Posted by keithgreene  6/03/2020 7:33 am | #1 |
|
Posted by Gwmayhem 6/03/2020 9:05 am | #2 |
Well stated. A great example of leadership. Follow-through is critically important. Let's all strive to become part of the solution.
|
Posted by GWRising 6/04/2020 9:49 am | #3 |
(Note: this is not personally directed at GW or Tanya but a general statement that applies to every one of these type of statements)
Words are important. But actions matter much more.
I have no problem with statements put out on this issue. The question remains though what will be the follow through. We've seen similar statements before. If statements were solely the answer, we would have solved this problem years ago.
I don't fault anyone for putting out a statement. However, only time will tell whether any of these statements are followed by actions or are mere virtue signaling. History says the latter. Convince me otherwise through actions.
Last edited by GWRising (6/04/2020 4:56 pm)
|
Posted by The Dude 6/04/2020 10:07 am | #4 |
If anyone believes these are two different people posting, complete opposite sides for the 15th year in a row, I have a bridge to sell ya, near where the Dodgers used to play in NYC
A tradition like no other at GW Hoops.
|
Posted by GWRising 6/04/2020 10:22 am | #5 |
I don't know what is funnier. The Dude thinking that we are the same person (which BGF can confirm that we are not) or the Dude claiming he only recently found the GW board (last 5 years) but claims to know what happened 15 years ago when no one by the name of the Dude was posting on GW Hoops. You really can't make this stuff up any better.
As for the substance, I don't think GWmayhem and I are disagreeing here. He said "follow through is critically important". I said actions matter much more than words, which are important. Not sure there is a lot of daylight between those positions.
|
Posted by Gwmayhem 6/04/2020 10:49 am | #6 |
Dude, you have done a somewhat admirable job on this board of not playing the fool. Please don't start now.
GWRising, I would answer you two ways. The first is a macro view. I think society has to come together and conclude that it's just not OK to be a racist. Just like it once wasn't OK for women to vote so this changed. Just like it once wasn't OK to segregate whites from blacks so this changed. People who choose to speak or act in a racist manner need to be vilified for doing so. Yes, these types of incidents have happened in the past and they eventually fell victim to the news cycle. This will too. However, there is something about these protests simultaneously occurring in so many cities, with so many protesters taking action in the midst of a pandemic, that makes me think that many Americans will truly think about this issue this time. I know I have. What I have come to realize is how pervasive a problem racism is. For an American in 2020 to not be afforded the very same liberties as anyone else due solely to the color of their skin is repulsive. I formerly think that this problem couldn't be so bad but I now realize that it is worse than I could have imagined. I have read too many articles about black people driving in their cars, expecting to be pulled over by the police for no reason than their skin color. This sickens me and I hope it sickens everyone. So my first answer is I hope we as a country collectively begin to think differently about all of this. We need to get from "I can not imagine what it must be like for you" to "I will never know what it's exactly like for you, but I do know that there is so much unfairness and bigotry you must contend with through no fault of your own."
The second answer, or micro view of what transpired with George Floyd, will only be able to be answered once the election is over with. I'll apologize for getting political, and of course this is only my opinion, but I think most of us know that any police reform or systemic changes to how police are legally permitted to deal with alleged criminals will not happen under our current Commander in Chief. He simply will not allow it to happen under his watch. Sadly, this would considerably slow down any progress in race relations which could otherwise be made. Yet another reason why our November election is so critical.
|
Posted by GWRising 6/04/2020 12:40 pm | #7 |
Gwmayhem, I agree with your macro view in the sense of what should happen. However, I think that past has shown us that outrage over these injustices and differences in treatment based solely upon race is a fleeting thing unfortunately. Put me in the it remains to be seen category whether this time is different. I hope and pray that it is but we simply have no evidence for that yet and history suggests strongly otherwise.
On the micro view, let me ask you a question. Why do you think it matters who the President is on this issue? For me, part of the reason we cannot solve this is because we are looking for someone of national authority with no real influence on local policing to say some magic words and presto, everything is better. If that were the case, this would have been solved long ago.
Taking this further, what makes you think that Joe Biden will solve this or even make it better even if his rhetoric would be more favorable and less divisive? I recall he was the author of the 1992 crime bill which many credit with the exacerbation of policing issues in minority communities. He had 8 years as VP to work on this issue and many more in the Senate, in the face of several notable killings. But can you point to anything other than to my earlier point, lofty statements with no actions? Also, ask yourself who controls the police force of almost every major American city. With very few exceptions, the Mayor, the City Council, the Police Commissioner, and the Courts (Judges) are controlled by Democrats and have been so for 50 years. These are the people who control the police in their communities and should act as a check against abuses. Why haven't they done anything about this problem? The simple fact is 99% of the policing problem doesn't reside federally (and does reside locally) no matter what you may think about the current occupant of the White House.
