ADVERTISEMENT

Chancellor Ronnie Green

Wat8.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: swissticuffs
Let's just say, if he was a mod here, at least half the posters would be immediately banned.
 
The funny thing is that, if my wife and her colleagues are indicative of "liberal academia", most liberal academics find the SJW stuff every bit as irritating as their conservative counterparts. My wife's area of expertise includes gender studies and feminist history, and her politics reflect that, but she was thrilled by the letter from the U of Chicago chancellor (or president, or whatever) in which new students were told not to expect safe spaces and trigger warnings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tpmcg
The funny thing is that, if my wife and her colleagues are indicative of "liberal academia", most liberal academics find the SJW stuff every bit as irritating as their conservative counterparts. My wife's area of expertise includes gender studies and feminist history, and her politics reflect that, but she was thrilled by the letter from the U of Chicago chancellor (or president, or whatever) in which new students were told not to expect safe spaces and trigger warnings.

Same here. I routinely teach Nietzsche and there is simply no way of reading his works if you can't take offense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pennsyhusker
I was a theology prof for 25 years. Try teaching about the world's religions without "triggering" or pissing somebody off, no matter how neutral you try to be.

This politically correct stuff is killing free speech at universities. When I read the article about Nebraska's new guy I was dismayed. Et tu Brute?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bomber89
isn't what happened at mizzou and taking place other places about endowment money?

maybe I'm wrong, but it seems those causing all the drama are in less popular/attended depts and how else can they get raises or money spent in their depts unless they pray upon some otherwise distracted students (athletes) and then play on or build up fears that weren't there or aren't rational (poop swastika).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pennsyhusker
Moron. Can we get Harvey back?

Dear academia, don't tell me what to think, don't tell me what not to say unless it is "fire' in a theater. Oh BTW, this post is "OT".

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/28888/

I read through several of the links in the original article and don't get why this is controversial. He simply states that they expect the students to present all ideas and disagreements in a respectful manner. I would say most adults need to learn that lesson also.
 
do you think professors or students are that disrespectful and hateful towards one another that it would require a university leader to address it? it seems like pandering and bowing down to pressure.
 
do you think professors or students are that disrespectful and hateful towards one another that it would require a university leader to address it? it seems like pandering and bowing down to pressure.

Yes they are. You asked a general broad question.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nwualum
I read through several of the links in the original article and don't get why this is controversial. He simply states that they expect the students to present all ideas and disagreements in a respectful manner. I would say most adults need to learn that lesson also.

It all sounds good from a high level - be nice. But what will ultimately happen is that 1 particular side of an issue will be allowed to establish the definition of what is disrespectful or hateful.
 
My interpretation: he's encouraging people to be politically correct.

The article, while not off base, I think is a bit over reacting to the intentions. But it is double talk none the less. So in the end, it just encourages people to act more PC. Which is a bad thing.

The basis for this whole thing, is should respect be earned, or is it some inherent right that all people have? I don't think people are born with a right to 'respect' from others. To me, it's an earned thing.
 
My interpretation: he's encouraging people to be politically correct.

The article, while not off base, I think is a bit over reacting to the intentions. But it is double talk none the less. So in the end, it just encourages people to act more PC. Which is a bad thing.

The basis for this whole thing, is should respect be earned, or is it some inherent right that all people have? I don't think people are born with a right to 'respect' from others. To me, it's an earned thing.

I don't understand the peoples needs to use vulgar language or name calling in arguments even in cases where someone hasn't "earned" your respect. What's so hard about saying. "You know what, I feel your point of view is wrong, I see that I can't make you change your mind so I'm going to go my separate way now." instead of " You are an f&%%$ing idiot I hope you kill yourself" .

To me that's what he is talking about. Its nothing about being politically correct. Unless we have labeled acting like a decent human being as being PC.
 
I don't understand the peoples needs to use vulgar language or name calling in arguments even in cases where someone hasn't "earned" your respect. What's so hard about saying. "You know what, I feel your point of view is wrong, I see that I can't make you change your mind so I'm going to go my separate way now." instead of " You are an f&%%$ing idiot I hope you kill yourself" .

To me that's what he is talking about. Its nothing about being politically correct. Unless we have labeled acting like a decent human being as being PC.
I didn't say anything about vulgar language.
 
I think people sometimes turn another's opinion or their losing an argument into 'you're being disrespectful of me and my opinion'.

regardless, of whether vulgar words are used or name-calling.
 
