Here
4mo ago
I'm in grad school at Penn, which has recently hit the news for former Penn president Liz Magill's responses to the congressional hearing on anti-Semitism (even making it to the SNL cold open!!). The question about genocide wasn't even supposed to be the "gotcha" question in the hearing; the follow up was going to be "is the river to the sea advocating for genocide", which was where things were going to get dicey. Instead, Liz and the presidents of Harvard and MIT did not get past the first question.
Liz was under fire for a bit, starting with the "Palestine Writes" festival back in September. The recent confessional hearing was more so the straw that broke the camel's back, as it were. Since September, we've lost almost $1b in donations, from donors with names adorning buildings such as Huntsman, Lauder, and more. The most recent is $100m joint venture that included a non-discrimination clause, and a lawsuit by two Penn students about their experiences (which, even before Oct. 7, included swastikas drawn on campus buildings and an individual breaking into the Jewish center on the campus; we had a day of solidarity on campus to stand against antisemetic hatred, and the progressives who participated have all quietly removed those pictures from their social media).
Liz's administration has also refused to show the pro-Palestine movie "Israelism" and has changed certain policies to make an ongoing pro-Palestine "teach in" more difficult at Houston Hall. The middle east director resigned in protest. It isn't that Liz is pro-Palestine; she's just... Not doing a good job of attempting neutrality.
Penn is ranked the second worst school for freedom of speech by FIRE, a ranking that focuses less on stated policies and more on students' subjective experiences. Liz will stay on until a replacement is announced, and remains a tenured law professor at Penn regardless.
The new YikYak, known as sidechat, has provided a not-so-scientific look into the undergrads' anonymous processing of events. The following stand out to me:
- how upset they are that donors influence the selection of President of the University, whose main role is to create more donations (donors are trying to get their money's worth)
- how concerned they are about how much "worse" free speech will get on campus with Liz's removal (it's already pretty bad, but this may be the first time that they're experiencing any pushback for their speech/views)
- the constant refrain that "Jewish students have no reason to feel unsafe here" (I want to note that buildings on campus have been tagged with "intifida" and Jewish owned businesses are being "charged with genocide" by chanting mobs)
- a discussion around Jews being too white/privileged to claim that they're being discriminated against/should stay out of the "oppression Olympics"
- how convinced they are that Liz only said what she said to avoid committing "perjury" (I don't think they understand what perjury means)
- how unfair it is that certain companies are reserving internship spots for Jewish students
- several jokes that people will now, finally, be able to tell Penn and Penn State apart.
It baffles me how much students (specifically, students without a personal connection to the conflict; those with a personal connection I completely understand) are getting so emotionally frothy about a conflict halfway around the world that Penn has zero influence over. Instead, we are able to influence how students, here on campus, are treated, and we are willing to sacrifice that to rant about the Middle East. Why?
Here
5mo ago
Why is this war "different?" Is the Israel-Hamas conflict is the first time that many young progressives have been on the opposite side from "public" opinion? How will that loss of popular support impact culture wars forward, or will it all?
I remember the mantra of "silence is violence" during the BLM protests. "If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor." But there has been a lot of silence- probably because speaking up has led to job offers being revoked, although some of those who lost their offers are not backing down:
Davis also asked "Do you condemn Hamas' actions on Oct. 7?" In response, Workman said "I think what I use my platform for and who I condemn was pretty clear by my message."
And Davis asked several times if there was room for empathy for the Israelis who died.
"I will continue to use my voice to uplift the voices of Palestinians and the struggles they're going through," Workman said.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/nyu-student-criticized-lost-job-offer-israel-hamas/story?id=104235399
Reddit removed this post for violating community guidelines, but it was a plea to Black women to stay silent about the conflict and not get involved (the comments are still up for some context of reactions): https://old.reddit.com/r/BlackWomenDivest/s/8IU6rXCvle
Why was there so much pressure for everyone to rise up and speak out during other injustices (Ukraine, Uyghurs, BLM, etc) but for this one, the advice is to shut up, sit down, stay out of it? Why did the rhetoric around social justice and activism drastically change overnight? BLM (the organization, not the movement) has gotten in trouble for antisemitism and/or support for Palestine in the past - why is it suddenly going quiet now? Is this the first real consequence to some of the progressive left's views, the first line in the sand?
