AM
No, I'm saying that the arguments from extremists from either end of the political spectrum that it's all-or-nothing are bogus....rules are necessary.

No reasonable person would disagree, certainly no one here, so you may stop with the gratuitous analogies, Mighty Marshdude.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on May 03, 2023, 07:05:00 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 03, 2023, 05:19:42 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 06:36:18 PM
It is very hard to commit mass murder with fake boobs, Marshy.

As is so often the case, you have apples and oranges there, my friend.

We have licenses to drive a car, reams of paperwork to buy a house, I.D.s to vote, and you can't change your name legally without court approval.

But regulating guns during the era of random mass killings and nation-wide gun violence (worse in red states)? 

In Canada, we have strict regulations on gun ownership. They are enforced at the border since there are many obnoxious idiots uninformed visitors who expect to be able to bring their arsenals with them. The vast majority of Canadians are perfectly happy with the rules, (and many think the rules should be tightened further), because restricting the actions of all for the sake of the few who would grossly abuse their freedom if the rules didn't exist is a worthwhile compromise.


Quote
I know you are striving for a "gotcha" that lays bare the hypocrisy of all these liberal-types and their attempts at outraging parents, but come on.

No, I'm saying that the arguments from extremists from either end of the political spectrum that it's all-or-nothing are bogus. Think of all of the calls for regulations on the Internet, and ask anyone from 40 or 50 *years ago how that would have been imagined then. In any area of human endeavour, in the absence of rules there will eventually be some who will engage in totally unexpected and shocking behaviour, which will be copied and amplified by others, until there will be widespread agreement that rules are necessary.


*before the World Wide Web, when the only people using the Internet were basically academics and government employees.


The amount of tap-dancing required to "explain" your morally and logically bankrupt statement about the Klan and Nazis is admittedly pretty impressive--not since Fred Astaire teamed up with Eleanor Powell in Broadway Melody of 1940 have I seen such footwork.

This fixation on "actual" trans people v. those who want to "get attention and/or annoy people" is... odd. Is there some sort of cabal, like the Elders of Transsexual Transylvania, who are actively plotting to put worldwide school boards in awkward situations? And even if there were, to put things a bit bluntly, who gives a flying f-ck? Unless, perhaps, the only reason you're bringing these questions up is to get attention and/or annoy people...

Hmmm.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 03, 2023, 07:10:57 AM
Quote from: little bongo on May 03, 2023, 07:05:00 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 03, 2023, 05:19:42 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 02, 2023, 06:36:18 PM
It is very hard to commit mass murder with fake boobs, Marshy.

As is so often the case, you have apples and oranges there, my friend.

We have licenses to drive a car, reams of paperwork to buy a house, I.D.s to vote, and you can't change your name legally without court approval.

But regulating guns during the era of random mass killings and nation-wide gun violence (worse in red states)? 

In Canada, we have strict regulations on gun ownership. They are enforced at the border since there are many obnoxious idiots uninformed visitors who expect to be able to bring their arsenals with them. The vast majority of Canadians are perfectly happy with the rules, (and many think the rules should be tightened further), because restricting the actions of all for the sake of the few who would grossly abuse their freedom if the rules didn't exist is a worthwhile compromise.


Quote
I know you are striving for a "gotcha" that lays bare the hypocrisy of all these liberal-types and their attempts at outraging parents, but come on.

No, I'm saying that the arguments from extremists from either end of the political spectrum that it's all-or-nothing are bogus. Think of all of the calls for regulations on the Internet, and ask anyone from 40 or 50 *years ago how that would have been imagined then. In any area of human endeavour, in the absence of rules there will eventually be some who will engage in totally unexpected and shocking behaviour, which will be copied and amplified by others, until there will be widespread agreement that rules are necessary.


*before the World Wide Web, when the only people using the Internet were basically academics and government employees.


The amount of tap-dancing required to "explain" your morally and logically bankrupt statement about the Klan and Nazis is admittedly pretty impressive--not since Fred Astaire teamed up with Eleanor Powell in Broadway Melody of 1940 have I seen such footwork.

This fixation on "actual" trans people v. those who want to "get attention and/or annoy people" is... odd. Is there some sort of cabal, like the Elders of Transsexual Transylvania, who are actively plotting to put worldwide school boards in awkward situations? And even if there were, to put things a bit bluntly, who gives a flying f-ck? Unless, perhaps, the only reason you're bringing these questions up is to get attention and/or annoy people...

Hmmm.

Jessica Yaniv (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Yaniv)

Quote
Jessica Yaniv (whose legal name is Jessica Simpson)is a Canadian transgender activist in British Columbia who is best known for filing at least 15 complaints of discrimination on the basis of gender identity against various beauty salons after they refused to wax her male genitalia. The complaints were filed with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal in 2018 and 2019. It was the first major case of alleged transgender discrimination in retail in Canada. In 2019, the Tribunal rejected her complaints and ruled Yaniv had racist motives. In following years, Yaniv has gone on to make additional complaints of discrimination, libel and privacy breach.

Not school boards, but small businesses typically run by immigrant women.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 03, 2023, 07:34:19 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on May 02, 2023, 08:49:59 PM
Are you just trying to be an annoyance?   The fact that many RC priests have molested kids does not mean all Catholics should be excluded from anything, and nothing I said remotely could legitimately be interpreted as suggesting such.

That was sarcasm to make a point.  Stereotyping and prejudice are unreasonable, aren't they?  Although the fact that the Catholic Church covered up its pedophilia problem for decades should be a cause for concern...

Quote
So let's now try a different tack, or perhaps two:

1) trying to create dress codes to punish trans teachers is one thing, and we could discuss the merits thereof elsewhere, but are there no legitimate reasons for public schools to impose reasonable dress codes on faculty, who are, like it or not, shepherding children.   If you come to school with a Judas Priest concert shirt, and have not bathed recently, is there no legitimate reason that the principal oughtn't be able to send you home to clean up and change into appropriate attire?

Bathing and dressing appropriately are fine, but you are falling into the Marshwiggle analogy pit. 

There is no reason to bring that up since appropriate dress is a standard aspect of any professional position and teacher dress does not seem to be a problem that schoolboards are negotiating except for certain minority demographics. 

Your purpose is to equate trans-clothing with an unkempt, inappropriate person-----although I am not sure I see the problem with a Judas Priest T-shirt; at one point they were a major musical act
(and yes, I know what the name refers to). 

This prejudice "gotcha" you fell into earlier. 

You may pretend, my friend, but your purpose is to make some sort of argument that trans-people are inappropriate because of [whatever prejudice you are working toward].

Quote
2) Who properly gets to decide what is 'age-appropriate' material to be taught to children, esp pre-pubescent ones?   Should parents and their elected representatives have a say, according to the predominant values and expectations of their community, or is perhaps the deep wisdom of a 23yo fresh from an education program to be considered dispositive, even all that matters?

We're back to this again, are we?

Fine.  "The community" has a say, but the community is also part of the greater whole and must follow federal laws and guidelines.  This includes "dispositive" 23-year-olds (who obviously should have no opinions, even when charged with running a classroom, right?).  So sure, but let the teachers do their jobs as we moguls of higher ed would prefer to be allowed to do our jobs.  Control should have its limits.

So sorry, buddy, but your enclaves of various bigotries still need to be part of the zeitgeist.   
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 03, 2023, 07:39:16 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 03, 2023, 07:10:57 AM

Jessica Yaniv (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Yaniv)

Quote
Jessica Yaniv (whose legal name is Jessica Simpson)is a Canadian transgender activist in British Columbia who is best known for filing at least 15 complaints of discrimination on the basis of gender identity against various beauty salons after they refused to wax her male genitalia. The complaints were filed with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal in 2018 and 2019. It was the first major case of alleged transgender discrimination in retail in Canada. In 2019, the Tribunal rejected her complaints and ruled Yaniv had racist motives. In following years, Yaniv has gone on to make additional complaints of discrimination, libel and privacy breach.

Not school boards, but small businesses typically run by immigrant women.

Once again, Marshy, you have picked a single weird incident to highlight.  Why?  You're not trying to imply that this is the way all trans people behave, are you?  That would be stereotyping. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on May 03, 2023, 07:53:09 AM
Okay, thanks for the laugh.

And Jessica, wherever you are, keep your freak flag flying. And if you really are a bigot, cut it out. It's not a good look.

So... we need additional laws, systems, checks and balances to protect us from Jessica? Is she indeed the Canadian face of the Elders of Transsexual Transylvania (EOTT)? I think my previous question regarding who cares enough to offer airborne copulation still stands.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 03, 2023, 08:15:07 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 03, 2023, 07:39:16 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 03, 2023, 07:10:57 AM

Jessica Yaniv (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Yaniv)

Quote
Jessica Yaniv (whose legal name is Jessica Simpson)is a Canadian transgender activist in British Columbia who is best known for filing at least 15 complaints of discrimination on the basis of gender identity against various beauty salons after they refused to wax her male genitalia. The complaints were filed with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal in 2018 and 2019. It was the first major case of alleged transgender discrimination in retail in Canada. In 2019, the Tribunal rejected her complaints and ruled Yaniv had racist motives. In following years, Yaniv has gone on to make additional complaints of discrimination, libel and privacy breach.

Not school boards, but small businesses typically run by immigrant women.

Once again, Marshy, you have picked a single weird incident to highlight.  Why? 

To point out how simply requiring self-identification opens the door to all kinds of abuses like this. (No, all trans people don't do this. But having no rules about who qualifies is where this mess comes from.)

Quote from: little bongo on May 03, 2023, 07:53:09 AM
Okay, thanks for the laugh.


Yeah, it's hilarious seeing these immigrant women facing the challenges of a new country afraid of going to jail or being bankrupted.

Especially when their religious beliefs forbid them having this contact with male genitalia. A real knee-slapper, that is.


Quote
And Jessica, wherever you are, keep your freak flag flying. And if you really are a bigot, cut it out. It's not a good look.


Sorry, which is it? Are you some sort of bigot for suggesting that a person's motives matter?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 03, 2023, 08:32:10 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 03, 2023, 08:15:07 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 03, 2023, 07:39:16 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 03, 2023, 07:10:57 AM

Jessica Yaniv (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Yaniv)

Quote
Jessica Yaniv (whose legal name is Jessica Simpson)is a Canadian transgender activist in British Columbia who is best known for filing at least 15 complaints of discrimination on the basis of gender identity against various beauty salons after they refused to wax her male genitalia. The complaints were filed with the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal in 2018 and 2019. It was the first major case of alleged transgender discrimination in retail in Canada. In 2019, the Tribunal rejected her complaints and ruled Yaniv had racist motives. In following years, Yaniv has gone on to make additional complaints of discrimination, libel and privacy breach.

Not school boards, but small businesses typically run by immigrant women.

Once again, Marshy, you have picked a single weird incident to highlight.  Why? 

To point out how simply requiring self-identification opens the door to all kinds of abuses like this. (No, all trans people don't do this. But having no rules about who qualifies is where this mess comes from.)

Sounds like the "mess" comes from the bigots in most cases----like, perhaps, using this example as representative of the whole demographic (deny, if you will).  Again, you have one example, not a "mess."  The person in question should have a little more sensitivity than to expect beauticians to wax her male neither parts, but this is one singular jackass who has probably faced a lifetime of prejudice----still not okay, but maybe understandable.  If we applied the same rubrics to professors (taking a singular incident or episode and trying to apply it to all professors), the industry would be in much worse condition than it even is.

You have one jackass.  You have nothing.

Or maybe we could apply your reasoning to Christianity.  If you want "a mess," I could give you plenty examples of Christians doing some pretty terrible stuff.  Maybe we should limit what Christians are allowed to do?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on May 03, 2023, 09:28:31 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 03, 2023, 08:15:07 AM

Quote from: little bongo on May 03, 2023, 07:53:09 AM
Okay, thanks for the laugh.


Yeah, it's hilarious seeing these immigrant women facing the challenges of a new country afraid of going to jail or being bankrupted.

Especially when their religious beliefs forbid them having this contact with male genitalia. A real knee-slapper, that is.

Well, here's the funny part. I ask what about people pretending to be trans to annoy people has you particularly disturbed, and you trot out, in Wahoo's words, one jackass. As if you've saved news of Jessica in your virtual back pocket to provide the ultimate Q.E.D. "See?! Abuse! Abuse! Here's the proof! I found one!"

That's the knee-slapper. Indeed, I'm slapping my knees as I type, which isn't easy.

But the immigrant women to whom Jessica was a nuisance (and was punished for it) must, or should, be eternally grateful that someone of your upstanding moral fibre is looking out for their best interests. I hope they at least send you holiday cards every year. You've earned it, you mensch.

[/quote]
And Jessica, wherever you are, keep your freak flag flying. And if you really are a bigot, cut it out. It's not a good look.
[/quote]

[/quote]
Sorry, which is it? Are you some sort of bigot for suggesting that a person's motives matter?
[/quote]

I'm pretty sure it's possible for Jessica to keep her freak flag flying AND not be a bigot.  If trying to put the two together make me bigoted, I guess i can live with it.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on May 04, 2023, 05:11:41 AM
Does this mean biological females cannot wear pants?  Will there be a genital examination to determine whether anyone wearing pants has a penis?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/new-dress-code-for-texas-agency-clothes-must-conform-to-biological-gender/ar-AA1an0Nn
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 04, 2023, 05:50:43 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on May 04, 2023, 05:11:41 AM
Does this mean biological females cannot wear pants? 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/new-dress-code-for-texas-agency-clothes-must-conform-to-biological-gender/ar-AA1an0Nn

Quote
For men, business attire means long-sleeved dress shirts, ties and sports coats with trousers and dress shoes or boots, according to the dress code. For women, it means "tailored pantsuits, businesslike dresses, coordinated dressy separates worn with or without a blazer, and conservative, closed-toe shoes or boots."

So, no.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 04, 2023, 07:00:28 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 04, 2023, 05:50:43 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on May 04, 2023, 05:11:41 AM
Does this mean biological females cannot wear pants? 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/new-dress-code-for-texas-agency-clothes-must-conform-to-biological-gender/ar-AA1an0Nn

Quote
For men, business attire means long-sleeved dress shirts, ties and sports coats with trousers and dress shoes or boots, according to the dress code. For women, it means "tailored pantsuits, businesslike dresses, coordinated dressy separates worn with or without a blazer, and conservative, closed-toe shoes or boots."

So, no.

You know, except for business dresses and pantsuits, that dress code mandates that men and woman are almost dressed the same. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 04, 2023, 12:24:36 PM
And now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

Palm Beach Atlantic professor files federal discrimination complaint after being fired (https://cbs12.com/news/local/i-made-it-my-mission-not-to-let-it-go-away-pbau-professor-files-federal-complaint-equal-employment-opportunity-commission-american-association-of-university-professors-may-3-2023)

Quote
The reason behind [the firing] was a parent who complained to the school, alleging Joeckel's racial justice unit was indoctrinating students. Joeckel told CBS12 he never expressed his views or opinions.

Updating: FIRING OF TENURED PROFESSOR AT BAKERSFIELD COLLEGE "BLURRED LINES" BETWEEN PROTECTED SPEECH AND CONDUCT THAT MAY MERIT INVESTIGATION, SAYS PEN AMERICA (https://pen.org/press-release/firing-of-tenured-professor-at-bakersfield-college-blurred-lines-between-protected-speech-and-conduct-that-may-merit-investigation-says-pen-america/)

Quote
Garrett was fired last month for what campus administrators say was, among other things, "immoral" and "unprofessional" conduct, "dishonesty," and "unsatisfactory performance." Garrett claims he is being targeted for protected speech. Garrett is the co-founder of the Renegade Institute for Liberty, a group that says it promotes free speech and viewpoint diversity but that has been controversial on campus and on social media.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 04, 2023, 03:29:16 PM
CHE: Presidents Are Changing Their Tune On Free Speech (https://www.chronicle.com/article/presidents-are-changing-their-tune-on-free-speech)

Quote
Here and there, in notes to campus communities, speeches during formal events, and open letters, university presidents and other administrators are pushing back in defense of academic freedom and free speech. They're not standing on soapboxes shouting against would-be censors, but the words they choose, the battles they pick, and the signals they send suggest a renewed fondness for free-speech principles.

Thank you, Hamline!!!

Remember, if you give CHE your email so they can annoy you, they will send you these articles to read for free.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 04, 2023, 03:38:34 PM
CHE: More Students Endorse an Expansive Definition of 'Harm.' Colleges Aren't So Sure. (https://www.chronicle.com/article/more-students-endorse-an-expansive-definition-of-harm-colleges-arent-so-sure)

Quote
A series of recent campus-speaker flare-ups has highlighted how college students are redefining "harm" as something that threatens not only their physical safety, but also their emotional safety. While that's not a new idea, experts say, today's students are more attuned to potential impacts of harm.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on May 05, 2023, 11:01:41 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 04, 2023, 03:38:34 PM
CHE: More Students Endorse an Expansive Definition of 'Harm.' Colleges Aren't So Sure. (https://www.chronicle.com/article/more-students-endorse-an-expansive-definition-of-harm-colleges-arent-so-sure)

Quote
A series of recent campus-speaker flare-ups has highlighted how college students are redefining "harm" as something that threatens not only their physical safety, but also their emotional safety. While that's not a new idea, experts say, today's students are more attuned to potential impacts of harm.

This is an important article illustrating how prickly this business of balancing harm assessment and free speech is on a daily basis. The following quote resonated most with me, from Lynn Mahoney based on her experience with Ben Shaprio's visit to Cal State L.A.:

"...protect free speech, address the harm, and 'keep these speakers from having the best day of their lives.'"

It's tough to implement, and probably imperfectly thought out. It's also the best place to start the difficult discussions that I've witnessed thus far.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on May 06, 2023, 01:19:52 PM
https://www.vox.com/politics/2023/5/5/23711417/republicans-want-to-defund-public-libraries-book-bans
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on May 08, 2023, 05:16:40 AM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 06, 2023, 01:19:52 PM
https://www.vox.com/politics/2023/5/5/23711417/republicans-want-to-defund-public-libraries-book-bans

In my county, they are not defunding, just starving....slowly.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 09, 2023, 11:02:30 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on May 01, 2023, 04:53:50 PM
Given that k12 ed teaches minor children, exactly what level of moral and behavioral standards ought a community, via its elected  school board reps, be able to impose upon teachers (who are not draftees, and have no sovereign right to their employment)?   Why or why not?

This might be an example of the "level of moral and behavioral standards...a community, via its elected  school board reps, [when it is] able to impose upon teachers."

NBC News: 'Trump was great at this': How conservatives transformed a Colorado school district (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/woodland-park-colorado-school-board-conservatives-rcna83311)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 15, 2023, 07:49:26 PM
NBC News: DeSantis signs bill defunding diversity programs at Florida colleges (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/desantis-signs-bill-defunding-diversity-programs-florida-colleges-rcna84481)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on May 16, 2023, 01:40:26 PM
This thread could easily have 10 new examples per day. The moral of this story might be "never teach a kid whose mother is placed by God on the school board".

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/15/us/florida-teacher-disney-movie-gay/index.html
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 17, 2023, 06:43:17 PM
IHE: The Scandal-Proof Star Coach (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/governance/executive-leadership/2023/05/17/scandal-proof-star-coach)

Lower Deck:
Quote
West Virginia's Bob Huggins kept his job after making blatantly homophobic comments earlier this month, reflecting the staying power of controversial coaches who deliver athletic victories.

Quote
A few weeks later, he went on a sports radio show and called members of Xavier University's basketball team—an old rival of his former team at the University of Cincinnati—a homophobic slur. He did this not once but twice during the interview, repeating both the slur and a derogatory portrayal of the school's Catholic identity.

For most university employees, such comments would be enough to justify an immediate firing. Not so for the Hall of Fame coach and prodigal son of Morgantown, who has led WVU since 2007 and is the winningest active coach in Division I men's basketball. Huggins emerged from the scandal damaged but intact, with a three-game suspension, a $1 million fine, mandatory sensitivity training and a contract alteration that came with a stern ultimatum.

Not even the top professors could survive such a faux pas. 

Then again, even the tippy-top professors would default on a million dollar fine.

Just shows how absolutely screwed up every single bit of this scenario is.

The football coach of our extraordinarily mediocre football team got away with stupid commentary, stupid recruiting of criminals, and losing half the time, the same with our tennis coach.  The school let go of numerous faculty and staff, many very good people.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 20, 2023, 09:52:00 PM
CHE: Diversity Statements Violate First Amendment, Professor Says in Suing U. of California (https://www.chronicle.com/article/diversity-statements-violate-first-amendment-professor-says-in-suing-u-of-california)

Quote
Haltigan argues in the lawsuit that Santa Cruz uses diversity statements to screen out job applicants who do not hold specific views, "including the view that treating individuals differently based on their race or sex is desirable." He claims that his views on "colorblind inclusivity," "viewpoint diversity," and "merit-based evaluation" mean that he cannot truthfully compete for the position, which involves receiving a high sore on a rubric used to evaluate candidates.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on May 21, 2023, 09:43:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 20, 2023, 09:52:00 PM
CHE: Diversity Statements Violate First Amendment, Professor Says in Suing U. of California (https://www.chronicle.com/article/diversity-statements-violate-first-amendment-professor-says-in-suing-u-of-california)

Quote
Haltigan argues in the lawsuit that Santa Cruz uses diversity statements to screen out job applicants who do not hold specific views, "including the view that treating individuals differently based on their race or sex is desirable." He claims that his views on "colorblind inclusivity," "viewpoint diversity," and "merit-based evaluation" mean that he cannot truthfully compete for the position, which involves receiving a high sore on a rubric used to evaluate candidates.

If the guy doesn't think he needs to make a learning environment appropriate to diverse students from diverse backgrounds so the maximum number can succeed, he's in the wrong field.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 21, 2023, 10:52:16 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 21, 2023, 09:43:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 20, 2023, 09:52:00 PM
CHE: Diversity Statements Violate First Amendment, Professor Says in Suing U. of California (https://www.chronicle.com/article/diversity-statements-violate-first-amendment-professor-says-in-suing-u-of-california)

Quote
Haltigan argues in the lawsuit that Santa Cruz uses diversity statements to screen out job applicants who do not hold specific views, "including the view that treating individuals differently based on their race or sex is desirable." He claims that his views on "colorblind inclusivity," "viewpoint diversity," and "merit-based evaluation" mean that he cannot truthfully compete for the position, which involves receiving a high sore on a rubric used to evaluate candidates.

If the guy doesn't think he needs to make a learning environment appropriate to diverse students from diverse backgrounds so the maximum number can succeed, he's in the wrong field.

Without knowing anything about how his students actually perform, this is pretty meaningless. A prof who is effective with all students using a single approach is better than a prof who has lots of different approaches for different students but none of whom learn much.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on May 21, 2023, 11:05:50 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 21, 2023, 10:52:16 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on May 21, 2023, 09:43:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 20, 2023, 09:52:00 PM
CHE: Diversity Statements Violate First Amendment, Professor Says in Suing U. of California (https://www.chronicle.com/article/diversity-statements-violate-first-amendment-professor-says-in-suing-u-of-california)

Quote
Haltigan argues in the lawsuit that Santa Cruz uses diversity statements to screen out job applicants who do not hold specific views, "including the view that treating individuals differently based on their race or sex is desirable." He claims that his views on "colorblind inclusivity," "viewpoint diversity," and "merit-based evaluation" mean that he cannot truthfully compete for the position, which involves receiving a high sore on a rubric used to evaluate candidates.

If the guy doesn't think he needs to make a learning environment appropriate to diverse students from diverse backgrounds so the maximum number can succeed, he's in the wrong field.

Without knowing anything about how his students actually perform, this is pretty meaningless. A prof who is effective with all students using a single approach is better than a prof who has lots of different approaches for different students but none of whom learn much.

He teaches psychiatry and psychology. So... lots of opportunity here.


When I was a teenager, my parents sent me to a therapist because apparently it was my fault they were alcoholics, kleptomaniacs, having financial problems and on the brink of divorce for the 3rd time.

Anyway, I talked to him and asked him about careers in psychology. He explained to me that it was a problem for a lot of people because you had to do "Original research." Further, "Everything had already been researched and discovered in the field. So there weren't any new topics." He seemed concerned about how anyone could possibly get a PhD in the future.

This was back when Reagan was president, FWIW.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 21, 2023, 11:12:59 AM
The controversy he's generating has nothing to do with teaching style or student success, however.  Rightly or wrongly, that is not what Haltigan is about here.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 21, 2023, 04:06:30 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 21, 2023, 11:12:59 AM
The controversy he's generating has nothing to do with teaching style or student success, however.  Rightly or wrongly, that is not what Haltigan is about here.

The point I was making is that all of the required genuflection regarding diversity assumes it is important for student outcomes, but any actual direct emphasis on student outcomes is missing (and apparently irrelevant).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on May 21, 2023, 04:24:58 PM
Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people":

     First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.

    Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.

The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 21, 2023, 10:26:06 PM
Quote from: dismalist on May 21, 2023, 04:24:58 PM
Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people":

     First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.

    Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.

The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.

Interesting.  I'd never thought about those ideas before.

But I am missing a bit of the context here.  Can you explain?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 22, 2023, 05:53:29 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 21, 2023, 10:26:06 PM
Quote from: dismalist on May 21, 2023, 04:24:58 PM
Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people":

     First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.

    Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.

The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.

Interesting.  I'd never thought about those ideas before.

But I am missing a bit of the context here.  Can you explain?

I'm guessing in this context that diversity bureaucrats would be in the second group, focusing on adherence to hoop-jumping requirements rather than identifying people who actually work to support true diversity, regardless of whether it checks the correct boxes.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 22, 2023, 08:20:10 AM
NBC News: Using 'he/him' and 'she/her' in emails got 2 people fired at small Christian college (https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/using-emails-got-2-people-fired-small-christian-college-rcna85542)

Quote
Shua Wilmot and Raegan Zelaya, two former dorm directors at a small Christian university in western New York, acknowledge their names are unconventional, which explains why they attached gender identities to their work email signatures.

Wilmot uses "he/him." Zelaya goes by "she/her."

Their former employer, Houghton University, wanted them to drop the identifiers in line with a new policy for email formats implemented in September. Both refused and were fired.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 22, 2023, 08:21:31 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 22, 2023, 05:53:29 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 21, 2023, 10:26:06 PM
Quote from: dismalist on May 21, 2023, 04:24:58 PM
Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people":

     First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.

    Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.

The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.

Interesting.  I'd never thought about those ideas before.

But I am missing a bit of the context here.  Can you explain?

I'm guessing in this context that diversity bureaucrats would be in the second group, focusing on adherence to hoop-jumping requirements rather than identifying people who actually work to support true diversity, regardless of whether it checks the correct boxes.

Well, that would make sense in this case.  I am afraid that, while I respect DEI efforts, all to often the effort is simply a box checking exercise.

Good to see you back, bub.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on May 22, 2023, 09:30:04 PM
Like it or not, the Houghton staffers, like the entire campus community, were told not to include any extraneous details in their sig files on their campus email accounts, and they disobeyed.   And, also like it or not, many conservative evangelicals do not think anyone should have to list 'their pronouns' anywhere, given, well, what that action implies.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: FishProf on May 23, 2023, 03:13:11 AM
Reasonable people can disagree about what counts as 'extraneous' and there is a huge difference between 'have to' and 'are allowed to'.

There are small tyrannies everywhere.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 23, 2023, 05:45:07 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on May 22, 2023, 09:30:04 PM
Like it or not, the Houghton staffers, like the entire campus community, were told not to include any extraneous details in their sig files on their campus email accounts, and they disobeyed.   And, also like it or not, many conservative evangelicals do not think anyone should have to list 'their pronouns' anywhere, given, well, what that action implies.

