Professor threatens students for use of the wrong words

[Ringel05]

This isn't something new. It's not "a couple of decades" old, it's thousands of years old. People have always tried to control how people think and what they say - that's the definition of political power. What you may refer to as the "politically correct" is no different from the hundreds of various movements to control what we think and say throughout history - including, in a way, every religion.

Here's the thing, though - there's legitimate social science in "gender studies", and the viewpoint of the people doing the research is the viewpoint from which the subject is taught, because that's where the research comes from.

The only way to change academia is to be an academic.

From the Enlightenment forward. Universities in free countries have be bastions of free thought and the exploration of ideas.

But the key element is "free countries." The left has occupied most of the Universities in this nation, and put a jack boot on the neck of free expression and intellectual curiosity. The left will not tolerate a thinking population, as thinking people question the dogma put forth by the party. Questioning is not allowed in Academia, rote recitation of dogma is the hallmark of leftist controlled Academia. The left is quite literally ushering in a new dark ages.

"The Free Speech Movement (FSM) at the University of California at Berkeley during the Fall 1964 semester was the first of the 1960s campus student movements to make headlines all over the world. Lasting a little over two months, it ended with the arrest of 773 persons for occupying the administration building, the removal of the campus administration, and a vast enlargement of student rights to use the University campus for political activity and debate. In the longer term it contributed to the election of Ronald Reagan as Governor of California in 1966, and the firing of University President Clark Kerr the following January.


From the 1930s onward, largely in response to fears generated by Communism, the University-wide administration imposed numerous rules designed to keep politics off of all the University campuses. By the time Berkeley Chancellor Clark Kerr became University President in 1958, student groups could not operate on campus if they engaged in any kind of off-campus politics, whether electoral, protest or even oratorical. At the Berkeley campus students spoke, leafleted and tabled on the city sidewalk at the campus edge. When the campus border was moved a block away, this activity moved with it. Since the sidewalk at the new boundary was too narrow for much activity, Kerr authorized the creation of a small plaza just inside the new boundary for student political groups to use. The Regents of the University voted to give the 26 x 40 foot strip at Bancroft and Telegraph to the City of Berkeley, but the transfer never took place. For the next few years student groups of all persuasions used this strip as though it was public property when legally it was still part of the University.

In the Fall of 1963 and the Spring of 1964 the Bay Area was rocked with civil rights demonstrations against employers who practiced racial discrimination. Vast numbers of Berkeley students were recruited for these protests from Bancroft and Telegraph, and they were numerous among the 500 arrests made over several months. This led to demands by some state legislators that the University discipline and control its students. In July, students were recruited to demonstrate at the Republican Convention being held just outside of San Francisco, as well as at several employers in Oakland. An Oakland Tribune reporter found out that this political activity was taking place on the campus proper; when word reached the campus administration, it decided to put a stop to it.

AFTERMATH


Symbolically, the FSM had won, but the struggle was not over; only the Regents could set policy. When they met on December 18, they voted to support the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, but insisted on law and order. The faculty felt the spirit of their resolution had been met, but the FSM did not. When the new campus administration wrote detailed regulations, content of advocacy was ignored in favor of stringent time, place and manner rules. Scuffling over the rules and how they were applied continued for some time.

In the Spring, Art Goldberg and eight others (but only three students) were arrested for displaying and saying the word "fuck" at the Bancroft plaza. The incident was precipitated by a young man just arrived from New York who was arrested for holding up a piece of paper with that word on it while on campus. There were three rather small support rallies, but apart from these few arrests, little action from either students or faculty. However, some Regents were outraged and told President Kerr to expel the students. Instead, he and the new acting Chancellor offered their resignations. These were withdrawn at an acrimonious Regents' meeting three days later, but the press had a field day. The student newspaper editorialized that "there is absolutely no need for a Filthy Speech Movement." That phrase was copied all over the country. The FSM, which had voted to stay out of this conflict, was permanently stuck with the label.

The nine were convicted in municipal court and sentenced without incident. The FSM only objected when the campus administration appointed a disciplinary committee, which the FSM charged was double jeopardy. Lacking support from students or faculty, only verbal protests were made when that committee recommended that Art Goldberg be expelled and three other students (two of whom had also been arrested) be suspended. However, the "fuck" incident convinced the Regents, the Legislature, and the public at large that the Berkeley students were irresponsible and needed more discipline, not more freedom.

