Problematic Stuff

[pErvinalia]

Justin Trudaeaueuae has culturally appropriated the shit out of India on his current trip there.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Any harassment is unacceptable.

However, I read through the article and it's long on general allegation, and quite short on specifics.

The harassment is described thusly:

1. A professor gets an email that a known right-wing publication is planning to run a story about your research or your teaching, and it offers you a chance to comment. [right wing publication? Fox News? The Wall Street Journal? Stormfront? What publication? If what we're talking about is a some conservative publication, even Breitbart, or another obviously, staunchly right wing publication, is doing this - this is not harassment. It's an email asking for comment. It's what journalists are supposed to do].

2. A story is published which then "goes viral" on social media. The article refers to it in scare quotes - the "little commie" -- is being criticized all over by an "army" of trolls. That's also known as "people on social media interested in a topic and commenting on it." And, the "little commie" sometimes is a commie, sometimes not. But, sometimes. And, as we have seen, a lot of professors have said a lot of fucking ridiculous shit, worthy of comment and scorn. And, so far, there is nothing wrong with what anyone is doing here. Both the left and the right have an outrage brigade, and they both have bunches of people who are interested in vigorous discussion of ideas. Just being an academic doesn't make you immune from social media commentary.

3. Within 24 hours, your university email is swarmed with messages from people claiming to be concerned students, concerned parents and concerned donors. Oh, they're "claiming" this? Maybe they are that. And, if you have a published university email to the public, then you're inviting such communications. She writes "Somewhere in the hundreds of emails there may be official communications from students and co-workers, but you don’t have the resources to find them. You cannot do your actual job of teaching and researching because you are drowning in emails, phone calls and messages." - So, here, we're missing any indication that any "racists" are after the "liberal commie" -- there are just upset parents and students and others who are writing to oppose something this professor wrote that probably sounds ludicrous to them.

4. Then there is this "Increasingly, it does not stop there. Angry consumers of this kind of culture war red meat do not live just on the internet. They live in your community. They may mail you packages, perhaps with dangerous contents in them. They may send you death threats. They may use the surveillance apparatus we built to sell internet ads and control poor people to find out where your children go to school or where your spouse works. They may threaten them, directly or indirectly." Dangerous packages with contents? Call the FBI folks, and the local police. That kind of shit - sending threatening packaging - especially with dangerous contents to university professors is not just ho-hum shit - that's terrorism, and would make every cable news channel if reported. And "death threats?" Again, are they death threats? And, have university professors had their kids and spouses threatened? When? Any examples at all? I don't buy it. This is a lot of "could happens." And, to suggest that the mob of internet asshats is something new is ridiculous. Nobody gives a fuck when mobs of people email prominent people on the internet -- Richard Dawkins was famous for his fireside readings of his hate mail, which included very vile and horrible suggestions, and nastiness. Of course that's out there. What do you think? If you publish some communist manifesto that nobody is going to call you an asshole for it? What do you think professors like Jordan Peterson, Gad Saad or Brett Weinstein get? Brett Weinstein is a great example - that guy was literally threatened with violence, and had leftist students hunting him on campus, and he was forced to hold his classes off campus for a time to avoid getting attacked.

The article then refers to "the perpetrators of THIS harassment," but conspicuously left out are any specific examples. All we know is that the writer says that hosts of left wing professors, starting 6 years ago or so, are routinely subjected to news outlets emailing them for comment on publications related the professors' work. Once those news outlets publish, then the public comments vigorously on social media about the "liberal commies." Then some actually write as concerned citizens and students to the professor to express their displeasure, using publicly available email addresses which are publicly available to the public so the public can email the professor.... there is then the strong implication that some numbers of these professors have received packages in the mail with dangerous substances and threats in them (none have made the news), and that some have had their families and even kids threatened (nothing like that has made the news).

Seems legit.

Predictable response, Forty Two. What the professor finds problematic is that 'comment and scorn' all too often lead to harrassment, including death threats against the professor and their family. You assiduously chronicle your own scorn and dismay at the actions of 'leftist scum' (both professors and students) on campus and elsewhere, but when presented with a description of how your right-wing compatriots react to those 'leftist scum' you adopt a skeptical stance. There are right wing websites like Professor Watchlist devoted exclusively to naming professors who hold and express leftist views and are used by right wing harassers for targeting professors. In your post you repeatedly assert that 'nothing like that has made the news,' while apparently not bothering to find out if your assertion is correct. A sample of what you might have found if you'd taken the time to look:

'Death threats sent to FGCU professor of racism class'

'College Professors Face Death Threats, Firings for Online Comments'

'Controversial Professor Quits'

'Police investigating white substance, rape threat sent to Stanford law professor'

[L'Emmerdeur]

Unintended consequences of ignorance and the unwillingness to face facts.

