Who exactly forced him to resign?
The university, in response to a social media firestorm.
Who are you defining as “we” in either of those sentences? :dubious:
Dr Matt Taylor and his shirt - sure, that was a social media firestorm. Sir Tim? Not so much, AFAICT.
Intimidating bigots is the fucking point. If you do something wrong, it is the responsibility of the good people of the world to provide consequences. Otherwise you will continue doing this thing that is wrong. The reason why you know you can’t say “nigger” is because you know you will have bad consequences for doing so.
The fact that you, adaher, are standing up for these people who did wrong and trying to keep them from getting their just punishment makes you part of the problem.
Yes, it would be wrong if we did something illegal, like death threats or worse, but using our freedom of speech to try and get someone fired is exactly the type of stuff we should do. It’s precisely the reason freedom of speech works. Sure, you can say what you want, but so can other people, and thus provide consequences for your speech.
And the crap about Tim Hunt’s comments is just that. Even looking at them in context, he is trying to justify his own beliefs. Humor is not a get-out-of-jail free card. There are comedians who have crafted a persona that you know isn’t who they really are for the purposes of comedy. It’s hard work, and even they don’t always make it. Amy Schumer recently had to apologize for her more racial humor in her standup act, because, even playing a vapid blonde character, it still came off wrong.
But, more importantly, Tim Hunt created most of his problems with how he responded. He gave the now infamous non-apology that always happens after these events. In fact, his was worse since he then basically came out and said “but I meant every word of it”:
I did mean the part about having trouble with girls. It is true that people – I have fallen in love with people in the lab and people in the lab have fallen in love with me and it’s very disruptive to the science because it’s terribly important that in a lab people are on a level playing field. I found that these emotional entanglements made life very difficult. I’m really, really sorry I caused any offense, that’s awful. I certainly didn’t mean that. I just meant to be honest, actually.
[…]
It’s terribly important that you can criticize people’s ideas without criticizing them and if they burst into tears, it means that you tend to hold back from getting at the absolute truth.
Science is about nothing but getting at the truth and anything that gets in the way of that diminishes, in my experience, the science.
So even if you were inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt, he completely squashed it. You can’t just call it a joke when you later say, in a clearly non-joking context, that you actually meant the sexist things you said. Nor can you, after being asked to resign, try to turn the whole thing to be about you and how you were mistreated.
This idea that laughter in the recording makes everything okay is silly. Sure, some people laughed. But we also know quite a few people were offended. There was even a call by the Korean group themselves (PDF) for Tim Hunt to issue an apology–something that would be pointless if no one there was offended.
Furthermore, if you know anything about translation, it is not uncommon for a translator to simply tell you that you need to laugh at a certain comment, telling you it is a joke. And if you know things about certain East Asian cultures, you know that it is considered bad form to let people know you were offended. You laugh when you are supposed to laugh.
This OP is a bunch of fucking horse shit. The examples posted here is using the blanket problem of over offended sensibilities and over use of PC bullshit to justify bigotry. THis is the classic when did you stop beating your wife bullshit. Good g-d what a fuckign maroon.
FG: You couldn’t be more wrong if you tried.
Briliant, well your fucking opinion means so much based on the bowl of steaming nonsense you puked up in the OP.
So, let’s be clear, FuriousGeorge. What you’re actually saying is that treating people like people, not discriminating against people based on their religion, ethnicity, culture, etc., is steaming nonsense.
Let’s be clear Monty, you are either willfully obtuse or using a ghost writer to do your thinking… and that ghost writer has all the skills of James Patterson on meth.
Free speech is great. If you say something wrong and get a free speech firestorm back at you, too bad for you. People should take responsibility for their words instead of complaining about PC. Make a mistake, own up to it. Clarify your remarks. Maybe even examine yourself. If your accusers are wrong, explain to them why.
Words are powerful, especially for people in the public eye. And that is a good thing.
Kid Rock hasn’t flown the Confederate Flag since 2011 apparently after the NAACP gave him some kind of award also that rumor about him and Ted Nugent recording some song about the flag are false:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/07/17/kid-rock-confederate-flag-chevrolet-gm/30300461/
Here’s an example that in my view demonstrates efforts at political correctness. I also feel that opposing the guidance in this example does not constitute bigotry.
That there also needs to go over in the Stupid Liberal Idea of the Day thread, if only to show Clothahump what he’s supposed to be looking for.
The sandwich metaphor is a minor point; it’s the squabbling over the drum corps that really nails it.
Unless I am reading this wrong, no one is calling the teacher a racist for using the PBJ example. Instead, they are pointing out that trying to be inclusive with minorities might help improve minority performance. What’s wrong with that?
Only if the speaker is white. Which is clearly racist. If it is wrong to use the n-word in public, then it is wrong to use the n-word in public.
It’s wrong to use racial slurs in public (or in private, for that matter). Some words are slurs in context, and not slurs in other contexts. If you don’t know the intricacies of these various contexts, then I would advise you not to use such words at all. But it’s silly to condemn anyone (if, indeed, you are) for using a word that, in the context it is being used, is not taken as a slur by the speaker or the listener(s).
Gutierrez, principal at Harvey Scott K-8 School, is using political-correctness to control the language of the speaker. A sandwich is a sandwich. How dare someone use the word sandwich in front of someone in the U.S. who might not know what a sandwich is!!! Especially in a U.S. classroom where 99.99% of the people know what a sandwich is. The other 0.01% might like to learn about sandwiches but Gutierrez’s Harvey Scott K-8 School frowns on things like “learning” something new. :smack:
Not so. Words cannot be taken out of their obvious social context. Words are just words, but understanding the underlying predjudices in the context of why a certain word is being used is important. The history, the speaker, the situation, … these all give words extra weight or less weight. I would think this is obvious.