These abuses have occurred for so long and we keep looking to the wrong people to solve them. I was taught if you do what you always do you will get what you always got. Seems like we don't understand that lesson very well when it comes to this problem.
|
Posted by 22ndandF 6/04/2020 12:41 pm | #8 |
I really liked what Tonya wrote. I've learned two great words, Sawubona and Ngikhona. Now it's my responsibility to make sure to incorporate them, and the implicit actions they require, into my daily life.
Last edited by 22ndandF (6/04/2020 12:42 pm)
|
Posted by Gwmayhem 6/04/2020 2:22 pm | #9 |
GWRising, of course the attention paid to these issues will be fleeting. It would be impossible, not to mention impractical, to attempt to sustain this level of focus. That's not an answer. Instead, what is an answer our are takeaways from this heinous chapter in our history. Do we start to think differently about minorities? Do non-minorities begin to display more empathy? Do we become less quick to judge? Will we put ourselves more in their shoes (not that we could ever truly do this)? Will the police continue to interrupt the lives of minorities for little to no reason? Will the threshold to commit violent acts on handcuffed minorities be the same tomorrow as it was last week in Minneapolis? If our country collectively seeks to learn from this experience, then positive change is possible. From the seemingly countless numbers of protesters out there, and based on the few conversations I have had with friends and relatives who are as outraged as I am, I do feel more than just hopeful.
Regarding your other question, I guess I was speculating that a federal law could be created regarding police conduct. For example, the firmly pressed knee to the back of the neck maneuver gets permanently removed from the playbook. Perhaps candidates to join the police force would need to undergo more severe psychological profiling prior to being hired in order to weed out possible would-be white supremacist cops under this law. Well, this law would never, ever, not in a million years be signed by Donald Trump. He would never advocate anything which makes it harder to become a ;police officer, or harder for a current officer to do his or her job. Am certain that Trump saw nothing wrong with how the police handled George Floyd (am not referring to his death but rather the use of violence to begin with). As for Biden, the old joke is that when you talk as much as he has, you're bound to hear a little bit of everything. He has been guilty of putting his foot in his mouth on more than one occasion. While he is not the perfect candidate, he is IMO by far not the lesser of two evils. Biden knows what empathy is and how to properly display it. He also knows that the world has changed a lot since 1992. I could easily foresee him signing into law a bill that reforms police conduct because he saw what happened to George Floyd and knows that this just can't happen again. This is not about the federal government taking over how local government polices its communities. It's about right and wrong and human decency. No state or local government ought to have a problem with that.
|
Posted by GWRising 6/04/2020 4:03 pm | #10 |
Gwmayhem, there are already potent laws on the books to address these issues both in respect of specific police actions and in respect of systematic police department issues. Some examples:
It is a crime for one or more persons acting under color of law willfully to deprive or conspire to deprive another person of any right protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. (18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242). The types of law enforcement misconduct covered by these laws include excessive force, sexual assault, intentional false arrests, theft, or the intentional fabrication of evidence resulting in a loss of liberty to another. Enforcement of these provisions does not require that any racial, religious, or other discriminatory motive existed.
It is unlawful for State or local law enforcement officers to engage in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives persons of rights protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. (34 U.S.C. § 12601). Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the "OJP Program Statute"Together, these laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, and religion by State and local law enforcement agencies that receive financial assistance from DOJ. (42 U.S.C. § 2000d, et seq. and 34 U.S.C. § 10228). These laws prohibit both individual instances and patterns or practices of discriminatory misconduct, i.e., treating a person differently because of race, color, national origin, sex, or religion. The misconduct covered by Title VI and the OJP (Office of Justice Programs) Program Statute includes, for example, harassment or use of racial slurs, discriminatory arrests, discriminatory traffic stops, coercive sexual conduct, retaliation for filing a complaint with DOJ or participating in the investigation, discriminatory use of force, or refusal by the agency to respond to complaints alleging discriminatory treatment by its officers.
The problem has been lack of enforcement or application of these laws to different situations. These laws have existed for years and both parties have largely refused to avail themselves of these limits on abusive policing.
