Should BU withdraw the job offer?

[Serenade]

Huh.  Who knew that my six boys would be the cause of the downfall of the country?

 

Look out, America.  They're starting to leave my nest.

 

 

We should have had kittens.

[poppy]

Right, it is - in an appropriate and edifying way. In a way that moves the dialog along. Twitter is simply not the way to do it. She didn't invite dialog; she just spewed commentary.

And doggone it if it didn't work in starting conversations. Moving the dialog on, if you will.

 

Do you use the term "spew" to describe comments from all social critics?

[SKL]

I just find it disturbing that the people who think they are most anti-racism are so perfectly comfortable with obvious double standards.

 

After all, what is racism but double standards?

 

Some people have lost a lot of credibility in this thread IMO.

[marbel]

And doggone it if it didn't work in starting conversations. Moving the dialog on, if you will.

 

Do you use the term "spew" to describe comments from all social critics?

 

Is it constructive dialog?  

 

I use the term "spew" to describe comments from people who appear to be talking without listening.  I have accused my children, my husband, and myself of "spewing."   So, no, not reserved for social critics.   

 

[Lisbeth]

But white people as a global population should get their shit together on matters of race. Me included. I truly don't understand why people are objecting to a woman speaking truth, unless it's because they don't like the truths that 'uppity' black women tell.

 

Probably because we don't think she *IS* speaking the truth.  Back to reading.

[unsinkable]

Probably because we don't think she *IS* speaking the truth. Back to reading.

Exactly.

 

It's pretty ugly that people set up these false dichotomies that either you agree she is speaking truth or you don't because you don't like the truths uppity black women tell.

[Lisbeth]

Whew, I came late to this one.  I have noticed a shift in the way people feel about the racial issue.  I think it is growing really, really tired.  However you feel about it, I don't think calling someone racist (not that that happened here, particularly) or accusing a whole race of being a problem (even the white race) is being given the pass it once was.  People are tired of it, whether you agree they should be or not, and push back is in the air.  The reason I think that is I have read and heard way more dissent to it lately than I have heard in years.  It will be interesting.  Many of us are not going to look at our white male sons, who have done nothing, and take kindly anymore to them being classified as a whole as the young version of a group being blamed as the cause of all of society's ills.  Yeah - no.  She should not keep her job/job offer, and if there are other professors who make these blanket accusing statements, they have no business teaching and grading for students who they automatically see as troublemakers and "evil" (or whatever milder version of that word you want to use) just because they are 1. male and 2. white.

[Lisbeth]

Oh and by the way, I don't agree with anyone saying all women are the cause of society's ills, all black people are the cause of society's ills, all Muslims are the cause of society's ills or all gay people are the cause of society's ills, either.  It's just so wrong.

[Slartibartfast]

Whew, I came late to this one.  I have noticed a shift in the way people feel about the racial issue.  I think it is growing really, really tired.  However you feel about it, I don't think calling someone racist (not that that happened here, particularly) or accusing a whole race of being a problem (even the white race) is being given the pass it once was.  People are tired of it, whether you agree they should be or not, and push back is in the air.  The reason I think that is I have read and heard way more dissent to it lately than I have heard in years.  It will be interesting.  Many of us are not going to look at our white male sons, who have done nothing, and take kindly anymore to them being classified as a whole as the young version of a group being blamed as the cause of all of society's ills.  Yeah - no.  She should not keep her job/job offer, and if there are other professors who make these blanket accusing statements, they have no business teaching and grading for students who they automatically see as troublemakers and "evil" (or whatever milder version of that word you want to use) just because they are 1. male and 2. white.

 

 

Growing tired? It seems to me that there is more overt racism lately and more violence against minorities.

 

It seems to me like the situation is getting worse, not in any way getting better and people should be MORE aware not less.

 

People might be tired of hearing about racism but it is a huge problem and if people just don't want to hear about it or are pushing back then they are "part of the problem."

 

The average white male isn't doing anything wrong but we should have more questions regarding people in positions of authority who abuse their positions and harm minorities without cause. If people in positions of authority are not being held accountable then that is something for which society is responsible.

[Laurie]

 

 

 

That was an unfortunate thing to say and I do wish he would have worded it differently, but why did it scare you? What did you think was going to happen? There IS often an imbalanced sense of understanding the lives of African Americans, people of color more generally, race or racism among white individuals because they are less likely to have to think about or deal it directly on a regular basis. Our high school history classes ARE pretty dismal in their effectiveness in teaching the basics of civil rights history. Many (though not all) black parents make up for that by ensuring their kids are taught that history elsewhere. The same doesn't seem to be happening any where nearly as much in white homes -- so kids aren't getting it at home and aren't getting it at school -- and then a big black scary professor comes along... (I'm being tongue in cheek).  Sure, you can catch more flies with honey -- but your college professor isn't there to ensure everyone has a "kumbuya" moment around race.  And our racial history isn't particularly a "Sunday picnic" -- you do have to be in a place to decide you will wrestle with it and face some of our historical and societal demons -- and what it means for TODAY to learn and grow from it. 

 

 

 

 Tone of voice, glowering at us...I found that scary and not especially welcoming on the first day of class!    

He chose to begin our first class together  by making it about "us" and "them".   I don't think that was necessary,  it wasn't  professional,  and it certainly didn't promote a spirit of collegiality.  Of course I wasn't expecting the subject matter to be sugar coated, as you seem to think.   But If one group of students is targeted from the first day as being ignorant and on the hot seat then it shouldn't be surprising that some will opt out like I did.  

 

As for high school, I went to a public school and we learned about civil rights history, not just on Martin Luther King's birthday.  That's a good thing, but I did have a problem with being asked to stand for the singing of "the Black National Anthem" at our school assembly honoring Dr. King.  I don't have any problem with the song "We Shall Overcome", just about calling it the Black National Anthem and asking people to stand for it at a school assemly. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Slartibartfast]

 Tone of voice, glowering at us...I found that scary and not especially welcoming on the first day of class!    

He chose to begin our first class together  by making it about "us" and "them".   I don't think that was necessary,  it wasn't  professional,  and it certainly didn't promote a spirit of collegiality.  Of course I wasn't expecting the subject matter to be sugar coated, as you seem to think.   But If one group of students is targeted from the first day as being ignorant and on the hot seat then it shouldn't be surprising that some will opt out like I did.  

 

As for high school, I went to a public school and we learned about civil rights history, not just on Martin Luther King's birthday.  That's a good thing, but I did have a problem with being asked to stand for the singing of "the Black National Anthem" at our school assembly honoring Dr. King.  I don't have any problem with the song "We Shall Overcome", just about calling it the Black National Anthem and asking people to stand for it at a school assemly. 

 

People should expect to have their worldview challenged if they are a white person in an AA studies class, it isn't any different for men in a Women's studies class or any other similar situation.

 

"Ignorant" is not an insult, it just means "lacking knowledge or information." 

 

I have seen multiple professors in non-sociological classes challenge their students the first day. It is far better they do it the first day so the kids know what to expect and still have time to drop the class.

 

I had a professor in a history class say, "this is a heavy reading class. If you aren't prepared to read a lot then you don't belong here," and some people dropped the class. 

[unsinkable]

People should expect to have their worldview challenged if they are a white person in an AA studies class, it isn't any different for men in a Women's studies class or any other similar situation.

 

"Ignorant" is not an insult, it just means "lacking knowledge or information."

 

I have seen multiple professors in non-sociological classes challenge their students the first day. It is far better they do it the first day so the kids know what to expect and still have time to drop the class.

 

I had a professor in a history class say, "this is a heavy reading class. If you aren't prepared to read a lot then you don't belong here," and some people dropped the class.

So the non-white people and the women SHOULDN'T expect to have their worldview challenged?

 

:confused:

[Slartibartfast]

So the non-white people and the women SHOULDN'T expect to have their worldview challenged?

 

:confused:

 

Yes, they should.

 

I certainly felt my worldview was challenged when I took classes taught by Women's studies professors. I didn't take a lot of those types of classes, the ones I took were "women in blah historical time period blah" classes.

