What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

What does the confederate flag mean to you? (1 Viewer)

Bull Dozier said:
TheIronSheik said:
General Malaise said:
I didn't see the abortion known as Dukes of Hazard: The Movie, but did they scrub out the Confederate flat on the General Lee?
Click to expand...
No. They actually made a pretty funny joke referencing it and how people were giving them the stink eye for having it.
Click to expand...
The Duke bros are doing Cars.com add in the General and I've notices they shoot it strategically so as to not show the roof of tha car. I can't tell if there is a flag there or if it is blank.
Click to expand...
You mean autotrader, not cars.com. So apparently the company came out and said that the idea of the commercials is that Luke and Bo are using their website to get a new car, because "The General Lee" is outdated.

"The whole point of the Dukes of Hazzard storyline was that the car is outdated in every way — and it needed replacing," the company said in a statement when asked about the Confederate flag. "The characters have a clear need that Autotrader can solve by helping them replace their old car that can't keep up with changing times."

 
I would hang my rebel flag upside down, but I don't know which way that is.

 
The Dukes/General Lee isn't an issue. The Duke boys are a couple of backwardsass country ####s. It makes total sense for them to have a car like that.

It's like Ed Norton's swastika tat in American History X.

 
TobiasFunke said:
General Tso said:
As usual Tobias, you are wrong. You're consistent though, I'll give you that. You really shouldn't pop off with such confidence all the time, especially on matters you know very little about.

These microaggressions were presented at Faculty Leadership Seminars for department chairs and Deans at the "invitation" of President Janet Napolitano. I highlight "invitation" because at the end of her letter she says that she will be briefed on all the sessions "and the attendance". Her expectations for the session couldn't be clearer. She wants microaggressions identified and removed from the day to day language.

One of the materials included with the invitation is an overview of "Chair/Dean responsibilities", which cites relevant passages in the Academic Personnel Manual. And on this one page document the words diversity, equal opportunity and affirmative action appear 12 times. There is also a ton of oter material, including a "Definitions" document that directly links the behaviors, attitudes and practices of faculty members with the overall campus climate. There is role play involved where microaggressions are identified and addressed. In short, it's a not so subtle reminder that although microaggressions may not be officially banned, their usage would definitely be construed as poor performance. The clear implication is that a Professor who wants to stay a Professor, or get tenured, shouldn't say them. There is even a document instructing Professors and Chairs on how to reframe or interrupt microaggressions. One excerpt shows how to respond when someone makes the horrible comment that everyone can succeed in this country, if they work hard enough.

Response - "So you feel that everyone in society can succeed if they work hard enough. Can you give me some examples?"

Yeah, this is the exact type of stuff we should all be cautious about when it comes to PC Police . It's lunacy by any standard, even yours. And if you think they are soft-shooing these microaggressions you are crazy. In Solorzano's PowerPoint presentation on microaggressions he defines them as "systematic everyday racism used to keep those at the racial margins in their place". He later calls them "assaults" and says they can be a form of "conscious racism". Lastly, he says that they lead to "anger, stress, poor academic performance, and poor health".

But hey - Tobias says that microaggressions aren't officially banned - and that the real nuts are FoxNews and Conservatives trying to stir up trouble in a thread about mass murders in churches and law enforcement abuse. Here's a little spot check for you T - this thread is about the Confederate flag, and I was responding directly to a post where someone was asking why we needed to be cautious about the PC Police. So stop being such a dink.
Click to expand...
Can you help me out? I'm trying to find the part where someone bans others from saying that "America is the land of opportunity." This is a lot of words, I'm sure it's in there somewhere.

Because if it isn't ... well, for someone who seems troubled by the notion of people who play "thought police" you sure seem eager to interpret the sentiments and motivations to others who did not speak or write anything like what what you ascribe to them.

Keep fighting that good fight on behalf of the academic community, though. Eyes on the prize. We shall overcome.
Click to expand...
Who said anything about a ban? Besides you? I said you "can't say it" on a college campus. Just like I'd say that you can't say the n-word to your boss. It's not specifically banned, but it's definitely against stated policy and expectations. Jesus dude, you are one of the most argumentative - I keep coming back to the word dink - in this whole place. If you'd been paying attention you'd see that I am one of the most ardent supporters in this thread of removing the flag. I've even gone beyond that and said I'd like to see the street names and school names changed as well. But your insistence on being such a consummate d-bag has you misrepresenting me as usual. Tired act.
 
