16 ms·

This sort of thing is alive and well in US schools, too. The official policy of the Seattle Public School system is to stamp out racism in all its forms, and no

by SiVal 13y ago

This sort of thing is alive and well in US schools, too. The official policy of the Seattle Public School system is to stamp out racism in all its forms, and notice how many forms there are. (Note in particular the Cultural Racism section that includes, "emphasizing individualism as opposed to a more collective ideology" as a form of racism that, by official policy, is to be stamped out by the government education system): http://web.archive.org/web/20060522101405/http://www.seattleschools.org/area/equityandrace/definitionofrace.xml http://web.archive.org/web/20060522101405/http://www.seattle...

dmix 13y ago
In Canada this week, my girlfriend is required to visit the dean of a [top Canadian law school] for calling a girl a "bitch" on Twitter. Backstory is interesting, because the girl had bullied her in person at school. GF never identified the girl on Twitter only saying "Some bitch blah blah at school today". But because she mentioned the school name, the dean found out and now wants to talk to her. There's apparently a policy against certain language at the schools which is enforced by the very highest people. Fortunately shes defending her right to freedom of expression (as any lawyer-in-training would) and refusing to delete the tweet. But the thought of students having to censor themselves because they are now a member of a school (which they paid $50k+ to join) is scary.
- corresation 13y ago
  I don't think expecting basic good judgment of those in law school is 'scary'. Further it is worth mentioning that hateful speech is not protected in Canada, and while you could say that it was but a response, such a tweet is almost certainly in violation of several new anti-'cyber' bullying restrictions.
  - stfu 13y ago
    So in your world "Some bitch at school did x" falls under hateful speech/cyber-bullying? Well, I guess by now we have to prosecute half of the YouTube and Twitter population. After all all those "first" posters are most certainly making a highly discriminatory remark against all those coming "second".
    - corresation 13y ago
      No, stfu, my "world" isn't quite so black and white: The choice isn't between prosecution or free-for-all, but if you're trying to incite freedom of expression over hateful speech, all while bringing disrepute upon a law school, you probably aren't going to get very far.
      - milsorgen 13y ago
        I don't think using a mild profanity on twitter constitutes "expecting good judgement of those in law school" it seems like vast overreach to me and as long as we accept moments like this in any form it will do nothing but get worse. If the graffiti of Pompeii is any indication humans want to be short, crass and coarse and I am okay with that and I think that is something we should accept and embrace as a society and culture. We give too much power to words when in fact it is the listener who derives the negative experience not the speaker.
      - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
        >while bringing disrepute upon a law school Quite a feat, I would say.
      - mcantelon 13y ago
        The claims that a benign, offhand comment on social media will bring the school into "disrepute" is absurd. The fact that claims like this are becoming increasingly common would indicate that the West (or perhaps just North America) is slowly retreating from the idea of reasonable individual freedom of expression.
        corresation 13y ago
        What absurd responses, though hardly unexpected given the story. Rabble rabble rabble! An institution gains disrepute through many actions over time. This particular action is very small, just as the response is. Hysterical responses as if she were sent the gallows denote a complete inability of so many to discuss a complex topic without instantly jerking to an extreme. But there is no extreme. And the whole slippery slope thing is simply nonsense. The idea that you represent such institutions when you go out of your way to incant it has been true throughout history.
  - stretchwithme 13y ago
    I think it all depends on the contract between the girl and the school. Did she agree to such restrictions on a 24/7 basis?
  - gngeal 13y ago
    hateful speech is not protected in Canada How do they prove that a speech is hateful instead of merely being ordinarily contemptuous?
    - dnautics 13y ago
      they don't. speech is not protected in Canada Is that better?
    - corresation 13y ago
      Just talking abstractly (again, the only reason I mentioned that is that saying "free speech!" is a non-starter when you're calling someone a bitch -- even if unnamed, if any other party could identify who you mean, it isn't anonymous -- and bringing disrepute upon an institution), but Canadian rights are generally based upon the idea that your rights end where my nose begins, and your right to free speech ends when you intrude on the rights of others not to be harassed, disparaged, etc. Rights go both ways, and there is a balance to be found somewhere in the middle. Westboro is a hate group, by Canadian law. Their hateful protests are actionable. We have a new crop of anti-bullying laws -- particularly focused on the online world -- because the speaker can't fallback on the notion that their speech is protected, because it isn't.
      - gngeal 13y ago
        So calling an idiot an idiot is not an option in Canada?
        001sky 13y ago
        In 19th and early 20th century medicine and psychology, an "idiot" was a person with a very severe mental retardation PC police will probably getcha for that, too.
      - mcantelon 13y ago
        >We have a new crop of anti-bullying laws Please cite the specific law that would make a single mention of an unnamed "bitch" criminal.
  - anoncowherd 13y ago
    > Further it is worth mentioning that hateful speech is not protected in Canada It's worth noting that speech is just speech. There's no objective definition for what constitutes hateful speech, nor should there be. If there's someone on a street corner shouting that all black people should be killed, you're perfectly free to ignore him and his ideas. You could perhaps even tell him that he's being an idiot. But someone else might be saying something worth listening to, even if it didn't happen to align with your current views.
  - droithomme 13y ago