I didn't say anything about vulgar language.
Then that's all the chancellor was saying. Just treat people with respect regardless of your views. It has nothing to do with being PC or not. You don't have to respect someone to handle the situation respectfully.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TurboHerbie
I think people sometimes turn another's opinion or their losing an argument into 'you're being disrespectful of me and my opinion'.

regardless, of whether vulgar words are used or name-calling.

That can be true but so is the side that they way people phrase their opinions can be disrespectful. Lets take homosexuality for example. On one side you have the Christian. The proper way to phrase their view may be something like "I was raised as a Christian and have learned through church, scripture etc. that homosexuality is a sin and I fully believe that or in my opinion it is a sin." but some of the times its phrased more along the lines of. "You are gay and committing sin you are going to go to hell, etc. etc." They are projecting their values onto someone who may or may not even believe in God.
 
ohmygodwhocaresit'sGAMEDAY!

Seriously, almost as bad as the "PC police" are the people who constantly whine about how PC society is forcing them to be. Just my two cents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Enrozes
That can be true but so is the side that they way people phrase their opinions can be disrespectful. Lets take homosexuality for example. On one side you have the Christian. The proper way to phrase their view may be something like "I was raised as a Christian and have learned through church, scripture etc. that homosexuality is a sin and I fully believe that or in my opinion it is a sin." but some of the times its phrased more along the lines of. "You are gay and committing sin you are going to go to hell, etc. etc." They are projecting their values onto someone who may or may not even believe in God.
the campus preachers used to do the same thing to everyone they could on campus and it was actually quite comical. there was quite a crowd that gathered for the debate that would ensue. I guess we understood their simple mindedness. however, I would have been mortified if they had been arrested or been escorted off campus - for words.
 
The head football coach at Mizzou had to sign his contract with very specific wording that he wouldn't speak in tones that players could have hurt feelings. He also couldn't say anything negative about any player in a public outlet. This is 100% true. PC will kill America!! Here is the story from USA today.

New Missouri head coach Barry Odom was hired to replace Garry Pinkel in 2015, but had to accept a long list of provisions in his contract before the job was officially his, reports USA Today's Steve Berkowitz.

Last November, African American members of the team threatened to not participate in any football activities if university president Tim Wolfe didn't resign from his position. A series of race-related incidents involving students of color going ignored led to the protest. The problem persisted to the point where a portion of Missouri's black student body banded together to protest under the name "Concerned Student 1950."

Eventually word spread about the group, and 30 black football players joined the movement in an effort to remove Wolfe from his position.

The group's protest paid off, as Wolfe eventually resigned.

As part of Odom's deal, he had to sign on to a provision that ensured the proper treatment of players. This comes in the wake of Illinois firing head coach Tim Beckman prior to last season following allegations of abuse of players.

"With the cooperation and assistance of the university, the employee shall engage in (and encourage that every coach under employee’s supervision is engaging in) fair, safe, and responsible treatment of student-athletes on the football team, and avoid behavior that could in any way jeopardize a student-athlete’s health, safety, or welfare, or that could otherwise cause harm or risk causing harm to a student-athlete," the contract read.

Odom's contract also contained a provision that limits his ability to speak negatively about the program in any public forum - including during radio and television appearances - and bars him from making any statements to the media that could potentially discredit the university or anyone associated with the school.

If Odom fails to uphold these provisions, the university would have every right to terminate the contract.
 
Last edited:
Just curious what your definition of killing America means. Is it the old way that included slavery, women not allowed to vote, interracial marriage shunned?

I understand why people push back when something is different than it was, but there is a lot of advancement that has occurred and is still yet to occur because of what many may have called "PC".

So maybe PC will "kill" the country that we all knew and that Donald Trump wants again, but for many people, advancements have improved their lives -and they wouldn't want to go back to the old days.
 
I would love to reply to you but board rules forbid talking politics. For the record I'm no Trump fan!
 
  • Like
Reactions: chicolby
What many fail to realize is being PC has nothing to do with actually furthering some gender, race, class, or social issue. Where this really stems from, is business/capitalism. Businesses don't care who or what social cause you have, they just want to sell you their product or service, and they want to sell it to everyone. They don't want to lose a chunk of their customer base over some bad press on some social issue, so they come out with a PC statement, and this happens over and over and over, and it creates an environment that exists today where you cannot offend anyone for any reason. It does not stem from some grand plan to fix social ills, it comes from business wanting to protect their bottom line.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT