Student sued for criticising race-segregated computer lab

[barbos]

Aborigines don't speak english?

It might be a second language.

I find it hard to believe.

And my impression that lab was not assigned to any class at the time.

That is very compatible with what I wrote, but I don't remember reading there was no class.

You wrote plausible but pretty convoluted explanation. Anyway, it seems that room was "assigned" as "culturally safe place" for indigenous.
I really don't understand why is that needed. Do they have "culturally safe" computer labs for russians too?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Do they have "culturally safe" computer labs for russians too?

No, Putin monitors them all for dissident expressions. There's no safety for Russians.

 

[bigfield]

The Russian students do just fine with pencil and paper.

Plus, you could count the number of Russian students on one hand.

 

[Metaphor]

I don't control the universe, Toni.



It could be that I have filtered out stories where men are accusing people of cultural appropriation. If you have evidence of that, please furnish it. Or, it could be that it is women who are more likely to accuse people of cultural appropriation.

But perhaps it's just a coincidence.

It wouldn't be a coincidence if most of the people who accuse others of cultural appropriation are women. It would just be that my posts reflect reality.

By coincidence (or was it????) I was listening to a radio program onNPR this morning, about how web algorithms heavily determine what news you see based on what you've read and searched for before. To the extent that your newsfeed can become a veritable echo chamber. I'm heavily paraphrasing here. The result is that certain groups become convinced that a political candidate is (fill in) and everyone knows it and those who just can't face that reality are (fill in the blank).

So I think that perhaps answers my question.

Edited to add that I don't believe that you are incapable or unwilling to entertain other view points but it does maybe explain to me why some posters are always posting about a particular topic or small set of topics..

My Facebook feed and my Google searches (when I'm logged in) most definitely appear to be learning what I've clicked on.

However, I'm aware of this and I sometimes seek alternatives e.g. searching for items with Bing and using my VPN so that search engines think I'm in a different country.

Additionally, I also visit sites directly that do not have enough content to employ an algorithm.

- - - Updated - - -

Do they have "culturally safe" computer labs for russians too?

No, Putin monitors them all for dissident expressions. There's no safety for Russians.

Incorrect. You are safe as long as you do what you're told.

 

[Metaphor]

It might be a second language.

It would be unusual for non-remote Indigenous students to have an aboriginal language as their first language. But if they did the lab would not be useful as a language bridger; there are dozens of aboriginal languages and if the lab monitor knew any she'd probably only know her own.

That is very compatible with what I wrote, but I don't remember reading there was no class.

There was no class; it was dedicated student-use labs. If you go into a teaching lab without being enrolled in the class on the timetable you'd be kicked out on that basis, not your ethnicity.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

It might be a second language.

I find it hard to believe.

Australian aborigines have more than 20 languages. Why is that hard to believe?

And my impression that lab was not assigned to any class at the time.

That is very compatible with what I wrote, but I don't remember reading there was no class.

You wrote plausible but pretty convoluted explanation. Anyway, it seems that room was "assigned" as "culturally safe place" for indigenous.
I really don't understand why is that needed. Do they have "culturally safe" computer labs for russians too?

What sign said "culturally safe" computer lab?

 

[Arctish]

I work in a building full of white males. I can't vouch for every single one of them but over the years I've talked to at least 100, and not a single one had this problem.

Most keep silent about the way society discriminates against white males. Mention it and you're vilified.

Most women in the building I work in keep silent about the way society discriminates against females. If they mention it they run the risk of being called bitchy cry-babies, or even *gasp* SJWs.

How is that different?

 

[barbos]

I find it hard to believe.

Australian aborigines have more than 20 languages. Why is that hard to believe?

I find it hard to believe they don't speak english.

And my impression that lab was not assigned to any class at the time.

That is very compatible with what I wrote, but I don't remember reading there was no class.

You wrote plausible but pretty convoluted explanation. Anyway, it seems that room was "assigned" as "culturally safe place" for indigenous.
I really don't understand why is that needed. Do they have "culturally safe" computer labs for russians too?

What sign said "culturally safe" computer lab?

Living sign, named Ms. Price

 

[Toni]

I work in a building full of white males. I can't vouch for every single one of them but over the years I've talked to at least 100, and not a single one had this problem.

Most keep silent about the way society discriminates against white males. Mention it and you're vilified.

Here's the thing:
the fact that society no longer sees white males as ALWAYS smarter, stronger, more capable, more intelligent, more deserving than the rest of humanity is not the same thing as discriminating against white males.

 

[Metaphor]

Most keep silent about the way society discriminates against white males. Mention it and you're vilified.