That's why I say that even if you don't like Trump, on this issue, the new boss would likely be the same as the old boss even if the rhetoric and empathy were different. And the problem is you have a fine line between passing new laws that prevent abusive policing and tying the hands of legitimate police activity. Abusive policing is often like pornography ... you know it when you see it - but its hard to pass additional laws that specifically capture it in a way that doesn't adversely affect law enforcement.
|
Posted by keithgreene 6/04/2020 9:25 pm | #11 |
And now, getting this string back on topic, here is the statement from the GW SAAC - https://gwsports.com/news/2020/6/4/general-statement-from-gw-saac.aspx
|
Posted by Gwmayhem 6/05/2020 8:53 am | #12 |
Keith, it's fine that you posted TV's statement, but I really don't see why you feel that the posts between myself and GWRising went off topic. GWRising made the point that statements are fine but what's really needed are actions to support such statements. I agree with this, and from there, we have had a discussion concerning the kinds of actions that are needed as well as those which may be more or less likely to come to fruition under a Trump or Biden administration. Just because every post in the thread does not directly comment on TV's statement does not mean we've moved away from the content behind TV's statement.
|
Posted by 22ndandF 6/05/2020 1:06 pm | #13 |
I am somewhat reluctant to bring this up, but I think it's appropriate, given that we can't be sweeping racism under the rug any more, or ever again.
https://www.gwhatchet.com/2018/02/02/sorority-expels-three-members-after-racist-snapchat-post/
Right now, I can't help to think back to that horrible time just a few years ago when those racist women had their sorority memberships terminated. I feel that was hardly a punishment. Was any other action taken? Did those people ever express any real contrition? What were their names? I still find it appalling that an apology only came after the Provost called them out. So despicable. Did the chapter ever respond to GW's NAACP or to Abiola Agora? Did the sorority lose their charter? At least to me, a little slap on the wrist isn't a satisfying response by the University. This was and remains very serious stuff.
Unless I missed something, (and I very sincerely hope I did) Sawubona is the Zulu are empty words here, unless both those responsible for the crime and those harmed have the discussion. It's clear those who were hurt wanted to talk. But if those that committed the crime, seem to have walked, free to enjoy their life. To me, GW failed here and they have a lot of work to do.
|
Posted by GWRising 6/05/2020 2:14 pm | #14 |
22ndandF wrote:
I am somewhat reluctant to bring this up, but I think it's appropriate, given that we can't be sweeping racism under the rug any more, or ever again.
https://www.gwhatchet.com/2018/02/02/sorority-expels-three-members-after-racist-snapchat-post/
Right now, I can't help to think back to that horrible time just a few years ago when those racist women had their sorority memberships terminated. I feel that was hardly a punishment. Was any other action taken? Did those people ever express any real contrition? What were their names? I still find it appalling that an apology only came after the Provost called them out. So despicable. Did the chapter ever respond to GW's NAACP or to Abiola Agora? Did the sorority lose their charter? At least to me, a little slap on the wrist isn't a satisfying response by the University. This was and remains very serious stuff.
Unless I missed something, (and I very sincerely hope I did) Sawubona is the Zulu are empty words here, unless both those responsible for the crime and those harmed have the discussion. It's clear those who were hurt wanted to talk. But if those that committed the crime, seem to have walked, free to enjoy their life. To me, GW failed here and they have a lot of work to do.
I doubt you will ever get a public statement of the exact consequences here due to student privacy. These matters are required to be handled internally by federal law unless privacy is waived by the student or falls within one of the noted exceptions. So we really have no real idea of how this was handled by GW - good or bad.
But I was struck by the question you posed: "Did the sorority lose their charter?" Why would the sorority lose their charter unless it was demonstrated that this was a pattern or practice within that sorority among its members?
You have struck on one of the key issues that surrounds our inability to make progress. The "all or nothing" concept. All police officers are racist and engage in brutality ... All protesters are looters and arsonists ... All Trump supporters believe X, All Democrats believe Y. You must believe all of what i believe in or I will treat you as a pariah if you only believe most of it.