    Hateful speech, such as calling someone a moron, an idiot, a dummy, a bitch, a fool, etc, is not the same as hate speech. I have no doubt you are aware of this. You are probably also aware that on the issue of laws regulating "hate speech" in Canada, which have generally been upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada, these laws are by Province and Territory. Saskatchewan’s Human Rights Code defines it one way, Alberta has another, B.C. has another, and the Northwest Territories have another.
- aheilbut 13y ago
  Just wanting to talk to her does not seem inappropriate. Lawyers in particular are expected to chose their words carefully and keep decorum. Perhaps it's a teachable moment.
  - fleitz 13y ago
    Lawyers are expected to win. If you want to hire a lawyer because of their decorum go right ahead.
    - chiph 13y ago
      The judge will enforce the decorum of his courtroom, and you don't want to be a lawyer on the receiving end of that.
      - fleitz 13y ago
        The decorum each judge sets is their own, and it's not necessarily overly formal, especially if it isn't required by the rules of court.
  - weland 13y ago
    Come on, we've all been to school. Unless it's your graduation party, the dean never wants to "just talk", like, you know, grab a beer or two together.
  - ceol 13y ago
    Students represent their school, so no surprise a top law school would crack down on students spouting shit on Twitter, certainly when they also mention the school in their tweet.
  - mcantelon 13y ago
    Wanting to spend time talking to her about an offhand, benign comment on social media doesn't seem "inappropriate", but it does seem ridiculous and intrusive.
- WalterBright 13y ago
  Old Soviet joke: "The Soviet Union is just like the United States. In the US, you can criticize the American President. In the USSR, you can also criticize the American President!"
  - atmosx 13y ago
    Sure, that was in 1988. This is 2013, you can criticize the Russian president, but you can't criticize the American president because he is listening.
    - saraid216 13y ago
      The Russian president rides a bear. You can't criticize that.
      - trekky1700 13y ago
        You can criticize moobs though. Even if they're bear mounted moobs.
        jlgreco 13y ago
        To be fair, he is 60. Even Arnold Schwarzenegger doesn't look fantastic without a shirt on these days, and dianabol is a hell of a drug...
  - altero 13y ago
    Interesting how silent we are. Obama is way worse than Bush ever was.
    - mikeash 13y ago
      Silent? I've seen way more criticism of Obama than I ever did of Bush.
      - o0-0o 13y ago
- saraid216 13y ago
  > But the thought of students having to censor themselves because they are now a member of a school (which they paid $50k+ to join) is scary. Um. This has basically been true throughout the entire history of law schools. The only significant difference is the amount they paid to get in.
- codex 13y ago
  Likely the school has a code of conduct which includes a prohibition on bullying. That's a bit different from censorship.
dogweather 13y ago
Where, specifically, is the quoted text?
- ddinh 13y ago
  It's in the section defining cultural racism: Those aspects of society that overtly and covertly attribute value and normality to white people and Whiteness, and devalue, stereotype, and label people of color as “other”, different, less than, or render them invisible. Examples of these norms include defining white skin tones as nude or flesh colored, having a future time orientation, emphasizing individualism as opposed to a more collective ideology, defining one form of English as standard, and identifying only Whites as great writers or composers.
  - arrrg 13y ago
    I do think schools shouldn't emphasize either collectivism or individualism over each other and I don't think the text you are quoting here advises that, either. Only a pretty narrow-mindes reading of that text would suggest that in any way. At any rate you would have to look at the actual implementation of that policy to really criticise it. As is this text is quite tame. Please also note that schools can hardly be idiologically neutral. That is not possible - they have to find a way to spproach how they depict individualism and collectivism no matter what. To connect this in any way to the linked situation is downright absurd.
    - emiliobumachar 13y ago
      It's one thing for an institution to position itself against emphasizing individualism. It's a couple steps further to define emphasizing individualism as a form of racism. Is there somethig that I as a non-american don't get that makes this newspeak palatable? Have american racists historically been more individualistic or something? EDIT: this comment from elnate nails it: "They're conflating racism with enthnocentrism, the idea that one culture (usually yours) is better than others."
      - 13y ago
walshemj 13y ago
I think that Mr. Szemalikowski may be an eu national from countries where social hierarchy is much much stronger. When I worked for a tiny companay in the UK our two polish developers where absolutely shocked that our MD would take his turn in making the coffee/tea.
- kybernetyk 13y ago
  I think this guy is just a nutjob and you shouldn't project his idiotic overreaction onto other countries.
Nate75Sanders 13y ago
You used the present tense, but then linked to a Wayback Machine link.
rickjames28 13y ago
The leftist, statist thought police is alive and well in the U.S. educational system. Students, parents, and others need to stand up and get in the faces of these immoral leftists.
ceol 13y ago
Actually, the point is that lots of cultures are collective-oriented, while we as a culture like to favor individualism (even though we are extremely collective in our own ways.) This is called "cultural bias"; it means that, should a student from another culture come into our schools, they should not feel wrong for being raised in an environment that doesn't promote individualism. Stuff like, "Don't be a sheep!" and, "You are your own person. Don't let anyone take that away from you!" can make them feel out of place and other'ed. Notice how the part you quoted says "as opposed to a more collective ideology." That means they want to get rid of pinning individualism against collectivism; they don't want to get rid of individualism. I'm not sure what the rest of your comment means, though. Even if that specific phrase is a problem, the rest of the document is all great stuff.
jotm 13y ago
"He's interested in what anarchism is, get him!" That is very stupid.