[unsinkable]

Yes, they should.

But you were defending the professor singling out the white person.

[Slartibartfast]

But you were defending the professor singling out the white person.

 

From the description it sounded like there was more than one white person and many professors do that sort of thing.

 

It isn't unusual IME.

 

 

[unsinkable]

But ideally, everyone should be challenged, not just the other race or gender.

[Caroline]

 Tone of voice, glowering at us...I found that scary and not especially welcoming on the first day of class!    

He chose to begin our first class together  by making it about "us" and "them".   I don't think that was necessary,  it wasn't  professional,  and it certainly didn't promote a spirit of collegiality.  Of course I wasn't expecting the subject matter to be sugar coated, as you seem to think.   But If one group of students is targeted from the first day as being ignorant and on the hot seat then it shouldn't be surprising that some will opt out like I did.  

 

As for high school, I went to a public school and we learned about civil rights history, not just on Martin Luther King's birthday.  That's a good thing, but I did have a problem with being asked to stand for the singing of "the Black National Anthem" at our school assembly honoring Dr. King.  I don't have any problem with the song "We Shall Overcome", just about calling it the Black National Anthem and asking people to stand for it at a school assemly. 

 

The Black National Anthem is "Lift Every Voice and Sing" not "We Shall Overcome."

[Slartibartfast]

 Tone of voice, glowering at us...I found that scary and not especially welcoming on the first day of class!    

He chose to begin our first class together  by making it about "us" and "them".   I don't think that was necessary,  it wasn't  professional,  and it certainly didn't promote a spirit of collegiality.  Of course I wasn't expecting the subject matter to be sugar coated, as you seem to think.   But If one group of students is targeted from the first day as being ignorant and on the hot seat then it shouldn't be surprising that some will opt out like I did.  

 

As for high school, I went to a public school and we learned about civil rights history, not just on Martin Luther King's birthday.  That's a good thing, but I did have a problem with being asked to stand for the singing of "the Black National Anthem" at our school assembly honoring Dr. King.  I don't have any problem with the song "We Shall Overcome", just about calling it the Black National Anthem and asking people to stand for it at a school assemly. 

 

 

Francis Scott Key was a slave owner and used his position as US Attorney to oppose abolitionists. The original poem contains the lines,

 

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore

That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,

A home and a country, should leave us no more?

Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution.

No refuge could save the hireling and slave

From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:

And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave,

O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

 

I am just saying that some might have a legitimate complain about the anthem but there are issues with many patriotic songs.

[SKL]

Francis Scott Key was a slave owner and used his position as US Attorney to oppose abolitionists. The original poem contains the lines,

 

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore

That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,

A home and a country, should leave us no more?

Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution.

No refuge could save the hireling and slave

From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:

And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave,

O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

 

I am just saying that some might have a legitimate complain about the anthem but there are issues with many patriotic songs.

 

I think he wrote that song during an actual battle (or at least inspired by one that he'd just recently watched), and he's talking about the other side being wrong about its expectation of obliterating the US folks.

 

A lot of people have suggested that The Star-Spangled Banner is not the best national anthem for us in the long run.  Maybe it will be replaced someday.

[MSNative]

Growing tired? It seems to me that there is more overt racism lately and more violence against minorities.

 

It seems to me like the situation is getting worse, not in any way getting better and people should be MORE aware not less.

 

People might be tired of hearing about racism but it is a huge problem and if people just don't want to hear about it or are pushing back then they are "part of the problem."

 

The average white male isn't doing anything wrong but we should have more questions regarding people in positions of authority who abuse their positions and harm minorities without cause. If people in positions of authority are not being held accountable then that is something for which society is responsible.

I completely agree that people in positions of authority who abuse their positions to harm people without cause should be held accountable. The difference is I think that principle applies to all people - even when the person abuses his or her power against non-minorities. So, a professor in a position of authority ought to be held accountable.

There are several ways to engage in useful and worldview changing discussion about race. She did not choose those methods. She chose to be divisive and hurtful. And the BU president agrees.