Our discourse has pushed people into camps. There is no middle anymore and no coalitions based on single issues where a majority could agree. Once upon a time, most people could converse and reach accommodation on most points. We've lost that in this era of social media and media posturing. It does not bode well for the future no matter what side of the political spectrum you are on.
|
Posted by 22ndandF 6/05/2020 2:59 pm | #15 |
I am somewhat reluctant to bring this up, but I think it's appropriate, given that we can't be sweeping racism under the rug any more, or ever again.
https://www.gwhatchet.com/2018/02/02/sorority-expels-three-members-after-racist-snapchat-post/
Right now, I can't help to think back to that horrible time just a few years ago when those racist women had their sorority memberships terminated. I feel that was hardly a punishment. Was any other action taken? Did those people ever express any real contrition? What were their names? I still find it appalling that an apology only came after the Provost called them out. So despicable. Did the chapter ever respond to GW's NAACP or to Abiola Agora? Did the sorority lose their charter? At least to me, a little slap on the wrist isn't a satisfying response by the University. This was and remains very serious stuff.
Unless I missed something, (and I very sincerely hope I did) Sawubona is the Zulu are empty words here, unless both those responsible for the crime and those harmed have the discussion. It's clear those who were hurt wanted to talk. But if those that committed the crime, seem to have walked, free to enjoy their life. To me, GW failed here and they have a lot of work to do.
I doubt you will ever get a public statement of the exact consequences here due to student privacy. These matters are required to be handled internally by federal law unless privacy is waived by the student or falls within one of the noted exceptions. So we really have no real idea of how this was handled by GW - good or bad.
But I was struck by the question you posed: "Did the sorority lose their charter?" Why would the sorority lose their charter unless it was demonstrated that this was a pattern or practice within that sorority among its members?
You have struck on one of the key issues that surrounds our inability to make progress. The "all or nothing" concept. All police officers are racist and engage in brutality ... All protesters are looters and arsonists ... All Trump supporters believe X, All Democrats believe Y. You must believe all of what i believe in or I will treat you as a pariah if you only believe most of it.
Our discourse has pushed people into camps. There is no middle anymore and no coalitions based on single issues where a majority could agree. Once upon a time, most people could converse and reach accommodation on most points. We've lost that in this era of social media and media posturing. It does not bode well for the future no matter what side of the political spectrum you are on.
GWRising, first of all, I want to sincerely apologize if I offended you. I was communicating in an unvarnished manner as I thought that was appropriate. Upon reflection, I should have been more sensitive. If you don't mind, let me try it another way....
As I understood the situation, the sorority in question, Alpha Pi, did absolutely nothing until the Provost called them on their racist cover-up. To me, that's like looking the other way when a crime is committed. I feel like if it was an African American sorority, they would have been held to a different standard. That's why I feel Alpha Pi's charter should have been revoked...they hoped nobody would find out, and only did something once they were caught.
If the sorority had done the honorable thing, and stepped forward before being called-out, I certainly wouldn't feel the same way.
Does that make more sense, or do you think I am still off base?
|
Posted by GWRising 6/05/2020 4:07 pm | #16 |
I am somewhat reluctant to bring this up, but I think it's appropriate, given that we can't be sweeping racism under the rug any more, or ever again.
https://www.gwhatchet.com/2018/02/02/sorority-expels-three-members-after-racist-snapchat-post/
Right now, I can't help to think back to that horrible time just a few years ago when those racist women had their sorority memberships terminated. I feel that was hardly a punishment. Was any other action taken? Did those people ever express any real contrition? What were their names? I still find it appalling that an apology only came after the Provost called them out. So despicable. Did the chapter ever respond to GW's NAACP or to Abiola Agora? Did the sorority lose their charter? At least to me, a little slap on the wrist isn't a satisfying response by the University. This was and remains very serious stuff.
Unless I missed something, (and I very sincerely hope I did) Sawubona is the Zulu are empty words here, unless both those responsible for the crime and those harmed have the discussion. It's clear those who were hurt wanted to talk. But if those that committed the crime, seem to have walked, free to enjoy their life. To me, GW failed here and they have a lot of work to do.
I doubt you will ever get a public statement of the exact consequences here due to student privacy. These matters are required to be handled internally by federal law unless privacy is waived by the student or falls within one of the noted exceptions. So we really have no real idea of how this was handled by GW - good or bad.
But I was struck by the question you posed: "Did the sorority lose their charter?" Why would the sorority lose their charter unless it was demonstrated that this was a pattern or practice within that sorority among its members?
You have struck on one of the key issues that surrounds our inability to make progress. The "all or nothing" concept. All police officers are racist and engage in brutality ... All protesters are looters and arsonists ... All Trump supporters believe X, All Democrats believe Y. You must believe all of what i believe in or I will treat you as a pariah if you only believe most of it.
