|
Post by millring on Sept 10, 2021 11:42:49 GMT -5
There probably should be a difference between "should be sensitive" and "must be sensitive". Especially in a hypersensitive world.
As a general life rule, politeness is a good idea. You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar, an' all.
But as soon as there is power to be had in victimhood, what is considered insensitive has become the central question. And it's a question that Academia has answered without a debate. And people are losing their jobs because of it.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Sept 10, 2021 11:55:34 GMT -5
I first encountered the pejorative use of the word "woke" on this forum. I didn't understand the pejorative use so I googled. The definitions I found were all along the lines of "sensitive to injustice, particularly racial injustice." That seemed to be a good thing. Obviously I wasn't getting what was meant when the word was used negatively.
James posted a link above about how the term because "weaponized," which I'm not sure is the right word. I read the article in James' link. It didn't really clarify what is being criticized by the negative use of the term. It suggested that the term is aimed at people who are intolerant of differing views. I dislike such intolerance but what's wrong with the people who exhibit it has nothing to do with their sensitivity or insensitivity to injustice.
So I still don't get it. Maybe it's just me.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Sept 10, 2021 12:22:53 GMT -5
I think the “weaponizing” is by people that feel their good life is being criticized as having been built on the backs of the downtrodden. They are tired of hearing they should feel “guilty” for what they have. They feel that they earned their lifestyle.
Plus it’s considered another socialist program that certain people should get favoritism and reparations. Another tax and attack on the American way of life. Another whiny liberal complaint.
Pull yourself up by the boot straps, damn it.
I’m sure I’ve simplified it and missed some important points.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Sept 10, 2021 12:27:53 GMT -5
That's helpful, Marshall.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 10, 2021 12:40:07 GMT -5
I think the “weaponizing” is by people that feel their good life is being criticized as having been built on the backs of the downtrodden. They are tired of hearing they should feel “guilty” for what they have. They feel that they earned their lifestyle. Plus it’s considered another socialist program that certain people should get favoritism and reparations. Another tax and attack on the American way of life. Another whiny liberal complaint. Pull yourself up by the boot straps, damn it. I’m sure I’ve simplified it and missed some important points. That's not it at all. Not even a little bit.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Sept 10, 2021 13:19:00 GMT -5
That's not it at all. Not even a little bit. OK. Enlighten me, oh great sage. My breath is baited.
|
|
|
Post by james on Sept 10, 2021 13:20:10 GMT -5
|
|
Dub
Administrator
I'm gettin' so the past is the only thing I can remember.
Posts: 19,904
|
Post by Dub on Sept 10, 2021 13:29:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Sept 10, 2021 13:32:20 GMT -5
On edit: This was drafted while the conversation (above) continued. But I'm leaving it up anyway. Some. From the feedback I've gotten, I appear to be quite good at it. Why do you ask? Because your question, if taken seriously, struck me as the slightest bit dismissive of the notion that teachers ought to be "reasonably sensitive." And perhaps because, in the current sociopolitical climate, "sensitivity" has come to suggest not empathy or attention to nuance or tact or even decent manners but a kind of exaggerated, self-satisfying, Pharisaical adherence to a list of triggers and code words and other shibboleths. Like the kind that Boghossian encountered when he insisted on poking that particular den of bears. (I have my own suspicions about Boghossian's personality type and the kind of campaign he has been waging, as well as the intellectual-moral framework from which he is waging it. I find myself only partly sympathetic, even while I find his opponents to be of the tribe described above in this paragraph. I have reserved sufficient poxes for both houses.)
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 10, 2021 13:38:20 GMT -5
in the current sociopolitical climate, "sensitivity" has come to suggest not empathy or attention to nuance or tact or even decent manners but a kind of exaggerated, self-satisfying, Pharisaical adherence to a list of triggers and code words and other shibboleths. Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 10, 2021 13:44:51 GMT -5
In fact, it defies the ability for even the sensitive, socially compliant to accommodate. There's a new trigger every week and they come out of nowhere.
|
|
|
Post by robjh22 on Sept 10, 2021 14:03:14 GMT -5
Yes, I call on people in power positions to be reasonably "sensitive" in the sense of attuned to history and polite, chivalrous if you will, towards their relatively tender charges. A kid from Somalia in a sociology class talking about sex slavery or genital mutiilation may have reasons for looking sad in the discussion. If she doesn't want to talk about it, only a cad would say "Miss Abdulrahman, you have nothing to say today? Hmmm? No? I guess you're okay with sex slavery and clitorectomies. Wake up, child, Republicans may win the midterms."
