Flu vaccine mandatory at Cornell...for white students

[Keith&Co.]

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.

Probably depends on if you read the Cornell version first, for content, or after some RW site told you what it said, first.

 

[Metaphor]

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.'

The facts are laid out on page 1. Either Cornell is allowing BIPOC to claim an exemption from the flu vaccination (under its newly-inserted category of "other exemptions"), in which case Cornell is discriminating against white students (which an ordinary reading of its website would imply), or it is not allowing that particular exemption, in which case it is just another virtue signal that has the added benefit of misleading BIPOC students.

 

[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.

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

Probably depends on if you read the Cornell version first, for content, or after some RW site told you what it said, first.

I sincerely hope I am wrong, and that Cornell is not allowing BIPOC to self-select out based on being BIPOC.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Assuming it is true, my only caveat would be the usual one, that it is incorrect to lump this sort of racial discrimination in with other sorts and what is normally understood by the term racism.

If it would be wrong to give exemptions to people because they are white then it's wrong to give them because they're black. Changing the races involved can't change whether the act is racist or not.

 

[Arctish]

Assuming it is true, my only caveat would be the usual one, that it is incorrect to lump this sort of racial discrimination in with other sorts and what is normally understood by the term racism.

If it would be wrong to give exemptions to people because they are white then it's wrong to give them because they're black. Changing the races involved can't change whether the act is racist or not.

If you read the Cornell immunization requirements page blastula posted here, and read the document it links to in the "Other exemption" bullet point, you will see that Cornell is not granting exemptions to people because of their race. The university is making no promises about granting exemptions at all. It is explaining the policy and being pro-active in addressing what may cause some students to object.

Cornell is clearly working to overcome resistance to the new vaccination policy, not pander to it.

 

[ruby sparks]

For several pages now, a few people have been trying to say that Cornell are not offering the possibility of an exemption for BIPOC. As far as I can see, they are. As such, I'm thinking wtf is going on with some people? By all means discuss the merits and demerits of offering it, but arguing over and over, in the face of what looks like clear (posted in the thread) evidence to the contrary from Cornell itself, that it is being offered, has been brain-hurting to read, and as with other times when some people seem to repeatedly base their view on 'what they'd prefer the facts to be' rather than what they are, I do not get the point of it. Yes, we do not know if they are granting it, but it seems they are clearly offering it, and it would in fact be odd if they did that and then turned all applicants down.

 

[ruby sparks]

Cornell is clearly working to overcome resistance to the new vaccination policy, not pander to it.

It's debatable as to whether it is clearly doing that, imo. Yes, they do stress that they would like BIPOC to get it, but only after literally offering a potential opt-out ticket to that whole category of people. It's at least a bit contradictory.

 

[Arctish]

For several pages now, a few people have been trying to say that Cornell are not offering the possibility of an exemption for BIPOC. As far as I can see, they are. As such, I'm thinking wtf is going on with some people? By all means discuss the merits and demerits of offering it, but arguing over and over, in the face of what looks like clear (posted in the thread) evidence to the contrary from Cornell itself, that it is being offered, has been brain-hurting to read, and as with other times when some people seem to repeatedly base their view on 'what they'd prefer the facts to be' rather than what they are, I do not get the point of it. Yes, we do not know if they are granting it, but it seems they are clearly offering it, and it would in fact be odd if they did that and then turned all applicants down.

It comes down to common understandings of phrases and words. I still think there are some cultural factors at work when you and I discuss things, and when Metaphor is commenting on something to do with American race relations.

Cornell students may apply for an exemption due to medical conditions and religious beliefs. That doesn't mean they'll get one. Each application will be evaluated by Cornell staff who will rule on its merits.

Black and minority students may apply for an exemption the same as everyone else. If they are considering using personal experience with abusers of authority, anecdotal information from family members, and the history of doctors in this country of using blacks as guinea pigs as a basis for their appeal, Cornell has provided a page of information they might find helpful. That page does not offer them special privileges. It does not say their applications will be granted. It says that Cornell recognizes the validity of their concerns, but also recognizes that black and minority communities have an even greater need of widespread vaccination programs due to being largely underserved by the medical community.

There are no blanket exemptions being offered to anyone. Not even to the Christian Scientists.

 

[ruby sparks]

It comes down to common understandings of phrases and words. I still think there are some cultural factors at work when you and I discuss things, and when Metaphor is commenting on something to do with American race relations.

Cornell students may apply for an exemption due to medical conditions and religious beliefs. That doesn't mean they'll get one. Each application will be evaluated by Cornell staff who will rule on its merits.

