Flu vaccine mandatory at Cornell...for white students

[Gun Nut]

And you know this how?

Of course it shouldn't be but there's no reason to mention BIPOCs other than to suggest that it is a reason for an exemption.

Because I can read. And reason.
Acknowledging potential concerns about a policy is not the same thing as providing an exemption from following a policy.

Exactly.

"While we understand concerns about X, our policy is Y...." is a very standard way to draft a policy narrative. Acknowledging up front a common concern and providing a means to express that concern while also stating a position on it within the text of a policy statement or narrative is simply good administrative control.

Snatching on that disclosure within the document to claim that ONLY those concerns are considered in policy development or enforcement is dishonest and ignorant.

 

[TomC]

And you know this how?

Of course it shouldn't be but there's no reason to mention BIPOCs other than to suggest that it is a reason for an exemption.

Because I can read. And reason.
Acknowledging potential concerns about a policy is not the same thing as providing an exemption from following a policy.

Really, it's just this simple.

Acknowledging concerns, while explaining why it's so important for everyone to be vaccinated, is nothing like a promise of exemption for being BIPOC. I suppose I interpreted the "For example,..." part as so strongly implied I didn't notice that it wasn't stated. Nowhere was anything like "BIPOC exemption".

Frankly, if Cornell had a policy of granting exemptions for a particular reason and the staff had to check the student's phenotype before giving the exemption, I would definitely consider that racist. But I see no evidence of such whatsoever.
Tom

 

[laughing dog]

For some reason you feel you need to understand why it is an issue for the black community. This is not about you. It is about their reaction and views.
Again with the obtuseness. Apparently the white community is not concerned with this.
I am sure that will reassure everyone there after you make that public announcement.

So what?

Well of course when I have questions about the 'black community' I turn to their leader Toni.

I don't know how you know what the 'white community' is or is not concerned with.

By being awake and thinking - you should try it some time. If there was the same issue among white people in the USA, there'd be a movement about it already.

Perhaps you could start one since it seems to bother you so much.

 

[ronburgundy]

And you know this how?

Of course it shouldn't be but there's no reason to mention BIPOCs other than to suggest that it is a reason for an exemption.

Because I can read. And reason.
Acknowledging potential concerns about a policy is not the same thing as providing an exemption from following a policy.

They do far more than merely "acknowledge potential concerns". They provide this concern of BIPOCs as the sole example described under the section "Other Exemption" under their "Are Exemptions Granted?" FAQ. After describing this potential reason for seeking an exemption, they state "To apply for a non-medical/religious exemption to the flu vaccination requirement, students should send us a secure message through our patient portal explaining why you believe you should receive an exemption from this requirement."

Note that while I think that such an exemption is harmful and irrational, even though acknowledging the history is not, I think that any religious exemption is far more absurd, discriminatory, and unjustified since they are the result of self-inflicted delusions and not mistreatment by others. It is telling that the OP and other right wingers only care about discriminatory exemptions when they view white people as being excluded from them.

 

[Rhea]

My goodness I didn't know so many people on talkfreethought were personally acquainted with the majority of the Cornell student body.

Goodness, now you know.

I have many co-workers who are alums, family members who are alums, friends who work on campus, and I do corporate recruiting there speaking to hundreds of students. Don’t know everyone there, but I seem to know a shitload more about the local Zeitgeist than you do.

What's their opinion of how Cornell has decided to speak about exemptions to flu vaccinations?

It doesnt appear to be triggering anyone.
But you.

 

[Toni]

And you know this how?

Of course it shouldn't be but there's no reason to mention BIPOCs other than to suggest that it is a reason for an exemption.

Because I can read. And reason.
Acknowledging potential concerns about a policy is not the same thing as providing an exemption from following a policy.

They do far more than merely "acknowledge potential concerns". They provide this concern of BIPOCs as the sole example described under the section "Other Exemption" under their "Are Exemptions Granted?" FAQ. After describing this potential reason for seeking an exemption, they state "To apply for a non-medical/religious exemption to the flu vaccination requirement, students should send us a secure message through our patient portal explaining why you believe you should receive an exemption from this requirement."

Note that while I think that such an exemption is harmful and irrational, even though acknowledging the history is not, I think that any religious exemption is far more absurd, discriminatory, and unjustified since they are the result of self-inflicted delusions and not mistreatment by others. It is telling that the OP and other right wingers only care about discriminatory exemptions when they view white people as being excluded from them.

