Tiny sombrero party

  • Thread starter Evo
  • Start date
  • #1
Evo
Mentor
23,925
3,264
It turns out that the news sources did not verify before posting and are only partially true, see the snopes post below by Tobias. Thanks Tobias! So, here are the real reports - for the Emory Event, here is Newsweek's report which is more accurate.

EMORY STUDENTS EXPLAIN WHY ‘TRUMP 2016’ CHALK MESSAGES TRIGGERED PROTEST

When the words “Trump 2016” and other chalked messages supporting the Republican presidential front-runner appeared Monday around the Emory University campus in Atlanta, students say they immediately felt threatened. Within hours, they launched a protest.

“We are in pain,” one student said at a rally, according to The Emory Wheel, a student newspaper. “I don’t deserve to feel afraid at my school,” a second student reportedly said.


<snip>

“I legitimately feared for my life,” a freshman who identifies as Latino told The Daily Beast. Another student told the publication, “Some of us were expecting shootings. We feared walking alone.”
http://www.newsweek.com/emory-trump-chalk-protests-440618


Students offered counselling over small sombrero hats at tequila-themed birthday party
A university offered counselling to students “injured and affected” by a group of classmates who wore small sombrero hats to a tequila-themed birthday party.

The row, which erupted at Bowdoin College, a private liberal arts college in the US state of Maine, is being seen as the latest instance of a new mood of censorious political correctness sweeping university campuses on both sides of the Atlantic.
more...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...t-tequila-themed-birthday-party-a6915521.html
 
Last edited:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Psinter
275
787
This is getting ridiculous.
I can always find something more ridiculous in this world. :-p

But yeah, this one... this one deserves a badge on the ridi-scale. :nb) (ridiculous scale)

Wait until I cosplay in their campuses with my Victorian Era clothes and see how many become offended and affected by PTSD because of it. o0) If they would put the poor victims in a mental hospital with meds to treat them we would see for how long they can keep their traumatic charade.
charade - an absurd pretense intended to create a pleasant or respectable appearance.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Evo and JorisL
  • #3
Evo
Mentor
23,925
3,264
If they're being taught not to cope with or learn how to live with things they just don't like and aren't an actual threat, how are they going to handle real life once they graduate? This just seems so wrong to me. What are these uni's and colleges teaching our children?
 
  • Like
Likes 1oldman2, Psinter and JorisL
  • #4
JorisL
492
189
The whole PC-thing has been getting on my nerves for a while.
Everytime I read about such an absurd over-reaction I think of a song (almost 20 years ago, 1999) by the Dutch punk band Heideroosjes.



Lyrics
 
  • #5
Hornbein
1,125
829
936fae84a1f4631a33d6bc5db6494ea6.jpg

Kitten in early stages of UFO abduction.
 
  • Like
Likes 1oldman2, Sophia, einswine and 5 others
  • #6
JorisL
492
189
Does PF offer counseling as well?

Because I can't stop thinking of that kitty now.
 
  • #7
Tobias Funke
131
40
It doesn't seem to be quite as bad as the articles suggest (which should probably be obvious).

http://www.snopes.com/emory-students-trump-graffiti/

Just anti-Trump protests in response and the sombrero thing seems overblown too. Possibly still an overreaction by some students--we don't really know the story--but not a case of administration setting up emergency counseling for scared little babies.
 
  • Like
Likes Evo and micromass
  • #8
dlgoff
Science Advisor
Gold Member
4,466
2,926
Does PF offer counseling as well? ...
I hope! :oldsurprised:
 
  • #9
Evo
Mentor
23,925
3,264
It doesn't seem to be quite as bad as the articles suggest (which should probably be obvious).

http://www.snopes.com/emory-students-trump-graffiti/

Just anti-Trump protests in response and the sombrero thing seems overblown too. Possibly still an overreaction by some students--we don't really know the story--but not a case of administration setting up emergency counseling for scared little babies.
It's still pretty bad
an e-mail sent by student government representatives (i.e. students, not adult faculty or administrators) offering support for events, not counseling:

That being said, by nature of the fact that for a significant portion of our student population, the messages represent particularly bigoted opinions, policies, and rhetoric directed at populations represented at Emory University, we would like to express our concern regarding the values espoused by the messages displayed, and our sympathy for the pain experienced by members of our community...