by SiVal 13y ago

dmix 13y ago

In Canada this week, my girlfriend is required to visit the dean of a [top Canadian law school] for calling a girl a "bitch" on Twitter. Backstory is interesting, because the girl had bullied her in person at school. GF never identified the girl on Twitter only saying "Some bitch blah blah at school today". But because she mentioned the school name, the dean found out and now wants to talk to her. There's apparently a policy against certain language at the schools which is enforced by the very highest people. Fortunately shes defending her right to freedom of expression (as any lawyer-in-training would) and refusing to delete the tweet. But the thought of students having to censor themselves because they are now a member of a school (which they paid $50k+ to join) is scary.

corresation 13y ago
I don't think expecting basic good judgment of those in law school is 'scary'. Further it is worth mentioning that hateful speech is not protected in Canada, and while you could say that it was but a response, such a tweet is almost certainly in violation of several new anti-'cyber' bullying restrictions.
- stfu 13y ago
  So in your world "Some bitch at school did x" falls under hateful speech/cyber-bullying? Well, I guess by now we have to prosecute half of the YouTube and Twitter population. After all all those "first" posters are most certainly making a highly discriminatory remark against all those coming "second".
  - corresation 13y ago
    No, stfu, my "world" isn't quite so black and white: The choice isn't between prosecution or free-for-all, but if you're trying to incite freedom of expression over hateful speech, all while bringing disrepute upon a law school, you probably aren't going to get very far.
    - milsorgen 13y ago
      I don't think using a mild profanity on twitter constitutes "expecting good judgement of those in law school" it seems like vast overreach to me and as long as we accept moments like this in any form it will do nothing but get worse. If the graffiti of Pompeii is any indication humans want to be short, crass and coarse and I am okay with that and I think that is something we should accept and embrace as a society and culture. We give too much power to words when in fact it is the listener who derives the negative experience not the speaker.
    - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
      >while bringing disrepute upon a law school Quite a feat, I would say.
    - mcantelon 13y ago
      The claims that a benign, offhand comment on social media will bring the school into "disrepute" is absurd. The fact that claims like this are becoming increasingly common would indicate that the West (or perhaps just North America) is slowly retreating from the idea of reasonable individual freedom of expression.
      - corresation 13y ago
        What absurd responses, though hardly unexpected given the story. Rabble rabble rabble! An institution gains disrepute through many actions over time. This particular action is very small, just as the response is. Hysterical responses as if she were sent the gallows denote a complete inability of so many to discuss a complex topic without instantly jerking to an extreme. But there is no extreme. And the whole slippery slope thing is simply nonsense. The idea that you represent such institutions when you go out of your way to incant it has been true throughout history.
- stretchwithme 13y ago
  I think it all depends on the contract between the girl and the school. Did she agree to such restrictions on a 24/7 basis?
- gngeal 13y ago
  hateful speech is not protected in Canada How do they prove that a speech is hateful instead of merely being ordinarily contemptuous?
  - dnautics 13y ago
    they don't. speech is not protected in Canada Is that better?
  - corresation 13y ago
    Just talking abstractly (again, the only reason I mentioned that is that saying "free speech!" is a non-starter when you're calling someone a bitch -- even if unnamed, if any other party could identify who you mean, it isn't anonymous -- and bringing disrepute upon an institution), but Canadian rights are generally based upon the idea that your rights end where my nose begins, and your right to free speech ends when you intrude on the rights of others not to be harassed, disparaged, etc. Rights go both ways, and there is a balance to be found somewhere in the middle. Westboro is a hate group, by Canadian law. Their hateful protests are actionable. We have a new crop of anti-bullying laws -- particularly focused on the online world -- because the speaker can't fallback on the notion that their speech is protected, because it isn't.