It seems unfeasible and Cumbersome for Cornell to address every possible concern a student might have that falls outside standard reasons for exemptions. I would hazard that Cornell was addressing one that had been raised before.

I haven’t checked the demographics at Cornell but I will go out on a limb and guess that black students are a small minority. Given the current political climate, particularly during the past 4-5 years, I can understand why Cornell might try to get in front of what could be seen as a controversial policy by addressing such concerns. None of the Ivies want to be seen as hostile towards BIPOC students -because they definitely do have a history of being hostile towards BIPOC students.

 

[ronburgundy]

They do far more than merely "acknowledge potential concerns". They provide this concern of BIPOCs as the sole example described under the section "Other Exemption" under their "Are Exemptions Granted?" FAQ. After describing this potential reason for seeking an exemption, they state "To apply for a non-medical/religious exemption to the flu vaccination requirement, students should send us a secure message through our patient portal explaining why you believe you should receive an exemption from this requirement."

Note that while I think that such an exemption is harmful and irrational, even though acknowledging the history is not, I think that any religious exemption is far more absurd, discriminatory, and unjustified since they are the result of self-inflicted delusions and not mistreatment by others. It is telling that the OP and other right wingers only care about discriminatory exemptions when they view white people as being excluded from them.

It seems unfeasible and Cumbersome for Cornell to address every possible concern a student might have that falls outside standard reasons for exemptions. I would hazard that Cornell was addressing one that had been raised before.

I haven’t checked the demographics at Cornell but I will go out on a limb and guess that black students are a small minority. Given the current political climate, particularly during the past 4-5 years, I can understand why Cornell might try to get in front of what could be seen as a controversial policy by addressing such concerns. None of the Ivies want to be seen as hostile towards BIPOC students -because they definitely do have a history of being hostile towards BIPOC students.

The fact that it's the sole non-medical/religious exemption they list is not my primary issue. My issue is that they are clearly saying this can be a basis for exemption, which basically means that anyone can just give the excuse that they don't trust vaccines and be exempt. Are they seriously going to tell a student "Nah, we don't think your subjective fears are sincere." Also, if BIPOCs can illogically apply historical instances targeting blacks to a modern situation where everyone all races are getting it, then why can't non BIPOCs illogically have the same fear that the government poisons it's citizens, also ignoring the actual race component that is missing from the current vaccinations?

Even if they allow other excuses, they shouldn't allow this one, or others, or religious exemptions. All such exemptions are discriminatory and biased, based upon purely arbitrary and subjective determinations whether a person's irrational fears or dogma are mainstream enough to be deemed worthy. Basically, either make it mandatory for everyone without a medical diagnoses the prohibits vaccination or make it strongly suggested rather then "required" for some and not others.

 

[Toni]

They do far more than merely "acknowledge potential concerns". They provide this concern of BIPOCs as the sole example described under the section "Other Exemption" under their "Are Exemptions Granted?" FAQ. After describing this potential reason for seeking an exemption, they state "To apply for a non-medical/religious exemption to the flu vaccination requirement, students should send us a secure message through our patient portal explaining why you believe you should receive an exemption from this requirement."

Note that while I think that such an exemption is harmful and irrational, even though acknowledging the history is not, I think that any religious exemption is far more absurd, discriminatory, and unjustified since they are the result of self-inflicted delusions and not mistreatment by others. It is telling that the OP and other right wingers only care about discriminatory exemptions when they view white people as being excluded from them.

It seems unfeasible and Cumbersome for Cornell to address every possible concern a student might have that falls outside standard reasons for exemptions. I would hazard that Cornell was addressing one that had been raised before.

I haven’t checked the demographics at Cornell but I will go out on a limb and guess that black students are a small minority. Given the current political climate, particularly during the past 4-5 years, I can understand why Cornell might try to get in front of what could be seen as a controversial policy by addressing such concerns. None of the Ivies want to be seen as hostile towards BIPOC students -because they definitely do have a history of being hostile towards BIPOC students.

The fact that it's the sole non-medical/religious exemption they list is not my primary issue. My issue is that they are clearly saying this can be a basis for exemption, which basically means that anyone can just give the excuse that they don't trust vaccines and be exempt. Are they seriously going to tell a student "Nah, we don't think your subjective fears are sincere." Also, if BIPOCs can illogically apply historical instances targeting blacks to a modern situation where everyone all races are getting it, then why can't non BIPOCs illogically have the same fear that the government poisons it's citizens, also ignoring the actual race component that is missing from the current vaccinations?