Black and minority students may apply for an exemption the same as everyone else. If they are considering using personal experience with abusers of authority, anecdotal information from family members, and the history of doctors in this country of using blacks as guinea pigs as a basis for their appeal, Cornell has provided a page of information they might find helpful. That page does not offer them special privileges. It does not say their applications will be granted. It says that Cornell recognizes the validity of their concerns, but also recognizes that black and minority communities have an even greater need of widespread vaccination programs due to being largely underserved by the medical community.

There are no blanket exemptions being offered to anyone. Not even to the Christian Scientists.

That seems to be a fair summary of how I already read it, and nor did I suggest otherwise in the post you replied to, so I'm not sure what you think might be getting lost in translation.

Although, I think your 'the same as everyone else' is incorrect? Surely BIPOC have been offered a special (and considered valid) reason on which to base an application, should they so wish to?

One final question. Do you actually live in the Twilight Zone, or do you just tend to post from there?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Now, not allowing BIPOC an exemption just because they are BIPOC would be the correct course of action, but Cornell should make it very explicit, after they've published their virtue-signal, that BIPOC students will not be granted an exemption just on the basis that they are BIPOC.

They did. It says right there in black and white that no sociological exemptions are allowed.

The page is self-contradictory. Pointing out that it says no doesn't mean it really says no.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Assuming it is true, my only caveat would be the usual one, that it is incorrect to lump this sort of racial discrimination in with other sorts and what is normally understood by the term racism.

If it would be wrong to give exemptions to people because they are white then it's wrong to give them because they're black. Changing the races involved can't change whether the act is racist or not.

If you read the Cornell immunization requirements page blastula posted here, and read the document it links to in the "Other exemption" bullet point, you will see that Cornell is not granting exemptions to people because of their race. The university is making no promises about granting exemptions at all. It is explaining the policy and being pro-active in addressing what may cause some students to object.

Cornell is clearly working to overcome resistance to the new vaccination policy, not pander to it.

Except if it really meant they aren't granting exemptions to BIPOCs there is no reason for the "considering an exemption" part. And of course they aren't making promises to engage in racism, this is just to make it clear that they are willing to engage in racism.

 

[TomC]

If you read the Cornell immunization requirements page blastula posted here, and read the document it links to in the "Other exemption" bullet point, you will see that Cornell is not granting exemptions to people because of their race. The university is making no promises about granting exemptions at all. It is explaining the policy and being pro-active in addressing what may cause some students to object.

Cornell is clearly working to overcome resistance to the new vaccination policy, not pander to it.

Except if it really meant they aren't granting exemptions to BIPOCs there is no reason for the "considering an exemption" part. And of course they aren't making promises to engage in racism, this is just to make it clear that they are willing to engage in racism.

Of course there is.

It's obvious to me that Cornell is telling everyone that everyone will be treated the same. No exceptions for BIPOC, except the same reasons anybody else might get one.

I agree that religious exemptions are ridiculous. If going to Cornell isn't worth a vaccination you aren't suited for such a rigorous environment anyways. But Cornell isn't anything like unique in this. It's all too common.

Bottom line is that "consider" doesn't mean "request". "Request" doesn't mean "grant". BIPOC are just as able to request an exemption as anybody else, but they've already been informed that political and sociological requests aren't going to granted.

Cornell used diplomatic language, but the message sure was clear to me.
Tom

 

[Politesse]

I think there are two problems here:

1. Cornell isn't exactly going out of their way to say what they really mean.

2. Conservatives lead with their conclusions first, and seek "evidence" for them second; they already believed, against all evidence, that the Ivy League schools cater to Blacks and discriminate against Whites, so any ambiguous language becomes certain proof that they were right all along.​

 

[laughing dog]

If one reads the Cornell pages, it should be obvious that requests for exemptions will be considered. There is nothing in those pages that prevents anyone to make a request for an exemption for any reason.

In the English language, a request is a polite form of asking. It does not mean that a request is automatically given. In fact, it is possible that when a request for an exemption is made for a non-medical reason from this educational institution that the answering personnel may try to educate the requester into reconsidering their position.

 

[Politesse]

If one reads the Cornell pages, it should be obvious that requests for exemptions will be considered. There is nothing in those pages that prevents anyone to make a request for an exemption for any reason.

This is true, and they even explain why on that page: all students have that right as a matter of contract. The school may turn down a request, but they cannot refuse to accept it in the first place.

 

[Toni]

If you read the Cornell immunization requirements page blastula posted here, and read the document it links to in the "Other exemption" bullet point, you will see that Cornell is not granting exemptions to people because of their race. The university is making no promises about granting exemptions at all. It is explaining the policy and being pro-active in addressing what may cause some students to object.

Cornell is clearly working to overcome resistance to the new vaccination policy, not pander to it.

Except if it really meant they aren't granting exemptions to BIPOCs there is no reason for the "considering an exemption" part. And of course they aren't making promises to engage in racism, this is just to make it clear that they are willing to engage in racism.

