Flu vaccine mandatory at Cornell...for white students

[Metaphor]

Hint: Cornell says, in the section you are quoting, called 'other exemption':



If Cornell meant 'we won't consider an exemption based on BIPOC personal concerns' then it has said it in a way where they've said the exact opposite.

Yeah, I actually read that link, which basically is trying to talk BIPOC students out of attempting to use historical wrongs as a reason to apply for an exemption.

I read it too. It does indeed try to emphasise how important a vaccination is.

But the fact persuading BIPOC out of attempting to gain a 'historical wrongs' exemption would not be necessary if they were not offering 'historical wrongs against BIPOC' as a reason for an 'other' exemption.

 

[blastula]

Politesse, as I already said, that page didn't always include the part about the flu vaccination. The flu vaccination is a new requirement because of covid. All the language above the last paragraph only applied to the other vaccinations. They sloppily inserted the last paragraph without editing anything anything else. Get it now?

 

[Toni]

No, Toni.

Explain to me what Cornell means when it says



If you interpret that to mean "we will not consider exemptions for BIPOC people as BIPOC", then that's a very strange way to say it, being that it says the opposite.

Not really. The link basically seeks to talk BIPOC students out of attempting to use historic wrongs, even grievous wrongs, as a basis for exemption. It stops short of saying We won't consider this a good reason but it does provide compelling arguments for students to reconsider using historical wrongs as the basis for an exemption.

I suppose that Cornell students are afforded the assumption of having basic reading and reasoning skills that you seem to either lack or be willing to set aside in order to grab some attention.

Maybe we should ask:

How are you doing, Metaphor? Have you and your family been well? How is your job going? I sincerely hope that you are doing well and enjoying a bit of sunshine and fresh air and getting the rest and relaxation you need, offset by just the right amount of intellectual and social stimulation and financial remuneration to optimize your health, happiness and well being. Read any good books lately?

That would be a derail, Toni.

Each of your 'arguments' is a derail, Metaphor. You either misunderstand or grossly misrepresent Cornell's position.

These times can be lonely times for all of us, Metaphor. Some of us talk about all kinds of things in other parts of this board. If you are concerned about a derail, please feel free to start or join a conversation about any topic you choose, including what is going on in your life. In my experience, people are pretty thoughtful and helpful--kind, even and funny, even if they disagree vehemently with most of another poster's more...political statements.

 

[Politesse]

If there is no valid "other exemption" category, what would it mean to qualify it with "flu vaccinations only"? Of course there is an 'other exemptions' category. It literally follows 'medical' and 'religious'.

Other exemption (for *FLU VACCINATION* requirement only): Ithaca students with other concerns / extenuating circumstances may request an exemption from the Fall 2020 flu vaccination requirement that is part of the university's COVID-19 Behavioral Compact.

i.e., the students are allowed, under the compact, to request an exemption for any reason.

 

[blastula]

No, there was no other exemption until they added the flu vaccination to the page.

This is an archived copy of the same page from last year.

https://web.archive.org/web/2019061...get-care/health-requirements-new-students/FAQ

 

[Metaphor]

If there is no valid "other exemption" category, what would it mean to qualify it with "flu vaccinations only"? Of course there is an 'other exemptions' category. It literally follows 'medical' and 'religious'.

Other exemption (for *FLU VACCINATION* requirement only): Ithaca students with other concerns / extenuating circumstances may request an exemption from the Fall 2020 flu vaccination requirement that is part of the university's COVID-19 Behavioral Compact.

i.e., the students are allowed, under the compact, to request an exemption for any reason.

If students are allowed to request an exemption for any 'other' reason, then there's an 'other exemptions' category.

If Cornell does not consider "BIPOC exemption as BIPOC" as a valid "other" exemption, it has been extraordinarily incompetent at conveying this information, because it has implied the opposite.

 

[Toni]

i.e., the students are allowed, under the compact, to request an exemption for any reason.

If students are allowed to request an exemption for any 'other' reason, then there's an 'other exemptions' category.

If Cornell does not consider "BIPOC exemption as BIPOC" as a valid "other" exemption, it has been extraordinarily incompetent at conveying this information, because it has implied the opposite.

No, it hasn't. As anyone with an 8th grade reading comprehension can plainly determine that Cornell is seeking to discourage using such an argument for exemption.

 

[Metaphor]

No, there was no other exemption until they added the flu vaccination to the page.

This is an archived copy of the same page from last year.

https://web.archive.org/web/2019061...get-care/health-requirements-new-students/FAQ

Thank you for the archive link.

That change implies that 'other exemption' was introduced specifically to allow BIPOC to get an exemption as BIPOC.

 

[Metaphor]

i.e., the students are allowed, under the compact, to request an exemption for any reason.

If students are allowed to request an exemption for any 'other' reason, then there's an 'other exemptions' category.

If Cornell does not consider "BIPOC exemption as BIPOC" as a valid "other" exemption, it has been extraordinarily incompetent at conveying this information, because it has implied the opposite.