Last edited:
General Tso said:
TobiasFunke said:
General Tso said:
As usual Tobias, you are wrong. You're consistent though, I'll give you that. You really shouldn't pop off with such confidence all the time, especially on matters you know very little about.

These microaggressions were presented at Faculty Leadership Seminars for department chairs and Deans at the "invitation" of President Janet Napolitano. I highlight "invitation" because at the end of her letter she says that she will be briefed on all the sessions "and the attendance". Her expectations for the session couldn't be clearer. She wants microaggressions identified and removed from the day to day language.

One of the materials included with the invitation is an overview of "Chair/Dean responsibilities", which cites relevant passages in the Academic Personnel Manual. And on this one page document the words diversity, equal opportunity and affirmative action appear 12 times. There is also a ton of oter material, including a "Definitions" document that directly links the behaviors, attitudes and practices of faculty members with the overall campus climate. There is role play involved where microaggressions are identified and addressed. In short, it's a not so subtle reminder that although microaggressions may not be officially banned, their usage would definitely be construed as poor performance. The clear implication is that a Professor who wants to stay a Professor, or get tenured, shouldn't say them. There is even a document instructing Professors and Chairs on how to reframe or interrupt microaggressions. One excerpt shows how to respond when someone makes the horrible comment that everyone can succeed in this country, if they work hard enough.

Response - "So you feel that everyone in society can succeed if they work hard enough. Can you give me some examples?"

Yeah, this is the exact type of stuff we should all be cautious about when it comes to PC Police . It's lunacy by any standard, even yours. And if you think they are soft-shooing these microaggressions you are crazy. In Solorzano's PowerPoint presentation on microaggressions he defines them as "systematic everyday racism used to keep those at the racial margins in their place". He later calls them "assaults" and says they can be a form of "conscious racism". Lastly, he says that they lead to "anger, stress, poor academic performance, and poor health".

But hey - Tobias says that microaggressions aren't officially banned - and that the real nuts are FoxNews and Conservatives trying to stir up trouble in a thread about mass murders in churches and law enforcement abuse. Here's a little spot check for you T - this thread is about the Confederate flag, and I was responding directly to a post where someone was asking why we needed to be cautious about the PC Police. So stop being such a dink.
Click to expand...
Can you help me out? I'm trying to find the part where someone bans others from saying that "America is the land of opportunity." This is a lot of words, I'm sure it's in there somewhere.

Because if it isn't ... well, for someone who seems troubled by the notion of people who play "thought police" you sure seem eager to interpret the sentiments and motivations to others who did not speak or write anything like what what you ascribe to them.

Keep fighting that good fight on behalf of the academic community, though. Eyes on the prize. We shall overcome.
Click to expand...
Who said anything about a ban? Besides you? Jesus dude, you are one of the most argumentative - I keep coming back to the word dink - in this whole place. If you'd been paying attention you'd see that I am one of the most ardent supporters in this thread of removing the flag. I've even gone beyond that and said I'd like to see the street names and school names changed as well. But your insistence on bring such a d-bag has you misrepresenting me as usual. Tired act.
Click to expand...
Dink works for me.

Fox News said it was banned. You said "you can no longer say 'America is the land of opportunity,'" which may or may not be exactly the same, but that's irrelevant because it is still false, as I said in my first post on this matter. Of course you can say it.

Also, if you don't want someone to be argumentative with you, maybe consider not starting your posts with like this?

As usual Tobias, you are wrong. You're consistent though, I'll give you that. You really shouldn't pop off with such confidence all the time, especially on matters you know very little about.
Click to expand...
Especially since I was right. And now you're not only a guy who picked a fight and lost it, you're also a guy who whined about it and called the other guy names when he did.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good try there D. Nobody's buying it.

In most peoples' worlds when an employer comes out with a 5 hour training course for all Department Heads, referring to microaggressions as "racism" and "assaults", with a portion of the training dedicated to "interrupting" microaggressions, that usually corresponds to "you can't say it". But congrats on the mental gymnastics, and somehow convincing yourself that you were right and I was wrong. It brings back memories of an Abnormal Psychology course I took in college.

