|
Post by Optimus on Oct 22, 2017 5:07:53 GMT -5
Apparently, she’s not even an actual teacher, just a freaking grad student teaching assistant, so it’s not like she knows WTF she’s talking about anyway. She’s just mindlessly regurgitating the regressive, postmodernist bullshit she’s been brainwashed with by her humanities professors. The only person who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about is you, Opty, because as usual, you rant first and read never. The only regurgitation here is by you with yet another spewing of your boilerplate "REGRESSIVES! REGRESSIVES!" reactionary bullshit. IF you had bothered to check out Vince's first link you'd see The College Fix, which is subtitled "your daily dose of right-minded news and commentary" is just another rag full of junk guaranteed to push the hot buttons of right-wingers and pseudo-libs who hate liberalism. The College Fix is another internet shitpile whose business is to spread Outrage Manure on the gullible and easily rankled, and business is good. It's become something of a standard move here to be ready at all times to roast college instructors as being clueless even as the ones doing so go about it cluelessly without bothering to get their facts straight before getting their undies in a bunch. *Yawn* Please point out what I said in that quoted section of mine that you posted that was factually incorrect or shows that I'm "the only person who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about." You didn't actually respond to anything I said; all you did was tell me I'm wrong and then started apoplectically hissy-fitting about College Fix. Is that more red-herring or strawman? I can't tell. Good thing I'm out of whiskey right now or I'd have to start up my "Nighttimer Logical Fallacy Drinking Game" again. Oh, the alcohol poisoning that game can cause! Given that this thread involves teaching on college campuses - which is what I do while you're off angrily pissing in the internet winds with race-baiting, misogynist posts - I know more about what I'm talking about in this case than you ever will. So, forgive me if I don't take your riposte too seriously. And, did you just use the word "fuck" toward me? Weren't you only just days ago clutching your pearls, huffing and puffing about how you were soooo faux-offended at that word. But, thanks for yet again being demonstrably hypocritical. I can set my watch now. However, since you brought up the issue of what is or is not a biased source, since you're claiming that the College Fix is biased toward the right wing (which I agree that it is), let's take a look at Dr. Cabrera, the guy you're so liberally (no pun intended) quoting as your go-to, "unbiased" source on the bullshit that is "progressive stacking:" "Critical Theory" is a fucking joke that nobody except postmodernist buffoons in the humanities takes seriously. It's neo-Marixist, bigoted bullshit. So, that alone tells me everything I need to know about this doofus, but let's continue anyway... And there it is. He studies "whiteness" which is the only academically acceptable form of racism these days. I'm suuure there's no anti-white bias in his perspective at all. But, just in case, let's take a look at some of his published work, you know, just for the lulz... 7 out of 13 articles are about "whiteness," particularly "white male college students." Seems like that guy's a bit obsessed. Possibly even angry ("show me on the doll where the white man marginalized you"). Some might even say "racially biased." I'd say it's probably pretty hard to be that obsessed (in a negative way) with "white male college students" and not be a bit of a bigot, but other's mileage may vary. And he's a non-white guy studying it, too. Imagine the reaction if a white guy studied "blackness" or "hispanicness" with such a thirsty, negative bent (or, studied it at all). Congratulations, nighttimer. You found an even more biased source than the College Fix. It's like you've just completely given up on ever making an effective/convincing argument. But, I mean, why start now, amirite? But, you know, since he's mouthfarting in that article about effective teaching techniques, let's see what his students think about him... Gee, what an "unbiased" expert on teaching he turned out to be. Does seem like your kinda guy, though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2017 8:43:43 GMT -5
I agree with the fucking* white males in the thread.
I don't want to be called on to the exclusion of others in the class, and I don't give a fuck who they are.
I feel strongly enough about it that I'd give this professor's classes a miss, were I attending school there, unless I could not avoid them.
And, as a wee woman with an Hispanic name, who thrusts my hand up vigorously a la Hermione Granger and speaks up when I want to participate....I always got called on. Where are these classes where women and minorities have their hands raised but only the white guys get called on? In 1958?
I've seen a couple classes where I was the only chick regularly speaking up, but that was typically on the non-participators. They didn't volunteer. Many keep their eyes on their notes the whole time. Some of my law school professors got around the issue of the non-volunteers by cold-calling on everyone, whether they wanted to speak or not, and keeping track so every member of the class was called on.
