Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 05-21-2019, 01:50 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 8,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
There is always a lot of work to be done. Board and community members can respectfully disagree about what that work is without gratuitous condescension.

FWIW from the just sent email:


Not exactly how things were stated during the meeting but that's how things go.
So silly. Itís only a matter of time before schools start monitoring social media and smart speakers for wrongthink.

That said, their yearbook their rules.
  #152  
Old 05-21-2019, 01:53 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 8,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Covfefe View Post
I'm not sure this is realistic for any school with low SES students that isn't highly selective in admittance. The roots of these inequalities often run deep.

I find the usage of the word "predictable" here troubling. I suppose it could be charitably interpreted from the students' perspective as an environment of expanded possibilities. To me it comes off revealing the perspective of adults who are tired of mostly knowing in advance who will struggle the most academically and behaviorally.
Grades will be subjected to an adversity curve.
  #153  
Old 05-21-2019, 04:06 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohiomstr2 View Post
Anyone care to think that the teenager making the sign was just being an ignorant asshole? May not even know what the sign was supposed to mean other than it was offensive?

Teenagers are kind of good at that sort of thing .
Didn't read the quote from DSeid's post from last night, did you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by within a quote
... The yearbook is being reprinted because it contained 18 photos of clubs or teams in which students of various races, ethnicities, genders, and grades made a hand gesture--an upside-down OK sign--that has different meanings. In some cases, itís used in what is known as the circle game. However, the sign has more recently become associated with White nationalism. The photos in question, as well as all the other club team/photos in which students are striking poses and making gestures, will be replaced with the straight-forward group shots.
One kid doing on ignorant thing in one photo is an ignorant asshole. Multiple groups of kids doing the same thing in 18 different photos may still be a youthful prank, but it's a pretty damn well organized youthful prank.
  #154  
Old 05-21-2019, 06:00 PM
elfkin477 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NH
Posts: 22,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Clark View Post
Didn't read the quote from DSeid's post from last night, did you?



One kid doing on ignorant thing in one photo is an ignorant asshole. Multiple groups of kids doing the same thing in 18 different photos may still be a youthful prank, but it's a pretty damn well organized youthful prank.
I mean, did you?

Quote:
... The yearbook is being reprinted because it contained 18 photos of clubs or teams in which students of various races, ethnicities, genders, and grades made a hand gesture--an upside-down OK sign--that has different meanings. In some cases, itís used in what is known as the circle game. However, the sign has more recently become associated with White nationalism. The photos in question, as well as all the other club team/photos in which students are striking poses and making gestures, will be replaced with the straight-forward group shots.

Use of the upside-down OK to mean White Power is an emerging issue. According to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), in 2017 members of the website 4chan came up with a hoax to falsely promote the gesture as a hate symbol. However, the ADL says, as of this year, at least some White supremacists are using the gesture as an actual symbol of White Power.Recent media events have heightened public awareness of the symbolís newer implications. The shooter who killed 50 people at a mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand, flashed the sign in court on March 16, 2019. Wrigley Field has banned a White man who made the gesture behind a Black broadcaster at the Chicago Cubs game on May 7.

The ďTabulaĒ photographs in question were taken of clubs or teams in mid-October. Those pages were reviewed and shipped to the printer in early December, before the gesture was widely known to have any association with white nationalism. I want to be clear that we are not making any presumptions about studentsí intent in using the gesture.
Unless you contend that the kids are psychic, it's a hell of a lot more likely they were playing the circle game than trying to be divisive. Did "the game" exist when you were a kid? Pretty much the same silly goal of irritating people, but without a gesture. It was popular when I was a teenager to annoy other people by claiming to have lost the game, which makes them lose too because they're also thinking about it.
  #155  
Old 05-21-2019, 06:31 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by elfkin477 View Post
Unless you contend that the kids are psychic, it's a hell of a lot more likely they were playing the circle game than trying to be divisive.
The school is being a bit cheeky here, Oct 2018 was not "before the gesture was widely known to have any association with white nationalism." Maybe it wasn't "widely known" among yearbook staff and administrators, but the ADL article that has been posted here announcing the symbol's hijacking by white nationalists is dated 1 May 2017, and obviously the hoax goes back farther than that. We covered it here on the dope in September last year.