Here's the thing:
the fact that society no longer sees white males as ALWAYS smarter, stronger, more capable, more intelligent, more deserving than the rest of humanity is not the same thing as discriminating against white males.

No, the fact that the State will throw out the test results for firefighter promotions because there were too many white men who qualified, or that Latino firefighters were basically blackmailed into taking promotions ahead of better-qualified white firefighters does not mean white males are assumed to always be the best.

If you don't understand why these cases represent systematic bias against white people, and white men in particular, I don't know what to tell you Toni.

 

[laughing dog]

Here's the thing:
the fact that society no longer sees white males as ALWAYS smarter, stronger, more capable, more intelligent, more deserving than the rest of humanity is not the same thing as discriminating against white males.

No, the fact that the State will throw out the test results for firefighter promotions because there were too many white men who qualified, or that Latino firefighters were basically blackmailed into taking promotions ahead of better-qualified white firefighters does not mean white males are assumed to always be the best.

Actually, if your description is accurate (which I doubt),and you think about it, it does.

 

[Metaphor]

No, the fact that the State will throw out the test results for firefighter promotions because there were too many white men who qualified, or that Latino firefighters were basically blackmailed into taking promotions ahead of better-qualified white firefighters does not mean white males are assumed to always be the best.

Actually, if your description is accurate (which I doubt),and you think about it, it does.

No. They were not assumed to be the best. Nobody assumed anything; that's why everyone was tested.

You can read the links if you think I've misrepresented or been mistaken about the stories.

 

[laughing dog]

Actually, if your description is accurate (which I doubt),and you think about it, it does.

No. They were not assumed to be the best. Nobody assumed anything; that's why everyone was tested.

Think harder about it.

 

[Toni]

Actually, if your description is accurate (which I doubt),and you think about it, it does.

No. They were not assumed to be the best. Nobody assumed anything; that's why everyone was tested.

You can read the links if you think I've misrepresented or been mistaken about the stories.

The assumption was that a written exam--one which the guy studied for for months, was the best way to identify and rank candidates for promotion to lieutenant in a company of firefighters.

I agree that such exams are the best way to identify and rank achievement in some areas. But I believe that those areas are far more limited than you seem to.

I'm writing this as someone who always performs extremely well on written exams. And who recognizes both the use and the limitations of examinations.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Most keep silent about the way society discriminates against white males. Mention it and you're vilified.

Here's the thing:
the fact that society no longer sees white males as ALWAYS smarter, stronger, more capable, more intelligent, more deserving than the rest of humanity is not the same thing as discriminating against white males.

I'm not talking about not always seeing white males as superior.

Rather, I'm talking about the legalized discrimination where other groups are deliberately selected over white males.

 

[Toni]

Here's the thing:
the fact that society no longer sees white males as ALWAYS smarter, stronger, more capable, more intelligent, more deserving than the rest of humanity is not the same thing as discriminating against white males.

I'm not talking about not always seeing white males as superior.

Rather, I'm talking about the legalized discrimination where other groups are deliberately selected over white males.

As opposed to the millennia of always choosing the white guy?

White men were born on the equivalent of third base for so long they simply cannot comprehend any point of view that a) notices or b)does not see this as the natural order of things.

 

[laughing dog]

Here's the thing:
the fact that society no longer sees white males as ALWAYS smarter, stronger, more capable, more intelligent, more deserving than the rest of humanity is not the same thing as discriminating against white males.

I'm not talking about not always seeing white males as superior.

Rather, I'm talking about the legalized discrimination where other groups are deliberately selected over white males.

Yes, because it always the case there are simply no cogent rationales for deliberately choosing people other than white males.

 

[Bomb#20]

I'm not talking about not always seeing white males as superior.

Rather, I'm talking about the legalized discrimination where other groups are deliberately selected over white males.

As opposed to the millennia of always choosing the white guy?

White men were born on the equivalent of third base for so long they simply cannot comprehend any point of view that a) notices or b)does not see this as the natural order of things.

How time-saving it must be for you to be able to tell what a man can comprehend by examining his skin.

 

[Bomb#20]

I'm not talking about not always seeing white males as superior.

Rather, I'm talking about the legalized discrimination where other groups are deliberately selected over white males.

Yes, because it always the case there are simply no cogent rationales for deliberately choosing people other than white males.

Um, you do know he wrote "groups", not "people", don't you?

 

[laughing dog]

Yes, because it always the case there are simply no cogent rationales for deliberately choosing people other than white males.

Um, you do know he wrote "groups", not "people", don't you?

Groups are comprised of people, and that people are selected not groups. Now, did you have some actual point to make?