DevoHusker
New member
[No message]
The Democrat Utopia
- Thread starter GBR0988
- Start date
knapplc
Active member
Lorewarn
New member
Should read, "Jon Gruden has resigned from coaching the Raiders after multiple emails over multiple years in which he routinely used misogynistic, homophobic, and racist language, were reported on."
I'm not even one who has much of a problem with a decent amount of that language in jest in private, but Matt Couch is bending over backwards trying to frame this as crazier than it is.
Last edited by a moderator:
Of course the point of me bringing this up in the first place, was that I never expected for her to have these opinions because she is liberal. These seem more like the opinions of someone who is conservative.
Weird that Danny doesn’t like someone so that makes him not credible on a topic? Not really. Interesting way of defining what credible is :dunno
DevoHusker
New member
DevoHusker
New member
What's weird is only certain folks call out sources on the regular...when they can't contradict the actual topic.
Ulty
New member
Okay, but why is this a problem for you. What is the harm to you? Because if someone prefers to use this as part of their personal identity, we can cause harm by refusing to acknowledge it.
By the way, there are plenty of alternative pronouns that have been created which are gender neutral, but lesser known. This would include (as opposed to she/her/hers): zie/zem/zis; or ve/ver/vis; or xe/xem/xyr. Are you saying you would be more comfortable using those pronouns? Because those or even more unusual!
I get it, and I would also prefer if someone had a problem with me that they come to me directly. However, not everyone is going to feel empowered to do that, especially if there is a perceived disparity of power. If someone feels unsafe or uncomfortable (even if they are being hypersensitive, which honestly is often the case), it is not a good idea to have someone who feels marginalized to confront the person who makes them feel that way.
The sort of conversations you are talking about with the union boss and the Dean, are conversations I have all the time at my job. People come to my office with complaints that they are feeling uncomfortable or feeling harassed. However, if someone says "you guys," that does not rise to harassment. However, I offer to engage in a conversation with the person to make them aware that they did something that made someone else uncomfortable. It's a matter of awareness and trying to prevent further issues. And if the other party was unintentional with their offense (which is usually the case), and they want to respect their coworkers and not cause further harm, they will make an adjustment in their interactions. These conversations are not disciplinary, even though sometimes people are taken aback that we are having the discussion in the first place.
We can't tell someone what they can or can't be offended by. It doesn't mean that it rises to harassment, or that it is even reasonable. But if a comment is tied to someone's identity and makes them feel unsafe, then the person making the comment has a decision to make: we can choose to respect others and acknowledge their feelings, or we can push back because it is too inconvenient to learn something new. Again, it causes no harm to me to use more inclusive language. But if I refuse to do so, it can harm someone else, even if I may not completely understand it.
Regarding the policy question, I still ask, for anyone reading this, to identify any specific policy that we can discuss:
DevoHusker
New member
I saw this somewhere over the weekend, and thought it was pretty accurate:
Liberals think that Conservatives are Bad People who have Ideas.
Conservatives think that Liberals are People who have Bad Ideas.
I see it in practice quite often.
@Ulty I have a question for you given your job expertise. An acquaintance of my wife and mine has a male college student at a public university who had a female write up an unwanted sexual contact complaint against the boy. Boy was suspended from campus while It was investigated by the university and subsequently found to have no merit. However, my dad friend says that the investigation still goes into that boys file??? And that the boy has no recourse to file a university complaint against the female for false charges and what he emotionally went through during the time. That all seems insane to me. Is that standard procedure, or is this particular university’s people in charge of this just being a bunch of a$$h@!es to the boy?
knapplc
Active member
Googled that. The source is the most-watched conservative infotainment channel - but also the one no one here ever claims to watch.
I explained in plain English why Greenwald was being a bad-faith actor in that tweet.
Ulty
New member
I'll try to answer as best as I can, I apologize for the wordiness. I am not a lawyer and none of this is not legal advice. Different universities will have different policies, and different legal jurisdictions (for example Nebraska is in the 8th appellate circuit, and I live in the 6th circuit) may have different legal guidelines to follow unless something has been superseded by SCOTUS.
In any event, I would not have expected Boy to be suspended during the investigation unless there was some reasonable belief that his continued presence on campus posed a serious risk to himself, the Complainant, or the community. Generally speaking, we don't take punitive action against without finding them responsible for a policy violation first, which requires the investigation and then the hearing. There are often other accommodations that can be made during the investigation (such as rearranging schedules, temporarily and voluntarily moving someone if they are in a residence hall, and/or mutual no contact orders). For the sake of due process, the Complainant and the Respondent need to be treated fairly throughout the process, and hopefully not have either of their academic opportunities disrupted. So for him to be suspended during the investigation, there must have been some sort of valid concern that he was still a threat, and that decision was hopefully very heavily scrutinized.