The "800" were tried in the Spring before a judge and convicted on two of three counts. Most got probation and fines; FSM leaders were sentenced to 30 to 120 days. After two years the final appeal was denied and the "800" paid their fines and served their time. The FSM dissolved. Its place was taken by new campus groups, especially the Vietnam Day Committee, which organized one of the first campus teach-ins in May of 1965. Protest against the war largely replaced civil rights demonstrations, though some new issues also emerged.

The FSM was the beginning of what came to be called the "six-year war" on the Berkeley campus. While student groups could now meet, set up tables, distribute literature, raise money, and pretty much say what they pleased at rallies and demonstrations on campus, skirmishes continued over time, place and manner rules, as well as what non-students, including drop-outs and alumni, could do on the campus proper.

Three decades later, a multimillion dollar grant from an alumnus paid for a student cafeteria which memorialized the FSM and for putting the FSM archives on line. The steps of the administration building were officially named the "Mario Savio" steps, and an adjacent campus was called the Clark Kerr campus of the University of California."
The Berkeley Free Speech Movement

Your ignorance of history is showing.

Yes and I was part of the free speech movement as it swept the country. It's sad how many who were part of that movement now strive to do exactly what they were fighting against but that's normal in human cultures.

Math and cultural studies, yup that's apples and apples........
Again here's the problem, your, the professor's and some others interpretation of what constitutes derogatory (offensive) and most everyone else. Look at the words, phrases being "banned' and tell me with a straight face that those are derogatory to anyone who is not in serious need of psychiatric counseling to help with their low self esteme.

Let me try to explain my analogy about math class.

In any class you take, there are fundamentals that you need to accept as fact in order to perform well in the class, even if they're not "true" in a larger context of reality. Even if you have an incredibly legitimate argument against a theory you are taught, you still need to know how to apply that theory to past the exam, and have to accept it in that context.

As or the words on the list, most of them are not the slightest bit "derogatory", in my opinion.

But neither my opinion, nor yours, matters in this context. I'm pretty confident that the majority of the people taking that class probably think that one or more of those terms are derogatory, and if the professor wants to prevent antagonistic fights in her class or even just to prevent herself from being offended, that's her right - it's her class. If you don't like it, don't take the class - instead, take a class on semantics and social norms - one in which you can explore why different groups of people find various choices of language offensive.

Fair enough.
However in one aspect we will have to agree to disagree, the social engineering aspect of why those words were specifically included, it's an ongoing process that has been picking up steam for a couple of decades now where some (on both sides of the political spectrum) want to control what we think and say.

This isn't something new. It's not "a couple of decades" old, it's thousands of years old. People have always tried to control how people think and what they say - that's the definition of political power. What you may refer to as the "politically correct" is no different from the hundreds of various movements to control what we think and say throughout history - including, in a way, every religion.

Here's the thing, though - there's legitimate social science in "gender studies", and the viewpoint of the people doing the research is the viewpoint from which the subject is taught, because that's where the research comes from.

The only way to change academia is to be an academic.

I was referring to the latest movement in this country that began a couple of decades ago, not the ongoing ones or ones that succeeded or failed in the past. Yes there are ongoing ones, short term ones and cyclical ones.

The "PC" movement came as a result of shifting social norms - as a repudiation of outdated ideas. Like every other ideological movements, it can and has fallen victims to the power plays of it's leading lights and push their cause too far.

I see those same symptoms in the "anti-PC" movement.

Then we both definitely agree. I was part of the Free Speech movement as it swept the country, it's sad to see so many of my compatriots now doing exactly what they were fighting against but given human nature and shifting social norms it's not surprising.

 

[Mac1958]

We agree. A single case proves nothing. An ongoing flurry of them do, but you're not going to admit to any of that.

I'm on campuses once in a while, but not to any degree, thanks for asking. I am paying attention, though.
.