No, it hasn't. As anyone with an 8th grade reading comprehension can plainly determine that Cornell is seeking to discourage using such an argument for exemption.

Yes, it's discouraging its use, while making its use available at the same time. One does not need to 'discourage' people from making an 'other exemption' request if such an exemption will never be granted/effectively does not exist.

 

[ruby sparks]

Hint: Cornell says, in the section you are quoting, called 'other exemption':



If Cornell meant 'we won't consider an exemption based on BIPOC personal concerns' then it has said it in a way where they've said the exact opposite.

Yeah, they did. Because it's a bullshit concession to "concerns" rather than an actual policy change. I guarantee you no one involved expects the students to actually read this page, it was probably the result of an argument, maybe in the academic senate after worried faculty pointed out that their "BIPOC" students might object to forced vaccinations given the ugly history of the issue, maybe the reuslt of a written complaint by the Native Law advocacy students at the school. One way or another, the Cornell admins got worried their policy might be criticized, and wrote up this page to get them off the hook without actually promising a thing.

I generally agree with the plausibility of your hypothetical, but imo it's a half-promise at least, to cater for what they see (or think might be seen) as a valid special case. As such, I think it's 'woke gone a little too far', because how, rationally, could BIPOC students think that a vaccine that was mandatory for everyone could be aimed adversely at them in particular? And some white students might equally distrust authority.

 

[laughing dog]

Your statement is so ludicrous I can't even. You might as well say when black people were redlined in certain neighbourhoods (because of their history and demography) that that did not limit their choices.

You should have paid attention to your first sentence. You might have avoided that idiotic straw men. Strike One.

Pointing out that you weighed personal cost at zero in your analysis is not me omitting external costs.

I didn't weigh personal costs at zero. Strike Two. Since you did not mention external costs in your argument, and since there is no recognition of them anywhere in your responses, it is a reasonable conclusion to make.

I didn't say it, I don't believe it, and it is not necessary for my argument.

It is for your argument to make sense. Strike three.

 

[laughing dog]

i.e., the students are allowed, under the compact, to request an exemption for any reason.

If students are allowed to request an exemption for any 'other' reason, then there's an 'other exemptions' category.

If Cornell does not consider "BIPOC exemption as BIPOC" as a valid "other" exemption, it has been extraordinarily incompetent at conveying this information, because it has implied the opposite.

The relevant snippet is

Students who identify as Black, Indigenous, or as a Person of Color (BIPOC) may have personal concerns about fulfilling the Compact requirements based on historical injustices and current events,and may find this information helpful in considering an exemption.

I doubt that even the severely reading or linguistically impaired would take that to mean
"if you are BIPOC get an exemption because you are BIPOC".

 

[Metaphor]

You should have paid attention to your first sentence. You might have avoided that idiotic straw men. Strike One.

It isn't a straw man, laughing dog. It is your own argument, recast.

I didn't weigh personal costs at zero. Strike Two.

Yes, you did, when you said taking away somebody's choice to do something doesn't cost them anything.

Since you did not mention external costs in your argument, and since there is no recognition of them anywhere in your responses, it is a reasonable conclusion to make.

No, it isn't.

It is for your argument to make sense. Strike three.

No, it isn't necessary. You simply have contempt for personal choices when it suits you to have contempt for them.

I knew somebody who requested a different hotel room once, because she was on a very high floor and the design was glass and concrete, with floor to ceiling windows serving as the outside wall to her room, and it made her feel unsafe and uncomfortable.

Her feelings were not grounded in any real danger (she was not in danger of falling from the room to her death). She wanted a different room on a lower floor, despite the fact that hotels charge extra for rooms on higher floors and she had been allocated a generally more desirable higher floor at no extra cost. If she were forced to stay in that room, she'd be worse off.

But I'm glad to know you trust the Cornell AI robots for their rationality.

 

[Metaphor]

The relevant snippet is

Students who identify as Black, Indigenous, or as a Person of Color (BIPOC) may have personal concerns about fulfilling the Compact requirements based on historical injustices and current events,and may find this information helpful in considering an exemption.

I doubt that even the severely reading or linguistically impaired would take that to mean
"if you are BIPOC get an exemption because you are BIPOC".

No, it means "if you are BIPOC, we will consider an 'other' exemption for you based on your BIPOC status", and if it doesn't mean that - if Cornell added the "other exemption" category, mentioned the historical wrongs against BIPOC people in the context of considering an exemption, but it didn't mean to imply BIPOC would be given extra consideration as BIPOC for an 'other exemption', then Cornell has gone ass over tit in its virtue signalling and has misled BIPOC students about their ability to gain an 'other' exemption.

 

[Toni]

The relevant snippet is

Students who identify as Black, Indigenous, or as a Person of Color (BIPOC) may have personal concerns about fulfilling the Compact requirements based on historical injustices and current events,and may find this information helpful in considering an exemption.

I doubt that even the severely reading or linguistically impaired would take that to mean
"if you are BIPOC get an exemption because you are BIPOC".

