Jump to content

Why is the younger generation so intolerant?


Recommended Posts

Posted
14 minutes ago, 'stache said:

LOL! I bet you also think the “DEI ban” means college professors can’t teach slavery as though it was bad. I’m sure that’ll be the next snowflake outburst. Fucking pathetic.

You should really take some time to read your proclaimed DEI ban before writing about it.

  • Fuck You 7
Posted
1 hour ago, Texas Fight said:

This school, in this course, says you can only teach 2 genders. Period.

Only abject morons would accept this policy in a state school. The hermaphrodite out front should have told you.

Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, Texas Fight said:

Not sure if you are serious but here you go:

 

if you aren’t aware, Texas A&M is a state government institution.

Governor Greg Abbott today sent a letter to Texas state agency heads directing them to follow state and federal law, including President Donald Trump’s executive order, in rejecting radical sexual orientation and gender identity ideologies.
 
“The State of Texas recognizes only two sexes—male and female—and sex discrimination consists in treating a member of one sex less favorably than the other, absent some pertinent difference,” reads the letter. “Others have sought to distort the guarantee that men and women must be treated equally in order to impose mandates concerning sexual orientation and gender identity. On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order, Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government, rejecting similar efforts by the Biden-Harris Administration to distort commonsense notions of biological sex. As the Chief Executive Officer of the State, I direct you to follow state and federal law. All Texas agencies must ensure that agency rules, internal policies, employment practices, and other actions comply with the law and the biological reality that there are only two sexes—male and female.”

 

Cool.  So answer this simple question: if literature that is part of a curriculum has a character that is trans, or of some other gender or sexual orientation, can the professor teaching on that book say "this character is trans?"

Or must the professor simply pretend the character and their sexual orientation in the book don't exist?  

And remember, the edict you cited also goes to sexual orientation.  So, if there is a gay character in a book, and their same-sex relationship is a part of the story, is the professor legally obligated to just redact those passages out of the book and not mention them?

Because in these books, trans is definitely a thing that exists.  Multiple genders - again, in books of YA fiction and such - is a thing that authors write about.  Homosexuality definitely exists in some of these books.  And by your take, and the governors, those things cannot be "taught" at all. 

Edited by Brisketexan
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, Texas Fight said:

Not sure if you are serious but here you go:

 

if you aren’t aware, Texas A&M is a state government institution.

Governor Greg Abbott today sent a letter to Texas state agency heads directing them to follow state and federal law, including President Donald Trump’s executive order, in rejecting radical sexual orientation and gender identity ideologies.
 
“The State of Texas recognizes only two sexes—male and female—and sex discrimination consists in treating a member of one sex less favorably than the other, absent some pertinent difference,” reads the letter. “Others have sought to distort the guarantee that men and women must be treated equally in order to impose mandates concerning sexual orientation and gender identity. On January 20, 2025, President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order, Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government, rejecting similar efforts by the Biden-Harris Administration to distort commonsense notions of biological sex. As the Chief Executive Officer of the State, I direct you to follow state and federal law. All Texas agencies must ensure that agency rules, internal policies, employment practices, and other actions comply with the law and the biological reality that there are only two sexes—male and female.”

 

Even if you’re fully on-board with this EO— surely you concede that children’s lit on these themes exist and that those books have been really influential one way or another, right? How are you supposed to teach a survey without bringing them up. 
 

It’s like if we decided we were big mad at, I don’t know, European national identity in the Habsburg realm and said we couldn’t teach anything about it.  And then said any survey course on 19th century European lit had to completely ignore books on those topics. It’s totally stupid and conflates understanding something with advocating for something (which I will grant you— understanding often leads to tolerance). 

Edited by 956 Worldwide
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Texas Fight said:

If a professor is told to teach evolution and not creation, but says fuck it, I’m teaching creation, then the professor is wrong. If they believe in creation, go find a school that allows that to be the content.

This school, in this course, says you can only teach 2 genders. Period. That’s it. Nothing more/less. The professor didn’t like/ageee with it. She can teach it and face consequences or she can find an institution that allows her to teach it.

The student, by all accounts, tools this through the appropriate channels. She was offered an A in the class. She didn’t want that. She wanted the content taught. The department continued to teach the content contrary to the school approved curriculum and has been fired.  

So only state-sanctioned doctrine can be taught going forward?  Jesus fucking Christ.

If one little snowflake gets butthurt, why doesn't she just drop the course instead of showing her whole ass and dragging the entire class into it?

