UPDATE: 7 GW students confess:
"It is to our great dismay that the student body and the media missed the clear, if subtle, message of our flier: the hyperbolic nature of the flier was aimed at exposing Islamophobic racism," the e-mail said.We didn't miss it here, of course.
पोस्ट्स
८२ टिप्पण्या:
This is disgusting. I am outraged. What a way to begin my week.
I hurt feelings all the time, always in my own name, though.
Hurt feelings get so much precedence these days! It must be the women taking over.
You don't see any accounts of hurt feelings from the British when America threw them out.
Anyway somebody is trading on this new heightened sensitivity. Why not? The quick route to idiot minds.
Free speech is a bitch.
Re: "Free speech is a bitch."
Especially when you pretnnd that someone else is saying your words.
Most people call that lying. It borders on libel.
There should be a Conservo-Moron awareness week.
"Campus police moved quickly to remove the fliers, university leaders began investigating how they got there..."
Thoughtcrime!
It borders on satire, not lying.
Satire is usually funny.
If I put flyers up around your campus that says "I hate lesbians. They are all doomed to hell. Signed Beth" would that also be satire?
I think it would be a vicious lie, and I doubt you would be so sanguine.
The irony is that someone who purports that his group promotes liberty and freedom is suddenly all a-twitter when his group is severely mocked.
Are students these days naive (I was just really shocked that this sort of hatred exists on our campus) or just willfully dense (It shows how desperate they become to try to silence debate on campus; News flash: This has ignited debate and is healthy)?
So if someone were to go around posting signs around your place of business that you are a commie-loving America-hating socialist, you would dismiss it as just some severe mocking, a fine expression of free speech, and good because it might spur healthy debate?
I somehow doubt it.
There are many ironies. There's also the irony that someone who (probably) thinks he cares about the expression of hatred against Muslims has put up signs that express hatred against Muslims which some Muslim students will experience as real hate speech.
Or even better-- posted flyers saying "Do you hate America? So do I!" and had it be in your name.
enigmaticore, if such signs were posted in my workplace, directed at me, they'd be laughed at. I might be subject to good-natured ribbing.
MadisonMan - You mean that in an environment where people know you and what you stand for, an obviously false slur would be more funny than harmful. Is that what happened in this story, though?
In the end, I think this story does show how these kinds of things tend to work out. The people who put up the signs are shown to prefer stifling debate than engaging in it, the people who are hosting the event have the opportunity to speak their piece to what is probably a larger audience now.
jennifer, if people don't know me or my values -- why will I care what they think of me? I will agree that my case doesn't exactly parallel the one in question.
I don't think the person who put up the mocking ad is very concerned that Muslims will experience hate speech (a phrase I don't particularly like, incidentally), of course -- I'm not naive; far more likely that they just want to mock the conservative group. Is the conservative group truly outraged or just mock outraged to generate sympathetic publicity by conservative bloggers (who apparently are all for tamping down free speech)? I don't see how putting up the signs has stifled debate at all. Witness this spate of comments.
I don't think it *has* stifled debate. That's what I mean when I say these kinds of things work themselves out.
I imagine, though, that the people who put the signs up were attempting to mock the conservative group and limit attendance at their event week. That's trying to stifle debate. Encourage debate by showing up, hearing what they have to say and engaging. Stifle debate by trying to discourage people from attending and listening to what the group has to say. That seems pretty obvious to me.
But isn't it a fact that Muslims hate women and gays?
What about that hate?
Compare and contrast with black students who manufacture stories of racism by Conservatives that turn out to be false, and gay students who manufacture stories of homophobic attacks by Conservatives that turn out to be false.
No difference.
This is how the Left fights. Dirty.
I'm furious.
Republicans we have to man our computers and show our outrage now.
This is so upsetting. I can't believe how angry I am.
I want justice now. This is infuriating.