No, it means "if you are BIPOC, we will consider an 'other' exemption for you based on your BIPOC status", and if it doesn't mean that - if Cornell added the "other exemption" category, mentioned the historical wrongs against BIPOC people in the context of considering an exemption, but it didn't mean to imply BIPOC would be given extra consideration as BIPOC for an 'other exemption', then Cornell has gone ass over tit in its virtue signalling and has misled BIPOC students about their ability to gain an 'other' exemption.

No. It means: we realize you may consider the grievous history of wrongs committed against BIPOC to be reason to apply for an exemption and we beg you to consider that you are especially at risk if you are not vaccinated. My impression is that Cornell will not accept this as sufficient reason for an exemption and is attempting to head off any such application.

 

[Politesse]

but it didn't mean to imply BIPOC would be given extra consideration as BIPOC for an 'other exemption', then Cornell has gone ass over tit in its virtue signalling and has misled BIPOC students about their ability to gain an 'other' exemption.

Now that is actually true.

Just the term "BIPOC" is a hell of a dogwhistle, I've never heard it used in any context other than liberal policymakers trying to get credit for social advancements they don't actually endorse. No one calls themselves "a BIPOC", it's like hella racist to group all the students together who aren't white, as though their assumed lack of privilege somehow defines them as members of an indistinguishably homogenous group with identical prerogatives.

 

[Metaphor]

No, it means "if you are BIPOC, we will consider an 'other' exemption for you based on your BIPOC status", and if it doesn't mean that - if Cornell added the "other exemption" category, mentioned the historical wrongs against BIPOC people in the context of considering an exemption, but it didn't mean to imply BIPOC would be given extra consideration as BIPOC for an 'other exemption', then Cornell has gone ass over tit in its virtue signalling and has misled BIPOC students about their ability to gain an 'other' exemption.

No. It means: we realize you may consider the grievous history of wrongs committed against BIPOC to be reason to apply for an exemption and we beg you to consider that you are especially at risk if you are not vaccinated. My impression is that Cornell will not accept this as sufficient reason for an exemption and is attempting to head off any such application.

It is not clear to me that that is what Cornell is doing, especially given that the 'other exemption' category was added this year and applies only to flu vaccinations, but I acknowledge the possibility that Cornell has been recklessly indifferent in how its virtue signalling is interfering with clear communication and expectations.

 

[laughing dog]

No, it means "if you are BIPOC, we will consider an 'other' exemption for you based on your BIPOC status", and if it doesn't mean that - if Cornell added the "other exemption" category, mentioned the historical wrongs against BIPOC people in the context of considering an exemption, but it didn't mean to imply BIPOC would be given extra consideration as BIPOC for an 'other exemption', then Cornell has gone ass over tit in its virtue signalling and has misled BIPOC students about their ability to gain an 'other' exemption.

No. It means: we realize you may consider the grievous history of wrongs committed against BIPOC to be reason to apply for an exemption and we beg you to consider that you are especially at risk if you are not vaccinated. My impression is that Cornell will not accept this as sufficient reason for an exemption and is attempting to head off any such application.

It is not clear to me that that is what Cornell is doing,

Yet you feel the need to be certain they are discriminating. Wow.

 

[laughing dog]

The relevant snippet is

Students who identify as Black, Indigenous, or as a Person of Color (BIPOC) may have personal concerns about fulfilling the Compact requirements based on historical injustices and current events,and may find this information helpful in considering an exemption.

I doubt that even the severely reading or linguistically impaired would take that to mean
"if you are BIPOC get an exemption because you are BIPOC".

No, it means "if you are BIPOC, we will consider an 'other' exemption for you based on your BIPOC status", and if it doesn't mean that - if Cornell added the "other exemption" category, mentioned the historical wrongs against BIPOC people in the context of considering an exemption, but it didn't mean to imply BIPOC would be given extra consideration as BIPOC for an 'other exemption', then Cornell has gone ass over tit in its virtue signalling and has misled BIPOC students about their ability to gain an 'other' exemption.

Perhaps it assumed its target audience was capable of reading with comprehension.

 

[Toni]

No, it means "if you are BIPOC, we will consider an 'other' exemption for you based on your BIPOC status", and if it doesn't mean that - if Cornell added the "other exemption" category, mentioned the historical wrongs against BIPOC people in the context of considering an exemption, but it didn't mean to imply BIPOC would be given extra consideration as BIPOC for an 'other exemption', then Cornell has gone ass over tit in its virtue signalling and has misled BIPOC students about their ability to gain an 'other' exemption.

No. It means: we realize you may consider the grievous history of wrongs committed against BIPOC to be reason to apply for an exemption and we beg you to consider that you are especially at risk if you are not vaccinated. My impression is that Cornell will not accept this as sufficient reason for an exemption and is attempting to head off any such application.

It is not clear to me that that is what Cornell is doing, especially given that the 'other exemption' category was added this year and applies only to flu vaccinations, but I acknowledge the possibility that Cornell has been recklessly indifferent in how its virtue signalling is interfering with clear communication and expectations.

The only thing reckless is your representation of the facts of this 'case.'