PC Principal thread

[Tyrath]

Why does she keep using the word huMAN then?

[dasva]

the student got like a b-

I asked her "how was the rest of the essay though"

"it was fine, but I marked him down to a b- for assuming the interviewers gender"

lol

At that point I'm pretty sure I'd be telling her to do her fucking job and to grade the actual essay

[Niiro]

Professor says to use gender neutral terms when appropriate and uses mankind/humankind verbatim as the ur-example.

Student uses mankind.

Student gets docked a point.

"REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"

[Niiro]

the student got like a b-

I asked her "how was the rest of the essay though"

"it was fine, but I marked him down to a b- for assuming the interviewers gender"

lol

Also this is totally a thing that happened.

Nothing like taking a student at their word as to why they didn't do well on an assignment.

[Kalmado]

someone needs to give that prof the mandible claw

A+

LAVA

[Mertron]

Also this is totally a thing that happened.

Nothing like taking a student at their word as to why they didn't do well on an assignment.

I was talking to my friend who was the professor who graded the paper. should have been obvious from the previous post.

[Niiro]

Yea, I misread the context.

In which case it just sounds like they were describing the work as acceptable.

When we describe something as "fine" we usually mean it's okay, which translated into a letter grade would probably be a B.

[Andalusian girls]

Professor says to use gender neutral terms when appropriate and uses mankind/humankind verbatim as the ur-example.

Student uses mankind.

Student gets docked a point.

"REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"

we're at the point a college student getting docked 1 point out of 50 for ignoring professor guidelines is a cause celebre

i hate the internet age. where's Dreyfuss at

[thetruepandagod]

Let's get back on topic.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/te...ampaign=buffer

Also, apparently people do actually retract hoax publications if meme'd hard enough.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...6.2017.1330439

http://www.skeptic.com/downloads/con...17.1330439.pdf

Most of these are just fantastic honestly.
https://twitter.com/realpeerreview?lang=en

[dasva]

Shame retractions mean so little really. Generally no consequences for publishing patently false information and they never get picked up as stories so for most all they saw was the original article

[Anoat]

Yea, I misread the context.

In which case it just sounds like they were describing the work as acceptable.

When we describe something as "fine" we usually mean it's okay, which translated into a letter grade would probably be a B.

You'll never get a B- if you continue to misread things

[archibaldcrane]

Lol, a 4-chan troll posed as an antifa member and got interviewed on Jesse Watters' dumbass show, where he claimed that antifa stabbed a police horse because it was a racist trump supporter.

http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/1...lling-fox-news

http://www.salon.com/2017/07/17/fox-...tifa-activist/

[Ragnus]

That's fucking hilarious.

[Ragnus]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/articl...ma-performance

Does this one count? Now that Cyrus is done with her Disney Kid Rebellion phase and trying to get a more wholesome image back, she's blaming everything but herself for her choices. She claims that she did it the first few times as a societal "fuck you", but then felt forced into it after a while.

Reddit comments:

"I had a big lunch and felt full."

"Today I felt like an employee while I was at my place of employment."

"It was raining when I went outside and I felt wet."

[Niiro]

Lol, a 4-chan troll posed as an antifa member and got interviewed on Jesse Watters' dumbass show, where he claimed that antifa stabbed a police horse because it was a racist trump supporter.

http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/1...lling-fox-news

http://www.salon.com/2017/07/17/fox-...tifa-activist/

We’ll see if Watters ever bothers to issue a correction after this incident. One person who could certainly use an update is President Trump who according to reports was watching the Fox News program over the weekend.

We saw President Trump & family watching @jessebwatters's Fox show on jumbo TV aboard Air Force One tonight en route home from Bedminster.

Fingers crossed.

[djzombie]

there's too much dumb bullshit to unpack in the last few pages but anything who thinks 'who i'm attracted to is just biology and chemicals lol' has a poobrain. standards of beauty vary widely and change with time. look at European impressionist paintings where soft, full-figured girls with fat arms was the ideal, look even to the 90s where heroin chic and model thin were very en vogue compared to today where thicc and fit rule the roost.

going even further see classical Grecian societies where an outright majority of the male populace was bisexual and hebephilia was a cultural norm, or the ancient Roman society where plowing boys wasn't gay as long as you were doing the penetrating, and both Julius and Octavian were rumored to have engaged in steamy man on man action.

your sexuality is not your own, you have been conditioned your entire life. deal with it nerds.

of course, this doesn't make you racist. having a foot fetish doesn't mean you cheat on your taxes. but it does mean you may have internalized some prejudice if you can't find a single attractive member out of an ethnicity with hundreds of millions of candidates.

I did find a few of the black chicks posted in the past pages attractive. (I was one of the ones that posted earlier saying I don't find most of them attractive.)

PHEW GLAD I'M NOT RACIST, LMAO.

Most of them, I did not. For me, now that I am analyzing this more closely, it is totally the hair and the face, less about skin tone. I do not like curly hair at all, don't find it attractive. The few black chicks posted that had straight hair I thought were attractive, and even a few with moderately curly hair. If the hair stands up above the head, not attractive to me, if it falls below their head to their shoulders, more attractive to me.

[Gredival]

We have gone from rightly defending the minority to wrongly problematizing the majority. It should surprise no one that, at some point, the majority will find all of this, as Josh Barro recently explained, “annoying.”

I say this as someone happily in the minority — and who believes strongly in the right to subvert or adapt traditional gender roles. It’s a free country, after all. But you can’t subvert something that you simultaneously argue doesn’t exist. And this strikes me as the core contradiction of ideological transgenderism. By severing the link between sex and gender completely, it abolishes the core natural framework without which the transgender experience makes no sense at all. It’s also a subtle, if unintentional, attack on homosexuality. Most homosexuals are strongly attached to their own gender and attracted to traditional, natural expressions of it. That’s what makes us gay, for heaven’s sake. And that’s one reason the entire notion of a common “LGBT” identity is so misleading. How can a single identity comprise both the abolition of gender and at the same time its celebration?

Exceptions, in other words, need a rule to exist. Abolish gender’s roots in biology and sex — and you abolish gay people and transgender people as well. Yes, there’s a range of gender expression among those of the same sex. But it’s still tethered among most to the forces of chromosomes and hormones that make us irreducibly male and female. Nature can be interpreted; it can even be played with; but it cannot be abolished. After all, how can you be “queer” if there is no such thing as “normal”?

Transgender people exist and should be treated with absolutely the same human respect, decency, and civil equality as anyone else. But they don’t disprove traditional notions of gender as such — which have existed in all times, places, and cultures in human history and prehistory, and are rooted deeply in evolutionary biology and reproductive strategy. Intersex people exist and, in my view, should not be genitally altered or “fixed” without their adult consent. But they do not somehow negate the overwhelming majority who have no such gender or sexual ambiguity. Gay people exist and should not be coerced into behaving in ways they find alien to their being. But the entire society does not need to be overhauled in order to make gay or trans experience central to it. Inclusion, yes. Revolution, no.

The added problem with this war on nature is the backlash it inevitably incurs. There’s a reason so many working-class men find it hard to vote for Democrats any more. And there’s a reason why a majority of white women last year voted for a man who boasted of sexual assault if the alternative was a triumph for contemporary left-feminism. You can’t assault the core identity of most people’s lives and then expect them to vote for you.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...long-game.html

[Fiye]

The majority of white people voted for Trump. I find that very annoying.

[EternityEnd]

You get the feeling that that author doesn't quite understand the difference between gender and sex, or what homosexuality is at all.

[Yuri-G]

I didn't get that feeling at all, and found the excerpt both thought-provoking and well-written.