 

"At Boston University, we acknowledge Dr. Grundy’s right to hold and express her opinions. Our community is composed of faculty, staff, and students who represent widely varying points of view on many sensitive issues.At the same time, we fully appreciate why many have reacted so strongly to her statements. Boston University does not condone racism or bigotry in any form, and we are committed to maintaining an educational environment that is free from bias, fully inclusive, and open to wide-ranging discussions. We are disappointed and concerned by statements that reduce individuals to stereotypes on the basis of a broad category such as sex, race, or ethnicity. I believe Dr. Grundy’s remarks fit this characterization.

 

I do not say this lightly or without a great deal of consultation and soul-searching. I understand there is a broader context to Dr. Grundy’s tweets and that, as a scholar, she has the right to pursue her research, formulate her views, and challenge the rest of us to think differently about race relations. But we also must recognize that words have power and the words in her Twitter feed were powerful in the way they stereotyped and condemned other people. As a university president, I am accustomed to living in a world where faculty do—and should—have great latitude to express their opinions and provoke discussion. But I also have an obligation to speak up when words become hurtful to one group or another in the way they typecast and label its members. That is why I weigh in on this issue today.

 

Too often conversations about race quickly become inflamed and divisive. We must resolve to find a vocabulary for these conversations that allows us to seek answers without intemperance, rancor, or unnecessary divisiveness. We expect our faculty members to strive to create this environment in their classrooms."

[poppy]

Is it constructive dialog?

 

I use the term "spew" to describe comments from people who appear to be talking without listening. I have accused my children, my husband, and myself of "spewing." So, no, not reserved for social critics.

So then the folks saying "she is obviously a racist" are spewing?

[Slartibartfast]

I think he wrote that song during an actual battle (or at least inspired by one that he'd just recently watched), and he's talking about the other side being wrong about its expectation of obliterating the US folks.

 

A lot of people have suggested that The Star-Spangled Banner is not the best national anthem for us in the long run. Maybe it will be replaced someday.

He did write it during the battle at Ft McHenry. Thousands of slaves reached freedom by escaping to the British military. The British recruited slaves in order to damage the US economy and fill their ranks.

 

He is referring to slaves being wrong and killing them, not calling the British slaves.

 

Francis Scott Key actively worked against abolitionists he was pro-slavery. He did speak out against poor treatment and as an attorney he helped freed slaves stay that way but he was anti-escaped slaves. He only helped if a white person freed them. He was very much in favor of slavery as an institution.

[Catwoman]

From the description it sounded like there was more than one white person and many professors do that sort of thing.

 

It isn't unusual IME.

I think the problem here is that she wasn't speaking to a classroom full of students to challenge their ideas within the context of a particular type of course.

 

She was ranting to the world in general on her Twitter account. She wasn't "educating;" she was posting her personal racist opinions.

[poppy]

I think the problem here is that she wasn't speaking to a classroom full of students to challenge their ideas within the context of a particular type of course.

 

She was ranting to the world in general on her Twitter account. She wasn't "educating;" she was posting her personal racist opinions.

 

Three or four of the posters here who have taken some AA studies classes have put it into the context of that discipline and said it was not that unusual a teaching method, and that she was not speaking literally about her personal dislike of white males.  

 

And I don't get why it would only be OK for her to discuss these things in a classroom full of people who have signed up for that class, and otherwise it's not appropriate for her for to bring up these topics? 

 

I do know sometimes it's weird to hear someone from outside your discipline.  When I was in college, I had a pet mouse. My pet mouse got sick. One of my friends who was studying biology offered to "put down" my mouse for me. She said she learned how to do that in class and it was the most humane option.   That was SO far outside my liberal arts education which was just reading, discussing, writing that I was kind of shocked by it.

[Catwoman]

Three or four of the posters here who have taken some AA studies classes have put it into the context of that discipline and said it was not that unusual a teaching method, and that she was not speaking literally about her personal dislike of white males.

 

And I don't get why it would only be OK for her to discuss these things in a classroom full of people who have signed up for that class, and otherwise it's not appropriate for her for to bring up these topics?