Personally, I think the school is going out of its way not to make accusations of either racism or even trolling, which (as has been brought up here) is the point of using it. You can always deny your true intention, and short of someone snitching or text messages discussing the plan, you're pretty much untouchable.

We've gone from 1 innocuous candid, to several students, to now 18 instances. I'd be surprised if most of them weren't intentional, and the school probably knows that which is why they're going to shell out $54k to fix it. But we'll never know.
  #156  
Old 05-22-2019, 09:09 AM
Barkis is Willin' is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,430
Kids of various races and ethnicities were making a white power symbol? Seems unlikely. Whenever I've seen pictures like this in memes or whatever, I thought it was the circle game, which definitely existed almost 30 years ago when I was a kid. The rules of the circle game were that it had to be below the waist.
  #157  
Old 05-22-2019, 08:21 PM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smudge777 View Post
I think this is precisely the problem. People see something that *could* be interpreted as a symbol of racism/hate/whatever and immediately assume the worst of the person using it.

Before we start calling people racist, shouldn't we, at the very least, wait until they say or do something unambiguously racist?
We never called the people racist. We called the sign a racist symbol. And it is one.

But, no, we do not need something "unambiguously racist" to declare someone or something racist. That is the bullshit special pleading that is constantly used to defend racists. In reality, we look for "more likely than not" not "unambiguous proof."

And, even if we're not sure the person is racist, we should call out racist actions. The only way to stop racism is to tell people when their actions are racist.

Quote:
If we assume that everyone using the OK symbol is racist unless proven otherwise
We are not doing this. We've said it over and over. The Nazi sign and the OK symbolr ARE TWO DIFFERENT SYMBOLS. You're perpetuating their narrative by calling it the OK symbol. The OK symbol is face up, and made big and noticeable, not face down and hidden. It is faced forward, and multiple people do not make it in a photo.

These kids are not using the OK symbol, so the rest of your argument fails. Your entire post is made up of statements that are untrue.

Last edited by BigT; 05-22-2019 at 08:25 PM.
  #158  
Old 05-22-2019, 08:43 PM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
To me, at least, the term SJW (with or without a modifying adjective) is ALWAYS a pejorative term, intended to imply that the target is, at best, a non-serious, bandwagon-hopping dilettante who is more interested in telegraphing their membership in the morally right side in every situation than in actually DOING the right thing, and can therefore have their every utterance dismissed out of hand.
That is indeed what it means. But the thing with pejoratives is that sometimes the people who are so attacked will reclaim the pejorative as their own. (See, for example, "queer," "gay," "nigga" (which is slightly modified).

I for one think it's ridiculous that a term "social justice warrior" is claimed as a negative thing. Social justice is a positive concept, and being a warrior for a good cause is a good thing.

So, at times, I will reclaim the term. It's usually in the context of saying "I'll receive that as a compliment." I'll also sometimes use the words to point out that, if you are anti-SJW, you're saying you're against social justice, which means you are pro-bigotry.

None of this is to say that the people on the social justice side are always perfect. They can make mistakes. But I don't attribute it to this concept that they are all just faking. I attribute it to the fact that they are kids and they are learning.

There are always mistakes made in the push for progress. It's silly to demand everyone handle everything perfectly. And it's really silly to use the mistakes as proof that the whole concept is bad.

So I do try to reclaim the concept. And so do others.
  #159  
Old 05-22-2019, 08:59 PM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,351
I keep seeing the circle game being brought up. But it seems a lot of people don't know what it is. Here's the first part of the link:
The game starts out when the Offensive Player creates a circle with their thumb and forefinger, not unlike an "A-Okay" signal, somewhere below his waist.

His goal is to trick another person into looking at his hand. If the Victim looks at the hand, he has lost the game, and is subsequently hit on the bicep with a closed fist, by the offensive player.
Now there should be one thing you notice about this. The game is to make someone else look. If you see them looking, you get to punch them.

So, how the fuck is this supposed to work in photographs? At best, you might accidentally take a picture of someone playing the game. But then, why would multiple people do it at the exact same time, with none of them in any position to be able to see the other person do it?

No, the circle game is as bad an explanation as the OK symbol. It does not fit the circumstances.

So can we give up on these obviously erroneous explanations?
  #160  
Old 05-22-2019, 09:51 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,176
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
The school is being a bit cheeky here, Oct 2018 was not "before the gesture was widely known to have any association with white nationalism." Maybe it wasn't "widely known" among yearbook staff and administrators, but the ADL article that has been posted here announcing the symbol's hijacking by white nationalists is dated 1 May 2017, and obviously the hoax goes back farther than that. We covered it here on the dope in September last year.

Personally, I think the school is going out of its way not to make accusations of either racism or even trolling, which (as has been brought up here) is the point of using it. You can always deny your true intention, and short of someone snitching or text messages discussing the plan, you're pretty much untouchable.

We've gone from 1 innocuous candid, to several students, to now 18 instances. I'd be surprised if most of them weren't intentional, and the school probably knows that which is why they're going to shell out $54k to fix it. But we'll never know.
It is very likely that the symbol was widely known among white nationalists before October 2017. And among those who follow what the current fads are among white nationalists, likely a inclusive of a few of this board. But even after Christchurch and the jerk at the Cubs game, it is still not something most in my community of well-educated and news following adults have known about, and it is a simple untruth to claim that it was widely known among the general public or among High School students in October '18.

But sure, High School students at this school work well together and can coordinate across racial groups, clubs, sports, and gender, to pull off a prank flashing a white power hate sign! And do it in a way that no one got wind of it too!!! Dang they are good!

How the fuck something is supposed to work in photographs is possibly that referencing the apparently faddishly popular game in the group photo became a thing to do.

But sure you want to ignore that this was kids of various races and ethnicities and assume what the school administrators and board clearly say is not true. And BigT ignorantly and arrogantly wants to claim expertise that the use upside down is clear a hate sign and above the shoulder right side up is "okay" - independent of any context - ignoring the fact that use above the shoulder right side up is clearly a hate sign in context of the original linked article, and that many kids are using the sign low as a play item understood by all involved as being that.

The administration is as unto a Beavis and Butthead cartoon "He said 'butt' (heh heh heh)" Words and symbols have meanings IN CONTEXTS. Intent does matter.

It is easily imaginable for white nationalists to co-opt other words or symbols as their deniable signifier in the near future, a meaning understandable by context ... could be just saying the word "Truth!" as a single word, or claiming that flashing the V (previously for victory or peace) now means support for their cause. If they do that is everyone else to stop saying the word "truth" or using the sign? Do we grant them that power?
  #161  
Old 05-22-2019, 10:09 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
It is very likely that the symbol was widely known among white nationalists before October 2017. And among those who follow what the current fads are among white nationalists, likely a inclusive of a few of this board. But even after Christchurch and the jerk at the Cubs game, it is still not something most in my community of well-educated and news following adults have known about, and it is a simple untruth to claim that it was widely known among the general public or among High School students in October '18.
The post I was responding to made the claim that the students would have to be "psychic" in order to know about the white power association in Oct 2018. I was simply correcting that bit of false information.

I agree that, despite a thread specifically about the symbol here on the dope, it's still not "widely known" outside of a certain subset of people who live and breathe on the internet.

Like me. And also, most teenagers. That's all I'm saying, the odds of a few teenagers knowing about the white power "hoax" symbol in Oct 2018 out of an entire class of students is extremely high.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
But sure, High School students at this school work well together and can coordinate across racial groups, clubs, sports, and gender, to pull off a prank flashing a white power hate sign! And do it in a way that no one got wind of it too!!! Dang they are good!
These "high school outrage" stories bubble to the national media periodically, and we discuss a lot of them here on the dope, and they're all extremely frustrating due to a lack of information. Initially you knew nothing, then you knew it was one student in one photo, then we knew it was "a number of" students, and now we seem to know that it's 18 photos across different racial and gender groups.

But we still don't know what the photos were. If there was 1 black guy giving the OK symbol, and one Hispanic girl, and 16 douchey white guys who the school knows as "the 4chan type," then the school's statement is both accurate and also not the whole picture. You keep giving the benefit of the doubt to the students, which is fine and probably appropriate for a parent, but I don't see any reason to do so. Something about a proportion of the 18 photos was alarming enough that the school basically went into crisis control mode. Could it be possible that some of the students are 4chan dweebs, and some of them decided to be edgelords in the yearbook? Yes! It's absolutely possible. And nobody can prove it. We can certainly disprove it, but I'd want to see all of the pictures before making that call, and nobody has.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
It is easily imaginable for white nationalists to co-opt other words or symbols as their deniable signifier in the near future, a meaning understandable by context ... could be just saying the word "Truth!" as a single word, or claiming that flashing the V (previously for victory or peace) now means support for their cause. If they do that is everyone else to stop saying the word "truth" or using the sign? Do we grant them that power?
I don't know if there's a good answer. But I know that I have the luxury of not being terribly affected by flipping through my high school yearbook and seeing faces of people who may be making a sign that they hate me for who I am.
  #162  
Old 05-23-2019, 08:27 AM
Barkis is Willin' is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,430
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
I keep seeing the circle game being brought up. But it seems a lot of people don't know what it is. Here's the first part of the link:
The game starts out when the Offensive Player creates a circle with their thumb and forefinger, not unlike an "A-Okay" signal, somewhere below his waist.

His goal is to trick another person into looking at his hand. If the Victim looks at the hand, he has lost the game, and is subsequently hit on the bicep with a closed fist, by the offensive player.
Now there should be one thing you notice about this. The game is to make someone else look. If you see them looking, you get to punch them.

So, how the fuck is this supposed to work in photographs? At best, you might accidentally take a picture of someone playing the game. But then, why would multiple people do it at the exact same time, with none of them in any position to be able to see the other person do it?

No, the circle game is as bad an explanation as the OK symbol. It does not fit the circumstances.

So can we give up on these obviously erroneous explanations?
Did you not know about the circle game before you looked it up? There were meme images of the circle game as a "gotcha" well before the white power connotation. There were car bumper stickers with the circle and a "gotcha" or "made you look" or whatever message before the white power connotation. So, yeah, pictures involving the circle game are a thing and have been for a long time.
  #163  
Old 05-23-2019, 08:41 AM
RitterSport's Avatar
RitterSport is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barkis is Willin' View Post
Did you not know about the circle game before you looked it up? There were meme images of the circle game as a "gotcha" well before the white power connotation. There were car bumper stickers with the circle and a "gotcha" or "made you look" or whatever message before the white power connotation. So, yeah, pictures involving the circle game are a thing and have been for a long time.
FWIW, I've never heard of the circle game until this thread. I guess it wasn't a thing in NYC or at least in my schools. I guess the OP can tell us whether it's a thing at his kid's school.
  #164  
Old 05-23-2019, 08:46 AM
Omega Glory is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,928
Yeah, there were several stories about the gesture that went viral before October 2018. I heard of this story and this story and this story before October 2018. All of them made the rounds on twitter. I'm not going to say all of these kids knew or that it was widely known among the general public, but a lot of people who get their news from the internet and are involved in social media knew.
  #165  
Old 05-23-2019, 05:15 PM
TokyoBayer's Avatar
TokyoBayer is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taiwan
Posts: 10,443

"Okay" sign NOT? High School Year book pulled


Quote:
Originally Posted by Omega Glory View Post
Yeah, there were several stories about the gesture that went viral before October 2018. I heard of this story and this story and this story before October 2018. All of them made the rounds on twitter. I'm not going to say all of these kids knew or that it was widely known among the general public, but a lot of people who get their news from the internet and are involved in social media knew.
Interestingly, the third link has this:
Quote:
Some Jasper residents disagreed with the meaning behind the symbol and told WBMA-LD that it’s part of the “Circle Game” that kids play with the goal being to trick another person into looking at the hand gesture placed below the waist. If the person looks, the person doing the hand gesture gets to punch them in the shoulder, according to Dictionary.com.

After speaking with two senior officers who are African-American and considered the punishment “fair,” O’Mary told WBMA-LD he suspended the officers for two weeks and docked their pay for one week. Newsweek reached out to O’Mary but did not receive a response in time for publication. While the mayor admitted to WBMA-LD that he hasn’t spoken to the officers to find out the intended meaning behind the gesture, he added the meaning doesn’t matter.

Last edited by TokyoBayer; 05-23-2019 at 05:16 PM.
  #166  
Old 05-23-2019, 05:24 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
But sure, High School students at this school work well together and can coordinate across racial groups, clubs, sports, and gender, to pull off a prank flashing a white power hate sign! And do it in a way that no one got wind of it too!!! Dang they are good!
You know, I think I remember something like this happening before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arlo Guthrie
You know, if one person, just one person, does it, they may think he's
Really sick and they won't take him
And if two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both faggots and
They won't take either of them
And if three people do it! Can you imagine three people walkin' in, singin'
A bar of "Alice's Restaurant" and walkin' out? They may think it's an
Organization!
And can you imagine fifty people a day? I said FIFTY people a day
Walkin' in, singin' a bar of "Alice's Restaurant" and walkin' out? Friends
They may think it's a Movement, and that's what it is THE Alices's
Restaurant anti-massacre movement!
  #167  
Old 05-23-2019, 07:08 PM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,611
Now they're spending $53,000 to reprint the yearbooks.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/high-scho...204500230.html
  #168  
Old 05-24-2019, 09:44 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,176
Yes, Velocity. That was shared here within minutes of the board voting on it.

steronz, again, those who have viewed the pictures say that they do not believe there was bad intent and part of the problem is that without being able to see the pictures students and others are able to imagine anything to fill in the blanks of these pictures that had been thought to be benign when originally reviewed and approved by administration before going to print. Imagination and people being what they the blanks are likely to be filled in with images much worse than what was actually there. Indeed we'll never know, so the worst can now be held as believable as the case stated by those who decided to pull the books.

Panning out to a bigger picture item is the principle expressed by both administration members and in that Jasper link, that intended meaning doesn't matter. Let's move out of this specific instance and focus on that as a principal.

It harkens back to the ... oh let's be safe here ... "n-word-ardly" controversy in the '90s (SD column on it here).

The word contains the sounds of a word that cannot be said by a white person (even in this context I am hesitant), and certainly could be used with that same intent the "okay sign" was co-opted to achieve: to signify a racist intent with some degree of deniability. Mr. Howard clearly had no such intent but it was heard as an offensive word and he experienced the consequences of saying an offensive word.

Are the responses of Julian Bond then
Quote:
You hate to think you have to censor your language to meet other people's lack of understanding
and the SD column take
Quote:
Sure, you donít want to offend anyone deliberately, but thereís a fine line between not being a jerk and examining every word you speak for nuances that might be misinterpreted by people who donít understand them. If thereís one thing the Straight Dope has taught me, political correctness should always take a back seat to actual correctness.
now out of date?

Should the current standard be that if even one person of a traditionally considered oppressed group interprets a word or symbol used as something hurtful then the word is to be forbidden and removed from the record, no matter how much the context is very clear that the word or symbol had no bad intent?

Is it true that intent is does not matter?
  #169  
Old 05-24-2019, 09:58 AM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
steronz, again, those who have viewed the pictures say that they do not believe there was bad intent
Is that what they say? The email says "I want to be clear that we are not making any presumptions about studentsí intent in using the gesture." That's not an exoneration, that's them sidestepping the issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
and part of the problem is that without being able to see the pictures students and others are able to imagine anything to fill in the blanks of these pictures that had been thought to be benign when originally reviewed and approved by administration before going to print. Imagination and people being what they the blanks are likely to be filled in with images much worse than what was actually there. Indeed we'll never know, so the worst can now be held as believable as the case stated by those who decided to pull the books.

Panning out to a bigger picture item is the principle expressed by both administration members and in that Jasper link, that intended meaning doesn't matter. Let's move out of this specific instance and focus on that as a principal.
It certainly is a squishy issue. I think intent does matter, up to a point, in that there are certainly going to be uses of the OK sign that are clearly not intended to be either racist or prank-racist, and in those cases the clear intent should be taken at face value. However, if 16 of the 18 pictures were of a few white boys making the symbol, and those pictures make the minority students think there was malicious intent, does the true intent matter? Do you want to sit down with the black kids who feel unwelcome in their own school and tell them not to be so sensitive, that you trust the white kids when they say they didn't mean anything by it?

Unless the intent is obviously not malicious, I wouldn't fault any minority for being concerned, and I sure as heck wouldn't try to talk them out of feeling the way they feel.
  #170  
Old 05-24-2019, 10:58 AM
Royal Nonesutch is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 399
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
And BigT ignorantly and arrogantly wants to claim expertise...
It always shocks me to see people I respect so much act totally out of character.
  #171  
Old 05-24-2019, 11:08 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,176
Let us be clear: no student has been offended by any of the picture because the only ones who have seen them are the members of the staff that submitted them. The concern is over the potential that someone may be offended. No one knows if any actually would have been. The Black staff of the yearbook had not seen it as offensive when they submitted it. Black administrators had not experienced it as offensive when they approved it.

The administration's expressed take during the meeting is that at the time they reviewed and approved the photos, months ago, they were of a benign nature. That's why they were approved. It is the fact that with the recent news cycle of the individual making the gesture at Wrigley and the attention in more mainstream media that the symbol's co-option now has, the potential for an offensive received meaning (and "trauma") now exists.

As to students' takes on it I can only go by my daughter's report. Again, her friends are a diverse lot by both race and SES. Her report is that students are all upset that the book was pulled, unhappy that the board is making presumptions about what they'd want without any student input, and unhappy that the administration at least initially seemed like they were throwing the yearbook staff under the bus. The racial difference she reads is only in degree of upset with her Black friends tending to be less upset. She doesn't know of anyone of any group who is happy that this decision was made. No doubt though that they exist; her experience is not a complete poll of the school. (And for further context, she is adopted and not racially white herself.)

In your take, how "obviously not malicious" does something need to be and by whose read? Tautologically if one person experiences a word or symbol as hurtful it was not obviously not malicious to at least one person.

Again, taking it out of this instance, given that no one here has the actual facts of how obvious or not obvious this was.
  #172  
Old 05-24-2019, 11:11 AM
Covfefe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: 100 miles N. of Chicago
Posts: 1,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
Unless the intent is obviously not malicious, I wouldn't fault any minority for being concerned, and I sure as heck wouldn't try to talk them out of feeling the way they feel.
Personally, if someone is feeling distressed based on what they've heard from the media, I wouldn't shy away from criticizing the media in replying to them.
  #173  
Old 05-24-2019, 07:44 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,226
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
The Black staff of the yearbook had not seen it as offensive when they submitted it. Black administrators had not experienced it as offensive when they approved it.
Unless you tell me he Black yearbook staff were actually making the signs, that's immaterial. Also, imagine, Black adults not being aware of what racist thing white teenagers are doing this month!

Quote:
The administration's expressed take during the meeting is that at the time they reviewed and approved the photos, months ago, they were of a benign nature. That's why they were approved. It is the fact that with the recent news cycle of the individual making the gesture at Wrigley and the attention in more mainstream media that the symbol's co-option now has, the potential for an offensive received meaning (and "trauma") now exists.
You mean the Administration thought the signs were benign. If those signs had a racial context at the time of the Wrigley incident, it's very likely they had a racial context before then. And a bunch of white adults might be even more clueless about what subtext a sign has than a bunch of Black adults.

Quote:
In your take, how "obviously not malicious" does something need to be and by whose read? Tautologically if one person experiences a word or symbol as hurtful it was not obviously not malicious to at least one person.

Again, taking it out of this instance, given that no one here has the actual facts of how obvious or not obvious this was.
My take is that the school administration is dealing directly with hundreds of students and parents, a school board and (is this a public school?) thousands of taxpayers ready to complain whichever position they take.
  #174  
Old 05-25-2019, 08:48 AM
digs's Avatar
digs is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: West of Wauwatosa
Posts: 9,690
Well, I'm going to show those 4chan trolls. I'm not going to react at all, one way or the other.

And I'm certainly not going to reply to this thread.
  #175  
Old 05-25-2019, 09:04 AM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,601
Just remember that this is what these nimnods do. They co-opt otherwise innocuous signage so that they have their"plausible deniability" built in up-front. Viewed objectively, an OK sign is about as racist as a cartoon frog. But.....

Personally I've always made the OK sign with the circle comprised of the the thumb and middle finger, so I'm good.
  #176  
Old 05-25-2019, 09:52 AM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-DUB View Post
Personally I've always made the OK sign with the circle comprised of the the thumb and middle finger, so I'm good.
You mean the NAMBLA membership sign? You disgust me.
  #177  
Old 05-25-2019, 12:37 PM
Dinsdale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 18,331
Hey Dseid. Ya might wanna correct that location in your profile. Where it says Chicago, I didn't realize you actually meant Chicago-adjacent!

Hadn't checked into this thread until this a.m. when I showed up to play at the local farmer's market, and one guy was bitching about the cost of reprinting.

I thought the better idea was to just put a stamp over the images, saying something like "No hateful images allowed." But, as I understand it, the thought was that such a step would potentially harm these little darlings down the line.

If you ever happen to stop by the farmer's market, say hi! I'm the guy playing bass.
__________________
I used to be disgusted.
Now I try to be amused.
  #178  
Old 05-25-2019, 02:27 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,176
Next Saturday I am off and I will! I'll be the guy who looks my avatar! Yes, Chicago-adjacent is more accurate.

At the meeting the concerns of the administration with stamps included that they might interfere with the longterm structural integrity of the book with the added thickness, that they might be able be removed and allow identification of the students in the images who could then, as a consequence of all this, be targeted by others in some way, and that doing such would be too time consuming for staff to pull off and as or more expensive than reprinting to have the printer do.

Kent Clark I am a Jewish adult and I am clueless about what the newest Jew-hating (which White Power endorsers are) signs are. In a time that has included mass shootings by members of these groups of Jews and Muslims both. Really, you think most parents of targeted minority groups spend much energy trying to stay hip with the newest White Power decoder rings?

It is an ... interesting ... position to take that if something historically benign is interpreted as offensive by some now, in the context of a current news cycle, it must have always have before.

Your last "answer" is completely unrelated to the question that you quoted being asked btw. Maybe you can re-read what you quoted and try to answer it? Or not if the question is not of interest to you. But yes, a public school with a few thousand students and more thousands of parents, and tens of thousands of taxpayers in two towns.
  #179  
Old 05-26-2019, 09:33 AM
Dinsdale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 18,331
A guy who often plays fiddle at the market (and whose opinion I generally respect) addresses this issue in his newspaper column this morning.
__________________
I used to be disgusted.
Now I try to be amused.
  #180  
Old 05-26-2019, 09:47 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,176
Thanks for the link.
  #181  
Old 05-26-2019, 05:26 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,364
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dinsdale View Post
A guy who often plays fiddle at the market (and whose opinion I generally respect) addresses this issue in his newspaper column this morning.
..."a misguided spasm of oversensitivity" sounds like a sentence the "guy who plays fiddle at the market" would say.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:18 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017