(08-19-2021 03:38 PM)DirtyDukes Wrote:  Better go ahead and lock this thread Zac

Does lock a thread equal censor a thread?

The PC sh#t is out of control at all institutions that are supported by money earned by others a.k.a. schools.

A friend of mine sends kids to V.E.S. in Lynchburg. The man is sending many tens of thousands of his dollars (are they really his dollars?) where his kids are told he is a racist because of the color of his skin.

Makes me want to get out my wallet and send some cash to JMU and the diversity lawyer being paid $600k a year with housing provided.

Back to the actual topic...

The Breeze just can't stop acting stupid. Every time I think they've gotten past their antagonistic relationship with the University that employs them and that they attend...they do something like this. They think they're in line for a Pulitzer, when in reality they're getting us in the news cycle with poor publicity for 30 seconds, at which point things will recede again, they'll lose the lawsuit, they'll be censured (likely nothing worse because the University won't do what they have the right to), and it will hurt the future job prospects of everyone involved.

WGAF?

(08-19-2021 03:25 PM)Dukeman2 Wrote:  "The JMU training materials listed the various races and nationalities they considered "privileged" or "agents" Among the privileged, according to the presentation, are people who identify as male, cisgender, heterosexual, heteroromantic, Christian, White, Western European, American, upper to middle class, thin/athletic build, able-bodied, or ages 30s to early 50s.

male, heterosexual, Christian, white, Western European, American, upper to middle class, able-bodied, ages 30-50 sounds like the demographic of the typical JMU alumni/parent/donor.

(08-20-2021 07:56 AM)Bill Wrote:  

(08-19-2021 03:25 PM)Dukeman2 Wrote:  "The JMU training materials listed the various races and nationalities they considered "privileged" or "agents" Among the privileged, according to the presentation, are people who identify as male, cisgender, heterosexual, heteroromantic, Christian, White, Western European, American, upper to middle class, thin/athletic build, able-bodied, or ages 30s to early 50s.

male, heterosexual, Christian, white, Western European, American, upper to middle class, able-bodied, ages 30-50 sounds like the demographic of the typical JMU alumni/parent/donor.

Recent alumni only. You left out the fit and trim part.

(08-19-2021 06:22 PM)Polish Hammer Wrote:  What will really be confusing for these kids, many that don’t even know how to do their own laundry or prepare their own food, will be trying to determine which group they belong to. Are they privileged/agents or oppressed/targets when they may check multiple boxes on each side?

Quote:The JMU training materials listed the various races and nationalities they considered "privileged" or "agents" and those they characterized as "oppressed" or "targets." Among the privileged, according to the presentation, are people who identify as male, cisgender, heterosexual, heteroromantic, Christian, White, Western European, American, upper to middle class, thin/athletic build, able-bodied, or ages 30s to early 50s.

Among the oppressed groups, according to the presentation, are people who identify as Black, Asian, Latinx, non-Western European, LGBTQ+, homoromantic, Muslim, Jewish, working class, overweight, or disabled, among others.

Can you imagine a human being trying to square being both white and homosexual? But....THAT'S TWO DIFFERENT THINGS!!

Polish, would you say that you're a white male, but also working class? If so, two questions for you.
1) Would you say you're an oppressed agent or a privileged target?
2) How do you even function?

(08-20-2021 08:11 AM)AllForDukes Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 07:56 AM)Bill Wrote:  

(08-19-2021 03:25 PM)Dukeman2 Wrote:  "The JMU training materials listed the various races and nationalities they considered "privileged" or "agents" Among the privileged, according to the presentation, are people who identify as male, cisgender, heterosexual, heteroromantic, Christian, White, Western European, American, upper to middle class, thin/athletic build, able-bodied, or ages 30s to early 50s.

male, heterosexual, Christian, white, Western European, American, upper to middle class, able-bodied, ages 30-50 sounds like the demographic of the typical JMU alumni/parent/donor.

Recent alumni only. You left out the fit and trim part.

So you can start out an oppressed out of shape person and through hard work in the gym turn yourself into a person of privilege? OK…

(08-20-2021 08:15 AM)bjk3047 Wrote:  

(08-19-2021 06:22 PM)Polish Hammer Wrote:  What will really be confusing for these kids, many that don’t even know how to do their own laundry or prepare their own food, will be trying to determine which group they belong to. Are they privileged/agents or oppressed/targets when they may check multiple boxes on each side?

Quote:The JMU training materials listed the various races and nationalities they considered "privileged" or "agents" and those they characterized as "oppressed" or "targets." Among the privileged, according to the presentation, are people who identify as male, cisgender, heterosexual, heteroromantic, Christian, White, Western European, American, upper to middle class, thin/athletic build, able-bodied, or ages 30s to early 50s.

Among the oppressed groups, according to the presentation, are people who identify as Black, Asian, Latinx, non-Western European, LGBTQ+, homoromantic, Muslim, Jewish, working class, overweight, or disabled, among others.