 

I do know sometimes it's weird to hear someone from outside your discipline. When I was in college, I had a pet mouse. My pet mouse got sick. One of my friends who was studying biology offered to "put down" my mouse for me. She said she learned how to do that in class and it was the most humane option. That was SO far outside my liberal arts education which was just reading, discussing, writing that I was kind of shocked by it.

Those tweets were obviously not intended to be educational. They were not directed toward her students. They were personal comments on a personal Twitter account.

 

Honestly, I don't think those comments would have been appropriate in a classroom situation, either, unless they were prefaced by an explanation that they were overtly racist ideas and that the class should discuss them in that context.

[poppy]

Those tweets were obviously not intended to be educational. They were not directed toward her students. They were personal comments on a personal Twitter account.

 

Honestly, I don't think those comments would have been appropriate in a classroom situation, either, unless they were prefaced by an explanation that they were overtly racist ideas and that the class should discuss them in that context.

 

What makes you think they were not educational and not directed at students? They were largely about the student body at BU.  A sociology professor writing "The problem with this school is...." in a public forum is not what I'd call personal.

[Anne in CA]

I AM prejudiced toward ANYONE who makes statements like "The problem with this..."

 

The reason I can't stand people who say stuff like that is that I have 25 years of customer service and ANYONE who starts off an interaction of any kind by telling you with a blanket statement about how wrong you are, how you have a "big problem", is usually going to be unhappy with anything, and there is no helping them, they just like to bring people down. I tolerate these people, fortunately there are very few of them, but some people only focus on what is wrong, they don't know how to be happy, and changing immediate circumstances to make them happy will STILL lead to trouble. They don't build things, they don't do things, they criticize. Well, have at it, but I am a doer and I don't have sympathy for whiners.

 

For example I saw a woman in our restaurant who had not eaten much of her sandwich. I asked her if something was wrong with it, intending to make her a new one if something had been messed up. She tells me, "You have a big problem in your kitchen..." Then tells me that her bread was days old, and that there was too much fat on her meat. #1 I had made the bread MYSELF the day before, it was not old. #2 the beef was grass fed, you could see there was almost no fat on it. She just wanted to complain. At that point there was no point in giving her anymore attention, and I didn't. I asked another person close to her at another table how her identical sandwich was and that woman raved about how great her Ruben was. Well, there it is. Focus on the person who is happy, don't focus on the person grumping.

 

Racism is a terrible thing. It exists everywhere, but that does not mean we should tolerate it or excuse it. But I won't engage someone who just wants to complain about other people. Life is too short.

 

 

 

[MSNative]

What makes you think they were not educational and not directed at students? They were largely about the student body at BU. A sociology professor writing "The problem with this school is...." in a public forum is not what I'd call personal.

How do you know the tweets were largely about BU student body? I must have missed the tweets that referenced BU.

 

What makes me think they weren't educational? For starters, the president of the university didn't think they were educational. Second, she tweeted them. She didn't present these thoughts on a forum that provides for discussion. Third, she did not end even one with a simple "thoughts?" Or "Discuss". Her tweets gave no indication that she wanted to discuss or even hear other viewpoints.

[Slartibartfast]

I think the problem here is that she wasn't speaking to a classroom full of students to challenge their ideas within the context of a particular type of course.

 

She was ranting to the world in general on her Twitter account. She wasn't "educating;" she was posting her personal racist opinions.

 

 

People use social media differently. My facebook is completely private and I am only addressing people that I know directly. Others have a public account and seem to be addressing all of facebook rather than just individuals on their friend list. Twitter is the same. Some people are addressing their followers and some people are just shouting into space. I don't know her intent or her purpose in her use of twitter.

 

She has since made her twitter private so it would be impossible to tell. 

 

If one looks at the other link, some of the tweets seem to be pieces of a larger conversation but we don't know what that was. Since it is pieces of conversation it is still possible things were out of context. From the "socawlege" link one can see that the Boston Herald took the “Deal with your white (expletive), white people. slavery is a *YALL* thing," out of context. It was part of a larger but factually flawed ramble in regard to slavery.

 

I don't know if any of these tweets were in response to someone or something.