Paying attention? No, you are not. This is one class. And, if you read the entire syllabus, there is nothing wrong with this class or the admonition to not use words that some in the class might find offensive. Tranny is offensive; colored is offensive; illegal is offensive. The class is not mandatory if some student were raised by someone like you and taught to arrogantly decide what shoul or should not offend others, they don't have to take the class. I have two in college. I visited a dozen different schools and studied what they had to offer my kids. I reviewed a couple dozen more schools and their curricula on line. the notion that education at the college level is some monolithic liberal entity is beyond stupid.

Exactly.

Conservatives try to propagate the lie of 'political correctness' because they fear open, unfettered debate where errant conservative dogma is challenged; conservatives try to propagate the lie of 'liberal colleges' because the facts and truth taught in colleges expose conservative dogma to be false.

It's no mistake that educated people.....and especially those trained in the practice of critical thinking.....lean left.

Nutters call it indoctrination. They fear what happens at colleges because they can't grasp these concepts.

---
Almost by definition, conservatives don't question dogma; they eat it like a dog swallowing any food given it, esp by its master.
.

Correct.

The 'PC' lie/myth is designed to safeguard rightist dogma from being challenged and having its flaws exposed; simply accuse those challenging conservative rhetoric of being the 'PC police' in an effort to deflect from rightists' references to 'thugs,' 'free stuff,' and 'entitlement mentality,' for example.

Americans are at liberty in our free and democratic society to speak out concerning any subject they so desire, and have the right in the context of private society to be critical of that which they oppose or find offensive, where such opposition or criticism in no way manifests in the myth of 'political correctness.'

You really are a hoot. Why in the world do you keep trying this?

So, I'll do it again.

Take it up with these honest lefties who admit that people like you have finally jumped the shark:

• Bill Maher Rails Against Crazy Political Correctness From Liberals Tells Media Matters to Shut The F ck Up Video RealClearPolitics
• Jerry Seinfeld says political correctness is hurting comedy - CBS News
• Don Lemon weighs in on PC culture Liberals are the most easily offended and the least tolerant - Salon.com
• Not a Very P.C. Thing to Say -- NYMag
• Liberal Turley against political correctness in News Forum
• Are Liberals Becoming Too Sensitive and Politically Correct
• Jim Webb says Democratic Party has lost its way - The Washington Post
• John Stuart Mill s Argument Against Political...
• Dem Blames Political Correctness for Fort Hood Workplace Violence Controversy - ABC News
• Is the New Political Correctness Already Dying -- NYMag
• I don t know what to do you guys Fredrik deBoer
• http://www.forwardprogressives.com/liberals-becoming-sensitive-politically-correct/
• http://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8706323/college-professor-afraid
• http://www.socialmemorycomplex.net/leftlibertarian/2012/06/12/a-leftist-critique-of-political-correctness/
• http://scienceblogs.com/webeasties/2013/05/21/science-racism-and-political-correctness/
• http://www.hawkeyelounge.com/threads/liberal-columnist-leonard-pitts-asks-if-weve-overdone-political-correctness.130665/
• #CancelColbert and the Return of the Anti-Liberal Left

 

[koshergrl]

My brother in law's two nieces, who are adopted Asian twins, were told they could NOT take the calculus they wanted to take, and instead had to take a DIVERSITY course.

We need to shut our universities and throw the instructors out on the street.

Shutting our universities would result in more people like you.

Good.

 

[NLT]

I'm pretty sure I do not regret skipping college.

Depends on when you went.

When I went to college in the late 70's, the campus was a stimulating, free-thinking, tolerant place. We were encouraged to challenge our own beliefs with the same passion that we challenged those of other people. We wanted to hear everyone's viewpoint. And this was in California, mind you.

Now, it's just the opposite. I don't know when this happened exactly, but it really is a shame. College should be a bastion of curiosity, debate and ideas, not this.
.

exactly, when I went to college you were encouraged to speak your mind freely....WTF happened?...

 

[squeeze berry]

Relate the OP's selection with the entire syllabus.

Have to use sensible language in a sensitive class subject.

Makes sense. Those who don't like it get to not like it. Don't enroll in the class.

Except for the fact that the LISTED words are NOT offensive.

You don't get to determine what is or is not offensive to other people.

you don't have the right to be offended

 

[squeeze berry]

Relate the OP's selection with the entire syllabus.

Have to use sensible language in a sensitive class subject.

Makes sense. Those who don't like it get to not like it. Don't enroll in the class.

