By scrabulista, in 'General Latin Chat (English)', Mar 3, 2019.
Now here's something we can all agree on.
That was indeed my question. The sentence was:
Other crudeliter facta at the meeting have been reported over social media.
I am guessing he is making reference to Suetonius
Singillatim crudeliter facta eius exequi longum est
You can find quite a few examples. It's very common with adverbs like bene or recte, but it also extends to other adverbs, also in a pejorative sense as in your example... but numerare longum est
Don't feel too secure. Europe has a long history of picking up all kinds of ideas coming from Northern America (the good along with the bad), it just lags behind by some 5-10 years. In fact, party conventions of the German Greens already look like the convention described in that article, and German universities are devising guidelines step by step on how to write in a politically correct, gender-neutral fashion... People are demanding quotas and affirmative action left and right; a merit-based system is getting villified as an unjust means to perpetuate white male privilege ... and it's just the beginning. A glance at America shows you what you can brace yourself for.
I hate quotas. The best people for the job should be chosen, no matter whether they're all males or all females or any mixture of the two. Period.
That's exactly what they don't want (and that's why the argument of the lady was essentially ignored). People who suggest these kinds of quotas have little interest in a merit-based selection of articles or employees. They want to be in control of the selection process to push their identity-based politics into the field of academia. And frankly speaking, it only makes sense, seeing as it is perfectly consistent with their world view: the papers they write have long since ceased to live up to any academic standard. They write their conclusions before conducting any kind of investigation and then fit in the rest to match their narrative. Anyone can produce that non-sense, so quality matters a lot less than the actual characteristics of the author, anyway.
I'd say they also want to be in charge of a non-anonymous selection process to prevent themselves from getting exposed. I don't know if you've seen what happened last autumn when a group of academics submitted fake essays to a number of identity-driven journals and actually got accepted with topics like
- Human Reactions to Rape Culture and Queer Performativity in Urban Dog Parks in Portland, Oregon (dog-humping incidents as evidence of rape culture)
- Our Struggle is My Struggle: Solidarity Feminism as an Intersectional Reply to Neoliberal and Choice Feminism (essentially a translation of Mein Kampf into feminist language)
- Challenging Straight Male Homohysteria and Transphobia through Receptive Penetrative Sex Toy Use
- Overcoming Anthropometry and a Framework for Fat Bodybuilding
You probably think I'm kidding, but the full story can be found here:
It's also quite a long read, but it comes with a convenient 6-minute video
Someone posted about that in Garritus a few months ago (I believe as a reaction to my moaning about nonsense articles in my course, which I've been doing a lot).
As Sir Humphrey would say : "We should always be able to choose the best man, regardless of sex." Politicians idea.
All joking apart, the best way to treat this is contempt and laughter.
Btw. I've just had a look at the youtube video. Obviously, I can't be bothered to watch the whole 2 hours, so I clicked a few bits at random ...
Did she really say "I really see the future of classics as broadening, classics not just being Greece and Rome, but broadening to the Mediterranean" ?? What is that even supposed to mean ... I mean, does she know where Greece and Rome are situated?
"My original plan was to offer some remarks on non-paradigmatic future verb forms in Greek <laughter>, BUT I think you are all expecting somewhat different ✝fare✝ (?? me confiteor non intellegere), so over the next few minutes I want to concentrate on the systemic marginalisation of people of colour in the credentialed and accredited knowledge production of the discipline."
How does that pass for a joke? Has it already become that normal not to talk about subjects pertaining to ancient philology on a meeting of classics scholars?? Or is my Greek just too bad to get the joke (I must admit I'm not an expert there)
is where Ms. Williams addresses the panel
first speaker suggesting to bring in dance professors
second speaker suggesting to write classics dissertations on indigenous people
third speaker outline epistemic reparative justice
Really? You are going to allow the OP in this type of forum? I suggest you close this thread before someone gets hurt. But if you are going to keep it open for "free speech" reasons:
Dr. Williams admits to saying, "You may have got your job because you're black, but I'd prefer to think you got your job because of merit." To me, that is roughly equivalent to someone saying to her, "You may have got your job because you had sex with your boss, but I'd prefer to think you got your job because of merit."
