Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
7 hours ago, Doc said:

 

She'd likely say "it depends on the context"...

I took a look back at that famous "gotcha" question and answer. 

You know what? As a pure matter of logic, the Ivy League Presidents answered correctly!

The question was: Would calling for genocide constitute harassment or bullying?

The question was not: Would calling for genocide be offensive speech?

So the logical answer is: "It depends on the context."

- If @Doc some bar somewhere far away drunkenly calls for genocide of the white guys born in Buffalo, and he has no reason to think that I'd hear him, has he bullied or harassed me? Of course not. 

- If he finds out where I live, drives up to my house at night, grabs a megaphone, and keeps shouting "death to the Buffalo white guys" for two hours, has he bullied and/or harassed me? Of course so.

 

That is, it depends on the context. 

Congresswoman Stefanik was given far too much credit here. If she wanted to know whether President Gay thinks calling for the genocide of a people is per se offensive speech, well, that's what she should have asked.

  • Eyeroll 1
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I took a look back at that famous "gotcha" question and answer. 

You know what? As a pure matter of logic, the Ivy League Presidents answered correctly!

The question was: Would calling for genocide constitute harassment or bullying?

The question was not: Would calling for genocide be offensive speech?

So the logical answer is: "It depends on the context."

- If @Doc some bar somewhere far away drunkenly calls for genocide of the white guys born in Buffalo, and he has no reason to think that I'd hear him, has he bullied or harassed me? Of course not. 

- If he finds out where I live, drives up to my house at night, grabs a megaphone, and keeps shouting "death to the Buffalo white guys" for two hours, has he bullied and/or harassed me? Of course so.

 

That is, it depends on the context. 

Congresswoman Stefanik was given far too much credit here. If she wanted to know whether President Gay thinks calling for the genocide of a people is per se offensive speech, well, that's what she should have asked.

It’s a shame this bit of genius wasn’t provided in time to save Liz Magill’s job at Penn. Hard to believe it cost her such a prestigious position even though she tried to walk back her comments. An unnecessary walking back based on this brilliant analysis. 
 

A read of the transcript will show the questions posed repeatedly and at the center of the matter were “specifically calling for the genocide of Jews, does that constitute bullying or harassment?“ and “does calling for the genocide of Jews violate (insert school name here) rules or code of conduct? Yes or no”?  Why did you alter the comment to leave out Jews? You must have a reason for doing so. 

Edited by JDHillFan
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
23 minutes ago, JDHillFan said:

It’s a shame this bit of genius wasn’t provided in time to save Liz Magill’s job at Penn. Hard to believe it cost her such a prestigious position even though she tried to walk back her comments. An unnecessary walking back based on this brilliant analysis. 
 

A read of the transcript will show the questions posed repeatedly and at the center of the matter were “specifically calling for the genocide of Jews, does that constitute bullying or harassment?“ and “does calling for the genocide of Jews violate (insert school name here) rules or code of conduct? Yes or no”?  Why did you alter the comment to leave out Jews? You must have a reason for doing so. 

 

Context is soooooo hard to figure out here.  Especially for Ivy League Presidents...

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
×
×
  • Create New...