Pogo, that would be an attempt at satire, and people who know me would laugh at the absurdity. It doesn't have to be actually funny for it to be free speech. That's the marketplace of ideas; it gets messy, and attempts to make a point can fall flat. So what? That happens all the time on campuses. I've seen "fighting dirty" from both sides, many times over the years. We survive it.
Sadly a conference on "Amerikkkan-Fascism Awareness Week" would be joyful, well attended event at most college campuses these days.
Because everyone on campus knows that unlike Muslim countries, Amerikkka is murderous, sexist, rascist, and homophobic.
The irony is that someone who purports that his group promotes liberty and freedom is suddenly all a-twitter when his group is severely mocked.
Where the posters crossed the line, MadisonMan, was in using the word "we". The authors represented themselves as members of the group hosting the event. That's not satire, and it isn't mockery either. It's just deception.
Furthermore, there's nothing ironic or hypocritical about a person who supports liberty and freedom being annoyed by unfair attacks by left-wing assholes. The fact is that you can support freedom of expression and still express disapproval of what other people say. Support for free speech doesn't require you to completely abandon your right to criticize other people.
Are students these days naive (I was just really shocked that this sort of hatred exists on our campus) or just willfully dense (It shows how desperate they become to try to silence debate on campus; News flash: This has ignited debate and is healthy)?
They don't want to debate, they want to destroy their opponents by smearing them as bigots.
If they had posted up a flyer saying the the YAF was a hate group or whatever, thats free speech.
The fact is, the left posted up a fake flyer, posing as the YAF, in order to try and paint their ideological opponents are racists and/or bigots, with nothing to back it up, other than the usual leftwing crap.
Re: "and people who know me would laugh at the absurdity. "
I dunno, Beth. Young men and women who did not know you wouldn't find it funny at all, and might believe it, and think you were really that sort of person.
The marketplace of ideas is insufficient to deal with a lie like that, or its harm to your reputation. As per Twain: "A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes."
Do you find "The Protocols of Zion" just satire, or just benign speech that the Jews can ignore and laugh off? I don't.
Yeah, the conservatives are the victims here - sheesh!
This is the same conservative movement spying on and harassing the Frost family because their son gave the Dem address on S-CHIP.
The conservative assholes have published the family's address on the web, Michelle Malkin has been stalking their home, and they've also been spreading lies about the family.
Why? Because the boy spoke up, so he must be crushed.
Notice when Republicans have children as messengers it's no problem, and liberals don't go stalking those families. Because we have some basic human decency. This must be a first in attacking children in a partisan fight. What assholes.
The latest story I read reveals that a Muslim student has confessed to creating the "satire."
Since speech codes are based entirely on the subject's feeling of offense, this seemingly makes a Muslim activist guilty of hate speech. Wacky.
"They don't want to debate, they want to destroy their opponents by smearing them as bigots."
They are bigots. When they denounce an entire religion as fascist, when they call for homosexuals to be relegated to second class status, "bigot" is one of the mildest descriptors available. Con writings these days drip with anti-muslim hate and defamation.
And, for all the cries of outrage, the "Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week" is a conservative event. Someone just put our a clearly satirical (if tasteless) flier mocking the event.
And now conservatives are over-acting like histrionic drama queens playing the victims, the martyrs.
Oh so now reporting is the new "stalking", at least when done by a "winger" huh? The Dems trotted out as little kid to do their talking for them. How disgusting.
Even more disgusting is those trying to smear MM etc for exposing the Dems tactic for what it is; a cheap play on the heart strings by the socialists, using someone who's family could probably afford their own health insurance, if their priorities were more in line. Maybe if they knew some actual poor people, they could trot one out, rather than someone with a 400K house who can't be bothered to insure his own family.
Naybe if the Democrats would man up and stop trying to rely on children to do their politicking for them, they would get better treatment. The Dems were trying to play the "Absolute Moral Authority" card, using a child and the best you defenders of such chicanery can do is to call MM a stalker for exposing the lie?
Thanks for making my point for me Alpha Lib. You are a shining jewel of glittering ignorance.
