October 2010
"No means yes. Yes means anal."
"My name is Jack. I'm a necrophiliac. I fuck dead women."
"Yale University didn't wait for federal civil rights officials to determine whether the presence of the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity was contributing to a hostile sexual environment. The University has banned George W. Bush's old frat from the campus for five years."
"The fraternity chants that helped launch a federal investigation raise an old question: is it ever right for Yale to suppress or punish speech?"
"First Amendment advocates, however, are less than pleased. 'Whether we like what DKE did or not—and I don’t—their chants were protected speech,' says Nathaniel Zelinsky, a rising junior. 'It’s kind of an unsettling conclusion to come to, but we don’t want to make content-based decisions on speech.'"
Links:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUEq75i_z-A
http://www.yalealumnimagazine.com/issues/2011_07/feature_freespeech.html
http://www.yalealumnimagazine.com/issues/2011_07/feature_titleix.html
http://bigthink.com/ideas/38479
http://www.drudge.com/news/144341/yale-suspends-frat-sexism
Interesting. This brings to mind 2 things. My HS class cheer was (I don't know how it came about, we certainly didn't vote on it, it just appeared, de facto): Beer & wine, sex & chicks, we're the class of '76!
ReplyDeleteI thought it was both funny and annoying since, being a "chick" it was clearly sexist. The school tried to get the chant to stop, because it was yelled at Pep rallies, games, etc. but being obnoxious teens, the chant continued. Times were different, technologies were different, etc.
The 2nd thing this brings to mind is a study that was done many years ago at at least one university. The question posed to college-aged men was, "If there was no way you'd ever be caught, would you rape someone?" The percentage that answered "yes" was astounding, I believe it was in the 40% range. I also recall there was debate over the methodology of the study, but still, anything over .001% is astounding, isn't it?
When you think about things that frats have routinely done in the past and have then received a pass, it is interesting that this frat at this place and time was suspended.
It should be noted there is a difference between a frat being suspended and a student. I assume the students are still at Yale, just temporarily homeless. I assume there is a contractual agreement between the schools and frats. There is no "right" to exist for a frat, it is a privilege and privileges can be taken away. I don't see this as necessarily a First Amendment issue but it is an interesting debate.
We've long been in an era of "free speech" that the founding fathers could not have foreseen.
PS: LoL! I just noticed that out of habit I capitalized the Pep in pep rallies! No! Our school did not hold rallies for Pserendipity Daniels! Not even once.
ReplyDeleteI read your first comment and was just about to tease you about that capitalization, but then I saw you beat me to it. ;-)
ReplyDeleteI was a sorority girl. My freshman year we were dragged out of our beds, most of us wearing t-shirts and boxer shorts, to stand on the front lawn of the frat houses and do the Zeta bunny dance. No frat boys or bunnies were harmed in our hazing.
ReplyDeleteI remember that study and the criticism of its methodology. I remember a couple of us gals asking a couple of our guy friends if they would rape someone if they knew they would never be caught. Reply: "Yes." So then we asked, a sobbing, kicking and screaming woman who does not look just like Christie Brinkley? Reply: "God, no." You could make the argument that the second reply was to placate the female questioners, but the guys honestly looked as if they had not fully considered what "rape" might really mean when they answered the first question. Would 40% of the male population like to have second with any woman of their choosing at any time of their choosing? Sure. But I don't think 40% of the male population wants to wrangle a terrified and/or furious woman for a quick fuck and cum. Even the guys who roleplay rape in virtual worlds tend, many of them, not all, to want to roleplay it with the woman eventually enjoying it and complimenting the man. Of course, in college, I noticed a lot of guys who were perfectly willing to take advantage of an extremely inebriated and effectively debilitated woman, which changes the scenario quite a bit. So yeah, my anecdotal stories don't mean a whole helluvalot, except to illustrate, in my mind at least, that the question asked is not a simple one by any means.