Here
1yr ago
I think they knew that the view from the body cameras was crap and only caught audio, because they kept saying things like "give us your hands" while holding his arms behind his back.
Yes, body cams re important, but the cops demeanor changed when they realized there was the traffic light cam. They knew the body cam footage was going to be messy and chaotic; the body cameras didn't stop them. The body cam footage isn't what is going to put them away; the street light camera is.
Here
1yr ago
The way Tyre Nichols murder has been handled by the media/internet feels... Weird?
The rhetoric around his killers have used the word "gang" more often than other police killings, and I can't help wonder if that is because his killers are Black. It's an odd form of racist dog whistling from the "woke" denizens of reddit.
In spite of that, there still seems an effort to claim the killing was racially motivated - that these cops were Black-hating Black men. It doesn't seem possible for the discourse to accept that police brutality isn't always a racial issue. Sometimes, it is just abuse of power by terrible people, and skin color has nothing to do with it.
Finally, the video release process is... Uncomfortable. We don't give terrorist videos this kind of air time, and we actively scrub videos of mass shootings that get posted online. Why does the public need to see the horrific last moments of this man's life? The video will surely get played at the cops' trials; cops who have already been charged, so there is no need for public pressure to get the prosecutor to do their job. But the media is hyping up the release schedule like it's a silver screen movie, and his mom got put on a press tour today in anticipation of the video, which feels like an exploitation of her pain. Biden is encouraging protests (peaceful, of course). What are we protesting? The cops are charged with murder, and very quickly. What does protesting accomplish here?
First time posting a parent comment, sorry if this isn't fleshed out to the quality of standards y'all normally utilize!
Here
1yr ago
Some of it was also just related to cleanliness/avoiding disease (food requirements, avoiding women on their periods (blood born diseases), etc.) and I can see men lying with men as falling into that category because of the realities of anal.
There's also the whole thing about baby making and you can only continue an ethnoreligion through babies and if everyone's coupled up with the same gender, there are no babies.
Babies are a very big deal to Mormons. They have so many of them.
Here
1yr ago
After all, most woke protected classes share either one of two traits. Historically did not have rights in the US or are hated by the ring wing in the US
I would argue that fat falls into the latter category of "the right wing hates fat people" especially with the rise of dramatically named concepts like "fascist fitness" (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/mar/06/fascist-fitness-how-the-far-right-is-recruiting-with-online-gym-groups) and "gym bro" culture being associated with the right wing. Even Trump, who isn't exactly skinny himself, could not stop making fun of people's weight.
Fatness also falls into "traditional" conservative thinking re: personal responsibility. You don't like being fat? Great, just diet and exercise. No, don't implement a sugar tax, because it is YOUR problem, not mine. Bill Maher requested that we "start fat shaming people again" back before COVID.
There have been Catholic arguments that fatness is akin to immorality. I know, conservatives are a far greater sphere than just Catholics, but religious guilt can go far, down with the patriarchy, etc.
There are also internet subcultures about "men's self-improvement" that also have encouraged this kind of thinking, as well as the whole "hot trad wife" mindset. While conservative states are the most obese in the US, the cultural pushback against "body positivity" for objectively unhealthy bodies is also primarily conservative.
See also, commentary on Lizzo, especially after the James Madison flute incident. Reddit banned fat people hate in 2015 and that also leaned fairly to the right.
A (potentially former?) staffer for allegedly Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Maryland) is making news for filming gay sex in the Senate hearing room. He also, allegedly, yelled "Free Palestine" at Rep. Max Miller (R-Ohio).
I include the last sentence only to clarify the full context for a statement the staffer posted on his LinkedIn about the matter:
I'm struggling with his statement because it seems like the "filmed sex tape at work in the Senate hearing room on Amy Koobuchar's desk" is more of the issue here than the staffer's sexuality itself, but the language used insinuates that he is using his sexuality as a defense for an act that straight people also probably could not have "gotten away" with.
The utter lack of understanding of consequences is also throwing me a little bit. Culture war discussions about sexuality dip into accusations of degeneracy and pleasure-seeking not associated with, necessarily, love that this video emulates. This video will of course be used to further those accusations onto "all gays" instead of the particularly privileged ones who work in the Senate.
More options
Context Copy link