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Drool 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Cool.  So answer this simple question: if literature that is part of a curriculum has a character that is trans, or of some other gender or sexual orientation, can the professor teaching on that book say "this character is trans?"

Or must the professor simply pretend the character and their sexual orientation in the book don't exist?  

And remember, the edict you cited also goes to sexual orientation.  So, if there is a gay character in a book, and their same-sex relationship is a part of the story, is the professor legally obligated to just redact those passages out of the book and not mention them?

Because in these books, trans is definitely a thing that exists.  Multiple genders - again, in books of YA fiction and such - is a thing that authors write about.  Homosexuality definitely exists in some of these books.  And by your take, and the governors, those things cannot be "taught" at all. 

Take that to the Federal court in Amarillo, Tyler or Marshall. I’m not the finder of fact.

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 9
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

So only state-sanctioned doctrine can be taught going forward?  Jesus fucking Christ.

If one little snowflake gets butthurt, why doesn't she just drop the course instead of showing her whole ass and dragging the entire class into it?

From looking at the syllabus for the summer the lecturer did not stray away from the course description either.

She did a graduate minor in gender studies and specialized in children's studies. This is a 300 level class where she been teaching it since 2018. The lecturer had good ratings for this class on ratemyprofessor. This whole thing should never happened and the student should have dropped the class instead of going on a witch hunt. This is why a lot of people are not wanting to work in this state and a good chunk of faculty want to leave the state too for higher education.

image.png

Edited by txexlonghorn23
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Cool.  So answer this simple question: if literature that is part of a curriculum has a character that is trans, or of some other gender or sexual orientation, can the professor teaching on that book say "this character is trans?"

Or must the professor simply pretend the character and their sexual orientation in the book don't exist?  

And remember, the edict you cited also goes to sexual orientation.  So, if there is a gay character in a book, and their same-sex relationship is a part of the story, is the professor legally obligated to just redact those passages out of the book and not mention them?

Because in these books, trans is definitely a thing that exists.  Multiple genders - again, in books of YA fiction and such - is a thing that authors write about.  Homosexuality definitely exists in some of these books.  And by your take, and the governors, those things cannot be "taught" at all. 

Reading books is gay ergo illegal. Quid quo pro.

Posted
2 hours ago, dieucla98 said:

What about this student screams "reasonable" to you? Other than that she is on the same side of the transgender issue as you.

I know you didn’t mean it to come across this way, but what the fuck is “the transgender issue?” It’s not an issue. There are transgender people in the world. It’s just a fact like the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. People who don’t accept this fact should be ridiculed for being the morons that they are. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Celery Man said:

Reading books is gay ergo illegal. Quid quo pro.

Oh that explains it. I read a lot as a kid. No wonder 

  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, Texas Fight said:

Take that to the Federal court in Amarillo, Tyler or Marshall. I’m not the finder of fact.

So.  You literally take the position that a university in the State of Texas should be at the very least subject to suit and litigation if a teacher chooses to include "A Song of Achilles" (a retelling of the story presuming a homosexual relationship) in a class?

Jesus fucking Christ, full-on Stasi thought-police shit.  The fact that someone is saying "well, it's an open question" as to whether even including a book with gay characters in the curriculum violates the law....that is beyond fucked.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
2 hours ago, dieucla98 said:

I don't think that's what she meant - she probably meant in today's day and age, as soon as the video was released, the end result was always going to be the professor gets fired. And "they" being Texas political powers, not A&M per say. Correct me if I'm wrong here @Mrs Whiggins

What about this student screams "reasonable" to you? Other than that she is on the same side of the transgender issue as you.

The old, “students who challenge the institution” reasonable argument.  Lia Thomas was a college swimmer on the MENS team. Then moved to the women’s team to challenge the institution.

Was that reasonable? Seems like the majority didn’t believe so. We now the DEI/Gender/LGBTQI+ policy we are debating here now.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 8
Posted
9 hours ago, NWBuck said:

I'd add two elements to this... 

Protective parenting and an extensively online culture have dimished the capacity and capabilities for engaging in face to face conversations with people who hold different ideas or have different life experiences. Combined with the worship of 'tolerance' rather than understanding, boundaries are drawn and enforced with overreactive responses. 

The valid and important conversation about the cost of higher education can shift expectations away from learning and towards certification. The latter sees college as a commodity, and it follows that expectations for return on investment would support egocentric behavior (which is also still developmentally appropriate for young adults). Put differently... "I'm paying your salary, do what I want and get me a job". Colleges are deeply responsible for this mindset, particularly in their focus on 'investment' language and the arms race of amenities that many *resorts* campuses have pursued. You can't treat people like customers and then be surprised when they want to always be right. 