But this is an interesting case because for both of these people, their names were unfamiliar enough that people who had not met them in person might not have any idea how to address them. In other words, this does not necessarily have anything to do with gender identity and would be totally unnecessary in-person. (It's worth pointing out that this often happened in the past, and some people chose to go by initials in communication to avoid identifying their sex. The only difference now is that there is a mechanism typically used for a different purpose that can potentially be used.)

I'm curious to hear how this turns out.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 23, 2023, 10:17:10 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on May 22, 2023, 09:30:04 PM
many conservative evangelicals do not think anyone should have to list 'their pronouns' anywhere,

What if they want to list their pronouns?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on May 23, 2023, 10:22:18 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on May 22, 2023, 09:30:04 PM
Like it or not, the Houghton staffers, like the entire campus community, were told not to include any extraneous details in their sig files on their campus email accounts, and they disobeyed.   And, also like it or not, many conservative evangelicals do not think anyone should have to list 'their pronouns' anywhere, given, well, what that action implies.

How about a favorite Bible verse?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on May 23, 2023, 10:50:41 AM
Along these lines, a private institution can require what it pleases from its employees. People's tastes differ so they can sort themselves into differing institutions, but they have no right to say what they want at any given institution. It's an efficient way for people who disagree with each other to live peaceably.

A public institution is considered to be promulgating so-called "government speech" and cannot require anybody to say anything. Whether it must or may allow people to say things, even academically, is a somewhat surprisingly open question.

So long as there is competition, and we have 3500+ colleges and universities, it's a non-problem.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 23, 2023, 11:09:40 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 23, 2023, 10:17:10 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on May 22, 2023, 09:30:04 PM
many conservative evangelicals do not think anyone should have to list 'their pronouns' anywhere,

What if they want to list their pronouns?

An interesting question is whether they would have been able to, alternatively, simply list themselves as "Mr. Shua Wilmot" and "Ms. Reagan Zelaya", and whether they would have chosen to. That would serve the same purpose in principle.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 23, 2023, 12:00:56 PM
Quote from: dismalist on May 23, 2023, 10:50:41 AM
Along these lines, a private institution can require what it pleases from its employees. People's tastes differ so they can sort themselves into differing institutions, but they have no right to say what they want at any given institution. It's an efficient way for people who disagree with each other to live peaceably.

A public institution is considered to be promulgating so-called "government speech" and cannot require anybody to say anything. Whether it must or may allow people to say things, even academically, is a somewhat surprisingly open question.

So long as there is competition, and we have 3500+ colleges and universities, it's a non-problem.

Yes, we know that free speech is a government issue.  And we know that "competition" is a panacea for all our problems----at least in your mind.

Nevertheless, this scenario seems like extremism, a little hysteria, and some pretty bad PR.  Maybe even illegal.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 23, 2023, 12:01:45 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 23, 2023, 11:09:40 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 23, 2023, 10:17:10 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on May 22, 2023, 09:30:04 PM
many conservative evangelicals do not think anyone should have to list 'their pronouns' anywhere,

What if they want to list their pronouns?

An interesting question is whether they would have been able to, alternatively, simply list themselves as "Mr. Shua Wilmot" and "Ms. Reagan Zelaya", and whether they would have chosen to. That would serve the same purpose in principle.

Sure.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on May 23, 2023, 03:36:56 PM
'cuz of course anything written by a non white is inherently hateful.....

https://people.com/amanda-gorman-inauguration-poem-banned-florida-school-7503225
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on May 23, 2023, 09:18:55 PM
I read  the president's memo to the campus community, somewhere on line.   He clearly wants *no extraneous stuff* in email sig files, and these people, avoiding marshy's obvious solution long done by people whose first names are gender ambiguous, disobeyed.   Adios.

Remember places like Houghton have to cater to their denominational constituencies, on whom they depend for funding and often also for students, and, well, in denoms like the one that owns this school, gender fluidity just ain't a thing.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 24, 2023, 05:57:48 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on May 23, 2023, 09:18:55 PM
I read  the president's memo to the campus community, somewhere on line.   He clearly wants *no extraneous stuff* in email sig files, and these people, avoiding marshy's obvious solution long done by people whose first names are gender ambiguous, disobeyed.   Adios.

The only real way to implement this is to have signatures pulled from a database, with the fields created (and potentially populated) by the institution. Otherwise the definition of "extraneous" is a hole with no bottom. (Even still, that doesn't prevent people from manually adding lines to their email, even though it might be tedious.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on May 24, 2023, 06:38:14 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 23, 2023, 12:01:45 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 23, 2023, 11:09:40 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 23, 2023, 10:17:10 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on May 22, 2023, 09:30:04 PM
many conservative evangelicals do not think anyone should have to list 'their pronouns' anywhere,

What if they want to list their pronouns?

An interesting question is whether they would have been able to, alternatively, simply list themselves as "Mr. Shua Wilmot" and "Ms. Reagan Zelaya", and whether they would have chosen to. That would serve the same purpose in principle.

Sure.

What if their title is "Doctor?"
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on May 24, 2023, 12:31:57 PM
Quote from: nebo113 on May 23, 2023, 03:36:56 PM
'cuz of course anything written by a non white is inherently hateful.....

https://people.com/amanda-gorman-inauguration-poem-banned-florida-school-7503225

I thought I couldn't be shocked by any banning, but this stunned me. And, yes I know it was just removed from the K-5 holdings and remains in the middle school section. Read it. There is not one word that can be construed as "hate", and it is clearly unrelated to CRT.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 24, 2023, 03:27:57 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 24, 2023, 12:31:57 PM
Quote from: nebo113 on May 23, 2023, 03:36:56 PM
'cuz of course anything written by a non white is inherently hateful.....

https://people.com/amanda-gorman-inauguration-poem-banned-florida-school-7503225

I thought I couldn't be shocked by any banning, but this stunned me. And, yes I know it was just removed from the K-5 holdings and remains in the middle school section. Read it. There is not one word that can be construed as "hate", and it is clearly unrelated to CRT.

There is nothing particularly surprising here.

This is the kind of society we've become on all sides.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 25, 2023, 06:06:20 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 24, 2023, 03:27:57 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 24, 2023, 12:31:57 PM
Quote from: nebo113 on May 23, 2023, 03:36:56 PM
'cuz of course anything written by a non white is inherently hateful.....

https://people.com/amanda-gorman-inauguration-poem-banned-florida-school-7503225

I thought I couldn't be shocked by any banning, but this stunned me. And, yes I know it was just removed from the K-5 holdings and remains in the middle school section. Read it. There is not one word that can be construed as "hate", and it is clearly unrelated to CRT.

There is nothing particularly surprising here.

This is the kind of society we've become on all sides.

Definitely. Instead of asking
"What can we all agree on?"
it has become
"What can WE do to stick it to THEM?"
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on May 25, 2023, 06:24:17 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on May 25, 2023, 06:06:20 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 24, 2023, 03:27:57 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on May 24, 2023, 12:31:57 PM
Quote from: nebo113 on May 23, 2023, 03:36:56 PM
'cuz of course anything written by a non white is inherently hateful.....

https://people.com/amanda-gorman-inauguration-poem-banned-florida-school-7503225

I thought I couldn't be shocked by any banning, but this stunned me. And, yes I know it was just removed from the K-5 holdings and remains in the middle school section. Read it. There is not one word that can be construed as "hate", and it is clearly unrelated to CRT.

There is nothing particularly surprising here.

This is the kind of society we've become on all sides.

Definitely. Instead of asking
"What can we all agree on?"
it has become
"What can WE do to stick it to THEM?"

According to the complainant, the poem was written by Oprah.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on May 25, 2023, 01:07:13 PM
Senate Bill 83 passes in Ohio (https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2023/05/18/ohio-senate-passes-massive-higher-education-overhaul-bill-house-version-hears-opponent-testimony/)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on May 26, 2023, 05:23:32 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on May 25, 2023, 01:07:13 PM
Senate Bill 83 passes in Ohio (https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2023/05/18/ohio-senate-passes-massive-higher-education-overhaul-bill-house-version-hears-opponent-testimony/)

Quote
Republican state Sen. Louis W. Blessing, III, Sen. Nathan Manning and Sen. Michele Reynolds joined the seven Senate democrats in voting against the bill, also known as the Ohio Higher Education Enhancement Act. Reynolds flipped her vote after voting in support of SB 83 Wednesday morning during the Senate Workforce and Higher Education Committee meeting.

It would be interesting to hear more about this; specifically what changed to change her opinion.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on June 03, 2023, 05:57:44 PM
QuoteUtah primary schools ban Bible for 'vulgarity and violence'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65794363

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 03, 2023, 06:02:22 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on June 03, 2023, 05:57:44 PM
QuoteUtah primary schools ban Bible for 'vulgarity and violence'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65794363

Goose and gander. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 04, 2023, 05:43:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 03, 2023, 06:02:22 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on June 03, 2023, 05:57:44 PM
QuoteUtah primary schools ban Bible for 'vulgarity and violence'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65794363

Goose and gander.

At some point, when the libraries are empty, both sides will have to decide if they want any books at all, and if so they'll need to establish criteria that they can all live with.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on June 04, 2023, 06:29:48 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 04, 2023, 05:43:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 03, 2023, 06:02:22 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on June 03, 2023, 05:57:44 PM
QuoteUtah primary schools ban Bible for 'vulgarity and violence'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65794363

Goose and gander.

At some point, when the libraries are empty, both sides will have to decide if they want any books at all, and if so they'll need to establish criteria that they can all live with.

The bible ban is a protest against rabid right wing nuts.  Not a two sided issue.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Langue_doc on June 04, 2023, 07:37:45 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on June 04, 2023, 06:29:48 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 04, 2023, 05:43:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 03, 2023, 06:02:22 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on June 03, 2023, 05:57:44 PM
QuoteUtah primary schools ban Bible for 'vulgarity and violence'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65794363

Goose and gander.

At some point, when the libraries are empty, both sides will have to decide if they want any books at all, and if so they'll need to establish criteria that they can all live with.

The bible ban is a protest against rabid right wing nuts.  Not a two sided issue.

Utah is staunchly Republican https://ballotpedia.org/Davis_County,_Utah
At least one local politician seems to be in favor of the ban:
https://www.npr.org/2023/06/02/1179906120/utah-bible-book-challenge
QuoteKen Ivory, a Republican legislator in the state, released a statement on Thursday reversing his position on the ban, after initially calling the complaint a "mockery." He wrote that the Bible is a "challenging read" for children, and that the Bible is "best taught, and best understood, in the home, and around the hearth, as a family."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 04, 2023, 09:30:31 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 04, 2023, 05:43:13 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 03, 2023, 06:02:22 PM
Quote from: Langue_doc on June 03, 2023, 05:57:44 PM
QuoteUtah primary schools ban Bible for 'vulgarity and violence'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65794363

Goose and gander.

At some point, when the libraries are empty, both sides will have to decide if they want any books at all, and if so they'll need to establish criteria that they can all live with.

As nebo posted, this is actually a ploy, and a good one.

But if you really worry about this conundrum of canceling, you'll need to rethink some of the things you've evinced on these boards, my friend.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 04, 2023, 11:42:32 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on June 03, 2023, 05:57:44 PM
QuoteUtah primary schools ban Bible for 'vulgarity and violence'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65794363

"Bob Johnson, the father of a primary school student in the Davis School District, told CBS News that he opposes the Bible's removal. 'I can't think of what's in the Bible that you would have to take out of it. Its not like there's pictures in it, he said."

No intimate photos of Tango's daddies or Heather's mommies, either.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 04, 2023, 11:52:00 AM
There is a brief discussion of the issue on another board. One comment [lightly edited] is germane:

"All books in any library are there by someone's subjective choice.
No library could physically contain the millions of available books, especially small school libraries.
Most books are 'absent' from any given library, but usually available elsewhere.
Key issue is who chooses a library's books -- not the merits of any specific book.

All choices in government schools are ultimately political choices."

I would add that the Davis school district contains 88 schools with 73,000 students. Why all these have to be restricted to the same books is beyond comprehension. Even for government schools, decentralize, decentralize. There is no need for school districts to be so big.

The law in Utah is actually about age appropriateness for the whole district [possibly State, IDNK], but allows parents to request that their own children not have access to books of the parents' choice. Virtually all requests from parents are the first method, not the second. Decentralization would reduce the influence of such busy bodies.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on June 04, 2023, 12:12:22 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 04, 2023, 11:42:32 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on June 03, 2023, 05:57:44 PM
QuoteUtah primary schools ban Bible for 'vulgarity and violence'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65794363


No intimate photos of Tango's daddies

On the contrary, they're naked throughout. And they wind their necks together.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on June 04, 2023, 12:24:24 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 04, 2023, 11:52:00 AM
There is a brief discussion of the issue on another board. One comment [lightly edited] is germane:

"All books in any library are there by someone's subjective choice.
No library could physically contain the millions of available books, especially small school libraries.
Most books are 'absent' from any given library, but usually available elsewhere.
Key issue is who chooses a library's books -- not the merits of any specific book.

All choices in government schools are ultimately political choices."

I would add that the Davis school district contains 88 schools with 73,000 students. Why all these have to be restricted to the same books is beyond comprehension. Even for government schools, decentralize, decentralize. There is no need for school districts to be so big.

The law in Utah is actually about age appropriateness for the whole district [possibly State, IDNK], but allows parents to request that their own children not have access to books of the parents' choice. Virtually all requests from parents are the first method, not the second. Decentralization would reduce the influence of such busy bodies.

But there is. We won't pay for small ones.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 04, 2023, 08:31:17 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 04, 2023, 11:52:00 AM
There is a brief discussion of the issue on another board. One comment [lightly edited] is germane:

"All books in any library are there by someone's subjective choice.
No library could physically contain the millions of available books, especially small school libraries.
Most books are 'absent' from any given library, but usually available elsewhere.
Key issue is who chooses a library's books -- not the merits of any specific book.

All choices in government schools are ultimately political choices."

I would add that the Davis school district contains 88 schools with 73,000 students. Why all these have to be restricted to the same books is beyond comprehension. Even for government schools, decentralize, decentralize. There is no need for school districts to be so big.

The law in Utah is actually about age appropriateness for the whole district [possibly State, IDNK], but allows parents to request that their own children not have access to books of the parents' choice. Virtually all requests from parents are the first method, not the second. Decentralization would reduce the influence of such busy bodies.

The use of the term "government school" instead of "public school" is pretty loaded.

And all choices are political. And social. And ideological. And...

Enough with the faux-freedom-outrage. It's boring.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 04, 2023, 08:34:47 PM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on June 04, 2023, 12:12:22 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 04, 2023, 11:42:32 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on June 03, 2023, 05:57:44 PM
QuoteUtah primary schools ban Bible for 'vulgarity and violence'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65794363


No intimate photos of Tango's daddies

On the contrary, they're naked throughout. And they wind their necks together.

It's Penguin Lust! (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=337954277692098&set=a.261773351976858)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 04, 2023, 09:58:51 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 04, 2023, 08:31:17 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 04, 2023, 11:52:00 AM
There is a brief discussion of the issue on another board. One comment [lightly edited] is germane:

"All books in any library are there by someone's subjective choice.
No library could physically contain the millions of available books, especially small school libraries.
Most books are 'absent' from any given library, but usually available elsewhere.
Key issue is who chooses a library's books -- not the merits of any specific book.

All choices in government schools are ultimately political choices."

I would add that the Davis school district contains 88 schools with 73,000 students. Why all these have to be restricted to the same books is beyond comprehension. Even for government schools, decentralize, decentralize. There is no need for school districts to be so big.

The law in Utah is actually about age appropriateness for the whole district [possibly State, IDNK], but allows parents to request that their own children not have access to books of the parents' choice. Virtually all requests from parents are the first method, not the second. Decentralization would reduce the influence of such busy bodies.

The use of the term "government school" instead of "public school" is pretty loaded.

And all choices are political. And social. And ideological. And...

Enough with the faux-freedom-outrage. It's boring.

And apparently no choices are personal.

We're both bored, then.

We merely view causality in the real world differently.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on June 04, 2023, 10:35:56 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 04, 2023, 08:34:47 PM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on June 04, 2023, 12:12:22 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 04, 2023, 11:42:32 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on June 03, 2023, 05:57:44 PM
QuoteUtah primary schools ban Bible for 'vulgarity and violence'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65794363


No intimate photos of Tango's daddies

On the contrary, they're naked throughout. And they wind their necks together.

It's Penguin Lust! (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=337954277692098&set=a.261773351976858)

Rofl! Thank you!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 05, 2023, 05:37:16 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 04, 2023, 08:31:17 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 04, 2023, 11:52:00 AM
There is a brief discussion of the issue on another board. One comment [lightly edited] is germane:

"All books in any library are there by someone's subjective choice.
No library could physically contain the millions of available books, especially small school libraries.
Most books are 'absent' from any given library, but usually available elsewhere.
Key issue is who chooses a library's books -- not the merits of any specific book.

All choices in government schools are ultimately political choices."

I would add that the Davis school district contains 88 schools with 73,000 students. Why all these have to be restricted to the same books is beyond comprehension. Even for government schools, decentralize, decentralize. There is no need for school districts to be so big.

The law in Utah is actually about age appropriateness for the whole district [possibly State, IDNK], but allows parents to request that their own children not have access to books of the parents' choice. Virtually all requests from parents are the first method, not the second. Decentralization would reduce the influence of such busy bodies.

The use of the term "government school" instead of "public school" is pretty loaded.

And all choices are political. And social. And ideological. And...


Which is why, in a pluralistic society, wherever possible choices should be made which are as acceptable as possible to as wide a range of the population as possible.

Given the limited budgets school libraries have, it's hard to believe there are so few childrens' books published that they have to buy ones on anyone's "ban list. As far as "ideology" is concerned, there are probably lots of books encouraging honesty, compassion, respect, etc. that do so without getting into all kinds of controversy. It is entirely reasonable to have civic expectation of how people should act towards one another; it's very dangerous government overreach to prescribe how people should think about everyone else.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Scout on June 05, 2023, 08:31:56 AM
The goal of a library should be more than offer "minimally offensive" reading material. Access to a wide range of knowledge and literature, to expand options for its users, and enrich society is part of the equation. Society is not benefitted from appeasing every demand to limit options. Parents are more than welcome to supervise what children read if it's that important to them.

As a child, access to a wide range of books on a variety of topics was incredibly important to me. While I know that every possible book wasn't in my branch library, knowing that professionals in that space were curating a collection and not just populating shelves with whatever was most inoffensive, is important. Children's literature isn't just a collection of entertainment- books expose children to world, build vocabulary, develop empathy, and expand minds.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 05, 2023, 08:55:50 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 05, 2023, 05:37:16 AM

Given the limited budgets school libraries have, it's hard to believe there are so few childrens' books published that they have to buy ones on anyone's "ban list. As far as "ideology" is concerned, there are probably lots of books encouraging honesty, compassion, respect, etc. that do so without getting into all kinds of controversy. It is entirely reasonable to have civic expectation of how people should act towards one another; it's very dangerous government overreach to prescribe how people should think about everyone else.

Oh, but then you might be getting into the dreaded social-emotional-learning and secular humanism that got math books banned from Florida.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 05, 2023, 08:58:50 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 05, 2023, 05:37:16 AM
As far as "ideology" is concerned, there are probably lots of books encouraging honesty, compassion, respect, etc. that do so without getting into all kinds of controversy. It is entirely reasonable to have civic expectation of how people should act towards one another; it's very dangerous government overreach to prescribe how people should think about everyone else.

In other words, we should avoid anything that might upset your ideological platform (you do realize you also have a very clear "ideology" too, right?).  Nothing is "controversial" unless we decide to make it controversial.

Really, truly think about honesty, compassion, and respect in these circumstances.  Are you fostering these?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on June 05, 2023, 10:17:37 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on June 03, 2023, 05:57:44 PM
QuoteUtah primary schools ban Bible for 'vulgarity and violence'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65794363

That's been a standard tit-for-tat dodge for years among people protesting book challenges.  The Bible has long been one of the most often-challenged books for that reason.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 05, 2023, 12:28:53 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 05, 2023, 08:58:50 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 05, 2023, 05:37:16 AM
As far as "ideology" is concerned, there are probably lots of books encouraging honesty, compassion, respect, etc. that do so without getting into all kinds of controversy. It is entirely reasonable to have civic expectation of how people should act towards one another; it's very dangerous government overreach to prescribe how people should think about everyone else.

In other words, we should avoid anything that might upset your ideological platform (you do realize you also have a very clear "ideology" too, right?).  Nothing is "controversial" unless we decide to make it controversial.

Really, truly think about honesty, compassion, and respect in these circumstances.  Are you fostering these?

As long as anyone feels the need to reinforce their own ideological platform, this tit-for-tat will continue. Put all of the "banners" from all sides in a room. Tell them " The school library budget for this year is X dollars. You have 48 hours to choose books. Only unanimous choices will be purchased. Any unspent money will disappear." That will show whether anyone cares more about students than about waving their ideological flags. Let the public see what was purchased and how much of the budget was spent and then let them decide who to re-elect in the future.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 05, 2023, 12:54:59 PM
I've never heard about fights about what books are to be in the library until fairly recently. The specific books are symbols with different meaning to different people. So, it's not about books! Reminds me of

QuoteAs a society, we're like the Marlon Brando character Johnny Strabler in The Wild One. "Hey Johnny," a woman asks him, "what are you rebelling against?" His laconic, iconic response: "Whaddya got?" [Nick Gillespie]

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on June 05, 2023, 01:23:00 PM
Out of curiosity, does anybody here have any personal experience with library selection and collection development?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on June 05, 2023, 02:51:41 PM
Quote from: apl68 on June 05, 2023, 01:23:00 PM
Out of curiosity, does anybody here have any personal experience with library selection and collection development?

Only thru siblings who do.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Scout on June 05, 2023, 05:37:40 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 05, 2023, 12:28:53 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 05, 2023, 08:58:50 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 05, 2023, 05:37:16 AM
As far as "ideology" is concerned, there are probably lots of books encouraging honesty, compassion, respect, etc. that do so without getting into all kinds of controversy. It is entirely reasonable to have civic expectation of how people should act towards one another; it's very dangerous government overreach to prescribe how people should think about everyone else.

In other words, we should avoid anything that might upset your ideological platform (you do realize you also have a very clear "ideology" too, right?).  Nothing is "controversial" unless we decide to make it controversial.

Really, truly think about honesty, compassion, and respect in these circumstances.  Are you fostering these?

As long as anyone feels the need to reinforce their own ideological platform, this tit-for-tat will continue. Put all of the "banners" from all sides in a room. Tell them " The school library budget for this year is X dollars. You have 48 hours to choose books. Only unanimous choices will be purchased. Any unspent money will disappear." That will show whether anyone cares more about students than about waving their ideological flags. Let the public see what was purchased and how much of the budget was spent and then let them decide who to re-elect in the future.

Advocating for students includes not appeasing people who would deny students access to the wide range of books out there. Hell yes it's ideological- I want gay, black, brown, immigrant, autistic, Jewish, Muslim  etc kids to see themselves represented in books. I want sheltered kids to be stretched. I want abused kids to read about struggling with trauma. I want kids denied knowledge about their bodies to have access to it. The ideology isn't a specific agenda but access to a wide range of experiences, some of them challenging.

Needing complete unanimity results in the most watered down pablum being fed our kids.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on June 05, 2023, 07:04:36 PM
Where are all these books coming from?   Where's the money for all these ideologically-agenda-driven books, and where's the library space to house em all?  And, what other titles will be sacrificed in order to do this?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 05, 2023, 07:51:16 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 05, 2023, 12:28:53 PM
As long as anyone feels the need to reinforce their own ideological platform, this tit-for-tat will continue.

Okay buddy, put your money where your mouth is.   Drop your ideological flag.

The people you object to and their ideas are not going away.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 05, 2023, 07:55:42 PM
Quote from: Scout on June 05, 2023, 05:37:40 PM
Advocating for students includes not appeasing people who would deny students access to the wide range of books out there. Hell yes it's ideological- I want gay, black, brown, immigrant, autistic, Jewish, Muslim  etc kids to see themselves represented in books. I want sheltered kids to be stretched. I want abused kids to read about struggling with trauma. I want kids denied knowledge about their bodies to have access to it. The ideology isn't a specific agenda but access to a wide range of experiences, some of them challenging.

Needing complete unanimity results in the most watered down pablum being fed our kids.

I wish The Fora had those "up vote" options. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 05, 2023, 07:58:11 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 05, 2023, 07:04:36 PM
Where are all these books coming from?   Where's the money for all these ideologically-agenda-driven books, and where's the library space to house em all?  And, what other titles will be sacrificed in order to do this?

They come from publishers for people who care.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on June 05, 2023, 09:08:32 PM
You expect the publishers to just donate the books in question to  your local library?   To all local libraries?

And, again, even if that be true, where's the space coming from?  What gets edited out?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on June 05, 2023, 09:15:39 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 05, 2023, 09:08:32 PM
You expect the publishers to just donate the books in question to  your local library?   To all local libraries?

And, again, even if that be true, where's the space coming from?  What gets edited out?

The books that don't get used much any more, or are in poor condition. I own a ton of books which libraries have purged, including some surprisingly recent titles.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 05, 2023, 10:38:36 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 05, 2023, 09:08:32 PM
You expect the publishers to just donate the books in question to  your local library?   To all local libraries?

And, again, even if that be true, where's the space coming from?  What gets edited out?

These are rhetorical, of course, but the answers are obvious.  The library pays for the books.  They use their budget and space allowance to buy what they feel is appropriate and serves the community.  What gets edited out and edited in depends upon the librarians' judgment.

Sorry that does not always conform to your ideology.  But then again, perhaps you should examine your ideology.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 06, 2023, 02:56:34 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 05, 2023, 07:04:36 PM
Where are all these books coming from?   Where's the money for all these ideologically-agenda-driven books, and where's the library space to house em all?  And, what other titles will be sacrificed in order to do this?

Can someone please name a non-ideologically-driven book? Waiting...
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: waterboy on June 06, 2023, 04:15:34 AM
Dictionary?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 06, 2023, 05:28:56 AM
Quote from: waterboy on June 06, 2023, 04:15:34 AM
Dictionary?

Encyclopedias, science books, biographies, lots of fiction.

(Yes, any of these can be written with a particular slant, but there are lots written without the goal of trying to change peoples' minds about something, but merely to give enjoyment to people who wanted to read them. Just like some people eat broccoli because they like it doesn't mean that it should be included as an essential ingredient in an institutional diet.)

Another issue to consider is whether everything in a school library can be assigned reading by teachers, or can be read out loud in class. If there is a distinction between books that students are free to choose for themselves and those that they are going to have to read or have read to them, then that would also potentially reduce some of the tension. (In a society with trigger warnings, where students are allowed to absent themselves for certain discussions, it's inconsistent to not much such allowances for specific political or ideological discussions which could be equally upsetting.)


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on June 06, 2023, 06:56:34 AM
Marshy....You're just funny.  Encyclopedias are one of the BEST sources of information about all those things that terrify right wing nuts:  sodomy, incest, homosexuality, satanism. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 06, 2023, 07:37:45 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on June 06, 2023, 06:56:34 AM
Marshy....You're just funny.  Encyclopedias are one of the BEST sources of information about all those things that terrify right wing nuts:  sodomy, incest, homosexuality, satanism.

You seem to be under the impression that information is something that I want to suppress. You are mistaken.

It is one thing for a library to contain a book that makes an ethical case for veganism. It is another thing entirely for a teacher to read that to her class and tell them how eating meat is morally wrong. Similarly, it is one thing to have a book in the library about vaccine hesitancy, and another entirely for a teacher to tell his class that vaccines are a tool of government control.