This is not at all true. Cornell is being proactive with regards to an issue that some of its students might possibly have that is not related to medical or religious grounds for declining vaccination.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If you read the Cornell immunization requirements page blastula posted here, and read the document it links to in the "Other exemption" bullet point, you will see that Cornell is not granting exemptions to people because of their race. The university is making no promises about granting exemptions at all. It is explaining the policy and being pro-active in addressing what may cause some students to object.

Cornell is clearly working to overcome resistance to the new vaccination policy, not pander to it.

Except if it really meant they aren't granting exemptions to BIPOCs there is no reason for the "considering an exemption" part. And of course they aren't making promises to engage in racism, this is just to make it clear that they are willing to engage in racism.

Of course there is.

It's obvious to me that Cornell is telling everyone that everyone will be treated the same. No exceptions for BIPOC, except the same reasons anybody else might get one.

I agree that religious exemptions are ridiculous. If going to Cornell isn't worth a vaccination you aren't suited for such a rigorous environment anyways. But Cornell isn't anything like unique in this. It's all too common.

Bottom line is that "consider" doesn't mean "request". "Request" doesn't mean "grant". BIPOC are just as able to request an exemption as anybody else, but they've already been informed that political and sociological requests aren't going to granted.

Cornell used diplomatic language, but the message sure was clear to me.
Tom

I do agree the religious exemptions don't belong there, but, as you say it's a widespread issue.

However, there's no point in that last bit other than to say that exemptions will be considered simply for being BIPOC.

 

[TomC]

However, there's no point in that last bit other than to say that exemptions will be considered simply for being BIPOC.

Where does the Cornell website say anything like "exemptions will be considered simply for being BIPOC"? Anybody can request an exemption. Cornell explicitly pointed out that political and sociological requests will not qualify for exemptions.

"Considered" is not "granted". "Will read your request" is not "considered".
Cornell explained why "political or sociological" requests for exemptions aren't going to work. Anybody can file a request. Doesn't mean you'll get one.
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think there are two problems here:

1. Cornell isn't exactly going out of their way to say what they really mean.

2. Conservatives lead with their conclusions first, and seek "evidence" for them second; they already believed, against all evidence, that the Ivy League schools cater to Blacks and discriminate against Whites, so any ambiguous language becomes certain proof that they were right all along.​

I definitely agree on #1, but you've got it backwards on #2--this is a dog whistle that they failed to slip past the conservatives. While the conservatives are usually wrong they occasionally find a bone and this certainly looks like one.

 

[Arctish]

It comes down to common understandings of phrases and words. I still think there are some cultural factors at work when you and I discuss things, and when Metaphor is commenting on something to do with American race relations.

Cornell students may apply for an exemption due to medical conditions and religious beliefs. That doesn't mean they'll get one. Each application will be evaluated by Cornell staff who will rule on its merits.

Black and minority students may apply for an exemption the same as everyone else. If they are considering using personal experience with abusers of authority, anecdotal information from family members, and the history of doctors in this country of using blacks as guinea pigs as a basis for their appeal, Cornell has provided a page of information they might find helpful. That page does not offer them special privileges. It does not say their applications will be granted. It says that Cornell recognizes the validity of their concerns, but also recognizes that black and minority communities have an even greater need of widespread vaccination programs due to being largely underserved by the medical community.

There are no blanket exemptions being offered to anyone. Not even to the Christian Scientists.

That seems to be a fair summary of how I already read it, and nor did I suggest otherwise in the post you replied to, so I'm not sure what you think might be getting lost in translation.

Although, I think your 'the same as everyone else' is incorrect? Surely BIPOC have been offered a special (and considered valid) reason on which to base an application, should they so wish to?

They weren't being offered a special reason for requesting an exemption. Cornell was preemptively addressing a likely reason BIPOC might give for requesting one, and presenting an argument against it.

One final question. Do you actually live in the Twilight Zone, or do you just tend to post from there?

I live in the United States of America, a place where medical doctors performed experiments on blacks without consent, including but not limited to cutting and sewing women's genitalia without anesthetic even though it was available, observing the progression of untreated syphilis in men without informing them they had the disease, and forced sterilization of women which might still be occurring in ICE facilities.

There's more to the Black Lives Matter movement than just protesting police brutality. The way BIPOC have been treated by the medical profession is part of it, too. That's a stark reality for us Americans that perhaps isn't so easily seen on your side of the ocean.

Suppose a university in Ireland was adopting a policy of putting students in sex-segregated dormitories supervised by nuns, said that students may request an exemption based on medical needs and religious beliefs, and then produced a document that acknowledged the specific concerns of single and unwed mothers while arguing in favor of the policy. Would that be unfair to the male students?