 

http://socawlege.com/boston-university-assistant-professor-saida-grundy-attacks-whites-makes-false-statements-on-twitter/

 

If I was in her class I would have challenged her statements and I would also disagree if some of those things were posted here but I don't take issue with academics being provocative, I just argue with them.  I argued in quite a few of my college classes. :lol:

 

If the professor was here in front of me I would be disagreeing with her. I am not defending all of her statements because some of them are CRAZY but I don't think she should be fired for those tweets.

 

[poppy]

How do you know the tweets were largely about BU student body? I must have missed the tweets that referenced BU.

 

What makes me think they weren't educational? For starters, the president of the university didn't think they were educational. Second, she tweeted them. She didn't present these thoughts on a forum that provides for discussion. Third, she did not end even one with a simple "thoughts?" Or "Discuss". Her tweets gave no indication that she wanted to discuss or even hear other viewpoints.

 

The whole goal of twitter is go get replies and retweets-- to discuss.

Getting mad someone doesn't explicitly say 'discuss' is like getting mad that not every single WTM poster puts "In my opinion" in front of every opinion.  It's a discussion forum, of course what we are sharing is opinions.

 

And as for whether it was about the BU student body, she references 'college males' and 'America's colleges'.  So, I guess it's more fair to say she is speaking about universities in general. But when a professor talks about colleges in broad strokes in a public forum, my first assumption isn't that she's offering purely personal opinions.  

 

[unsinkable]

So then the folks saying "she is obviously a racist" are spewing?

Do you realize how aggressive and manipulative these types of posts are? Do you understand it isn't a cross examination around here?

[poppy]

Do you realize how aggressive and manipulative these types of posts are? Do you understand it isn't a cross examination around here?

 

Aren't you the one who replied to questions about how no one refers to BU as a "white college" with a series of detailed questions about the demographics of BU, and the difference between historically black vs predominantly black colleges?   I didn't mind those replies, but, I did find them to be ..... cross examine-y.

 

But here I guess I was being aggressive.  I was honestly really frustrated by that reply.  I was talking about how uncomfortable it is that we're not talking about the substance of the issues, but about her "right" to say them.   And the reply was so dismissive- "she's spewing".

[unsinkable]

Aren't you the one who replied to questions about how no one refers to BU as a "white college" with a series of detailed questions about the demographics of BU, and the difference between historically black vs predominantly black colleges? I didn't mind those replies, but, I did find them to be ..... cross examine-y.

 

But here I guess I was being aggressive. I was honestly really frustrated by that reply. I was talking about how uncomfortable it is that we're not talking about the substance of the issues, but about her "right" to say them. And the reply was so dismissive- "she's spewing".

I was "the one" with whom you had the exchange about HBCs and black/white colleges. But none of my posts were questions. They focused and short statements, not interrogatives.

[poppy]

I was "the one" with whom you had the exchange about HBCs and black/white colleges. But none of my posts were questions. They focused and short statements, not interrogatives.

 

Interrogatives like "Do you realize how aggressive and manipulative these types of posts are?"

 

I think you & I are probably a bit alike..... it's hard to be the voice of reason.

heh heh.

[unsinkable]

Interrogatives like "Do you realize how aggressive and manipulative these types of posts are?"

 

I think you & I are probably a bit alike..... it's hard to be the voice of reason.

heh heh.

Yeah, I see you might have caught what I was doing there...

 

:-)

[luuknam]

This re: the AA studies prof telling the black students at the start of the semester that he's not there to educate them, but to educate the white students (so not re: Grundy).

 

 

People should expect to have their worldview challenged if they are a white person in an AA studies class, it isn't any different for men in a Women's studies class or any other similar situation.

 

If I'd had a prof start a Women's Studies class with "I'm here to educate the males in this class, not the females", I'd be annoyed. If there isn't any content in the class that's new to females, then they should list it in the catalog as being for males only. Which would be weird if they did that, fwiw - I'm not sure it would make sense to have a Women's Studies class *just* for male students. It also sounds like the prof just wants to lecture rather than have the students think. I would not be scared though - if a prof is unfair you can always take things to the dean.

