Post: #1

Harvard goes full retard:

Harvard abolishes 'master' in titles in slavery row

Quote:Harvard University in the US is going to remove the word "master" from academic titles, after protests from students who claimed the title had echoes of slavery.

House masters, in charge of residential halls at the university, will become known as "faculty deans".

Harvard Law School is also deciding whether to change its official seal, because of links to slavery.

US campuses have faced a series of protests over allegations of racism.

Harvard has not agreed that the use of "master" represented a link to slavery, but it has accepted campaigners' calls for a name change.

It will mean changing the job titles of 24 members of staff - but will not affect other uses of "master", such as a master's level degree.

Harvard academics say that the word "master" derives from the Latin term "magister" - a form of address for scholars or teachers. It is similar to terms such as "school master" or "head master".
But protesters have argued that whatever its original derivation, the word now has connotations of slavery.

Student campaigners are also calling for a change in the official seal of Harvard Law School, with a sit-in being held this week.

The seal includes the coat of arms of 18th Century college donor Isaac Royall, who as well as establishing the college's first professorship in law, was a notoriously brutal slaveholder.

Isaac Royall, whose money helped to endow the university, has been accused of burning slaves alive.

A decision on whether to change the seal is expected to be made soon.

Disputes about race and identity have affected many US campuses.

Carol Christ, director of the Center for Studies in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley, has said that "symbolic fights are always about real and current political issues" and race and diversity remain major campus issues.

"Race is so traumatic and central an issue in American culture," said Dr Christ.

Last month, Amherst College, in Massachusetts, accepted student demands to drop links with its informal mascot, Jeffery Amherst, an 18th Century general accused of advocating infecting native Americans with smallpox.

And there have been sit-ins at Princeton in a bid to rename a school named after Woodrow Wilson, because of claims the former US president held racist views.

The protests by US students are part of a wider international campaign challenging historical titles, statues and emblems.

But further demands for "safe space", where some students have called for the right to study away from attitudes or behaviour they find offensive, have been rejected by university leaders and others who have argued for the importance of protecting free speech.

In South Africa, a statue of Cecil Rhodes was removed from the University of Cape Town, with protesters attacking the statue as an emblem of colonialism and apartheid.

But a call to remove a statue of the 19th Century politician from Oriel College in Oxford University was rejected.

Louise Richardson, the university's vice-chancellor, said students needed to be able to debate and confront "ideas that make them uncomfortable".

I think Harvard's decision is ridiculous - "Master" in this instance has no connotations with slavery. Even it did, so fucking what?! We can't go around erasing the past because people are offended by it today. They should act like fucking adults and deal with it.

Plenty of organisations and individuals did inappropriate stuff back in the day - are we supposed to erase them from history?

Post: #2

And people pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to send their kids to that shithole?

Post: #3

Post: #4

When elders make no demands of the young, the young cannot grow up.

Instead of forcing their students to confront the often-dark reality of human nature, Harvard is giving away a teachable moment necessary to a person's maturation.

Further, and possibly more importantly, these debacles reinforce to these young folk that symbols are more important than substance. Toppling a statute makes a person feel mighty powerful in the short-term, but it doesn't change anything in the long-term.

You have to be the change you want to see in the world. I'd imagine the only thing these students fear more than the world not changing is they themselves changing. The impotent fear that lurks beneath these petulant attacks on "oppressive symbols" speaks to a personality afraid to confront the person most resistant to change in their life: themselves.

Post: #5

This is like Idiocracy,except that for adorable fat oafs who watch people getting hit in the balls you get entitled crybullies who watch people with decency and/or intelligence get horribly tortured

Post: #6

Harvard do away with cotton because of links to slavery.

Post: #7

So I can't get a Massa o' Science degree?

Post: #8

Very deep into the darkest part of my inner self, i am laughing to this shit.

Post: #9

So, will they also be changing Master's degrees to something else?

Post: #10

The title of master was abolished a long time ago as a title for a bachelor. Because once men realized they became slaves to their families, they said "Lets be masters of our lives for life."

It is part of a running joke for the blogger seanmalstrom. He is bit of manosphere lite right, but most of his blog is focused on business and video games.

Post: #11

This may sound amusing, but I see it as part of a dangerous trend. SJWs are systematically trying to dismantle historical traditions. They are trying to cut us off from our past and our heritage, so that they can whitewash history and control the minds of the future.

It is very sinister, and is needs to be resisted.

The irony here is that the word "master" in the academic context has absolutely nothing to do with slavery. Nothing at all.

I believe the etymology of this word is derived from the Latin "magister" which means "teacher" or "rector." It has absolutely nothing to do with pre-Civil War slavery.

