3 ms·

>unless it passes some bureaucrat's standard of diversity? That is what was said, but not why the school is attacking student organizations. Any student organ

>unless it passes some bureaucrat's standard of diversity? That is what was said, but not why the school is attacking student organizations. Any student organization presents a liability to the school. An outdoor club, something with the schools name on it where student go out and teach each other how to ski on glaciers or climb rocks? The schools are listening to their lawyers, their insurance schemes. They are against any and all groups that operate without direct school management. I was a member of the VOC, UBC's outdoor club and an organization that predates the school itself. Every year I am surprised that the school hasn't moved to to shut them down. https://www.ubc-voc.com/tripagenda/upcoming.php https://www.ubc-voc.com/tripagenda/upcoming.php

majormajor 4y ago
Go a layer deeper. Liability to whom? Blame the lawyers and blame the parents both. The lawyers part... that's a broader issue with how the American legal system is intentionally adversarial. The parents part... that could be changed more easily, but reducing risk is absolutely what they're pushing for currently. So, short of not depending on parents' money... which is of course tough at an expensive private school, but also even tough at public schools that are no longer even close to as affordable as they used to be too... what ya gonna do?
hooloovoo_zoo 4y ago
I don’t think so. Stanford has several suicides a year. Any theoretical liability from and outdoor accident is a rounding error on their total liability for student deaths, morbid though it is.
- ehvatum 4y ago
  The consequences to the university of being labeled a white supremacist institution would be far greater than a few student deaths per year. Stanford’s reputation would never recover, if that label adhered. The university would shrink to nothing and vanish. Not one whiff of a hint of liability to being labeled racist in favor of white people can be tolerated. If that means a total ban on supporting outdoorsmanship, so be it. The university survives. For that reason, fighting white supremacy is the keys to the kingdom for despot administrators, and the definition of white supremacy is undergoing an accelerating expansion that will soon extend past the edges of the universe.

majormajor 4y ago

Go a layer deeper. Liability to whom? Blame the lawyers and blame the parents both. The lawyers part... that's a broader issue with how the American legal system is intentionally adversarial. The parents part... that could be changed more easily, but reducing risk is absolutely what they're pushing for currently. So, short of not depending on parents' money... which is of course tough at an expensive private school, but also even tough at public schools that are no longer even close to as affordable as they used to be too... what ya gonna do?

hooloovoo_zoo 4y ago

I don’t think so. Stanford has several suicides a year. Any theoretical liability from and outdoor accident is a rounding error on their total liability for student deaths, morbid though it is.

ehvatum 4y ago
The consequences to the university of being labeled a white supremacist institution would be far greater than a few student deaths per year. Stanford’s reputation would never recover, if that label adhered. The university would shrink to nothing and vanish. Not one whiff of a hint of liability to being labeled racist in favor of white people can be tolerated. If that means a total ban on supporting outdoorsmanship, so be it. The university survives. For that reason, fighting white supremacy is the keys to the kingdom for despot administrators, and the definition of white supremacy is undergoing an accelerating expansion that will soon extend past the edges of the universe.