The YAF calls negative attention to the people and governments who execute women and gays in the name of Islam and you call the YAF "bigots".
When are you going to start supporting Human Rights, Alpha?
sgt ted, parking outside of someone's home is not "reporting." If she wanted to report, she would do research, respectfully call them up on the phone, ask them questions, confirm the research before she publishes it.
That's what real reporters typically do.
Parking outside someone's home, noting the bumper sticker on their door, and never confirming the falsehoods they publish is not "reporting." Publishing someone's home address is a threat to their personal safety, as Malkin the hypocrite has previously pointed out.
Republicans have also used children as messengers. That's okay, right? But allowing a child to speak for children being denied health care, oh, that's bad because ...?
I swear if I ever see an adult attacking a child I will send them to the hospital. I feel the exact same ways about your attacks on this child and his disabled sister.
You people have no decency left.
And now conservatives are over-acting like histrionic drama queens playing the victims, the martyrs.
Well, that's what sells, and it's nicely publicizing their event. I suspect attendance will be higher than it otherwise may have been.
And Alpha got its Journalism degree from....?
Ncie try at outrage Alpha, but talk about ho-hum.
Like I asked: When will AL start supporting Human Rights?
"enigmaticore, if such signs were posted in my workplace, directed at me, they'd be laughed at. I might be subject to good-natured ribbing."
Because your co-workers know you.
But let's say you were a businessman. Some of your customers know you on a personal level, but most do not. And around your place of business, these flyers started being distributed.
I bet your devil may care attitude would change very quickly, especially if your business started seeing a drop-off.
That is the analogy here. This group's sphere of 'business' is the campus. The flyers were posted so that people, most of who do not have personal relationships or personal knowledge of those in the group, would see it.
And it was not done in good humor. It was done to intentionally mislead people into believing a lie-- that this group had said what the flyer said.
Sgt Ted, I think being silent would be better than such an obvious dodge.
It doesn't take a real degree to be a reporter, much less to tell real reporting from partisan attack hackery.
You and your ilk are nailed for the bullies you are, you can't defend yourselves and you know it.
Please stop beating up on the little children.
"It was done to intentionally mislead people into believing a lie-"
Please explain how you come across this information. Have you finally cracked the secret to reading minds?
Do you need some kind of special headware for that? A tinfoil hat, perhaps?
"Please stop beating up on the little children."
It is rank cowardice to hid behind little kids as the Democrats have done.
e-core, if I were a businessman, I'd invest considerable time in cultivating a reputation, probably through advertising. If you are well known, scandal isn't very effective.
I'll guess that the poor Conservatives on this campus either aren't well known, or they've spent little time among the student body acquiring a reputation that is counter to what the satire of the posters suggested.
If I saw something like the flier in question, I'd know immediately that it was a clumsy attempt at satire. I think anyone would.
pogo, no-one was hiding. Dem's are all over the airwaves denouncing Bush's move. Nancy Pelosi went on Fox News to answers Mike Wallace's punk son's questions.
Please elaborate how that is "hiding." And why your attacks on the kid's family are legitimized.
And why is it okay for Republicans to use children as messengers, but not Democrats.
It's not okay to use kids as messengers. I would not defend it.
Doing so is cowardly and evasive.
Ann Althouse said: But whoever hates the conservatives doesn't mind making the Muslim students feel hurt — as long as they feel hurt by conservatives.
That's an excellent point. Well said.
It reminds me precisely of how conservatives, REpublicans, and even the president himself routinely amplify and broadcast as far and wide as possible the worst possible interpretation of even the slightest offense to the troops.
Repeatedly, Republicans show they are willing to make sure the troops feel the hurt, feel attacked and unappreciated, as long as they can be convinced that it is liberals and Democrats who hate and underappreciate them.
That's one of the leading tactics in the Republican playbook.
The president himself, in response to the MoveOn ad, said that the ad was an insult not just of Petraeus, but the entire armed forces. Of course he doesn't believe it, and neither do most other smart people.
