University of Dayton

Alma mater of Colin Gerker, who apparently told a fraternity that it was appropriating culture.  The profile includes “Bachelor of Arts, Film & Audio Production, History”, so you would think there would be more sensitivity for freedom of action and/or speech.  Not in this particular case.

More details apparently here.  Name of evnet not in very good taste, in my opinion.  Now the cancelled event has even more attention.  Welcome to the Streisand effect.

KKK kicking itself

For not thinking of this excuse to suppress the Civil Rights movement.

Calling for hate speech exemptions to the First Amendment is always a call for censorship.

Smoking out that passive voice

Professor Althouse does it so well, and does it again here.  She nails the NY Times here ‘”Gunfire erupted” is a classic hiding of human agency. And then one guard “was killed” and another guard “was left.” The dead guard was Peter Paige.’

The story is about the recent denial of parole to Judith Clark, driver of the getaway car in the Brinks’ robbery in Nanuet, NY.   It happened in 1981.  Is there a White Privilege angle here?  Ms. Clark, who is apparently Caucasian, formerly sentenced to life without parole, now is eligible for parole thanks to NY Governor Andrew Cuomo.  But one of the victims was a police officer and African American: Waverly Brown.

Fascist quote of the day

From Wellesley student newspaper.  “If people are given the resources to learn and either continue to speak hate speech or refuse to adapt their beliefs, then hostility may be warranted.” [my emphasis] The context shows they mean what they say.


I would like the student newspaper to discuss the paradox of them being confronted by a free-speech advocate.  Assuming the advocate presents his arguments for free speech, and the editorial board ‘refuse[s] to adapt their beliefs’, would hostility against the board be warranted?