Post by: RadioFreeSeaLab on November 01, 2007, 12:08:04 PM
Quote
The universitys views are forced on students through a comprehensive manipulation of the residence hall environment, from mandatory training sessions to sustainability door decorations. Students living in the universitys eight housing complexes are required to attend training sessions, floor meetings, and one-on-one meetings with their Resident Assistants (RAs). The RAs who facilitate these meetings have received their own intensive training from the university, including a diversity facilitation training session at which RAs were taught, among other things, that [a] racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality.
The university suggests that at one-on-one sessions with students, RAs should ask intrusive personal questions such as When did you discover your sexual identity? Students who express discomfort with this type of questioning often meet with disapproval from their RAs, who write reports on these one-on-one sessions and deliver these reports to their superiors. One student identified in a write-up as an RAs worst one-on-one session was a young woman who stated that she was tired of having diversity shoved down her throat.
The university suggests that at one-on-one sessions with students, RAs should ask intrusive personal questions such as When did you discover your sexual identity? Students who express discomfort with this type of questioning often meet with disapproval from their RAs, who write reports on these one-on-one sessions and deliver these reports to their superiors. One student identified in a write-up as an RAs worst one-on-one session was a young woman who stated that she was tired of having diversity shoved down her throat.
Excuse my while I clear my throat, so this isn't misunderstood. *expletive deleted*ck you, people who think I'm a racist simply because of the color of my skin. Wait...isn't judging someone based on the color of their skin racism?
Post by: cosine on November 01, 2007, 12:13:38 PM
Post by: Manedwolf on November 01, 2007, 12:17:40 PM
Quote
[a] racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality.
Tribes engaged in interethnic violence between different shades of black in Africa would be startled to learn that.
So would the Japanese. They think American whites are racist? Ha! Watch the original versions of a lot of anime...vaudeville giant-lips blackface is quite acceptable in that culture.
Post by: RadioFreeSeaLab on November 01, 2007, 12:21:25 PM
http://thefire.org/index.php/article/8552.html
Quote
A RACIST: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality. By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, because as peoples within the U.S. system, they do not have the power to back up their prejudices, hostilities, or acts of discrimination. (This does not deny the existence of such prejudices, hostilities, acts of rage or discrimination.)" - Page 3
Quote
A NON-RACIST: A non-term. The term was created by whites to deny responsibility for systemic racism, to maintain an aura of innocence in the face of racial oppression, and to shift responsibility for that oppression from whites to people of color (called "blaming the victim"). Responsibility for perpetuating and legitimizing a racist system rests both on those who actively maintain it, and on those who refuse to challenge it. Silence is consent." - Page 3
Quote
REVERSE RACISM: A term created and used by white people to deny their white privilege. Those in denial use the term reverse racism to refer to hostile behavior by people of color toward whites, and to affirmative action policies, which allegedly give 'preferential treatment' to people of color over whites. In the U.S., there is no such thing as 'reverse racism.'" - Page 3
Quote
"Have you ever heard a well-meaning white person say, 'I'm not a member of any race except the human race?' What she usually means by this statement is that she doesn't want to perpetuate racial categories by acknowledging that she is white. This is an evasion of responsibility for her participation in a system based on supremacy for white people." - Page 8
Post by: cosine on November 01, 2007, 12:28:26 PM
Post by: Len Budney on November 01, 2007, 12:30:51 PM
After all, an armed society is a polite one (or so I've heard). I think it's more than the fear that your neighbors will take you out, though. I think a lethal weapon on one's person really makes one rethink one's priorities. Am I serious about all this "oppression" jazz? Do I really "hate whitey"? Do I want to start a fight, realizing that it could well escalate to real violence? And that as the instigator, things can't possibly turn out to my advantage?
--Len.
Post by: Manedwolf on November 01, 2007, 12:33:45 PM
Post by: Len Budney on November 01, 2007, 12:35:56 PM
That won't work. There's an entire definition of weak leftists who, if they see a gun, would start hyperventilating and crying, and then sue someone for emotional distress.