I have much less concern about what information a student has access to than about what moral claims teachers force students to appear to accept.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on June 06, 2023, 07:39:17 AM
Quote from: waterboy on June 06, 2023, 04:15:34 AM
Dictionary?

That's absolutely not the case. Dictionaries were established as part of a very clear (and misguided) linguistic agenda. And the decisions about what to include and what not are often themselves guided by political moral, etc. reasons. That's why, for example, the OED has an entry for 'goblin mode', which nobody uses, but none for 'pegging', which has been in widespread and constant use for over twenty years.


EDIT: I said 'decade', but it was coined in 2001.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: waterboy on June 06, 2023, 07:43:13 AM
Ok...not a dictionary.  How about a plant ID book?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on June 06, 2023, 07:44:35 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 06, 2023, 07:37:45 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on June 06, 2023, 06:56:34 AM
Marshy....You're just funny.  Encyclopedias are one of the BEST sources of information about all those things that terrify right wing nuts:  sodomy, incest, homosexuality, satanism.

You seem to be under the impression that information is something that I want to suppress. You are mistaken.

It is one thing for a library to contain a book that makes an ethical case for veganism. It is another thing entirely for a teacher to read that to her class and tell them how eating meat is morally wrong. Similarly, it is one thing to have a book in the library about vaccine hesitancy, and another entirely for a teacher to tell his class that vaccines are a tool of government control.

I have much less concern about what information a student has access to than about what moral claims teachers force students to appear to accept.

This is nonsense. Moral claims are normative. That's inescapable. Besides, the classroom is full of moral claims students are required to accept, such as that hitting one another is wrong. If you eliminate any and all moral claims, you'll be left with rather little.

Besides, you're not allowing school libraries to serve the diverse range of their users. What's appropriate for a seventh grader is different from what's appropriate for a twelfth grader. If you only fill the library with See Spot Run (which, incidentally, is designed to service a particular--wrong--ideology about learning to read) and nothing else, you're depriving everyone outside of the first graders. And forcing them to read hellish bullshit.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 06, 2023, 08:00:54 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 06, 2023, 05:28:56 AM
Quote from: waterboy on June 06, 2023, 04:15:34 AM
Dictionary?

Encyclopedias, science books, biographies, lots of fiction.

As long as the science book doesn't include....

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 06, 2023, 08:02:07 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on June 06, 2023, 06:56:34 AM
Marshy....You're just funny.  Encyclopedias are one of the BEST sources of information about all those things that terrify right wing nuts:  sodomy, incest, homosexuality, satanism.

How about just listing the many religions of the world and in history? And how fascinating that the Shintos and Hindus believe just as fervently as Christians do about Jesus?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 06, 2023, 08:03:52 AM
Quote from: waterboy on June 06, 2023, 07:43:13 AM
Ok...not a dictionary.  How about a plant ID book?

As long as it doesn't list any of these plants (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/01/nyregion/alice-austen-house-queer-garden.html).
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 06, 2023, 08:26:05 AM
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on June 06, 2023, 07:39:17 AM
Quote from: waterboy on June 06, 2023, 04:15:34 AM
Dictionary?

That's absolutely not the case. Dictionaries were established as part of a very clear (and misguided) linguistic agenda. And the decisions about what to include and what not are often themselves guided by political moral, etc. reasons. That's why, for example, the OED has an entry for 'goblin mode', which nobody uses, but none for 'pegging', which has been in widespread and constant use for over a decade.

Read "Tense Present: Democracy, English, and the Wars Over Word Usage" by David Foster Wallace for a deeper read on the politicizing of the dictionary and language itself.  There are several complete versions but they are Chrome extensions and don't hyperlink very well.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 06, 2023, 08:44:21 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 06, 2023, 05:28:56 AM
Encyclopedias, science books, biographies, lots of fiction.

(Yes, any of these can be written with a particular slant, but there are lots written without the goal of trying to change peoples' minds about something,

Oh Marshy...oh Marshy, oh Marshy, oh Marshy...

You do realize that The Chronicles of Narnia are 100% Christian indoctrination, right?

Oliver Twist can be read as an indictment of the lower classes for their behavior and lifestyles.

Nobel laureate William Golding's The Lord of the Flies has been challenged multiple times because it makes young boys look like animals.

Fairy tales inculcate all sorts of gender roles at the same time they are anti-authoritarian, particularly when the authority is a parent figure.  Sometimes they are simple recitations of violence and cruelty.

The Lord of the Rings infantilizes the working class and elevates the gentry and aristocratic class.

The Iliad and Odyssey are chock-full of objectionable stuff.

Every story tries to convince you of something whether it means to or not. 

Not every story tries to convince you about things that are currently controversial.

You really need to read more and think about what you are reading if you are going to make these kind of statements.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Diogenes on June 06, 2023, 10:03:18 AM
Quote from: Langue_doc on June 04, 2023, 07:37:45 AM

Utah is staunchly Republican https://ballotpedia.org/Davis_County,_Utah
At least one local politician seems to be in favor of the ban:
https://www.npr.org/2023/06/02/1179906120/utah-bible-book-challenge
QuoteKen Ivory, a Republican legislator in the state, released a statement on Thursday reversing his position on the ban, after initially calling the complaint a "mockery." He wrote that the Bible is a "challenging read" for children, and that the Bible is "best taught, and best understood, in the home, and around the hearth, as a family."

That article is missing important context: Ken Ivory, the Republican quoted supporting, authored the bill that passed this year making removing books so much easier. So he's defending his own law, unintended consequences and all.

More fun context, Utah Parents United, the stanchly religious group that lobbied Ivory on this bill and does most of the grassroots reporting of books across the state have been quoted in response to this Bible ban, "... It is sad when religious texts are used in a culture war."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 06, 2023, 10:41:46 AM
Quote from this weekend's NYTimes regarding AI (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/31/magazine/ai-start-up-accelerator-san-francisco.html), but also relevant to this discussion about what is "appropriate" or "moral" or "indoctrination."

"Sanity is a very narrow sliver of the possibilities of mind. Because we have culturally accepted norms, we have a certain way of acting and thinking and speaking, and if you deviate from that a little too much, then you're, at best, weird, and at worst, clinically insane."

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on June 06, 2023, 10:48:01 AM
If I might, a little explanation about how library collection development and selection work:

Much of what libraries collect is simply a matter of getting what patrons are demanding.  This is especially true of public libraries.  School and academic libraries do some of this demand-directed acquisition as well. 

Libraries also attempt proactively to build collections of materials that will meet their community's interests and needs.  This is especially true of school and academic libraries, and to some extent of publics (Depending on the size of the library and the abundance of the acquisitions budget).  For this, they need the help of various selection aids that can give them recommendations about what to acquire in different areas.  These include:

Core collection guides with recommendations on a wide range of subjects.  These take the form of very expensive specialized volumes or database subscriptions.

Reviews by subject experts found in academic journals and the like.  May also include lists of recommendations prepared by subject experts (Librarians are quick to share and borrow things like this).

General review publications, such as The New York Times Book Review and the Times of London Literary Supplement.

Specialized library review publications, such as Library Journal, School Library Journal, and Horn Book.  These contain reviews and recommendations by librarians for librarians.  I have a lot of experience of using Library Journal as a review publication--in fact, that's the main thing we use it for here.

You use core collection guides when you're trying to build a collection from scratch or go back and beef up a collection using in-print, but not necessarily the latest, materials.  The review publications are for keeping up with the newest stuff that's coming out.  Librarians obviously can't personally read everything they acquire for their institutions.  We have to depend on reviews and recommendations from review publications to have an idea what to get.  And that's where...issues can arise.

Continued below
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on June 06, 2023, 11:30:10 AM
Continued from above

Library review publications like Library Journal can only review/recommend a small proportion of what gets published.  Within these limits, they try to cover a very broad number of categories for different needs and interests.  Some categories get reviewed with every issue, some only every few months, some mainly in occasional special interest sections.  So, for example, you can find reviews of a selection of social sciences and natural sciences titles in every issue, but specialized fiction genres, such as Christian historical romances or graphic novels, only in some issues.  You'll find an enormous variety of different types of items for an enormous variety of types of patrons in Library Journal.

That said, they have to prioritize...and it's pretty clear, if one reads LJ on a regular basis, that items representing certain types of perspectives have more priority, and are accorded more respect, than others.  I hesitate to use a term that tends to be thrown around very subjectively as an insult, but it's pretty fair to say that LJ, and the American Library Association's leadership in general, come across as being pretty "woke."  Items informed by intersectionality and LBG++++ perspectives are reviewed continually and usually praised and recommended to the skies by reviewers.  Items that represent more socially conservative perspectives, when they are reviewed at all, tend to be reviewed negatively, or at best damned with faint praise as suitable for (implicitly benighted) patrons that request them.  The social and political biases of most LJ reviewers come through loud and clear.  On several occasions I've seen reviews contain statements that many readers would find frankly hostile and insulting.

Let me make clear that I don't object to LJ reviewing works informed by intersectionality and LBG++++ perspectives.  They're being published, they're being read, and librarians are here to supply and serve all sorts of patrons.  What concerns me is the extent to which so much of the library profession's leadership is taking very clear sides in some very deeply controversial matters, stances that in many cases go beyond simply trying to make sure all groups are fairly served and into some pretty radical territory. They're trying to nudge libraries, library collections, and library services in general into that sort of radicalism and advocacy.

This is a carefully considered professional judgement on my part, and I am not unique among library professionals in having such concerns.  But these concerns are not welcome in many library professional circles, especially at a national level.  I and others have been concerned for a long time that many libraries and librarians have been needlessly courting a backlash through their advocacy, and through widely expressed attitudes of contempt and disrespect toward large segments of their communities that don't see things their way (I hear things at conferences).  And now, sure enough, we see that that backlash has arrived.

I do not approve of or support the legislation meddling in library affairs that we've been talking about on this thread.  I think it throws the baby out with the bathwater, and risks creating all sorts of unintended consequences.  In the analog, in-person world I've stood up and told local and state elected officials as much.  I do, however, understand the concerns that have sparked the backlash, I do believe that some of them are legitimate, and I do believe that most of this backlash could have been avoided if segments of the library profession hadn't made such a point of courting it in the first place.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 06, 2023, 12:37:32 PM
Quote from: apl68 on June 06, 2023, 11:30:10 AM


That said, they have to prioritize...and it's pretty clear, if one reads LJ on a regular basis, that items representing certain types of perspectives have more priority, and are accorded more respect, than others.  I hesitate to use a term that tends to be thrown around very subjectively as an insult, but it's pretty fair to say that LJ, and the American Library Association's leadership in general, come across as being pretty "woke."  Items informed by intersectionality and LBG++++ perspectives are reviewed continually and usually praised and recommended to the skies by reviewers.  Items that represent more socially conservative perspectives, when they are reviewed at all, tend to be reviewed negatively, or at best damned with faint praise as suitable for (implicitly benighted) patrons that request them.  The social and political biases of most LJ reviewers come through loud and clear.  On several occasions I've seen reviews contain statements that many readers would find frankly hostile and insulting.

Thanks for the historical perspective. Would you say the focus on " moral" content has become bigger of late? My sense is that a few decades ago there was much more focus on books that were well-written,  rather than having a "message". But I'm a layman in this.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 01:06:20 PM
Quote from: apl68 on June 06, 2023, 10:48:01 AM
If I might, a little explanation about how library collection development and selection work:

Much of what libraries collect is simply a matter of getting what patrons are demanding.  This is especially true of public libraries.  School and academic libraries do some of this demand-directed acquisition as well. 

Libraries also attempt proactively to build collections of materials that will meet their community's interests and needs.  This is especially true of school and academic libraries, and to some extent of publics (Depending on the size of the library and the abundance of the acquisitions budget).  For this, they need the help of various selection aids that can give them recommendations about what to acquire in different areas.  These include:

Core collection guides with recommendations on a wide range of subjects.  These take the form of very expensive specialized volumes or database subscriptions.

Reviews by subject experts found in academic journals and the like.  May also include lists of recommendations prepared by subject experts (Librarians are quick to share and borrow things like this).

General review publications, such as The New York Times Book Review and the Times of London Literary Supplement.

Specialized library review publications, such as Library Journal, School Library Journal, and Horn Book.  These contain reviews and recommendations by librarians for librarians.  I have a lot of experience of using Library Journal as a review publication--in fact, that's the main thing we use it for here.

You use core collection guides when you're trying to build a collection from scratch or go back and beef up a collection using in-print, but not necessarily the latest, materials.  The review publications are for keeping up with the newest stuff that's coming out.  Librarians obviously can't personally read everything they acquire for their institutions.  We have to depend on reviews and recommendations from review publications to have an idea what to get.  And that's where...issues can arise.

Continued below

Quote from: apl68 on June 06, 2023, 11:30:10 AM
Continued from above

Library review publications like Library Journal can only review/recommend a small proportion of what gets published.  Within these limits, they try to cover a very broad number of categories for different needs and interests.  Some categories get reviewed with every issue, some only every few months, some mainly in occasional special interest sections.  So, for example, you can find reviews of a selection of social sciences and natural sciences titles in every issue, but specialized fiction genres, such as Christian historical romances or graphic novels, only in some issues.  You'll find an enormous variety of different types of items for an enormous variety of types of patrons in Library Journal.

That said, they have to prioritize...and it's pretty clear, if one reads LJ on a regular basis, that items representing certain types of perspectives have more priority, and are accorded more respect, than others.  I hesitate to use a term that tends to be thrown around very subjectively as an insult, but it's pretty fair to say that LJ, and the American Library Association's leadership in general, come across as being pretty "woke."  Items informed by intersectionality and LBG++++ perspectives are reviewed continually and usually praised and recommended to the skies by reviewers.  Items that represent more socially conservative perspectives, when they are reviewed at all, tend to be reviewed negatively, or at best damned with faint praise as suitable for (implicitly benighted) patrons that request them.  The social and political biases of most LJ reviewers come through loud and clear.  On several occasions I've seen reviews contain statements that many readers would find frankly hostile and insulting.

Let me make clear that I don't object to LJ reviewing works informed by intersectionality and LBG++++ perspectives.  They're being published, they're being read, and librarians are here to supply and serve all sorts of patrons.  What concerns me is the extent to which so much of the library profession's leadership is taking very clear sides in some very deeply controversial matters, stances that in many cases go beyond simply trying to make sure all groups are fairly served and into some pretty radical territory. They're trying to nudge libraries, library collections, and library services in general into that sort of radicalism and advocacy.

This is a carefully considered professional judgement on my part, and I am not unique among library professionals in having such concerns.  But these concerns are not welcome in many library professional circles, especially at a national level.  I and others have been concerned for a long time that many libraries and librarians have been needlessly courting a backlash through their advocacy, and through widely expressed attitudes of contempt and disrespect toward large segments of their communities that don't see things their way (I hear things at conferences).  And now, sure enough, we see that that backlash has arrived.

I do not approve of or support the legislation meddling in library affairs that we've been talking about on this thread.  I think it throws the baby out with the bathwater, and risks creating all sorts of unintended consequences.  In the analog, in-person world I've stood up and told local and state elected officials as much.  I do, however, understand the concerns that have sparked the backlash, I do believe that some of them are legitimate, and I do believe that most of this backlash could have been avoided if segments of the library profession hadn't made such a point of courting it in the first place.

I very much appreciate the day-to-day work of librarians. But even with the best of will book choices cannot be made that will please everybody. Unanimity guarantees no one is made worse off, but there can be no unanimity here. The source of the problem is that one side considers the others side's book choices pollution and the other side insists on its books. There can be no compromise. The fundamental question is not "which books?", but rather "who owns the library?" And that is a political question.

What would work to preserve the peace is separate libraries [and yes, separate schools].

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 06, 2023, 03:53:01 PM
Quote from: apl68 on June 06, 2023, 11:30:10 AM
What concerns me is the extent to which so much of the library profession's leadership is taking very clear sides in some very deeply controversial matters, stances that in many cases go beyond simply trying to make sure all groups are fairly served and into some pretty radical territory. They're trying to nudge libraries, library collections, and library services in general into that sort of radicalism and advocacy.

At the heart of this is not a fear of "controversy," which will always be a facet of a free speech society, but the concern, often draped in euphemisms and ironic defenses of respect and inclusion, that the morally incorrect things are being taught.  As always, the default is 'they-are-trying-to-get-the-children' in the age of terrible abuse of children, usually female, by Christians of all stripes and a number of pseudo-religious charlatans building fraudulent empires off of vulnerable people...

I'm sorry, but I have no trouble with the idea that the "library profession's leadership is taking very clear sides in some very deeply controversial matters."  Good for them.  They are on the right side----the right side of history and the right side of morality. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 06, 2023, 04:11:26 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 01:06:20 PM
What would work to preserve the peace is separate libraries [and yes, separate schools].

I think you're talking about re-education camps rather than allowing people to make up their own minds.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 04:21:33 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 06, 2023, 04:11:26 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 01:06:20 PM
What would work to preserve the peace is separate libraries [and yes, separate schools].

I think you're talking about re-education camps rather than allowing people to make up their own minds.

When children come of age, they can choose. Not before.

Meanwhile, my child stays in my camp, me deciding all kinds of stuff. The fundamental question is: Who owns the camp?

Separate camps, otherwise, there won't be peace.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 06, 2023, 05:58:48 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 04:21:33 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 06, 2023, 04:11:26 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 01:06:20 PM
What would work to preserve the peace is separate libraries [and yes, separate schools].

I think you're talking about re-education camps rather than allowing people to make up their own minds.

When children come of age, they can choose. Not before.

Meanwhile, my child stays in my camp, me deciding all kinds of stuff. The fundamental question is: Who owns the camp?

Separate camps, otherwise, there won't be peace.

So... never let your children leave the house? Meet other children whose families are different from yours? Read every book your child brought home from the library before allowing them to see it themselves?

As an example - I am not a vegetarian. Animals are delicious. And their skins look great on boots and jackets, and their cocoons make lovely dresses and blouses.

Let's say I had children and they came home from the library with a book by PETA, or came home from the household of a family who was strongly into vegan/animal rights. Would I... call the library and insist they toss the book or that the family... I dunno, serve a big juicy steak when my kid came over? 

I would talk to my child. "Well people think differently about a lot of things. What do you think? What questions do you have? I believe X. Others believe Y. That's certainly worth thinking about."

Because children are people and capable of independent thought.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 06:06:27 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 06, 2023, 05:58:48 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 04:21:33 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 06, 2023, 04:11:26 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 01:06:20 PM
What would work to preserve the peace is separate libraries [and yes, separate schools].

I think you're talking about re-education camps rather than allowing people to make up their own minds.

When children come of age, they can choose. Not before.

Meanwhile, my child stays in my camp, me deciding all kinds of stuff. The fundamental question is: Who owns the camp?

Separate camps, otherwise, there won't be peace.

So... never let your children leave the house? Meet other children whose families are different from yours? Read every book your child brought home from the library before allowing them to see it themselves?

As an example - I am not a vegetarian. Animals are delicious. And their skins look great on boots and jackets, and their cocoons make lovely dresses and blouses.

Let's say I had children and they came home from the library with a book by PETA, or came home from the household of a family who was strongly into vegan/animal rights. Would I... call the library and insist they toss the book or that the family... I dunno, serve a big juicy steak when my kid came over? 

I would talk to my child. "Well people think differently about a lot of things. What do you think? What questions do you have? I believe X. Others believe Y. That's certainly worth thinking about."

Because children are people and capable of independent thought.

It's not about a book or set of books,  and it's not about the specific things one does or doesn't do to educate a child. It's about who has the authority to decide. This must be, and will be, decided through politics.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 06, 2023, 07:56:01 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 04:21:33 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 06, 2023, 04:11:26 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 01:06:20 PM
What would work to preserve the peace is separate libraries [and yes, separate schools].

I think you're talking about re-education camps rather than allowing people to make up their own minds.

When children come of age, they can choose. Not before.

Meanwhile, my child stays in my camp, me deciding all kinds of stuff. The fundamental question is: Who owns the camp?

Separate camps, otherwise, there won't be peace.

So?  Go to your own camp.  That's your kid, do whatever you think is best.  Don't try to foist your private camp on my public camp, however, and if you want to fund your private camp, I could care less. It sure worked out well for the Duggars. 

That really is the issue.  Do not pretend like you "own" the library.  You don't.  And neither do I.  Have all the copies of Bun-Hur you like.  I will stock Heather Has Two Mommies.

But I suspect there will not be peace, and the conservatives are getting so desperate they are boycotting beer.  You will never get what you want, Big-D. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 06, 2023, 08:10:36 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 06, 2023, 05:58:48 PM

So... never let your children leave the house? Meet other children whose families are different from yours? Read every book your child brought home from the library before allowing them to see it themselves?


Because children are people and capable of independent thought.

That's part of the reason I post as I do.  I'm getting tired of the bullshit 'for-God's-sake-won't-someone-think-of-the-children' topos.  It is a bullshit pretense.  There will always be certain people who will react with inborn prejudice, and that's what this whole book business is all about.  As always, they rely on the lie that they cannot adequately protect their children if people live differently or think differently than they do.  Pretend otherwise.

Since our censors in this age can no longer rely on "public decency" or some such crap, they must figure out some way to claim victimhood.  Apparently some people can't even browse the library if there are books on the shelves with ideas they disagree with.  It's all a confabulation to try and control what people think and do.  And it is failing spectacularly.

And I hate to tell'ya, folks, but your kids are gonna find out.  Particularly in the age of information.  The library is probably the last bastion of sane information about things like sexuality and choice.  Don't kid yourself that you can sequester them in your camp.  It won't work. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on June 06, 2023, 10:42:00 PM
Like it or not, libraryland in the USA is amongst the most lefty graduate-educated professions.  There are a variety of reasons for this, but that it is, is beyond any disputing.

A challenge for folks here, esp those not living in 'Bible belt' locales-- go into your local PL, and if it uses the Dewey Decimal system, as most still do, look at the 200s century.   You will not find many titles even there, and those that are there are not, ahem, exactly slanted towards traditional/conservative American religious views.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 07, 2023, 05:05:59 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 06, 2023, 08:10:36 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 06, 2023, 05:58:48 PM

So... never let your children leave the house? Meet other children whose families are different from yours? Read every book your child brought home from the library before allowing them to see it themselves?


Because children are people and capable of independent thought.

That's part of the reason I post as I do.  I'm getting tired of the bullshit 'for-God's-sake-won't-someone-think-of-the-children' topos.  It is a bullshit pretense. 

You do realize that all kinds of pro-trans lobbying uses exactly the argument that the children are at risk?

Both sides use that argument.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 07, 2023, 06:32:53 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 06:06:27 PM

It's not about a book or set of books,  and it's not about the specific things one does or doesn't do to educate a child. It's about who has the authority to decide. This must be, and will be, decided through politics.

So, some "majority" gets to decide what books my community is allowed to access at the public library?

What if that "majority" decides that there should be a wide variety of books so the community of adults and children get exposed to all sorts of ideas, lifestyles, and experiences?

Because I think that 99% of the time, that has been the purpose of the public library. To expand the world for everyone, not to reinforce a few politically connected points of view.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on June 07, 2023, 07:30:07 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 06, 2023, 03:53:01 PM
Quote from: apl68 on June 06, 2023, 11:30:10 AM
What concerns me is the extent to which so much of the library profession's leadership is taking very clear sides in some very deeply controversial matters, stances that in many cases go beyond simply trying to make sure all groups are fairly served and into some pretty radical territory. They're trying to nudge libraries, library collections, and library services in general into that sort of radicalism and advocacy.

At the heart of this is not a fear of "controversy," which will always be a facet of a free speech society, but the concern, often draped in euphemisms and ironic defenses of respect and inclusion, that the morally incorrect things are being taught.  As always, the default is 'they-are-trying-to-get-the-children' in the age of terrible abuse of children, usually female, by Christians of all stripes and a number of pseudo-religious charlatans building fraudulent empires off of vulnerable people...

I'm sorry, but I have no trouble with the idea that the "library profession's leadership is taking very clear sides in some very deeply controversial matters."  Good for them.  They are on the right side----the right side of history and the right side of morality.

This is exactly the sort of contempt for and refusal even to try to understand different points of view that I see within much of the library profession now, and which I believe has done so much to undermine librarians' and libraries' standing in many communities.

I'm not against you here, Wahoo.  I'm a loyal member of the library profession who believes in libraries as a place where people can freely learn about all kinds of things.  As I've said above, I've spoken out publicly and to elected representatives against this legislation.  But I see a lot of lack of understanding and respect on the part of many librarians toward substantial segments of the communities that they serve.  I don't believe that they should just cave in to those segments of the community, but they have to actually hear them and address their concerns.  Librarians should be finding ways to navigate through the culture wars, not picking sides in them.  Any sides.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on June 07, 2023, 07:31:10 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 01:06:20 PM

I very much appreciate the day-to-day work of librarians. But even with the best of will book choices cannot be made that will please everybody. Unanimity guarantees no one is made worse off, but there can be no unanimity here. The source of the problem is that one side considers the others side's book choices pollution and the other side insists on its books. There can be no compromise. The fundamental question is not "which books?", but rather "who owns the library?" And that is a political question.

What would work to preserve the peace is separate libraries [and yes, separate schools].

Well, that would kind of defeat the whole idea of libraries as a public good, wouldn't it?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on June 07, 2023, 07:36:27 AM
Cue the libertarian response, from Maggie's lips. "There is no such thing as society." And so there is no such thing as a public good.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 09:39:51 AM
Quote from: apl68 on June 07, 2023, 07:31:10 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 01:06:20 PM

I very much appreciate the day-to-day work of librarians. But even with the best of will book choices cannot be made that will please everybody. Unanimity guarantees no one is made worse off, but there can be no unanimity here. The source of the problem is that one side considers the others side's book choices pollution and the other side insists on its books. There can be no compromise. The fundamental question is not "which books?", but rather "who owns the library?" And that is a political question.

What would work to preserve the peace is separate libraries [and yes, separate schools].

Well, that would kind of defeat the whole idea of libraries as a public good, wouldn't it?

Libraries are a publicly financed good. There is nothing wrong with having libraries of different flavors.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 07, 2023, 10:04:45 AM
Quote from: apl68 on June 07, 2023, 07:30:07 AM

This is exactly the sort of contempt for and refusal even to try to understand different points of view

I love you apl, but you've just pointed out the beam in your eye.

I've read your comments.  You are not always accepting of different points of view.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 07, 2023, 02:43:19 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 06:06:27 PM
It's not about a book or set of books,  and it's not about the specific things one does or doesn't do to educate a child. It's about who has the authority to decide. This must be, and will be, decided through politics.

It's about censorship. You should be able to go into a library and read Jay Sekulow, James Dobson, Christopher Hitchens, the Dead Kennedys, Catherine Castro, and the Duggars, no problem.

But there are, as always, certain segments of the population who do not want some of these people on the list and will hide their prejudice behind some elevated-sounding dogma as they try to remove the names they don't want, as you would do here.

This is why it is important for library admin to take a side and fight for a cause.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 03:12:14 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 07, 2023, 02:43:19 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 06, 2023, 06:06:27 PM
It's not about a book or set of books,  and it's not about the specific things one does or doesn't do to educate a child. It's about who has the authority to decide. This must be, and will be, decided through politics.

It's about censorship. You should be able to go into a library and read Jay Sekulow, James Dobson, Christopher Hitchens, the Dead Kennedys, Catherine Castro, and the Duggars, no problem.

But there are, as always, certain segments of the population who do not want some of these people on the list and will hide their prejudice behind some elevated-sounding dogma as they try to remove the names they don't want, as you would do here.

This is why it is important for library admin to take a side and fight for a cause.

Should, should, should. Other people have different shoulds. They disagree with you. They will fight for a cause.

