Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The President's comments were thoroughly pwned by this letter in response:
"We are talking about the judgments and sensibilities of 18 to 21 year olds. "Context matters."
We are talking about a novel, ill-defined, and controversial sociological concept that appears very messy (if arbitrary) in its application. "Context matters."
We are being lectured by two securely-employed, well-paid adults, Dr. Rose and Mr. Foster, who presumably never faced discipline for their own "appropriative" misdeeds committed when they were foolhardy undergraduates. "Context matters."
The "hats [and] drinks" of one party are unapologetically held to a different standard than the "hats [and] drinks" of another party, ostensibly due to the victims' melanin rather than the issue of identifying the cultural stereotyping at play. "Context matters."
Dr. Rose bemoans the lack of "open and thoughtful discussion." He has done nothing—I mean nothing—to reassure students that they can speak openly. He is instilling a climate where clumsy words or foolish deeds that cause offense to some will be persecuted; where being "coarse" in private is grounds for being publicly and indelibly labeled a "racist."
I am deeply ashamed of this school, and I have no confidence in Dr. Rose's leadership."
I don't know what "pwned" means, but my comment was referring to the President's allusion to further facts about the situation, not his general discussion about context. None of what you posted clearly demonstrates that there are no additional relevant facts in the case.
"Offended"??
You likely have never googled Michael Tuohey. 1% of Americans know his story, when 100% should. (Teaser: he was a CENTRAL figure in the events that took place on the actual day of 9/11).
Thousands of people were not just "offended" by his political correctness; they were killed partly because of it. And being killed is worse than being offended, most people will tell you (although not all).
Tuohey himself, upon realizing what his PC did, had his own life destroyed by shame. A sad story.
I have read about him, and I don't believe it's fair to blame him for what the terrorists did. Yes, his gut was telling him something, and he brushed it off thinking it wasn't what he thought, but it is NOT his fault that the hijackers killed people. It is the hijackers' fault.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost
I don't know what "pwned" means, but my comment was referring to the President's allusion to further facts about the situation, not his general discussion about context. None of what you posted clearly demonstrates that there are no additional relevant facts in the case.
"pwnd" means OWNED. It's speak that you see on the internet that came from gaming.
"Offended"??
You likely have never googled Michael Tuohey. 1% of Americans know his story, when 100% should. (Teaser: he was a CENTRAL figure in the events that took place on the actual day of 9/11).
Thousands of people were not just "offended" by his political correctness; they were killed partly because of it. And being killed is worse than being offended, most people will tell you (although not all).
Tuohey himself, upon realizing what his PC did, had his own life destroyed by shame. A sad story.
This is terrible reasoning. Tuohey isn't responsible for those deaths. No reasonable person, knowing only what Tuohey knew, could have known with enough certainty what was about to transpire. If every person who thought "Oh, that looks like a terrorist" in an airport acted out on their beliefs, no people of color would ever get to fly through airports in the US. If every person who thought "Oh, he looks dangerous" when seeing a black person actually called the police, black people would never leave their houses.
You are playing monday morning quarterback, nothing more. Tuohey was simply unlucky that his suspicion turned out to be true.
"pwnd" means OWNED. It's speak that you see on the internet that came from gaming.
Why wouldn't someone just say "owned"? What percentage of the US population actually plays video games? Surely not enough to assume that "pwned" would be understood by most readers.
Why wouldn't someone just say "owned"? What percentage of the US population actually plays video games? Surely not enough to assume that "pwned" would be understood by most readers.
Those of you saying "this is ok" don't have that much of a logical leap to make between this and Minstrel shows. Since when was American freedom defined as being able to freely act a fool with no consequences? In this case mocking Mexican people.
It's mocking and it's boorish. Disciplinary action is being taken toward those who are connected with the school in leadership positions in student government. They might lose their leadership positions. That is the extent of what will happen to the students in question. They will still be students, It's actually good preparation for real life. The problem is not PC - it's that their actions had equal and opposite reactions. Someone reported them.
Let's say you work for Verizon wireless as a salesperson. You go to a " Mexican tequila party," get plastered, and in the process get video taken and posted on social media doing some insulting thing about Mexicans in a sombrero. Oh, and you did this right after work in your Verizon polo shirt. Your boss sees it. How long do you think you'd keep your job?
It is not because of some liberal "PC silliness." It's because Verizon has a lot of Hispanic customers and they don't want to lose them. You made the company look bad to them and may have cost them a lot of money. Same principle here. These students were part of a sanctioned group and in leadership positions in the school.