Sigh. Too true.
But that's what makes it possible to engage in these histrionics, IMO. Anyone who spouts the rhetoric of class or racial "warfare" should be handed a loaded weapon and presented with a choice: shoot, or shut your damn mouth.
--Len.
Post by: Perd Hapley on November 01, 2007, 01:03:39 PM
Or would it be preferable to interrupt the session, point out that you have paid for this education, and tell the speaker to please go away and find someone who has a knowledge of the subject matter?
Post by: charby on November 01, 2007, 01:07:17 PM
Post by: One of Many on November 01, 2007, 01:34:12 PM
That document seems to be biased on the basis of gender, as well as skin color, with the comments concerning 'an evasion of responsibility for her participation in a system based on supremacy for white people'. This is certifiably Political Correctness taken to the extreme, and could only have been written by a minority racist out to prove how evil all white people are. My suspicion is that white students/faculty/staff are in the minority at that school, and are about to become even more of a minority at that school, due to enactment of this policy. That policy seems intent on forcing whites to leave, or to subjugate themselves in a manner worse than that the black slaves endured until our civil war. In fact, this policy seems to be a declaration of civil war.
Post by: RadioFreeSeaLab on November 01, 2007, 01:36:49 PM
What do you know, I was right.
By Gender
Men: 42.6%
Women: 57.4%
Ethnicity
Non-resident alien: 0.8%
Black non-Hispanic: 6.1%
American Indian or Alaskan Native: 0.3%
Asian or Pacific Islander: 3.6%
Hispanic: 4.0%
White non-Hispanic: 83.7%
Race-ethnicity unknown: 1.4%
Source: http://education-portal.com/articles/Delaware_(DE):_University_and_College_System.html
Post by: Perd Hapley on November 01, 2007, 01:40:53 PM
One of Many, I bet it's exactly opposite of what you think.
You mean the whites are the ones encouraging this nonsense, and are in the majority? Probably.
Post by: Marnoot on November 01, 2007, 01:42:15 PM
One of Many, I bet it's exactly opposite of what you think.
What do you know, I was right.
By Gender
Men: 42.6%
Women: 57.4%
Ethnicity
Non-resident alien: 0.8%
Black non-Hispanic: 6.1%
American Indian or Alaskan Native: 0.3%
Asian or Pacific Islander: 3.6%
Hispanic: 4.0%
White non-Hispanic: 83.7%
Race-ethnicity unknown: 1.4%
Source: http://education-portal.com/articles/Delaware_(DE):_University_and_College_System.html
What do you know, I was right.
By Gender
Men: 42.6%
Women: 57.4%
Ethnicity
Non-resident alien: 0.8%
Black non-Hispanic: 6.1%
American Indian or Alaskan Native: 0.3%
Asian or Pacific Islander: 3.6%
Hispanic: 4.0%
White non-Hispanic: 83.7%
Race-ethnicity unknown: 1.4%
Source: http://education-portal.com/articles/Delaware_(DE):_University_and_College_System.html
Yeah, I'd bet it's being perpetuated by those with "white guilt."
Post by: RadioFreeSeaLab on November 01, 2007, 02:29:46 PM
http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/8585.html
Post by: MechAg94 on November 01, 2007, 03:30:35 PM
Post by: jefnvk on November 01, 2007, 04:37:59 PM
Our RA's had enough to do trying to keep us from destroying the building, let alone promoting diversity.
Post by: charby on November 01, 2007, 04:48:44 PM
Hmmmm....
Our RA's had enough to do trying to keep us from destroying the building, let alone promoting diversity.
Our RA's had enough to do trying to keep us from destroying the building, let alone promoting diversity.
Same here also, probably pretty par for the course on "wet" dormitories.
Post by: Boomhauer on November 01, 2007, 06:45:48 PM
Then I realized that I would give up my guns and knives, and have to deal with other people. Within a week or two, I probably would have thrown some people out the window for playing rap "music" or something similar to this diversity crap.