Separate libraries would do the trick!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on June 07, 2023, 05:06:00 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 03:12:14 PM

Should, should, should. Other people have different shoulds. They disagree with you. They will fight for a cause.

Separate libraries would do the trick!

The trick could also be achieved by people realizing that in a public library intended for the broad community their are going to be items that may not conform to your taste or moral code.

I'm in!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 05:09:13 PM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 07, 2023, 05:06:00 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 03:12:14 PM

Should, should, should. Other people have different shoulds. They disagree with you. They will fight for a cause.

Separate libraries would do the trick!

The trick could also be achieved by people realizing that in a public library intended for the broad community their are going to be items that may not conform to your taste or moral code.

I'm in!

That requires people who don't agree with you to conform to your views. That's what they're not doing.

What's going on here is not about books. It's about how people who disagree with each other can live together peaceably.

Diverse libraries and schools is one way to ensure that nobody has to conform.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 07, 2023, 05:17:40 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 03:12:14 PM
Should, should, should. Other people have different shoulds. They disagree with you. They will fight for a cause.

I know.  We call them bigots and control freaks.  Their "cause" is to shut down anyone who disagrees with them.  That really does not work in our society.

You know, you do have separate libraries at your religious colleges, megachurches, and Christian bookstores. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 07, 2023, 05:20:42 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 05:09:13 PM
What's going on here is not about books. It's about how people who disagree with each other can live together peaceably.

Diverse libraries and schools is one way to ensure that nobody has to conform.

!!!!????

What about the "separate libraries?"
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 05:31:37 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 07, 2023, 05:20:42 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 05:09:13 PM
What's going on here is not about books. It's about how people who disagree with each other can live together peaceably.

Diverse libraries and schools is one way to ensure that nobody has to conform.

!!!!????

What about the "separate libraries?"

"Diverse" libraries means "many different libraries".

Of course some of us  can have these if we pay for them ourselves. Others cannot afford such.. Whether they will be able to will be decided through politics.

QuoteI know.  We call them bigots and control freaks.  Their "cause" is to shut down anyone who disagrees with them.  That really does not work in our society.

Each side can call the other that. It's just name-calling.

So, how to peaceably deal with differences of beliefs? Separate libraries and schools.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on June 07, 2023, 07:25:05 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 05:31:37 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 07, 2023, 05:20:42 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 05:09:13 PM
What's going on here is not about books. It's about how people who disagree with each other can live together peaceably.

Diverse libraries and schools is one way to ensure that nobody has to conform.

!!!!????

What about the "separate libraries?"

"Diverse" libraries means "many different libraries".

Of course some of us  can have these if we pay for them ourselves. Others cannot afford such.. Whether they will be able to will be decided through politics.

QuoteI know.  We call them bigots and control freaks.  Their "cause" is to shut down anyone who disagrees with them.  That really does not work in our society.

Each side can call the other that. It's just name-calling.

So, how to peaceably deal with differences of beliefs? Separate libraries and schools.

Well, how about separate wings of the same library? Or maybe separate shelves? Or maybe (and I know it's crazy) separate books in the same library and don't take out the ones that offend you?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 07:33:23 PM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 07, 2023, 07:25:05 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 05:31:37 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 07, 2023, 05:20:42 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 05:09:13 PM
What's going on here is not about books. It's about how people who disagree with each other can live together peaceably.

Diverse libraries and schools is one way to ensure that nobody has to conform.

!!!!????

What about the "separate libraries?"

"Diverse" libraries means "many different libraries".

Of course some of us  can have these if we pay for them ourselves. Others cannot afford such.. Whether they will be able to will be decided through politics.

QuoteI know.  We call them bigots and control freaks.  Their "cause" is to shut down anyone who disagrees with them.  That really does not work in our society.

Each side can call the other that. It's just name-calling.

So, how to peaceably deal with differences of beliefs? Separate libraries and schools.

Well, how about separate wings of the same library? Or maybe separate shelves? Or maybe (and I know it's crazy) separate books in the same library and don't take out the ones that offend you?

The offensive bit for some is having books they don't like being available. Therefore, there must be separation. Who owns the library?

Berlin Walls between tracts of existing library buildings would work. New buildings far enough apart to prevent cross pollution is easy.

Large warning signs at crossovers within and between buildings: Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter here!

The problem is symmetric. It's about disagreement.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 07, 2023, 08:10:08 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 07:33:23 PM
The offensive bit for some is having books they don't like being available. Therefore, there must be separation. Who owns the library?

Berlin Walls between tracts of existing library buildings would work. New buildings far enough apart to prevent cross pollution is easy.

Large warning signs at crossovers within and between buildings: Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter here!

The problem is symmetric. It's about disagreement.

I can't tell if you are now being satiric. 

You know that you are defending quintessential snowflakes.

Quote
Each side can call the other that. It's just name-calling.

And each side is right.  Don't shut down the Christians.  Don't shut down LGBTQ peeps.

And it is not just name calling.  Bigots and control-freaks are who try to censor. 

The answer to who owns the libraries has been posted multiple times.  It's just not the answer you want.  The idea of separate libraries is ridiculous.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 08:17:31 PM
QuoteThe answer to who owns the libraries has been posted multiple times.  It's just not the answer you want.  The idea of separate libraries is ridiculous.

Hence, the political determination of ownership continues.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 07, 2023, 08:24:35 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 07, 2023, 08:17:31 PM
QuoteThe answer to who owns the libraries has been posted multiple times.  It's just not the answer you want.  The idea of separate libraries is ridiculous.

Hence, the political determination of ownership continues.

Let it continue.  This needs to be hashed out, not surrendered to.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on June 08, 2023, 05:41:51 AM
Please, Wahoo, spare us the Duggars.....tee hee.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 08, 2023, 07:12:20 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on June 08, 2023, 05:41:51 AM
Please, Wahoo, spare us the Duggars.....tee hee.

I'm sorry, but even the Duggars are not spared the Duggars.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on June 08, 2023, 07:30:29 AM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 07, 2023, 07:25:05 PM

Well, how about separate wings of the same library? Or maybe separate shelves? Or maybe (and I know it's crazy) separate books in the same library and don't take out the ones that offend you?

The separate shelves idea has been tried and found unacceptable at one library in our state.  The librarian addressed concerns of parents regarding LGBT items in the children's section by putting the library's LGBT material into its own dedicated special-interest section.  There's nothing inherently sinister or unprecedented about doing this.  Special interest sections of various kinds have been common practice for many years (Our own library has a "Black Authors" section that has been popular with black patrons.  White people use it too).  Bookstores have long had LGBT specialty sections, and been applauded for it.  I'm reasonably sure that some public libraries have already been doing the same thing.  In this case, librarians did not remove, mutilate, or make inaccessible a single item. 

Nonetheless, a local LGBT group has now sued the library claiming that grouping the items into a special-interest section "stigmatizes" them, and therefore constitutes a form a censorship.  Which seems like an extremely broad definition of what constitutes censorship.  The impression this move gives is that the plaintiffs are attempting to punish the library for so much as making a concession toward the other side of the debate.  It looks rather like the same sort of all-or-nothing mentality that demands that materials dealing with LGBT matters be removed from the library entirely.  It's not only what some on this thread seem to regard as "the usual suspects" who are giving librarians a hard time.  We're really being caught in the middle here.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on June 08, 2023, 07:48:08 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 07, 2023, 10:04:45 AM
Quote from: apl68 on June 07, 2023, 07:30:07 AM

This is exactly the sort of contempt for and refusal even to try to understand different points of view

I love you apl, but you've just pointed out the beam in your eye.

I've read your comments.  You are not always accepting of different points of view.

I register disagreement with different points of view.  I also refrain from insulting and belittling them, or calling anybody who doesn't agree with me a fool, a bigot, or a dogmatist.  I do find this sort of treatment of myself and others frustrating, and can't seem to help myself from expressing that frustration now and then.

As far as at least trying to understand other points of view goes, I do earnestly make the attempt.  Including on this matter.  I've read a substantial amount of opinion and personal memoir touching LGBT experience.  I just recently added to the library collection an item dealing with the matter that has some potential to be locally controversial, because it had viewpoints that I felt needed to be represented.  I'm not going to wave a red flag in front of the bull by placing it in the children's area--this particular item isn't for children anyway--or making a commemorative display of it to celebrate Pride Month.  It's here, in our library's catalog, on an ordinary public library shelf, quietly available for those who feel the need for it.

I'm a professional trying to do my professional duty in a cultural minefield.  It's not a situation that lends itself to simple or easy or sweeping answers.  I'm also trying to live out a faith that has values that our society increasingly considers out of step with its emerging mainstream.  That doesn't lend itself to simple or easy or sweeping answers either.  I wish that people would at least acknowledge that much. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on June 08, 2023, 08:03:05 AM
Quote from: apl68 on June 08, 2023, 07:30:29 AM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 07, 2023, 07:25:05 PM

Well, how about separate wings of the same library? Or maybe separate shelves? Or maybe (and I know it's crazy) separate books in the same library and don't take out the ones that offend you?

The separate shelves idea has been tried and found unacceptable at one library in our state.  The librarian addressed concerns of parents regarding LGBT items in the children's section by putting the library's LGBT material into its own dedicated special-interest section.  There's nothing inherently sinister or unprecedented about doing this.  Special interest sections of various kinds have been common practice for many years (Our own library has a "Black Authors" section that has been popular with black patrons.  White people use it too).  Bookstores have long had LGBT specialty sections, and been applauded for it.  I'm reasonably sure that some public libraries have already been doing the same thing.  In this case, librarians did not remove, mutilate, or make inaccessible a single item. 

Nonetheless, a local LGBT group has now sued the library claiming that grouping the items into a special-interest section "stigmatizes" them, and therefore constitutes a form a censorship.  Which seems like an extremely broad definition of what constitutes censorship.  The impression this move gives is that the plaintiffs are attempting to punish the library for so much as making a concession toward the other side of the debate.  It looks rather like the same sort of all-or-nothing mentality that demands that materials dealing with LGBT matters be removed from the library entirely.  It's not only what some on this thread seem to regard as "the usual suspects" who are giving librarians a hard time.  We're really being caught in the middle here.

To be clear, I was being facetious about separate rooms or shelves, trying to move towards the obvious answer of "all the books in one library and don't take out the ones that offend you"
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on June 08, 2023, 09:05:13 AM
Well, to paraphrase Lenny Bruce, when you get into morality, it's always your morality. And then it's not morality anymore; it's mores.

Now I may be missing something, but it doesn't seem feasible or practical to arrange for libraries for every morality and more.

 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on June 08, 2023, 10:08:40 AM
Why does this remind me so much of separate but equal? Just as wrong.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 08, 2023, 11:25:29 AM
Quote from: little bongo on June 08, 2023, 09:05:13 AM

...

Now I may be missing something, but it doesn't seem feasible or practical to arrange for libraries for every morality and more.


There are general bookstores and there are specialized bookstores. Do the same with libraries and there need be no problem.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on June 08, 2023, 02:09:05 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 08, 2023, 11:25:29 AM
Quote from: little bongo on June 08, 2023, 09:05:13 AM

...

Now I may be missing something, but it doesn't seem feasible or practical to arrange for libraries for every morality and more.


There are general bookstores and there are specialized bookstores. Do the same with libraries and there need be no problem.

dismalist, you keep saying all kinds of things are "no problem" when obviously they are huge problems. Given the issues with funding schools, public libraries, and school libraries, where do you think the money would come from to fund 4236 different libraries each catering to a specific subgroup. Plus, the increasing fractionation of our society is a huge problem that is only exacerbated by building bubbles where we never interact with people who disagree with us.

The purpose of education and the purpose of libraries is emphatically not to make everyone comfortable all the time. And in the "my library has books I disagree with" its not even making anyone uncomfortable unless they actively choose to read a book that makes them uncomfortable.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 08, 2023, 02:13:02 PM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 08, 2023, 02:09:05 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 08, 2023, 11:25:29 AM
Quote from: little bongo on June 08, 2023, 09:05:13 AM

...

Now I may be missing something, but it doesn't seem feasible or practical to arrange for libraries for every morality and more.


There are general bookstores and there are specialized bookstores. Do the same with libraries and there need be no problem.

dismalist, you keep saying all kinds of things are "no problem" when obviously they are huge problems. Given the issues with funding schools, public libraries, and school libraries, where do you think the money would come from to fund 4236 different libraries each catering to a specific subgroup. Plus, the increasing fractionation of our society is a huge problem that is only exacerbated by building bubbles where we never interact with people who disagree with us.

The purpose of education and the purpose of libraries is emphatically not to make everyone comfortable all the time. And in the "my library has books I disagree with" its not even making anyone uncomfortable unless they actively choose to read a book that makes them uncomfortable.

There are only problems when some insist on uniformity. Allowing variety is what solves these kinds of problems.

And money is not an issue here -- we already  have all kinds of bookstores. We just need all kinds of libraries.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on June 08, 2023, 02:26:25 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 08, 2023, 02:13:02 PM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 08, 2023, 02:09:05 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 08, 2023, 11:25:29 AM
Quote from: little bongo on June 08, 2023, 09:05:13 AM

...

Now I may be missing something, but it doesn't seem feasible or practical to arrange for libraries for every morality and more.


There are general bookstores and there are specialized bookstores. Do the same with libraries and there need be no problem.

dismalist, you keep saying all kinds of things are "no problem" when obviously they are huge problems. Given the issues with funding schools, public libraries, and school libraries, where do you think the money would come from to fund 4236 different libraries each catering to a specific subgroup. Plus, the increasing fractionation of our society is a huge problem that is only exacerbated by building bubbles where we never interact with people who disagree with us.

The purpose of education and the purpose of libraries is emphatically not to make everyone comfortable all the time. And in the "my library has books I disagree with" its not even making anyone uncomfortable unless they actively choose to read a book that makes them uncomfortable.

There are only problems when some insist on uniformity. Allowing variety is what solves these kinds of problems.

And money is not an issue here -- we already  have all kinds of bookstores. We just need all kinds of libraries.

bookstores = for profit (and we don't really have all kinds. some places can support a few small, specialty bookstores in addition to a big chan one. Many places can't even support a chain one).

libraries = nonpropfit = money needs to come from somewhere. So "we just need to" is a wish, not a realistic plan.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 08, 2023, 02:42:21 PM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 08, 2023, 02:26:25 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 08, 2023, 02:13:02 PM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 08, 2023, 02:09:05 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 08, 2023, 11:25:29 AM
Quote from: little bongo on June 08, 2023, 09:05:13 AM

...

Now I may be missing something, but it doesn't seem feasible or practical to arrange for libraries for every morality and more.


There are general bookstores and there are specialized bookstores. Do the same with libraries and there need be no problem.

dismalist, you keep saying all kinds of things are "no problem" when obviously they are huge problems. Given the issues with funding schools, public libraries, and school libraries, where do you think the money would come from to fund 4236 different libraries each catering to a specific subgroup. Plus, the increasing fractionation of our society is a huge problem that is only exacerbated by building bubbles where we never interact with people who disagree with us.

The purpose of education and the purpose of libraries is emphatically not to make everyone comfortable all the time. And in the "my library has books I disagree with" its not even making anyone uncomfortable unless they actively choose to read a book that makes them uncomfortable.

There are only problems when some insist on uniformity. Allowing variety is what solves these kinds of problems.

And money is not an issue here -- we already  have all kinds of bookstores. We just need all kinds of libraries.

bookstores = for profit (and we don't really have all kinds. some places can support a few small, specialty bookstores in addition to a big chan one. Many places can't even support a chain one).

libraries = nonpropfit = money needs to come from somewhere. So "we just need to" is a wish, not a realistic plan.

The money for libraries is already there. It comes from governments. There is no money problem, just a library problem, or better, a uniformity problem.

I know I have no plan with any chance of being adopted if one looks only at this thread. Outside this thread the expectation cannot be worse. The fighting will continue, and it will be solved politically state-by-state. I only wish it could be solved library by library! :-)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 08, 2023, 08:20:12 PM
You have a silly idea, Big-D, generated no doubt from the sort of conservative hurly-burly brewing in culture by people who want you to be angry at some nebulous, undefined "woke" culture.  I am surprised that someone with your intellect fell for it.  You are implicitly waving a white flag of sorts that no one will ever respond to.

I am sorry for the librarians caught in the middle.  Blame Republican politicians, preachers-cum-politicians, and rightwing propaganda outlets.  Oh, and the bigots who foster a culture of hate and paranoia.

In the meantime, make of this what you will for the hardcore conservative agenda: Even die-hard Republicans are getting fed up with a new conservative school board in Colorado as teachers quit in droves (https://www.insider.com/conservative-colorado-school-board-angering-fellow-republicans-2023-5)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 08, 2023, 08:34:01 PM
Quote from: apl68 on June 08, 2023, 07:48:08 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 07, 2023, 10:04:45 AM
Quote from: apl68 on June 07, 2023, 07:30:07 AM

This is exactly the sort of contempt for and refusal even to try to understand different points of view

I love you apl, but you've just pointed out the beam in your eye.

I've read your comments.  You are not always accepting of different points of view.

I register disagreement with different points of view.  I also refrain from insulting and belittling them, or calling anybody who doesn't agree with me a fool, a bigot, or a dogmatist.  I do find this sort of treatment of myself and others frustrating, and can't seem to help myself from expressing that frustration now and then.

As far as at least trying to understand other points of view goes, I do earnestly make the attempt.  Including on this matter.  I've read a substantial amount of opinion and personal memoir touching LGBT experience.  I just recently added to the library collection an item dealing with the matter that has some potential to be locally controversial, because it had viewpoints that I felt needed to be represented.  I'm not going to wave a red flag in front of the bull by placing it in the children's area--this particular item isn't for children anyway--or making a commemorative display of it to celebrate Pride Month.  It's here, in our library's catalog, on an ordinary public library shelf, quietly available for those who feel the need for it.

I'm a professional trying to do my professional duty in a cultural minefield.  It's not a situation that lends itself to simple or easy or sweeping answers.  I'm also trying to live out a faith that has values that our society increasingly considers out of step with its emerging mainstream.  That doesn't lend itself to simple or easy or sweeping answers either.  I wish that people would at least acknowledge that much.

Again, apl, consider the psychological issues of being an outsider.  Whatever you face is not a fraction of what drag-queens, LGBTQ, and others face.  These people are truly in the crux of the culture wars.  You have a job, they have a life in the crosshairs.

I do remember you complaining that a gay man came to your library and was openly gay, and you wished he would have restrained his open homosexuality.  That's a beam.

And I would never suspect you of assaulting or insulting any LGBTQ to their face; you are not that kind of person at all-----but here you are both implicitly and sometimes explicitly condemning them.  Sorry. 

And yeah, traditional conservative and literalist Christianity is increasingly out of step with modern society.  There has been great good done in the name of Christ, and also great evil.  It is a little hard for moderns to overlook the evil, particularly as it seems to be ongoing. Moderns have their own moral compass, sometimes but not necessarily aligned with traditional ideals of Christianity.  Perhaps if we did not see you as adversarial more of us would reevaluate what we believe.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 08, 2023, 08:46:06 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 08, 2023, 11:25:29 AM
Quote from: little bongo on June 08, 2023, 09:05:13 AM

...

Now I may be missing something, but it doesn't seem feasible or practical to arrange for libraries for every morality and more.


There are general bookstores and there are specialized bookstores. Do the same with libraries and there need be no problem.

Do you really, truly, honestly think the bigots are going to go to bed just because the things they hate are in a separate building!?!?!? 

Come on, man.

The next step is to picket the "woke" libraries.  No one is fooled.  These worlds are already separated by choice, and the wingnuts are still not happy.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on June 09, 2023, 05:17:53 AM
from Wahoo:  "In the meantime, make of this what you will for the hardcore conservative agenda: Even die-hard Republicans are getting fed up with a new conservative school board in Colorado as teachers quit in droves"

I surmise that the school board is quite pleased that teachers are leaving.  OTOH:  If mental health issues are the cause of gun violence, as shouted by the right, then firing school counselors because mental health problems
should be handled at home seems .....
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 09, 2023, 05:56:24 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 08, 2023, 08:34:01 PM
Quote from: apl68 on June 08, 2023, 07:48:08 AM

I'm a professional trying to do my professional duty in a cultural minefield.  It's not a situation that lends itself to simple or easy or sweeping answers.  I'm also trying to live out a faith that has values that our society increasingly considers out of step with its emerging mainstream.  That doesn't lend itself to simple or easy or sweeping answers either.  I wish that people would at least acknowledge that much.

Again, apl, consider the psychological issues of being an outsider.  Whatever you face is not a fraction of what drag-queens, LGBTQ, and others face.  These people are truly in the crux of the culture wars.  You have a job, they have a life in the crosshairs.


The issue, as stated previously, is this:
Quote from: apl68 on June 08, 2023, 07:30:29 AM
The impression this move gives is that the plaintiffs are attempting to punish the library for so much as making a concession toward the other side of the debate.  It looks rather like the same sort of all-or-nothing mentality that demands that materials dealing with LGBT matters be removed from the library entirely.  It's not only what some on this thread seem to regard as "the usual suspects" who are giving librarians a hard time.  We're really being caught in the middle here.

Let me try a couple of examples:

1. Many people are vegan, and believe that eating meat is morally wrong. I don't agree, but I respect their position and if I'm going to dinner with someone who is vegan, I will make sure to choose a place with vegan options. I may even have a vegan meal myself. But I don't feel the need to pretend to be vegan or to share that philosophy.

2. Many people smoke weed. I don't, and I think it's unhealthy in various ways, but I don't offer unsolicited criticism. (If they're smoking in a designated non-smoking area, or smoking while driving, I might, since they would be violating a clear rule or law that applies to everyone.) However, treating them with respect doesn't require me to pretend to agree with their views.

This is the problem with a culture where activists claim things like "You are either a hater or an ally." Being an "ally" implies being totally supportive of whatever someone else thinks, feels, says, or does. (Or more realistically, pretending to do so.)

As long as progressives insist on that level of total agreement as necessary for someone to be considered a decent human being, they're going to be at odds with all kinds of normal people who are moderate and willing to treat others with respect and dignity without having to pretend to drink every drop of Kool-Aid.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on June 09, 2023, 07:33:47 AM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 08, 2023, 08:03:05 AM
Quote from: apl68 on June 08, 2023, 07:30:29 AM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 07, 2023, 07:25:05 PM

Well, how about separate wings of the same library? Or maybe separate shelves? Or maybe (and I know it's crazy) separate books in the same library and don't take out the ones that offend you?

The separate shelves idea has been tried and found unacceptable at one library in our state.  The librarian addressed concerns of parents regarding LGBT items in the children's section by putting the library's LGBT material into its own dedicated special-interest section.  There's nothing inherently sinister or unprecedented about doing this.  Special interest sections of various kinds have been common practice for many years (Our own library has a "Black Authors" section that has been popular with black patrons.  White people use it too).  Bookstores have long had LGBT specialty sections, and been applauded for it.  I'm reasonably sure that some public libraries have already been doing the same thing.  In this case, librarians did not remove, mutilate, or make inaccessible a single item. 

Nonetheless, a local LGBT group has now sued the library claiming that grouping the items into a special-interest section "stigmatizes" them, and therefore constitutes a form a censorship.  Which seems like an extremely broad definition of what constitutes censorship.  The impression this move gives is that the plaintiffs are attempting to punish the library for so much as making a concession toward the other side of the debate.  It looks rather like the same sort of all-or-nothing mentality that demands that materials dealing with LGBT matters be removed from the library entirely.  It's not only what some on this thread seem to regard as "the usual suspects" who are giving librarians a hard time.  We're really being caught in the middle here.

To be clear, I was being facetious about separate rooms or shelves, trying to move towards the obvious answer of "all the books in one library and don't take out the ones that offend you"

The special section that I mentioned was not a separate room, BTW.  It was part of the library's general stacks area.  I don't know precisely where, since I don't work there. 

There have been suggestions that libraries be made to create a separate "adults-only" room that children could be prevented from entering.  The state's librarians are unanimous in opposing that sort of thing.  It's a bad idea for all sorts of reasons.  Something like that could very fairly be accused of stigmatizing or excessively limiting access to materials.  Mainly we're opposing it on the more pragmatic grounds that libraries simply don't have handy unused rooms available for something like that.  We'd have to sacrifice services like community rooms, local history rooms, or study and conference rooms to create an "adults-only"  room.  It's just not feasible.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 09, 2023, 07:38:45 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 09, 2023, 05:56:24 AM

Let me try a couple of examples:

1. Many people are vegan, and believe that eating meat is morally wrong. I don't agree, but I respect their position and if I'm going to dinner with someone who is vegan, I will make sure to choose a place with vegan options. I may even have a vegan meal myself. But I don't feel the need to pretend to be vegan or to share that philosophy.

2. Many people smoke weed. I don't, and I think it's unhealthy in various ways, but I don't offer unsolicited criticism. (If they're smoking in a designated non-smoking area, or smoking while driving, I might, since they would be violating a clear rule or law that applies to everyone.) However, treating them with respect doesn't require me to pretend to agree with their views.

This is the problem with a culture where activists claim things like "You are either a hater or an ally." Being an "ally" implies being totally supportive of whatever someone else thinks, feels, says, or does. (Or more realistically, pretending to do so.)

As long as progressives insist on that level of total agreement as necessary for someone to be considered a decent human being, they're going to be at odds with all kinds of normal people who are moderate and willing to treat others with respect and dignity without having to pretend to drink every drop of Kool-Aid.

It's all the same, Marshman.  You are pretending this is something different than it it.

1.  Fine.  Just don't try to stop vegans being vegans.  And don't pretend that is not what's happening when we discuss LGBTQ rights.  Leave the vegan books on the shelves.

2.  Fine.  Don't smoke weed.  As long as it is legal where you live, mind your own beeswax.  And that is apples and oranges anyway.  Leave High Times in the magazine rack----if you don't want your kids reading it, then be a parent, not a censor.

Fine.  You don't want to be an "ally."  Then keep your bigotry to yourself.  Or at least don't try and legislate your bigotry.

"Progressives" (whoever you think that is) are going to be at odds with you.  As long as bigotry exists, the bigots are going to be at odds with the good, moral people.  It's really kind of up to the bigots in society.  And it is up to you to stop pretending that this is simply a disagreement.  Conservatives are trying to limit what people say; they want the books off the shelves.  It is explicitly NOT just "I don't want to have to pretend that I like you"----that is B.S.  It is actively trying to cancel people. 
And quit with the pretenses. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on June 09, 2023, 07:40:23 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 08, 2023, 02:42:21 PM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 08, 2023, 02:26:25 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 08, 2023, 02:13:02 PM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 08, 2023, 02:09:05 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 08, 2023, 11:25:29 AM
Quote from: little bongo on June 08, 2023, 09:05:13 AM

...

Now I may be missing something, but it doesn't seem feasible or practical to arrange for libraries for every morality and more.


There are general bookstores and there are specialized bookstores. Do the same with libraries and there need be no problem.

dismalist, you keep saying all kinds of things are "no problem" when obviously they are huge problems. Given the issues with funding schools, public libraries, and school libraries, where do you think the money would come from to fund 4236 different libraries each catering to a specific subgroup. Plus, the increasing fractionation of our society is a huge problem that is only exacerbated by building bubbles where we never interact with people who disagree with us.

The purpose of education and the purpose of libraries is emphatically not to make everyone comfortable all the time. And in the "my library has books I disagree with" its not even making anyone uncomfortable unless they actively choose to read a book that makes them uncomfortable.

There are only problems when some insist on uniformity. Allowing variety is what solves these kinds of problems.