Our discourse has pushed people into camps. There is no middle anymore and no coalitions based on single issues where a majority could agree. Once upon a time, most people could converse and reach accommodation on most points. We've lost that in this era of social media and media posturing. It does not bode well for the future no matter what side of the political spectrum you are on.GWRising, first of all, I want to sincerely apologize if I offended you. I was communicating in an unvarnished manner as I thought that was appropriate. Upon reflection, I should have been more sensitive. If you don't mind, let me try it another way....
As I understood the situation, the sorority in question, Alpha Pi, did absolutely nothing until the Provost called them on their racist cover-up. To me, that's like looking the other way when a crime is committed. I feel like if it was an African American sorority, they would have been held to a different standard. That's why I feel Alpha Pi's charter should have been revoked...they hoped nobody would find out, and only did something once they were caught.
If the sorority had done the honorable thing, and stepped forward before being called-out, I certainly wouldn't feel the same way.
Does that make more sense, or do you think I am still off base?
First of all, you did nothing to offend me. It's all good ... just an exchange of thoughts and ideas. No offense taken at all.
I am not aware of the facts (as you may be) surrounding the entire sorority in question as opposed to the individuals. Obviously, if it was a pattern or practice of racism, condoning racism or covering up racism by the sorority that is a different matter entirely. I may have misconstrued you to be saying that if some members acted in a racist way that all members were guilty of the same. That was my objection. But if the facts were that the sorority condoned this behavior then I would have a different opinion..
|
Posted by Gwmayhem 6/05/2020 4:26 pm | #17 |
GWRising, there's an awful lot that's wrong with your post. First, I know your very fond of the phrase "student privacy" but in this specific instance, there is a picture of two of the girls with a caption belonging to Izzy. While their faces are a bit blurred, it would not be too difficult to determine their identities if in fact you knew these young women. Granted, the school will not provide their names.
Next, maybe times have changed since you were in school, but a sorority or fraternity needn't demonstrate a pattern of abhorrent or wreckless behavior in order to have its charter revoked. It only takes one horrific incident for that to happen. Am not arguing that this is necessarily what should or should not have happened here, but your rationale that no pattern had been established is a flimsy argument.
Lastly, I see I am not getting anywhere with this, but am perplexed as to why you continue to suggest your "all or nothing" theories. Cable news hosts are like this because they are paid to be like this. I like to believe that many of us in this world don't necessarily see things definitively one way or the other. As we discussed the other day, the peaceful protesters are making a statement and are well within their rights. The looters and violent protesters are wrong and their behavior is unacceptable. So, who exactly is suggesting that all protesters are looters and arsonists? I'd venture to say that practically everyone in this country is smart enough to understand that this is not the case.
|
Posted by 22ndandF 6/05/2020 5:25 pm | #18 |
I doubt you will ever get a public statement of the exact consequences here due to student privacy. These matters are required to be handled internally by federal law unless privacy is waived by the student or falls within one of the noted exceptions. So we really have no real idea of how this was handled by GW - good or bad.
But I was struck by the question you posed: "Did the sorority lose their charter?" Why would the sorority lose their charter unless it was demonstrated that this was a pattern or practice within that sorority among its members?
You have struck on one of the key issues that surrounds our inability to make progress. The "all or nothing" concept. All police officers are racist and engage in brutality ... All protesters are looters and arsonists ... All Trump supporters believe X, All Democrats believe Y. You must believe all of what i believe in or I will treat you as a pariah if you only believe most of it.
Our discourse has pushed people into camps. There is no middle anymore and no coalitions based on single issues where a majority could agree. Once upon a time, most people could converse and reach accommodation on most points. We've lost that in this era of social media and media posturing. It does not bode well for the future no matter what side of the political spectrum you are on.GWRising, first of all, I want to sincerely apologize if I offended you. I was communicating in an unvarnished manner as I thought that was appropriate. Upon reflection, I should have been more sensitive. If you don't mind, let me try it another way....
As I understood the situation, the sorority in question, Alpha Pi, did absolutely nothing until the Provost called them on their racist cover-up. To me, that's like looking the other way when a crime is committed. I feel like if it was an African American sorority, they would have been held to a different standard. That's why I feel Alpha Pi's charter should have been revoked...they hoped nobody would find out, and only did something once they were caught.
If the sorority had done the honorable thing, and stepped forward before being called-out, I certainly wouldn't feel the same way.
Does that make more sense, or do you think I am still off base?First of all, you did nothing to offend me. It's all good ... just an exchange of thoughts and ideas. No offense taken at all.
