I don’t believe this for a second.
But they knew each other well and got along well before bantering with racial stereotypes, as opposed to bantering with racial stereotypes upon first meeting someone, right?
But if you were “always” doing it, that seems unusual. What I have observed, even among young and/or drunk men, is that bantering tends not to go into racial stereotypes, and those racial stereotypes that do come up are usually those of the speaker’s own race.
In contrast, fraternities and (perhaps even more so) sororities have built a reputation of being more racist than other aspects of college (e.g. current levels of racial segregation in many of these organizations, the 2013 Alabama sorority scandal, being laggards at desegregation in the past, etc.).
“BTW - I don’t feel like I’m engaging in righteous indignation. I view people who do that as moral hypocrites who cast first stones.”
@simba9 I don’t doubt your sincerity and I definitely don’t want to start any debate. But I was making the point that your thoughtful, considered opinion could be perceived as righteous indignation by those who disagree with it, and suggest it is likely your perception of others was the same, that’s all. I don’t think there is about irony or hypocrisy demonstrated in any posts in this thread.
I’m not condoning the sort of bantering that went on the military when simba was there, and probably still does, but I agree that there’s a big difference between a more or less integrated military unit and a more or less segregated frat.
I told Helen Keller jokes and dead baby jokes when I was 12 and I thought they were funny. I don’t tell them any more, because now I know they can cause hurtful feelings.
@mathmom That’s the huge difference: it’s less a big deal in the military where the race being joked about is of a specific person, in the room, that you know, in the right context. The video shows a pretty white room to be talking trash about lots of groups in the abstract.
And no, not satire.
Lawsuit by four prospective members and one current member:
http://dailyorange.com/2018/04/5-prospective-members-of-theta-tau-file-lawsuit-against-su/
http://www.syracuse.com/su-news/index.ssf/2018/04/5_theta_tau_brothers_in_syracuse_frat_video_file_lawsuit_against_university_1.html
“Five Theta Tau brothers have anonymously filed a lawsuit against Syracuse University after offensive videos surfaced of a fraternity event.”
The men accuse SU of “branding them as racist, anti-sematic [sic], sexist and hostile to people with disabilities,” in the aftermath of the videos, according to the complaint filed in federal court.
The brothers say they were suspended from school, barred from classes and maligned “to salvage Syracuse University’s reputation” at their expense. They said they were subjected to “ridicule and scorn.”
I’m pretty sure all that is the obvious consequence of participating in and filming those videos, not anything Syracuse did. They “branded” themselves with their actions.
So, under what circumstances are plaintiffs allowed to be anonymous?
it seems like they still don’t understand what they did was blatantly wrong and why they’re receiving “ridicule and scorn” for it… lol.
Disgusting, moronic, offensive and stupid. That is clear.
Now, what do we do with 18 year olds who act like that? Outside of college idiots can be idiots. Of course, if caught on tape they might lose their jobs as no self-respecting company would want to be associated with that behavior.
I think a private University has a right to set expectations of behavior for the students. And I think they have a right ot enforce those expectations. If the expectations were clear, and the consequences were clear, and the idiots chose to ignore both of those, I feel the University has a right to enforce those consequences. BUT if the expectations were NOT spelled out I think there is a problem jumping in after the fact to enforce a punishment.
Yup it is clear as mud. Hope the uni consulted their attorney before they reacted. I cannot believe the uni suspended not just the organization but took specific action against individuals as that seems alittle knee jerk but then I don’t know the legalities or jurisdiction the uni has over a private function. I agree moronic, stupid and offensive but warranting suspension and the legal fallout plus defaming every member of that house I am not so sure but it will become clear with the uni response to the suit.
Technically, have they been suspended yet? It doesn’t look like they have.
"The university filed disciplinary charges against 18 students after the videos surfaced last week. SU previously said it removed students from classes during judiciary proceedings “out of an abundance of caution and concern.”
“Syracuse University does not comment on the specifics of pending litigation. The University stands by the actions it took to protect the well-being of the campus community and maintain a respectful and safe learning environment.”
“The lawsuit also claims that SU placed the students “on an unauthorized, improper ‘suspension’ without cause.””