Even if they allow other excuses, they shouldn't allow this one, or others, or religious exemptions. All such exemptions are discriminatory and biased, based upon purely arbitrary and subjective determinations whether a person's irrational fears or dogma are mainstream enough to be deemed worthy. Basically, either make it mandatory for everyone without a medical diagnoses the prohibits vaccination or make it strongly suggested rather then "required" for some and not others.

No, they are saying that some might view this as a reason to request an exemption--and then provide a link that explains why they should get vaccinated.

I agree that religious exemptions are not rational but in this country, we allow freedom of (and from) religion. The way that I look at it is if they excluded Christian Scientists because they wouldn't get vaccinated, then they would actually narrow the breadth of their student body and would miss the opportunity to convince some Christian Scientists that they should indeed get vaccinated along with accepting medical science, etc. Keep in mind that college students are not generally financially independent from their parents and in fact, heading to university is the first real taste of actual independence most 18 year olds experience. 18 year olds cannot even take out student loans without parental co-signing. It's a big step and one should encourage students to broaden their thinking, not beat them over the head with: Defy your parents' religious views!

I think society is better served by more inclusion, more diversity, not less.

 

[Rhea]

This whole thread and its origins are so interesting

I keep thinking about how obvious it is to so many here that Cornell is trying to talk to their BIPOC community and get them to accept the vaccine despite their fears, and how badly it is being interpreted by those who have a history of searching the earth for any possible instance of marginally (or even falsely) impacted white men so that they can screech about it.

The latter, of course is exemplified in the types of websites who hosted the article in the OP (how can you stand reading this shallow garbage?) (founder’s facebook page full of right wing screeching) as rated by mediabiasfactcheck

Overall, we rate Law Enforcement Today far-Right Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that align with the conservative right. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to the use of poor sources, lack of transparency, and failed fact checks.

As they run around the internet looking for reasons to feel victimized, even if it takes badly reading perfectly non-threatening material in a University website.

Founded in 2008

Gee, what happened in 2008 that could have triggered far right people to start a website? Hmm. Will have staff researchers look into this.

The other websites who copy and link to this article are similarly screechy, full of putting on an unearned mantle of victimhood.

I mean, really, finding a university halfway across the world and looking on their health page and saying, “oh! Infamy! Horrible oppressionz!!” Just makes me eye-roll. I’d find it different if they said, “well this is interesting, what does it mean? It sounds bad!” But that’s clearly not the lens through which it is being viewed. It’s full-on OPPRESSIONZ!


Anyway, this is not a topic of conversation going on around the campus, and it is certainly not what was intended by the writers as the edits to the page have made clear. It was a misinterpretation that requires the most aggressive assumptions of intent, which are being made more clearly wrong with every edit attempt to appease the fragile white victims and predict how they could possibly mis-read it this time.

The current version shows this:

Compliance with Testing & Flu Vaccine Requirements

Cornell's Behavioral Compact for Fall 2020 outlines several important steps that students must take as they return to Ithaca. In addition to requiring the wearing of masks and engagement in physical distancing, the Compact requires students to participate in ongoing surveillance testing for COVID-19 and to be vaccinated against seasonal influenza. Collectively, these measures are critical for reducing viral infections within our community and also protecting the most vulnerable among us (e.g., older individuals and people with pre-existing health conditions). Access to COVID-19 testing and flu vaccine is made available for all students by systems put in place at the beginning of the school year.

A history of mistreatment & lack of access to appropriate care
We recognize that, due to longstanding systemic racism and health inequities in this country, individuals from some marginalized communities may have concerns about needing to agree to such requirements. For example, historically, the bodies the of Black, Indigenous, and other People of Color (BIPOC) have been mistreated, and used by people in power, sometimes for profit or medical gain. It is understandable that the current Compact requirements may feel suspect or even exploitative to some BIPOC members of the Cornell community. Additionally, recent acts of violence against Black people by law enforcement may contribute to feelings of distrust or powerlessness. We know this history and validate the potential concerns it may raise. At the same time, we know that long-standing social inequalities and health disparities have resulted in COVID-19 disproportionately affecting BIPOC individuals. Higher percentages of individuals from these communities become infected with COVID, and the health outcomes related to infection are often more serious. Away from campus community, BIPOC individuals are not as likely to have access to preventive services or quality health care. The systems, services, and policies being implemented at Cornell seek to address these inequalities as well as the differential impacts.

The importance of this moment
The aforementioned inequities and injustices may lead some individuals to have reservations about testing and immunization, yet it is also important to acknowledge the critical role these measures play in protecting community health and well-being. In fact, they are likely to be especially helpful for BIPOC communities.