Barack Obama Applause GIF by Obama

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

So.  You literally take the position that a university in the State of Texas should be at the very least subject to suit and litigation if a teacher chooses to include "A Song of Achilles" (a retelling of the story presuming a homosexual relationship) in a class?

Jesus fucking Christ, full-on Stasi thought-police shit.  The fact that someone is saying "well, it's an open question" as to whether even including a book with gay characters in the curriculum violates the law....that is beyond fucked.

The elected governor, by the majority of the State, endorsed/adopted and put into effect 100% of the federal EO. Once he does that, it is the states policy.

It’s not MY position. It’s how government works. If you believe this is so wrong or does not follow a legal framework, this should be a slam dunk for you to win in court. Get off the internet and go file an argument. Do something about it.

 

 

  • Fuck You 9
Posted
Just now, Texas Fight said:

The elected governor, by the majority of the State, endorsed/adopted and put into effect 100% of the federal EO. Once he does that, it is the states policy.

It’s not MY position. It’s how government works. If you believe this is so wrong or does not follow a legal framework, this should be a slam dunk for you to win in court. Get off the internet and go file an argument. Do something about it.

 

 

Do you agree that the EO bans the teaching of a book in which a character is gay?  Have the balls to take a position.

Posted
Just now, Beau Vine said:

I remember when the MAGAtards used to loudly shout that EOs were not actual law.

And that they had no issue with gay people, they just don't want them to have "special rights."

And now, they are making it illegal to even acknowledge that gay people exist.

Fantastic.

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
Just now, Beau Vine said:

I remember when the MAGAtards used to loudly shout that EOs were not actual law.

The Office Thank You GIF

I remember when Texas governors used to say they weren't going to let Washington dictate what Texans do.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Haha 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

I remember when the MAGAtards used to loudly shout that EOs were not actual law.

America is not a monarchy! You cannot govern by fiat!!!!!!

Posted
13 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Do you agree that the EO bans the teaching of a book in which a character is gay?  Have the balls to take a position.

I think that the EO does say any institution taking federal money, or as promulgated by the State, state money, that promoting anything other than 2 genders is a violation. I’m not the finder of fact. 
 

As you probably picked up in my last response, taking this issue to a federal court in Texas and then on to the 5th circuit (en banc) you know the answer to your question as well. 
 

  • Fuck You 6
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Texas Fight said:

I think that the EO does say any institution taking federal money, or as promulgated by the State, state money, that promoting anything other than 2 genders is a violation. I’m not the finder of fact. 
 

As you probably picked up in my last response, taking this issue to a federal court in Texas and then on to the 5th circuit (en banc) you know the answer to your question as well. 
 

How about this, do you think its good legal/educational policy for college professors to have to walk on eggshells when it comes to teaching a piece of literature that features a gay or trans character? If you're response is a continued "ThE Law'S tHE laW" then you're every bit the beta bitch boy that you're coming of as with this pussy ass bullshit.

Edited by 'stache
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Texas Fight said:

I think that the EO does say any institution taking federal money, or as promulgated by the State, state money, that promoting anything other than 2 genders is a violation. I’m not the finder of fact. 
 

As you probably picked up in my last response, taking this issue to a federal court in Texas and then on to the 5th circuit (en banc) you know the answer to your question as well. 
 

Have some balls, for once in your life -- BE the finder of fact. Tell us how YOU would rule in such a case.

Have a spine.  Just for giggles, once in your life.  Tell us how YOU would find in such a case, you pathetic coward.

  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
Just now, Brisketexan said:

Have some balls, for once in your life -- BE the finder of fact. Tell us how YOU would rule in such a case.

Have a spine.  Just for giggles, once in your life.  Tell us how YOU would find in such a case, you pathetic coward.

Now, now Brisket. We both know that he's simply being consistent. When it comes to blue states doing things they don't like, they maintain the same "hey, who are we to question it. That's the law. Take it up with the courts," approach.

  • Haha 2
Posted (edited)

So as we've seen from this example, social media shaming adults into action is partially to blame. It has empowered young people to feel they don't have to listen to something they don't agree with or they feel runs counter to their religious beliefs or overall belief system. Some are fine with this until it's their beliefs that are the ones being attacked and removed. Then it's a bridge too far. 