Hell, I even once investigated a discrimination complaint against a Title IX investigator in our student conduct office across campus. The complainant accused the investigator of being an a$$hole, and racist to boot (which is why it came to me), so I carefully examined the investigative process that the other office used. There is always another step, and everyone who gets into this line of work has a strong sense of justice. But there has to be plenty of evidence in order to get anywhere.
First of all, the Title IX regulations were entirely rewritten by DeVos's Dept of Ed last year, and all universities had to be compliant in pretty short order. I have a lot of problems with the new regs, but one of the impacts is that Title IX processes are now in favor of the Respondent (the accused party), as the investigative and hearing process is more complicated, and more like a courtroom setting, and will have the effect of deterring Complainants from coming forward. So depending on when this particular complaint occurred (before August 2020 or after), the process may be different.
In any event, I would not have expected Boy to be suspended during the investigation unless there was some reasonable belief that his continued presence on campus posed a serious risk to himself, the Complainant, or the community. Generally speaking, we don't take punitive action against without finding them responsible for a policy violation first, which requires the investigation and then the hearing. There are often other accommodations that can be made during the investigation (such as rearranging schedules, temporarily and voluntarily moving someone if they are in a residence hall, and/or mutual no contact orders). For the sake of due process, the Complainant and the Respondent need to be treated fairly throughout the process, and hopefully not have either of their academic opportunities disrupted. So for him to be suspended during the investigation, there must have been some sort of valid concern that he was still a threat, and that decision was hopefully very heavily scrutinized.
So, if he was found to not be responsible, I hope that he was immediately reinstated. The impact of his suspension very well could have harmed his academic pursuits. I would not expect the full investigation to go into his file, though. At my university, I know that in employee-related cases, the only thing that ever shows up in an employee's personnel file is a disciplinary letter only if the investigation results in a finding and it goes to hearing. My investigative reports are sent to the parties who need to know, but the report itself is typically not part of the file. I don't dig into student conduct files as often, but I believe that the only thing that ends up in the files where I work is the disposition (the final results) of the case, and not the investigative report itself. That report and the evidence is stored elsewhere. Boy should have the right to view his file, so maybe he should ask, to see what is in there.
My school's policies do have provisions against knowingly providing false information at any part of the process. It is a violation of policy and can similarly be investigated and result in discipline. However, things like that are very hard to prove. If a complaint is made in good faith but the evidence is not sufficient to support it, that is not necessarily a false report. Proving that the report was knowingly false is very, very hard, and this complaint might even be construed to be retaliatory. Of course, retaliation is also a violation of policy. So I would guess that he could file a complaint himself, he would be hard pressed to have sufficient evidence to support it.
That is always a possibility of course. In my investigations, I work really hard to treat all parties with respect, dignity, and empathy. You get more flies with honey than with vinegar, they say. But that doesn't mean that the process won't be intimidating or just flat out suck for all of the people involved. But there are multiple levels in the process. A student complaint starts with resources and support services offered by a Deputy Title IX Coordinator, then it goes to an investigator if the allegations are serious enough, then if a hearing is appropriate the case goes to a hearing panel who makes the actual decisions in the case, and there are appeal processes for both the investigation and the hearing if there is an error along the way. If it still doesn't go well, the parties always have the right to file a lawsuit. So everyone involved has a strong interest in getting it right.
Hell, I even once investigated a discrimination complaint against a Title IX investigator in our student conduct office across campus. The complainant accused the investigator of being an a$$hole, and racist to boot (which is why it came to me), so I carefully examined the investigative process that the other office used. There is always another step, and everyone who gets into this line of work has a strong sense of justice. But there has to be plenty of evidence in order to get anywhere.
DevoHusker
New member
I have honestly told you that I don't watch/never watch Fox News except in passing or on public venue TVs. What was it you told me the other day? "Believe what you want". You don't like Glenn Greenwald, and call him an a$$hat and bad faith actor because he is conservative.
Kind of prove the adage true...
knapplc
Active member
Of course you think the adage is true. It paints conservatives as the victims - it's like their favorite pastime.
DevoHusker
New member
Liberals invented that schtick...
And, btw, Greenwald used to be pretty Liberal. That was before he was on my read list. He adjusted his views over time based on the evidence that was presented to him, or that he found on his own. Isn't that what numerous folks on here advocate?