 
Last edited:
lod01 said:
Anyone got some confederate books to burn? Why stop at the flag?

I've got $1 and 20 confederate bills. Should I burn them or sell them on Ebay? unfortunately they were printed in the south and not in Richmond, Virginia. It the mint was Virginia, they are worth big $.
Click to expand...
Are you a government, or a private person? Has anyone mentioned burning the flag, or simply removing it and retiring it, with respect, or at least tolerance. I'm confused by your post.

 
The flag means less than nothing to me but I defended it because at its core meaning it was a very important and historic symbol.

At this point in time the symbolism had been trashed by ignorant people. Just like some people believe all Muslims are terrorists.

Each thought is as ignorant as the other.

It is unfortunate to history but the confederate flag needs to be retired from use in the USA.

 
GrandpaRox said:
The flag means less than nothing to me but I defended it because at its core meaning it was a very important and historic symbol.

At this point in time the symbolism had been trashed by ignorant people. Just like some people believe all Muslims are terrorists.

Each thought is as ignorant as the other.

It is unfortunate to history but the confederate flag needs to be retired from use in the USA.
Click to expand...
How so?

 
At this point, should it really matter what it may mean to someone personally - is it not enough that the display of the confederate flag does harm to others, and understandably so - makes them uncomfortable, intimidated even. Why anyone would want to purposely make others feel worse is beyond me. Seems just mean as utterly inconsiderate.

 
Koya said:
At this point, should it really matter what it may mean to someone personally - is it not enough that the display of the confederate flag does harm to others, and understandably so - makes them uncomfortable, intimidated even. Why anyone would want to purposely make others feel worse is beyond me. Seems just mean as utterly inconsiderate.
Click to expand...
BUT MY GREAT GREAT GRANDPAPPY AND OTHER KINFOLK OF MINE FOUGHT TO PROTECT THEIR HOMES*

*dirt floor shacks

 
General Malaise said:
Slapdash said:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
At the Tennessee Capitol in Nashville, a bust of Nathan Bedford Forrest, a Confederate general and an early Ku Klux Klan leader, has sat in an alcove outside the Senate chamber for decades.

Democratic and Republican leaders are calling for the bust to be removed.
Click to expand...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3135820/Hillary-Clinton-camp-won-t-say-Confederate-flag-button-official-92-presidential-campaign.html

Ok that sht needs to go.
Click to expand...
Though this speech on his wiki page was interesting. Evidently his last public speech and it was to a black organization:

"Ladies and Gentlemen I accept the flowers as a memento of reconciliation between the white and colored races of the southern states. I accept it more particularly as it comes from a colored lady, for if there is any one on God's earth who loves the ladies I believe it is myself. ( Immense applause and laughter.) This day is a day that is proud to me, having occupied the position that I did for the past twelve years, and been misunderstood by your race. This is the first opportunity I have had during that time to say that I am your friend. I am here a representative of the southern people, one more slandered and maligned than any man in the nation. I will say to you and to the colored race that men who bore arms and followed the flag of the Confederacy are, with very few exceptions, your friends. I have an opportunity of saying what I have always felt - that I am your friend, for my interests are your interests, and your interests are my interests. We were born on the same soil, breathe the same air, and live in the same land. Why, then, can we not live as brothers? I will say that when the war broke out I felt it my duty to stand by my people. When the time came I did the best I could, and I don't believe I flickered. I came here with the jeers of some white people, who think that I am doing wrong. I believe that I can exert some influence, and do much to assist the people in strengthening fraternal relations, and shall do all in my power to bring about peace. It has always been my motto to elevate every man- to depress none. (Applause.) I want to elevate you to take positions in law offices, in stores, on farms, and wherever you are capable of going. I have not said anything about politics today. I don't propose to say anything about politics. You have a right to elect whom you please; vote for the man you think best, and I think, when that is done, that you and I are freemen. Do as you consider right and honest in electing men for office. I did not come here to make you a long speech, although invited to do so by you. I am not much of a speaker, and my business prevented me from preparing myself. I came to meet you as friends, and welcome you to the white people. I want you to come nearer to us. When I can serve you I will do so. We have but one flag, one country; let us stand together. We may differ in color, but not in sentiment. Use your best judgement in selecting men for office and vote as you think right.Many things have been said about me which are wrong, and which white and black persons here, who stood by me through the war, can contradict. I have been in the heat of battle when colored men, asked me to protect them. I have placed myself between them and the bullets of my men, and told them they should be kept unharmed. Go to work, be industrious, live honestly and act truly, and when you are oppressed I'll come to your relief. I thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for this opportunity you have afforded me to be with you, and to assure you that I am with you in heart and in hand."
Click to expand...
Yeah, Forrest is an interesting cat. From what I remember, he didn't want be associated with the KKK if the KKK was going to be a racist organization against blacks. I'll have to relook, but he left when that was the direction it was heading. I also think he was the only civilian elevated to the role of General or some such.