ReplyDelete"51-60% of college men report they would rape a woman if they were certain that they would get away with it. One out of twelve college men surveyed had committed acts that met the legal definition of rape; 84% of these men said what they did was DEFINITELY not rape --Tavris, C. & Wade, C. (1984) The Longest War: Sex Differences in Perspective, Second Edition San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers. --Warshaw, R. (1988) I Never Called it Rape: The Ms. Report New York: Harper and Row Publishers. --Women's Action Coalition (no date given) WAC Stats: The Facts About Women New York: WAC."
ReplyDeletehttp://web.mit.edu/stop/www/statistics.htm
If we're not careful, we'll draw Scylla in here. ;-)
ReplyDeleteOkay, someone explain the Freudian slip that lead me to use the word "second" for "sex" in that post. I think maybe I've spent a little too much time in the Zindra section of Second Life. lol
ReplyDeleteInteresting conversation on a site called "Nerd Fighters" of all things. The title of the discussion is "Female responsabilty for the culture of rape." Catchy, hunh?
ReplyDeleteÜbereil said: "That's why you don't ask that. Instead you ask something like "would you coerce a woman into having sex with you if you could get away with it?", at which point you get results like that. Why? Because (as I've said earlier) men don't really know what rape is."
Vertigo_One said: "Then you walk into difficulties regarding the definition of "coerce". Do you mean use very good seduction techniques?"
And so on.
Female responsabilty for the culture of rape
ReplyDeletePosted by Vertigo_One on June 12, 2011 at 4:40pm in Debates, Intellectual Discourse, and Current Events
View Discussions
http://nerdfighters.ning.com/forum/topics/female-responsabilty-for-the?commentId=1833893%3AComment%3A4271504
I believe the standard Lee to L ratio of posts is currently at 5:1?
ReplyDelete:)
Well, I still hold my view that even with dubious questions and methodology, getting anything over a .001% "yes" response to the "would you rape if you wouldn't get caught" question is astounding. Yeah, yeah, I know about scientific method and that there is a fundamental flaw in that part of my logic, but I don't care.
It is a totally different situation from the study to ask guys that you know if they would rape! (Or, I hope it is a different situation or the study was REALLY fucked up.) So...to your friends' minds it was OK to force-fuck (rape) someone who looked like Christy Brinkley because she was (IS!) pretty but not an average looking girl? Wanting to have sex with anyone of their choosing whenever they wanted? Um... what kind of retards confuse that with rape?
If there was enough of a problem with the methodology of the original study, you'd think by now people would have done it over and tightened it up.
The Yale frat chant/haze was incredibly stupid. These people got into Yale? I haven't delved into the situation deeply (at all) but don't have a problem with stupidity having consequences, which in this case is getting the frat suspended.
Next time try a word count ratio comparison.
ReplyDelete1. They were young and dumb, at the time anyway, one of them went on to be the head of oncology of a hospital in the midwest. He's also a husband, father, and valued member of his community, and has not, to my knowledge, raped anyone ever, nor, in my opinion, would he ever, regardless of the possibility of getting caught, do so. I believe he had not truly considered the question beyond the initial Beavis & Butthead/Playboy aspect of it when we asked it. And no, I'm under no illusion whatsoever that my one anecdotal experience so long ago trumps the study. I think the critics of the methodology of the study trump the study.
ReplyDelete2. My point was that the question was so massively broad and ambiguous that, in my personal example, the question had very little to do with the answer, and therefore, in my biased opinion, had a lot to do with my perception that the study garnered a disproportionate and unreliable response.
3. The question for them (my friends) brought up images of a beautiful woman completely and readily available to them without any effort or thought. The "Sure Thing" (a movie that was out in the 80s when this conversation would have occurred.) It's like the guys at Nerd Fighters asking, "well, what do you mean by 'coerce'?" There is a long stretch between violent assault and verbally seduce.
