I don’t see any connection between the above, and what the syllabus says.
Look up the word “yield”.
If the instructions were “Listen to all opinions and do not dismiss them without consideration”, fine. But “yield” means to give in to or submit to. And really? Fuck that idea.
I never get tired of ITR’s OP fails, which seems to happen the moment someone else bothers enough to glance at the facts.
I know this is the boiler plate response, but it always struck me as weird. Where did it even come from? Did it exist pre-internet?
Men are violent.
Males are violent.
Male people are violent.
Never saw any difference.
Another argument I see is that it’s too clinical, like something from a scientific study or a nature documentary. So now neutral language is bad.
That’s news to me. And I don’t mean that insincerely. Almost any word can be hostile in the right context, but I’ve never heard male or female used disparagingly.
We’ve all had shitty professors. You play by their rules for a semester and go about your life.
In this context, I’ll bet it means ‘shut the fuck up and listen’, not ‘accept and believe a viewpoint different than one you have.’.
eschereal may or may not be serious, but what they’re describing is absolutely a real thing. You may not have ever personally encountered the terms being used that way, but that doesn’t mean it never happens.
The syllabus does basically say what you want: “Feel free to disagree, respectfully. Consider others’ views.”
The syllabus also never said that the class had to give in to minority opinions. The offensive line is “Reflect your grasp of history and social relations by respecting shy and quiet classmates, and by deferring to the experiences of people of color.”
Since neither of us have presumably been in this class, it is impossible for either of us to know if the enactment of this instruction has been to only allow people of color to have opinions, or to shout down and silence whites.
But I suspect that is not what has happened, nor what has been intended. Maybe I’m wrong, and it’s all “kill whitey”. Or maybe there are some white kids who are appalled at the idea that their experience is not the norm. I suspect that the instruction in the syllabus is a nod to the latter.
Can you provide an example of “Male” and “Female” being used in a way that “Man and Woman” would not be exactly synonymous?
(IE: “You wouldn’t understand. You’re just a (male/man)” or “(Women/Females) are terrible drivers”–either gender term is precisely equal to the other in both examples. Can you give me a sentence where it isn’t? )
Actually, having read the syllabus you linked to (after I submitted my first two posts, natch), I have to agree with you. The teacher definitely doesn’t have a “Kill whitey” vibe going. The word “defer” is problematic, but since I don’t like politically correct crap, I’m perfectly comfortable with assuming he made a bad word choice rather than a crazy-ass statement. Most of the rest of the syllabus supports this.
When you “yield” to a vehicle on the thoroughfare that you are entering, is that an act of “submission” or “giving in”? I think of yielding as a form of courtesy, which is probably what the teacher has in mind.
Everyone’s views should be considered and respected, unless we start from the assumption that people of color hold views that are inherently more worthy of respect, which is the professor’s point. If it weren’t, why mention race at all? Just have rules for respectful discussion.
Yes. Of course it’s an act of ‘submission’. You are letting the other car go, while you’re stopped or slowed. And if you “yield” the floor, you are “giving up” your speaking time. And if you “yield” to someone else’s position, you are accepting it in lieu of your own.
Courtesy would be “Please listen attentively to all students, even shy and minority ones”.
Like I told Moriarty: I think the teacher made a dumb word choice, but let’s not pretend that his word choice doesn’t imply submitting even if the rest of the syllabus implies strongly that this isn’t what he actually meant.
When a student who is a minority says, “White people look at me funny all the time and hold their purses tighter when I walk by,” the teacher is saying that the white students are out of place to respond with the likes of “Oh, that’s bullshit. Never happens. I don’t do that.” That is how “defer” is meant.
Also, consider this, “A black man married my daughter,” as opposed to “A black male married my daughter.” If you see those two sentences as absolutely identical, I find that troubling. “Male” and “female”, as nouns, are used in police reports and a few instances of journalism (typically involving police reports), in the same way that the passive voice is standard dialect in experimental reports. Much less so in common English.
You know what? I’m going to take my own advice and own up to the fact that I don’t know how Professor John Streamas’ class is actually run. He may indeed by a provocative windbag who sees people as race first, person second.
I’ve certainly been in classes where the professor has not hid his political views, or attempted to be neutral in his discussion of controversial topics (and these include people I agree with, but who clearly exaggerated for effect, which caused my eyes to roll).
There’s at least one article that reflects that Streamas is hostile to those he disagrees with. In 2006, he was reprimanded for getting into an argument with the College Republicans over immigration reform (granted, they were being provocative by erecting a long fence on campus to support the building of a wall on the Mexican border). Further googling suggests that he called the offended student a “white shitbag”, and he is quoted as saying that WSU should stand for “White Supremacist University”.
But none of that gets to the OP’s point, which is whether he is instructing his students on what opinion to hold. I don’t see any evidence that he has done so, and I’m not convinced by parsing words in his syllabus.
Sure, people who don’t agree with him may find the class heavy-handed and his comments asinine. But isn’t that the essence of the anti-PC argument that people who disagree with his politics espouse. Isn’t it a travesty when a professor couches his words in polite rhetoric for fear of offending someone? Aren’t you supposed to be confronted with opinions that may be anathema to your views when in college? Unless there is an actual example of him failing a student for disagreeing with him, has he actually done anything that warrants sanction?
If I can ably sit in a class while a college professor laments the “mental masturbation” that happens in academia, can’t a sensitive little snowflake survive hearing their prof complain that racism is inherent in their culture?
True enough, but I often refer to “one of my male friends” since saying “one of my man friends” sounds awkward and vaguely sexual. Similarly, I would say “one of my female friends” and not “one of my woman friends”. That is, assuming gender was important to the conversation.
Yes, but in that case, you are using “male” or “female” as an adjective.
As was mentioned up-thread, there’s a difference in tone between using “man” versus “male” as a noun.
Your example (“one of my male friends”) does not touch on this difference in tone, because you are using male as an adjective rather than as a noun. It’s the use of “male” and “female” as nouns—not as adjectives—that has been questioned (and by some, found to be objectionable).
Indeed, I was going to ask if this is another version of the “elitist liberal academics are brainwashing our kids” thread that seems to crop up around the Interwebs in various guises.
Man and woman are human, male and female can be anything including plants, animals, nuts and bolts, electrical connections, etc.
We are changing, different experiments in polite terminology are to be expected. It will evolve over time, just as language evolves. When I was a boy in utterly racist Texas, I was taught that “colored” was the polite referent, then it became “Negro”, and so on. Now we have “African American” which is clumsy and kinda dumb, and I very much expect another polite referent will arise, just as language evolves.
But if “African-American” is the end of the line, well shit! I’ll get over it. Just so long as I can be sure that the people I’m talking about aren’t insulted. Don’t much care to be called “white” for that matter, but it is a minor thing. What academics are attempting here and there is an effort to anticipate that evolution in language, which is, IMHO, a futile exercise. Like herding cats, the language will evolve according to its own inner energies.