That's a speech that reads incongruous to his legacy.
Click to expand...
Key word there, "reconciliation" - that was so, so important after the CW.

Interesting letter to the Nashville Scene here.

http://www.nashvillescene.com/pitw/archives/2015/06/23/for-the-sake-of-nathan-bedford-forrest-lets-stop-worshipping-him/

Some bad, bad things were done.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I listened to an political analyst from South Carolina and, despite the growing pressure, this still won't be easy. You need a 2/3rds vote in the legislature to remove the flag. Many of the legislators are from all white rural districts- the same districts that make South Carolina a conservative bastion- and they don't see the flag as racist and they don't want it removed, and they regard all of this talk as "outside pressure", which they have a historical problem with in South Carolina. According to this analyst, many of these legislators don't really give a crap if the whole world looks down on them- they're going to "stand up for their principles no matter what."

Guess we'll find out soon...

 
I've read a few places that while it does require 2/3 to remove it under current law, a simple majority could change the law, which seems kind of stupid. but this is state government, so who knows.

 
timschochet said:
I listened to an political analyst from South Carolina and, despite the growing pressure, this still won't be easy. You need a 2/3rds vote in the legislature to remove the flag. Many of the legislators are from all white rural districts- the same districts that make South Carolina a conservative bastion- and they don't see the flag as racist and they don't want it removed, and they regard all of this talk as "outside pressure", which they have a historical problem with in South Carolina. According to this analyst, many of these legislators don't really give a crap if the whole world looks down on them- they're going to "stand up for their principles no matter what."

Guess we'll find out soon...
Click to expand...
joffer said:
I've read a few places that while it does require 2/3 to remove it under current law, a simple majority could change the law, which seems kind of stupid. but this is state government, so who knows.
Click to expand...
There's more than one way to fillet a fish.

The last vote was in 2000, and that moved it from the Capitol dome to Capitol grounds. Hard to imagine, but most Democrats joined, including the Democratic governor and 6 of the 7 black senators, the idea being that getting it off the dome was the big victory I guess.

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/05/19/us/south-carolina-votes-to-remove-confederate-flag-from-dome.html

If it does require 2/3's vote and if that's not achievable, I bet they can amend the law somehow with less than 2/3s. Anyway the 2000 vote did not have 2/3s in the House.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Officer Pete Malloy said:
Fennis said:
Officer Pete Malloy said:
moleculo said:
Even NASCAR says it's time for the flag to go.
Click to expand...
:lmao: you know when NASCAR says something is too white trash it really is time for it to go away.
Click to expand...
Snuffy Smith just came out against the flag
Click to expand...
Lol oh lord. The guy that raped Ned Beatty in "Deliverance" just tweeted that he thinks it should come down.
Click to expand...
He's already dead at the bottom of a lake with an arrow through his chest.

 
joffer said:
I've read a few places that while it does require 2/3 to remove it under current law, a simple majority could change the law, which seems kind of stupid. but this is state government, so who knows.
Click to expand...
Yes. A Legislator said this on Meet the Press on Sunday as well.
 
General Tso said:
Good try there D. Nobody's buying it.

In most peoples' worlds when an employer comes out with a 5 hour training course for all Department Heads, referring to microaggressions as "racism" and "assaults", with a portion of the training dedicated to "interrupting" microaggressions, that usually corresponds to "you can't say it". But congrats on the mental gymnastics, and somehow convincing yourself that you were right and I was wrong. It brings back memories of an Abnormal Psychology course I took in college.
Click to expand...
The stuff you're referring to is about deans, department chairs and faculty, right? If so, that's a pretty small minority of the individuals who inhabit a campus college daily. I took your original statement that "you can no longer say 'America is the land of opportunity' on a college campus in California" to be a far broader assertion than one limited to department faculty in the course of their classroom instruction.