I would hazard a guess that there is a big difference in the mind of some, if not many, men between say, opportunistically taking advantage of an intoxicated and semi or unconscious coed, for example, and hunting, capturing and violently force-fucking a strange woman, though both are considered rape. The more defined and splintered the question, the more interesting things get.
I think you'd be surprised at the quality and quantity of people who'd "confuse that with rape."
ReplyDeleteAlso, keep in mind, this wasn't yesterday or even last decade. I was in college in 1989. Even the concept of "date rape" was still in its infancy at the time my friends and I had this conversation.
ReplyDeleteThe study was conducted in the 80s too.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, I know you are familiar with the decade. I've seen and noted some of your biographical details.
ReplyDeleteI feel sure there is another study. I'll keep an eye out for it.
ReplyDeleteI do not meant to personally diminish any rape experience with my comments, merely to comment on my personal observation that there is a continuum of the definition and description of rape in our society.
ReplyDeleteI'm surfing. I'm just gonna park these links here for future reference.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/malamuth/pdf/80jrp14.pdf
http://www.johnbriere.com/83JRP17.pdf
http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9502/sommers.html
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=547552&page=2
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/vaw00/theories_of_rape.html
I'd surf and read longer, but I've got homework and chores to do. ;-)
ReplyDelete20 bucks for parking.
ReplyDeleteIt's a good thing the space is already mine. ;-)
ReplyDeleteI agree with you lee....that without VERY precise language...things cant get real blurry...real fast on this subject.
ReplyDeleteAs you no doubt know...Rape is one of the most common female sexual fantasies.
However...it appears...that what MOST women are fantasising about..is a Date with Brad Pitt...that turns in to some very Hot Sweaty sex...where they verbally say no...but indicate by body language and other signaling..that they WANT to fuck him.
A far cry from some back alley violent attack..by some HIV-laden crack addict. ( although weirdly...there is prolly a very tiny percentage of women who fantasise about this.)
So yeah...it is prolly not safe to assume you can use a word like rape...and expect everyone to be on the same page.
There is a world of difference between serious academic study...and some pollster...who has already written up the answer and conclusions he wants...and then figures out which questions will get him his answers.
Ask anybody if they would take an opportunity to enjoy themselves if there were no consequences and they would have to be irrational to reject the offer.
ReplyDeleteWhat is missing is the explicit need for the respondees to demonstrate empathic connections with their targets, and expect them to be sympathetic to the disbenefit that they might experience.
There is a big difference between "Would you enjoy an apple you picked from a branch that overhung a sidewalk" and "would you enjoy sex with someone that appeared to resist your attentions".
Pep (expects to be accused of quasi-rape for laughing at someone saying that they were too short for their weight.)
Ooh, so many comments so little time! I'm getting ready for work...
ReplyDelete1) Oooooh SNAP! on the "word count ratio"! Cruel vixen. Of course then you followed it up by a longish post and 400 other little posts. :p
2) @ Orfeu: The study in question WAS a "serious" academic study. (That doesn't mean it can't be seriously flawed and/or biased.)
3) Back @ Lee: Since I started out saying my HS chant was for class of '76, it was very astute of you to note I was around in the '80s. (Take that!)
4) I actually agree with you, Lee. Mostly. If you look at my statements you'll see I stated I realized there was a debate about the methodology of the study in question. I also stated that my "point" that even with flawed methodology if the study got over 0.001% "yes" answers it was astounding. I pointed out that "point" was fallacious in its reasoning. (Fallacious because if the methodology is SO flawed ANY response is invalid, which I was conveniently ignoring...and still do!)
I don't want to go back and read a 30 yr old study! However, (and this goes to your points), imagine the different answers you get if you just started out the questionnaire with:
a) Would you ever rape someone?
b) If you knew you would never be caught, would you ever rape someone?
I would think that if you worded it like that you'd get virtually 100% "no" response to 'a' and because the next question is right on its heels you'd get a virtually 100% "no" response to 'b'.
Which would give you a different response to simply asking, "If you knew you would never get caught, would you rape someone?" with no lead ins. (Or so I would think.)