And money is not an issue here -- we already  have all kinds of bookstores. We just need all kinds of libraries.

bookstores = for profit (and we don't really have all kinds. some places can support a few small, specialty bookstores in addition to a big chan one. Many places can't even support a chain one).

libraries = nonpropfit = money needs to come from somewhere. So "we just need to" is a wish, not a realistic plan.

The money for libraries is already there. It comes from governments. There is no money problem, just a library problem, or better, a uniformity problem.

I know I have no plan with any chance of being adopted if one looks only at this thread. Outside this thread the expectation cannot be worse. The fighting will continue, and it will be solved politically state-by-state. I only wish it could be solved library by library! :-)


Tell a city that lacks funding to fix the roof on its library or branches that money's not a problem!  Systems with multiple branches do try to tailor services and collections on offer with local needs and requests.  But they can only do this up to a point.  Each branch still has to serve a general range of needs and interests.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 09, 2023, 06:42:48 PM
'A lot to handle': Ohio professor at center of TikTok controversy speaks out (https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/2023/06/09/olivia-krolczyk-professor-university-cincinnati-assignment-failed-women-studies-ohio/70305781007/)

Quote
The adjunct professor in the Women's, Gender and Sexuality Studies department at the University of Cincinnati is the former instructor of Olivia Krolczyk. Krolczyk is the student who created a viral TikTok in which she denounced her professor (unnamed in the video) for giving her a failing grade on an assignment because Krolczyk used the term "biological women."

The video has been covered by the New York Post, News Nation and Fox News, the incident offering a platter of America's culture war issues: transgender rights, free speech and "leftist" professors.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on June 09, 2023, 10:50:16 PM
Exactly what public behavior in a public library is properly seen as beyond the pale, unacceptable, which the library can prevent?   I am talking about things which would be legal in private places, but are inappropriate for non-21+ public venues?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on June 10, 2023, 05:23:12 AM
via apl:   There have been suggestions that libraries be made to create a separate "adults-only" room that children could be prevented from entering. 

Back in the dark ages, when I first got a library card, there was not only a separate room for us non-adults, we also had a different colored card.  I don't remember the magical cross over age.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: apl68 on June 10, 2023, 06:33:12 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on June 10, 2023, 05:23:12 AM
via apl:   There have been suggestions that libraries be made to create a separate "adults-only" room that children could be prevented from entering. 

Back in the dark ages, when I first got a library card, there was not only a separate room for us non-adults, we also had a different colored card.  I don't remember the magical cross over age.

Separate rooms for children and young adults are still pretty common, depending on the size of the library and the decisions made in the design process.  We have an open-plan building with separate community meeting, genealogy/local history, periodical, and book sale rooms, but all the book stacks are in one great big space.  The children's area is a wide-open space easily visible from the circulation desk.  The mostly open plan allows one or two staff members to keep an eye out on pretty much the whole building--but it also means that any story times or other activities in the children's area can be clearly head pretty much everywhere.  Doesn't do much for our peace and quiet sometimes.  Oh well, we don't set much stock with the old idea of a library as a place of tomb-like silence.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 10, 2023, 08:05:07 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 09, 2023, 10:50:16 PM
Exactly what public behavior in a public library is properly seen as beyond the pale, unacceptable, which the library can prevent?   I am talking about things which would be legal in private places, but are inappropriate for non-21+ public venues?

Just come out and say whatever point you want to make, my friend.  The Socratic method is not always exact.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 10, 2023, 10:20:08 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 09, 2023, 06:42:48 PM
'A lot to handle': Ohio professor at center of TikTok controversy speaks out (https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/2023/06/09/olivia-krolczyk-professor-university-cincinnati-assignment-failed-women-studies-ohio/70305781007/)

Quote
The adjunct professor in the Women's, Gender and Sexuality Studies department at the University of Cincinnati is the former instructor of Olivia Krolczyk. Krolczyk is the student who created a viral TikTok in which she denounced her professor (unnamed in the video) for giving her a failing grade on an assignment because Krolczyk used the term "biological women."

The video has been covered by the New York Post, News Nation and Fox News, the incident offering a platter of America's culture war issues: transgender rights, free speech and "leftist" professors.

All, or virtually all, the problems posted on this thread have the same structure. Somebody does something Tribe A thinks is crazy, unjust, moronic, or otherwise. Somebody else does something tribe B is crazy, unjust, moronic, or otherewise. Neither tribe wishes to compromise -- indeed they can't because their views are so strongly held, for whatever reason. 'Twould be like compromising on slavery. Have some slavery? No.

The example from this thread I remember most vividly is of the poor adjunct who got fired for showing a picture of Mohamed. Well, that would not be a problem if each college specified its speech code ahead of time. We have enough colleges to allow true variety. It should be clear that I think that that college was run by a bunch of nut-jobs, but as I don't have to send my kids there, I can let them live, even thrive.

The Ohio case is no different.

There's a another case in the news -- censorship at the Mayo Clinic.

https://go.thefire.org/webmail/869921/1521560553/aab548e604fa8e9f8881a2acf925174bb2997131300a3f1b46bb5c8156600b57 (https://go.thefire.org/webmail/869921/1521560553/aab548e604fa8e9f8881a2acf925174bb2997131300a3f1b46bb5c8156600b57)

Let the Mayo Clinic publish its speech code and those who disagree can work elsewhere.

So the solution is tolerance for differing attitudes and beliefs. This is easy for me so long as I don't have to share them. Would be easy for many others, too. Of course, it would mean that we can't impose our will on each other either.

And, emphatically, no tolerance of the intolerant.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 10, 2023, 01:59:30 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 10, 2023, 10:20:08 AM
So the solution is tolerance for differing attitudes and beliefs. This is easy for me so long as I don't have to share them. Would be easy for many others, too. Of course, it would mean that we can't impose our will on each other either.

And, emphatically, no tolerance of the intolerant.

Hmmmm...I am pretty sure your commentary on this thread has been diametrically opposed to the tenets of culture expoused above.

And it is a pretence---AGAIN!---to claim that you are fine with the way other people live and believe as "long as you don't have to share" their beliefs and lifestyles.  You've tried to give yourself an escape hatch, here, another ploy for victimhood...

In our Western culture no one can force you to accept other people's beliefs.  You can be a Nazi in your private life or join the KKK or even be a member of NAMBLA.  What you will have to face, in these circumstance, is the opprobrium of the majority of society, but you can have those beliefs.  Freedom of speech and thought, not freedom from consequences.

It reminds me of something hilarious I read on Reddit a while back.  I tried to find it, but could not.

The gist of it was a quote that went something like----

"I am not a bigot, but I don't like black people."

This redditor was roundly scorched from all sides for the egregiously hypocrisy and frank cluelessness of their comment.

You cannot have your cake and eat it to.

Fine.  Don't like whatever you don't like.  But if you bring it out into the open be prepared for other people's opinions about what you don't like.  Our culture is strong in fighting down its prejudices, but the battle is not done.  I personally do not care what other people think either as long as they do not try to impose their limitations and prejudices on the public----let's just say, like, I dunno...what a public library can stock on its shelves.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 10, 2023, 02:06:41 PM
BTW, FIRE is right on about the Mayo Clinic.

Quote

Because when he spoke to the press about transgender athletes and COVID-19, he "failed to communicate in accordance with prescribed messaging," which the college claims reflects poorly on its "brand and reputation."

But Dr. Joyner never claimed to represent the college and its faculty, staff, and students. In fact, he's consistently made clear to journalists and his college that he speaks only for himself on matters related to his academic and professional expertise.

Dr. Joyner's refusal to toe the party line is protected by the free speech and academic freedom principles Mayo Clinic claims to value. Faculty like Dr. Joyner are not mouthpieces for their institutions, and they can't be punished for saying things in their personal capacities that administrators dislike.

I obviously feel very strongly about standing up to prejudice.

But I also feel strongly in free speech, and it is a very dangerous precedent to allow our employers to dictate what we think and say off the clock. 

Go FIRE!!!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 10, 2023, 02:21:59 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 10, 2023, 01:59:30 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 10, 2023, 10:20:08 AM
So the solution is tolerance for differing attitudes and beliefs. This is easy for me so long as I don't have to share them. Would be easy for many others, too. Of course, it would mean that we can't impose our will on each other either.

And, emphatically, no tolerance of the intolerant.

Hmmmm...I am pretty sure your commentary on this thread has been diametrically opposed to the tenets of culture expoused above.

And it is a pretence---AGAIN!---to claim that you are fine with the way other people live and believe as "long as you don't have to share" their beliefs and lifestyles.  You've tried to give yourself an escape hatch, here, another ploy for victimhood...

In our Western culture no one can force you to accept other people's beliefs.  You can be a Nazi in your private life or join the KKK or even be a member of NAMBLA.  What you will have to face, in these circumstance, is the opprobrium of the majority of society, but you can have those beliefs.  Freedom of speech and thought, not freedom from consequences.

It reminds me of something hilarious I read on Reddit a while back.  I tried to find it, but could not.

The gist of it was a quote that went something like----

"I am not a bigot, but I don't like black people."

This redditor was roundly scorched from all sides for the egregiously hypocrisy and frank cluelessness of their comment.

You cannot have your cake and eat it to.

Fine.  Don't like whatever you don't like.  But if you bring it out into the open be prepared for other people's opinions about what you don't like.  Our culture is strong in fighting down its prejudices, but the battle is not done.  I personally do not care what other people think either as long as they do not try to impose their limitations and prejudices on the public----let's just say, like, I dunno...what a public library can stock on its shelves.

That's a good example of what I objected to.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 10, 2023, 04:25:03 PM
Yup, I am intolerant of bigotry, no matter how rooted in righteousness.

I'm not alone.  And that is the important thing.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on June 10, 2023, 07:10:24 PM
Aha!  Nazis!  NAMBLAites!   Would it be acceptable for Swastika-clad Nazis or 'I love man-boy sex t-shirt' donning NAMBLAites to come to your library and distribute literature?  Why or why not?  Or even without distributing any lit, hang out in the children's room?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 10, 2023, 07:33:29 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 10, 2023, 07:10:24 PM
Aha!  Nazis!  NAMBLAites!   Would it be acceptable for Swastika-clad Nazis or 'I love man-boy sex t-shirt' donning NAMBLAites to come to your library and distribute literature?  Why or why not?  Or even without distributing any lit, hang out in the children's room?

This example just repeats what's been on this thread, people disagreeing. What I gather is that many want to impose their will, as though there were no problem.

What we have now is the Namblaites making their desires known. The Nazis will not be far behind.

I personally want neither. To get neither, I need my own library and my own college and my own TV channel, and so on. That's desirable and feasible. If a local library or college invites in the Nazis or the Namablaites, let them. No one who doesn't want to has to have anythng to do with them.

People differ.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 10, 2023, 07:56:19 PM
So?  Pay for your own library then.  No one can stop you.  Apparently unable to deal with the rest of society, you feel the need to retreat.  Pick a room in your house; move your books there; voila! 

In your bubble, no one can bother you with ideas of equality.

But again, let us not pretend.  The Nazis are not following my ideology.  I know we always trot out the Nazis for people we disagree with----but I really am talking about Nazis following the homophobic sentiments. 

Video Shows Nazi Protesters With Ron DeSantis 2024 Signs Outside Disney (https://www.newsweek.com/video-shows-nazi-protesters-ron-desantis-2024-signs-outside-disney-1805771)

So sure, wax tragic regarding the thought police that badger your about your personal prejudices, but the Nazis really are in your camp in the real world.

And, BTW, this is why the "live and let live as long as no one tries to force me to like them" really doesn't work.  I am going to call these real live Nazis a bunch of sociopathic, antisemitic, homophobic, racist A-holes----and I am fine if they do not think I am respecting their opinions.  They can also have their own libraries and I am going to call them a bunch of bigots anyway.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 11, 2023, 06:29:27 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 09, 2023, 07:38:45 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 09, 2023, 05:56:24 AM

Let me try a couple of examples:

1. Many people are vegan, and believe that eating meat is morally wrong. I don't agree, but I respect their position and if I'm going to dinner with someone who is vegan, I will make sure to choose a place with vegan options. I may even have a vegan meal myself. But I don't feel the need to pretend to be vegan or to share that philosophy.

2. Many people smoke weed. I don't, and I think it's unhealthy in various ways, but I don't offer unsolicited criticism. (If they're smoking in a designated non-smoking area, or smoking while driving, I might, since they would be violating a clear rule or law that applies to everyone.) However, treating them with respect doesn't require me to pretend to agree with their views.

This is the problem with a culture where activists claim things like "You are either a hater or an ally." Being an "ally" implies being totally supportive of whatever someone else thinks, feels, says, or does. (Or more realistically, pretending to do so.)

As long as progressives insist on that level of total agreement as necessary for someone to be considered a decent human being, they're going to be at odds with all kinds of normal people who are moderate and willing to treat others with respect and dignity without having to pretend to drink every drop of Kool-Aid.

It's all the same, Marshman.  You are pretending this is something different than it it.

1.  Fine.  Just don't try to stop vegans being vegans.  And don't pretend that is not what's happening when we discuss LGBTQ rights.  Leave the vegan books on the shelves.

2.  Fine.  Don't smoke weed.  As long as it is legal where you live, mind your own beeswax.  And that is apples and oranges anyway.  Leave High Times in the magazine rack----if you don't want your kids reading it, then be a parent, not a censor.

Fine.  You don't want to be an "ally."  Then keep your bigotry to yourself.  Or at least don't try and legislate your bigotry.


Please define "bigotry". If bigotry means somebody telling someone else they shouldn't do something, then vegans who tell others they shouldn't eat meat are bigots. Pacifists who tell others they shouldn't serve in the military are bigots. Most people are bigots for saying adults should not have sexual relationships with children. Or is the only distinction between "bigotry" and legitimate speech whether it has sufficient public support? If enough people agree, it's OK; otherwise it's bigotry?

(Or is it like the old saw about pornography; "I know it when I see it"?)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on June 11, 2023, 06:55:52 AM
via APL:  Separate rooms for children and young adults are still pretty common, depending on the size of the library and the decisions made in the design process.   The real difference between now and back in the dark ages is the different library card, which prohibited us from entering the main adult section or checking out any books from there.  The mark of Cain!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 08:27:41 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 11, 2023, 06:29:27 AM
Please define "bigotry". If bigotry means somebody telling someone else they shouldn't do something, then vegans who tell others they shouldn't eat meat are bigots. Pacifists who tell others they shouldn't serve in the military are bigots. Most people are bigots for saying adults should not have sexual relationships with children. Or is the only distinction between "bigotry" and legitimate speech whether it has sufficient public support? If enough people agree, it's OK; otherwise it's bigotry?

(Or is it like the old saw about pornography; "I know it when I see it"?)

You can play dumb games, Marshy, as many people are want to do.  I'm just going to go with the online dictionary (see bolded):

Quote
obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.

Play stupid if you want. 

As far as vegetarianism goes, I do not run into very many vegans or vegetarians who try to ban books.  Sure, I see the "Meat is Murder" signs----but they don't get the Nazis, as do the homophobes, and there are some very good, practical reasons for being vegetarian:

----Cruelty of factory farming (my reason for being a pescatarian)
----Environmental factors of factory farming (including but not limited to water usage, green house gasses, deforestation, and contamination)
----Obesity epidemic (fueled to a large degree by the burger joints) and the protein imbalances in many Americans from overconsumption of meats
----The use of contingent labor
----The amount of grain used to feed chickens and cattle which could feed millions of humans
----And readily available alternatives to dead animals for eating.

The same is true for pacifists (which I am not necessarily) who feel that human beings should not maim and kill other human beings or invade other countries.

The same is true for child sexual abuse for which we have unfortunately more than ample evidence hurts children.

But what we don't have is any evidence that the LGBTQ community poses any threat to anybody----we've actually been over this----at least the LGBTQ community is less dangerous than the Christian community----which we have also been over.

To put it simply, "bigotry" is not simply having an opinion or belief.  It is NOT "somebody telling someone else they shouldn't do something."  It never was, even here.  See above for definition.

Now you can go and pick some more apples to go with the oranges we have here. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 11, 2023, 10:47:07 AM
The state of someone being a vegan, carnivore, cannabis user, atheist, non-White, non-Christian or LGBTQ does not harm or impact anyone else.

However, if an employer, landlord, or realtor refuses to hire, rent an apartment or sell a home to someone simply because they are any or all of the above, then that someone is harmed. That action is being a hater and a bigot.

Being an ally simply means minding your own business and engaging with others based on maximizing microeconomic transactions. Who can do the job, has good credit, or offers the most for the house?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 11, 2023, 10:50:05 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 10, 2023, 07:10:24 PM
Aha!  Nazis!  NAMBLAites!   Would it be acceptable for Swastika-clad Nazis or 'I love man-boy sex t-shirt' donning NAMBLAites to come to your library and distribute literature?  Why or why not?  Or even without distributing any lit, hang out in the children's room?

Because both these groups advocate doing harm.

That's a pretty reasonable standard for refusing to allow entry.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 11:07:06 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 10, 2023, 07:10:24 PM
Aha!  Nazis!  NAMBLAites!   Would it be acceptable for Swastika-clad Nazis or 'I love man-boy sex t-shirt' donning NAMBLAites to come to your library and distribute literature?  Why or why not?  Or even without distributing any lit, hang out in the children's room?

Freedom of speech and thought are very, very dangerous.  Someone will always say something evil. 

That is the price.

So yeah, these people can come to the library.

I know you were thinking I would reply otherwise, but I am not.  NAMBLA has a right to distribute literature, as do the Nazis.

The rest of us have freedom of speech too, and we can tell them to F-Off as is our right!  But we have no right to stop them saying what they want to say.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 11, 2023, 11:16:47 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 11, 2023, 10:50:05 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 10, 2023, 07:10:24 PM
Aha!  Nazis!  NAMBLAites!   Would it be acceptable for Swastika-clad Nazis or 'I love man-boy sex t-shirt' donning NAMBLAites to come to your library and distribute literature?  Why or why not?  Or even without distributing any lit, hang out in the children's room?

Because both these groups advocate doing harm.

That's a pretty reasonable standard for refusing to allow entry.

Ah, corollary to Godwin's Law: The first person to refer to the Nazi's has lost the argument!

Of course there cannot be free entry. The question is: "Who decides?" It all depends on proper governance. In the case of libraries, I envision small groups of citizens close to a library to control the activities of the library. In other words, the library is locally controlled, rather than necessarily by a county or State. That way, one library can keep sex books targeting minors out of the library, and Mein Kampf, too. It may well be the opposite down the road. And the libraries can compete with each other!

Colleges, even State colleges, by and large have independent governance already. Let them promulgate what speech is allowed by whom, and publish it ahead of cancellations and firings. Then see how many students they can attract.

Small is beautiful
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 11:35:19 AM
In other words, Big-D, you DO endorse censorship. Your mechanism are the local bigots, or who you hope are local bigots.  Fair enough.

If you really want to keep children safe, keep the Catholics, the Mormons, and even the Baptists out of the library, physically and philosophically.  Heck, most Christian denominations need to stay well away from the kids.  Again, ask the Duggars.

Who brought up the Nazis first?  If you do a search, they have been mentioned several times----usually by or in relation to Marshwiggle.

But in my case, I am actually referring to REAL live Nazis in the news two days ago supporting DeSantis who has made a campaign of intolerance----I don't think Godwin's law applies here.  If you can link your belief system to an authoritarian politicians who has real live neo-Nazis in his camp, rethink. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 11, 2023, 11:48:25 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 11:35:19 AM
In other words, Big-D, you DO endorse censorship. Your mechanism are the local bigots, or who you hope are local bigots.  Fair enough.

If you really want to keep children safe, keep the Catholics, the Mormons, and even the Baptists out of the library, physically and philosophically.  Heck, most Christian denominations need to stay well away from the kids.  Again, ask the Duggars.

Who brought up the Nazis first?  If you do a search, they have been mentioned several times----usually by or in relation to Marshwiggle.

But in my case, I am actually referring to REAL live Nazis in the news two days ago supporting DeSantis who has made a campaign of intolerance----I don't think Godwin's law applies here.  If you can link your belief system to an authoritarian politicians who has real live neo-Nazis in his camp, rethink.

We clearly differ on many issues. We probably live on different planets.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 01:10:51 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 11, 2023, 11:48:25 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 11:35:19 AM
In other words, Big-D, you DO endorse censorship. Your mechanism are the local bigots, or who you hope are local bigots.  Fair enough.

If you really want to keep children safe, keep the Catholics, the Mormons, and even the Baptists out of the library, physically and philosophically.  Heck, most Christian denominations need to stay well away from the kids.  Again, ask the Duggars.

Who brought up the Nazis first?  If you do a search, they have been mentioned several times----usually by or in relation to Marshwiggle.

But in my case, I am actually referring to REAL live Nazis in the news two days ago supporting DeSantis who has made a campaign of intolerance----I don't think Godwin's law applies here.  If you can link your belief system to an authoritarian politicians who has real live neo-Nazis in his camp, rethink.

We clearly differ on many issues. We probably live on different planets.

Facts, my friend.  Same planet, both of us.  Those statements above are based on facts.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 11, 2023, 03:59:41 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 11:07:06 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 10, 2023, 07:10:24 PM
Aha!  Nazis!  NAMBLAites!   Would it be acceptable for Swastika-clad Nazis or 'I love man-boy sex t-shirt' donning NAMBLAites to come to your library and distribute literature?  Why or why not?  Or even without distributing any lit, hang out in the children's room?

Freedom of speech and thought are very, very dangerous.  Someone will always say something evil. 

That is the price.

So yeah, these people can come to the library.

I know you were thinking I would reply otherwise, but I am not.  NAMBLA has a right to distribute literature, as do the Nazis.

The rest of us have freedom of speech too, and we can tell them to F-Off as is our right!  But we have no right to stop them saying what they want to say.

I would put these groups in the category "Free speech doesn't cover falsely shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater." Or, as Fox News discovered, knowingly presenting lies as truth.

A group that argues for the taking away of rights for others, or threatens their dignity, or attempts to take advantage of people who cannot legally consent to participating in such activities, doesn't have free speech rights.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 05:23:41 PM
You know, ciao, I'm with you.  But think of the arguments people use against the LGBTQ group.  "They're after our kids."  "They want to silence conservative voices."  "They want to destroy [name the traditional belief]."  Posters on this very thread have essentially made these very arguments in one form or another.   The way some people look at it, to disagree is paramount to forcing them to be an "ally" or an attempt to shut them down.

And if you have free speech, you have to make room even for the people you disagree with or who frighten you.  Banning the neo-Nazis from the library actually takes away their rights. 

If they shout "fire" in a crowded library seminar room or knowingly slander or liable someone, we have laws to deal with these situations. 

And we have the right to call them on their bigotry and censorship, just as we have done here.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on June 11, 2023, 07:24:49 PM
OK, simple language for minimum ambiguity: is there no proper role for 'community standards' allowing the censorship of disreputable views, esp in or around the children's area?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 08:58:26 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 11, 2023, 07:24:49 PM
OK, simple language for minimum ambiguity: is there no proper role for 'community standards' allowing the censorship of disreputable views, esp in or around the children's area?

Sure.  Always has been.  Laws too.  No problem.

But (in simple language for minimum ambiguity) these 'community standards' cannot enforce prejudice. 

If 'community standards' have a "Whites Only" policy in the romper room (and some places would enforce this if they could) the 'community standards' need to go out the window. 

Nor can the 'community standards' limit what adults can do----which is really the issue here. 

Or how about this: quit trying to use the kids to enforce your prejudice.  The 'for-God's-sake-won't-someone-think-of-the-children' reasoning is paper thin and not really what all this is about.  Right next to 'the-Nazis-are-next' is the 'save-the-children' strawman. 

Or even more direct, quit scrounging around for egregious reasons to justify prejudice.  The issue here is NOT the children----it is prejudice.  Some people do not like drag queens, trans people, gay people, and bisexual people (among many, many others).  So they try to justify their prejudice in all sorts of ways; when they are desperate, they try to defend the kiddies from some nonexistent boogeyman (or woman).  And it is as old and as tired as the hills.

If the neo-Nazis want to do a story time, call the Nazis a bunch of fascists to their faces, grab your kid, and leave.  Make an example for junior.

As I said, if you are really worried, K16, keep the Catholic priests at bay.  The peeps here really want to ignore that one.



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on June 12, 2023, 05:16:01 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 11, 2023, 11:16:47 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 11, 2023, 10:50:05 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 10, 2023, 07:10:24 PM
Aha!  Nazis!  NAMBLAites!   Would it be acceptable for Swastika-clad Nazis or 'I love man-boy sex t-shirt' donning NAMBLAites to come to your library and distribute literature?  Why or why not?  Or even without distributing any lit, hang out in the children's room?

Because both these groups advocate doing harm.

That's a pretty reasonable standard for refusing to allow entry.

Ah, corollary to Godwin's Law: The first person to refer to the Nazi's has lost the argument!

Of course there cannot be free entry. The question is: "Who decides?" It all depends on proper governance. In the case of libraries, I envision small groups of citizens close to a library to control the activities of the library. In other words, the library is locally controlled, rather than necessarily by a county or State. That way, one library can keep sex books targeting minors out of the library, and Mein Kampf, too. It may well be the opposite down the road. And the libraries can compete with each other!

Colleges, even State colleges, by and large have independent governance already. Let them promulgate what speech is allowed by whom, and publish it ahead of cancellations and firings. Then see how many students they can attract.

Small is beautiful

My library system is county funded.  Nor can I get a library card the next county over.  Even if I wanted to, it would be an hours drive.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 12, 2023, 05:50:03 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 08:27:41 AM

Quote
obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.


"Obstinate" is curious. If adults categorically reject sexual relationships between adults and children, that's certainly obstinate, so I guess that does count as bigotry.

"Unreasonable" is completely in the eye of the beholder. Clearly, anyone assumes their own beliefs are "reasonable", and anyone assumes beliefs they strongly disagree with to be "unreasonable".

So it really does come down to a term used for any beliefs the speaker doesn't like. It's not helpful for actually identifying legitimate concerns that people might have, and tends to imply that none exist.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 12, 2023, 06:13:00 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 11, 2023, 10:47:07 AM
Being an ally simply means minding your own business and engaging with others based on maximizing microeconomic transactions. Who can do the job, has good credit, or offers the most for the house?

That's an odd take. "Minding your own business" traditionally would have meant not being either an ally or an opponent, but doing things like, as you say, "maximizing microeconomic transactions". "Minding your own business" involves not having to express any sort of opinion on anything which is not directly relevant to an action which must be taken or a decision which must be made.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 12, 2023, 08:39:56 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 12, 2023, 05:50:03 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 08:27:41 AM

Quote
obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.


"Obstinate" is curious. If adults categorically reject sexual relationships between adults and children, that's certainly obstinate, so I guess that does count as bigotry.

"Unreasonable" is completely in the eye of the beholder. Clearly, anyone assumes their own beliefs are "reasonable", and anyone assumes beliefs they strongly disagree with to be "unreasonable".

So it really does come down to a term used for any beliefs the speaker doesn't like. It's not helpful for actually identifying legitimate concerns that people might have, and tends to imply that none exist.

It's simple, Marshy.  You are looking to rationalize your own prejudice.

As I posted, as we all know, the problem with adult/child sexual relationships is that we know it damages the child.  This belief is not a "prejudice."  This belief is a well documented phenomenon.

Certainly you can see this, right?  Or are you just being obstinate?  Those are not rhetorical questions.  I'm actually asking.  Do you really think it is a "prejudice" to oppose pedophilia?  I'm actually asking.  Don't run away.

Should we allow Catholic priests in the company of children?  This is not a rhetorical question.  I'm actually asking.  Are you going to ignore that?

If you have a problem with LGBTQ----for whom we have no evidence of harm any more than any other demographic----you have an unreasonable prejudice based upon no evidence.