    - gngeal 13y ago
      So calling an idiot an idiot is not an option in Canada?
      - 001sky 13y ago
        In 19th and early 20th century medicine and psychology, an "idiot" was a person with a very severe mental retardation PC police will probably getcha for that, too.
    - mcantelon 13y ago
      >We have a new crop of anti-bullying laws Please cite the specific law that would make a single mention of an unnamed "bitch" criminal.
- anoncowherd 13y ago
  > Further it is worth mentioning that hateful speech is not protected in Canada It's worth noting that speech is just speech. There's no objective definition for what constitutes hateful speech, nor should there be. If there's someone on a street corner shouting that all black people should be killed, you're perfectly free to ignore him and his ideas. You could perhaps even tell him that he's being an idiot. But someone else might be saying something worth listening to, even if it didn't happen to align with your current views.
- droithomme 13y ago
  Hateful speech, such as calling someone a moron, an idiot, a dummy, a bitch, a fool, etc, is not the same as hate speech. I have no doubt you are aware of this. You are probably also aware that on the issue of laws regulating "hate speech" in Canada, which have generally been upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada, these laws are by Province and Territory. Saskatchewan’s Human Rights Code defines it one way, Alberta has another, B.C. has another, and the Northwest Territories have another.
aheilbut 13y ago
Just wanting to talk to her does not seem inappropriate. Lawyers in particular are expected to chose their words carefully and keep decorum. Perhaps it's a teachable moment.
- fleitz 13y ago
  Lawyers are expected to win. If you want to hire a lawyer because of their decorum go right ahead.
  - chiph 13y ago
    The judge will enforce the decorum of his courtroom, and you don't want to be a lawyer on the receiving end of that.
    - fleitz 13y ago
      The decorum each judge sets is their own, and it's not necessarily overly formal, especially if it isn't required by the rules of court.
- weland 13y ago
  Come on, we've all been to school. Unless it's your graduation party, the dean never wants to "just talk", like, you know, grab a beer or two together.
- ceol 13y ago
  Students represent their school, so no surprise a top law school would crack down on students spouting shit on Twitter, certainly when they also mention the school in their tweet.
- mcantelon 13y ago
  Wanting to spend time talking to her about an offhand, benign comment on social media doesn't seem "inappropriate", but it does seem ridiculous and intrusive.
WalterBright 13y ago
Old Soviet joke: "The Soviet Union is just like the United States. In the US, you can criticize the American President. In the USSR, you can also criticize the American President!"
- atmosx 13y ago
  Sure, that was in 1988. This is 2013, you can criticize the Russian president, but you can't criticize the American president because he is listening.
  - saraid216 13y ago
    The Russian president rides a bear. You can't criticize that.
    - trekky1700 13y ago
      You can criticize moobs though. Even if they're bear mounted moobs.
      - jlgreco 13y ago
        To be fair, he is 60. Even Arnold Schwarzenegger doesn't look fantastic without a shirt on these days, and dianabol is a hell of a drug...
- altero 13y ago
  Interesting how silent we are. Obama is way worse than Bush ever was.
  - mikeash 13y ago
    Silent? I've seen way more criticism of Obama than I ever did of Bush.
    - o0-0o 13y ago
saraid216 13y ago
> But the thought of students having to censor themselves because they are now a member of a school (which they paid $50k+ to join) is scary. Um. This has basically been true throughout the entire history of law schools. The only significant difference is the amount they paid to get in.
codex 13y ago
Likely the school has a code of conduct which includes a prohibition on bullying. That's a bit different from censorship.