Sure, probably some college professor somewhere is ignoring all the women and minorities in the class who are so desperately raising their hands and only calling on the white guys. But if this issue is so endemic, it is amazing I have somehow lucked out and never hit such a class.
*I think I'm going to work the word "fuck" into every post henceforth. You're welcome.
ETA:
One thing I have seen often, mostly done by women, but sometimes by men -- a hand raise that is belated and half-hearted, by a person sitting in the middle or the back of the class. If you've got a big class where a fair number of people are actively doing the Hermione Granger thing, your half-hand raise ten seconds after the other hands shoot up in front of you may not even be seen.
Ever teach a class, or speak in front of a large group? I've done both. You've got this mob of faces and hands in front of you. You tend to notice the eager beavers because they're making themselves noticed. It's harder to catch that person holding up one finger behind them. I promise, put me in a classroom with a group of white guys, and I WILL be called on because I do the Hermione thing when I want to talk.
I'm all for a professor trying hard to ensure that everyone (including women and minorities) gets their fair shot.
But Frankly? I find what this professor is doing downright condescending. I don't want anyone condescending to me, thanks.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Oct 22, 2017 10:20:34 GMT -5
Apparently, she’s not even an actual teacher, just a freaking grad student teaching assistant, so it’s not like she knows WTF she’s talking about anyway. She’s just mindlessly regurgitating the regressive, postmodernist bullshit she’s been brainwashed with by her humanities professors. My bad. I didn't note the fact she is just a TA. I guess that mitigates the situation to some extent, insofar as she can hopefully learn, so I guess I'm less annoyed with her stupidity. Of course, given that there are actual, thinking people defending her "system," maybe I should be more annoyed. Seriously, teachers--at any level--cannot be allowed to forbid or purposefully minimize participation of some of their students, based on the sex, race, religion, or the like of those students. And again, this is particularly egregious at a university level, where students are paying for classes. Is there a clause in their contract that states "some students may not be allowed to participate fully in some classes because of their race, sex, or ethnicity." No, of course there isn't. Again, is was particularly stupid of this TA to publicly declare that she was using thin system. The fact that she's a TA may cover the school, I guess, because I'm thinking that if a professor mandated this policy, that professor would be fired and/or the school would be sued.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Oct 22, 2017 10:27:55 GMT -5
Where are these classes where women and minorities have their hands raised but only the white guys get called on? In 1958? Yeah, I think that's about right. Having been a TA who taught/gave lectures for history classes in a school that was not predominantly peopled with white males, I can say that in many cases--depending on the topic--different viewpoints added to the discussion, and I would purposefully seek out those different viewpoints, as would most all of the professors I have studied under. That's a good thing imo, a positive approach. But one cannot purposefully ignore some viewpoints because of the "who" providing them. It's wrong, regardless of the particular "who," regardless if the intent.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Oct 22, 2017 11:28:57 GMT -5
A University of Penn State Student teacher has come under fire for a tweet. www.thecollegefix.com/post/38120/I always call on my black women students first. Other POC get second tier priority. WW come next. And, if I have to, white men. www.philly.com/philly/columnists/helen_ubinas/university-of-pennsylvania-teaching-assistant-mckellop-progressive-stacking-20171020.htmlNow, the push back seems to be that the teacher is saying she wants to make sure marginalized students are heard, but that's not how the tweet read. It read that she always calls on women of color first, then POC, then WW then if she has to, white men. So if she has a class where every student is willing to participate, she'll never have to call on white men? There's a difference between making sure you're including everyone and having a pecking order based on race, and gender that you follow every time. Seems this is the latter, at least to me. Any thoughts? There is a difference and too bad you don't know what it is. A history teacher, apparently. Imo, any halfway decent teacher makes an effort to vary which students that they call on. It's not rocket science. Prioritizing systematically--based on race, sex, etc.