I am not aware of the facts (as you may be) surrounding the entire sorority in question as opposed to the individuals. Obviously, if it was a pattern or practice of racism, condoning racism or covering up racism by the sorority that is a different matter entirely. I may have misconstrued you to be saying that if some members acted in a racist way that all members were guilty of the same. That was my objection. But if the facts were that the sorority condoned this behavior then I would have a different opinion..
Hi GWRising. Thank you and I feel the same about just wanting to have a conversation. One of my main points is that, because the sorority didn't do anything until they were called-out by the Provost, I think they should have their charter revoked. To me, if you are protecting racists, you're just as bad as the racists. Sawubona, Ngikhona. If you agree with Tonya, I think it's not a stretch to agree that harboring racists is unacceptable. That's exactly what Sigma Phi did, at least in my eyes. I'm not talking about an all or nothing proposition, and for the record, I have several policemen in my family. I know better than to generalize about people and professions. I'm glad we can discuss it without getting upset with each other. I am sure you are a good person and I respect you for being willing to discuss this topic!!
|
Posted by GWRising 6/05/2020 5:36 pm | #19 |
GWRising, there's an awful lot that's wrong with your post. First, I know your very fond of the phrase "student privacy" but in this specific instance, there is a picture of two of the girls with a caption belonging to Izzy. While their faces are a bit blurred, it would not be too difficult to determine their identities if in fact you knew these young women. Granted, the school will not provide their names.
Next, maybe times have changed since you were in school, but a sorority or fraternity needn't demonstrate a pattern of abhorrent or wreckless behavior in order to have its charter revoked. It only takes one horrific incident for that to happen. Am not arguing that this is necessarily what should or should not have happened here, but your rationale that no pattern had been established is a flimsy argument.
Lastly, I see I am not getting anywhere with this, but am perplexed as to why you continue to suggest your "all or nothing" theories. Cable news hosts are like this because they are paid to be like this. I like to believe that many of us in this world don't necessarily see things definitively one way or the other. As we discussed the other day, the peaceful protesters are making a statement and are well within their rights. The looters and violent protesters are wrong and their behavior is unacceptable. So, who exactly is suggesting that all protesters are looters and arsonists? I'd venture to say that practically everyone in this country is smart enough to understand that this is not the case.
GWmayhem - the issue wasn't their identities it was whether the school would announce in any detail what the sanctions were for these students. I believe privacy laws prevent this. That's not to stop someone else from outing these folks or learning details from other students regarding the sanctions (clearly if they were expelled others would know). It merely is an acknowledgement as to why the school can't say anything official. That silence cannot be necessarily construed as no action was taken.
Yes, fraternities and sororities can have their charter revoked. Usually it's when a crime has been committed such as a rape or abusive hazing. Not sure the thoughts or actions of a few can be ascribed to all in this case without additional evidence showing the pattern, practice or condoning of racism by the sorority at large. If this was at some sort of official function then perhaps that would/should happen.
You must not watch much news or engage in social media if you think many or most don't promote these all or nothing labels and purity tests. Plenty of folks have conflated all protesting with looting and rioting. It's wrong but it is being done mainly on the right. Plenty of folks have conflated all police to Nazis and racists. It's wrong and done mainly on the left. I am not saying you do this but I think it's naive to suggest that this labeling isn't a dominant feature of current discourse. The reason we are so divided is because it's easier to dismiss a group as a looter/arsonist or as a Nazi/racist, then deal with the nuances of both sides. Think of conundrum posed by the concept of "white privilege". The whole idea of equality is to judge people by the content of their character not the color of their skin. Yet, we have the same people arguing (rightfully so) that the police and others shouldn't judge people by the color of their skin judging people by the color of their skin.
Last edited by GWRising (6/05/2020 5:37 pm)
|
Posted by Joel Joseph 6/08/2020 1:10 pm | #20 |
The Higher Education publication is a must read for those in college administration.
GW Athletics is well known throughout the Country after their piece almost 2 years ago:
www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2018/11/26/gw-athletics-director-left-after-lewd-behavior/reported
Vogel has accomplished nothing so far as athletics director. She has been on the job less than 2 years so I'm willing to give her another couple years but ultimately she will be judged on the success (or lack of) on each of our athletic teams both individually and collectively. We have not been lighting the conference on fire recently.
She wasn't on top of my list, especially seeing who her "mentor" was. GW is also well known throughout the Country by the athletic director's. This article sums up Vogel and her relationship to the guy who set us back 10 years pretty well:
athleticdirectorsu.com/video/vogel-nero-george-washington-risk-management