'Texas Should Let Trans Wrestlers Like Mack Beggs Fight Other Boys'

Do opponents of transgender rights realize that transgender men exist?

That’s the question I’m left wondering yet again, after Texas transgender boy Mack Beggs won his second state-level wrestling tournament in a girls category.

Beggs’ unique predicament—being barred from competing against boys because his original birth certificate lists him as female, but being allowed to take testosterone because it is a medically necessary part of his transition-related health care—has drawn a great deal of media attention and, predictably, outrage.

But it also exposes a blind spot in the culture war over transgender rights: Often, the architects of anti-transgender policies don’t seem to realize—or don’t care—that transgender people aren’t just comprised of those who transition from male to female, but those who transition from female to male as well.

So focused are they on the specter of “men in dresses” that they don’t think about how their rules will affect men in pants—or, in this case, wrestling unitards.

Beggs himself has been caught in this awkward spot for the entirety of his wrestling career.

As The Daily Beast previously reported, he won the girls 110-pound category in a state tournament last February. Although his victory angered parents and other competitors, the University Interscholastic League, a Texas state-level high school athletics organization, failed to adjust the rules to allow Beggs to wrestle boys instead.

...

The particular policy that kept Beggs out of the boys category is of tellingly recent vintage.

In 2016, as a University Interscholastic League FAQ noted, 95 percent of UIL-member school superintendents gave the birth certificate rule their stamp of approval.

According to TransAthlete.com, that makes Texas just one of seven states that requires a birth certificate change or proof of surgery to allow K-12 transgender athletes to compete against others of their gender.

Mercifully, once at the college level, the NCAA has an inclusive policy with guidelines that were developed with input from LGBT advocates and medical professionals.

But thanks to the University Interscholastic League’s birth certificate rule—approved during a year when several state legislatures were targeting transgender people based on their documentation—Beggs has been surrounded by controversy for simply opting to play his sport.

What should be eminently clear by now is that policies that ban transgender girls from competing against other girls also have the the effect of forcing transgender boys like Beggs to compete against girls.

At least next year he'll finally get to wrestle opponents of his own gender.

[pErvinalia]

This is all the social justice warriors fault. Without them, there wouldn't be any transgender people.

[rainbow]

Justin Trudaeaueuae has culturally appropriated the shit out of India on his current trip there.

Golly!

[JimC]

Bolly!

[pErvinalia]

Wood.

[pErvinalia]

Apparently Jim Beam are releasing a Jane Beam variety. This is proving problematic for man-babies.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Apparently Jim Beam are releasing a Jane Beam variety. This is proving problematic for man-babies.

As far as I know it's the Johnnie Walker company. I hadn't heard that it was ruffling the fashies, but given previous sensitive reactions to perceived slights I wouldn't put it past them.

[pErvinalia]

It's yet another in the long line of slights against men.

[Forty Two]

I would think the only ones getting ruffled about this would be the Progressive SJWs. https://www.dailydot.com/irl/jane-walke ... for-women/ and https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/vor ... 96c91db939 (the only complaints I've found are articles complaining about it from a feminist perspective)

The notion of a Jane (female) for a Johnnie (male) is inherently transphobic anyway, and gender binary normative. It's just stereotypical portrayals of male and female genders, and ignores the reality that Jane may well be "male" (or something else) and Johnnie may be female (or something else), or they may change from day to day. Gender is a fluid spectrum, after all, and just because "Jane" is wearing what appear to be feminine clothes and have long hair does not mean she's female. The assumption that Johnnie or Jane are gender binaries is itself problematic.

Also, the Jane Walker label places Jane in an inherently subservient role. It's "Jane Walker" in small font, and then "by Johnny Walker" in large font. A clear signifier that that the "male" walker is the dominant walker.

[Brian Peacock]

pErvinalia,

In this post you say...

You know exactly why I abuse you. It's because you are dishonest beyond belief, and your disingenuous reply here just reinforces that view.

This goes against our play nice and no personal attacks rule - not least because it shifts the responsibility for your own action onto those you have determined can be justifiably abused. Cut this shit out or spend a week on an enforced posting holiday.

Brian

[pErvinalia]

Yes Sir.

[laklak]

The article says that Johnny Walker has "Stood for progress" for 200 years.

What's that mean?

[JimC]

Rather uneven, staggering progress mostly...