<p>Thanks for the link to that story. Very interesting.<br>
Seems like the Prince students in question could also have used someone yelling at them, "What is this c**p?"</p>
<p>"Let me throw myself on my sword here."</p>
<p>Hey, the whole thing is not half as bad (in my view) as the excrement spreaders at my alma mater,</p>
<p>or last year's Princeton vomit eaters.</p>
<p>One can live and protest against offensive journalism. It is much harder to take on the other two.</p>
<p>Couldn't get the link, mini, what was it?
Also... vomit eaters???</p>
<p>Have any of you spent much time in the company of college age males? While I laughed out loud at some lines, much of the article was in poor taste and not clever enough to be funny. However, this is the type of humor that males in this age range find hilarious. Have any of you seen Jack Ass or Family Guy? My household endured many hours of these types of movies/TV shows during the holiday break as hoards of my sons' friends descended on our house to much on cookies and laugh their a**'s off. Adults may bristle at such material, but from the kids/young adults view point, the more offensive and distasteful it is, the funnier they find it. This whole thing reminds me of our parents finding Rock and Roll offensive and in poor taste.</p>
<p>Oh, I love parody. Good parody is quite edgy, often politically incorrect for the time (see J. Swift). And I support Freedom of the Press. Even this press and this story. Even Falwell's Hustler cartoon. (My gosh that was just awful.) </p>
<p>But this just wasn't funny or funny enough anyway, and should have been internally censored by the other student editors. IMO Parody is always offensive and often at its best when it is biting , but the humor makes it "acceptable", artfully handled.</p>
<p>Lesson learned. Move along. Nothing to see here. LOL.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>...those kids have been adequately punished by the public outcry....<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Alum - this is the only part of your post that I disagree with. It was clear from the editorial in response to the outcry that those responsible still don't get it. They admitted no errors in judgment. They didn't apologize for having done it; they merely regretted that some found it offensive -- not at all the same thing. Its tone was that of a brush-off and insincere half-apology.</p>
<p>I agree; it is totally lame to say, "I'm sorry you felt bad." Admit you are wrong or say nothing.</p>
<p>Several years ago, Carnegie Mellon's joke news issue "Natrat" dedicated its them to mcoking African Americans. You had better believe the administration's reaction was swift and severe. Had the kids from Princeton chosen that theme, I think the reaction would have been more along that line. Natrat, by the way had made all sort of slurs, including some pretty nasty ones about Catholics in prior years, and did not get more than slapped wrists, and "not funny, poor taste,kids" type reactions from the school.</p>
<p>Students speak up:</p>
<p>Way better than the first official apology.</p>
<p>cookiemom- I completely agree. This is exactly the kind of humor college age males love. Check out Tucker Max's website if you want to be disgusted. I can also believe there were Asians involved in the writing of the article.
I actually found the article somewhat funny, although totally in poor taste. I wasn't the least bit surprised that it was in a college paper joke issue, though.</p>
<p>cookiemom--I have to defend Family Guy here. That show is funny, really funny. It routinely pokes fun at stereotypes with very clever parody.</p>
<p>The editorial isn't poking fun at stereotypes; it's just regurgitating ones that weren't funny 50 years ago (stale Charlie Chan accent, greasy food, laundry, for gosh sake.) I don't know any 20 year old who would see much humor here (certainly not the one I know best), but I betcha you can find some post-middleaged closet bigots (who grew up with that level of "humor") who'd find the whole thing a big chucklefest.</p>
<p>I think it certainly would be possible to really satirize the actual situation in a pithy, funny way, but this doesn't do it.</p>
<p>It's good to now hear that the editors are rethinking the whole thing--that's what a good education is for!</p>
<p>"Couldn't get the link, mini, what was it?
Also... vomit eaters???"</p>
<p>Link works for me - just press the "Proceed without Contributing".</p>
<p>Last year, when we were discussing the feces spreaders and window ploppers at my alma mater, an article came out in the New Jersey Star-Ledger about a Princeton frat where it had become a custom for new members to eat their own stomach regurgitations and that of their friends.</p>
<p>O.K. I'll tell my story. It's not very flattering. ;) </p>
<p>The few months I spent of my senior year in high school actually going to a class or two I was in "Humor and Satire in American Literature". Sounds great but not really. Many students thought it would be a cheap A. They weren't the most academic bunch. </p>
<p>For a class project I attempted to present a National Lampoon Parody of Southern White Culture. Probably not my best choice in a recently forcibly integrated south Georgia high school. I felt it appropriate for us to broach the topic of racism and this issue was to be my weapon of choice. </p>
<p>I remember when I presented the pictures of the "white man's" toe and the horribly deformed "Negro" toe (the same toe, only shaded). I remember it clearly as my life flashed before my eyes and I felt this rush of panic as I viewed the angry reaction of my classmates both black and white (many of whom I didn't know that well as they weren't in any of my honors type classes) .</p>
<p>No matter how hard I tried to explain the author's purpose or my own, I couldn't. The hole kept getting deeper. I barely made it out with my skin. I think I may have started a small race war. I wouldn't know.</p>
<p>I think I cut for a week or two. </p>
<p>It was truly a learning experience. ;)</p>
<p>Edit: Heck. I feel queasy just thinking about it again.</p>
<p>New York Times:</p>
<p>"But the debate has not subsided. “The damage has been done, and we now all face the collective task of repairing our civil discourse and salvaging our university’s reputation,” said April Chou, chairwoman of the Asian-American Alumni Association of Princeton, in a statement published in the newspaper on Monday."</p>
<p>Alumother--I appreciate your link to the most recent joint response from the Prince editors and the Asian-American Student Association. It seems to me that it is much more appropriate than the initial reaction from the editors of the Prince.</p>
<p>I continue to believe that the offensive Prince op-ed piece reflects incredibly poor judgment on the parts of the writers and editors, but does not reflect anything about the general student body at Princeton. I don't think that the Princeton student body now has to prove that it is not racist. I further believe that the outcry from most parts of the Princeton community as well as the administration, clearly shows that the story was unacceptable to most of them.</p>
<p>And coureur, even though you only chose to quote a statement from the Times article about "salvaging" the University's reputation, the Princeton students referenced in the article, including many Asian students, do not believe that the university is unwelcoming to Asians or racist or anything of the sort (and I should also note that since this was your 14th post about the situation, you might want to try giving it a rest).</p>
<p>Harvard had an article in its magazine on Asian-American stereotypes, etc. about two months ago:</p>
<p>Later on, The Crimson published an editorial: <a href="http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=515908%5B/url%5D">http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=515908</a>, which created a minor uproar within the community -- not as huge as Princeton, however.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>and I should also note that since this was your 14th post about the situation, you might want to try giving it a rest<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Make it 15. Because as the New York Times said: "But the debate has not subsided."</p>
<p>However, if you really want to try to shut off a controversy discussion with legs, I suggest you tackle Duke.</p>
<p>Today's Philadelphia Inquirer has a front page story about the Daily Princetonian joke issue. It is more general, and not specifically about the piece mocking Asians. The conservative professor who was featured in a story saying he was caught with a gay hooker is very upset and is consulting with an attorney about the matter.</p>
<p>Yes. As it turns out, the board that thought the "Liang Ji" piece was funny and OK may have made some other errors of judgment, too. Not very surprising. </p>
<p>Interesting quotes from other college paper editors about why they don't do joke issues. I sort of think that's too bad. I suppose if you play with fire, eventually someone's going to get burned, and really that's what happened here. The easiest solution is not to play with fire at all. I think playing with fire a bit is good -- but follow fire safety rules!</p>