--is not very bright, imo. Announcing that this is the system one is using is even less bright. A teacher can't say "I'm not going to let students in demo group X participate in my class unless I absolutely have to." Well, I guess a teacher can say that, but they should be fired for it, especially at a college level. Wrong. Any halfway decent teacher should make an effort to call upon students who may not have received an opportunity to be called up on because of their race or gender. It is very bright to include someone other than White males all the time, but it's no surprise to notice it's primarily White males displaying the greatest degree of butthurt. How is it the same group which decries any special treatment based upon race and gender has no problem when they are the ones on the receiving end of the special treatment due to their race and gender? Oh, if only there were a better definition of what "progressive stacking" is from a less slanted source than The College Fix. Maybe The Chronicle of Higher Education could help? Ask someone other than Chad and Brad to contribute in the class discussion? How radical! Only not. It's just White right-wingers getting all hot and bothered over nothing and then spreading the manure around. It's still crap and it still stinks. Apparently, she’s not even an actual teacher, just a freaking grad student teaching assistant, so it’s not like she knows WTF she’s talking about anyway. She’s just mindlessly regurgitating the regressive, postmodernist bullshit she’s been brainwashed with by her humanities professors. The only person who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about is you, Opty, because as usual, you rant first and read never. The only regurgitation here is by you with yet another spewing of your boilerplate "REGRESSIVES! REGRESSIVES!" reactionary bullshit. IF you had bothered to check out Vince's first link you'd see The College Fix, which is subtitled "your daily dose of right-minded news and commentary" is just another rag full of junk guaranteed to push the hot buttons of right-wingers and pseudo-libs who hate liberalism. The College Fix is another internet shitpile whose business is to spread Outrage Manure on the gullible and easily rankled, and business is good. It's become something of a standard move here to be ready at all times to roast college instructors as being clueless even as the ones doing so go about it cluelessly without bothering to get their facts straight before getting their undies in a bunch. To be fair, I first came across this on Twitter as the shit storm started. The next day, I posted the threads and looked for a few links. The College Fix was actually one I came across after I posted, so I edited it in. Having said that, this person isn't saying she's making sure that she's calling everyone, including those that may not have been called on because of the fact that their POC, but that she has a pecking order, and it reads as if she resents calling on white male students. Not all POC have issues being called upon or raising their hand. And remember, a male POC is second tier. You say there's a difference, but I don't see it. I think I do see it. She identifies the worth and experiences of her students based on their race and gender. The idea that she should encourage John in her class who is white and male to participate more because he's shy, less likely to raise his hand. Not attractive, or comfortable speaking. But he's white, male so his educational needs are less important. That's how her tweet reads. All white men aren't the same.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Oct 22, 2017 11:59:56 GMT -5
The only person who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about is you, Opty, because as usual, you rant first and read never. The only regurgitation here is by you with yet another spewing of your boilerplate "REGRESSIVES! REGRESSIVES!" reactionary bullshit. IF you had bothered to check out Vince's first link you'd see The College Fix, which is subtitled "your daily dose of right-minded news and commentary" is just another rag full of junk guaranteed to push the hot buttons of right-wingers and pseudo-libs who hate liberalism. The College Fix is another internet shitpile whose business is to spread Outrage Manure on the gullible and easily rankled, and business is good. It's become something of a standard move here to be ready at all times to roast college instructors as being clueless even as the ones doing so go about it cluelessly without bothering to get their facts straight before getting their undies in a bunch. *Yawn* Please point out what I said in that quoted section of mine that you posted that was factually incorrect "... it’s not like she knows WTF she’s talking about anyway. She’s just mindlessly regurgitating the regressive, postmodernist bullshit she’s been brainwashed with by her humanities professors." That's called an opinion, not a fact. So you're incorrect. Again. You don't know what her humanities professors taught Stephanie McKellop. Welcome to not knowing What The FUCK you're talking about and you should feel right at home there. See above. You're welcome. You coming down with alcohol poisoning? Well, I wouldn't wish it on you, but I won't say it would fuck up my day either. Don't tease me unless you're going to please me. Oh, and I responded to everything you said, but to be honest you didn't say much besides "REGRESSIVES! REGRESSIVES!" Same