It's a distant relation, but this is your cousin:

Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/comments/14706v3/im_not_a_racist_but/)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 12, 2023, 09:18:06 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on June 12, 2023, 05:16:01 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 11, 2023, 11:16:47 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 11, 2023, 10:50:05 AM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 10, 2023, 07:10:24 PM
Aha!  Nazis!  NAMBLAites!   Would it be acceptable for Swastika-clad Nazis or 'I love man-boy sex t-shirt' donning NAMBLAites to come to your library and distribute literature?  Why or why not?  Or even without distributing any lit, hang out in the children's room?

Because both these groups advocate doing harm.

That's a pretty reasonable standard for refusing to allow entry.

Ah, corollary to Godwin's Law: The first person to refer to the Nazi's has lost the argument!

Of course there cannot be free entry. The question is: "Who decides?" It all depends on proper governance. In the case of libraries, I envision small groups of citizens close to a library to control the activities of the library. In other words, the library is locally controlled, rather than necessarily by a county or State. That way, one library can keep sex books targeting minors out of the library, and Mein Kampf, too. It may well be the opposite down the road. And the libraries can compete with each other!

Colleges, even State colleges, by and large have independent governance already. Let them promulgate what speech is allowed by whom, and publish it ahead of cancellations and firings. Then see how many students they can attract.

Small is beautiful

My library system is county funded.  Nor can I get a library card the next county over.  Even if I wanted to, it would be an hours drive.

On-line libraries can overcome the transport costs.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 12, 2023, 10:40:53 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 12, 2023, 06:13:00 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 11, 2023, 10:47:07 AM
Being an ally simply means minding your own business and engaging with others based on maximizing microeconomic transactions. Who can do the job, has good credit, or offers the most for the house?

That's an odd take. "Minding your own business" traditionally would have meant not being either an ally or an opponent, but doing things like, as you say, "maximizing microeconomic transactions". "Minding your own business" involves not having to express any sort of opinion on anything which is not directly relevant to an action which must be taken or a decision which must be made.

Right. It's none of your business what race, religion, or sexual orientation someone has. So even if you have an opinion, you don't get to express it. I don't run up to every Black, Muslim and/or queer person I see in life and say I AFFIRM YOUR RIGHT TO BE YOU!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 12, 2023, 10:48:40 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 12, 2023, 10:40:53 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 12, 2023, 06:13:00 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 11, 2023, 10:47:07 AM
Being an ally simply means minding your own business and engaging with others based on maximizing microeconomic transactions. Who can do the job, has good credit, or offers the most for the house?

That's an odd take. "Minding your own business" traditionally would have meant not being either an ally or an opponent, but doing things like, as you say, "maximizing microeconomic transactions". "Minding your own business" involves not having to express any sort of opinion on anything which is not directly relevant to an action which must be taken or a decision which must be made.

Right. It's none of your business what race, religion, or sexual orientation someone has. So even if you have an opinion, you don't get to express it. I don't run up to every Black, Muslim and/or queer person I see in life and say I AFFIRM YOUR RIGHT TO BE YOU!

Upvote!

Why would you even feel you have to have an opinion on he way other good, healthy, law-abiding people live their lives? 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 12, 2023, 10:49:52 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 05:23:41 PM
You know, ciao, I'm with you.  But think of the arguments people use against the LGBTQ group.  "They're after our kids."  "They want to silence conservative voices."  "They want to destroy [name the traditional belief]."  Posters on this very thread have essentially made these very arguments in one form or another.   The way some people look at it, to disagree is paramount to forcing them to be an "ally" or an attempt to shut them down.

And if you have free speech, you have to make room even for the people you disagree with or who frighten you.  Banning the neo-Nazis from the library actually takes away their rights. 

If they shout "fire" in a crowded library seminar room or knowingly slander or liable someone, we have laws to deal with these situations. 

And we have the right to call them on their bigotry and censorship, just as we have done here.

Fair enough.

Still, if someone believes that someone is causing harm, focus on that specific action. Don't say that it's not okay to ever be gay, live in a neighborhood while being gay, or vote while being gay. Because simply being does not "groom" children.

Just because one Jewish person made a questionable business decision doesn't mean all are in a secret cabal controlling the media and banks and need to be removed. Just because one person took offense at something another said does not mean that person is trying to "silence all conservative voices."

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 12, 2023, 11:16:24 AM
Totally agree.  But again, we already have mechanisms in place to deal with things like libel, assault, child abuse, etc.

What we need to stay away from are mechanisms that shut down belief and expression. 

Remember, any time we institute rules, we, like Trump, may find those rules used against us.  If you have laws that limit what a neo-Nazi says, those laws can probably be applied to you.  Plus limits just drive bad people underground where they actually become stronger, more fanatical, and more sectarian.

We always think we can just silence the bad people, but it does not work that way.  And censoring even the bad people is wrong.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 12, 2023, 11:35:17 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 12, 2023, 11:16:24 AM
Totally agree.  But again, we already have mechanisms in place to deal with things like libel, assault, child abuse, etc.

What we need to stay away from are mechanisms that shut down belief and expression. 

Remember, any time we institute rules, we, like Trump, may find those rules used against us.  If you have laws that limit what a neo-Nazi says, those laws can probably be applied to you.  Plus limits just drive bad people underground where they actually become stronger, more fanatical, and more sectarian.

We always think we can just silence the bad people, but it does not work that way.  And censoring even the bad people is wrong.

Is marching around with a sign inciting violence against a particular group of people a form of assault?

Or if that sign says they are inferior, disease-riddled beings that should not be allowed to live in polite society, is that a form of libel?

And if children see those signs that say these things against their own communities or their parents' identities, is that not child abuse?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: kaysixteen on June 12, 2023, 12:38:31 PM
Keep all Catholic priests away from children?  Really?   You didn't actually just say that, did you?

Remember that although a small minority of RC priests are/have been pedophiles, and assorted corrupt bishops did cover for them, most RC priests have never been pedophiles (although many are homosexuals), and, of course and most centrally, the RCC does not teach that any form of child-adult sex is acceptable, whereas that is exactly the teaching of NAMBLA.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 12, 2023, 01:05:01 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 12, 2023, 08:39:56 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 12, 2023, 05:50:03 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 08:27:41 AM
Quoteobstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.


"Obstinate" is curious. If adults categorically reject sexual relationships between adults and children, that's certainly obstinate, so I guess that does count as bigotry.

"Unreasonable" is completely in the eye of the beholder. Clearly, anyone assumes their own beliefs are "reasonable", and anyone assumes beliefs they strongly disagree with to be "unreasonable".

So it really does come down to a term used for any beliefs the speaker doesn't like. It's not helpful for actually identifying legitimate concerns that people might have, and tends to imply that none exist.

It's simple, Marshy.  You are looking to rationalize your own prejudice.

As I posted, as we all know, the problem with adult/child sexual relationships is that we know it damages the child.  This belief is not a "prejudice."  This belief is a well documented phenomenon.

Certainly you can see this, right?  Or are you just being obstinate?  Those are not rhetorical questions.  I'm actually asking.  Do you really think it is a "prejudice" to oppose pedophilia?  I'm actually asking.  Don't run away.

No, I don't think it is "prejudice" to oppose pedophilia. Neither do I think it is "prejudice" to say it's wrong to administer "puberty-blockers" to children. I don't think it's "prejudice" to say biological males should not be put in womens' prisons, or compete in womens' sports, or be allowed in womens' shelters.



QuoteShould we allow Catholic priests in the company of children?  This is not a rhetorical question.  I'm actually asking.  Are you going to ignore that?


Priests, teachers, coaches, scout leaders, etc. should all have the same kind of vetting and precautions taken. Most organizations now have policies and procedures in place to reduce the risk of theses things, but even still parents should not let their kids be in situations where they are alone with some adult other than a trusted family member. That goes for adults in all of the categories above.

QuoteIf you have a problem with LGBTQ----for whom we have no evidence of harm any more than any other demographic----you have an unreasonable prejudice based upon no evidence.


"A problem" is way too vague to be useful. I gave examples above of specific situations that I take issue with. I probably have at least "a" problem with every organization, institution, political party, etc. that I know of.
And I would assume anyone that knows me very well would have at least "a" problem with something I think or do.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on June 12, 2023, 01:22:59 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 12, 2023, 12:38:31 PMKeep all Catholic priests away from children?  Really?   You didn't actually just say that, did you?

Remember that although a small minority of RC priests are/have been pedophiles, and assorted corrupt bishops did cover for them, most RC priests have never been pedophiles (although many are homosexuals), and, of course and most centrally, the RCC does not teach that any form of child-adult sex is acceptable, whereas that is exactly the teaching of NAMBLA.

I thought that was satiric, as in "all gays are pedophiles", or "all librarians are groomers".
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on June 12, 2023, 01:58:16 PM
Sorry for the double. WaPo Editors on this issue as it pertains to rewriting: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/06/12/books-editing-retouching-free-expression/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 12, 2023, 03:28:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 12, 2023, 01:05:01 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 12, 2023, 08:39:56 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 12, 2023, 05:50:03 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 08:27:41 AM
Quoteobstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.


"Obstinate" is curious. If adults categorically reject sexual relationships between adults and children, that's certainly obstinate, so I guess that does count as bigotry.

"Unreasonable" is completely in the eye of the beholder. Clearly, anyone assumes their own beliefs are "reasonable", and anyone assumes beliefs they strongly disagree with to be "unreasonable".

So it really does come down to a term used for any beliefs the speaker doesn't like. It's not helpful for actually identifying legitimate concerns that people might have, and tends to imply that none exist.

It's simple, Marshy.  You are looking to rationalize your own prejudice.

As I posted, as we all know, the problem with adult/child sexual relationships is that we know it damages the child.  This belief is not a "prejudice."  This belief is a well documented phenomenon.

Certainly you can see this, right?  Or are you just being obstinate?  Those are not rhetorical questions.  I'm actually asking.  Do you really think it is a "prejudice" to oppose pedophilia?  I'm actually asking.  Don't run away.

No, I don't think it is "prejudice" to oppose pedophilia. Neither do I think it is "prejudice" to say it's wrong to administer "puberty-blockers" to children. I don't think it's "prejudice" to say biological males should not be put in womens' prisons, or compete in womens' sports, or be allowed in womens' shelters.



QuoteShould we allow Catholic priests in the company of children?  This is not a rhetorical question.  I'm actually asking.  Are you going to ignore that?


Priests, teachers, coaches, scout leaders, etc. should all have the same kind of vetting and precautions taken. Most organizations now have policies and procedures in place to reduce the risk of theses things, but even still parents should not let their kids be in situations where they are alone with some adult other than a trusted family member. That goes for adults in all of the categories above.

QuoteIf you have a problem with LGBTQ----for whom we have no evidence of harm any more than any other demographic----you have an unreasonable prejudice based upon no evidence.


"A problem" is way too vague to be useful. I gave examples above of specific situations that I take issue with. I probably have at least "a" problem with every organization, institution, political party, etc. that I know of.
And I would assume anyone that knows me very well would have at least "a" problem with something I think or do.


We tread a lot of water here. 

The things you object to above have nothing to do with libraries, are anomalies, are fair to object to, and (again) are very rare anomalies and thus not really worth objecting to.  Most people agree with your objections, myself including.  And that is not what I am talking about.  You had to dig really hard to find something to object to, didn't you?

And yes, try not to point out the obvious. Yes, parents should try to protect their kids. Yes, all organizations have abuse (including high ed).  But the Catholic church has a massive, generational, and pervasive problem with child abuse. Nice try sidestepping the issue, but if there is one demographic that should be banned from working with kids in the library, it is not the drag queens.  Do you disagree?

Have I read you wrong, Marshbeast?  If the issue does not involve sports, bathrooms, or prisons, are you okay with the LGBTQ community?  Honest not rhetorical questions: is it okay with you to have Heather Has Two Mommies on your public library shelves, and would you be okay with a drag queen reading during a story hour at your local public library?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 12, 2023, 03:35:34 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 12, 2023, 11:35:17 AMIs marching around with a sign inciting violence against a particular group of people a form of assault?

No.

These people can be held accountable if they do indeed cite violence.  But not their language.

QuoteOr if that sign says they are inferior, disease-riddled beings that should not be allowed to live in polite society, is that a form of libel?

I don't believe expression can be libel if it is a form of opinion.  Hateful, yes, libel, no.

Someone with a law degree might correct me.

QuoteAnd if children see those signs that say these things against their own communities or their parents' identities, is that not child abuse?

No.  Again, it is a hateful, terrible thing, but not abuse.  I certainly don't think you can be arrested for these things.  And, as always, we cannot use children for an excuse to limit what adults say and do.  Remember that the objection to the drag queens are the damage they do to children.  The reason for the attempts to outlaw CRT is the spurious defense of children. 
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 12, 2023, 03:45:25 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 12, 2023, 12:38:31 PMKeep all Catholic priests away from children?  Really?   You didn't actually just say that, did you?

Yes, I did.

Do you seriously have no idea how big the problem is!?!?!

QuoteRemember that although a small minority of RC priests are/have been pedophiles, and assorted corrupt bishops did cover for them, most RC priests have never been pedophiles (although many are homosexuals), and, of course and most centrally, the RCC does not teach that any form of child-adult sex is acceptable, whereas that is exactly the teaching of NAMBLA.

The point is, my friend, that if you are rightfully worried about NAMBLA then you should be doubly worried about the Catholic church. The problem with Catholic pedophilia is centuries old and worldwide.  Do not bury your head in the sand.

I'll refer to Wikipedia because it is easiest; you may challenge their facts if you like:

QuoteBy the 1990s, the cases began to receive significant media and public attention in countries including in Canada, United States, Chile, Australia and Ireland, and much of Europe and South America.[11][12][13] In 2002, an investigation by The Boston Globe led to widespread media coverage of the issue in the United States. Widespread abuse has been exposed in Europe, Australia, Chile, and the United States, reflecting worldwide patterns of long-term abuse as well as the Church hierarchy's pattern of regularly covering up reports of abuse.[note 1]

From 2001 to 2010, the Holy See examined sex abuse cases involving about 3,000 priests, some of which dated back fifty years.[14] Diocesan officials and academics knowledgeable about the Catholic Church say that sexual abuse by clergy is generally not discussed, and thus is difficult to measure.[15] Members of the Church's hierarchy have argued that media coverage was excessive and disproportionate, and that such abuse also takes place in other religions and institutions, a stance that dismayed critics who saw it as a device to avoid resolving the abuse problem within the Church.[16]

****

Sexual abuse in the Catholic Church has been reported as far back as the 11th century, when Peter Damian wrote the treatise Liber Gomorrhianus against such abuses and others. In the late 15th century, Katharina von Zimmern and her sister were removed from their abbey to live in their family's house for a while partly because the young girls were molested by priests.[30] In 1531, Martin Luther claimed that Pope Leo X had vetoed a measure that cardinals should restrict the number of boys they kept for their pleasure, "otherwise it would have been spread throughout the world how openly and shamelessly the Pope and the cardinals in Rome practice sodomy."[31]

****

On 3 October 2021, an independent commission set up by the Bishops' Conference of France released a report[205] estimating that the ranks of the 115,000 Catholic priests and other religious officials in France since the 1950s have included about 3,000 abusers.[206][207] The report estimates that 216,000 children were abused by Catholic priests between 1950 and 2020, and that accounting for abuse by other Catholic church employees increases the total number to around 330,000.[208] Around 80% of the victims were boys.[209]

****

The Associated Press estimated the settlements of US Church sex abuse cases from 1950 to 2007 totaled more than US$2 billion.[105] The figure was more than $3 billion in 2012 according to BishopAccountability.[62][101]
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 13, 2023, 05:31:46 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 12, 2023, 03:28:22 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 12, 2023, 01:05:01 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 12, 2023, 08:39:56 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 12, 2023, 05:50:03 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 11, 2023, 08:27:41 AM
Quoteobstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.


"Obstinate" is curious. If adults categorically reject sexual relationships between adults and children, that's certainly obstinate, so I guess that does count as bigotry.

"Unreasonable" is completely in the eye of the beholder. Clearly, anyone assumes their own beliefs are "reasonable", and anyone assumes beliefs they strongly disagree with to be "unreasonable".

So it really does come down to a term used for any beliefs the speaker doesn't like. It's not helpful for actually identifying legitimate concerns that people might have, and tends to imply that none exist.

It's simple, Marshy.  You are looking to rationalize your own prejudice.

As I posted, as we all know, the problem with adult/child sexual relationships is that we know it damages the child.  This belief is not a "prejudice."  This belief is a well documented phenomenon.

Certainly you can see this, right?  Or are you just being obstinate?  Those are not rhetorical questions.  I'm actually asking.  Do you really think it is a "prejudice" to oppose pedophilia?  I'm actually asking.  Don't run away.

No, I don't think it is "prejudice" to oppose pedophilia. Neither do I think it is "prejudice" to say it's wrong to administer "puberty-blockers" to children. I don't think it's "prejudice" to say biological males should not be put in womens' prisons, or compete in womens' sports, or be allowed in womens' shelters.



QuoteShould we allow Catholic priests in the company of children?  This is not a rhetorical question.  I'm actually asking.  Are you going to ignore that?


Priests, teachers, coaches, scout leaders, etc. should all have the same kind of vetting and precautions taken. Most organizations now have policies and procedures in place to reduce the risk of theses things, but even still parents should not let their kids be in situations where they are alone with some adult other than a trusted family member. That goes for adults in all of the categories above.

QuoteIf you have a problem with LGBTQ----for whom we have no evidence of harm any more than any other demographic----you have an unreasonable prejudice based upon no evidence.


"A problem" is way too vague to be useful. I gave examples above of specific situations that I take issue with. I probably have at least "a" problem with every organization, institution, political party, etc. that I know of.
And I would assume anyone that knows me very well would have at least "a" problem with something I think or do.


We tread a lot of water here. 

The things you object to above have nothing to do with libraries, are anomalies, are fair to object to, and (again) are very rare anomalies and thus not really worth objecting to.  Most people agree with your objections, myself including.

But it's considered "bigoted" to raise those issues at all. If the activists would admit that those are totally legitimate concerns, and the law should reflect that, then much of the conflict would disappear.

QuoteAnd that is not what I am talking about.  You had to dig really hard to find something to object to, didn't you?

As above, it's precisely the "all or nothing" stance demanded by the activists that means these kinds of issues aren't even supposed to be discussed publicly. It's not "digging"; it's pointing out the problem with the totally inflexible rules about what "support" is supposed to mean. As I said, if the activists accepted these real concerns and addressed them, this wouldn't be nearly the conflict it is.



QuoteAnd yes, try not to point out the obvious. Yes, parents should try to protect their kids. Yes, all organizations have abuse (including high ed).  But the Catholic church has a massive, generational, and pervasive problem with child abuse. Nice try sidestepping the issue, but if there is one demographic that should be banned from working with kids in the library, it is not the drag queens.  Do you disagree?

Have I read you wrong, Marshbeast?  If the issue does not involve sports, bathrooms, or prisons, are you okay with the LGBTQ community?  Honest not rhetorical questions: is it okay with you to have Heather Has Two Mommies on your public library shelves, and would you be okay with a drag queen reading during a story hour at your local public library?

What consenting adults do in their own homes is their own business. I think the vast majority of people believe this, and I think you'd find (in any western country) a very small portion of the population favouring criminalization of homosexual activity (for instance) between consenting adults. Similarly, I imagine you'd find a very small portion who would criminalize how people dress, other than the existing kinds of laws about public nudity, etc.

Drag queen story time has the same problem as things like BDSM displays in Pride parades which are supposed to be "family-friendly"; it sexualizes content and situations for children who are young enough that it doesn't really belong on their radar at all. Heterosexual displays that are similarly explicit also don't belong in those settings for the same reason.

(Just a side note: It's recognized as normal that some kids (and even adults) are freaked out by clowns. Why isn't is similarly OK to be freaked out by a guy with a full beard in a dress? It's a similarly incongruous sight. And the clowns aren't supposed to be dangerous either, but their strange appearance is unsettling.)

So I'm not going to protest "Heather Has Two Mommies" being on the library shelves, although I have the same issue with its being read to young children *in school as for drag queen story time; it makes sexuality a much more explicit issue for children who are young enough that it shouldn't be on their radar yet. (And if the "fair" alternative would be to avoid having readings from any books like that including ones with heterosexual parents, I'd be OK with that. Until it is time to explain human reproduction to children, sexuality shouldn't be introduced in any other context.)


*I make a big distinction between things children can access, and things that adults expose them to when they are a captive audience. Adults in those situations always have an ideological agenda, whether liberal or conservative.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 13, 2023, 09:15:33 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 13, 2023, 05:31:46 AMBut it's considered "bigoted" to raise those issues at all.

Which "issues" in particular?  Trans men on women's teams?  No, a majority think men-at-birth should not compete on women's teams.  You too can look this stuff up:

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/29/1107484965/transgender-athletes-trans-rights-gender-transition-poll

But again (and I cannot tell if you are being obstinate, sidestepping, or obtuse), these are very rare problems.  Most of us are concerned with bigger issues dealing with LGBTQ rights.

QuoteIf the activists would admit that those are totally legitimate concerns, and the law should reflect that, then much of the conflict would disappear.

Bullshit.  There are very few actual, real world problems with LQBTQ people, certainly less than cisgender men (look up crime stats by gender; look up violence in particular; look up the amount of damage men do) and less than, you guessed it, Catholic priests.

No Marshy, you are a good man, I am sure, but your fixation on a few minor issues that only affect a tiny percent of any population is a bit, well, bigoted.  You are looking for a reason to object.

QuoteAs above, it's precisely the "all or nothing" stance demanded by the activists that means these kinds of issues aren't even supposed to be discussed publicly. It's not "digging"; it's pointing out the problem with the totally inflexible rules about what "support" is supposed to mean. As I said, if the activists accepted these real concerns and addressed them, this wouldn't be nearly the conflict it is.

More B.S. strawmaning, my friend.

Now we are blaming "activists" for not worrying enough about a swim team.

QuoteDrag queen story time has the same problem as things like BDSM displays in Pride parades which are supposed to be "family-friendly"; it sexualizes content and situations for children who are young enough that it doesn't really belong on their radar at all. Heterosexual displays that are similarly explicit also don't belong in those settings for the same reason.

Wait, wait, wait...

How does a drag queen "sexualize" anything if they are wearing publicly appropriate attire?

Wearing a dress and makeup "sexualizes" someone?

That's YOUR hangup, Marshman. 

Quote(Why isn't is similarly OK to be freaked out by a guy with a full beard in a dress? It's a similarly incongruous sight. And the clowns aren't supposed to be dangerous either, but their strange appearance is unsettling.)

"I'm not a bigot, but..."

I do so love your comparisons.

Again, YOU'RE the one with the hangup.  I think you need to deal with it.

Quoteit makes sexuality a much more explicit issue for children who are young enough that it shouldn't be on their radar yet. (And if the "fair" alternative would be to avoid having readings from any books like that including ones with heterosexual parents, I'd be OK with that. Until it is time to explain human reproduction to children, sexuality shouldn't be introduced in any other context.)

So..."Heather Has Two Mommies" has sex in it?

Nope.  Sure doesn't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHPELRbTINk

YOU are fixated on the sexuality of these folks.  Not me.  Not the kids.  YOU.

Every one of your objections is you projecting your hangups.  This is pure bigotry, buddy.  Plain and simple.

Quote*I make a big distinction between things children can access, and things that adults expose them to when they are a captive audience. Adults in those situations always have an ideological agenda, whether liberal or conservative.


Good reason not to take your kids to church, huh?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 13, 2023, 09:58:46 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 13, 2023, 05:31:46 AMBut it's considered "bigoted" to raise those issues at all. If the activists would admit that those are totally legitimate concerns, and the law should reflect that, then much of the conflict would disappear.


It's not "bigoted" to raise an issue if one is thoughtful and respectful of the people involved.

For example, wondering about the inherent physical differences of a post-pubescent transgender woman in a sport is a fair question.

Oddly enough, these were similar reasons that sports were segregated back in the day. In a similar way, we decided that performance in sports was partly but not entirely based on different individual physical characteristics and there was no way to completely eliminate these differences. Hence, plenty of diversity on sports teams today.

Accusing a woman of changing genders just so she can get an athletic scholarship/ gold medal/ Wheaties box is clueless at best. Much easier and less stressful ways to pay for college or achieve fame and fortune.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Diogenes on June 13, 2023, 10:19:21 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 13, 2023, 05:31:46 AMDrag queen story time has the same problem as things like BDSM displays in Pride parades which are supposed to be "family-friendly"; it sexualizes content and situations for children who are young enough that it doesn't really belong on their radar at all. Heterosexual displays that are similarly explicit also don't belong in those settings for the same reason.



Little Shop of Horrors has overt references to BDSM.

Ursula from The Little Mermaid is modeled after the famous drag queen Divine.

You should ask yourself- why are people performing such outrage now about such things? Is it due to a sincere concern for the well being of children, or is it a tool to rally a base and demonize their perceived enemies?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: nebo113 on June 13, 2023, 11:28:53 AM
Marshwiggle said I don't think it's "prejudice" to say biological males should not be put in womens' prisons, or compete in womens' sports, or be allowed in womens' shelters.
  Please operationally define "biological male", keeping in mind that some births are intersexed.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on June 13, 2023, 11:42:09 AM
Here is a vivid description of what anti-woke can lead to from 2013:https://slate.com/culture/2023/06/megyn-kelly-white-santa-aisha-harris-wannabe.html
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on June 13, 2023, 11:48:57 AM
And, I agree with Wahoo completely that the Nazi types such as those outside Disney (and remember Skokie?) you should be allowed the freedom to express their idiocy and hatred. But, as stated eloquently in this USA Today piece it HAS to be called out as reprehensible.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/health-wellness/2023/06/13/ron-desantis-disney-world-nazis-the-truth-about-hate/70314668007/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 13, 2023, 12:18:27 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on June 13, 2023, 11:48:57 AMas stated eloquently in this USA Today piece it HAS to be called out as reprehensible.

ABSOLUTELY right on!

And that is specifically what I am agitating for. 

Let them speak.

Speak back.

Freedom of speech.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 13, 2023, 05:34:10 PM
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 12, 2023, 12:38:31 PMKeep all Catholic priests away from children?  Really?   You didn't actually just say that, did you?

Disgraced Michigan priest sentenced to jail, probation in sex abuse case (https://www.mlive.com/news/flint/2023/06/disgraced-michigan-priest-sentenced-to-jail-probation-in-sex-abuse-case.html)

I know it is painful, but look objectively.  This sounds like Brock Turner 2.0 to me.  A single year!!!!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 14, 2023, 05:35:02 AM
Quote from: nebo113 on June 13, 2023, 11:28:53 AMMarshwiggle said I don't think it's "prejudice" to say biological males should not be put in womens' prisons, or compete in womens' sports, or be allowed in womens' shelters.
  Please operationally define "biological male", keeping in mind that some births are intersexed.

I'll let Wahoo explain that by what he calls "men-at-birth".

Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 13, 2023, 09:15:33 AMTrans men on women's teams?  No, a majority think men-at-birth should not compete on women's teams. 

Intersex refers to a very small and fixed portion of the population with objectively diagnosable medical conditions, so it isn't subject to fad or social contagion. (In fact it seems that many/most intersex people don't know they are in any way unusual until some sort of medical issue arises which leads to a diagnosis.) Since they represent a fixed portion of the population, they can be dealt with on a rational basis since there's no danger of them becoming a trendy thing. (And many of those medical conditions have effects like making people infertile, which they would rather not have. Being intersex is not something anyone chooses.)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: little bongo on June 14, 2023, 07:49:22 AM
Marshwiggle's sophistry regarding the nature and definition of bigotry has me thinking quite a bit. On the one hand, you feel kind of bad for the guy--all those hang-ups about sexualizing children with "Heather Has Two Mommies" and fear of story-time leaders dressed in drag must be taxing things to carry on one's psyche. On the other hand, you feel like congratulating him for having no real problems in life, if he's got all this spare time to worry about such low-to no-stakes trivia.