Can you imagine a human being trying to square being both white and homosexual? But....THAT'S TWO DIFFERENT THINGS!!

Polish, would you say that you're a white male, but also working class? If so, two questions for you.
1) Would you say you're an oppressed agent or a privileged target?
2) How do you even function?

The once middle class, athletic white Jewish heterosexual person that recently had an accident and is now out of work, financially limited, disabled and out of shape is truly at odds within themself. Imagine the person with multiple personalities battling it out. The combinations are seemingly endless.

(08-20-2021 08:17 AM)Polish Hammer Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 08:11 AM)AllForDukes Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 07:56 AM)Bill Wrote:  

(08-19-2021 03:25 PM)Dukeman2 Wrote:  "The JMU training materials listed the various races and nationalities they considered "privileged" or "agents" Among the privileged, according to the presentation, are people who identify as male, cisgender, heterosexual, heteroromantic, Christian, White, Western European, American, upper to middle class, thin/athletic build, able-bodied, or ages 30s to early 50s.

male, heterosexual, Christian, white, Western European, American, upper to middle class, able-bodied, ages 30-50 sounds like the demographic of the typical JMU alumni/parent/donor.

Recent alumni only. You left out the fit and trim part.

So you can start out an oppressed out of shape person and through hard work in the gym turn yourself into a person of privilege? OK…

Sure "oppressed" is a little dramatized there, but the other title of "target" certainty works, and you selectively choose which one you wanted to use here. I'm not sure why you felt the need to post other than to make it clear that you have fully dug your heels in on the wider topic. I mean you clearly know how to use the internet so you are clearly aware of instances of fat shaming and that there are certainty times out of shape are treated different than able-bodied/fit and trim. All in all, just a very weird hill to die on.

(08-19-2021 03:38 PM)DirtyDukes Wrote:  Better go ahead and lock this thread Zac

Yes, plz kill it with fire.

(08-20-2021 08:43 AM)DoubleDogDare Wrote:  Sure "oppressed" is a little dramatized there, but the other title of "target" certainty works, and you selectively choose which one you wanted to use here. I'm not sure why you felt the need to post other than to make it clear that you have fully dug your heels in on the wider topic. I mean you clearly know how to use the internet so you are clearly aware of instances of fat shaming and that there are certainty times out of shape are treated different than able-bodied/fit and trim. All in all, just a very weird hill to die on.

Quote:Among the privileged, according to the presentation, are people who identify as male, cisgender, heterosexual, heteroromantic, Christian, White, Western European, American, upper to middle class, thin/athletic build, able-bodied, or ages 30s to early 50s.

Among the oppressed groups, according to the presentation, are people who identify as Black, Asian, Latinx, non-Western European, LGBTQ+, homoromantic, Muslim, Jewish, working class, overweight, or disabled, among others.

Clearly I’m just following their wording.

(08-20-2021 08:43 AM)DoubleDogDare Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 08:17 AM)Polish Hammer Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 08:11 AM)AllForDukes Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 07:56 AM)Bill Wrote:  

(08-19-2021 03:25 PM)Dukeman2 Wrote:  "The JMU training materials listed the various races and nationalities they considered "privileged" or "agents" Among the privileged, according to the presentation, are people who identify as male, cisgender, heterosexual, heteroromantic, Christian, White, Western European, American, upper to middle class, thin/athletic build, able-bodied, or ages 30s to early 50s.

male, heterosexual, Christian, white, Western European, American, upper to middle class, able-bodied, ages 30-50 sounds like the demographic of the typical JMU alumni/parent/donor.

Recent alumni only. You left out the fit and trim part.

So you can start out an oppressed out of shape person and through hard work in the gym turn yourself into a person of privilege? OK…

Sure "oppressed" is a little dramatized there, but the other title of "target" certainty works, and you selectively choose which one you wanted to use here. I'm not sure why you felt the need to post other than to make it clear that you have fully dug your heels in on the wider topic. I mean you clearly know how to use the internet so you are clearly aware of instances of fat shaming and that there are certainty times out of shape are treated different than able-bodied/fit and trim. All in all, just a very weird hill to die on.

This one is tricky... White, make, educated, successful, heterosexual, no crime record, less than 60 years old, debt free due to good decision making...

...and bald shamed. Who is protecting from oppression the bald people?

(08-20-2021 08:58 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  This one is tricky... White, make, educated, successful, heterosexual, no crime record, less than 60 years old, debt free due to good decision making...

...and bald shamed. Who is protecting from oppression the bald people?

I know you’re trying to make light of this but that brings up a great point. If people want to continue to play victim you could expound on all of the previously listed categories to eventually find yourself in a category that has been shamed and/or made hurdles to cross.

(08-20-2021 08:58 AM)Polish Hammer Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 08:43 AM)DoubleDogDare Wrote:  Sure "oppressed" is a little dramatized there, but the other title of "target" certainty works, and you selectively choose which one you wanted to use here. I'm not sure why you felt the need to post other than to make it clear that you have fully dug your heels in on the wider topic. I mean you clearly know how to use the internet so you are clearly aware of instances of fat shaming and that there are certainty times out of shape are treated different than able-bodied/fit and trim. All in all, just a very weird hill to die on.

