sabbott on July 17, 2008 at 8:30 AM

Word.

But this was different, and I don’t mean in the “I can read whatever I want” sense. I get the point; I just don’t think it works here.

We agree on the astonishing conduct of the race hustlers, I think. I was going to say “failure”, but they didn’t fail; this is what race hustlers do, and this is why a “chief affirmative action officer” is so wrong in the first place.

We disagree on the conduct of the individuals. In my opinion, Sampson was fine, and not just within his free speech rights. His co-worker is a nitwit, and should have had the brains to understand what the book is about, and applaud Sampson for it – if she felt compelled to have an opinion about his reading material in the first place.

Ubertards have no tolerance even for themselves.

“Off with their heads” was a phrase once spoken by monarchs.

Now, since long ago it was used against them, the ubertards have picked up the refrain to use against everyone.

To hell with PC.

This guy’s livelihood was threatened, and with all of the black balling done with his reputation, finding the next job would not have been a piece of cake even if a lot of jobs were available. Typical ubertard university asshats; Pay them to f*ck you over and say thank you when you get your piece of paper that affirms you took it.

Thanks for the response.

No, I haven’t been on the University scene for some time now, though I do have a couple of degrees. I’ve been thinking about what I wrote, and FWIW I am an evangelical Christian, and where I was coming from was a Pauline expression about having the freedom to do certain things, but realizing that my actions do have the capability to offend others.

I have said more than once, and will repeat here, that the University actions taken here were clearly wrong. I read all the comments about freedom of speech, not allowing others to determine what I can or can’t read, etc. I don’t think we need to allow PC to hamstring us, or expand the list of things you “can’t do.” On the other hand, some of the comments here read like chest-thumping to me: “Nobody’s gonna tell me what I can read, by God!”

My point was simple- some images provoke stronger reactions than others. Context matters. I have the right to read a book about the Crusades in front of a convention center hosting a CAIR convention if I want to. If I do that and am surprised when some of the attendees choose to confront me, I’m not the sharpest tool in the shed.

That’s all I was trying to say.

Jaibones on July 16, 2008 at 11:58 PM

Thank you. Just got back from a much-needed internet-siesta, though. It’s on the to-do list. : )

Anna on July 16, 2008 at 7:39 PM

Your blog is unusually literate and readable. I hope you continue to write.

My point is… after your, um, aggressive reaction, I think I’ll type real slow to make sure you get it… in my opinion, most semi-cognizant individuals would realize that reading a book with a Klan picture on the cover would have the potential to provoke a different reaction from a book with pictures of say, cute little puppies on the cover. Even if the content is anti-Klan.

cs89 on July 16, 2008 at 12:58 AM

Sorry for the assault. As I said to Tony, I have a special and very fresh hell for leftist college administrators that I keep right under my tongue.

Back to your point – I vigorously disagree with your contention, and here’s why: is not the single most overused cliche in all of life “Do not judge a book by its cover”? And yet here we are, with an example of why this is a cliche in the first place that is so Soap Opera Obvious, that I would have sworn you made it up if I hadn’t read about it first.

So, again, to your question – no, I absolutely reject any suggestion that I might choose my reading material on my work break based solely on the social, political, racial, or religious sensitivities to book cover pictures of those around me, so long as the book is not otherwise obscene. Clearly this book was scholarly and wholly appropriate, and the first observation of the subject matter by his coworker should have ended the kerfuffle.

That the race hustlers who make money at IUPUI by fomenting racial unrest let this become what it has is just sinful.

So, cs89, tell us about you. Are you a student or a teacher? Do you have business in or around the universities? Can you place yourself in a situation at one of the colleges where hyper-sensitivity to the Islamists is de rigeur? And would you therefore consciously refrain from carrying or reading your Bible on campus – from Theology 141 – for fear of offending the delicate flower of Islam?

I have books on all sorts of controversial subjects – I love to read. I have respect for anyone who reads for pleasure. However, I have no respect at all for those who judge a book by it’s title or cover art. Some of the best books I’ve ever read have had strange titles or absurd artwork on them. The accusor in this case needs to be reprimanded.