It is clear to us that these statements are triggering for many of you. As a result, both College Council and the Student Government Association pledge to stand in solidarity with those communities who feel threatened by this incident and to help navigate the student body through it and the environment of distrust and unease it has created.

To that end, Emergency Funds within the College Council monetary policy were created to provide time-sensitive funds during circumstances involving discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, and such funds are available to any student organization looking to sponsor events in response to this incident.
 
  • #10
Evo
Mentor
23,925
3,264
936fae84a1f4631a33d6bc5db6494ea6.jpg

Kitten in early stages of UFO abduction.
That is just TOO CUTE!
 
  • #11
Tobias Funke
131
40
It's still pretty bad

Yeah, that quote does seem like a parody you'd find on Portlandia if it's really only over some "Trump 2016" chalkings. It's what you'd expect to read after finding a black mannequin hanging from a rope or something. There's either more to the story or I bet most of the students who just wanted to know when the anti-Trump rally was laughed and rolled their eyes when they read the email.
 
  • Like
Likes Evo and micromass
  • #12
At my school we had a speaker come who is known to be controversial, and imo a little nuts. But a group of students who attended the meeting had a similar reaction to the articles above and protested his speech to the student government, who kindly read them the first amendment and told them to be on their way. On top of that one student's family who was live tweeting at the event got doxed because they supported his world view. I feel like this isn't just a millennial thing though. This is the same mentality that a lot of angry people have about competing ideas. Most of them up to this point have just lashed out in punches instead of curling up in a ball. For what it's worth most of the students at my school think the kids who got upset were full of it.
 
  • Like
Likes Evo and russ_watters
  • #13
einswine
19
48
It both saddened and distressed me to hear a young Japanese woman who was outraged by a performance of The Mikado by Gilbert and Sullivan which is obviously a satire of British government and culture of the period and which was deeply influenced by the Japonism then near its height. If one walks around with a pile of chips on one's shoulder one is certain to get bent.

I think the present fad of removing statues of Confederate "heros" is also misguided. Rather then be removed they should be augmented by statues that depict the evil they defended and plaques that explain that evil and explicitly condemn their uncritical lionization. Yes some were great generals, that does not make them good human beings and we Southerners need to be reminded of that, it seems.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
Sophia
113
568
This political correctness thing has gotten out of control. Ok, I understand why it was created in the first place, but now we got to the other extreme when you can't express legitimate facts or have simple fun. Everyone gets offended for something.

I think the present fad of removing statues of Confederate "heros" is also misguided. Rather then be removed they should be augmented by statues that depict the evil they defended and plaques that explain that evil and explictyly condemn their uncritical lionization. Yes some were great generals, that does not make them good human beings and we Southerners need to be reminded of that, it seems.

Who are these Confederate heros?
 
  • #15
einswine
19
48
Lets start with R. E. Lee. The school attended by my mother in the early 1900s was named after him.
 
  • #16
Sophia
113
568
Lets start with R. E. Lee. The school attended by my mother in the early 1900s was named after him.

Oh, now I've googled him and see that it's about American Civil war. I don't know much about it, only that it was about slavery,
 
  • #17
micromass
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
22,178
3,316
This is getting ridiculous. There was another incident recently with students crying and terrorized because a guest at their college was reading from a book at a designated location. They did not have to attend or listen to it.

more...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...t-tequila-themed-birthday-party-a6915521.html

And another

more...

http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/03/25/students-reportedly-frightened-pain-after-seeing-trump-2016-signs-campus

You know what's sad? Major news channels like the one you listed distorting and lying in their news in order to gain views/reads. Is it so hard to do some basic facts checking? The snopes site seems to be able to do it. This junk-journalism pisses me off.
 
  • Like
Likes billy_joule, 1oldman2 and zoobyshoe
  • #18
Hornbein
1,125
829
Lets start with R. E. Lee. The school attended by my mother in the early 1900s was named after him.
A friend of mine used to wonder why Robert E. Lee had a Chinese name.
 