There’s more - it goes on in further detail about why they should put their fears - real as they are - aside to get vaccinated.

It is so obviously an attempt to talk with respect to those members of the community who are least likely to get the vaccine because of genuine historical reasons, acknowledging and understanding those reasons, and to convince them to get the vaccine.


But the idea that this triggered all of these white male fragilists to leap out of their armchairs and scream OPPRESSIONZ! Because of this one college in this one town and their attempt to acknowledge a past wrong that is impacting today’s safety, it just... it is a VERY intresting look into their souls.

 

[TomC]

My issue is that they are clearly saying this can be a basis for exemption, which basically means that anyone can just give the excuse that they don't trust vaccines and be exempt.

Where does Cornell clearly say this?
Tom

 

[Metaphor]

Note that while I think that such an exemption is harmful and irrational, even though acknowledging the history is not, I think that any religious exemption is far more absurd, discriminatory, and unjustified since they are the result of self-inflicted delusions and not mistreatment by others. It is telling that the OP and other right wingers only care about discriminatory exemptions when they view white people as being excluded from them.

What on earth makes you think that because discrimination along racial lines is unacceptable that I think exemptions for religious reasons are reasonable? In fact, I don't think they're reasonable and I said so.

 

[Metaphor]

What's their opinion of how Cornell has decided to speak about exemptions to flu vaccinations?

It doesnt appear to be triggering anyone.
But you.

So, what you mean is, nobody has spontaneously talked to you about it.

 

[laughing dog]

What's their opinion of how Cornell has decided to speak about exemptions to flu vaccinations?

It doesnt appear to be triggering anyone.
But you.

So, what you mean is, nobody has spontaneously talked to you about it.

That is a category error, since the appearance of being triggered does not require anyone to spontaneously speak to her.

 

[Metaphor]

So, what you mean is, nobody has spontaneously talked to you about it.

That is a category error, since the appearance of being triggered does not require anyone to spontaneously speak to her.

Indeed, Rhea appears to have the ability to do it with someone she hasn't seen or heard by reading a post on the internet. So I don't doubt that if somebody was triggered in her presence, Rhea would know about it.

But, I did not ask if people had been triggered by the vaccine policy. I asked:

What's their opinion of how Cornell has decided to speak about exemptions to flu vaccinations?

So, Rhea hasn't answered the question, except to imply she hasn't seen someone have a public breakdown about it while verbalising what the breakdown is about.

I doubt Rhea has spoken to anybody at Cornell about the vaccine policy. So I wondered if anybody had spontaneously spoken to her about it. Or if she had otherwise gotten their opinion on it. Opinions are usually disclosed by acts other than a public 'triggering'. Sometimes you can even uncover them by talking about it.

 

[Rhea]

What's their opinion of how Cornell has decided to speak about exemptions to flu vaccinations?

It doesnt appear to be triggering anyone.
But you.

So, what you mean is, nobody has spontaneously talked to you about it.

Indeed, while talking about vaccines, and local outbreaks and diversity, not once has a white person triggered by this outrageous OPPRESSIONZ! said, “but get a load of this!” the way you have, from across the globe.

So, to sum up, you thought this was a clear obvious and aggressive case of OPPRESSIONZ! and all the people here are all, “so how about that nursing home?” So on the Big Deal scale, it appears to be a 0.

 

[Metaphor]

So, what you mean is, nobody has spontaneously talked to you about it.

Indeed, while talking about vaccines, and local outbreaks and diversity, not once has a white person triggered by this outrageous OPPRESSIONZ! said, “but get a load of this!” the way you have, from across the globe.

So, to sum up, you thought this was a clear obvious and aggressive case of OPPRESSIONZ! and all the people here are all, “so how about that nursing home?” So on the Big Deal scale, it appears to be a 0.

I didn't ask about white people at Cornell. I asked about people at Cornell. I didn't ask about 'triggered' responses, I asked about opinions. I didn't characterise the policy as oppression; I characterised it as discrimination by race.

If you think my response is one of being triggered by the policy, and of shouting in all caps with misspelled words because I'm either too seething with anger to spell correctly or I'm just too stupid and ignorant in general to spell correctly, you'll need to point me to the posts where I've done that, if I am to correct it. But, I don't think I have done that. I think you've just decided to be particularly nasty out of nowhere.

 

[Toni]

So, what you mean is, nobody has spontaneously talked to you about it.

