I said nothing about intentional association - do not change my construct. I talked about life, and life is very unintentional, and you have very little control over who is around you in many situations.
Unless, of course, you have an ability to know in advance all the views of all people attending a party or function or meeting you have been invited to or class you are in? Holy cow, if you do! Write a book as it would sell millions. Only if we all could have such knowledge of people on every invitation list/situation we are on/in.
I note that you nicely side-stepped the restaurant example. Or do you know the views of everyone in every restaurant you go to as well. Interesting, you immediately call people, who may be having a normal conversation, minding their own business, “insensitive” even if they do not know you? Living in your own universe much, as you think people should be aware of your beliefs and experiences before conversing with others?
Anyway, I doubt you notice the illogic in your post, Hm… exactly how do you expect to create social change if you and your ilk “[do not] intentionally associate with [supposedly] insensitive people”? Do you have some magic powers that work from a distance and can just change people? I am serious in how you do this change thing, as what you want (change) and what you practice (non-association) are counterintuitive.
Taking the lead of @cobrat — I think everyone on here needs to go to a party tonight or watch a movie or just get off CC and stop fretting about this. Relish this weekend! Life is too short to get all cranked up about a letter to freshmen at the University of Chicago that the media is hyping because that’s all they do. It’s almost the end of summer. Relax! I’m off for pizza and a glass of wine.
I just looked at the disinvitation list a little more carefully.
FIRE listed 300+ disinvites…
The actual disinvites and not invited back is closer to 70- 75. (Univ of Chicago had zero ) Very similar numbers between the left and right. Probably a little more from the left. Some of the disinvites are from multiple schools for the same person like Ward Churchill. He was not too popular.
I looked at the list and many of the people who were disinvited and not invited back were kind of sketchy. There was a nazi of course. Somebody who advocated violence against cops. A couple of people who didn’t think rape was a big deal. Religious reasons. Sometimes a school invited somebody and didn’t know the person’s views. I guess when you invite somebody and you don’t know their views, that is really free speech.
Many of the people who were disinvited were disinvited because it was decided the commencement address shouldn’t be so political.
This is over a 16 year period. This is across many schools. Not just the top schools. For example, San Diego City College is on the list.
Approximately 5 people a year are disinvited and not invited back. FIRE may not have all the numbers.
Ironic in my case as one reason why I spent much time on this thread today was some of the issues tied up in the issues of the OP letter affect most of the friends at the birthday party I attended last night.
Funny enough, such a party wouldn’t have been possible/legal in many US regions if MLK hadn’t been “disruptive” against the prevailing White dominated establishment and its status quo of the period.
@cobrat NY Style is always my preference. But, husband likes Chicago Style Deep Dish, so sometimes I have to compromise, even though I agree with @Pizzagirl (ironic) on this topic!
Like you, I am also grateful to MLK for the changes he brought. He was a true leader. I always think of him as a kind, religious, social activist who led with positive dreams instead of negativity. I don’t picture him as a rude, loud protester. Am I wrong? He had the same birthday as my father…and was around the same age.
I promised myself I wouldn’t come back to this thread tonight, but I did. This CC website is an addiction - on top of the many other addictions I already have!
I get it. You don’t like George Bush so, in your opinion, he is unworthy to speak at a college campus. I know you think he is a war criminal or is it just Cheney and Rice that are war criminals. I never seem to remember… Personally, I would like to see him or any ex-President speak. I asked my three kids. They would like to see him speak too if they had the chance. By the way, all three would love a chance to see Obama speak as well, and one would even like to see Bernie Sanders speak. (UGH!)
What would I learn from GW Bush? Not sure. Maybe he would talk about the US/Soviet relationship. Maybe he would tell a story about one of Nolan Ryan’s no hitters. Being an ex-President, an ex Governor, and a former MLB owner, I am sure most people would learn something interesting from him.
Apparently, you would not as you know everything about him already.
His actions and protest methods were certainly considered rude and in some cases…would still be considered rude and disruptive today by some who want an appearance of order and civility without understanding those tend to favor those with an interest in maintaining the status quo…however problematic or wrong it may be.
Some who have studied MLK in detail felt the omission of his “rude” activism…or the fact he became more radicalized in the mid-late '60s in areas such as being stridently anti-Vietnam war.
Some direct MLK quotes which show he wasn’t the compromising “polite” activist portrayed in recent years by the mainstream media…especially by conservatives:
@cobrat Maybe I’m jaded, but nothing in the article about MLK above made me think rude or obnoxious. Not like yelling obscenities and throwing eggs at people, which we see protesters do these days. Or did I miss some of the things that MLK did? He may have been arrested 30 times, but apparently he was always non-violent.
That would be odd–the USSR broke up a decade before he took office.
I’ve said no such thing. I only said he’s not known for being a particularly good public speaker or a particularly substantive one. As for your memory, well, good thing my opinions are saved on this site right here so you can always scroll up and check when your memory fails you!
He may not have done any of that personally, but then again…the vast majority of activists on college campuses don’t do that either.
If anything, the throwing eggs and yelling obscenities are behaviors seem much more common among teens/young adults who are not doing it for political reasons…whether it’s HS teens vandalizing homes or drunk college students doing the same at a fraternity party or Div I sports event.
This isn’t only from newsmedia sources, but also my own observations from living a city(Boston area) with a large number of colleges for 5 years after undergrad.
Back when I attended Oberlin, while students were fierce at times with the political protests which were far more prevalent and radical* when i attended in the '90s than now…never saw any cursing or throwing of eggs or behaviors of that sort.
One common complaint older and contemporary Oberlin classmates have about younger alums who graduated after 2000 is that they've become far too mellow and "bourgeois" compared to when we attended. Ironically, I'd fit in far better with the younger alums than my contemporaries/older classmates on the political spectrum front.
He clarifies that the university doesn’t and will not require trigger warnings, but professors won’t be forbidden to offer them either. Likewise, the university doesn’t provide safe spaces, but students are free to create groups or spaces that act as such.
@Hanna, I still say that claiming widespread corrective action is needed because “some students” did or wanted something is quite the wrong way of going about things—it’s generalizing from a fringe. Generalization from a fringe is pointless.
Say that a fringe has problematic positions, sure. But trying to say that general corrective action is necessary because a fringe espouses some position? That’s really kind of silly—there’s a lot of wasted effort there.