But he knows it's good political strategy to convince the troops that they are being hurt and attacked and unappreciated, because it protects the political power of Republicans.
It's scummy.
Repeatedly, Republicans show they are willing to make sure the troops feel the hurt, feel attacked and unappreciated, as long as they can be convinced that it is liberals and Democrats who hate and underappreciate them.
Well said! Well said!!
gt ted, parking outside of someone's home is not "reporting."
Are you high? Reporters park outside the homes of people they're hoping to interview all the time.
And why your attacks on the kid's family are legitimized
The reason the "attacks" are legitimate is that the Democrats trotted out this kid as an example of someone whose family can't afford health care.
The reality is that his parents could easily afford health care if they weren't a couple of irresponsible assholes. What kind of a jerk-off of a father has four kids and refuses to get a real job with health coverage -- despite the fact that he's a college graduate?
The reality is that the parents gambled the well-being of their kids on their own search for personal satisfaction, and they lost. Now they want me to pay their bills? F*** them.
No. Not high, but thanks for asking. I left out that apparent phrase "by itself."
Malkin didn't ask the subjects of her attacks about her observations, as a reporter would.
Malkin did not confirm the news she misreported as "fact." (Leaving out, the kids have scholarships, the home was bought before the neighborhood gentrified, etc).
Malkin doesn't give a rat's ass for a fact in her rush to pummel a 12-year-old kid and his family.
Bitch.
Revenant, you are passing judgment on people based on very flawed, wrong and partisan reports.
So you know this man's life so well you can denounce him to the world, having read a few hate-filled posts?
Your thought leaders have told you they send their kids to an expensive school with expensive tuition. did they tell you the family only pays $500 of that tuition?
If you have a difference on the political fights, take it up with the pols and stop beating up on kids, you bully. We know your game, you're trying to make an example of thie family.
Fuck the right.
the home was bought before the neighborhood gentrified
That makes the situation even *less* defensible for the parents, since it means they're sitting on a small fortune in equity. They could have sold the house, bought a 1400 square foot place in a cheaper neighborhood, and pocketed hundreds of thousands of dollars. They chose to keep living in their McMansion, working their cheesy little jobs, and gambling with their children's health. It didn't work out for them.
So you know this man's life so well you can denounce him to the world
They both have college degrees and claim to make less than $45k a year between them. It is therefore a fact that they are choosing to work jobs that pay far less, with far fewer benefits, than they could get if they were willing to sacrifice. Hell, I made more than $45k a year four years out of state college with only an undergraduate degree.
Your thought leaders have told you they send their kids to an expensive school with expensive tuition.
I didn't mention the "expensive school" at all, although obviously spending any amount of money on private education while letting your kids go without health coverage is irresponsible.
pummel a 12-year-old kid and his family.
Anyone who chooses to publicly speak out on behalf of a political agenda is open to criticism -- as are the parents, in this case, for choosing to use their son to further their selfish political agenda.
Please stop beating up on the little children.
"Ignore the fact that I used this kid to mouth my words for me. How could you attack the cute little dears?!1"
And this is precisely why the Dems used a kid in their response. They knew that scumbags like Alpha would respond to any criticism of their choice with that cheesy line. What a lowlife you are Alpha.
It reminds me a little of when terrorists hide behind children to attack coalition forces so when the response kills kids they can use the corpses as props for anti-American propaganda ala Haditha and Lebanon and where ever else Islamo-whacko's wage war.
The upside to the Dems tactic is the kid is alive to re-use again and again!
"I'm a bitch."
--Madison Man
What's truly sad is how quickly the posters were torn down.
So much for Madison Man's "free speech" theory. There is no more free speech on our campuses.
If you want to say that Muslim Arabs with oil money are a bunch of goat-molesting terrorist-loving boy-chasers, they'll shout you down and shut you up. You're not allowed to say that, because people might be offended!
I'm not a bitch, life is.