From a different article in Daily Orange:
“Those 18 individuals have also been removed from academic participation out of an “abundance of caution” and concern for the university community, Maldonado said. Alternate class and study arrangements will be made for those students during the university’s judicial process, the chief said.”
http://dailyorange.com/2018/04/complaints-filed-18-people-present-theta-tau-event/
And in regards to the claim of branding: “Dean of Students Robert Hradsky on Sunday night said Syracuse University will not publicly release names of the students who are suspended, expelled or acquitted of code of conduct charges in relation to the university’s investigation into the Theta Tau fraternity.”
http://dailyorange.com/2018/04/su-will-not-publicly-release-names-students-theta-tau-investigation/
–
Not letting the students attend classes for safety reasons is different than actually suspending them. Even the lawsuit puts “suspension” in quotes.
Here’s the Student Code of Conduct. I think there are parts that could apply to violations by the students in question.
http://studentconduct.syr.edu/_documents/StudentConductSystemHandbook2016%20-%202017.pdf
The students in the suit are claiming they are unable to complete the semester coursework. It is all turning on technicalities…but on surface I do think the students have a viable case, there is no way a thorough investigation of the circumstances could have been completed and by the book with the speed the university reacted. Another due process issue almost more than a free speech issue perhaps.
According to the school’s statement I posted above, alternative arrangements are being made for their coursework. Considering that the school needs to be mindful of the safety and wellbeing of these students and ALL students, I could understand why their presence in the classroom would not be conducive to such.
I’m not sure it’s a huge difference, but I agree that there’s some difference between the military and the frat. I’d like to hear from people of color that they were fine with the bantering for if they felt that they had to go along with it.
These are the type of issues that all colleges are going to have to deal with in this age of everything being taped and put out there beyond the intended initial audience. What you think may have been said in private might end up on the national news. If colleges are going to expel kids for things like this , they probably need to spell all of that out in advance.
Not “always” as in that’s all we talked about. It would happen several times a week. I’m sure that well under 1% of our conversations involved race or insults, and they’d rarely go more than a minute. 49% of our conversations involved work - typically complaining about it, and 50% were about women, alcohol and marijuana. It occurred all four years I was in the military.
The conversations in question would be stuff like white guys telling blacks how #$&@!?% awful black music (R&B) was,and to, “Stop playing that &#%”, and we’d tell them they were being too “#$&@!?% uppity.” The black guys would tell the white guys how #$&@!?% terrible white music (heavy metal rock) was and to, “Stop playing that &#%”, and remind us of the differences in “physical endowment” between the races. Plenty of expletives would be used as adjectives during these discussions. I still remember a Native American co-worker telling me he would “slap the #$&@!?% white off of my face,” and me cracking up because it was such a strange and funny insult… (You had to be there.) Things like that. The same kind of locker room talk that many guys typically engage in, only 50 times cruder.
We’d also engage in less racial, more mainstream insults - like telling each other how #$&@!?% ugly their girlfriends and wives were.
I will say that it was acceptable among many in the military to hold gays in contempt. This was around 1980, and the only person I remember being shunned in our squadron was a guy who was suspected of being gay because he came off as effeminate.
Otherwise, there was a line you couldn’t cross. Nothing was ever said that was meant to genuinely offend or hurt anyone’s feelings. We worked together, we ate together, we trained together, we played on the squadron football team together, a lot of us lived in the same apartment complex together -, but if people who weren’t familiar with our group only saw little video snippets or transcripts of the way we talked to each other, they’d no doubt be convinced we were all #$&@!?% racists.
But that has nothing to do with the university publically defaming all the members of the fraternity and going outside their own published due process. It will be compounded if the university never saw the complete video only the screen shot version that was heavily edited before they passed judgement. That is what is going to turn the suit one way or another. All the university’s comments are public and all the steps they took published through correspondence with the individuals.
Now because of the suit the university has to defend their own language and reconcile their actions against their very own code of conduct around prohibited speech and published documents around process. They will also need to prove that those kids are able to complete their labs and coursework as the uni claims and that they are not effectively suspended by virtue of lack of access to the education they paid for and may have been deprived of the published due process. Right now from where I sit it is all in the hands of the uni and their response.
The university hasn’t called students out by name.
Also, why are you assuming they didn’t watch the videos?
There is at least one name out there that I saw (David but won’t add more) but not sure who released that info.
It was posted in one of the articles as that is the student that posted the videos online. The university’s administration has not disclosed names. However, when you do stupid stuff your name does get out there. Surprise! Actions have consequences. Not the administration’s fault though.