  • Like
Likes einswine and Sophia
  • #19
einswine
19
48
Oh, now I've googled him and see that it's about American Civil war. I don't know much about it, only that it was about slavery,

The real horror is that many Southerners say they don't believe that.
 
  • #20
collinsmark
Homework Helper
Gold Member
3,238
2,132
In case anybody didn't get @micromass's reference, here's the Snopes article:

http://www.snopes.com/bowdoin-mini-sombrero-controversy/

According to Snopes anyway, the "news" articles are Mostly False.

WHAT'S TRUE: In February 2016, a controversy arose at Bowdoin College over cultural sensitivity and a tequila party; Bowdoin officials stated that subsequent harassment (not sombreros) were the cause of the controversy.

WHAT'S FALSE: Students were offered counseling over the presence of "mini sombreros."

WHAT'S Undetermined: The specifics of the controversy, due to considerations of confidentiality.
Edit: I see @Tobias Funke already posted a Snopes link back in post #7. I missed that the first time. Although that Snopes link was about the Trump with chalk story, and this one is about the Sombrero and Tequila story.
 
Last edited:
  • #21
Sophia
113
568
The real horror is that many Southerners say they don't believe that.
That's really strange... How can they deny it?
Building statues of people who were for slavery seems very politically incorrect to me. Doesn't matter if they were good generals.
 
  • #22
micromass
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
22,178
3,316
Building statues of people who were for slavery seems very politically incorrect to me

You do know that would include most historical figures right? Slavery was a really common practice in human history with shockingly little opposition.
 
  • #23
Psinter
275
787
Every time I see this thread I laugh when reading the word sombrero in the title. It sounds funny when reading it in the title. :oldlaugh:

Mad Hatter
says: ♪ You could wear a sombrero... ♪
 
  • #24
OmCheeto
Gold Member
2,265
2,741
You do know that would include most historical figures right? Slavery was a really common practice in human history with shockingly little opposition.
I read that about native Americans the other day.
I was kind of stunned.

wiki said:
Traditions of Native American slavery
Many Native American tribes practiced some form of slavery before the European introduction of African slavery into North America; but none exploited slave labor on a large scale.
...

Anyways, before I go off into my usual; "Oh yeah! Well I've had 5 conversations about this over the last year, and let me tell you!" schpiel, I decided to look up what an expert had to say about this:

Political Correctness Gone Mad
Emotional thinking and Folie à Plusieurs ["madness of many"] in the 21st century
Posted Sep 29, 2015

Introduction:

If the reports are to be believed, many Millennial students (Born after 1980) on college campuses have become “infected” with the mental contagion of emotional thinking or pathological thinking judging from a recent article appearing in the September 2015 edition of Atlantic Magazine. The cover story has a headline shouting “Better Watch What You Say: How the New Political Correctness is Ruining Education."
...

Fascinating article. I'd love to quote the whole thing.
 
  • #26
Hornbein
1,125
829
That's really strange... How can they deny it?

Just do it.

Late in life I learned that all this stuff about evidence, logic, and truth has nothing to do with the beliefs of the great majority of people. Even smart people. They just believe what they feel like believing, which is usually what their friends believe.

It makes sense. If you stopped believing it and said so, then you'd lose all of your friends.

My friends from childhood have narrow beliefs. I just conform. They aren't going to change no matter what, so why make trouble? I don't.

Sometimes I wonder whether anyone really believes what they are saying. Maybe they are all saying it because everyone else is saying it and they are afraid they'll get in trouble if they deviate. Conformity is rewarded.

Corollary: Falsehood sells better than truth. Falsehood is more useful as support for self-interested programs. Besides, if it's true, you don't need to pay anyone to promote it.
 
  • #27
Hornbein
1,125
829
You do know that would include most historical figures right? Slavery was a really common practice in human history with shockingly little opposition.

Suppose you didn't enslave others. Then those who did would become more powerful than you, and might enslave you. So you'd enslave others as the lesser of two evils.

Suppose you didn't colonize others. Then those who did would become more powerful than you, and colonize you.

That's how the British Empire got started. Spain and Holland tried to colonize England, and would have done it if not for a big storm. England built a navy to defend itself. Then it colonized countries to, among other things, pay for the navy.
 