Except for the fact that the LISTED words are NOT offensive.

You don't get to determine what is or is not offensive to other people.

Homey, you don't make the rules for the class, so yeah the prof gets to set the standards.

What you can do is not enroll.

too bad I won't be taking the class, I'm not a brainwashed intimidated 18 year old

 

[Uncensored2008]

you don't have the right to be offended

Sure he does.

But what leftists cannot grasp is that they don't have a right to NOT be offended.

Doc, like most of the anti-liberty left, believes in freedom FROM speech that offends him. Leftists seek to crush freedom of speech and instead ensure that no one says anything that offends party guidelines.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Relate the OP's selection with the entire syllabus.

Have to use sensible language in a sensitive class subject.

Makes sense. Those who don't like it get to not like it. Don't enroll in the class.

Except for the fact that the LISTED words are NOT offensive.

You don't get to determine what is or is not offensive to other people.

you don't have the right to be offended

Everyone has the right to be offended, and no one has complete control over what offends them.

This whole thread is nothing more than an exercise in outrage and offense over what this teacher has said.

 

[squeeze berry]

Relate the OP's selection with the entire syllabus.

Have to use sensible language in a sensitive class subject.

Makes sense. Those who don't like it get to not like it. Don't enroll in the class.

Except for the fact that the LISTED words are NOT offensive.

You don't get to determine what is or is not offensive to other people.

you don't have the right to be offended

Everyone has the right to be offended, and no one has complete control over what offends them.

This whole thread is nothing more than an exercise in outrage and offense over what this teacher has said.

OK, let's put it another way. I have the right to disregard your outrage

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Relate the OP's selection with the entire syllabus.

Have to use sensible language in a sensitive class subject.

Makes sense. Those who don't like it get to not like it. Don't enroll in the class.

Except for the fact that the LISTED words are NOT offensive.

You don't get to determine what is or is not offensive to other people.

you don't have the right to be offended

Everyone has the right to be offended, and no one has complete control over what offends them.

This whole thread is nothing more than an exercise in outrage and offense over what this teacher has said.

OK, let's put it another way. I have the right to disregard your outrage

I'm not outraged about anything - but you're right, you do have the right to disregard any outrage that you like. In certain contexts, that disregard will have consequences though. For example, if you disregard that outrage in this professor's class, you'll probably be asked to leave - just as someone screaming "Hail Satan" in the middle of a church service would be.

 

[Star]

.

Washington State University's "Introduction to Comparative Ethnic Studies" joins UCLA and UC Berkeley in banning certain offensive terms.

Why would anyone want to offend the largest minority (about 25 million eligible voters) group in the country?

According to a report from Campus Reform, one Washington State University professor said she will dock points from students who use the terms “illegal alien” or “illegals” in written assignments.

Rebecca Fowler is a member of the critical culture, gender & race studies department at WSU, where she is also a PhD candidate in American Studies.

<snip>

According to the course syllabus for her fall 2015 Introduction to Comparative Ethnic Studies, the phrases are unacceptable for use in her classroom.

Per the syllabus:
Not “illegal alien” or “illegals” but “undocumented” migrants/immigrants/persons. Note that the Associated Press (AP) has determined not to use it: ‘The Stylebook no longer sanctions the term “illegal immigrant” or the use of “illegal” to describe a person. Instead, it tells users that “illegal” should describe only an action, such as living in or immigrating to a country illegally.’

She told Campus Reform that “the term ‘illegal alien’ has permeated dominant discourses that circulate in the news to the extent that our society has come to associate ALL unauthorized border crossings with those immigrants originating from countries south of our border.”

The phrases are not the only ones Fowler tells her students to avoid—also on the list are “colored” and “the white man,” (opt instead, she writes, for “white society,” “white men,” or “white males.”) Students who use these phrase in written assignments will lose one grade point per use.


.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

She's nuts....like the majority of moon bat libtards

 

[Stephanie]

well maybe next they'll start burning books they find Offensive.




where have we seen that done before. ? and then after that they can start jailing dissenters for speaking "WORDS" or speak ill WORDS about your masters in University, Government, etc: like they do in Iran, China, Cuba, etc.

the drip drip drip of LOSING YOUR FREEDOMS is dripping mighty fast anymore

just STAND by and say nothing

 

[irosie91]

She's nuts....like the majority of moon bat libtards

Lassie-----PUHLEEEZE-----lots of those undocumented immigrants are wee lads and lassies. You want darling wee lads and lasssies to hear themselves being called ILLEGALs.
Repeat after me "sin papeles" (spelling??)))