as it ever was. Forgiven. Forgotten. Forgive me if I don't take seriously your huffy assertion you teach on a college campus or even if you do you're any good at it. Appeal to authority arguments don't mean much to me and particularly not when it comes from someone who screams "misogynist" yet somehow can't bear to call Ms. McKellop by name because it's more fun to call her " a bigoted idiot" who is " virtue-signalling out of her ass." That's not much more but male chauvinist shit-talking as you gleefully denigrate McKellop's intelligence, education, future job prospects and her rear end. Being called a misogynist by someone like you is like being called stupid by Donald Trump. Being called a race-baiter by someone who slathered sloppy kisses over James Damore's racist ass falls under the category of pots calling kettles. Why, yes I did just fucking use the word "fuck" toward you. If you want a much better example of being demonstrably hypocritical, go back and read your own posts. You're welcome. Ooooo...somebody did some RESEARCH!!!! Good for you! Rose to the challenge like a brook trout, Opty. You must be so proud. You probably didn't consult Wikipedia even once! But all you've done is sneer like a chump in the cheap seats of a ball game at Dr. Cabrera's credentials and research. All that does is prove you have a negative opinion of him and hostility toward his work. It does not make him wrong and you right. Thanks for trying. Still need to try harder. No, because who said I was trying to convince you of anything. After all, I'm not an Angry White Man who claims an "effective/convincing argument" is saying a teaching assistant is "mindlessly regurgitating the regressive, postmodernist bullshit she’s been brainwashed with by her humanities professors." Wow. That's really convincing, Opty. You find a website where students can rate their professors and do it anonymously and that's your proof Cabrera is a lousy professor. Welp, I'm sure convinced. It couldn't be whomever the moron is that wrote that crap flunked the class or is a racist shitbag or just happens to blow wet sloppy kisses to racist shitbags. Naaaaaah. Couldn't be that. Oh hey, Opty. You missed what another student had to say about Cabrera. Excellent- I learned so much! Hmph. Well, that's one person's opinion and proves not a thing. Tell you what. Why don't you post your credentials and your published works and your reviews? You like slapping around graduate students and real academics so much. Let's see what YOUR students have to say about good ol' Professor Opty. That should be good for shit n' giggles.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Oct 22, 2017 15:11:05 GMT -5
You didn't address my point that maybe white men who aren't called on could just listen, that this might not be a bad thing. You didn't address my point that I don't think white men are going to get an inferior education as a result of not being picked to give their opinion in the classroom. I don't have a problem with being attentive to subconscious biases - we are all familiar with the studies that show boys get called on more often than girls (partly because boys are more likely to eagerly put their hands up and speak out, Hermiones aside...). Making sure everyone gets an equal chance to be heard, and maybe giving extra attention to groups who tend to be heard less, is not unreasonable. The problem with this grad student's tweet is if I were in her class, I'd assume that being a white male, not only can I expect not to be called on (which, okay, fine, I don't feel like I need to put my opinion out there all the time and maybe sometimes I like being the guy sitting quietly in the back being ignored), but her attitude suggests active hostility towards me. I would transfer out of her class because I'd assume her judgment is going to carry over to her grading. That's not being upset that I don't get to speak over non-white guys, it's making a pragmatic assessment that this person who has power over me has said, in so many words, that she assumes I'm a bag of privilege who needs to be taken down a peg.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Oct 22, 2017 15:25:11 GMT -5
It also ignores the reality that not many students raise their hands or try to answer questions in the first place. I consider it an almost-miracle sometimes when I pose a question to the class and I get even one person who attempts to answer it. There's debate in academic circles about whether calling on people who don't have their hands up is good practice. The literature I've read on it suggests that the anxiety and the reinforcement of negative beliefs it can cause (if the student gets it wrong) just aren't worth it, but I know a few (old school) instructors who disagree. This is especially true in the tougher classes involving more abstruse subjects.
I think a good teacher is able to balance these things out, and recognize when it is and isn't a good idea to call on people, and is good at understanding why people aren't answering in the first place (lack of confidence which likely comes from lack of understanding the material, which means the teacher needs to explain it again).