However, I really disagree that there is a whole lot of range of definitions of simply the word 'rape'. If you asked your friends way back then, to define 'rape' I'm sure you'd get a fairly consistent answer. Forced, non-consentual sex & a crime. Yes, if you then start getting into the gray areas, and start talking about fantasies, sure then you get more diversity.
Look at the nature of the question (again I don't have the exact wording of the original study), but "if you would never be caught". The word 'caught' has some specific connotations there. It brings out that if one WAS caught it would be a punishment which again points to the onus of the deed. So putting it into context, rape is associated with getting "caught" and that flips it back to the true definition of rape and...getting anything over .001% "yes" is astounding.
I'm VERY aware of the social situation surrounding rape in the 80's and how date rape wasn't much of a concept, etc.
I realize my past history could also be clouding things although I'm trying to just discuss the pertinent points.
Back to it...I basically agree with you, Lee. Also I think in many ways this OP was about freedom of speech (or lack thereof) and the right/privilege of a campus entity to be censured by the University it belongs to.
Eeek! Work!
Pep said, "Ask anybody if they would take an opportunity to enjoy themselves if there were no consequences and they would have to be irrational to reject the offer."
ReplyDeleteWhoa! OK, define "no consequences"! No consequences to themselves or no consequences to anyone? There is a big difference there in concept! If the definition is only no consequences to the doer then I highly reject your notion that to deny that urge is irrational!
PS: I'm trying, with varying success, to drown out my boss's incessant need to repeat his FOX news regurgitation to everyone who comes into the office. He does this ad nauseum. Gah! The least he could do is watch a new segment. He's been on the same kick for 2 weeks.
ReplyDelete:::Ty, that outburst was a necessary vent! If I hear about the SC Boeing plant one more time I'm gonna burst.:::
Wondering if the Latin spell checkers will be out in force today, en masse perhaps? I barf at the thought...
ReplyDelete:)
How one frames the question, would surely dictate the reply.
ReplyDeleteAsk someone…would you like to enjoy yourself without consequences….and our monkey brain might well press the pleasure button all day long.
Ask….to receive your sexual gratification…are you prepared to beat a woman half senseless…have your way with her, while she constantly screams in protest…knowing that you have violated her…betrayed any sense of being an adult Male…wrecked her life for many years to come…and burdened yourself with such a load of guilt…that you will probably feel crushed by it, till the day you die.???
You might expect a different response.
The framing of the question dictates the outcome.
What is hidden in the "Without Consequences"…is the effect such an act would have on yourself…not just your victim.
One thinks of Raskolnikov in Crime and Punishment…replaying his sordid murder of the old woman …over and over again in his mind.
No consequences at all.
ReplyDeletePep (Like Total Recall except without the twist)
PS Or "We Can Remember It For You Wholesale" if you would prefer a reference to the Philip K Dick original source, which had a considerably lower body count - which in the movie I understand beat out the record of any single Rambo.
Pep said "no consequences at all" which is basically an impossibility. Whether you want to cite Newton's Third Law of Motion to karma to modern psychology, every action is an expenditure of energy and every expenditure of energy results in some kind of reaction (consequence).
ReplyDeleteApologies L, I missed off "in this universe" from the end of my "no consequences at all" phrase.
ReplyDeletePep (the consequences would be eliminated against anti-consequences from whichever one of the infinite universes I had made a similar, but inverse, hypothetical proposition.)
@ Pep: You sure about that, the parenthetical bit? I don't recall those theories from my physics studies...
ReplyDeleteIs it too soon for rape jokes? (I was contemplating making some about Pep.)
ReplyDeleteRape jokes? No, but have one about Amy Whitehouse, who arrived in Heaven (don't protest at the unlikelihood - it's a joke, not a bloody documentary) and bumped into Lady Di.
ReplyDelete"How come you're the only one with a black halo on top of your head?" asks Amy.
"That isn't a fucking halo", responds Di, "it's a fucking steering wheel".