This little drama reminds me of the battle over the word "Plantation" in the context of talking about the state of Rhode Island. A few years back, some ignorant people objected to the use of the word "Plantation" in the context of talking about the historic colony of Rhode Island and Providence.

The "Plantation" of Rhode Island had absolutely nothing to do with "slavery." It was just a name given to a colony. But that didn't stop the ignorant mob from shrieking.

Beyond this, I think, the typical SJW is such an undisciplined, cowardly loser that they can't even bear to hear the word "master" in any context. It reminds them that there are hierarchical relationships in the world, and this offends their dainty, effete sensibilities. They don't want any discipline, control, or restraint on their impulses. This is the real reason.

These ignorant people thought that the word had something to do with "slavery." They were mistaken. The word "Plantation" in the 17th century meant a "colony" or "planting" of settlers. The word was so used to described the importation of British settlers into Northern Ireland, during a process known as the "The Plantation."

But SJWs do not know language or history. Even if they do, they don't care; their goal is to control and take over.

And the chickenshits on the Harvard faculty are sitting there and allowing it, just like the military generals sat there like chickenshits and let the SJWs in Congress tell them what to do. People who should be fighting for us are not doing it. They are selling us out.

Post: #12

(02-25-2016 02:03 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  This may sound amusing, but I see it as part of a dangerous trend. SJWs are systematically trying to dismantle historical traditions. They are trying to cut us off from our past and our heritage, so that they can whitewash history and control the minds of the future.

They may try, but like anything else they get their hands on it will destroy the credibility of the institution.

Is this a bad thing? I dunno, nothing would make me smile more than watching these places become relics of history. From the ashes rises the phoenix.

Post: #13

(02-25-2016 02:03 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  This may sound amusing, but I see it as part of a dangerous trend. SJWs are systematically trying to dismantle historical traditions. They are trying to cut us off from our past and our heritage, so that they can whitewash history and control the minds of the future.

It is very sinister, and is needs to be resisted.

The irony here is that the word "master" in the academic context has absolutely nothing to do with slavery. Nothing at all.

I believe the etymology of this word is derived from the Latin "magister" which means "teacher" or "rector." It has absolutely nothing to do with pre-Civil War slavery.

This little drama reminds me of the battle over the word "Plantation" in the context of talking about the state of Rhode Island. A few years back, some ignorant people objected to the use of the word "Plantation" in the context of talking about the historic colony of Rhode Island and Providence.

The "Plantation" of Rhode Island had absolutely nothing to do with "slavery." It was just a name given to a colony. But that didn't stop the ignorant mob from shrieking.

Beyond this, I think, the typical SJW is such an undisciplined, cowardly loser that they can't even bear to hear the word "master" in any context. It reminds them that there are hierarchical relationships in the world, and this offends their dainty, effete sensibilities. They don't want any discipline, control, or restraint on their impulses. This is the real reason.

These ignorant people thought that the word had something to do with "slavery." They were mistaken. The word "Plantation" in the 17th century meant a "colony" or "planting" of settlers. The word was so used to described the importation of British settlers into Northern Ireland, during a process known as the "The Plantation."

But SJWs do not know language or history. Even if they do, they don't care; their goal is to control and take over.

And the chickenshits on the Harvard faculty are sitting there and allowing it, just like the military generals sat there like chickenshits and let the SJWs in Congress tell them what to do. People who should be fighting for us are not doing it. They are selling us out.

Unfortunately an educated response doesn't count for a whole lot. I remember hearing over a decade ago controversy over the use of the word niggardly" (meaning cheap) or the phrase "To call a spade a spade" (meaning to call it as it is). Some people just can't help but to spot made up racism everywhere. I once used the term "fly in the ointment" and the girl I was talking to was shocked. Because flies are black, and anything that even references the color black in a negative context is racist. Other people's ignorance is now reason enough to have to censor your speech.

Post: #14

Harvard should be more niggardly with these minorities demands.

Post: #15

MIT has gone full retard too - this article is from 2 weeks ago

MIT Administrators Propose Change to House Master Title

Quote:Debates over race and historical legacies have traveled about two miles downstream to MIT, where several House masters voted to request changing the title, which some associate with slavery.

In January, the MIT House masters present at a meeting unanimously voted to consider changing their title of “Housemaster,” which, similar to the Harvard position, names faculty who lead residence halls of 100 to 500 students. House masters, administrators, and students are currently debating the change, according to John M. Essigmann, one of MIT’s more than 25 Housemasters.

Essigmann wrote in an email that administrators narrowed potential replacements from about 20 choices down to two terms: House Dean and Head of House. MIT Chancellor Cynthia Barnhart must approve the proposal before administrators can change the title, according to Essigmann.