Good teachers don't need "progressive stacking" bullshit. Only shitty and ideologically-obsessed ones do. Or TAs who don't have the adequate experience to know what they're talking about in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Oct 22, 2017 16:43:30 GMT -5
You didn't address my point that maybe white men who aren't called on could just listen, that this might not be a bad thing. You didn't address my point that I don't think white men are going to get an inferior education as a result of not being picked to give their opinion in the classroom. I don't have a problem with being attentive to subconscious biases - we are all familiar with the studies that show boys get called on more often than girls (partly because boys are more likely to eagerly put their hands up and speak out, Hermiones aside...). Making sure everyone gets an equal chance to be heard, and maybe giving extra attention to groups who tend to be heard less, is not unreasonable. The problem with this grad student's tweet is if I were in her class, I'd assume that being a white male, not only can I expect not to be called on (which, okay, fine, I don't feel like I need to put my opinion out there all the time and maybe sometimes I like being the guy sitting quietly in the back being ignored), but her attitude suggests active hostility towards me. I would transfer out of her class because I'd assume her judgment is going to carry over to her grading. That's not being upset that I don't get to speak over non-white guys, it's making a pragmatic assessment that this person who has power over me has said, in so many words, that she assumes I'm a bag of privilege who needs to be taken down a peg. So, basically, progressive stacking makes white men feel alienated and resentful, and we can't have that. (Yes, there's a bit of snark there, but I can agree the best solution to a problem is going to be the one that does not alienate anyone--if this is possible.) So, if this T.A. had, instead of "I never call on white men if I can help it," said, "I always try to call on people in this order," -- same order, just not with the subtext of "white men should shut up, I hate them," or whatever, would that be okay with everyone?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2017 16:54:03 GMT -5
No. Progressive stacking is just fucking stupid. And we can't have that.
By all means encourage the shy/quiet reluctant people to speak up and participate. By all means try to call on them instead of the same eager Hermiones every time. That's a great idea.
But to assume that's always going to be the chicks and the people of color, and act accordingly? I find that actively insulting. Put me in a classroom with Vince. Add nighttimer to the mix for shits and giggles. Which of us do you think is likely to be the shyest one of the three? Unless I greatly miss my guess, it would be the white guy.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Oct 22, 2017 17:05:16 GMT -5
Also, where is the data showing that white male students are always overwhelmingly called on more than every other group, in every classroom, in every school, across the country to validate this BS in the first place?
As the racially-obsessed-with-white-males guy stated...
That is simply a "critical race theory" claim without a single shred of quantitative evidence (which is typical of most postmodernist claims). It's just his opinion is asserted as fact when it is not one. Please name the specific "traditional pedagogical techniques" that repeatedly, reliably ensure that everyone except white males keep their mouths shut in class and cite the credible research showing this to be true and not just some bullshit claim he's pulling out of his ass to create a false justification for his position.
Also...
LOL, what college classroom is that happening in on a regular basis?
The entire premise of this bullshit "progressive stacking" is based on an unproven strawman...just like most postmodernist, CRT claptrap.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Oct 22, 2017 17:24:35 GMT -5
So, basically, progressive stacking makes white men feel alienated and resentful, and we can't have that. (Yes, there's a bit of snark there, but I can agree the best solution to a problem is going to be the one that does not alienate anyone--if this is possible.) So, if this T.A. had, instead of "I never call on white men if I can help it," said, "I always try to call on people in this order," -- same order, just not with the subtext of "white men should shut up, I hate them," or whatever, would that be okay with everyone? The snark seems to be evading my point. Yes, progressive stacking does make white men feel alienated and resentful, but that's an intended effect. Advocates of progressive stacking believe that white men deserve to be alienated and resentful because they've been guilty of making other people feel alienated and resentful for generations and now it's time for them to get a taste of their own medicine. Whether or not this is actually a good or moral strategy is up for debate, but let's not pretend that that's not the point. ("Give marginalized voices a chance to be heard" only applies if you've been making a habit of not calling on women and non-white people in class.) As I said very clearly, if you set out to alienate me, I'll react accordingly and assume you're hostile to me. And maybe that was your intent! But if you have power over me (even the power to assign my grade), I'm obviously going to act in my own self-interest by trying to remove myself from that situation. If the TA had said "I always call on people in this order" I'd still have rolled my eyes at her personally, and I suspect she'd still have gotten some flack on social media for bragging about how woke she is, but yes, without the subtext of "white men should shut up" it might not have gone quite so viral.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Oct 22, 2017 17:33:29 GMT -5
