Just no tolerance for SUB-SID-IZED religious themed parties hosted by Satanists, Orthodox Jews, worshippers of Baal, Scientologists, etc.
And the non-sardonic version of why those groups rarely apply for subsidies for such parties is they don’t want to create an uproar over their practices, and so resign themselves to having their religious practices supressed. SU-PRESSED. Not tolerated. Supressed. By Christians. Setting the tone and setting the rules. Consciously, actively, deliberately.
Please provide the specific examples from your institution of non-Christian groups of people having been prohibited from having an office party.
Please learn how to read.
Don’t you see, Muffin? Nobody has tried, which proves his point. The lack of evidence is his evidence.
So there we were, a couple of dozen of us, mostly university professors (but not me – a freeboater), paddling a really big university owned canoe, singing French-Canadian voyageur songs, when one fellow broke out with a Maori Hakka.
So there we were, the English department, holding a Excommunication party.
Of course I would. That activity would be acting like an asshole. Jesus. Now you’re blaming me for something you think I wouldn’t do in the conditional.
Daniel
As I keep emphasizing to those of you who refuse to read:
You keep acknowledging that, yes, HR in a secular institution will be far less likely to reimburse a nickel to any religious group, other than Christians celebrating Christmas with songs about Christianity, the more explicitly that non-Christian religion notes the purpose of the party in its requests for reimbursement. So in effect, you have claimed for Christians some sort of general, cultural purpose to a Christian-themed party which you deny to other groups so effectively that they don’t trouble to ask for reimbursement, official recognition of their celebration, time officially released from work to celebrate their occult rituals, but simply have done whatever they need to do on their own time, with their own money. On top of this obvious and blatent discrimination, it never ceases to amaze me that you also have the chutzpah to cite this total suppression as something for which you need me to provide you with evidence of.
I will take some bets, however. Let’s design a system by which I can submit receipts for food, drink, party doodads, up to the amount the Christians get from HR for their Christmas party, and you agree to pay me X times that total if I get turned down, and I agree to pay you X times whatever I get reimbursed for. How’s that?
So there we were . . .
Look, it’s this simple. A decent university will have people of many religions and cultures working and studying at it, and will encourage such diversity.
If your institution promotes a culture in which minorities are supressed, then the solution is not to press for supression of the majority, but instead to work toward removing the supression of the minorities.
As far as the whole issue of a university subsidizing parties goes, your university must be very different from those at which I taught, for at mine, one was paid to do a job, rather than paid by the hour. And you had better believe that various departments had their own parties to celebrate cultural and religious events particular to them.
More the pity that you don’t understand the value of commuinity, morale building, cross-cultural polination, and just plain normal human interaction.
So your position on my proposed bet is…?
Or is that another crystal-clear point that I don’t understand from your post?
As far as hourly vs. yearly wages go, that party was attended by staff, who are paid by the hour, and are very strictly advised as to time taken off the clock for lunch, for bathroom breaks, etc. As it happened, this year, an important person came by during the party (a newly-hired professor looking for an administrator to help her with paperwork) and was frustrated by finding no one manning the phone to get her admitted to the building for over a half-hour, which would be the duty of one of the hourly wage-earners who was being paid her full salary to attend this Christian-themed party.
It’s a pity you understand so little about how businesses and universities are run that I need to explain such simple things to you in such patronizingly clear langiage. Haven’t you ever worked for a living?
Actually, at most unviersities I’m familiar with (both state and private), most staff, particularly clerical and professional staff, are salaried employees. Your university may be the exception rather than the rule in terms of how they pay staff.
(Frankly, I’m also not sure I’d classify a newly-hired professor as “an important person,” but I’ll admit that also be my own bias. Again, in my experience, you’re ten times better off annoying a new prof than a long-time department secretary who knows exactly how things run and where all the bodies are buried.)
I can’t say whether they would reimburse you or not, but I’d place my bet on what would happen next…they’d probably tell you that the next year, the Christmas party will be a generic “holiday party,” and/or that you can feel free to include your own traditions as a part of it. I’m sure the chances that the are going to pay for every group to have it’s own separate party are slim.
Zoe, I sincerely hope that you are not planning to start up with your accusations that prr is not really a university English professor. I can personally vouch for the fact that he does, indeed, hold that job. Perhaps your issue is with the quality of faculty at the college level these days, and not with prr’s truthfulness on this point (just kidding, prr! :))
No, dear. The insults started in MPSIMS. Please do follow along.