Edited by mdmost
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 hours ago, dieucla98 said:

I don't think that's what she meant - she probably meant in today's day and age, as soon as the video was released, the end result was always going to be the professor gets fired. And "they" being Texas political powers, not A&M per say. Correct me if I'm wrong here @Mrs Whiggins

Yes. As I stated previously, the College (Arts + Science) appeared to be either going through or revising a plan to go through the protocol to amend either instruction and/or content and/or description etc. once the initial complaint was lodged. It was a summer class and thus I expect things to not run as quickly because many faculty are likely on 9 month appointments (if it's like other unis) and so while the lecturer was obviously there and teaching, coordinating all the others to meet probably took awhile and meanwhile the clock is ticking. But yeah, the video from that summer class being released now means instructor will be/was fired. Should they have been fired/released  from the beginning? No. But given the way the argument was framed it was going to go that way.

The Dean and Department Head were released from their administrative positions but were not fired from the school unlike the lecturer. The legal grounds for firing them were likely on shaky ground when examined by counsel.

The domino effect will restrict and censor courses and topics regardless of elective status because that is the way it's going to go. Sucks to our assmar.

 

 

Posted
2 minutes ago, mdmost said:

So as we've seen from this example, social media shaming adults into action is partially to blame. It has empowered young people to feel they don't have to listen to something they don't agree with or they feel runs counter to their religious beliefs or overall belief system. Some are fine with this until it's their beliefs that are the ones being attacked and removed. Then it's a bridge too far. 

A jesus freak kid got a teacher to be forced to resign at my ex's high school in the early 2000s for showing Romeo and Juliet which was against her religious beliefs. This shit isn't something new and moral panics certainly aren't anything new or unique to this generation.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, usmc0331horn said:

A jesus freak kid got a teacher to be forced to resign at my ex's high school in the early 2000s for showing Romeo and Juliet which was against her religious beliefs. This shit isn't something new and moral panics certainly aren't anything new or unique to this generation.

But the "grown ups" in charge being cowards and kowtowing to the performative outrage certainly is. Bunch of weak cowards like Texas Fight hiding behind their lie of "the executive order is da law, sowwee" rather than owning their hate and/or lack of spine

Edited by Captainant
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Drool 1
Posted
29 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

And that they had no issue with gay people, they just don't want them to have "special rights."

And now, they are making it illegal to even acknowledge that gay people exist.

Fantastic.

I wonder how our governor feels about "special rights" for handicapped people?

Posted
7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Have some balls, for once in your life -- BE the finder of fact. Tell us how YOU would rule in such a case.

Have a spine.  Just for giggles, once in your life.  Tell us how YOU would find in such a case, you pathetic coward.

Have a spine? balls? You seem to have all of the answers and are so troubled by this (and many issues). Take all of the time and energy from these posts and go file a lawsuit and win some arguments. Otherwise, you are just a spineless, nutless poster like you claim others to be. Go do something.

  • Fuck You 9
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, usmc0331horn said:

A jesus freak kid got a teacher to be forced to resign at my ex's high school in the early 2000s for showing Romeo and Juliet which was against her religious beliefs. This shit isn't something new and moral panics certainly aren't anything new or unique to this generation.

Sure but the social media aspect of this is new and now you can amplify and pressure administrations into action on a level not possible before unless you went to a school board meeting. 

Edited by mdmost
Posted
2 minutes ago, mdmost said:

Sure but the social media aspect of this is new and now you can amplify and pressure administrations into action on a level possible before. 

One step further, social media is engineered to pick up on outrage content and amplify it to drive more engagement, and make better margins on microtargeted ads. It's not just people using SM to amplify it, the platforms do it too to goose numbers.

The administors mistake that cacophony of shit for people actually caring, when they'll have moved on to the next thing if you just tell them to fuck off. Let that snowball, and you're at the point of the governor and president being led by the nose of social media to do whatever they can be outraged into doing

Posted
Just now, Captainant said:

The administors mistake that cacophony of shit for people actually caring, when they'll have moved on to the next thing if you just tell them to fuck off. Let that snowball, and you're at the point of the governor and president being led by the nose of social media to do whatever they can be outraged into doing

Yep, administrators need to stand up for their teachers/professors who are doing what they are supposed to be doing.

But hey - the state (and the Republican party nationwide) absolutely are ensuring the best and brightest of the teaching profession go into doing something else, because they do not want an educated population.  Just drones who can't think for themselves. 

"The President told me there's 2 genders, so there's only 2 genders"

"RFK said vaccines are bad, so vaccines are bad" 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
On 9/9/2025 at 8:07 AM, TwiceHorn said:

Students taking umbrage at what a professor teaches, yes.

University administrators and, especially, government officials taking action on it, not so much.