[marbel]

Aren't you the one who replied to questions about how no one refers to BU as a "white college" with a series of detailed questions about the demographics of BU, and the difference between historically black vs predominantly black colleges?   I didn't mind those replies, but, I did find them to be ..... cross examine-y.

 

But here I guess I was being aggressive.  I was honestly really frustrated by that reply.  I was talking about how uncomfortable it is that we're not talking about the substance of the issues, but about her "right" to say them.   And the reply was so dismissive- "she's spewing".

 

But the reason people here are talking less about the substance of the issues, and more about her right to say them, is because of the way she said them.  She sent out a bunch of tweets with bold, controversial, offensive statements. Sure, I suppose one could say she invited dialog by posting on social media.  But she could have worded it in a way that explicitly invited dialog without being offensive. As a Ph.D. and prospective university professor, she surely has the communication skills to do that.

 

People in conversation, discussing and debating and thus expressing their opinions, are generally not spewing. Just tossing offensive (or potentially offensive) comments about populations which are comprised of actual people is spewing. 

[Entropymama]

But white people as a global population should get their shit together on matters of race. Me included. I truly don't understand why people are objecting to a woman speaking truth, unless it's because they don't like the truths that 'uppity' black women tell.

 

See, stuff like this is very frustrating for the average white, middle-class person (me). WE ARE TRYING. I've had in-depth conversations with black and Hispanic friends about what this is supposed to look like. I'm not racist, but in our culture it feels like I have to walk on egg shells sometimes to prove it. I try to be aware, and understanding, and do and say the right things. Yet I still don't have my shit together. I know there are racist white people, and as a whole the 'establishment' has been and still can be racist. But I believe that the vast majority of white people would really like all this to be resolved, and for us to go forward as the human species. 

 

And I'm aware that some could say that my saying 'white people would really like all this to be resolved' is racist in itself. Because clearly I don't care that people have been marginalized and I just want it to 'go away'. But this isn't true! It begins to feel like a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' situation. For example, if I support welfare, I'm racist because what minorities need isn't a hand-out, but if I don't support welfare I'm racist because minorities are valuable and need the help. 

 

My genuine question (no snark, no sarcasm, no manipulation) is - what should we do? How can we do better?

[poppy]

Yeah, I see you might have caught what I was doing there...

 

:-)

 

You'll note, though, that I just answered your question  without going off in a huff. 

[unsinkable]

You'll note, though, that I just answered your question without going off in a huff.

And scene...

[poppy]

See, stuff like this is very frustrating for the average white, middle-class person (me). WE ARE TRYING. I've had in-depth conversations with black and Hispanic friends about what this is supposed to look like. I'm not racist, but in our culture it feels like I have to walk on egg shells sometimes to prove it. I try to be aware, and understanding, and do and say the right things. Yet I still don't have my shit together. I know there are racist white people, and as a whole the 'establishment' has been and still can be racist. But I believe that the vast majority of white people would really like all this to be resolved, and for us to go forward as the human species. 

 

And I'm aware that some could say that my saying 'white people would really like all this to be resolved' is racist in itself. Because clearly I don't care that people have been marginalized and I just want it to 'go away'. But this isn't true! It begins to feel like a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' situation. For example, if I support welfare, I'm racist because what minorities need isn't a hand-out, but if I don't support welfare I'm racist because minorities are valuable and need the help. 

 

My genuine question (no snark, no sarcasm, no manipulation) is - what should we do? How can we do better?

 

This is one of those macro-not-micro things.  It's not an admonishment of YOU personally. It's bigger- why is our Senate 95% white? What would be good steps we can take to make a change in that number by the time our kids are our ages?

 

I also want to put in a note that most people who get welfare are not minorities.   And personally, I don't think support or any political issue one way or another makes a person racist for any US cause I can think of.     The reasons for those beliefs can stem from racist beliefs, but it's always more nuanced than "anyone who doesn't support ____ is a racist".

[poppy]

And scene...

 

I hope not, I like having my own personal forum police. It keeps me on my toes! LOL

[Slartibartfast]

This re: the AA studies prof telling the black students at the start of the semester that he's not there to educate them, but to educate the white students (so not re: Grundy).

