tiphareth: That is harmful!

Настроение:	sick
Музыка:	Current 93 - Island
Entry tags:	blm, nyc, smeshnoe

That is harmful!
Это охуеннейше вообще
https://twitter.com/BarrettWilson6/status/1279499313811505152
https://www.theblaze.com/news/nyc-education-meeting-parody-woke-politics
https://www.westernjournal.com/makes-people-cry-watch-nyc-officials-insane-rant-white-colleague-holds-black-baby-lap/
http://tmp.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/07/theres_a_civil_war_happening_between_minorities_and_woke_whites.html
https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/hm71qf/nyc_ed_council_meeting_member_robin_broshi/
https://thefederalist.com/2020/06/12/welcome-to-your-new-world-order-a-rundown-of-woke-insanity-amid-the-newest-cultural-revolution/
https://legalinsurrection.com/2020/07/crazy-woke-it-hurts-people-when-they-see-a-white-man-bouncing-a-brown-baby-on-their-lap/
идет заседание нью-йоркского совета по образованию
советник по имени Robin Broshi (по профессии
чиновник от образования, по основному призванию - борец с
меритократией) закатывает лютую истерику с судорогами
и пеной изо рта по случаю того, что ее коллега (белый) держит
на коленях черного младенца. В ответ на вопрос, а чего собственно
в этом ужасного, орет еще громче, что спрашивать о подобном
само по себе оскорбительно, а плебс должен сидеть молча и
конспектировать "The White Fragility".

Остальные чиновники там тоже ярко
выступают, в подобном же духе по большей части.

Вообще давно пора ввести люстрации для всех
людей со степенью по педагогике, уволить их нахуй
и не подпускать к детским учреждениям ближе, чем
на километр. Эта хуйня не только разрушает мозги,
она есть основная причина упадка школьного
образования в западном мире.

Morden: During our last meeting you were talking about
someone's friend on someone's lap when there were actual
kids who were saying there are racist acts in your school!
Sad! You are sad! But today you want to talk about...

Broshi: Ben!...It hurts people when they see a white man
bouncing a brown baby on their lap and they don't know the
context! That is harmful! It makes people cry! It makes
people log out of our meeting! They don't come here! They
don't come to our meetings! And they give me a hard time
because I'm not vocal enough! And I'm not trying to be a
martyr! I'm trying to illustrate to you that you think I'm
a f**k-excuse me-you think I'm a social justice warrior!
And you think I'm being patronizing and I'm getting
pressure for not being enough of an advocate! And I take
that to heart and that hurts me! And I have to learn to be
a better white person!

Wrocklage: I would like to know before this meeting
adjourns how having my friend's nephew on my lap was
hurtful to people and was racist. Can you please explain?

Broshi: Tom! I've explained it to you! You can Google-you
can read a book! Read [inaudible]! Read White Fragility!
Read How to Talk to White People! It's not my job to
educate you! You're an educated white man! You could read
a book and you could learn about it yourself!

Привет

(Читать комментарии) - (Добавить комментарий)

tiphareth
2020-07-19 00:59 (ссылка)

https://quillette.com/2020/03/06/ive-been-fired-if-you-value-academic-freedom-that-should-worry-you/

Until a week ago, I was a tenure-track assistant professor at a small college. Then I was fired. And although I am but one professor at one small college in one small town, I want to persuade you that, if you care about free speech and free inquiry in academia, you should be alarmed by my termination. My troubles began in October 2019 when I was invited to address an evolutionary group at the University of Alabama. I had decided that I would discuss human population variation, the hypothesis that human biological differences are at least partially produced by different environments selecting for different physical and psychological traits in their populations over time. I planned to defend this view as most consistent with a Darwinian understanding of the world.

My first day in Tuscaloosa was uneventful. On the second day, I visited a class and had an enjoyable discussion with students about various topics, including human evolution and social signaling. I was then supposed to meet professors and students for lunch, but instead my guide delivered me to an empty room where I received a number of texts from my host: The professors had found my RationalWiki entry, which accuses me—inter alia—of writing “racist bullshit for the right-wing online magazine Quillette.”

Notwithstanding its name, which indicates a commitment to thought and reason, RationalWiki is a highly partisan and tendentious site which its authors use to mock and defame their political opponents. (They have also refused to update misinformation about my work and views even after I have written corrections.) Which is to say that it is not a reliable source of information about anything, still less a sound basis upon which to judge a person’s character. Professors routinely warn their students not to cite Wikipedia, but the lies and misrepresentations on my RationalWiki page were thought to be so unanswerable that the faculty who read them refused to meet with me so I could speak in my own defense. (A handful of other curious professors did extend me the courtesy of a meeting, and we enjoyed a perfectly civil chat.)

I assumed that my scheduled talk would be cancelled, but it was not. I thought the room would be empty, but it was not. Word had evidently spread and a number of angry students were in attendance. The atmosphere was hostile, and the audience was eager to challenge me, but I was able to deliver my talk as planned. The Q and A that followed was quite rowdy, however—one of the students yelled that I was a racist and someone else accused me of promoting the long-discredited pseudoscience of phrenology. And so on. It was not an especially cordial or constructive exchange of ideas.

Shortly after my talk, the student newspaper published a clearly slanted article about the event that casually quoted anonymous criticism that my work “resembles the pseudoscience employed by eugenicists.” This criticism was completely irrelevant to my talk, in which I never discussed anything resembling “eugenics,” and was likely included to poison the study of human biological variation by associating it with other unsavory intellectual traditions. The group that invited me to speak also issued an unconditional apology to attendees of my talk and vowed to do better. My lecture, they explained, was “non-scientific” (it formed the basis for an article that passed three reviewers at a professional psychology journal) and they had been unaware of what I planned to say (I had provided them with an outline of my talk at least two months in advance, which they had approved). And as soon as controversy arose, they denounced me and my expressed views (most of which are undisputed in the relevant literature), and explained that the invitation they had extended had been a mistake.

When the newspaper article was emailed by persons unknown to my university’s provost and president, I was called for a meeting. They were not terribly pleased, but the meeting was uneventful and I was told to be more strategic in my navigation of such a sensitive topic. I agreed that I would try. A few months later, however, someone using a pseudonym began emailing my provost, my president, and my entire department (but not me) links to my articles (including those written for this outlet) and screenshots of “offensive” tweets. My anonymous accuser held me to be guilty of all kinds of treachery and threatened to inform the board of trustees of my sins.

A few days later, however, my boss informed me, without any warning, that the college was not renewing my contract—in other words, they were firing me. I don’t know if my paper was the proximate cause of my firing, but in the light of the foregoing weeks’ tumult, it was plausibly the last straw. Nevertheless, I was nonplussed. Fired? I had worried vaguely about such an eventuality, but didn’t really think it would happen. I naively assumed that the norms of academic freedom would prevail. They did not.

My situation might strike you as trivial and insignificant. And, indeed, I am insignificant. But my firing is not. I did not enjoy the protection of tenure (I was, however, tenure-track), but we should not rely upon tenure to uphold free inquiry. Academic health is not served by a message that tenure can only be secured by those prepared to embrace political orthodoxies. After all, if tenure is intended to protect people who challenge dogmas and orthodoxies, why would we support a system that punishes non-conformists and that sieves them out before they are capable of safely challenging prevailing views?

(Ответить) (Уровень выше)

(Читать комментарии) -