Fanning the flames?

[Mountain Man]

Do you think the professor was actively encouraging students to positively engage with certain ideas? Because he assigned an essay from a gay humorist or for some other reason?

Considering the discussion the assignment apparently spawned, I think the professor's intent was clear.

[rogue06]

reminds me of a meme I saw yesterday:

gameshow.jpg

[alaskazimm]

It is rather amusing watching those who insisted that a woman standing across the street silently praying was such a threat to public order that she needed to be stopped, are now supporting much more invasive and destructive forms of protesting.

I guess it all depends on the cause. If the protest fits into what they support, then it doesn't really matter what they do -- their voices must be heard and heeded. But if the cause isn't one they support then any protest, no matter how innocuous, must be quashed to show that sort of thinking is unacceptable and won't be tolerated.

Same thing with the Summer of Love - those actual insurrections were good and proper, but the J6 riot was evil and democracy destroying.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

It was.

Correction. She was not prohibited from silently praying. The issue revolved around where she chose to silently pray.

You forgot trespassing, breaking policy, destruction of property.

For balance what is your position on the trespass and damage to property that occurred at the Capitol on January 6th 2021?

Odd, You were all for squashing protests for (paraphrasing) making people uncomfortable.

I know you and others here like to make blanket comparisons and generalisations but a group standing with placards on the street near an abortion clinic is not exactly the same as a discussion on controversial issues where opposing views are expressed.

This is where academic freedom has been skewed. That was raised in another article in The New Yorker by Professor Suk Gersen in January this year. Suk Gersen is based at Harvard Law School and in that January piece she commented that in 2014 she wrote an article for the magazine that was:

about students’ suggestions (then shocking to me) that rape law should not be taught in the criminal-law course, because debates involving arguments for defendants, in addition to the prosecution, caused distress. At the very least, some students said, nobody should be asked in class to argue a side with which they disagree. Since then, students have asked me to excuse them from discussing or being examined on guns, gang violence, domestic violence, the death penalty, L.G.B.T.Q. issues, police brutality, kidnapping, suicide, and abortion. I have declined, because I believe the most important skill I teach is the ability to have rigorous exchanges on difficult topics, but professors across the country have agreed to similar requests. https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-w...ademic-freedom

Who? Links.

From the UK . Prof David Miller was dismissed from his post at Bristol university in 2021 for allegedly making anti-Semitic remarks. He appealed and won his case. Prof Kathleen Stock eventually resigned from the University of Sussex after students called for her dismissal over her comments on transgender rights and gender identification. And a lecture in December 2019 by a visiting academic, Joe Phoenix , a professor criminology with the Open University that was to be given at Essex University was eventually cancelled. The lecture was looking at trans rights in prison; however, activity by students and staff alleging that a "transphobe" would be on the campus led to that decision. So one dismissal, one forced resignation, and a lecture cancelled.

However, they already violated school policy in terms of time and place of protest. In other words, by breaking that policy they ended up trespassing, and breaking the law.

You appear to be advocating suppressing peaceful protests and curbing free speech at universities..

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Still trying to peddling that falsehood?

See above comment to Civil Discourse.

Advocating violence tends to be considered overstepping academic freedom, but when the target of such advocation of violence is Jews, I guess that should be covered under "academic freedom".

Again, see above comment.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I have to admit it didn't occur to me that anyone would see a reading assignment as indoctrinating. Then again, I've read the Prince, and Mein Kampf, and even the Bible and didn't find any of the underlying narratives compelling, so maybe that's just me.

Would you care to flesh out your thoughts here? I'm likely to disagree, but I'd like to make sure I'm disagreeing with what you think, not what I think you think.

You surely realise that by merely reading a work by a homosexual the innocent student mind could be corrupted by that individual's "perversion"!

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

It is rather amusing watching those who insisted that a woman standing across the street silently praying was such a threat to public order that she needed to be stopped

Her name is Isabel Vaughan-Spruce Why can you not remember it?

However, you are welcome to trawl through the site and find actual quotes where anyone described her as "a threat to public order".

[Diogenes]

You surely realise that by merely reading a work by a homosexual the innocent student mind could be corrupted by that individual's "perversion"!

Given the biographies of James Baldwin and Gwendolyn Brooks (two of his influences), that his book revolves around "queerness" (which is political as opposed to merely being homosexual), and the general tone of his WaPo articles, it's not the student indoctrinated the professor.

[Diogenes]

See above comment to Civil Discourse.


Again, see above comment.

So calling for an Intifada is a "peaceful protest"? I mean, if you don't consider Jews to be persons, an Intifada wouldn't be violence against persons.

[rogue06]

I have to admit it didn't occur to me that anyone would see a reading assignment as indoctrinating. Then again, I've read the Prince, and Mein Kampf, and even the Bible and didn't find any of the underlying narratives compelling, so maybe that's just me.

But did you ever read Beyond Good and Evil and the Prince one after another when you were 11? Because you wanted to?

Personally, I'd advice against doing so.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Given the biographies of James Baldwin and Gwendolyn Brooks (two of his influences), that his book revolves around "queerness" (which is political as opposed to merely being homosexual), and the general tone of his WaPo articles, it's not the student indoctrinated the professor.

Did you read the extract available on Amazon? If not, perhaps you should. Broome is gay

[rogue06]

Her name is Isabel Vaughan-Spruce Why can you not remember it?.

Does it change anything by mentioning her name rather than simply writing "a woman"? No. So why kvetch?




94490950_160165328797627_4364777836163104768_n.jpg

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

So calling for an Intifada is a "peaceful protest"? I mean, if you don't consider Jews to be persons, an Intifada wouldn't be violence against persons.

Why does that imply "you don't consider Jews to be persons"? Do you think colonial Americans in the 1770s considered the British to be non persons?

[Diogenes]

Did you read the extract available on Amazon? If not, perhaps you should. Broome is gay

I got it from an interview he did.

http://www.ohioana.org/wp-content/up...-OQ-2022-1.pdf

Broome is not "gay", Broome is "queer" in that the latter has a political implication per queer theory. One can be gay but not queer.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Does it change anything by mentioning her name rather than simply writing "the woman"?

It shows the individual has retained some information about the person. Furthermore, given the length of the initial thread about Ms Vaughan Spruce and your repeated comments endorsing and supporting her cause, one supposes that you might have made the effort to remember her name.