 

[PaintMyHouse]

.

Washington State University's "Introduction to Comparative Ethnic Studies" joins UCLA and UC Berkeley in banning certain offensive terms.

Why would anyone want to offend the largest minority (about 25 million eligible voters) group in the country?

According to a report from Campus Reform, one Washington State University professor said she will dock points from students who use the terms “illegal alien” or “illegals” in written assignments.

Rebecca Fowler is a member of the critical culture, gender & race studies department at WSU, where she is also a PhD candidate in American Studies.

<snip>

According to the course syllabus for her fall 2015 Introduction to Comparative Ethnic Studies, the phrases are unacceptable for use in her classroom.

Per the syllabus:
Not “illegal alien” or “illegals” but “undocumented” migrants/immigrants/persons. Note that the Associated Press (AP) has determined not to use it: ‘The Stylebook no longer sanctions the term “illegal immigrant” or the use of “illegal” to describe a person. Instead, it tells users that “illegal” should describe only an action, such as living in or immigrating to a country illegally.’

She told Campus Reform that “the term ‘illegal alien’ has permeated dominant discourses that circulate in the news to the extent that our society has come to associate ALL unauthorized border crossings with those immigrants originating from countries south of our border.”

The phrases are not the only ones Fowler tells her students to avoid—also on the list are “colored” and “the white man,” (opt instead, she writes, for “white society,” “white men,” or “white males.”) Students who use these phrase in written assignments will lose one grade point per use.


.

Rather PC but it's her class so follow her rules. I hate PC BTW...

 

[Redfish]

Mind and thought control. Orwell and Rand saw it coming and wrote about. Their fiction is becoming fact.

 

[blackhawk]

The irony here is if conservatives tried to ban terms they find offensive this nut job would likely be one of the first ones to scream censorship.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Mind and thought control. Orwell and Rand saw it coming and wrote about. Their fiction is becoming fact.

So, don't go to a state school? iI's not mandatory at that level. Vote with your feet and your dollars, people.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

well maybe next they'll start burning books they find Offensive.

where have we seen that done before. ? and then after that they can start jailing dissenters for speaking "WORDS" or speak ill WORDS about your masters in University, Government, etc: like they do in Iran, China, Cuba, etc.

just STAND by and say nothing that will BE NEXT

I think most of these jackasses do this stuff for attention.

 

[irosie91]

.

Washington State University's "Introduction to Comparative Ethnic Studies" joins UCLA and UC Berkeley in banning certain offensive terms.

Why would anyone want to offend the largest minority (about 25 million eligible voters) group in the country?

According to a report from Campus Reform, one Washington State University professor said she will dock points from students who use the terms “illegal alien” or “illegals” in written assignments.

Rebecca Fowler is a member of the critical culture, gender & race studies department at WSU, where she is also a PhD candidate in American Studies.

<snip>

According to the course syllabus for her fall 2015 Introduction to Comparative Ethnic Studies, the phrases are unacceptable for use in her classroom.

Per the syllabus:
Not “illegal alien” or “illegals” but “undocumented” migrants/immigrants/persons. Note that the Associated Press (AP) has determined not to use it: ‘The Stylebook no longer sanctions the term “illegal immigrant” or the use of “illegal” to describe a person. Instead, it tells users that “illegal” should describe only an action, such as living in or immigrating to a country illegally.’

She told Campus Reform that “the term ‘illegal alien’ has permeated dominant discourses that circulate in the news to the extent that our society has come to associate ALL unauthorized border crossings with those immigrants originating from countries south of our border.”

The phrases are not the only ones Fowler tells her students to avoid—also on the list are “colored” and “the white man,” (opt instead, she writes, for “white society,” “white men,” or “white males.”) Students who use these phrase in written assignments will lose one grade point per use.


.

Rather PC but it's her class so follow her rules. I hate PC BTW...

when I was in college ----the only reason I attended classes was to find out what the PROF WANTED------other than that ----I just read the textbook