Crime and punishment for reading

Damn, it must be a slow week for KP.

Someone got offended. Someone took (scary enough, the appropriate) action. And what happens?-- nothing. No action was taken.

Holy Mackel Katman, the system works.

We have a system where someone can report possible offense up the line and (horror of horrors!) they actually listen and make reasonable judgments!!

No wonder KP is so offended. She'd must rather someone make snap judgments (not based on facts) that gets people killed.

Why are her articles carried by the Sentinel again?

We've had in Orlando a contractor for our local utility (OUC) who was put through the royal ringer as if he had set crosses afire in the parking garage simply because he parked his personal vehicle in the garage, daring to have a confederate flag decal on it. Heavens to be, black workers passing by were "offended" and "outraged" ( Terms later explained to them by their advisors, and taken from similar "offended" and "outraged" Muslims over God only knows what it was that day ) It has become the popular thing nowdays for all minoities to become "offended" and "outraged" because liberal media prints the story and they get their moment of fame and pictures in the paper with tears welling up in their eyes and mouthes agape. The fact that the other 99.999 percent of us are "offended' and "outraged" that so much attention is paid to the one or two supposedly "offended" and "outraged" doesn't seem to register with anyone, but then again we only have to look at who owns the local mullet wrapper and who has the trucks full of newpaper rolls and barrels of ink.

Michael Grant wrote:

Damn, it must be a slow week for KP.
Someone got offended. Someone took (scary enough, the appropriate) action. And what happens?-- nothing. No action was taken.
Holy Mackel Katman, the system works.
We have a system where someone can report possible offense up the line and (horror of horrors!) they actually listen and make reasonable judgments!!
No wonder KP is so offended. She'd must rather someone make snap judgments (not based on facts) that gets people killed.
Why are her articles carried by the Sentinel again?

According to you then, if the Slantinel dares to carry a conservative columnist at all we should storm the building and burn it to the ground I guess? Oh I can see the coming Presidential administration is going to "reach across the party lines" and make us all hold hands and dance in the street alright. You are so drunk on the KoolAid, you really think it is your way or the highway. "Believe what I believe or I'll kill you?" That seems to be your motto.

Captain Jack wrote:

<quoted text>
According to you then, if the Slantinel dares to carry a conservative columnist at all we should storm the building and burn it to the ground I guess?

Try again Jack. Have I complained about Cal Thomas? George Will?(I have complained about Goldberg, but then he's a White Feather)

Captain Jack wrote:

<quoted text>
You are so drunk on the KoolAid, you really think it is your way or the highway. "Believe what I believe or I'll kill you?" That seems to be your motto.

You need to lay off the Koolaid, Jack. "Believe what I believe or I'll kill you" is a Conservative motto - not Liberal.(or haven't you read Ann Coulter and Pat Robinson?)

So you think it appropriate that the complainant didn't bother to find out what she was complaining about? Or that a university official also failed to determine what the book in question actually was?
Those aren't appropriate actions to me...
But KP's bigger point is that universities should be the last place where people should have to worry about Orwellian control over literature.
Of course, there are people out there who still fail to see that the only ethical adults in Huckleberry Finn are the women and the black man.

mleake wrote:

So you think it appropriate that the complainant didn't bother to find out what she was complaining about?

Where did you read that the university didn't bother to find out what she was complaining about?

The first step is ALWAYS to acknowledge the complaint. Doesn't mean the university agrees with it. Doesn't mean it's right. Doesn't mean it's logical.

The fact remains that an employee had a complaint.

The university then has an obligation to record the complaint and to investigate it (which they did).

mleake wrote:

Or that a university official also failed to determine what the book in question actually was?

Sorry, you didn't read the article. They did determine that - it's why no action was taken.

mleake wrote:

Those aren't appropriate actions to me...
But KP's bigger point is that universities should be the last place where people should have to worry about Orwellian control over literature.

Orwellian control is an entirely different thing. No one banned the book. It wasn't removed from the library.

mleake wrote:

Of course, there are people out there who still fail to see that the only ethical adults in Huckleberry Finn are the women and the black man.

Yep...and those people DO remove books.