You never stop, do you? You’ve got me, twickster, What Exit?, and Sarahfeena all vouching for him. Not good enough for you? Then nothing is. But do shut up about it, because YOU ARE WRONG. I can’t be more clear with you than that.
I agree completely, Sarah! The fact that I can hold down any sort of a job is a testament to the generosity and charity of my employer. It’s kind of a sad day in higher education when an ignoramus like me is given an appointment, but what can we do to prevent such gross errors in judgment? Very little, I’m afraid. As Starving Artist might note, how much lower can standards possibly fall?
Regarding your other point, Sarah, I do wonder, however, why these Christians aren’t more grateful to me. Am I not showing restraint and some generosity of spirit in NOT making a fuss and causing some big, nasty official bureaucratic quashing of their religious-themed celebration such as you suggest would be the outcome of my getting off my ass to protest their parties? You’d almost think I was the protector of Christmas here, and they the enemies of religious-themed parties, the way they agitate and dare me to demonstrate the results of a vigorous protest. I will try to resist temptation just a little bit further.
Really? Work-study students, who would be manning the phones while the secretaries and admin. assistants are taking time off to party, are not hourly wage earners? I’m sure they are at most institiutions, as are many higher clerical workers, who have, as I say, very strict written guidelines to follow regarding their hours and minutes off the clock.
That you are obviously full of shit when you are complaining about minorities being supressed at your university, and that in fact you have never even attempted to put together an office party yourself for whatever belief/culture you adhere to.
What, you mean as a university and college instructor before running my own business in which I expect I take home one hell of a lot moe that you do? Got news for you on that issue.
If someone is not attending to reception or urgent matters during an office party during office hours, that is poor planning on the part of the party organizers, not a reason to ban all office parties. Rather than pout in your cell, you should have addressed this issue.
Oh, I didn’t mean to imply that you are any dumber or more incompetent than your average professor of English these days. Anyone can tell from my grammar and sentence structure that I don’t have a clue in that regard. I’ll leave those critiques to Zoe. 
Er, how many jobs have you had? I have had, believe me, a LOT, and not one in which HR would reimburse anybody a penny for any party whatsoever. Somebody may have been reimbursed, but not always, and not in any case by HR. Are you sure you work in a secular institution?
I don’t think I’ve ever known places that had people clock out when they went to the bathroom. I’m not saying that it doesn’t happen, but that would be a little discriminatory against the preggies.
I’ve already said that I don’t trust you.
Not only did he forget what his doctorate was in, but he he tried to criticize me for reminding him of what he said it was.
I haven’t yet located a university that has as large an English Department as he claimed to be the chairman of.
He claimed that he was elected head of the department, but that he could hire and fire the very professors who elected him.
He claimed that he was virtually an expert on Emerson (I am paraphrasing) and yet knew nothing about Transendentalism and backed down from a discussion of Emerson or from answering any basic questions about his hero after he had challenged me to compare our knowledge of him.
His notions of how things transpire in academic settings are laughable.
One of his earliest posts on SDMB was a question about what colleges offer degrees in writing.
Despite his talent for colorful and interesting language, he does not demonstrate mastery of writing skills. Since he has claimed that his doctorate is in writing, his persona just doesn’t hang together.
Ruby, you may want me to shut up, but I’m not the one who introduced this topic into PRR’s thread. He did that himself several days ago. (See Post 49.) He is such a troll.
I expected you to show up to defend him. What I think of the other names you mentioned is my business.
Even you and PRR don’t really have access to my feelings about you – only some of my thoughts.
Have a terrific New Year full of good surprises!
The portion of these claims that actually contain accurate accounts of what I’ve written here about myself (about half) do actually constitute clear evidence of trolling–if it can be shown that they’re not true. Since I’ve many times offered to have these charges investigated by SD Mods (it should take them about 90 seconds, with the contact info I’ll be glad to provide), and since I’m only asking that Zoe accept banning herself if none of these charges stand up–she can actually just hit the “report” button, and may have done so without reporting the results–her repeating the slanders contained above merely confirm their falsity, and will continue to do so whenever they are repeated.
If I’m a troll–which I admit to being if any of the above claims were accurate and accurately reported–then it would be a simple matter of reporting me and getting me banned. They take trolling very seriously here. That **Zoe **has not done so is clear evidence that none of the charges are true.
I wonder if it is a bannable offense to charge someone with being a troll despite specific evidence to the contrary? I may find out.