Why wouldn't someone just say "owned"? What percentage of the US population actually plays video games? Surely not enough to assume that "pwned" would be understood by most readers.
Because "pwnd" has now grown so much that it's considered even harsher than "owned".
This is terrible reasoning. Tuohey isn't responsible for those deaths. No reasonable person, knowing only what Tuohey knew, could have known with enough certainty what was about to transpire. If every person who thought "Oh, that looks like a terrorist" in an airport acted out on their beliefs, no people of color would ever get to fly through airports in the US. If every person who thought "Oh, he looks dangerous" when seeing a black person actually called the police, black people would never leave their houses.
You are playing monday morning quarterback, nothing more. Tuohey was simply unlucky that his suspicion turned out to be true.
I challenge you to find one statement in my earlier post which even implies personal responsibility on the part of Tuohey. In fact, my earlier post spoke to the exact opposite reality. Have you changed the meaning of the earlier post so you would have an easier time arguing? Sorry, you do not get to choose what I am arguing.
The salient point, of course, is that nothing happens in a vacuum. Tuohey's actions did not, the college students' actions did not, and nobody else's actions take place in a vacuum either.
The raison d'etre for political correctness is to bring about a culture of fear and intimidation. And that outcome has deadly consequences.
(Interestingly, guess which airport Mr. Tuohey worked out of? PWM, which lies exactly thirty miles away from.....wait for it, wait for it..Brunswick, Maine......which is home of........ Bowdoin College. The area has one of the most politically correct cultures in the country.)
Glad to see the people of my old area have learned the lessons of 9/11 so well..........or not.
Those of you saying "this is ok" don't have that much of a logical leap to make between this and Minstrel shows. Since when was American freedom defined as being able to freely act a fool with no consequences? In this case mocking Mexican people.
It's mocking and it's boorish. Disciplinary action is being taken toward those who are connected with the school in leadership positions in student government. They might lose their leadership positions. That is the extent of what will happen to the students in question. They will still be students, It's actually good preparation for real life. The problem is not PC - it's that their actions had equal and opposite reactions. Someone reported them.
Let's say you work for Verizon wireless as a salesperson. You go to a " Mexican tequila party," get plastered, and in the process get video taken and posted on social media doing some insulting thing about Mexicans in a sombrero. Oh, and you did this right after work in your Verizon polo shirt. Your boss sees it. How long do you think you'd keep your job?
It is not because of some liberal "PC silliness." It's because Verizon has a lot of Hispanic customers and they don't want to lose them. You made the company look bad to them and may have cost them a lot of money. Same principle here. These students were part of a sanctioned group and in leadership positions in the school.
I mock your desire to see all mocking stamped out by force.
I challenge you to find one statement in my earlier post which even implies personal responsibility on the part of Tuohey.
I think saying that thousands of people were killed because of his actions at least implies causation. Perhaps it isn't culpability necessarily, but your ensuing statement about dying being worse than being offended certainly does imply that Mr. Tuohey should have done something other than what he did. If his actions had both a causal connection to the events and he should have done something other than what he did, it's hard to argue that you didn't imply he bore personal responsibility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maineguy8888
Thousands of people were not just "offended" by his political correctness; they were killed partly because of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maineguy8888
In fact, my earlier post spoke to the exact opposite reality. Have you changed the meaning of the earlier post so you would have an easier time arguing? Sorry, you do not get to choose what I am arguing.
What is more likely, that I was intentionally creating a strawman so I could knock down your argument or that I simply misunderstood your claim? Do you always have discussions like this? If so, how many friends do you have?
See my above point, however, as I'm not sure that I am responding to something other than what you said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maineguy8888
The salient point, of course, is that nothing happens in a vacuum. Tuohey's actions did not, the college students' actions did not, and nobody else's actions take place in a vacuum either.
The raison d'etre for political correctness is to bring about a culture of fear and intimidation. And that outcome has deadly consequences.
(Interestingly, guess which airport Mr. Tuohey worked out of? PWM, which lies exactly thirty miles away from.....wait for it, wait for it..Brunswick, Maine......which is home of........ Bowdoin College. The area has one of the most politically correct cultures in the country.)
Glad to see the people of my old area have learned the lessons of 9/11 so well..........or not.
I'm not sure who has argued that things happen in a vacuum. Being politically correct by not treating people who appear to be Muslim as though they are terrorists is a good thing. There is nothing we should learn from Tuohey's encounter.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