 
South Postpones Rising Again For Yet Another YearHUNTSVILLE, AL–For the 135th straight year since Gen. Robert E. Lee's surrender at Appomattox, representatives for the South announced Monday that the region has postponed plans to rise again.

"Make no mistake, the South shall rise again," said Knox Pritchard, president of the Huntsville-based Alliance Of Confederate States. "But we're just not quite ready to do it now. Hopefully, we'll be able to rise again real soon, maybe even in 2001."

Pritchard's fellow Southerners shared his confidence.

"Yes, sir. The South will rise again, and when it does, I'll be right up front waving the Stars and Bars," said Dock Mullins of Decatur, GA. "But first, I gotta get my truck fixed and get that rusty old stove out of my yard."

"Lord willing, and the creek don't rise, we gonna rise again," said Sumter, SC, radiator technician Hap Slidell, who describes himself as "Southern by the grace of God."

"I don't know exactly when we're gonna do it, but one of these days, we're gonna show them Yankees how it's done."

"Save your Confederate dollars," Slidell added. "You can bet on that."

The Deep South states of Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, Louisiana, and Tennessee consistently rank at the bottom of the nation in a wide variety of statistical categories, including literacy, infant mortality, hospital beds, toilet-paper sales, and shoe usage. Even so, some experts believe the region could be poised for a renaissance.

"The way things stand, things in the Deep South almost have to get better. Otherwise, the people who live there will devolve into preverbal, overall-wearing sub-morons within a century," said Professor Dennis Lassiter of Princeton University. "Either Southerners will start improving themselves, or they'll be sold to middle-class Asians as pets."

"My constituents are decent, hard-working folk," said Sen. Jesse Helms (R-NC), despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, in his 22nd annual "Next Year, By God!" speech on the steps of North Carolina's capitol building. "We are a proud people who mayn't have all that much fancy-pants book-learnin', but we live and die with pride in our proud heritage and the dignity of our forebears."

Helms' speech was met with nearly 25 minutes of enthusiastic hoots and rebel yells by the 15,000 drunk, unemployed tobacco pickers in attendance.

Though Southerners are overwhelmingly in favor of rising again, few were able to provide specific details of the rising-again process.

"I don't know, I reckon we'll build us a bunch of big, fancy buildins and pave us up a whole mess of roads," said Bobby Lee Fuller of Greenville, MS. "I ain't exactly sure where we're gonna get the money for that, but when Johnny Reb sets his mind to something, you best get out of his way."

"Oh, it'll happen, sure as the sun come up in the morning," said Buford Comstock, 26, a student at Over 'N' Back Diesel Driving School in Union City, TN. "The South is gonna rise up, just as soon as we get together and get all our #### back in one sock. Then, look out, Northerners!"

"Yesiree," Comstock added, "one day soon, the Mason-Dixon Line will be the boundary between a great nation and one whose time done passed."
Click to expand...

http://www.theonion.com/article/south-postpones-rising-again-for-yet-another-year-377

 
dickey moe said:
Officer Pete Malloy said:
Fennis said:
Officer Pete Malloy said:
moleculo said:
Even NASCAR says it's time for the flag to go.
Click to expand...
:lmao: you know when NASCAR says something is too white trash it really is time for it to go away.
Click to expand...
Snuffy Smith just came out against the flag
Click to expand...
Lol oh lord. The guy that raped Ned Beatty in "Deliverance" just tweeted that he thinks it should come down.
Click to expand...
He's already dead at the bottom of a lake with an arrow through his chest.
Click to expand...
Got me there.

 
Notorious T.R.E. said:
GrandpaRox said:
The flag means less than nothing to me but I defended it because at its core meaning it was a very important and historic symbol.

At this point in time the symbolism had been trashed by ignorant people. Just like some people believe all Muslims are terrorists.

Each thought is as ignorant as the other.

