This whole post is a consequence of over-generalizations caused by right-wing media and Russian propaganda that feeds on outrage and works to divide Americans.
Thanks for your value-added contribution to this thread.
When a situation like this is in the spotlight, unless the facts of the situation are in dispute, I really don’t see how it’s helpful to try to bring focus onto the motivations of those who brought it into the spotlight. It just makes it seem like the thing you’re most concerned with is not whether what happened here was right or wrong, but annoyance that it has been brought to public attention. I don’t think that’s a tactic that’s likely to bring anyone at the margin to your side.
I think the focus should be solely on (a) speaking to the merits of what happened here - and condemning it; and (b) making clear these are the actions of silly immature students, this is not what BLM or the wider social justice movement is about, here’s what it’s about.
It was explained.
My side? Is that the one that doesn’t like bullshit outrage media? That side?
Professors get suspended. It happens. Deans are stupid and overreact. That happens, too. USC is overly sensitive because of its recent history of racial problems.
This is nothing, less than a tempest in a teapot, and is being amplified in order to make people think that PC is out of control, or that this kind of thing happens all the time, in order to drive a certain right-wing point of view that because PC is out of control, it’s OK to say racist or insensitive things.
This is a stupid suspension from a stupid dean and stupid students and an “expert in communications” that did a shitty job with this particular foreign language word. Before I started saying something that sounded like “nigga nigga nigga” on a crappy video call, I would definitely say, “hey, the Mandarin version of “er, um” sounds very similar to an offensive English word, but it’s used all the time by Mandarin speakers, so if you hear them saying “nei ga, nei ga, nei ga”, they’re just saying their equivalent of “er” or “uh”.” I’d be really clear and probably said it more like “nay ga”, since I’m not a Mandarin speaker anyway and this isn’t a Mandarin class.
I think the focus should be on something important, not this idiotic episode being amplified by media and foreign propaganda that looks to divide Americans.
This would be a pretty serious violation of USC’s non-retaliation policy, as well as a complete abuse of trust of the student body.
So, I listened to it, and it really does sound like he set it up specifically so that he could use that line.
I don’t think that he was racist, I think he thought it was funny to say.
It was clear that he was talking about a word in Mandarin, as that was part of the set up.
He chose the language to use as an example, he chose the word in that language, and he chose to repeat it several times, in a way that would be perceived in the way that it was.
I did play that clip for two other people, both white males, with little context, and both of their eyes widened and heads rocked back when he got to his punchline. They agreed that it was intentional, that it was a set up to be able to deliver that line.
If your defense of him is that he could not have possibly understood how that would sound, then your defense is that he is entirely unqualified to be teaching a class on how to effectively communicate.
It is not catering to some lowest common denominator of stupidity to choose a different example, or a different presentation, that does not have you saying what is obviously going to come across as problematic, at best.
If he were pointing out that words in other languages sound like slurs in the English, then that was not the best way to broach it. If he did not know that words in other languages sound like slurs in English, then he’s incompetent and should be attending his class, not teaching it.
this is mere fearmongering. As I said, RT has done its job.
Why would you guess that? Please be specific.
And if someone chose to teach french by saying. “Snow snow snow snow snow, neige, neige, neige, neige, neige.” then they should probably be talked to about their ineffectiveness as a teacher.
Or to bring it up in a completely different way and context.
Oh, so now interpreting the message sent that is different than the message that is said is okay?
Criticizing the communications professor on how he chose to communicate is beyond the pale, but making up stuff about what the administration said about is just dandy?
Glad that you are an authority on what minorities should feel comfortable with.
the classic, “they get to say it, why don’t we?” defense? Really?
Is this the first time that anyone has ever complained about it? This is the first time that anyone has ever told him what it sounds like?
If anything, this is the first time that it was on tape, and so when students brought a complaint to the administration, they did not dismiss it as many posters here have, but actually listened, and thought, “Yeah, that doesn’t sound too good, does it?”
It also depends on what his reaction was.
If the admin said, “Hey, yeah, that was a bit problmatic, could you not do that in the future.” and he said, “Oh now that I hear the recording of it, you are right, I should avoid that.” then that would be one thing.
If he got defensive and said that people had a positive reaction to it in the past, indicating that that is not the first time that he has gotten feedback as to how it sounds, and that he would continue doing it that way, then that may mean that he is not really the best one to be teaching a class on effective communication.
How often does someone without a stutter say “that, that, that, that, that” in English.
How common is it for a Mandarin speaker to do the same, in Mandarin?
You are making assumptions that are not evident. My contention is that he thought it sounded funny, not that he meant to be racist. He wasn’t trying to trigger anybody, other than as a laugh.
So, this guy is explaining that there is a word in Mandarin that sounds like a slur in English.
He’s not just throwing it out there, as a repetition, as did the professor in question.