dogweather 13y ago

Where, specifically, is the quoted text?

ddinh 13y ago
It's in the section defining cultural racism: Those aspects of society that overtly and covertly attribute value and normality to white people and Whiteness, and devalue, stereotype, and label people of color as “other”, different, less than, or render them invisible. Examples of these norms include defining white skin tones as nude or flesh colored, having a future time orientation, emphasizing individualism as opposed to a more collective ideology, defining one form of English as standard, and identifying only Whites as great writers or composers.
- arrrg 13y ago
  I do think schools shouldn't emphasize either collectivism or individualism over each other and I don't think the text you are quoting here advises that, either. Only a pretty narrow-mindes reading of that text would suggest that in any way. At any rate you would have to look at the actual implementation of that policy to really criticise it. As is this text is quite tame. Please also note that schools can hardly be idiologically neutral. That is not possible - they have to find a way to spproach how they depict individualism and collectivism no matter what. To connect this in any way to the linked situation is downright absurd.
  - emiliobumachar 13y ago
    It's one thing for an institution to position itself against emphasizing individualism. It's a couple steps further to define emphasizing individualism as a form of racism. Is there somethig that I as a non-american don't get that makes this newspeak palatable? Have american racists historically been more individualistic or something? EDIT: this comment from elnate nails it: "They're conflating racism with enthnocentrism, the idea that one culture (usually yours) is better than others."
    - 13y ago

walshemj 13y ago

I think that Mr. Szemalikowski may be an eu national from countries where social hierarchy is much much stronger. When I worked for a tiny companay in the UK our two polish developers where absolutely shocked that our MD would take his turn in making the coffee/tea.

kybernetyk 13y ago
I think this guy is just a nutjob and you shouldn't project his idiotic overreaction onto other countries.

Nate75Sanders 13y ago

You used the present tense, but then linked to a Wayback Machine link.

rickjames28 13y ago

The leftist, statist thought police is alive and well in the U.S. educational system. Students, parents, and others need to stand up and get in the faces of these immoral leftists.

ceol 13y ago

Actually, the point is that lots of cultures are collective-oriented, while we as a culture like to favor individualism (even though we are extremely collective in our own ways.) This is called "cultural bias"; it means that, should a student from another culture come into our schools, they should not feel wrong for being raised in an environment that doesn't promote individualism. Stuff like, "Don't be a sheep!" and, "You are your own person. Don't let anyone take that away from you!" can make them feel out of place and other'ed. Notice how the part you quoted says "as opposed to a more collective ideology." That means they want to get rid of pinning individualism against collectivism; they don't want to get rid of individualism. I'm not sure what the rest of your comment means, though. Even if that specific phrase is a problem, the rest of the document is all great stuff.

jotm 13y ago

"He's interested in what anarchism is, get him!" That is very stupid.