Proponents of the name change framed the debate in largely similar terms as Harvard’s House masters, who decided unanimously in November to change their title. Dean of the College and Cabot House master Rakesh Khurana said in November that he would inform the College of a new title early this year, but administrators have yet to settle on revised nomenclature.

In emails between MIT students and faculty, Essigmann wrote that the decision to replace the title arose “primarily because of the negative historical connotations associated with the term.”

“I do note that a significant number of students prefer the existing Housemaster title,” he wrote. “I believe, however, that the historical negatives of the word ‘master’ and the fact that it is not gender neutral, may not have been considered by those students.”

Many MIT House masters and a member of the Dormitory Council—a student body representing MIT students living on campus—declined to comment, saying administrators have not yet decided on a new title.

Two miles west of MIT, Harvard administrators have also yet to provide a selection of alternative titles, although some have speculated potential picks.

According to Essigmann, MIT administrators settled on the two terms because of their gender neutrality and avoidance of “words that might cause confusion or offense.” He added that Head of House in particular is favorite among many students, because of its appeal to Harry Potter fans.

For Peter F. Lake ’81, a professor at Stetson University College of Law who specializes in higher education law, debates at MIT and Harvard reflect a broader shift among national universities that are revisiting their past and putting legacies on trial.

“It’s kind of a new way about looking into the past and reviewing it through the modern lens and thinking about what deserves to come forward and what needs to be revived,” Lake said.

Lake said the intensity of debates over historical legacies have become more charged in recent years. At Harvard, University President Drew G. Faust advocated against renaming buildings en masse, though she has addressed recent student protests over support for minority students on campus.

Lake predicted that other universities may follow in Harvard and MIT’s footsteps by bringing their controversial histories into public debate.

“There’s no question that when a school shifts, supporters of a different model get a shot in the arm and say ‘hey they changed things at Harvard, why not here?’” Lake added. “There’s no reason things have to be static or unreviewable.”

So a naming convention is OK because it's like Harry Potter? Isn't "reviewing through a modern lens and deciding what comes forward" a soft form of fascism? Who the fuck are these people to decide what is historically significant? They've already showed by their actions that they are spineless cowards - it seems that most students are OK with the status quo.

So where does "House Master" come from?

from Harvard Magazine

Quote:In December, the heads of all 12 undergraduate Houses decided unanimously to abandon the title “House master” (imported in the 1930s from the Oxbridge residential systems), in favor of a new term more in line with their role in the twenty-first century; the University is expected to announce a new title this semester. Said Michael Rosengarten, co-master of Mather House, “[The title] had an association with slavery in the South, and you just can’t divorce them.…We have a long history relating to Oxford and Cambridge, but times change, and we have to make sure the University isn’t so inflexible that it can’t change.”

He and Mather House master Christie McDonald, Smith professor of French language and literature and professor of comparative literature, had, as a joke, briefly changed their own titles to “chief executive officers” on the House website a few weeks ahead of the college-wide decision. “It was a non-gendered name that described most of what we do,” Rosengarten said, alluding to the feeling among some that “master” is biased with respect to gender as well as race.

So Oxford/Cambridge = Bad, and Harry Potter = Good?

Doesn't anybody out there have the balls to say this is all bullshit?!

Post: #16

FYI, gentlemen...

Quote:It will mean changing the job titles of 24 members of staff - but will not affect other uses of "master", such as a master's level degree.
Harvard academics say that the word "master" derives from the Latin term "magister" - a form of address for scholars or teachers. It is similar to terms such as "school master" or "head master".

(02-25-2016 02:57 PM)RioNomad Wrote:  Harvard should be more niggardly with these minorities demands.

Yeah, when are university administrators ever going to learn?

N*ggers gonna n*g.



You know, naggers.

Post: #17

(02-25-2016 03:22 PM)WalterBlack Wrote:  Doesn't anybody out there have the balls to say this is all bullshit?!

Nope, because the students are not seen as students but rather as "customers" and they act accordingly. If I was shelling out 50-60k per year for tuition, I would do whatever the fuck I want, too.

Post: #18

So now they're just baters?

Post: #19

The following cultural icons are also being strongly petitioned (via attorney demand letters) to change the "master" in their names to "person"

1. Grandmaster Flash And The Furious Five

2. Money Masters of Our Time (book by John Train)

3. The estate of the deceased Jam Master Jay (of Run DMC)

4. "The Masters" Annual Pro Golf Tournament

5. The character "Master Blaster" from the 1985 film "Mad Mad Beyond Thunderdome"

Post: #20

This reminds me of another SJW assault on our language, culture and heritage. The word police SJWs also want to abolish the term "founding fathers" and make it "founding persons" because y'know, patriarchy and stuff. How much more can they try and distort our history and re-write history books through their modern day fish eye lenses of insanity?