A friend (who believes she will be my bunkmate in hell) is enjoying Amy Winehouse jokes at present. (It's "wine" in our world and not just because we are lushes. "I said, 'no, no no.'") I'll pass yours on. She'll be delighted, I'm sure.
ReplyDeleteMy friend has also explained to me that hell is not like a Cornfield subforum in SC MKII. I cannot "pick a spot" early.
ReplyDeleteSo who is the party pooper? My friend or the devil?
ReplyDeleteSo what are you saying here lee...are you trying to pretend you are not the devil.??
ReplyDeleteYour greatest trick was to make the world believe you didnt exist.
But I am enjoying your present womanly incarnation. :)
Hell is not being able to have your choice of sin.
ReplyDeletePep (My idea of hell would be if they had confined me to the "Nobody Cares" thread!)
@Lee: Contrary to popular belief I have a dark-ish sense of humor and can handle generic rape, death, catastrophe, etc. jokes that ARE generic, clever and often sarcastically funny. There is a matter of style, degree and INTENT involved. Although I don't know of one off the top of my head, there's probably a funny Holocaust joke or two out there. However, if I thought the person telling the joke had the point of view that the Holocaust was a good thing it would be a whole different story. If a Holocaust joke was told to the survivor of a death camp, that too, changes things. Just fyi (for some obvious reasons). Once again going to the OP here...freedom of speech vs the right to be hateful, ugly &/or stupid without consequences.
ReplyDelete@ Pep: Hell is other people.
@ Pep...Ooh ..I like that one. ( hell is not having your choice of sin) at this point in my life it is mostly my vices that are joining my entity together...My virtues...like the single cilia of a smoker playing patience ...seem to have piped down somewhat.
ReplyDelete@ L.... agreed that viewpoint affects how we appreciate humour...which is why it pays to have catholic taste in humour.....you get to spend way more time laughing. :-)
Holocaust Joke.
ReplyDeleteHey fuck you...I dont think jokes about the Holocaust are in any way funny.
Because my father died at Auschwitz.
He got drunk and fell out of the Guard-Tower.
I know.... I know........
@ Orfeu: Catholic humor? Oooh fun!
ReplyDelete"I read this in the paper this morning: New York City has a priest shortage. So you see, there is some good news in the world. ... To give you an idea how bad it is, earlier today in Brooklyn an alter boy had to grope himself."
As you've probably heard, the Pope has asked all the Cardinals to return to Rome. You know how they got them all to come back? They told them that there was going to be a performance by the Vienna Boys Choir.
:::pause:::
Oh. You said catholic taste in humour. You might have meant something different. Never mind.
"L'enfer, c'est les autres"?
ReplyDeletePep (doesn't understand why people think Satre invented Existentialism, when he was just a figment of Pep's imagination.)
Pep Typo! :)
ReplyDelete:::happy dance:::
Et oui, mille fois oui, l'enfer c'est les autres.
"I read this in the paper this morning: New York City has a priest shortage. So you see, there is some good news in the world. ... To give you an idea how bad it is, earlier today in Brooklyn an alter boy had to grope himself."
ReplyDeleteA rape joke? How many of those 10-15 year old boys wanted to be molested by their priest?
So where and how do you draw the line, Storm?
ReplyDeleteAnd for who?
ReplyDeleteI didn't draw the emotional line. I am questioning why the line was just changed. I need to always keep my bearings.
ReplyDeleteI know these one-liners were posted to a different thread, but this one, and my most favorite, may be appropriate now.
ReplyDeleteWhat did the fish say when he swam into the wall?
Damn!
ReplyDelete/me is laughing her ass off (again)
Storm said: "I didn't draw the emotional line. I am questioning why the line was just changed. I need to always keep my bearings."
ReplyDeleteDid it change? Who changed it? L (Seicher Rae) & Orfeu? From where to where? I need to keep my bearings too.