I’m just saying that, while any of us can read whatever we want to, it is appropriate to be aware of the potential reaction from others.

If I were to spend my life pondering the “potential reaction from others” to my every action and consider whether I need to adjust my actions in response to those “potential reactions”, I think I would never get out of bed in the mornings.

cs89 on July 16, 2008 at 1:45 PM

There’s a difference between expressing your reaction and calling the Political Correctness Police to come down on you. Unpopular speech is the speech that is most meant to be protected by our Constitution. Provocative imagery is supposed to spark debate. People who were offended should have asked the guy about the book and perhaps everything would have been alright, but instead they run like little wussy Stalinists to the authorities to launch a complaint. How gutless to say the least. This is exactly how political correctness undermines free speech.

I’m not the dumb one in this thread.

The whole point is simple.
No one should have to think about whether what they do will offend some simple minded minority victim or their handlers.

People who concern themselves with the professional victims feelings are excellent examples of dhimis.

The dumb ones never are aware of their..situation.

Much better. Thanks.

Jerk.

Gasp! By your logic, that should be unacceptable. After all, it might bother someone. It matters not a wit that if you’re going to discuss WWII, pictures of Hitler may come up now and then, right?

If you bothered to read my followup comment- or if you were able to understand it- I specifically stated he had the right to read it if he wanted to. In my earlier comment, I clearly stated the University response was wrong- an overreaction, if I remember the term I used there.

I’m just saying that, while any of us can read whatever we want to, it is appropriate to be aware of the potential reaction from others.

Disagree all you want. If you are really not aware that other people’s reactions are often based on first impressions (e.g., a Klan picture on a book), maybe I’m not the dumb one in this thread.

I think I’m done with this discussion. Have a nice day.

C. My point is… after your, um, aggressive reaction, I think I’ll type real slow to make sure you get it… in my opinion, most semi-cognizant individuals would realize that reading a book with a Klan picture on the cover would have the potential to provoke a different reaction from a book with pictures of say, cute little puppies on the cover. Even if the content is anti-Klan.

Sorry if I was unclear in my point. Feel free to disagree with it if you wish.

I would appreciate not being called a f- i- in the future, if you don’t mind.

cs89 on July 16, 2008 at 12:58 AM

Professor Blather, you are right on the mark as usual. cs89, did you read the good Profs comment. I don’t have much to add to what he said but I hope you stuck around long enough to read it.

What really struck me about this whole episode was how cowardly and impersonal the “tattle tale” who started this whole thing was. What ever happened to conversation? Polite confrontation? If a coworker of mine was sitting in the office reading a book with a dead US Marine on the cover, my instinct wouldn’t be to quickly run into the President’s office and tattle on that person all the while completely ignorant about the content of the book. My instinct would be to politely and personally ask them what that book was about. Chances are the book is not a gleeful compilation of military deaths. Chances are the book would be history oriented or, for example, a real life tale about the challenges faced by our men and women in the military and how they and their families deal/cope with the consequence of being on the front lines in defense of freedom. Once I was no longer ignorant to the content of the book then hopefully a conversation about the topic would take place between us. If the image on the cover was still distasteful despite the content of the book I might ask that person if they didn’t mind concealing it somehow so as not to unecessarily startle the woman down the hall who has a son fighting overseas as we speak. Simple solutions right?

The sheer cowardace of the tattle tale at this university is what first got me thinking when I read about this. The simplest of conversations could have avoided this whole ordeal. You know, conversations? Human beings are supposed to be pretty good at them.

Chief affirmative action officer Lillian Charleston: `The moral of all this is–Be what you would seem to be–or if you’d like it put more simply–Never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise.’

`I think I should understand that better,’ Keith Sampson said very politely, `if I had it written down: but I can’t quite follow it as you say it.’

`That’s nothing to what I could say if I chose,’ Chief affirmative action officer Lillian Charleston replied, in a pleased tone.

MB4 on July 15, 2008 at 8:31 PM

LOL

Winner!

clear to all but the most abject imbecile

Careful! We AIs are sensitive and litigious.

Anytime you see someone with a CSP degree, run away as quickly as you can. Or commence mocking.