Instead, I get to go home each night, cradle my guns, and know that if someone said something about " diversity", I could put a magazine of buckshot into them.
Hell, I was sitting in the atrium of one of the buildings yesterday and some girl came up collecting for UNICEF. I said I wasn't giving one cent to the damn UN. She left in a huff.
Post by: longeyes on November 01, 2007, 08:29:12 PM
Post by: yesitsloaded on November 01, 2007, 08:38:18 PM
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
Post by: Dannyboy on November 02, 2007, 03:23:59 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on November 02, 2007, 04:01:48 AM
Hmmmm....
Our RA's had enough to do trying to keep us from destroying the building, let alone promoting diversity.
Our RA's had enough to do trying to keep us from destroying the building, let alone promoting diversity.
Same here also, probably pretty par for the course on "wet" dormitories.
Multiple definitions, there. We had Super Soaker fights in the hallways at UM. White hallways with bolts of water flying back and forth, it looked like the intro to the first Star Wars. Then it escalated to wastebaskets of water, and, in revenge, someone had a 55gal garbage can of water tipped against their door so it fell in when they opened the door, resulting in a recreation of "Titanic". The RA was not too happy.
Post by: RadioFreeSeaLab on November 02, 2007, 06:04:26 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on November 02, 2007, 06:24:18 AM
Besides, I had one of these!
Most powerful one they ever made, discontinued because it was too powerful...it actually caused bruises. Had a range of about 50 feet, and fired a thick water bolt that really stung and could indeed bruise at close range. It actually kicked when you fired!
Post by: Len Budney on November 02, 2007, 07:36:07 AM
Supersoakers? Wuss. We had a fire extinguisher war.
At Brown we'd get billed for recharging the extinguisher. Not to say we didn't have fire-extinguisher fights, of course. But we also had midnight raids to trade our empties for other suites' fulls.
--Len.
Post by: HankB on November 02, 2007, 07:39:08 AM
Post by: Waitone on November 02, 2007, 04:26:54 PM
Anyone with half a brain knows it won't work without re-education camps. Delaware is sufficiently rural to have a number of camps where those of unacceptable mindset can go and be adjusted. Might even be able to get credit and a couple of months in the woods all in the name of correct thinking. What was Comrade President thinking?
Post by: doczinn on November 04, 2007, 10:17:20 AM
Post by: RevDisk on November 04, 2007, 04:11:21 PM
Yeah, but fire extinguishers would get you arrested there.
Besides, I had one of these!
Most powerful one they ever made, discontinued because it was too powerful...it actually caused bruises. Had a range of about 50 feet, and fired a thick water bolt that really stung and could indeed bruise at close range. It actually kicked when you fired!
Besides, I had one of these!
Most powerful one they ever made, discontinued because it was too powerful...it actually caused bruises. Had a range of about 50 feet, and fired a thick water bolt that really stung and could indeed bruise at close range. It actually kicked when you fired!
I still have that exact model. It's at my parent's place. Yep, was a lot of fun and did leave bruises when used at extremely close ranges. Such as 6 inches away.
Post by: Manedwolf on November 04, 2007, 04:46:23 PM
Yeah, but fire extinguishers would get you arrested there.
Besides, I had one of these!
Most powerful one they ever made, discontinued because it was too powerful...it actually caused bruises. Had a range of about 50 feet, and fired a thick water bolt that really stung and could indeed bruise at close range. It actually kicked when you fired!
Besides, I had one of these!
Most powerful one they ever made, discontinued because it was too powerful...it actually caused bruises. Had a range of about 50 feet, and fired a thick water bolt that really stung and could indeed bruise at close range. It actually kicked when you fired!
I still have that exact model. It's at my parent's place. Yep, was a lot of fun and did leave bruises when used at extremely close ranges. Such as 6 inches away.
They go for over $100 now on eBay. O_O