@ Storm & Venus: Nicely played. ;-)
ReplyDeleteWhere the hell is Ima? Oh wait. Ummmm...
“Your current safe boundaries were once unknown frontiers.” - Dunno
ReplyDelete“Witticisms please as long as we keep them within boundaries, but pushed to excess they cause offense.” Duh. “Gentleness is the antidote for cruelty.” Un hunh. “Whoever is detected in a shameful fraud is ever after not believed even if they speak the truth.”
ReplyDeleteI have an idea I know what Pisthetairos would make of Phaedrus.
Venus, you're hired! We go on tour next Tuesday.
ReplyDeleteDisclaimer: Venus is my friend, so she has heard and read my puerile humor over and over and over again. She keeps laughing though - I don't get it.
"I have an idea I know what Pisthetairos would make of Phaedrus"
ReplyDeletePistachio nuts?
That's love. (Of a friendship variety, natch. Stephie and I get no end of mileage out of stuff like "if it bleeds we can kill it" and "too late man, game over!")
ReplyDeleteBtw, thanks for the kudos on gV. I get the feeling they are just about to filet me.
ReplyDeleteLOL @ Pistachio nuts. Made all the funnier to me by the fact that Ishina is currently describing Pep as "teabagging the thread."
ReplyDeletehttp://www.secondcitizen.net/Forum/showpost.php?p=384284&postcount=238
Ah, it's the little things...
ReplyDelete/me grins
ReplyDelete?
ReplyDeleteWhat emotional line was changed?
I've never wavered about humor that I know of. I believe about 1/2 a column up from this post I spoke to Lee regarding humor.
It's pretty "duh" so perhaps I'm misreading things. A generic black humor xyz joke can be funny if it is well done. A specific xyz "joke", not well done, with the intent only to harm, told to the person who has experienced xyz, using specific details of the experience...is not humor.
Let's substitute 9/11 for xyz. I've heard a handful of funny 9/11 jokes. They were generic and clever and there was no way in the world I thought the person telling the joke thought 9/11 was deserved, a good thing, wanted to hurt victims of 9/11 and so forth. Now, take some moron who doesn't like someone who went through 9/11 and was traumatized by it. The moron makes a "joke" talking about falling body parts, PTSD and other specific and personal items included in the target's experience. The teller claims it is a joke—everyone knows it isn't, slapping a smiley emoticon on it doesn't cover it up either. Understand that, Storm?
@ Storm re: kudos - Who me? The "likes"? You're welcome. Filet you? Nah. You've got to necro-snark some threads, "like" the posts of Lee's Forum Horde Trolls, post a manifesto, criticize the founding documents and get lewd in SFW before they drop the butter knife for the filet knife, I think. Unless they're particularly bored...oh wait.
ReplyDeleteOf course I understand: 9/11 is how we met. I have only spoken of 9/11 with two people in SL; you display your true character with your words. Do you want to take your Hugz back; it, too, seemed sincere - unsolicited by me, but sincere?
ReplyDeleteI know a few 9/11 jokes, too.
@Storm:
ReplyDelete1) You were the one who made the statement about some kind of line changing. My post was in response to that. Don't want a response? Don't make the accusation.
2) You've been showing your true character to me & your opinion of me for quite a while, Storm, on other blogs on other things. You've been very nasty & specifically naming me (in SR form). As to my generic comments about 9/11 above, other than saying "Understand that, Storm?" there was nothing or no one specific stated. If you read it differently, that's your problem.
If there is one thing in my life I understand it is violence.
ReplyDeleteYou invoke 9/11 to make me agree with you; 'feel' for you more? Teach me perspective, perhaps? This is a fail. You simply don't get it…as discussing 9/11 carries no emotional weight with me; none that you will ever perceive, anyway. Why do you think I posted *that* under an alt - to get huggies for Storm? It was you that was emotional; I made the mistake of "comforting" you.
You are redrawing the lines again Seicher. I expected it.
I have no idea what you are going on about, Storm.
ReplyDeleteNor do I care.
As far as us meeting, as I recall you are the one who IM'd me, told me things...rather dumped them on my lap without so much as a by your leave. I don't recall needing any comfort from you, ever. We have never been friends. We've had degrees of civility that you've chosen to ignore and you have sniped at me off and on for ages.
I've redrawn no lines. Think what you want. You are nothing to me.
I've been here discussing Lee's OP. Get over it.
Yes, you are discussing Lee's OP, and making rape jokes, too. I made a fish joke.
ReplyDeleteI quoted Leno and Letterman about "catholic" jokes making a play on Orfeu's remark about catholic tastes. I've also described humor, context, and a lot of other things. You made stupid accusations about some kind of line being drawn. As I said, I responded to you. I don't need a line by line reiteration of what I said/you said/anyone else said, since it is all right here. Your opinion of me is quite clear and has been for a long time, sealed with your diatribe and over the top responses because I dared to say the SLF is boring. Whatever. I really don't care about your opinions or thoughts.
ReplyDeleteI came here because Lee's OP is interesting and has nothing to do with SL or its blogorums. Your blathering and continued sniping and petulance is none of the above.
Again, the OP is about rape jokes. And you made sure to make one.
ReplyDeleteI made a fish joke. Would you like to hear a turkey joke? Elephants, perhaps?
TTTH
ReplyDeleteAs I read Lee's OP it is about first ammendment rights, the right (or not) of a university to suspend a frat for the frat doing something incredibly dumb. It is about political correctness versus freedoms and a few other things.
ReplyDeleteI may have to add "the Seicher Rae phenomenon" to my list of planned blog posts. ;-)
ReplyDelete"Don't know why there's no sun up in the sky
ReplyDeleteStormy weather..."
I find it amusing (not ironic) that something named a "Fraternity" has been accused of sexism.
ReplyDeletePep (Even ignoring the French interpretation of the word for the time being.)
@Pep: I prefer to think of it that they are being accused of cluelessness and stupidity! (Oh, wait, come to think of it, that is also part of the definition of "fraternity"...)
ReplyDeleteI would like to think if their chants were pro-Holocaust and if they were sent to say them in front of the campus Jewish Anti-Defamation League's building (like there is one of *those* at the campus of Yale, lol!)that the frat would have gotten suspended in exactly the same way.
Also, I would like to think they are being suspended for poor joke structure! :) The video Lee included of The Young Turks showed the commentators getting it right. The "joke" failed at the "no means yes" part. If they had changed it to "No means no" the "joke" would have been better formulated (still stupid, but better). The necrophiliac part was just 3rd grade and lame. You'd think students at Yale could have afforded to buy a copy of "Joke Writing for Dummies."
@Lee: So what is this "SR phenomenon" of which you speak? I could guess but I'd probably be wrong.
Does THIS cross a line?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/14289518
Pep (doesn't understand why you shouldn't speak ill of the dead; they are such easy targets and can't retaliate.)
Pep gave us http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/14289518
ReplyDelete/me rolls her eyes
Nahhhh, no commercial attempt to cash in at all! They're Microsoft after all! Sheez, how cynical can people be? MS is all warm and cuddly. Shame on those nasty people for making the poor lil guys at MS apologize by claiming MS was crass.
/me sheds a tear of support for MS
Now, on the same page I saw this http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/14308714 and I can't believe the evilness of cosmetic companies enhancing models' photos to make us buy some product! I mean, cmon! I totally believed all those ads and know I look just like Julia and Christy after using those (and a boatload of other) products geared to us insecure, slightly over 23 yr olds. It...it...it has to be true, doesn't it?
/me looks worried then stops 'cause it makes wrinkles
(DOES sarcasm travel in print without the visual cues???)
@L: Only if you can mentally visualise the tone and body language based on prior experience.
ReplyDeletePep (it helps to be epsychic, of course.)
@Pep: Ah, shit. I'm screwed then (and not in the good way).
ReplyDelete