 

 

 

If I'd had a prof start a Women's Studies class with "I'm here to educate the males in this class, not the females", I'd be annoyed. If there isn't any content in the class that's new to females, then they should list it in the catalog as being for males only. Which would be weird if they did that, fwiw - I'm not sure it would make sense to have a Women's Studies class *just* for male students. It also sounds like the prof just wants to lecture rather than have the students think. I would not be scared though - if a prof is unfair you can always take things to the dean.

 

My women's studies classes were history classes, they weren't sociology classes. I don't know that they said anything along those lines exactly but they did say things that I felt were overt male bashing.

[luuknam]

My women's studies classes were history classes, they weren't sociology classes. I don't know that they said anything along those lines exactly but they did say things that I felt were overt male bashing.

 

I guess I haven't taken any sociology classes (I read an AP sociology book that a previous exchange student had left in the library in Thailand when I was there, but that's not the same as taking a class). I took a Women's History class once and ended up dropping it because of circumstances unrelated to the class. You made the analogy between Women's Studies and AA Studies though.

 

I'm not sure why it'd matter if something is a sociology class or a history class - I'd hope that a prof would be able to teach the class in a way so that students of every race/gender could learn from them, and maybe have the presence of AA or female students (for AA studies or women's studies respectively) be enriching, rather than an "I'm not here for you" kind of thing. I don't know if AA/female students sign up for AA/women's studies classes because they think it will be easy, but I'd think that at least *some* of them sign up because they genuinely want to learn more about AA/women's studies, and it'd be offensive to say "I'm not here to teach you, I'm here to teach THEM".

 

Incidentally, in the women's history class I was in the prof did single out the one male student (out of 100 or so) at the start of the first class, but it was more in an "I'm impressed, hope you're not overwhelmed being the only guy here" kind of way. Not sure if she'd have said anything if males had been a large minority or a majority in that class.

 

ETA: I didn't say your prof said that, I was commenting on you commenting on someone who's prof said that.

[SKL]

So the verb "spew" is so uncomfortable it deserves its own rabbit trail.  I guess that means the actual tweets that are the subject of this thread are perfectly mellow in comparison.

[Slartibartfast]

I guess I haven't taken any sociology classes (I read an AP sociology book that a previous exchange student had left in the library in Thailand when I was there, but that's not the same as taking a class). I took a Women's History class once and ended up dropping it because of circumstances unrelated to the class. You made the analogy between Women's Studies and AA Studies though.

 

I'm not sure why it'd matter if something is a sociology class or a history class - I'd hope that a prof would be able to teach the class in a way so that students of every race/gender could learn from them, and maybe have the presence of AA or female students (for AA studies or women's studies respectively) be enriching, rather than an "I'm not here for you" kind of thing. I don't know if AA/female students sign up for AA/women's studies classes because they think it will be easy, but I'd think that at least *some* of them sign up because they genuinely want to learn more about AA/women's studies, and it'd be offensive to say "I'm not here to teach you, I'm here to teach THEM".

 

Incidentally, in the women's history class I was in the prof did single out the one male student (out of 100 or so) at the start of the first class, but it was more in an "I'm impressed, hope you're not overwhelmed being the only guy here" kind of way. Not sure if she'd have said anything if males had been a large minority or a majority in that class.

 

ETA: I didn't say your prof said that, I was commenting on you commenting on someone who's prof said that.

That wasn't my experience. I was speaking from my experience. I also said I found the class terrifying.

 

If something doesn't matter then saying it doesn't matter is not necessary. I was just being descriptive.

[unsinkable]

Oh god, thanks. This made me truly chortle.

Oh, I read this really fast and thought it made you turtle.

 

I wondered what the heck you talking about. But I see it's your usual schtick.

[unsinkable]

I hope not, I like having my own personal forum police. It keeps me on my toes! LOL

Nope, I actually thought we were getting somewhere until that comment.

[poppy]

Nope, I actually thought we were getting somewhere until that comment.

Wherever you go, there you are.

[Little Nyssa]

I think it's possible to challenge people and make them think, while still participating in a civil discussion.