Indeed, while talking about vaccines, and local outbreaks and diversity, not once has a white person triggered by this outrageous OPPRESSIONZ! said, “but get a load of this!” the way you have, from across the globe.

So, to sum up, you thought this was a clear obvious and aggressive case of OPPRESSIONZ! and all the people here are all, “so how about that nursing home?” So on the Big Deal scale, it appears to be a 0.

I didn't ask about white people at Cornell. I asked about people at Cornell. I didn't ask about 'triggered' responses, I asked about opinions. I didn't characterise the policy as oppression; I characterised it as discrimination by race.

If you think my response is one of being triggered by the policy, and of shouting in all caps with misspelled words because I'm either too seething with anger to spell correctly or I'm just too stupid and ignorant in general to spell correctly, you'll need to point me to the posts where I've done that, if I am to correct it. But, I don't think I have done that. I think you've just decided to be particularly nasty out of nowhere.

Really? You think that Rhea is being nasty? Or that it came out of 'nowhere?'

You've spent this entire thread talking about how racist something that an American University has on its website---and have argued with anyone who has pointed out that the policy does not say or mean or imply what the OP claims. Some have even taken considerable time and effort to look through archived materials for other versions, hoping to help bring some clarity to you. Now, you are belittling Rhea's own conversations with the many people she knows at Cornell, where she has from time to time, spoken and recruited.

I guess my old boss was right: You can lead someone to knowledge but you cannot make them think.

 

[Arctish]

Internet slang

 

[laughing dog]

Indeed, Rhea appears to have the ability to do it with someone she hasn't seen or heard by reading a post on the internet. So I don't doubt that if somebody was triggered in her presence, Rhea would know about it.

But, I did not ask if people had been triggered by the vaccine policy. I asked:

What's their opinion of how Cornell has decided to speak about exemptions to flu vaccinations?

So, Rhea hasn't answered the question, except to imply she hasn't seen someone have a public breakdown about it while verbalising what the breakdown is about.

I doubt Rhea has spoken to anybody at Cornell about the vaccine policy. So I wondered if anybody had spontaneously spoken to her about it. Or if she had otherwise gotten their opinion on it. Opinions are usually disclosed by acts other than a public 'triggering'. Sometimes you can even uncover them by talking about it.

As Rhea's subsequent post indicates (295), once again you have jumped to erroneous conclusions and tried to evade the obvious with your tiresome pedantry.

 

[blastula]

Anyway, this is not a topic of conversation going on around the campus, and it is certainly not what was intended by the writers as the edits to the page have made clear. It was a misinterpretation that requires the most aggressive assumptions of intent, which are being made more clearly wrong with every edit attempt to appease the fragile white victims and predict how they could possibly mis-read it this time.


The current version shows this:

Sorry, but you have this exactly backwards. The page you copied from is not the page with the exemption language and has never been edited. It's the FAQ page that's been changed.

As I already posted, it looked like this on 8-28-20.

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. To do so, send us a secure message through our patient portal explaining why you believe you should receive an exemption from this requirement. Log in to myCornellHealth and select Messages & Pharmacy Services > New Message > Send a message or an attachment to Immunization Requirements.

At that point, the exemption was offered to anyone, with nothing said about POCs. Nobody should be bothered about it at that point, other than that they are offering a non-medical exemption at all to anyone.

But then the same page on 9-2-20

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 Behavioral Compact. For example, 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. Learn more below about why Cornell is requiring flu vaccination for students,
​​​​​To do so, send us a secure message through our patient portal explaining why you believe you should receive an exemption from this requirement. Log in to myCornellHealth and select Messages & Pharmacy Services > New Message > Send a message or an attachment to Immunization Requirements.

That added the "for example" with the POC stuff.

But now currently, the page says this:

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. (Learn more about why Cornell is requiring flu vaccination for students.) 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.

• To apply for a non-medical/religious exemption to the flu vaccination requirement, students should send us a secure message through our patient portal explaining why you believe you should receive an exemption from this requirement. Log in to myCornellHealth and select Messages & Pharmacy Services > New Message > Send a message or an attachment to Immunization Requirements.

Which took out "for example" and so made it sound like that was the only allowed exemption.

So, the editing went in the exact opposite direction of what you said:

It was a misinterpretation that requires the most aggressive assumptions of intent, which are being made more clearly wrong with every edit attempt to appease the fragile white victims and predict how they could possibly mis-read it this time.

I do find it amusing though to think that this forum here could be the only place on the planet that's still discussing this policy.