I've been thinking about bigotry, one way or another, for a long time now. I've been very impatient with bigots, having the attitude of, "Well, dude, just stop being a bigot." But I'm starting to see that it's more complicated than that, as I examine my own myriad prejudices. What does it mean to perform outrage (bigot's version of "virtue-signaling") against those who aren't hurting anyone?

I think that 1) it's tough to be a bigot; 2) it's tough to acknowledge one's bigotry; and 3) it's tough to stop being a bigot. I'm reminded now of "Archie Bunker's Place," the spin-off to "All in the Family" that ran for several seasons in the 1980s. Now, this wasn't a great, ground-breaking show the way "All in the Family" was, nor was it even that funny most of the time. But it did tell an interesting story of a man who's lived most of his life with pronounced bigotry, and is finally starting to realize that his views offend and hurt those he loves and respects, and may even have deeper repercussions in the world he lives in. He spends most of the run of this show trying his damndest to stop being a bigot. He fails, sometimes humorously, most of the time--a lot of the humor stems from Archie saying something cringey while he's sure he's being accepting and inclusive. And while he fails, he gets called on his bigotry again--very few people appreciate that he's trying, which is quite true to life--you don't get a cookie for your attempts to correct your bigotry. It's hard, daily work, and you often have to start all over again after making a mistake. But Archie does indeed keep trying. In fact, a lot of us are not as advanced as Archie is in this particular stage of his character.

So, to all of us bigots on the thread, let's see if we can be as smart as Archie Bunker was in 1982. Let's recognize our bigotry, and let's recognize that it's worth the effort to correct it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 14, 2023, 08:23:04 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 14, 2023, 05:35:02 AMI'll let Wahoo explain that by what he calls "men-at-birth".


Sure.

At birth we are generally a single gender and will retain our chromosomes for the rest of our lives.

Then culture will overlay our psychology with all sorts of ideas and behaviors and beliefs which is some folks cannot (or choose not to) differentiate from biology.

Upvote to little bongo.

Sometimes these folks claim that they could care less what people do in the privacyof their own bedrooms...but this is hogwash, and these same folks are actually obsessed with what other people do in private, largely because they are mistaking psychology for biology.  Oh, and because they were taught at one point that these sorts of things are wrong and they can't (or won't) rethink their beliefs.

And now that we have surgical techniques that can alter many of the cosmetic and biological aspects of gender, and some men want to dress as women, these realities are REALLY stomping on these folks hangups, like stepping on big toes with hangnails, and since the conservatives have been losing the culture wars for generations, rightwing politicians and media have amped the rhetoric up to such a degree that these folks have their knickers all in knots and part of the discourse has collapsed.  These folks naturally blame the people who live their own lives in their own ways unencumbered by all these prejudices, reenacting bigotries that have been around for generations.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Diogenes on June 14, 2023, 08:58:26 AM
We are all presumably academics, right? So we should show deference to the experts in the fields of medicine and psychology on such a topic, right? If one is not an expert and only getting their info from popular media, that would be anti-intellectual, wouldn't we say?

Here's a non-exclusive list of major professional organizations that have made statements supporting gender affirming care for minors. If you are not an expert, it's time to sit down with your ignorant opinion about "groomers" and gender or whatever.


    American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
    American Academy of Dermatology
    American Academy of Family Physicians
    American Academy of Nursing
    American Academy of Pediatrics
    American Academy of Physician Assistants
    American College Health Association
    American College of Nurse-Midwives
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
    American College of Physicians
    American Counseling Association
    American Heart Association
    American Medical Association
    American Medical Student Association
    American Nurses Association
    American Osteopathic Association
    American Psychiatric Association
    American Psychological Association
    American Public Health Association
    American Society of Plastic Surgeons
    Endocrine Society
    Federation of Pediatric Organizations
    GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality
    National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health
    National Association of Social Workers
    National Commission on Correctional Health Care
    Pediatric Endocrine Society
    Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine
    World Medical Association
    World Professional Association for Transgender Health
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on June 14, 2023, 10:00:19 AM
You would have to be a sort of conspiracy theorist to think that all those professional associations were cabable of jumping on a bandwagon rather than assessing good evidence. You'd have to have a severe distrust in the idea of medical expertise as practiced in the USA.

Of course, quite a few academics take exactly that attitude towards modern medicine in the USA. Indeed, quite a few doctors also share scepticism towards their profession.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 14, 2023, 10:04:19 AM
Quote from: downer on June 14, 2023, 10:00:19 AMYou would have to be a sort of conspiracy theorist to think that all those professional associations were cabable of jumping on a bandwagon rather than assessing good evidence. You'd have to have a severe distrust in the idea of medical expertise as practiced in the USA.

Of course, quite a few academics take exactly that attitude towards modern medicine in the USA. Indeed, quite a few doctors also share scepticism towards their profession.

Well, it's one thing to trust other physicians to find the right level of what might be defined as "gender-affirming-care" for their own patients.

I doubt any of these organizations, contrary to the shrill shoutings of Faux News, agree that hormones and surgery are appropriate the first time a 6-year-old boy wants to try on Mommy's dresses.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Diogenes on June 14, 2023, 10:29:59 AM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 14, 2023, 10:04:19 AM
Quote from: downer on June 14, 2023, 10:00:19 AMYou would have to be a sort of conspiracy theorist to think that all those professional associations were cabable of jumping on a bandwagon rather than assessing good evidence. You'd have to have a severe distrust in the idea of medical expertise as practiced in the USA.

Of course, quite a few academics take exactly that attitude towards modern medicine in the USA. Indeed, quite a few doctors also share scepticism towards their profession.

Well, it's one thing to trust other physicians to find the right level of what might be defined as "gender-affirming-care" for their own patients.

I doubt any of these organizations, contrary to the shrill shoutings of Faux News, agree that hormones and surgery are appropriate the first time a 6-year-old boy wants to try on Mommy's dresses.


Yep. "Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria" is straight up not a thing, even though Faux News harps on about it. One terrible paper used the term, and many have called for it's retraction due to overtly bad methods. When medical intervention occurs, it's after years of social transitioning and guidance with expert mental health workers.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 14, 2023, 10:34:47 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on June 14, 2023, 08:58:26 AMWe are all presumably academics, right? So we should show deference to the experts in the fields of medicine and psychology on such a topic, right? If one is not an expert and only getting their info from popular media, that would be anti-intellectual, wouldn't we say?

Here's a non-exclusive list of major professional organizations that have made statements supporting gender affirming care for minors. If you are not an expert, it's time to sit down with your ignorant opinion about "groomers" and gender or whatever.


    American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
    American Academy of Dermatology
    American Academy of Family Physicians
    American Academy of Nursing
    American Academy of Pediatrics
    American Academy of Physician Assistants
    American College Health Association
    American College of Nurse-Midwives
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
    American College of Physicians
    American Counseling Association
    American Heart Association
    American Medical Association
    American Medical Student Association
    American Nurses Association
    American Osteopathic Association
    American Psychiatric Association
    American Psychological Association
    American Public Health Association
    American Society of Plastic Surgeons
    Endocrine Society
    Federation of Pediatric Organizations
    GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality
    National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health
    National Association of Social Workers
    National Commission on Correctional Health Care
    Pediatric Endocrine Society
    Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine
    World Medical Association
    World Professional Association for Transgender Health


Interesting, that all these experts are promoting what's in their own narrow economic interest. Find new things to treat, get new customers, make more money! Incentives, man, incentives.

We shouldn't show deference to any expert group per se. Richard Feynman opined:

--Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.

--Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: jimbogumbo on June 14, 2023, 01:41:23 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 14, 2023, 10:34:47 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on June 14, 2023, 08:58:26 AMWe are all presumably academics, right? So we should show deference to the experts in the fields of medicine and psychology on such a topic, right? If one is not an expert and only getting their info from popular media, that would be anti-intellectual, wouldn't we say?

Here's a non-exclusive list of major professional organizations that have made statements supporting gender affirming care for minors. If you are not an expert, it's time to sit down with your ignorant opinion about "groomers" and gender or whatever.


    American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
    American Academy of Dermatology
    American Academy of Family Physicians
    American Academy of Nursing
    American Academy of Pediatrics
    American Academy of Physician Assistants
    American College Health Association
    American College of Nurse-Midwives
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
    American College of Physicians
    American Counseling Association
    American Heart Association
    American Medical Association
    American Medical Student Association
    American Nurses Association
    American Osteopathic Association
    American Psychiatric Association
    American Psychological Association
    American Public Health Association
    American Society of Plastic Surgeons
    Endocrine Society
    Federation of Pediatric Organizations
    GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality
    National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health
    National Association of Social Workers
    National Commission on Correctional Health Care
    Pediatric Endocrine Society
    Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine
    World Medical Association
    World Professional Association for Transgender Health


Interesting, that all these experts are promoting what's in their own narrow economic interest. Find new things to treat, get new customers, make more money! Incentives, man, incentives.

We shouldn't show deference to any expert group per se. Richard Feynman opined:

--Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.

--Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.





Sorry dismalist, but I think your claim is horse crap. Tell me what on earth nurses/nurse practitioners, midwives, GPs, dermatologists(!!), cardiologists etc have to gain financially from this stance? You cannot possibly believe that the financial fate of hospitals and these practices is tied to the economic gains associated with this still really quite rare procedure.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 14, 2023, 01:46:29 PM
Quote from: jimbogumbo on June 14, 2023, 01:41:23 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 14, 2023, 10:34:47 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on June 14, 2023, 08:58:26 AMWe are all presumably academics, right? So we should show deference to the experts in the fields of medicine and psychology on such a topic, right? If one is not an expert and only getting their info from popular media, that would be anti-intellectual, wouldn't we say?

...


Interesting, that all these experts are promoting what's in their own narrow economic interest. Find new things to treat, get new customers, make more money! Incentives, man, incentives.

We shouldn't show deference to any expert group per se. Richard Feynman opined:

--Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.

--Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.





Sorry dismalist, but I think your claim is horse crap. Tell me what on earth nurses/nurse practitioners, midwives, GPs, dermatologists(!!), cardiologists etc have to gain financially from this stance? You cannot possibly believe that the financial fate of hospitals and these practices is tied to the economic gains associated with this still really quite rare procedure.

I have this Brooklyn Bridge to sell you.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: downer on June 14, 2023, 01:58:08 PM
Yeah. There are some gender clinics which may have a profit motive to promote their services and get customers, but the numbers are too small to make any real difference to the whole medical profession.

On the other hand, the number of youth who now identify as gender non-conforming are significant. Some estimates put it at 5% of young adults. But it isn't clear exactly what that means. Back in the 1970s lots of us were gender nonconforming.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 14, 2023, 02:53:52 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 14, 2023, 10:34:47 AMInteresting, that all these experts are promoting what's in their own narrow economic interest.

As is so often the case when these sorts of cliches are hurled at a professional class, you have made a claim----can you prove it?

Go on, prove with evidence that health care professionals are buying those beach houses off the genders of callow young innocents and gullible parents.

I double dog dare you.

And while you are at it, prove the same is true of climate scientists.

Then go "doubt" your oncologist, while you are at it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 14, 2023, 03:15:28 PM
Oh, you naive soul. There's gold in them thar' hills!

I also sell used cars.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on June 14, 2023, 03:39:10 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 14, 2023, 08:23:04 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 14, 2023, 05:35:02 AMI'll let Wahoo explain that by what he calls "men-at-birth".


Sure.

At birth we are generally a single gender and will retain our chromosomes for the rest of our lives.


Argh. While I generally agree with Wahoo, this is one of my pet peeves.

Gender and sex are different things.

Sex can be defined on many levels:
Size and motility of gametes: female is large, nonmotile while male is small, motile
Nature of primary sexual characteristics: (for humans male is penis and testes and associated tubing, female is uterus, ovaries, associated tubing, and externally a clitoris and vulva)
Nature of secondary sexual characteristics acquired at puberty: (male includes deeper voice, wider shoulders, 'male' hair pattern; female includes breasts, wider hips, 'female' hair patterns)

In humans there is a strong, but not 100%, correlation between an XY karyotype and the things labeled male above and between an XX karyotype and the things labeled female above.

Intersex could be defined as any lack of clear, typical outcomes connecting karyotype, gametes, primary sex characteristics, and secondary sex characteristics. It includes things like people who have ambiguous genitalia and people who have apparently unabiguous external genitalia that aren't the ones expected for their karyotype.

Gender is a person's understanding of whether they are a man or a woman in the context of their society.

Gender is not a polite word for sex. Animals may or may not have genders, but it would be impossible for a person to tell what 'gender' a cat was.

Babies probably don't have genders either because they don't (yet) have the language or ability to understand whether they feel like boys/men or girls/women.

There's a strong, but not 100% correlation between specific karyotypes and sexual characteristics and specific gender identifications. Some aspects of gender identification are probably socially driven and others are probably biologically driven.

I think (but am not positive) that what Wahoo means by "men at birth" is what I would call "assigned male at birth" in the specific subset of cases where karyotype and external genitalia are those we consider male and where puberty would be expected to produce male secondary sexual characteristics.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 14, 2023, 03:54:53 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 14, 2023, 03:15:28 PMOh, you naive soul. There's gold in them thar' hills!

I also sell used cars.

Yup, thought so.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 06:37:50 AM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 14, 2023, 03:39:10 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 14, 2023, 08:23:04 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 14, 2023, 05:35:02 AMI'll let Wahoo explain that by what he calls "men-at-birth".


Sure.

At birth we are generally a single gender and will retain our chromosomes for the rest of our lives.


Argh. While I generally agree with Wahoo, this is one of my pet peeves.

Gender and sex are different things.

Sex can be defined on many levels:
Size and motility of gametes: female is large, nonmotile while male is small, motile
Nature of primary sexual characteristics: (for humans male is penis and testes and associated tubing, female is uterus, ovaries, associated tubing, and externally a clitoris and vulva)
Nature of secondary sexual characteristics acquired at puberty: (male includes deeper voice, wider shoulders, 'male' hair pattern; female includes breasts, wider hips, 'female' hair patterns)

In humans there is a strong, but not 100%, correlation between an XY karyotype and the things labeled male above and between an XX karyotype and the things labeled female above.

Intersex could be defined as any lack of clear, typical outcomes connecting karyotype, gametes, primary sex characteristics, and secondary sex characteristics. It includes things like people who have ambiguous genitalia and people who have apparently unabiguous external genitalia that aren't the ones expected for their karyotype.

Gender is a person's understanding of whether they are a man or a woman in the context of their society.

Gender is not a polite word for sex. Animals may or may not have genders, but it would be impossible for a person to tell what 'gender' a cat was.

Babies probably don't have genders either because they don't (yet) have the language or ability to understand whether they feel like boys/men or girls/women.

There's a strong, but not 100% correlation between specific karyotypes and sexual characteristics and specific gender identifications. Some aspects of gender identification are probably socially driven and others are probably biologically driven.

I think (but am not positive) that what Wahoo means by "men at birth" is what I would call "assigned male at birth" in the specific subset of cases where karyotype and external genitalia are those we consider male and where puberty would be expected to produce male secondary sexual characteristics.



Wahoo, do you want to change your previous statements?

If, in fact, "some aspects of gender identification are probably socially driven and others are probably biologically driven", why is making medical changes (to alter biology)considered the best solution rather than counselling (to alter psychology)? What evidence is there that "gender identity" is more inflexible than biology? Especially to the point where even suggesting counselling to make people comfortable with their biology is considered some form of abuse?


Many musicians are left-handed, even at the highest levels of professional performance. This includes people playing stringed instruments, where the two hands are doing very different things. No doubt over the centuries the style of playing the instrument developed in the way that was easiest for the majority of musicians who were right-handed. However, the top-notch left-handed musicians have obviously been able to adapt their brains so that they have not been limited in their performance.

The brain is amazingly malleable. Surgery and medication can't hold a candle to neural plasticity.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on June 15, 2023, 07:00:44 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 06:37:50 AM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 14, 2023, 03:39:10 PM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 14, 2023, 08:23:04 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 14, 2023, 05:35:02 AMI'll let Wahoo explain that by what he calls "men-at-birth".


Sure.

At birth we are generally a single gender and will retain our chromosomes for the rest of our lives.


Argh. While I generally agree with Wahoo, this is one of my pet peeves.

Gender and sex are different things.

Sex can be defined on many levels:
Size and motility of gametes: female is large, nonmotile while male is small, motile
Nature of primary sexual characteristics: (for humans male is penis and testes and associated tubing, female is uterus, ovaries, associated tubing, and externally a clitoris and vulva)
Nature of secondary sexual characteristics acquired at puberty: (male includes deeper voice, wider shoulders, 'male' hair pattern; female includes breasts, wider hips, 'female' hair patterns)

In humans there is a strong, but not 100%, correlation between an XY karyotype and the things labeled male above and between an XX karyotype and the things labeled female above.

Intersex could be defined as any lack of clear, typical outcomes connecting karyotype, gametes, primary sex characteristics, and secondary sex characteristics. It includes things like people who have ambiguous genitalia and people who have apparently unabiguous external genitalia that aren't the ones expected for their karyotype.

Gender is a person's understanding of whether they are a man or a woman in the context of their society.

Gender is not a polite word for sex. Animals may or may not have genders, but it would be impossible for a person to tell what 'gender' a cat was.

Babies probably don't have genders either because they don't (yet) have the language or ability to understand whether they feel like boys/men or girls/women.

There's a strong, but not 100% correlation between specific karyotypes and sexual characteristics and specific gender identifications. Some aspects of gender identification are probably socially driven and others are probably biologically driven.

I think (but am not positive) that what Wahoo means by "men at birth" is what I would call "assigned male at birth" in the specific subset of cases where karyotype and external genitalia are those we consider male and where puberty would be expected to produce male secondary sexual characteristics.



Wahoo, do you want to change your previous statements?

If, in fact, "some aspects of gender identification are probably socially driven and others are probably biologically driven", why is making medical changes (to alter biology)considered the best solution rather than counselling (to alter psychology)? What evidence is there that "gender identity" is more inflexible than biology? Especially to the point where even suggesting counselling to make people comfortable with their biology is considered some form of abuse?


Many musicians are left-handed, even at the highest levels of professional performance. This includes people playing stringed instruments, where the two hands are doing very different things. No doubt over the centuries the style of playing the instrument developed in the way that was easiest for the majority of musicians who were right-handed. However, the top-notch left-handed musicians have obviously been able to adapt their brains so that they have not been limited in their performance.

The brain is amazingly malleable. Surgery and medication can't hold a candle to neural plasticity.



The fact that gender identity (probably) has some social influences does not make it amenable to changes via "counseling". There's in fact quite a lot of data suggesting that trying to change people's gender identification can be extremely harmful (read up on John Money if you want some horrifying stories supporting the idea that gender identity is not something that can be programmed by social input).

So the question becomes what signifier do you (and here I actually mean you, marshwiggle, not a vague societal "you") want to try to force people to match their gender to?

Consider a person assigned female at birth with typical female external genitalia. This person is raised as a girl, and identifies as a girl and goes through a typical-seeming female puberty, developing breasts and expanded hips. This person comes to medical attention due to lack of menstruation, and doctors discover a lack of a uterus and that the gonads are actually undescended testicles. The patient has an XY karyotype and high levels of circulating testosterone, but a mutation that makes their cells insensitive to testosterone.

So some aspects of biology say "male" and others say "female". But gender identification says "woman". To me it is a no brainer that this person is a woman and should be allowed to live and identify as one. To force this woman to live as a man because of her karyotype or gonadal structure would be insane and harmful.

The fact that many other cases are less clear cut does not alter the general principle. I believe that the least harmful thing in these cases is that if someone continues to identify as a specific gender, society should accept and support that gender identification.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 07:06:53 AM
Quote from: onthefringe on June 15, 2023, 07:00:44 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 06:37:50 AMWahoo, do you want to change your previous statements?

If, in fact, "some aspects of gender identification are probably socially driven and others are probably biologically driven", why is making medical changes (to alter biology)considered the best solution rather than counselling (to alter psychology)? What evidence is there that "gender identity" is more inflexible than biology? Especially to the point where even suggesting counselling to make people comfortable with their biology is considered some form of abuse?


Many musicians are left-handed, even at the highest levels of professional performance. This includes people playing stringed instruments, where the two hands are doing very different things. No doubt over the centuries the style of playing the instrument developed in the way that was easiest for the majority of musicians who were right-handed. However, the top-notch left-handed musicians have obviously been able to adapt their brains so that they have not been limited in their performance.

The brain is amazingly malleable. Surgery and medication can't hold a candle to neural plasticity.



The fact that gender identity (probably) has some social influences does not make it amenable to changes via "counseling". There's in fact quite a lot of data suggesting that trying to change people's gender identification can be extremely harmful (read up on John Money if you want some horrifying stories supporting the idea that gender identity is not something that can be programmed by social input).


Are you talking about David Reimer? That was exactly a case of trying to change someone's "gender identity" from their biological reality!

QuoteSo the question becomes what signifier do you (and here I actually mean you, marshwiggle, not a vague societal "you") want to try to force people to match their gender to?

Consider a person assigned female at birth with typical female external genitalia. This person is raised as a girl, and identifies as a girl and goes through a typical-seeming female puberty, developing breasts and expanded hips. This person comes to medical attention due to lack of menstruation, and doctors discover a lack of a uterus and that the gonads are actually undescended testicles. The patient has an XY karyotype and high levels of circulating testosterone, but a mutation that makes their cells insensitive to testosterone.

So some aspects of biology say "male" and others say "female". But gender identification says "woman". To me it is a no brainer that this person is a woman and should be allowed to live and identify as one. To force this woman to live as a man because of her karyotype or gonadal structure would be insane and harmful.

The fact that many other cases are less clear cut does not alter the general principle. I believe that the least harmful thing in these cases is that if someone continues to identify as a specific gender, society should accept and support that gender identification.

Intersex people are, as I have said, a tiny fraction of the population. That is entirely different from the vast majority of trans people, whose biology is not remotely unusual.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: onthefringe on June 15, 2023, 07:37:18 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 07:06:53 AMIntersex people are, as I have said, a tiny fraction of the population. That is entirely different from the vast majority of trans people, whose biology is not remotely unusual.


So they are rare, so what? I still would love to hear your answer. Our responses to rare 'edge cases' frequently highlight our internal contradictions.

And you (and we) have essentially no idea if the majority of trans people have completely typical biology. Are you saying you only give people the grace of knowing their own gender if you personally understand the biological underpinnings of that gender identity?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Istiblennius on June 15, 2023, 08:20:47 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 14, 2023, 10:34:47 AM--Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.


No. Science is a culture of evidence.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 15, 2023, 08:53:32 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 06:37:50 AMWahoo, do you want to change your previous statements?


Not really.

I was just thinking "men" because we were discussing adults.

I appreciate onthefringe's specificity.  That is Butler's argument, actually, and if I hadn't been typing so fast I probably would have caught it.

Quotewhy is making medical changes (to alter biology)considered the best solution rather than counselling (to alter psychology)?

Why?  If people want to switch genders now, they can.  People are generally happier in their new gender.  What purpose would counselling serve? 

Why do you care?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 10:40:21 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 15, 2023, 08:53:32 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 06:37:50 AMWahoo, do you want to change your previous statements?


Not really.

I was just thinking "men" because we were discussing adults.

I appreciate onthefringe's specificity.  That is Butler's argument, actually, and if I hadn't been typing so fast I probably would have caught it.

Quotewhy is making medical changes (to alter biology)considered the best solution rather than counselling (to alter psychology)?

Why?  If people want to switch genders now, they can.  People are generally happier in their new gender.  What purpose would counselling serve? 

Why do you care?

Generally speaking, the medical profession is supposed to provide the most efficacious care, based on evidence. Santa Claus is the one who is supposed to give people what they want.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Diogenes on June 15, 2023, 10:41:58 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 14, 2023, 10:34:47 AMInteresting, that all these experts are promoting what's in their own narrow economic interest. Find new things to treat, get new customers, make more money! Incentives, man, incentives.

We shouldn't show deference to any expert group per se. Richard Feynman opined:

--Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.

--Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.





Now you are just falling into conspiracy theories. All those shadow Social Workers with $80k in student debt pulling the strings to make $45k a year to keep kids from killing themselves. Take a step back and think about what you are claiming.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Diogenes on June 15, 2023, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 06:37:50 AMThe brain is amazingly malleable. Surgery and medication can't hold a candle to neural plasticity.



Don't oversell the research on neuroplasticity. It's clearly not your area.

Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 07:06:53 AMAre you talking about David Reimer? That was exactly a case of trying to change someone's "gender identity" from their biological reality!



You are intentionally missing the point entirely. His gender identity was being a boy. No intensive training or acculturation to try to get him to identify as a girl worked. Drag shows weren't going to do it.

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: MarathonRunner on June 15, 2023, 11:05:59 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 14, 2023, 10:34:47 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on June 14, 2023, 08:58:26 AMWe are all presumably academics, right? So we should show deference to the experts in the fields of medicine and psychology on such a topic, right? If one is not an expert and only getting their info from popular media, that would be anti-intellectual, wouldn't we say?

Here's a non-exclusive list of major professional organizations that have made statements supporting gender affirming care for minors. If you are not an expert, it's time to sit down with your ignorant opinion about "groomers" and gender or whatever.


    American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
    American Academy of Dermatology
    American Academy of Family Physicians
    American Academy of Nursing
    American Academy of Pediatrics
    American Academy of Physician Assistants
    American College Health Association
    American College of Nurse-Midwives
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
    American College of Physicians
    American Counseling Association
    American Heart Association
    American Medical Association
    American Medical Student Association
    American Nurses Association
    American Osteopathic Association
    American Psychiatric Association
    American Psychological Association
    American Public Health Association
    American Society of Plastic Surgeons
    Endocrine Society
    Federation of Pediatric Organizations
    GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality
    National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health
    National Association of Social Workers
    National Commission on Correctional Health Care
    Pediatric Endocrine Society
    Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine
    World Medical Association
    World Professional Association for Transgender Health


Interesting, that all these experts are promoting what's in their own narrow economic interest. Find new things to treat, get new customers, make more money! Incentives, man, incentives.

We shouldn't show deference to any expert group per se. Richard Feynman opined:

--Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.

--Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.





Plenty of countries have socialized or single payer medicine, so providing gender-affirming care doesn't provide them any new "customers" or any extra money. Using someone's preferred name and pronouns when providing care doesn't give me any financial bonus. For my physician colleagues, a 15 min appointment about hormone therapy yields the same fee for service, whether it's someone looking to decrease menopause symptoms, some young person who is in surgical menopause but identifies as female so needs hormone therapy, or someone seeking gender-affirming hormones. No financial incentive for the gender-affirming care.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 11:10:46 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on June 15, 2023, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 06:37:50 AMThe brain is amazingly malleable. Surgery and medication can't hold a candle to neural plasticity.



Don't oversell the research on neuroplasticity. It's clearly not your area.

Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 07:06:53 AMAre you talking about David Reimer? That was exactly a case of trying to change someone's "gender identity" from their biological reality!



You are intentionally missing the point entirely. His gender identity was being a boy. No intensive training or acculturation to try to get him to identify as a girl worked. Drag shows weren't going to do it.