 

This is fucking horseshit.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Baldwin said:

Answer to the OP:

Because you liberal boomers have sat back and let the West fall apart while you benefitted from a beautiful system and we are the ones that have to deal with trying to survive with inflation, immigration etc. 

It is not more difficult than this.

Oh look, a neg, instead of discussion. How tolerant the people are!

Wow.  Is this a workswithseed sock?  

  • Drool 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Js1 said:

Yep, administrators need to stand up for their teachers/professors who are doing what they are supposed to be doing.

I believe the two that were removed attempted to do so. Beginning with intro courses, many schools across the state that offered multiple sections (of a single numerical course) were trying to achieve consistent content and instruction partially due to some of the logistics involved with high enrollments and also with the new law regarding instruction to minors (i.e. the 'adult' topic law) because there are more 17 year olds on campuses than one might think. That takes time, however, because one has to consider the ramifications downstream of such actions--changes to degree plans, grandfathering, money, time, bottlenecks, etc.

Posted
41 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

The Dean and Department Head were released from their administrative positions but were not fired from the school unlike the lecturer. The legal grounds for firing them were likely on shaky ground when examined by counsel.

You are clearly well versed in all of this. Please educate us how an at-will state works for employment?

  • Fuck You 8
Posted (edited)
49 minutes ago, usmc0331horn said:

This shit isn't something new and moral panics certainly aren't anything new or unique to this generation.

The band and football team at my school refused to sing/play the schools song because they claimed it was racist. We don’t want their fee fees to get hurt. (Am I doing this right?). It’s crazy.

Edited by Texas Fight
  • Fuck You 8
Posted
12 hours ago, txexlonghorn23 said:

shit's sad man.

and i found evidence of the course description that is from an archive before they changed it and the more recent one both indicating that the professor did not diverge from the course description.

I just wish more people understood the negative impact all this crap is having on Texas higher education regardless of someone's political/religious belief. It is scaring talent from wanting to work here.

This was the course description on February 23rd before it was removed.
image.png.06364d0ce9d9c5cd54129faf6a10183b.png

Current one:

image.png.c6a050d3e5cdacb45b5b717bbaa24bd9.png

I took American novel before 1920 as an upper division English core curriculum class in the late 80s or early 90s. It was taught by a very masculine lesbian, and while we did read Melville’s Benito Cereno and of course Huck Finn, and I think one Jack London novel, everything else was from female authors like Edith Wharton, Kate Chopin, Willa Cather, Sarah Orne Jewett. etc. I never even thought about dropping it, much less complaining to anyone about her choice of representative reading (because I was not a titty baby snowflake, or moron)

And it was an awesome class full of books I probably would not have otherwise been exposed to had I had some old white dude loading us up on Henry James, Theodore Dreiser, Stephen Crane and William Dean Howells.

I probably wouldn’t have read any of those female authors on my own, especially since my only exposure to Wharton was Ethan Frome in high school 

Oh also, we did read uncle Tom’s cabin, and she had a pretty awesome take on it. I wrote my main paper for the semester on the contrast between Babo and Uncle Tom.

so again, fuck that kid, fuck the university president, and fuck the daily texan snowflakes that see any of this as political

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

I took American novel before 1920 as an upper division English core curriculum class in the late 80s or early 90s. It was taught by a very masculine lesbian, and while we did read Melville’s Benito Cereno and of course Huck Finn, and I think one Jack London novel, everything else was from female authors like Edith Wharton, Kate Chopin, Willa Cather, Sarah Orne Jewett. etc. I never even thought about dropping it, much less complaining to anyone about her choice of representative reading (because I was not a titty baby snowflake, or moron)

And it was an awesome class full of books I probably would not have otherwise been exposed to had I had some old white dude loading us up on Henry James, Theodore Dreiser, Stephen Crane and William Dean Howells.

I probably wouldn’t have read any of those female authors on my own, especially since my only exposure to Wharton was Ethan Frome in high school 

Oh also, we did read uncle Tom’s cabin, and she had a pretty awesome take on it. I wrote my main paper for the semester on the contrast between Babo and Uncle Tom.

so again, fuck that kid, fuck the university president, and fuck the daily texan snowflakes that see any of this as political

Do you always plagiarize Cynthia Griffin Wolff or is this a new thing?

Edited by Texas Fight
Spell check
  • Fuck You 6
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Texas Fight said:

Do you always plagiarize Cynthia Griffin Wolff or is this a new thing?

Can’t even not fuck up one sentence without editing? What looks plagiarized to you in that response?

Edited by Sawbonz
And yes, I am going to neg every single response you make in this thread

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...