Pogo, are you going for hyperbole? I'm not going to compare every little satirical or snarky flyer campaign to the Protocols, for goodness' sake. Whoever did the flyers signed them with an obviously hyperbolic name -- :Brought to you by Students for Conservativo-Fascism Awareness: that's satire.
Michelle Malkin didn't confirm anything through two sources, she didn't speak with the family, and she was careful to make sure we know the family doesn't like Bush. She's not a journalist, she's a gadfly. To "smear" her, you'd first have to wash her down with a firehose.
They both have college degrees and claim to make less than $45k a year between them.
Yes, that's true of more people than you're apparently aware of. Welcome to the investment economy.
None of us know the facts of this family's situation, not from the news article and certainly not from the slimy Malkin's skulking about their driveway.
But if one of the children was seriously injured in an accident, and requires more attention than the average healthy kid, I wouldn't be surprised if this mom were less focused on cracking the glass ceiling at some company and instead has a less ambitious career that allows her to be home with her kids more.
None of us know the facts of this family's situation, not from the news article and certainly not from the slimy Malkin's skulking about their driveway.
The Frosts decided to inject themselves into the (contentious) public debate over pending legislation. In doing so they have invited their political opponents to scrutinize their lives in order to challenge both the veracity and credibility of their public statements.
Do you expect those who oppose the expansion of the S-Chip program into the middle class to sit idly by and genuflect to the Frost's sob-story claims of poverty and suffering without checking to see if their stories are true or not?
Your statement that "none of us knows the facts of the family's situation" is true. If we are to believe what they say, and take their advice about what to do regarding this legislations, don't you think it is important that we find out the facts about this family's "situation"?
"that's satire"
Yes, I was being hyperbolic.
I offer that the affected student didn't find it satirical at all, and might have been concerned someone would take it seriously.
3 boys at Duke had legal proceedings against them for the mere fact of being white jocks, had people threaten their lives, had 88 teachers at the school speak against them.
I no longer trust the university to have the intellectual honesty or decency to sort out fact from fiction, or judge defamatory speech from satire. They left that presumption of "the open mind" long ago.
Principal Claude Rolle: Two of your students are in the nurses office talking a lawsuit.
Shale: What, is the nurse a lawyer?
(The Substitute 1996)
Gedaliya,
Sure. The family should expect other interviews, and questions. If we don't get more specific information, then we can write them off as a good example of what's wrong and right with the health program. But that still won't do much to tell us about the program. There's not a program, government or not, for which we can't find examples that represent the margins of the program's intentions. If the Dems put up a poor example, then they made a lousy strategic choice.
But no, they shouldn't have to deal with attention-seeking bloggers skulking in their driveways. This isn't the first time Malkin's directed personal attacks at people in their homes, and helped direct wingnut freaks right to someone's home address.
If I ever look out and see Michelle Malkin on my front porch, I'm going to choose that moment to clean the catbox, the old medieval way. Garde loo!
Gedaliya laid out this threat to all who publicly disagree with Republicans:
The Frosts decided to inject themselves into the (contentious) public debate over pending legislation. In doing so they have invited their political opponents to scrutinize their lives in order to challenge both the veracity and credibility of their public statements.
This is simply false. You don't have the right to damage the lives of people who engage in civic debate. To pester their neighbors, phone death threats, bother people at their work place.
I thought conservatives respect families? Not families who DARE UTTER PUBLIC DISAGREEMENT WITH THE REPUBLICAN LINE. THEY MUST BE DESTROYED.
This is the thinking of brownshirts.
Sadlyno put it best. Time to do some citizen journalism and find out if these kids are "really" virgins.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPnI9XAOzvE
Beth says:
But no, they shouldn't have to deal with attention-seeking bloggers skulking in their driveways.