I don't have a problem with being attentive to subconscious biases - we are all familiar with the studies that show boys get called on more often than girls (partly because boys are more likely to eagerly put their hands up and speak out, Hermiones aside...). Making sure everyone gets an equal chance to be heard, and maybe giving extra attention to groups who tend to be heard less, is not unreasonable. The problem with this grad student's tweet is if I were in her class, I'd assume that being a white male, not only can I expect not to be called on (which, okay, fine, I don't feel like I need to put my opinion out there all the time and maybe sometimes I like being the guy sitting quietly in the back being ignored), but her attitude suggests active hostility towards me. I would transfer out of her class because I'd assume her judgment is going to carry over to her grading. That's not being upset that I don't get to speak over non-white guys, it's making a pragmatic assessment that this person who has power over me has said, in so many words, that she assumes I'm a bag of privilege who needs to be taken down a peg. So, basically, progressive stacking makes white men feel alienated and resentful, and we can't have that. (Yes, there's a bit of snark there, but I can agree the best solution to a problem is going to be the one that does not alienate anyone--if this is possible.) So, if this T.A. had, instead of "I never call on white men if I can help it," said, "I always try to call on people in this order," -- same order, just not with the subtext of "white men should shut up, I hate them," or whatever, would that be okay with everyone? If she had said she always made an effort to call on students that were often marginalized, making sure everyone had their chance and voices heard, it would be fine. She specifically makes it out as if she'd be happy if she never did. If a teacher finds that they're more likely to call on boys more than girls, that's a personal bias and they need to address that. If they find they call on white students more than black students, same. But what she's saying, out loud and proud, is that she has a bias against white, male students and she's going to let it dictate how she runs her class. I saw a screen shot on twitter this morning from an earlier tweet. Day one and we already scared off one white boy in the middle of class. Sounds like she has an issue.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Oct 22, 2017 17:43:13 GMT -5
So, basically, progressive stacking makes white men feel alienated and resentful, and we can't have that. (Yes, there's a bit of snark there, but I can agree the best solution to a problem is going to be the one that does not alienate anyone--if this is possible.) So, if this T.A. had, instead of "I never call on white men if I can help it," said, "I always try to call on people in this order," -- same order, just not with the subtext of "white men should shut up, I hate them," or whatever, would that be okay with everyone? The snark seems to be evading my point. Yes, progressive stacking does make white men feel alienated and resentful, but that's an intended effect. Advocates of progressive stacking believe that white men deserve to be alienated and resentful because they've been guilty of making other people feel alienated and resentful for generations and now it's time for them to get a taste of their own medicine. Whether or not this is actually a good or moral strategy is up for debate, but let's not pretend that that's not the point. ("Give marginalized voices a chance to be heard" only applies if you've been making a habit of not calling on women and non-white people in class.) Holy. Shit. So, no one is actually trying to balance the scales when it comes to historical (and in some cases, current) inequities? They're just trying to piss off all the white guys? I don't think that's a good or moral strategy, at all. I also don't think it's the point, at all, but MMV. My question was, if you're called on "last," do you still feel alienated? You still get to speak. So, you'd roll your eyes, as opposed to dropping the class. I think that's a perfectly fine response, and I might even roll my eyes with you, depending on the teacher, the class, the school, etc. For a minute there it sounded like everyone thought progressive stacking was an affront to humanity.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Oct 22, 2017 17:55:20 GMT -5
The snark seems to be evading my point. Yes, progressive stacking does make white men feel alienated and resentful, but that's an intended effect. Advocates of progressive stacking believe that white men deserve to be alienated and resentful because they've been guilty of making other people feel alienated and resentful for generations and now it's time for them to get a taste of their own medicine. Whether or not this is actually a good or moral strategy is up for debate, but let's not pretend that that's not the point. ("Give marginalized voices a chance to be heard" only applies if you've been making a habit of not calling on women and non-white people in class.) Holy. Shit. So, no one is actually trying to balance the scales when it comes to historical (and in some cases, current) inequities? They're just trying to piss off all the white guys? I don't think that's a good or moral strategy, at all. I also don't think it's the point, at all, but MMV. My question was, if you're called on "last," do you still feel alienated? You still get to speak. So, you'd roll your eyes, as opposed to dropping the class. I think that's a perfectly fine response, and I might even roll my eyes with you, depending on the teacher, the class, the school, etc. For a minute there it sounded like everyone thought progressive stacking was an affront to humanity. If I was called on last during one class, I'd probably not notice. If I was called last most classes, I'd notice and maybe get annoyed. If I barely got called on, but others did, I'd be upset. If I often didn't get called on, so I stopped raising my hand, and came to understand that she didn't want to call on me because of the color of my skin, then I'd be downright pissed. And that's what she said. As a last resort. So if class after class, she was able only call on other's not you, then she's specifically discriminating against you. This isn't a case of everyone gets to speak eventually. Not according to her.
|
|