It is unfortunate to history but the confederate flag needs to be retired from use in the USA.
Click to expand...
How so?
Click to expand...
If any historic item is banished it is a loss to humanity. You okay with ISIS tearing down christian monuments and religious figures. Even if it a part of history that means evil to you, it is a part of this countries history nevertheless.

 
bigbottom said:
General Tso said:
Good try there D. Nobody's buying it.

In most peoples' worlds when an employer comes out with a 5 hour training course for all Department Heads, referring to microaggressions as "racism" and "assaults", with a portion of the training dedicated to "interrupting" microaggressions, that usually corresponds to "you can't say it". But congrats on the mental gymnastics, and somehow convincing yourself that you were right and I was wrong. It brings back memories of an Abnormal Psychology course I took in college.
Click to expand...
The stuff you're referring to is about deans, department chairs and faculty, right? If so, that's a pretty small minority of the individuals who inhabit a campus college daily. I took your original statement that "you can no longer say 'America is the land of opportunity' on a college campus in California" to be a far broader assertion than one limited to department faculty in the course of their classroom instruction.
Click to expand...
Sorry dude. Not my job to spoonfeed all you fine Liberal minds. We talked about it at length in the other thread I referred to. The training may have been given to faculty only, but the instructions on how to police it (or as they call it "interrupt") apply to students as well. The general point stands - microaggressions, including "America is the land of opportunity", are formally defined by UCLA as "an act of systemic racism" and are about as welcome as a fart in an elevator.
 
Last edited:
GrandpaRox said:
Notorious T.R.E. said:
GrandpaRox said:
The flag means less than nothing to me but I defended it because at its core meaning it was a very important and historic symbol.

At this point in time the symbolism had been trashed by ignorant people. Just like some people believe all Muslims are terrorists.

Each thought is as ignorant as the other.

It is unfortunate to history but the confederate flag needs to be retired from use in the USA.
Click to expand...
How so?
Click to expand...
If any historic item is banished it is a loss to humanity. You okay with ISIS tearing down christian monuments and religious figures. Even if it a part of history that means evil to you, it is a part of this countries history nevertheless.
Click to expand...
Banished, huh? So anything a state doesn't fly from its capitol has been banished?

 
General Tso said:
bigbottom said:
General Tso said:
Good try there D. Nobody's buying it.

In most peoples' worlds when an employer comes out with a 5 hour training course for all Department Heads, referring to microaggressions as "racism" and "assaults", with a portion of the training dedicated to "interrupting" microaggressions, that usually corresponds to "you can't say it". But congrats on the mental gymnastics, and somehow convincing yourself that you were right and I was wrong. It brings back memories of an Abnormal Psychology course I took in college.
Click to expand...
The stuff you're referring to is about deans, department chairs and faculty, right? If so, that's a pretty small minority of the individuals who inhabit a campus college daily. I took your original statement that "you can no longer say 'America is the land of opportunity' on a college campus in California" to be a far broader assertion than one limited to department faculty in the course of their classroom instruction.
Click to expand...
Sorry dude. Not my job to spoonfeed all you fine Liberal minds. We talked about it at length in the other thread I referred to. The training may have been given to faculty only, but the instructions on how to police it (or as they call it "interrupt") apply to students as well. The general point stands - microaggressions, including "America is the land of opportunity", are formally defined by UCLA as "an act of systemic racism" and are about as welcome as a fart in an elevator.
Click to expand...
It's not so much about spoonfeeding as it is about the use of language to accurately express an intended point.

 
bigbottom said:
General Tso said:
bigbottom said:
General Tso said:
Good try there D. Nobody's buying it.