Or how about, "Mr. Hamilton won't tell us his thoughts on abortion. He's from Texas, his daddy's a clown in the Christian rodeo, and so maybe he's feeling a little touchy today. Come, Mr. Hamilton, enlighten us. How did the 'people' of your state come to elect sexist monsters to the legislature? Do your legislators hate all women or just those who don't want them controlling their bodies?"
Or "Mr. Trump , tell us the definition of 'insurrection ' and give us some recent examples, if you think you can."
"Ms. Madison, nice beard you've got going there. Are we transitioning, or did you just forget to shave this morning? Wait,where are you going? To HR? Feeling 'trigggered' as well as dysphoric? Ta ta, do remind them that I have tenure."
|
|
|
Post by robjh22 on Sept 10, 2021 14:21:31 GMT -5
In fact, it defies the ability for even the sensitive, socially compliant to accommodate. There's a new trigger every week and they come out of nowhere. Do not despair: even in Prof. Boghossian's case, “Global Diversity & Inclusion finds there is insufficient evidence that Boghossian violated PSU’s Prohibited Discrimination & Harassment policy. GDI recommends Boghossian receive coaching.” Note the "recommendation" language. It is not clear whether coaching was ordered, or even if the recommendation was made to him or to the trustees or some other person with power to require it. It's not a well written sentence. Perhaps the G,D&I panel members need coaching in the English language. You know, use of capitals and "The perils of the passive voice," that kind of thing.
|
|
|
Post by james on Sept 10, 2021 14:45:59 GMT -5
In May, Boghossian revealed on 'The Rubin Report' that his next mission was to save western civilization from its ideological enemies. I dare say he will have many new, well paid platforms to do that.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Sept 10, 2021 16:58:13 GMT -5
OK. If I can answer my question to Millring, I would think he’d say it is the overwrought examination of the “woke” that everything needs to pass through the lens of race history to be legitimized. That has given rise to a “cancel culture” that will negate any person or accomplishment that doesn’ t fit their narrative. Or something like that
And weaponizing wokeness is a response to the attack of the woke.
I don’t buy either extreme explanation in their entirety. But there are two sides to the coin.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 10, 2021 17:23:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Sept 10, 2021 17:36:19 GMT -5
Can you say "purity"?
Can you say "obsessive"?
Can you say "hypersensitive"? "Self-absorbed"? "Scrupulosity"?
I knew you could.
|
|
|
Post by robjh22 on Sept 10, 2021 17:37:14 GMT -5
OK. If I can answer my question to Millring, I would think he’d say it is the overwrought examination of the “woke” that everything needs to pass through the lens of race history to be legitimized. That has given rise to a “cancel culture” that will negate any person or accomplishment that doesn’ t fit their narrative. Or something like that And weaponizing wokeness is a response to the attack of the woke. I don’t buy either extreme explanation in their entirety. But there are two sides to the coin. Though serious, it's hard to tell how prevalent militant wokeness (my term) really is. Is it happening at every university and liberal arts college? I don't think so. Maybe the professors at Amherts, Trinity, Dartmouth etc.. are too scared to conplain. Some of it, too, is self correcting. Enrollment dropped drastically at Evergreen College, I think it's called, after The Woke bullied Bret Weinstein out of his classroom and finally out of a job. He sued and the college agreed to a half million dollar settlement, and several of the students were disciplined, if not severely enough. As I've noted, this Portland professor's resignation looks like a product of disgust. Not even he claims he was pressured to resign. Not by the school, at least. Finally, remember that bakery in ... was it Iowa or Ohio ... that was picketed by students and aided by a professor for supposedly racially profiling the liquor thieves? They sued the university and got a multimillion dollar judgment after a jury trial. So sweet! Note too that these stories seem never to come out of the colleges of science and engineering. Bret Weinstein was an evolutionary biologist, true, but the nuts in his case were not his own students.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Sept 10, 2021 18:00:58 GMT -5
Oh, I forgot to add "apologetics." Possibly the most dangerous item on the list.
|
|
|
Post by james on Sept 10, 2021 18:11:54 GMT -5
|
|