Quote:Among the privileged, according to the presentation, are people who identify as male, cisgender, heterosexual, heteroromantic, Christian, White, Western European, American, upper to middle class, thin/athletic build, able-bodied, or ages 30s to early 50s.

Among the oppressed groups, according to the presentation, are people who identify as Black, Asian, Latinx, non-Western European, LGBTQ+, homoromantic, Muslim, Jewish, working class, overweight, or disabled, among others.

Clearly I’m just following their wording.

Who is "their"?

(08-20-2021 09:05 AM)Polish Hammer Wrote:  If people want to continue to play victim you could expound on all of the previously listed categories to eventually find yourself in a category that has been shamed and/or made hurdles to cross.

Pointing out the obvious, but the slippery slope argument is a pretty rich stance for someone very clearly in the majority who experiences exactly zero oppression.

(08-20-2021 09:37 AM)bjk3047 Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 09:05 AM)Polish Hammer Wrote:  If people want to continue to play victim you could expound on all of the previously listed categories to eventually find yourself in a category that has been shamed and/or made hurdles to cross.

Pointing out the obvious, but the slippery slope argument is a pretty rich stance for someone very clearly in the majority who experiences exactly zero oppression.

Pointing out the even more obvious, but it’s an extremely slippery slope to make assumptions about people you know nothing about. Ironic that all of this is supposed to be not judging people by certain factors and then you get somebody making assumptions about somebody’s race, color, creed, religion, employment, body type, age, sexual orientation etc.

(08-20-2021 09:25 AM)DoubleDogDare Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 08:58 AM)Polish Hammer Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 08:43 AM)DoubleDogDare Wrote:  Sure "oppressed" is a little dramatized there, but the other title of "target" certainty works, and you selectively choose which one you wanted to use here. I'm not sure why you felt the need to post other than to make it clear that you have fully dug your heels in on the wider topic. I mean you clearly know how to use the internet so you are clearly aware of instances of fat shaming and that there are certainty times out of shape are treated different than able-bodied/fit and trim. All in all, just a very weird hill to die on.

Quote:Among the privileged, according to the presentation, are people who identify as male, cisgender, heterosexual, heteroromantic, Christian, White, Western European, American, upper to middle class, thin/athletic build, able-bodied, or ages 30s to early 50s.

Among the oppressed groups, according to the presentation, are people who identify as Black, Asian, Latinx, non-Western European, LGBTQ+, homoromantic, Muslim, Jewish, working class, overweight, or disabled, among others.

Clearly I’m just following their wording.

Who is "their"?

you clearly know how to use the internet so you are clearly aware of the link in this thread identifying who crafted this. All in all, just a very weird question to ask.

(08-20-2021 09:05 AM)Polish Hammer Wrote:  

(08-20-2021 08:58 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  This one is tricky... White, make, educated, successful, heterosexual, no crime record, less than 60 years old, debt free due to good decision making...

...and bald shamed. Who is protecting from oppression the bald people?

I know you’re trying to make light of this but that brings up a great point. If people want to continue to play victim you could expound on all of the previously listed categories to eventually find yourself in a category that has been shamed and/or made hurdles to cross.

It isn't tricky. Bald is bald. Will people make fun of your shining top? Yep. Is that more or less okay than making fun of someone for being overweight? Nope.

And I should clear up my initial wording: I said "you are clearly aware of instances of fat shaming and that there are certainty times out of shape are treated different." The treated different part was not exclusive to jokes of shaming, but I can easily see how it could be interpreted that way especially with the use of "target" in my post. The treated different was meant to point out the limiting of options of people because of being out of shape and how they may have to unjustly tailor their life because of it. I haven't spent much time on it but I believe the only choice that is removed from a bald's person life is what style of haircut to get. Oh wait, wigs. I forgot. So yeah bald isn't a limiting factor. Being overweight / out of shape is. A a bald fit person doesn't have to point out that they are bald when the waiter tries to sit them in a booth.

The entire point of my post was to point out that to pick such a niche point of the larger discussion to try and discount the entire discussion was odd.

(08-19-2021 03:51 PM)JMU85 Wrote:  I can't keep up with this. I didn't realize that Romantic Orientation was a Social Identity. I also find it laughable that the most spoiled generation is classified as oppressed.

so is currently being able bodied.......what a clown show.

and obviously JMU knew this was not a good move b/c they wanted students to keep the presentation private.

(08-20-2021 09:44 AM)Polish Hammer Wrote:  Pointing out the even more obvious, but it’s an extremely slippery slope to make assumptions about people you know nothing about.

Well on that note, you've definitely convinced me that you contain multitudes, and are not a very obvious person with obvious demographics, personality traits, and convictions, which have been obviously conveyed on this board for years.