In Latin, perhaps, one could write those sentences so the first part is clearly indicated "contrary to fact". Not only is English, I think, less exact, but the use of "prefer to think" in the second part strongly affirms the previous clause.
In my opinion, Dr. Williams statement was more than "regrettable", it was outrageous. By the almost snickering use of "PC" by some of the commentators on the Board I my guess my opinion is not a unanimous opinion [not sure why "an unanimous" sounds so incorrect. I would say "an umbrella", but "a unicorn"--must be the particular "u" sound]. Fine, we disagree.
The problem with Dr. Williams's punishment, in my opinion, is that sometimes nice people, truly nice people, get whacked (Google governor, blackface, Virginia--my former home state). Other nice people are horrified/scared/angry in some combination. When it might affect their jobs, the reaction is even worse. Some people might think that is good--make people confront reality--, but I worry about the consequences of that. Better, in my opinion, would be some sort of sit-down and discussion, and more soulful resolution.
Merit: Can we almost all agree people should advance due to merit? Probably yes. Can we all agree with what is merit? Probably not.
The problem I have with the 4 points Dr. Williams wanted to make was that they appear to me so obvious. They are the water the panelists probably swim in everyday. Her urge to present them makes it seem as though she was not listening. (Do I hear groans when that sentence is read? Is it too "woke"? Do I hear groans at my writing of "woke"). So I am not going to make the same error by arguing diversity is not about "goodness", but strengthens research and teaching on its own. You have heard the arguments. You either agree with the points, or not. I could also parse a sentence like "Rome/Greece 'gave' 'us' the concept of Democracy and Freedom". But I am almost completely sure that anyone on this forum could do it better.
I certainly hope we're not going to close this thread, David. Let's not be hysterical here, after all, all these problems arose in the first place because some people started to be hysterical without any good reasons to. In the academic sphere, we should be measured and put emotions aside and I think that most people actually do! I certainly hope no one's getting bullied here into closing a thread like this.
I don't think so. First, there is "may" and second, Dr. Williams is just obviously playing the same game under the same rules as the one he's talking to started to. When someone thinks that blackness is the important thing when hiring people, then it is perfectly correct to say "you may have got your job because you're black, but... " <- this is using EXACTLY the same rules as the actual person had established before them. It's not outrageous, it's a measured response to an outrageous claim.
That's an incredible exaggeration. We should calm down. This is clearly a matter of opinion and I see absolutely nothing wrong with it if those were the rules of conversation that had been established = speaking about "blackness" as merit beforehand (or along those lines).
I actually think we can. When you hire people, the merit is the skill or the previous work the person has done in the respective field. That's objectively absolutely the merit. Never blackness e.g.
Disclaimer: I haven't read the whole article, I have read bits of it, I read the reactions, and I read a tiny part of the response in a blog where the person would emphasize blackness as something to be rewarded for.
The rules of the forum are that the discussion must remain civil. I think the subject matter is worthy of discussion.
I find retrospectively application of modern day morals to the past to be disturbing.
I would have thought that if you did a survey on papers written on ancient Chinese poetry, that you would find that most authors were Chinese.
By all means, do not close this thread! That's exactly what those people want. They do not have the slightest interest in any debate, they are just striving to shut down any opinion that differs from their identity-based viewpoints. What they want, in one word, is socialism.
I was born in a socialist state. I was fortunate enough to only live through 5 years of that scourge, but I know what the generation of my parents and grandparents had to endure. Indoctrination - anyone who dared to utter the slightest bit of criticism against that oppressive regime could be arrested and cast into prison without any legal process. What happened to that classicist who was thrown out of that meeting is basically the same thing. It seems like almost the entire American academy is plagued by that pest.
We must not let this happen in Europe. It may be a small contribution to make, but I will certainly teach my pupils the values of democracy, free speech and accepting other people's viewpoints, even if you strongly disagree. In other words: the values that the antiquity taught us.
I must say that's funny! If this thread is a threat, should it not be closed?
Our Latin forum is a community for discussion of all topics relating to Latin language, ancient and medieval world.
Separate names with a comma.