It’s almost as if “Context is everything, even here.”!
Accidents happen. Why would speech be immune to this?
Wouldn’t. But he did not accidentally say “a” word. The account from his boss is he said that word “multiple times”. Once may be an accident. Multiples times is vastly less likely to be so.
It does seem like whenever this hue and cry over cancel culture gets stirred up, once the facts get known, it turns out that the hyperventilating was unwarranted. The actions were more egregious than previously reported, often times the person is a high profile individual who needs to command personal authority and respect.
The virtue signalling in denouncing “cancel culture” takes priority over what actually happened, and it always devolves into, “Well, if it happened the way I imagined it, it would be so very terrible.”
Then devolves into the inevitable fallacies of “Freedom of speech means that I can say anything I want, and no one can say anything in response.” and “They can say it, why can’t I?” or calling disapproval of speech a form of violence.
This was a man who was responsible for a group of young men, including young black men. He is supposed to be a person guiding and leading these young black men, he has authority over them, will in some way determine their future opportunities, and black parents choose to let him, and the other OU coaches, have that power and influence over their sons.
Perhaps angrily saying that word over and over again to a young black man will cause other black families to think twice about sending their sons to OU.
OK fair enough. I thought there was an argument being made that a standard of perfection was somehow attainable, therefore expected.
That’s really where my disgust lies. But perhaps the coach decided to use his faux pas to get away from a culture that supports that bigoted outlook.
I do think that he shouldn’t have to resign, but it appears he took the initiative. I’m also sure that there are plenty of organizations that would welcome him into their own fold a) because he is woke, and b) because he has a great record behind him.
Edit: I read an article that implied he was woke. I do not know the man and cannot speak to it on a personal level. @Chingon
In no universe is Gundy “woke”.
I personally don’t agree with the argument “They can say it, why can’t I?” I believe that it’s a word that we should try to eleminate from society. It is degrading, it was when it was originated, and it is now, regardless of who uses it.
Maybe would have been a better thread title.
I find it hard to work up sympathy for a tremendously overpaid doofus who is too stupid to keep the n-word out of his overpaid mouth. Resigning is likely the smartest thing he ever did.
I genuinely don’t get what the heck you’re talking about, here; I think you’re wrong, but I don’t even get what you think the right answer is.
Imagine that Guy A uses his, uh, individual liberty to, y’know, say something. And imagine that Guy B uses his individual liberty to say he thinks Guy A should lose his job. And imagine that Guy C uses his individual liberty to say, hey, Guy A: remember how you and I had one of those individual-liberty meeting-of-the-minds things when we entered into a contract, such that I’ve been paying you to do stuff but can now end your employment? And imagine Guy A uses his individual liberty to say aw, you don’t need to fire me; I quit.
Do you think someone in that arrangement is making an implicitly violent threat? Do you think someone’s individual liberty was constrained? If so: who?
(I guess we could postulate some Guy D who makes an implicitly violent threat to constrain Guy C’s individual liberty: forcing him to keep Guy A on. And I guess we could postulate some Guy E who makes an implicitly violent threat to constrain Guy B’s individual liberty: forcing him to keep quiet about Guy A. And I guess we could even postulate some Guy F who makes an implicitly violent threat to constrain Guy A’s individual liberty — and, if that’s your point, then my question remains: What The F Are You Talking About?)
Hey, as long as it’s said without context, it’s harmless. (so I hear)
Like, hop on a bus, ride around town for a while, intermittently shout the N word (without context, naturally) and things should go just swimmingly!
Anyone else here ever taught a class with people who dropped their attention and pulled out their phone? It never occurred to me to grab it away and recite the rap lyrics on the screen, or describe the porn, or read the text or whatever.
There is no such thing as a context-free word, I don’t think I’ve seen anyone claim that.
That actually happened (or very similar) in my last year of school when a friend of mine was sneaking a read of “Viz” in an English class. (no phones in those days)
Teacher caught him, grabbed it and proceeded to read out the relevant strip “Sid the Sexist” complete with all its overt sexual and sexist language. Language that would obviously have had that teacher sacked were they said in a different context.
Of course, the teacher thought they would be shaming that lad by reading it all out. It did not have the intended effect.
“Teacher reading out the confiscated item to embarrass said kid” won’t be a rare occurence.
I’d say in that context, there are still some passages that they should avoid. Is it okay to explicitly describe sexual conduct to the class if they are reading it out of a student’s property? Or even if it is “merely” misogynistic. Would you feel the same if, rather than a raunchy manga, it was just straight up Penthouse Forums?
They have a choice, and if they choose to do this, then they are still responsible for the words that come out of their mouth.
And that’s the other problem, it’s rarely going to be effective, and essentially, it sounds like your friend tricked the teacher into saying things that they really shouldn’t be saying in front of a class. That teacher probably got mocked and shamed for their inappropriate behavior, the student probably got a high five.
Teachers should be more careful if they are choosing to read what a student has provided them, not less.
I didn’t feel much about it one way or another, I wasn’t suggesting that what the teacher did was necessarily good, bad or useful. Merely that the uttering of certain words and phrases is treated differently dependent on the context.
Had the teacher used any of the same puerile and sexist chat-up lines from the comic directly to a 15 year old female classmate, that would have been treated very differently, and quite right too.
Well of course it was ineffective, 15 year old kids are going to love a teacher doing that, 15 year kids are idiots. But it wasn’t a trick, it absolutely was just a sneaking of a read and getting caught.
Well, the UK, mid-80’s equivalent of a high-five yes. But the teacher was just being a teacher. That is the sort of thing they do. Had the teacher tried to make out they were hip, cool and daring by reading out the naughty words then yes, they would have been mocked mercilessly.
Interestingly, I know that silly notes getting passed around would be intercepted confiscated and sometimes read out. I say sometimes because if it were a personal slight against someone, or an acutely embarrassing love poem then the teachers would often spare the blushes of the writer or the subject. I think that’s an excellent example of suitable care and discretion.
It’s a shaming tactic, which means it’s a shameful tactic. By itself, that’s just a sign of a shitty leader, who leads through humiliation.
I can imagine the coach being super irritated at the fucking-around kid, and deciding that he’d get his vengeance by humiliating the kid by reading his screen aloud–and his irritation clouded his judgment to the extent that he read a hateful racist epithet several times without going “fuck I shouldn’t do this.” Without more details, that seems a likely explanation. And if that’s what happened, I agree with his later judgment that he’s not fit to continue at the job.
Try post number, I’m not even kidding, 88.