Post: #21

Quote:The irony here is that the word "master" in the academic context has absolutely nothing to do with slavery. Nothing at all.

I believe the etymology of this word is derived from the Latin "magister" which means "teacher" or "rector." It has absolutely nothing to do with pre-Civil War slavery.

Even beyond dismantling historical traditions, it is like meaning itself is being hijacked. There are definitely situations where someone says something unconsciously racist and it needs to be brought to their attention for them to remedy.

But now, it seems like it we have thrown away the whole concept of the reasonable person, and without this, we are absolutely and unequivocably sunk as a society:

Quote:The standard also holds that each person owes a duty to behave as a reasonable person would under the same or similar circumstances.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_person

If no one is held to being reasonable, then it doesn't even matter if anyone is knowingly being racist, or being unconsciously racist, or even not being racist at all.

The standard of the reasonable person has been replaced by the standard of distant plausibility. (Note, this standard, while already in effect, hasn't even been named yet.) The standard of distant plausibility goes like this:

In order to accuse someone of racism or sexism or any kind of chauvinism, not only do you not have to be reasonable about it, but the claim doesn't even have to be plausibly plausible. All it takes for one person, anyone, anywhere, to interpret any action as possibly offensive, is for that person to make a charge that is not absolutely impossible.

If their statement is not absolutely impossible, than it shall be treated as if it were the only possible possibility.

At this point, the standard of distant plausibility shall be invoked, and all other possible interpretations shall be considered null and void.

This allows all sorts of terms to be renamed, at any time and anywhere. It can create new speech codes, which can then change at will, at whim, as well has leading to buildings being renamed, and on and on.

And it leads not only to situations like the one in the OP, but ever proliferating others:

How about this recent one. A couple of college kids post a picture of themselves wearing a facemask beauty product:




This immediately leads to pandemonium when someone, somewhere invokes the standard of distant plausibility and declares the two racists for posting a picture of themselves in blackface:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...z41DHlMnZj

Another recent example. In order to celebrate the Chinese Lunar New Year of the Monkey, which begins Feb 8, the Sacramento Kings basketball teams tried to give away these tee shirts on a home game Feb 1:




However basketball player DeMarcus Cousins, invoking the standard of distant plausibility, found the fact that the shirts were being given out on the first day of Black History month to be a clear sign of racial insensitivity, and the promotion was cancelled, and the shirts were removed.

Yes, it is getting serious when the standard of distant plausibility can even lead to the possibility of free shit you were about to get being taken back even before you get it.

(I may even end up being forced to edit that ^ sentence, seeing as how it carries an implied reference to the term "Indian giving.")

http://www.eurweb.com/2016/02/sacramento...complains/

Now, to be fair, it is possible that a secret racist was sneaking some underhanded insults into the equation. However, if you look at the Kings home schedule (http://espn.go.com/nba/team/schedule/_/n...ento-kings), you can see it is much more likely that the day was chosen because there was a run of away games for the Kings, and the dates of February 1st and 2nd were the two days closest to the beginning of the Chinese Lunar Year, and they had to pick one of the two.

It is unlikely that the people who schedule all the events and promotions for the venue were even thinking about the first day of Black History Month as a separate date apart from Black History Month as a whole, and you could easily take any day from the month and look for a possible insult or grievance in the choice of object given away or the food they chose to serve or whatever.

So I am gonna go with, using the now archaic "reasonable person standard," it was only DeMarcus Cousins who connected the animal on the Chinese New Year tee shirt with black people, and decided to make an issue of it. To everyone else, it was a free tee shirt celebrating the Chinese New Year, and had nothing to do with black people at all.

Yeah, I think we are not only shitting on history, but we are also having a go at meaning itself right now, and if we don't watch out we will be bickering with each other endlessly pointlessly over irrelevancies, while the world gives up the ghost in the background.

Post: #22

There is such a term in the UK known as 'Master of the house', given to the man and his son's. In my mind the term master, when associated with academic or a skill is simply describing the skill level of that individual. You have mastered it, ergo you are a master of that particular science/skill/vocation.

Once again ignorance has won the day.

Post: #23

Post: #24

Harvard did indeed go 'Full Retard'

Post: #25

It is a conspiracy to have RVF removed from the greater society rather than dominating it. Yet this is exactly what society truly wants, RVFers as their masters. Its time to ante up our societal game skills. This is what Roosh has been training us to do all these years.