Student's At It Again.

[esmith]

Well it seems that the students are at it again and this time it is at Harvard Law School. Seems that a seal includes the crest of a notoriously brutal 18th Century slave owner and the students want it changed. It also seem the school will no longer use the term "master" in academic titles, because of connotations of slavery. So what next you brain-dead idiots, remove any word that you find offensive? Poor little rich kids, your mommy not teach you there is a real world out there.

http://www.bbc.com/news/education-35726878

 

[Buttercup]

I agree with changing the crest but dropping "Master" from academic titles is lame.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Defacing the past is unwise, they serve as reminders of our history, whether they be mistakes, right or wrong, good or evil. Who knows what modern figures might be removed from public places 100 years from now.

 

[Altfish]

Defacing the past is unwise, they serve as reminders of our history, whether they be mistakes, right or wrong, good or evil. Who knows what modern figures might be removed from public places 100 years from now.

If they change the crest it does not deface the past, it brings the college into the 21st century. There will still be plenty of evidence that it once existed.
Even the first outraged poster described the crest as belonging to "...a notoriously brutal 18th Century slave owner..", perhaps it is time to put forward a more positive image.

 

[Quetzal]

Well it seems that the students are at it again and this time it is at Harvard Law School. Seems that a seal includes the crest of a notoriously brutal 18th Century slave owner and the students want it changed. It also seem the school will no longer use the term "master" in academic titles, because of connotations of slavery. So what next you brain-dead idiots, remove any word that you find offensive? Poor little rich kids, your mommy not teach you there is a real world out there.

http://www.bbc.com/news/education-35726878

A Harvard Law School committee says the seal no longer represents the institution's values.

Well there you have it. I guess they are all "brain dead idiots" anyway, so why should we care?

 

[Iti oj]

Well it seems that the students are at it again and this time it is at Harvard Law School. Seems that a seal includes the crest of a notoriously brutal 18th Century slave owner and the students want it changed. It also seem the school will no longer use the term "master" in academic titles, because of connotations of slavery. So what next you brain-dead idiots, remove any word that you find offensive? Poor little rich kids, your mommy not teach you there is a real world out there.

http://www.bbc.com/news/education-35726878

You call them idiots but you can't even comment on this with out insulting a whole group of people.

 

[Skwim]

Well it seems that the students are at it again and this time it is at Harvard Law School. Seems that a seal includes the crest of a notoriously brutal 18th Century slave owner and the students want it changed. It also seem the school will no longer use the term "master" in academic titles, because of connotations of slavery. So what next you brain-dead idiots, remove any word that you find offensive? Poor little rich kids, your mommy not teach you there is a real world out there.

http://www.bbc.com/news/education-35726878

My, my, my. How petulant. Somebody woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well it seems that the students are at it again and this time it is at Harvard Law School. Seems that a seal includes the crest of a notoriously brutal 18th Century slave owner and the students want it changed. It also seem the school will no longer use the term "master" in academic titles, because of connotations of slavery. So what next you brain-dead idiots, remove any word that you find offensive? Poor little rich kids, your mommy not teach you there is a real world out there.

http://www.bbc.com/news/education-35726878

I'm in favor of keeping offensive symbols.
They're educational, & they get the juices flowing.
And when the students don't get their way, they learn a
valuable lesson about not getting their way over silly fixations.
Everyone wins!

 

[Revoltingest]

Somebody woke up on the wrongs side of the bed this morning.

I think I know what you're trying to say.
But I prefer this way of saying it.

 

[Buttercup]

I'm in favor of keeping offensive symbols.
They're educational, & they get the juices flowing.
And when the students don't get their way, they learn a
valuable lesson about not getting their way over silly fixations.
Everyone wins!

I think I'll buy you a Confederate flag for your birthday even though you're a Yankee. .

 

[Quetzal]

I'm in favor of keeping offensive symbols.
They're educational, & they get the juices flowing.
And when the students don't get their way, they learn a
valuable lesson about not getting their way over silly fixations.
Everyone wins!

You are making it sound like the students are demanding more pudding and a later class schedule. (Although I could go for some pudding...)

But this isn't a self centered issue. It is about making social progress and understanding that certain concepts in symbols are not appropriate.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think I'll buy you a Confederate flag for your birthday even though you're a Yankee. .

That would get me juices flow'n!

 

[Revoltingest]

You are making it sound like the students are demanding more pudding and a later class schedule. (Although I could go for some pudding...)