No, you are intentionally missing the point. Money was convinced that biology didn't matter. He was totally and tragically wrong.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: MarathonRunner on June 15, 2023, 11:18:58 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 14, 2023, 08:23:04 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 14, 2023, 05:35:02 AMI'll let Wahoo explain that by what he calls "men-at-birth".


Sure.

At birth we are generally a single gender and will retain our chromosomes for the rest of our lives.

Then culture will overlay our psychology with all sorts of ideas and behaviors and beliefs which is some folks cannot (or choose not to) differentiate from biology.

Upvote to little bongo.

Sometimes these folks claim that they could care less what people do in the privacyof their own bedrooms...but this is hogwash, and these same folks are actually obsessed with what other people do in private, largely because they are mistaking psychology for biology.  Oh, and because they were taught at one point that these sorts of things are wrong and they can't (or won't) rethink their beliefs.

And now that we have surgical techniques that can alter many of the cosmetic and biological aspects of gender, and some men want to dress as women, these realities are REALLY stomping on these folks hangups, like stepping on big toes with hangnails, and since the conservatives have been losing the culture wars for generations, rightwing politicians and media have amped the rhetoric up to such a degree that these folks have their knickers all in knots and part of the discourse has collapsed.  These folks naturally blame the people who live their own lives in their own ways unencumbered by all these prejudices, reenacting bigotries that have been around for generations.


There is no gender at birth. I've published on this. We have sex assigned at birth, based usually on the appearance of external genitalia. We have no idea of someone's chromosomes unless testing was done or it is apparent they have a sex-linked or other genetic disorder. Sex is biological, but is not binary.

Gender is cultural and sociological. We acquire gender as we are socialized. For most, gender and biological sex align, or some it doesn't.

Indigenous peoples have long histories of what we would call queer or trans people today. In Canada, many First Nations have long had two-spirited individuals. While two spirit is a modern term, many First Nations had a third gender that was considered just as normal as the male or female gender.

If anyone legitimately is interested in the differences between sex and gender, check out CIHR's resources on sex and gender.

Both sex and gender lie on a continuum.

See https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-redefined-the-idea-of-2-sexes-is-overly-simplistic1/
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/sa-visual/visualizing-sex-as-a-spectrum/

Also, Sky has an excellent series on right now called Queer Planet, showing the amazing diversity of sex in our world. There's nothing "natural" about what we think of as heterosexual sex. Nature has many different forms of sex identification and sexual activity.


Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 15, 2023, 11:37:50 AM
Quote from: MarathonRunner on June 15, 2023, 11:05:59 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 14, 2023, 10:34:47 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on June 14, 2023, 08:58:26 AMWe are all presumably academics, right? So we should show deference to the experts in the fields of medicine and psychology on such a topic, right? If one is not an expert and only getting their info from popular media, that would be anti-intellectual, wouldn't we say?

Here's a non-exclusive list of major professional organizations that have made statements supporting gender affirming care for minors. If you are not an expert, it's time to sit down with your ignorant opinion about "groomers" and gender or whatever.


    American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
    American Academy of Dermatology
    American Academy of Family Physicians
    American Academy of Nursing
    American Academy of Pediatrics
    American Academy of Physician Assistants
    American College Health Association
    American College of Nurse-Midwives
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
    American College of Physicians
    American Counseling Association
    American Heart Association
    American Medical Association
    American Medical Student Association
    American Nurses Association
    American Osteopathic Association
    American Psychiatric Association
    American Psychological Association
    American Public Health Association
    American Society of Plastic Surgeons
    Endocrine Society
    Federation of Pediatric Organizations
    GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality
    National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health
    National Association of Social Workers
    National Commission on Correctional Health Care
    Pediatric Endocrine Society
    Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine
    World Medical Association
    World Professional Association for Transgender Health


Interesting, that all these experts are promoting what's in their own narrow economic interest. Find new things to treat, get new customers, make more money! Incentives, man, incentives.

We shouldn't show deference to any expert group per se. Richard Feynman opined:

--Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.

--Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.





Plenty of countries have socialized or single payer medicine, so providing gender-affirming care doesn't provide them any new "customers" or any extra money. Using someone's preferred name and pronouns when providing care doesn't give me any financial bonus. For my physician colleagues, a 15 min appointment about hormone therapy yields the same fee for service, whether it's someone looking to decrease menopause symptoms, some young person who is in surgical menopause but identifies as female so needs hormone therapy, or someone seeking gender-affirming hormones. No financial incentive for the gender-affirming care.

..yields the same fee-for-service: But now you can recruit more customers! That's what advertising is for. I never knew I had that treatable symptom.

This means more influence even in Bevanian health care provision or Bismarckian health finance systems. There, the reward to doctors is hashed out politically. The more demand for treatment, the greater the political pull of health workers.

There is no reason to trust anyone who benefits financially from his or her doings unless the quality of the outcome can be determined independently. 



Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 15, 2023, 11:50:21 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 10:40:21 AM
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on June 15, 2023, 08:53:32 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 06:37:50 AMWahoo, do you want to change your previous statements?


Not really.

I was just thinking "men" because we were discussing adults.

I appreciate onthefringe's specificity.  That is Butler's argument, actually, and if I hadn't been typing so fast I probably would have caught it.

Quotewhy is making medical changes (to alter biology)considered the best solution rather than counselling (to alter psychology)?

Why?  If people want to switch genders now, they can.  People are generally happier in their new gender.  What purpose would counselling serve? 

Why do you care?

Generally speaking, the medical profession is supposed to provide the most efficacious care, based on evidence. Santa Claus is the one who is supposed to give people what they want.

So that's your latest issue?  That gender transition is not "efficacious?"

Well, my friend, I challenge your contention that psychology is as malleable as you suggest. 

The only way you could convince me that I am not straight, that I am not attracted to women, or that I was not happy in my man's body (although I wish it were a little trimmer at the moment) would be to brainwash me.  I mean, you would really have to hammer into my head that I want to be a woman, that I am attracted to men, and that actually, for my own good, I am gay.  It doesn't matter what I desire, I am a gay man----that would take a hell of a lot of doing.

So no, buddy.  You are just generating more spurious objections to stuff that you really have no reason to worry about.  In your heart you just think it is wrong to be gay or dress as the opposite gender from your birth sex.  Your clown comparison is risible.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 15, 2023, 11:57:06 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 15, 2023, 11:37:50 AMhe more demand for treatment, the greater the political pull of health workers.

There is no reason to trust anyone who benefits financially from his or her doings unless the quality of the outcome can be determined independently. 

Big talk is easy.  Prove it.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 15, 2023, 11:58:19 AM
IHE: Houston Dean Accused of Racial, LGBTQ Harassment (https://www.insidehighered.com/home-page/ihe-home-page-2023-06-15)

Lower Deck:
QuoteTwo preliminary investigation reports allege "microaggressions, slights, double entendre and boorish behavior."
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Diogenes on June 15, 2023, 11:58:31 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 11:10:46 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on June 15, 2023, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 06:37:50 AMThe brain is amazingly malleable. Surgery and medication can't hold a candle to neural plasticity.



Don't oversell the research on neuroplasticity. It's clearly not your area.

Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 07:06:53 AMAre you talking about David Reimer? That was exactly a case of trying to change someone's "gender identity" from their biological reality!



You are intentionally missing the point entirely. His gender identity was being a boy. No intensive training or acculturation to try to get him to identify as a girl worked. Drag shows weren't going to do it.



No, you are intentionally missing the point. Money was convinced that biology didn't matter. He was totally and tragically wrong.

Fine, I'll disclose. I'm a tenured professor of biopsychology. Wanna keep tilting at this windmill? I have original editions of some of his work on my shelf for historical purposes to show students. Shall I grab them for you?

Actually, you would be better off reading up on the modern understanding of the biology of gender identity. She talks neuroplasticity limits in there too, since you should probably get caught up there also. https://www.rosalindfranklin.edu/academics/faculty/pink-brain-blue-brain/
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 15, 2023, 12:15:23 PM
Quote from: Diogenes on June 15, 2023, 11:58:31 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 11:10:46 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on June 15, 2023, 10:46:42 AM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 06:37:50 AMThe brain is amazingly malleable. Surgery and medication can't hold a candle to neural plasticity.



Don't oversell the research on neuroplasticity. It's clearly not your area.

Quote from: marshwiggle on June 15, 2023, 07:06:53 AMAre you talking about David Reimer? That was exactly a case of trying to change someone's "gender identity" from their biological reality!



You are intentionally missing the point entirely. His gender identity was being a boy. No intensive training or acculturation to try to get him to identify as a girl worked. Drag shows weren't going to do it.



No, you are intentionally missing the point. Money was convinced that biology didn't matter. He was totally and tragically wrong.

Fine, I'll disclose. I'm a tenured professor of biopsychology. Wanna keep tilting at this windmill? I have original editions of some of his work on my shelf for historical purposes to show students. Shall I grab them for you?

Actually, you would be better off reading up on the modern understanding of the biology of gender identity. She talks neuroplasticity limits in there too, since you should probably get caught up there also. https://www.rosalindfranklin.edu/academics/faculty/pink-brain-blue-brain/

I don't want to get too pissy, dio, but let me ask if the author had kids.

When our daughter was born, I was over the moon, but noticed about myself a small number of years on that I treated her like a boy. In particular, I bought her a small train set beautifully designed for small hands. She did play with it on the floor, for what it was intended, though not spontaneously, only when I brought out the set. While playing with the train often somebody would come by -- wife, wife's female friends, whoever -- bringing a doll or a ragdoll. Bam! End of train. Kid grabs doll, and is happy as a clam. Boy, was I pissed off at all those women!

But wife and I early on let daughter decide.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: MarathonRunner on June 15, 2023, 12:21:05 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 15, 2023, 11:37:50 AM
Quote from: MarathonRunner on June 15, 2023, 11:05:59 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 14, 2023, 10:34:47 AM
Quote from: Diogenes on June 14, 2023, 08:58:26 AMWe are all presumably academics, right? So we should show deference to the experts in the fields of medicine and psychology on such a topic, right? If one is not an expert and only getting their info from popular media, that would be anti-intellectual, wouldn't we say?

Here's a non-exclusive list of major professional organizations that have made statements supporting gender affirming care for minors. If you are not an expert, it's time to sit down with your ignorant opinion about "groomers" and gender or whatever.


    American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
    American Academy of Dermatology
    American Academy of Family Physicians
    American Academy of Nursing
    American Academy of Pediatrics
    American Academy of Physician Assistants
    American College Health Association
    American College of Nurse-Midwives
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
    American College of Physicians
    American Counseling Association
    American Heart Association
    American Medical Association
    American Medical Student Association
    American Nurses Association
    American Osteopathic Association
    American Psychiatric Association
    American Psychological Association
    American Public Health Association
    American Society of Plastic Surgeons
    Endocrine Society
    Federation of Pediatric Organizations
    GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality
    National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health
    National Association of Social Workers
    National Commission on Correctional Health Care
    Pediatric Endocrine Society
    Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine
    World Medical Association
    World Professional Association for Transgender Health


Interesting, that all these experts are promoting what's in their own narrow economic interest. Find new things to treat, get new customers, make more money! Incentives, man, incentives.

We shouldn't show deference to any expert group per se. Richard Feynman opined:

--Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.

--Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.





Plenty of countries have socialized or single payer medicine, so providing gender-affirming care doesn't provide them any new "customers" or any extra money. Using someone's preferred name and pronouns when providing care doesn't give me any financial bonus. For my physician colleagues, a 15 min appointment about hormone therapy yields the same fee for service, whether it's someone looking to decrease menopause symptoms, some young person who is in surgical menopause but identifies as female so needs hormone therapy, or someone seeking gender-affirming hormones. No financial incentive for the gender-affirming care.

..yields the same fee-for-service: But now you can recruit more customers! That's what advertising is for. I never knew I had that treatable symptom.

This means more influence even in Bevanian health care provision or Bismarckian health finance systems. There, the reward to doctors is hashed out politically. The more demand for treatment, the greater the political pull of health workers.

There is no reason to trust anyone who benefits financially from his or her doings unless the quality of the outcome can be determined independently.



Except there is no such thing as customers in single payer or socialized medicine. Physicians already have more patients than they can see on any given day. Hence why there are often long wait times in these systems. There are only so many hours in a day that a physician can work. Whether they spend 10 hours seeing patients with diabetes or 10 hours seeing patients for gender affirming care, provided the same number of appointments occur during those 10 hours, they are paid the exact same. There is no incentive to providing gender affirming care in such systems, since physicians are already overworked and get paid the same regardless of who they see or for what those patients are seen. There are already more than enough patients to go around (look at Canada and how many Canadian are without a family doctor). There is simply no monetary incentive in places like Canada to provide gender affirming care. It's just the right, ethical thing to do, even when physicians actually lose money on providing it, because other forms of care take less time and fewer resources. Physicians actually earn less sometimes, prove gender affirming care, so definitely no financial incentive at all in those circumstances.

I don't think those of you who haven't worked in healthcare in places like Canada or Germany realize that there is no need to find new patient groups. It's hard enough providing appropriate care to existing patients. There is no need to find new patients at all. I realize the U.S. with its perverse health care system, is very different. But that's just not the case in most high income countries. People are actually providing gender affirming care at a loss to their income, because it can take more time and effort. You could see three sore throats in the time it might take you to provide gender affirming care. So you get paid 1/3 what you could have made if you just saw those sore throats. Wow, getting paid less is such a huge incentive!
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 15, 2023, 12:28:57 PM
...

QuoteExcept there is no such thing as customers in single payer or socialized medicine. Physicians already have more patients than they can see on any given day. Hence why there are often long wait times in these systems. There are only so many hours in a day that a physician can work. Whether they spend 10 hours seeing patients with diabetes or 290 hours seeing patients for gender affirming care, they are paid the exact same. There is no incentive to providing gender affirming care in such systems, since physicians are already overworked and get paid the same regardless of who they see or for what those patients are seen. There are already more than enough patients to go around (look at Canada and how many Canadian are without a family doctor). There is simply no monetary incentive in places like Canada to provide gender affirming care. It's just the right, ethical thing to do, even when physicians actually lose money on providing it, because other forms of care take less time and fewer resources. Physicians actually earn less sometimes, prove gender affirming care, so definitely no financial incentive at all in those circumstances.

I don't think those of you who haven't worked in healthcare in places like Canada or Germany realize that there is no need to find new patient groups. It's hard enough providing appropriate care to existing patients. There is no nice to find new patients at all. I realize the U.S. with its perverse health care system, is very different. But that's just not the case in most high income countries. People are actually providing gender affirming care at a loss to their income, because it can take more time and effort. You could see three sore throats in the time it might take you to provide gender affirming care. So you get paid 1/3 what you could have made if you just saw those sore throats. Wow, getting paid less is such a huge incentive!

The descriptions are nothing more than price discrimination -- if there are not enough sore throats at $1, I am better off with three gender affirmations at $0.33. It's like "financial aid"!

Political clout to get more through the government is what's at issue in Bevanian and Bismarckian systems. Many work in public bureaucracies [private one's are not immune]. Is there anyone on this discussion board who is against an expansion of higher education?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: MarathonRunner on June 15, 2023, 12:39:25 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 15, 2023, 12:28:57 PM...

QuoteExcept there is no such thing as customers in single payer or socialized medicine. Physicians already have more patients than they can see on any given day. Hence why there are often long wait times in these systems. There are only so many hours in a day that a physician can work. Whether they spend 10 hours seeing patients with diabetes or 290 hours seeing patients for gender affirming care, they are paid the exact same. There is no incentive to providing gender affirming care in such systems, since physicians are already overworked and get paid the same regardless of who they see or for what those patients are seen. There are already more than enough patients to go around (look at Canada and how many Canadian are without a family doctor). There is simply no monetary incentive in places like Canada to provide gender affirming care. It's just the right, ethical thing to do, even when physicians actually lose money on providing it, because other forms of care take less time and fewer resources. Physicians actually earn less sometimes, prove gender affirming care, so definitely no financial incentive at all in those circumstances.

I don't think those of you who haven't worked in healthcare in places like Canada or Germany realize that there is no need to find new patient groups. It's hard enough providing appropriate care to existing patients. There is no nice to find new patients at all. I realize the U.S. with its perverse health care system, is very different. But that's just not the case in most high income countries. People are actually providing gender affirming care at a loss to their income, because it can take more time and effort. You could see three sore throats in the time it might take you to provide gender affirming care. So you get paid 1/3 what you could have made if you just saw those sore throats. Wow, getting paid less is such a huge incentive!

The descriptions are nothing more than price discrimination -- if there are not enough sore throats at $1, I am better off with three gender affirmations at $0.33. It's like "financial aid"!

Political clout to get more through the government is what's at issue in Bevanian and Bismarckian systems. Many work in public bureaucracies [private one's are not immune]. Is there anyone on this discussion board who is against an expansion of higher education?

Unless we suddenly have a new baby boom, I see no need for an expansion in higher education, at least in Canada. Programs are being closed in some Canadian universities, as there is low enrolment in those programs, and while that is sad, it is reality. In Canada, at least, I think we need universities to focus on their strengths, and invest in those. Ontario has many universities, do all of them need to offer all programs? We already specialize with programs like medicine, optometry, dietetics, education, veterinary medicine, with only one to a few universities in Ontario offering those programs. Why not do that with programs like engineering, sociology, psychology, business, computer science, etc. Let universities focus on their areas of strength and the synergies that go with those strengths.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 15, 2023, 12:51:22 PM
Quote from: MarathonRunner on June 15, 2023, 12:39:25 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 15, 2023, 12:28:57 PM...

QuoteExcept there is no such thing as customers in single payer or socialized medicine. Physicians already have more patients than they can see on any given day. Hence why there are often long wait times in these systems. There are only so many hours in a day that a physician can work. Whether they spend 10 hours seeing patients with diabetes or 290 hours seeing patients for gender affirming care, they are paid the exact same. There is no incentive to providing gender affirming care in such systems, since physicians are already overworked and get paid the same regardless of who they see or for what those patients are seen. There are already more than enough patients to go around (look at Canada and how many Canadian are without a family doctor). There is simply no monetary incentive in places like Canada to provide gender affirming care. It's just the right, ethical thing to do, even when physicians actually lose money on providing it, because other forms of care take less time and fewer resources. Physicians actually earn less sometimes, prove gender affirming care, so definitely no financial incentive at all in those circumstances.

I don't think those of you who haven't worked in healthcare in places like Canada or Germany realize that there is no need to find new patient groups. It's hard enough providing appropriate care to existing patients. There is no nice to find new patients at all. I realize the U.S. with its perverse health care system, is very different. But that's just not the case in most high income countries. People are actually providing gender affirming care at a loss to their income, because it can take more time and effort. You could see three sore throats in the time it might take you to provide gender affirming care. So you get paid 1/3 what you could have made if you just saw those sore throats. Wow, getting paid less is such a huge incentive!

The descriptions are nothing more than price discrimination -- if there are not enough sore throats at $1, I am better off with three gender affirmations at $0.33. It's like "financial aid"!

Political clout to get more through the government is what's at issue in Bevanian and Bismarckian systems. Many work in public bureaucracies [private one's are not immune]. Is there anyone on this discussion board who is against an expansion of higher education?

Unless we suddenly have a new baby boom, I see no need for an expansion in higher education, at least in Canada. Programs are being closed in some Canadian universities, as there is low enrolment in those programs, and while that is sad, it is reality. In Canada, at least, I think we need universities to focus on their strengths, and invest in those. Ontario has many universities, do all of them need to offer all programs? We already specialize with programs like medicine, optometry, dietetics, education, veterinary medicine, with only one to a few universities in Ontario offering those programs. Why not do that with programs like engineering, sociology, psychology, business, computer science, etc. Let universities focus on their areas of strength and the synergies that go with those strengths.

And the money that is saved will be used to reduce taxes? :-)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: ciao_yall on June 15, 2023, 01:27:59 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 15, 2023, 12:51:22 PMAnd the money that is saved will be used to reduce taxes? :-)

No, it will go to elder care because there are not enough young workers paying into Social Security, Medicare and other programs for retirees.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 15, 2023, 01:30:49 PM
Quote from: ciao_yall on June 15, 2023, 01:27:59 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 15, 2023, 12:51:22 PMAnd the money that is saved will be used to reduce taxes? :-)

No, it will go to elder care because there are not enough young workers paying into Social Security, Medicare and other programs for retirees.


You hope! :-)

Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: dismalist on June 15, 2023, 03:37:25 PM
Quote from: Istiblennius on June 15, 2023, 08:20:47 AM
Quote from: dismalist on June 14, 2023, 10:34:47 AM--Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.


No. Science is a culture of evidence.

Here's evidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsqTz4zg8Xk [Two minutes from Yes, Prime Minister]

What does the evidence suggest? :-)
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Wahoo Redux on June 15, 2023, 07:27:13 PM
Quote from: MarathonRunner on June 15, 2023, 12:39:25 PMUnless we suddenly have a new baby boom, I see no need for an expansion in higher education, at least in Canada. Programs are being closed in some Canadian universities, as there is low enrolment in those programs, and while that is sad, it is reality. In Canada, at least, I think we need universities to focus on their strengths, and invest in those. Ontario has many universities, do all of them need to offer all programs? We already specialize with programs like medicine, optometry, dietetics, education, veterinary medicine, with only one to a few universities in Ontario offering those programs. Why not do that with programs like engineering, sociology, psychology, business, computer science, etc. Let universities focus on their areas of strength and the synergies that go with those strengths.

I think we are there already, aren't we?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: marshwiggle on June 16, 2023, 10:20:43 AM
Quote from: MarathonRunner on June 15, 2023, 12:39:25 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 15, 2023, 12:28:57 PM...

QuoteExcept there is no such thing as customers in single payer or socialized medicine. Physicians already have more patients than they can see on any given day. Hence why there are often long wait times in these systems. There are only so many hours in a day that a physician can work. Whether they spend 10 hours seeing patients with diabetes or 290 hours seeing patients for gender affirming care, they are paid the exact same. There is no incentive to providing gender affirming care in such systems, since physicians are already overworked and get paid the same regardless of who they see or for what those patients are seen. There are already more than enough patients to go around (look at Canada and how many Canadian are without a family doctor). There is simply no monetary incentive in places like Canada to provide gender affirming care. It's just the right, ethical thing to do, even when physicians actually lose money on providing it, because other forms of care take less time and fewer resources. Physicians actually earn less sometimes, prove gender affirming care, so definitely no financial incentive at all in those circumstances.

I don't think those of you who haven't worked in healthcare in places like Canada or Germany realize that there is no need to find new patient groups. It's hard enough providing appropriate care to existing patients. There is no nice to find new patients at all. I realize the U.S. with its perverse health care system, is very different. But that's just not the case in most high income countries. People are actually providing gender affirming care at a loss to their income, because it can take more time and effort. You could see three sore throats in the time it might take you to provide gender affirming care. So you get paid 1/3 what you could have made if you just saw those sore throats. Wow, getting paid less is such a huge incentive!

The descriptions are nothing more than price discrimination -- if there are not enough sore throats at $1, I am better off with three gender affirmations at $0.33. It's like "financial aid"!

Political clout to get more through the government is what's at issue in Bevanian and Bismarckian systems. Many work in public bureaucracies [private one's are not immune]. Is there anyone on this discussion board who is against an expansion of higher education?

Unless we suddenly have a new baby boom, I see no need for an expansion in higher education, at least in Canada. Programs are being closed in some Canadian universities, as there is low enrolment in those programs, and while that is sad, it is reality. In Canada, at least, I think we need universities to focus on their strengths, and invest in those. Ontario has many universities, do all of them need to offer all programs? We already specialize with programs like medicine, optometry, dietetics, education, veterinary medicine, with only one to a few universities in Ontario offering those programs. Why not do that with programs like engineering, sociology, psychology, business, computer science, etc. Let universities focus on their areas of strength and the synergies that go with those strengths.

The difficulty is with the departments that provide service to lots of others. Math, for instance, is required by lots of other disciplines, so what "credit" should that give them in retaining their own major even if the enrollment is low?
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: MarathonRunner on June 16, 2023, 12:06:06 PM
Quote from: marshwiggle on June 16, 2023, 10:20:43 AM
Quote from: MarathonRunner on June 15, 2023, 12:39:25 PM
Quote from: dismalist on June 15, 2023, 12:28:57 PM...

QuoteExcept there is no such thing as customers in single payer or socialized medicine. Physicians already have more patients than they can see on any given day. Hence why there are often long wait times in these systems. There are only so many hours in a day that a physician can work. Whether they spend 10 hours seeing patients with diabetes or 290 hours seeing patients for gender affirming care, they are paid the exact same. There is no incentive to providing gender affirming care in such systems, since physicians are already overworked and get paid the same regardless of who they see or for what those patients are seen. There are already more than enough patients to go around (look at Canada and how many Canadian are without a family doctor). There is simply no monetary incentive in places like Canada to provide gender affirming care. It's just the right, ethical thing to do, even when physicians actually lose money on providing it, because other forms of care take less time and fewer resources. Physicians actually earn less sometimes, prove gender affirming care, so definitely no financial incentive at all in those circumstances.

I don't think those of you who haven't worked in healthcare in places like Canada or Germany realize that there is no need to find new patient groups. It's hard enough providing appropriate care to existing patients. There is no nice to find new patients at all. I realize the U.S. with its perverse health care system, is very different. But that's just not the case in most high income countries. People are actually providing gender affirming care at a loss to their income, because it can take more time and effort. You could see three sore throats in the time it might take you to provide gender affirming care. So you get paid 1/3 what you could have made if you just saw those sore throats. Wow, getting paid less is such a huge incentive!

The descriptions are nothing more than price discrimination -- if there are not enough sore throats at $1, I am better off with three gender affirmations at $0.33. It's like "financial aid"!

Political clout to get more through the government is what's at issue in Bevanian and Bismarckian systems. Many work in public bureaucracies [private one's are not immune]. Is there anyone on this discussion board who is against an expansion of higher education?

Unless we suddenly have a new baby boom, I see no need for an expansion in higher education, at least in Canada. Programs are being closed in some Canadian universities, as there is low enrolment in those programs, and while that is sad, it is reality. In Canada, at least, I think we need universities to focus on their strengths, and invest in those. Ontario has many universities, do all of them need to offer all programs? We already specialize with programs like medicine, optometry, dietetics, education, veterinary medicine, with only one to a few universities in Ontario offering those programs. Why not do that with programs like engineering, sociology, psychology, business, computer science, etc. Let universities focus on their areas of strength and the synergies that go with those strengths.

The difficulty is with the departments that provide service to lots of others. Math, for instance, is required by lots of other disciplines, so what "credit" should that give them in retaining their own major even if the enrollment is low?

That's why I said synergies. Engineering programs obviously require math, as do plenty of other disciplines, from dietetics to psychology to business and others. So if enough programs require math, keep the math department. But is it really worth hiring a math advisor (not faculty at any Canadian university I've attended) or keeping all the math-major specific courses if you only have two math majors enrolling each year? Same with things like chemistry. Obviously many programs need chemistry up to even third year. But if there are only 3 chem majors, is it viable to offer the specialized fourth year chem courses that are only open to chem majors? I'm not in charge, obviously, but I don't think every single program needs to be offered at every single university. Like I said, we already have that with professional programs, but not so much with the generic BAs, BScs, etc. I'm just looking at what has happened recently. I'd rather all Canadian universities offer many different programs, but given funding, program closures, etc., I think specialization may help more than hurt. But I'm definitely no expert.
Title: Re: Cancelling Dr. Seuss
Post by: Parasaurolophus on June 21, 2023, 03:02:40 PM
Per the discussion in the suggestion forum, I'm going to start trying to split threads that get too long on a regular basis (i.e. I'm cancelling this thread!), to see if that makes them a little more accessible to new members and lurkers. The new thread is here (https://thefora.org/index.php?topic=3490.0).