If the communications professor had had a similar presentation, that would have been perfectly fine. But he did not have a similar presentation, he had a completely different presentation, leaving the repetition of the word as the punchline.
Or if he had, as part of a lesson plan, a punchline that he thought was funny, because it sounded as though he was repeating a slur.
And if it is not that the processor was racist, but that he was making a bad joke, does that change your dismissal of the students concerns at all?
the only prevarication that I see in this thread is that a communications professor, teaching a class on effective communication, could not have possible known how that would sound.
You mean refuse to agree with your dismissal of the student’s concerns? that’s some prevarication on your part. “If we cannot have unanimous consent that these students were idiots and stupid and should be punished in violation of the student handbook’s anti retaliation policy, for voicing their concerns, then the racists will win”
And this also means that we have to agree with you that the student’s complaints were not made in good faith, that they have some sort of agenda against this professor. Do you have evidence as to this claim, or are you just going to try to bully others into agreeing with it?
It sounds like you are saying that if we don’t throw these students under the bus for bringing their concerns to the attention of the administration, then the racists have won. And you wouldn’t want that, would you?
Who’s prevaricating now?
Yep. It sure is. Professor gets investigated because some students brought legitimate concern to the administration, and suddenly the students and the dean are called stupid and immature and all manor of unpleasantness.
this is one of the wisest posts in the thread so far.
Yes, but why is it in the spotlight?
Because people that want to divide america knew that there would be exactly this reaction. You are doing exactly what it is that they want, to rant and rage against those who would dare to express their concerns about how a lesson from a communication professor teaching effective communication techniques sounds.
And if we don’t agree with your assertions of fact?
I am happy to see that you have made a worthwhile contribution.
Are you also a communications professor attempting to teach effective communication?
What punchline, you made that up wholecloth from your head. So you showed two random, non-mandarin speakers something and they had seizures or something, um ok??
You have no evidence whatsoever for this supposition. Is he grinning? Not at all. All I see is an academic giving a serious lecture.
It is indeed idiomatically ubiquitous in Mandarin to say “neige neige neige…” repeatedly as a filler. See the video linked at post 93 above.
Nonsense. That’s the exact opposite of what I’m saying. Since it’s widely accepted that black people using the word is acceptable, whereas white people using the word is not, the framework for acceptable usage of the word is clearly and fundamentally that context matters. So it cannot possibly be the case that phonemes that sound similar are, in and of themselves, intrinsically traumatic regardless of context. It’s not credible to suggest that a black person using the word is sufficient context to render the phonemes harmless; yet clear knowledge that these are merely similar phonemes in a different language is not also sufficient context to render the phonemes harmless.
But in fact, the students never made this claim anyway. Their claim was the professor was a racist who was baiting black students by deliberately mispronouncing the Chinese word to make it sound more like the English slur. If that had been true, of course that’s a serious problem. But they were simply wrong. His pronunciation was standard Mandarin, and his usage perfectly idiomatic.
I’ve watched the lecture multiple times, and never once did I think that he was trying to make an off-color joke.
I’m not aware of any facts in the story that are in dispute. If you’re talking about my opinions about what happened? Then all I can say is that if a majority on the left think this kind of ignorant performative offense-taking is acceptable, then we have lost our way and this not just a storm in a teacup - the alt-right sites that are promoting this story are making a valid point.
And I think you are doing exactly what they want, by failing to condemn the immature stupidity of these students and the inappropriate cowed respond of the Dean, and to dispel the alt-right propaganda narrative that the entire social justice movement is “political correctness gone mad”. This is stupid fringe behavior by immature students, and I think it’s important the people on the left not prevaricate, that we call it what it is, and make clear that this is not what the social justice movement is about. That BLM is about the real harm caused every day by actual racism.
The default is always first to listen to the lived experience of people who live with racism every day.
That doesn’t mean that we must entirely abandon our critical thinking skills and and can never form an opinion. I’m not so insecure in my woke credentials that I’m not going to call bullshit when I see bullshit.
If we do talk about it then I think it’s right to wholeheartedly condemn it, but to accede that this needs to be in the spotlight will reward nutpicking behavior by right-wing media. Best ignore stuff that comes from them entirely and you will almost always not be disappointed.
You guys are hanging onto that line like it’s the last helicopter out of Saigon.
[My bold] Sure, I’m on board with that.
Then you no longer feel that k9bfriender should take steps “to condemn the immature stupidity of these students and the inappropriate cowed respond of the Dean”? Great, we’re on the same page!
Exactly! And you’ll spend less time outraged over silly stuff, too.
There were two sentences in @Ludovic’s comment that I agreed with. Which of the two options that @Ludovic mentioned are you suggesting @k9bfriender was following in putting up the longest post of this thread, expanding the baseless attack on the professor and defending the students for their “legitimate concern”?