  • #28
Vanadium 50
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
29,634
15,139
I think the whole point of the British Empire was to find something better to eat than boiled beef and haggis.
 
  • #29
zoobyshoe
6,551
1,288
That's really strange... How can they deny it?
For decades people in the North were taught that Lincoln initiated war with the South specifically to end slavery. In fact, that's wrong: his purpose was to prevent the Southern states from withdrawing from the United States and forming a new country. But, why did they want to withdraw?

Overall, the Northern population was growing much more quickly than the Southern population, which made it increasingly difficult for the South to continue to influence the national government. By the time the 1860 election occurred, the heavily agricultural southern states as a group had fewer Electoral College votes than the rapidly industrializing northern states. Abraham Lincoln was able to win the 1860 Presidential election without even being on the ballot in ten Southern states. Southerners felt a loss of federal concern for Southern pro-slavery political demands, and their continued domination of the Federal government was threatened. This political calculus provided a very real basis for Southerners' worry about the relative political decline of their region due to the North growing much faster in terms of population and industrial output.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_American_Civil_War

So, while the South tried to withdraw from the union to protect its slave based economy, the North was actually only invading to preserve the Union, and not particularly to end slavery. In that sense a Southener can claim, "The War of Northern Aggression (The Civil War) was not about slavery."
 
  • #30
SteamKing
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
12,809
1,670
That's really strange... How can they deny it?
Building statues of people who were for slavery seems very politically incorrect to me. Doesn't matter if they were good generals.
The history and politics of the U.S. in the first half of the 19th century are more complex than just the issue of slavery.

Many who fought on the supposedly "pro-slavery" side never owned any slaves (which were quite expensive to purchase and maintain), just as some who fought on the "anti-slavery" side did own slaves.

Robert E. Lee's father died when the boy was 11, and his mother had to raise her son and five other children by herself. Lee's father had done time in debtor's prison before his death and could not be considered prosperous enough by any means to be a slaveholder. Lee's wealth was obtained later in life after he married Martha Washington's great granddaughter Mary Anna Custis, and through her, came to own the estate at Arlington (now Arlington National Cemetery) and the slaves which worked the estate after the death of his father in law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_E._Lee

On the other hand, Lee's nemesis from late in the war, U.S. Grant, also married up, and his wife's family was rather wealthy and prominent in pre-war Missouri, sufficiently prosperous to own several slaves. For a time, Grant himself owned a slave with whom he worked a small farm, but Grant freed his slave just before the war broke out when the farm failed and he had to seek other employment to support his family.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulysses_S._Grant

Hindsight is always 20-20 and is a rather superficial means of judging the past by present day standards.
 
  • Like
Likes Jaeusm and Sophia
  • #31
Psinter
275
787
For decades people in the North were taught that Lincoln initiated war with the South specifically to end slavery. In fact, that's wrong: his purpose was to prevent the Southern states from withdrawing from the United States and forming a new country. But, why did they want to withdraw?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_American_Civil_War

So, while the South tried to withdraw from the union to protect its slave based economy, the North was actually only invading to preserve the Union, and not particularly to end slavery. In that sense a Southener can claim, "The War of Northern Aggression (The Civil War) was not about slavery."
Yup. It wasn't about slavery. I'm not American and I got that part of history right. A lot of people confuse it, but that's because of the way it is portrayed and the way history is delivered in teaching institutions like schools. The bunch of slaves been freed was simply a means to an end (protect the Union), not the end itself.
[PLAIN]http://quod.lib.umich.edu/l/lincoln/lincoln5/1:848?rgn=div1;view=fulltext said:
My[/PLAIN] [Broken] paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery.