Well, this is a tough call. I agree that if I found a reporter violating my privacy and that reporter refused to leave me alone after being politely invited to do so, I would find means to make that reporter's life unpleasant. OTOH, most of us used to be thrilled when we saw Mike Wallace stick his microphone into the face of some used-car salesman as he left his home asking him how it feels to steal the rent money from some poor schmuck he ripped off.
The Dems did put forward a bad example for their cause by showcasing the Frosts. The Frosts participated in the game with their eyes wide open. They invited public scrutiny. I agree that some on my side of the debate have gone farther than necessary in discrediting them, but there is no effective means of regulating the behavior of journalists or bloggers in these kind of situations.
As the saying goes, politics isn't beanbag. If the Frosts were naive before this incident, it is a good bet they're not so now.
This is simply false. You don't have the right to damage the lives of people who engage in civic debate. To pester their neighbors, phone death threats, bother people at their work place.
Are you responding to me? I never said anyone had the right to "damage the lives" of the Frosts. Nor did I advocate any of the other alleged incidents you detail.
If you want to make persuasive arguments, try addressing the points of your opponents, and not those of straw men.
This is the thinking of brownshirts.
Do you actually believe that I or anyone else posting here is a "brownshirt"? If you do, you are either delusional of hopelessly stupid.
It's really time some lefties start keeping track of Michelle Malkin's comings and goings. She is making the case that people who speak out on an issue must have their lives laid bare.
We need to dig into hers, Dan Riehl's and all the other dimwits leading this witch hunt.
Too bad they're too boring to follow it through.
I agree that if I found a reporter violating my privacy and that reporter refused to leave me alone after being politely invited to do so, I would find means to make that reporter's life unpleasant.
We agree, but I would add that Michelle Malkin is not a reporter.
We can actually regulate journalists' behavior--just ask Dan Rather. Professional reporters who want some veneer of credibility follow rules of ethics; they can be fired for failing to do that. Malkin as "citizen journalist" isn't obliged to present multiple sources, to tell why it's relevant that she note the "1-20-2009" stiker on the family's door. She's a hack, an ideologue who "reports" only in the service of her political ideology, and her ego. Purely. She has no other purpose. I have no desire to stifle free speech, not even for the vile Michelle Malkin. But part of putting herself into the public eye is that the public might scream back "You're vile" when it's deserved.
She's a hack, an ideologue who "reports" only in the service of her political ideology, and her ego.
Well. I would characterize her as an entertainer. She may not be your cup of tea, but she does have a significant audience for her schtick.
The left has its own revolting bloggers...Glenn Greenwald comes immediately to mind. Michalangelo Signoreli "outs" people and may truly have ruined people's lives.
Malkin is hated by many people. She regularly gets death threats. She doesn't complain much about it, as far as I know (I don't regularly read her blog)...but be assured she pays a price for her contentious and aggressive public persona.
It's really time some lefties start keeping track of Michelle Malkin's comings and goings. She is making the case that people who speak out on an issue must have their lives laid bare.
We need to dig into hers, Dan Riehl's and all the other dimwits leading this witch hunt.
It is clear you possess zero moral authority to critize Malkin since you advocate the precise tactics you purport to deplore in her behavior. This makes you a hypocrite and someone no one on this blog should take seriously.
"... to tell why it's relevant that she note the "1-20-2009" stiker [sic] on the family's door ..."
How is this *not* relevant? And if they're sticking it on their door it isn't exactly sensitive, private, personal informationn.
"Brought to you by Students for Conservativo-Fascism Awareness: that's satire"
In very tiny print at the bottom of the poster. That's weaseling.
Sgt TED - though I am 99% in agreement with you on this thread, it is *way* over the top to compare the Frosts to terrorists using kids as human shields. I'm not sure that it's even all that sleazy - but it *is* political and the Frosts are fair game for reporters. In any case, the Frosts came up because it was getting pretty hard for Alpha, Beth et al to defend the dishonesty of the poster that started this thread so they needed a diversionary tactic.
I'm not referring to the Frosts.
