Yes, but when the context is that you are trying to humiliate one of your students, I’d say that you should be more responsible with what comes out of your mouth, not less.
So, reading it to a 15 year old female student is okay, as long as the intent is to humiliate someone else?
And so is a teacher that thinks that it would be effective.
Ah, just lucky then. Well, I’m sure the next time you guys got this idiot of a teacher to read out loud to the class inappropriate material it was on purpose.
Attempt to humiliate students?
Wait, I thought you said that they did read it. Now you are saying that they did not?
Did they self sensor the naughty words?
So, are you now saying that a teacher should take responsibility for what they read in front of the class?
You are reading too much into what I’ve said. I’m not talking about the absolute good or bad, right or wrong of the teacher taking that approach.
I’m saying that
a) Reading the contents of a student’s material is not ridiculously rare (in my experience)
b) That the same words can carry different weight depending on the context and circumstances of usage.
Hardly controversial I would think.
If, in your opinon what the teacher did was terrible in any case then that’s fine. I’m not going to argue otherwise. I don’t particularly have a strong opinion.
What do you mean “now saying”? where did I say that they have no responsibility?
Absolutely they read it, naughty words and all, what I mean is that the reading of the words, as they did, in a dry, sarcastic, mocking tone was less embarrasing for the teacher, and got them less derision than had they affected a “cool teacher, call me Dave, listen to me swear” vibe while doing so. If they had done that, I think they’d have been pitied, then mocked.
You said that you never heard anyone claim it. Regarding context free words. I pointed you to someone philosophising about context free words.
It’s not important to me that you follow this. I’ll be going.
Now people, stop teasing poor Novelty_Bobble. The significance of the number 88 in this context, of course, is that it is the number of keys on a standard piano keyboard.
If this is RitterSports post you are talking about then there is no mention of any context free word, certainly no claim that there is such a thing, not even any mention of the concept of a context-free word and no identifiable philosophising on that concept.
Apart from that, I suppose it is an ideal example.
If that isn’t the post you are referring to then perhaps quote the actual relevant text?
Why must the response to a genuine question be a several stage obstacle course of nods, winks and diversions? How exactly does that help? Why would you assume that is something I would know?
At any point you could have said that 88 was used by neo-nazis as a nod towards Hitler’s initials. But I guess clarity of communication and honest answering of questions is not high on some people’s list of priorities.
ETA - the above text is directed at Bobot, not Kimstu. At least Kimstu did actually provide a relevant link (thought of course could not resist a dig whilst doing so)
Maybe I’m late to the party, but without more context, I can’t know what was warranted. Maybe he absent mindedly mumbled they lyrics, maybe he recited them sarcastically, and overemphasized every slur…. There’s no way to know from the information released. Until I hear otherwise, this is not cancel culture, it’s just a guy resigning.
Just a guess, based on similar responses in the concurrent Pit thread when you said you didn’t know what the expression “passive voice” meant and asked other posters to explain it to you:
The “nods and winks” might be a joking way of expressing somewhat justifiable irritation that you don’t bother even trying to find out independently what an unfamiliar expression might mean. A few seconds’ googling would have clued you in on either of those very common and widely understood terms, and would have been faster than demanding that other people explain it to you and then kvetching because they didn’t explain it to you fast enough.
Why would “not knowing what the passive voice is” have any connection to my not knowing the the symbolism of 88?
I actually did google about the relevance of the number 88 and nowhere in the first pages of results was anything about a racing driver, piano keys or Adolf Hitler… it was all lucky numbers and numerology, nothing that seemed relevant to the discussion.
To @Omar_Little, given the new information that the coach apparently said the word multiple times, and seems to really have resigned and taken responsibility for his actions, and that the school said they’re sorry to see him go but accept his resignation and reasons, do you still think this is “cancel culture”?
Maybe you define “cancel culture” as society improving when it comes to race and gender?
I’m not sure how much of the article is to be believed. Coach said he unknowingly read the word once, then his supervisor said it was multiple times. Who knows how many times it was actually said, and the tone it was delivered in, and if he “read the room” correctly? This may not be as innocent as presented.
But if it was just one utterance, well, I am not a fan of the attitude that certain words are so magically evil that their use must always be punished no matter the context. I cringe when I see a journalist say something like “the suspect said the N-word.” It’s so infantilizing. We know the reporter is quoting someone’s words, we know they intend nothing at all by it, nevertheless we will fire them if they speak the no-no word that is the whole subject of the story. And when we do this, ironically we give the word even more power to offend, which doesn’t seem to benefit anyone.
The connection is, as I said, that they are both examples of your being unfamiliar with widely-known expressions which you ask other posters to explain to you instead of (easily) finding out their meaning for yourself.
I wonder if this hijack about your feelings concerning how other posters respond to you may not have worn out its welcome in this thread by now. Feel free to relocate it to the concurrent Pit thread if desired.
Well, this is one of those “this is why we can’t have nice things” issues. (Not that uttering racial slurs even in the context of quoting others is particularly “nice”, but you know what I mean.)
There are still so many people who gleefully seize on any opportunity to “say-but-not-say” the n-word, in the hope that they can annoy other people with it but nonetheless get away with it as not officially racist,* that most people of good will have just given up on ever even mentioning the word.
*See also: all the folks who just love using and talking about the word “niggardly”, with the same sort of “I’m not touching yooouuuu!” attitude.
I’m sure that a brief ask of the people around me would see mostly blank faces when it comes to the relevance of both the “passive voice” and “88”. This could of course be a cultural gap in both education and experience.
Also, it isn’t always the case that the definition(s) one finds are necessarily the one that poster is using. In the case of “passive voice” I note pros and cons of using it and merely knowing in theory what it is doesn’t advance the conversation very much.
After all, I now now what it means, I still have no idea what the point of mentioning it was.
But yes, it is a hijack for this thread and not an interesting one for me or anyone else I’m sure.
Please, everyone, drop the chatter about a pit thread, and about @Novelty_Bobble’s shortcomings or lack thereof. Those are not relevant to the topic. If you think a poster is saying dumb things in this thread, point out why those things are dumb. Or ignore them. If you think a poster is demonstrating a pattern of dishonest posting, please report it. Or take it to the pit. But it’s not appropriate to attack a poster in an IMHO thread.