I was going to post exactly what you posted, zooby, but then I thought to myself: "Nah, I would be getting off topic if I do that."
Here is what the Emory Wheel says happened: http://emorywheel.com/emory-student...h-administrative-response-to-trump-chalkings/

I think the "emergency counseling" detail that Snopes seized on is possibly overblown, but the general description in the press seems to be mostly in line with what the student news paper reported.
Even with that update I still think the response from the students was ridiculous. I also read the responses of the President and while I do not side with the students I do not side with the president either. They are typical responses of someone who is trying to get rid of the ones questioning them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #32
Tobias Funke
131
40
Sure, most in the north didn't particularly care about slaves (that may be an understatement) and so in that sense the war wasn't about slavery. But it's hard to deny that it basically boiled down to slavery (that's why the south started the war). It's not revisionist history; everyone knew it at the time--read the Lincoln-Douglas debates. It's my understanding that the north wanted to contain slavery to have room for white immigrants to expand in an industrial society and they couldn't do that easily if they had to compete with slave labor. That probably isn't the whole story or even necessarily correct, though. I'm sure morality had something to do with it too, since after all there were plenty of abolitionists at the time.

I guess this is a slavery thread now...?
 
Last edited:
  • #33
einswine
19
48
That's really strange... How can they deny it?
Building statues of people who were for slavery seems very politically incorrect to me. Doesn't matter if they were good generals.

To be clear, most of the statues in question were put up in the period following Reconstruction and ending with WWI, though they have continued to be built almost up to the present time. Regarding a very major one: "Finishing touches to the masterpiece were completed in 1972."

Many Southerners believe, against all evidence, that the South was fighting for State's Rights. And Hornbein is correct, to paraphrase P. Simon "People believe what they want to believe and disregard the rest." Honor, that scourge of so many tribal cultures, is fairly strong in the South. To preserve their fragile constructs of self esteem our fore fathers must be seen as great men beyond reproach. I mean, boy howdy, just look how glorious our guys look up on that mountain. Here is the appropriate monument of Lee: a life size statue of Lee standing at ground level, looking at a piece of paper in his hand with a satisfied look on his face. His back is to a group of his slaves, tied and being severely whipped for jumping him and trying to tell him they were legally just as free as him (Which they were at the time, as later ruled by the pre-Civil-War courts.).
 
  • #34
einswine
19
48
For decades people in the North were taught that Lincoln initiated war with the South specifically to end slavery. In fact, that's wrong: his purpose was to prevent the Southern states from withdrawing from the United States and forming a new country. But, why did they want to withdraw?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_American_Civil_War

So, while the South tried to withdraw from the union to protect its slave based economy, the North was actually only invading to preserve the Union, and not particularly to end slavery. In that sense a Southerner can claim, "The War of Northern Aggression (The Civil War) was not about slavery."

Quoting from the link above:

"As a panel of historians emphasized in 2011, '...while slavery and its various and multifaceted discontents were the primary cause of disunion, it was disunion itself that sparked the war.'"

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolitionism_in_the_United_States for information on the history and impact of the abolitionist movements. I admit it's hardly possible to find a war that did not have economic motivations. But I think it is wrong to totally dismiss the role of human compassion and sense of justice in bringing about the end of slavery and the Civil War and so effectively deny the humanistic impulse any efficacy at all.
 
  • #35
zoobyshoe
6,551
1,288
Here is what the Emory Wheel says happened: http://emorywheel.com/emory-student...h-administrative-response-to-trump-chalkings/

I think the "emergency counseling" detail that Snopes seized on is possibly overblown, but the general description in the press seems to be mostly in line with what the student news paper reported.
From Evo's link:
Officials at the Atlanta school, which has an enrollment of more than 14,000, were forced to act after the youngsters claimed their 'safe space' was violated when the messages of 'hate' appeared on sidewalks and buildings.
This sentence is constructed to sound like all 14,000 youngsters were upset.
But, from your link:
Roughly 40 students gathered shortly after 4:30 p.m. in the outdoors space between the Administration Building and Goodrich C. White Hall; many students carried signs featuring slogans such as “Stop Trump” or “Stop Hate” and an antiphonal chant addressed to University administration, led by College sophomore Jonathan Peraza, resounded “You are not listening! Come speak to us, we are in pain!” throughout the Quad.
Any article in the press at large that fails to point out that it was an exceptionally tiny fraction of the student body that felt threatened by the Trump graffiti is certainly distorting the story to create the erroneous impression that political correctness has gone out of control on campuses.
 

Suggested for: Tiny sombrero party

Replies
3
Views
89
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
588
  • Last Post
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
35
Views
16K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
36
Views
22K
Replies
0
Views
363
Top