I am comparing the Dems and their fellow travelling enablers who are going over the cliff defending the use of this child as a political set piece, claming an Absolute Moral Authority to be free from the most cursory "investigation". An address check, one interview and a housing price check have now become stalking and some sort of abuse, when the fact is, it just uncovered how irresponsible the Frost parents are.
2 college educated people and they pull in 45K combined? I was making 45K a year as a Buck Sergeant with a GED. and my family was fully insured while I was doing it.
Their priorities are screwed up and they want people of lesser means to foot the bill for their lack of planning.
Let's see... posters go up all over campus that say "we hate muslims"...
Some right-wing students did it? "Frightening! Bigoted! Reprehensible!"
Some left-wing students did it? "Satire! How could anyone be offended??? How silly--wouldn't bother me!"
Right-wing students offended at the posters? "Oh please"
Muslim/minorities offended? Calls for "global cultural understanding and respect"
That's the marketplace of ideas; it gets messy, and attempts to make a point can fall flat. So what? That happens all the time on campuses.
Describing a college campus as a "marketplace of ideas"... now that's satire.
I love how the leftards have morphed Islam into a racial category now so they can use it as a club to beat up opponents of Radical Islam without having to address the issue.
If anyone is still interested in the original subject of this thread (the poster at GWU), Eugent Volokh at the Volokh Conspiracy has put up the actual poster, and it's hard to imagine how anyone viewing it wouldn't realize it's satiric.
Dark, you're absolutely right. But this sort of tasteless "humor" from non-leftists--i.e. Frat Boys who dress in blackface, for exammple--is not treated like harmless satire. A fraternity here at UT was dissolved for that reason several years ago.
Knox, I agree that roughly comparable actions should result in roughly comparable punishment (that is, if there's going to be any punishment at all, which I'm nearly always opposed to when it comes to speech). And to the degree that isn't the case on campus for left-leaning vs. right-leaning folks, I think that's wrong.
That said, I don't think fraternity boys in blackface constitutes "satire."
This is the thinking of brownshirts.
Yes, because someone saying "This story seems fishy" and checking it out...
equals....
...Beating up Jews, Homo's and Crystalnacht and other acts of political violence committed by Nazi's.
Can Alpha get anymore stupid before it qualifies for disability benefits?
knoxwhirled and darkbloom, first, I don't agree with speech codes on campus. I don't like speech police in the marketplace of ideas (still using that term unironically, and I will continue to). But acts that deserve a response from the administration should receive a response, regardless of who does them. If a group, for example, rounds up all the copies of the college paper and dumps them in the trash for any reason, I don't care who they are, they should be held to account.
But frat boys in blackface? Exactly what are they satirizing?
Beth, we are in agreement.
"...it's hard to imagine how anyone viewing it wouldn't realize it's satiric."
1. What if the YAF had made a poster with a mirror-image "satire"? I'm sure Beth would be loudly defending their free speech rights, yeah right.
2. At least some people didn't realize it was satire because there were calls for the perpetrators to be expelled until it was discovered that they were politically correct.
But frat boys in blackface? Exactly what are they satirizing?
Al Jolson?
Black ghetto street culture, maybe?
Maybe they are satirizing the 1st Amendment?
If a stripper stripping is "free speech" how can blackface NOT be "free speech"? Offensive, of course.
At what point does someone elses offense to speech override the speech itself?
I'm not talking about a crime, like fire in a theater.
Sgt. Ted, I think the issue with frats is that they have governing bodies, national organizations that have to be chartered to exist on a campus. They agree to some behavioral restrictions to get those charters. That's my guess.
Yes, Gary, the YAF has free speech rights, too, and the right to attempt, for good or ill, satire.
As for some people not getting that it was satire, that doesn't surprise me at all. I teach college freshmen, and those who are in their late teens are terribly literal. They don't immediately get satire in their literature courses, either. There are always a few upset and even enraged souls when I assign "A Modest Proposal."
I think the conservative group used a little satire in their replay, too, claiming "It was hateful."
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा