Marc Xenos writes:
> Sounds like 4th Grade playground… “Oh yeah? Prove it!” And I’m sure you’re
> already familiar with the rejoinder.
No, I’m not. What’s the rejoinder to this?
See needscoffee’s post in #113. I am not sure how anyone can even be tricked into watching a movie in the first place. And it was only a hypothetical suggestion anyway. Calm down before you blow an artery. Besides, I already told the ratings to everyone in my classes ahead of time. If she wasn’t listening, it’s her own fault.
How can someone be “tricked” into watching a movie? Easy, by being misled about it’s content!
It was a joke! Settle down, etv78. Lay off the caps lock key. And what’s the point of using the word “asshole” but changing two of the characters? It’s still the same word.
“It’s content” [sic] is the point I was trying to make. The content of The King’s Speech isn’t R. It was poorly rated. Nobody is seriously suggesting tricking her into watching it. We’re just noting that she won’t be morally harmed by it, regardless of her preconceptions. She’s being misled about its content by the rating itself.
etv, you did the same thing in the thread about the White House Correspondents Dinner, repeatedly. You *really *need to work on your reading comprehension and your irascibility or something.
needscoffee, I apologize for even pursuing this with etv. I realized last night when I went to bed that I had been arguing over something that was a joke to begin with and hasn’t even happened.
etv, it’s not the hypothetical professor that is misleading; it is the rating itself that misleads. OK? I’m done now.
I also went to film school. In a Freshman class, we had a sub in for what was to have been several weeks; the normal instructor was out for a while. He showed a documentary on John Holmes, the porn star. He showed it the very first week he was there.
It was astonishingly graphic and the “interviews” reinforced the cruelty and abuse and horrific attitudes towards the women in the films. During the break in class, a bunch of us went upstairs, demanding to see the Dept Chair. We were told he was in a meeting, so we went in anyway. He was not in a meeting. We informed him of what we’d just sat through, and that we as a group were cutting the rest of class and every other class this man would be teaching at our school.
The man was removed immediately and escorted from the building.
There’s a range of what is acceptable. It seems the young lady in the OP cannot handle the range of what is considered acceptable fare in college English classes. If she was indeed very sheltered as she grew up- and I can both believe and appreciate that she may have been- she’s got to make some hard choices.
As an aside but not a hijack, what does it cost to attend B.Y.U. ?
Now I’m wondering if these students are examples of the “customer is always right and students are customers” mentality that is so pervasive. Perhaps they think that they have the right to customize the menu/syllabus/rules wherever they go and to re-negotiate everything.
I'm reminded of a possibly apocryphal story about a college student who asked, "If I take a swim class, do I have to get in the water?" The answer, of course, is "No, but you do have to accept the consequence/grade for not fulfilling a course requirement."
If these students want to have it Their Way, they should try Burger King College instead.http://yfacts.byu.edu/viewarticle.aspx?id=85
A lot more than it costs to attend any of CA’s public colleges and universities.
I went to a Catholic college, where I majored in biology. We had to take 2 religion classes for core requirements, so I put those off until the spring semester of my senior year. One of the classes was New Testament Studies; I and another senior bio major were the only two upperclassmen in the class.
The first day of the class the teacher walked in, stood at the podium, leaned over it, looked us all in the eye, and asked, dead serious, “Do you think Jesus was a bastard?”
The other bio major and I just cracked up laughing, but some of the gasps that comment got just about sucked the paint off the walls. It was awesome.
needscoffee- two things, I censored asshole because we aren’t in the Pit. And this thread and the White House Correspondent’s Dinner thread make me think,“Get off my lawn!”, and trust me, I’m not happy with that development!
What does that have to do with anything?
You still used the word.
Plus, the little @ symbols actually look like little a@@holes, so you made it worse.
I thought profanity wasn’t allowed outside the Pit. If I’m wrong, I “sit” corrected.
If “asshole” was banned outside the Pit, why would it be okay to say “a@@hole”?
because the @ aren’t s’s. Maybe you ask because I didn’t censor it enough.
There’s no rule against saying “asshole” outside of the pit, but there is a rule against calling someone an asshole, and no amount of censorship is going to get around that.
No, that’s not it. If you can’t say “asshole,” you also wouldn’t be allowed to say anything else that was recognizable as “asshole.” Otherwise, what would be the point of banning it?
The discussion of “asshole” is straying from the topic of this thread, which is the legitimacy of objections to college-level material. Let’s get back around to it.
At the SDMB you can use the word “asshole” outside the Pit; ultrafilter is correct in saying you can’t call someone an asshole — that would be an insult, and “hiding” it with A’s or $'s isn’t fooling anyone if the intent is to insult.
I hope this clears thing up. Back to the thread topic, please.
Ellen Cherry
IMHO Moderator
Yes the article agrees with what you said. I apologize for what I said about urban legends.
I think I will stand by my babysitting comment. I looked up the course name and it is called ENGL 67 Writing Fundamentals.
http://www.mtsac.edu/instruction/humanities/english/courses.html
Having 5 movies in a writing course seems excessive and having Inglorious Basterds as one of them seems bizarre. I noticed that the article mentions that the professor is a SAG member.
I watched Inglorious Basterds and enjoyed it, but it doesn’t strike me as an example of good writing.
ENGL 67 doesn’t appear to be required course, so I suspect the woman was only taking it because it was known as a gut course.
Thanx Cherry!