In most peoples' worlds when an employer comes out with a 5 hour training course for all Department Heads, referring to microaggressions as "racism" and "assaults", with a portion of the training dedicated to "interrupting" microaggressions, that usually corresponds to "you can't say it". But congrats on the mental gymnastics, and somehow convincing yourself that you were right and I was wrong. It brings back memories of an Abnormal Psychology course I took in college.
Click to expand...
The stuff you're referring to is about deans, department chairs and faculty, right? If so, that's a pretty small minority of the individuals who inhabit a campus college daily. I took your original statement that "you can no longer say 'America is the land of opportunity' on a college campus in California" to be a far broader assertion than one limited to department faculty in the course of their classroom instruction.
Click to expand...
Sorry dude. Not my job to spoonfeed all you fine Liberal minds. We talked about it at length in the other thread I referred to. The training may have been given to faculty only, but the instructions on how to police it (or as they call it "interrupt") apply to students as well. The general point stands - microaggressions, including "America is the land of opportunity", are formally defined by UCLA as "an act of systemic racism" and are about as welcome as a fart in an elevator.
Click to expand...
It's not so much about spoonfeeding as it is about the use of language to accurately express an intended point.
Click to expand...
You seem way too intelligent and decent minded to be supporting Tobias on this dumb crusade. My intended point was to highlight a situation where a poster asked for an example of PC Police gone awry. So while taking a #### at work I obliged with a quick example with reference to the other thread where details could be found if necessary. The point was spot on to anyone with half a brain or even the slightest amount of common sense. But carry on and keep expressing your outrage that it was misrepresented. It's adding a lot to the thread.
 
Last edited:
General Tso said:
bigbottom said:
General Tso said:
Good try there D. Nobody's buying it.

In most peoples' worlds when an employer comes out with a 5 hour training course for all Department Heads, referring to microaggressions as "racism" and "assaults", with a portion of the training dedicated to "interrupting" microaggressions, that usually corresponds to "you can't say it". But congrats on the mental gymnastics, and somehow convincing yourself that you were right and I was wrong. It brings back memories of an Abnormal Psychology course I took in college.
Click to expand...
The stuff you're referring to is about deans, department chairs and faculty, right? If so, that's a pretty small minority of the individuals who inhabit a campus college daily. I took your original statement that "you can no longer say 'America is the land of opportunity' on a college campus in California" to be a far broader assertion than one limited to department faculty in the course of their classroom instruction.
Click to expand...
Sorry dude. Not my job to spoonfeed all you fine Liberal minds. We talked about it at length in the other thread I referred to. The training may have been given to faculty only, but the instructions on how to police it (or as they call it "interrupt") apply to students as well. The general point stands - microaggressions, including "America is the land of opportunity", are formally defined by UCLA as "an act of systemic racism" and are about as welcome as a fart in an elevator.
Click to expand...
Always appreciate the UCLA mention. Go Bruins!

 
General Tso said:
bigbottom said:
General Tso said:
bigbottom said:
General Tso said:
Good try there D. Nobody's buying it.

In most peoples' worlds when an employer comes out with a 5 hour training course for all Department Heads, referring to microaggressions as "racism" and "assaults", with a portion of the training dedicated to "interrupting" microaggressions, that usually corresponds to "you can't say it". But congrats on the mental gymnastics, and somehow convincing yourself that you were right and I was wrong. It brings back memories of an Abnormal Psychology course I took in college.
Click to expand...
The stuff you're referring to is about deans, department chairs and faculty, right? If so, that's a pretty small minority of the individuals who inhabit a campus college daily. I took your original statement that "you can no longer say 'America is the land of opportunity' on a college campus in California" to be a far broader assertion than one limited to department faculty in the course of their classroom instruction.
Click to expand...
Sorry dude. Not my job to spoonfeed all you fine Liberal minds. We talked about it at length in the other thread I referred to. The training may have been given to faculty only, but the instructions on how to police it (or as they call it "interrupt") apply to students as well. The general point stands - microaggressions, including "America is the land of opportunity", are formally defined by UCLA as "an act of systemic racism" and are about as welcome as a fart in an elevator.
Click to expand...
It's not so much about spoonfeeding as it is about the use of language to accurately express an intended point.
Click to expand...
How would you have expressed it FA?
Click to expand...
You did a decent job in subsequent posts of clarifying what you initially intended to express.

And FA? Free agent? Fine arts? Fallen angel?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TheDirtyWord
Burgeoning Property Dispute: My Trees Were Cut Down...
2
Replies
97
Views
4K
TheDirtyWord
TheDirtyWord
Judge Smails
Official 2025 Kentucky Derby thread - Sovereignty 1, Journalism 1 - on to the Belmont!
6 7 8
Replies
396
Views
11K
Cowboysfan8
Cowboysfan8
GordonGekko
At What Point Does Sports Fandom / Homerism Turn From Passionate To Completely Toxic ? (6/30)
Replies
16
Views
1K
modogg
modogg

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top