But this isn't a self centered issue. It is about making social progress and understanding that certain concepts in symbols are not appropriate.

Or it's obsessing over style instead of substance.
What symbols would be left if we ditched every on with some offense in its history?
Most of our money would need new profiles.
Tis better to display unfortunate history than to sanitize it, which is more Maoist & Talibanish in spirit.

 

[Quetzal]

Or it's obsessing over style instead of substance.

The substance of something is the most important part!

What symbols would be left if we ditched every on with some offense in its history?

Depends, do all of those symbols embody the idea that slavery is okay?

Most of our money would need new profiles.

They need a face lift anyway. No one really messes with George much anymore...

Tis better to display unfortunate history than to sanitize it

IMO it's better to learn about unfortunate history in lecture, discussion, and study. Not promote the wrong messages via an ignorant use of symbology.

 

[Revoltingest]

The substance of something is the most important part!

Agreed.

Depends, do all of those symbols embody the idea that slavery is okay?

Symbols which say slavery is OK would be inappropriate for some uses.
But I wouldn't want hyper-sensitive SJWs be the authority to determine this.

They need a face lift anyway. No one really messes with George much anymore...

Change is dangerous.
Depending on the political makeup of government, we might find Alec Baldwin on the $1 bill !

IMO it's better to learn about unfortunate history in lecture, discussion, and study. Not promote the wrong messages via an ignorant use of symbology.

Is it promotion, or is it the aforementioned SJW obsessing over something insignificant?

Consider....
A young student's job is to learn about the world.
Exploring issues means stumbling now & then when picking one to get all worked up over.
If it weren't these little historical oddities, it would be something else.

 

[Quetzal]

But I wouldn't want hyper-sensitive SJWs be the authority to determine this.

They didn't. They brought the issue before the university and the university determined it was no longer appropriate.

Change is dangerous.
Depending on the political makeup of government, we might find Alec Baldwin on the $1 bill !

Is it promotion, or is it the aforementioned SJW obsessing over something insignificant?

That symbol is the face of that school, a law school of all things. That symbol represents them. The students believed it did not accurately reflect their values, they brought it to the attention of the power that be, and they agreed this determination was correct.

I do find it ironic that you and @esmith are the harshest critics when it comes to entitlement and young folks. And yet, here you are whining this didn't go your way.

 

[Iti oj]

I'm in favor of keeping offensive symbols.
They're educational, & they get the juices flowing.
And when the students don't get their way, they learn a
valuable lesson about not getting their way over silly fixations.
Everyone wins!

Defacing the past is unwise, they serve as reminders of our history, whether they be mistakes, right or wrong, good or evil. Who knows what modern figures might be removed from public places 100 years from now.

I find both of these statements mistaken and the reasoning flawed and the arguments easily disputable. Here is more or less why I feel and think that way.

one we don't owe history or the past anything. Two the idea that changing a seal in know way defaces the history. The school and its prestige is a testament to that history. Three history is important for learning from not hold on to. Four Schools are a place of business whose customer is the students. The customer is always right. Students might seek different place to go if the school no loner represents them or there interest. Five this seal also reflects and represents the students who go and especially graduate there. Six and this one is important, this is not about protecting history(knowledge) but about protecting nostalgia(how it makes some one feel). Seven institutions as much as people need to change to grow and survive. Eight 100 years from now will have new heroes and stories to remember. Nine adapting to the present does not mean forgetting the past. 10 change happens get over it.

 

[Altfish]

Next thing you know they'll change US money and put, "In God We Trust" on it.

 

[Iti oj]

Next thing you know they'll change US money and put, "In God We Trust" on it.

I love you.

 

[Revoltingest]

They didn't. They brought the issue before the university and the university determined it was no longer appropriate.

By "hyper-sensitive SJW", I'd include school officials who go along.

That symbol is the face of that school, a law school of all things. That symbol represents them. The students believed it did not accurately reflect their values, they brought it to the attention of the power that be, and they agreed this determination was correct.

Who actually looks at such a symbol, & thinks, "Oh, no! It's advocating brutal slavery!"?
I'll wager that some history geek had to research the matter in order to become highly offended.

I do find it ironic that you and @esmith are the harshest critics when it comes to entitlement and young folks. And yet, here you are whining this didn't go your way.

I'm not whining.
(After all, it's not my alma mater, so I've no dog in this fight.)
(Btw, I oppose dog fighting.)
I'm chortling.
There's a huge difference.