They obviously haven’t a clue as to what constitutes education. I went to a Jesuit college. You’d be surprised how open the discussions were. Today’s Jesuits, unfortunately, apparently are woke — which of course means purblind.
From the wiki, "Woke (/ˈwoʊk/ WOHK) is an English adjective meaning 'alert to racial prejudice and discrimination' that originated in African-American Vernacular English (AAVE). Beginning in the 2010s, it came to encompass a broader awareness of social inequalities such as sexism, and has also been used as shorthand for American Left ideas involving identity politics and social justice, such as the notion of white privilege and slavery reparations for African Americans."
It sounds silly for woke to be considered synonymous with purblind. And I understand that there exists a minority who like to use the term as a sarcastic put down. "Oh, you're woke, nah nah nah, la-de-da!" It's like using "genius" for the same purpose. It's like sarcastically calling Frank Wilson a book editor. Someone who is indeed woke is 'alert to racial prejudice and discrimination' and a book editor is a book editor. What's so bad about that? Those who aren't just aren't.
From the "UMass Lowell Acceptable Use Policy" pdf, here are the only 2 "prohibitive actions" when using university resources, which contain the term "offensive":
j. Use information technology resource irresponsibly or in a manner that needlessly affects the work of others. This includes transmitting or making accessible offensive, or harassing material; intentionally, recklessly or negligently damaging any system (i.e. by the introduction of any virus, worm, or trojan-horse program); intentionally damaging or violating the privacy of information not belonging to you; or intentionally misusing or allowing misuse of system resources
k. Use information technology resources or services for intentionally transmitting, communicating or accessing pornographic or sexually explicit material, images, text or other offensive material except when clearly required to do so in the course of their work
If the university were to unconstitutionally define something as offensive, then it would not be able to enforce the rule. So in the context of j, this would mean "offensive, or harassing material." I actually know someone in New Jersey, working at a public library, who was sending our mutual friend Judith "offensive, or harassing material." From Ontario, Judith used such a rule, to put a stop to it. In context, it seems to mostly go back to earlier in the pdf, when it was stated that a certain amount of personal emailing is okay, but don't let it interfere with your work.
On item k, I do not believe sending photos of people wearing "Trump Won" t-shirts would come under the category of pornography. It would be quite the court case.
I see no reason to call the University where I got my AS and where I studied for an MA, to edit their policy statement. To note, Rivier where I got my BA is not Jesuit, but is Catholic.
This is more horn bowing than whistle blowing. This is a non-issue.
From the wiki, "Woke (/ˈwoʊk/ WOHK) is an English adjective meaning 'alert to racial prejudice and discrimination' that originated in African-American Vernacular English (AAVE). Beginning in the 2010s, it came to encompass a broader awareness of social inequalities such as sexism, and has also been used as shorthand for American Left ideas involving identity politics and social justice, such as the notion of white privilege and slavery reparations for African Americans."
ReplyDeleteIt sounds silly for woke to be considered synonymous with purblind. And I understand that there exists a minority who like to use the term as a sarcastic put down. "Oh, you're woke, nah nah nah, la-de-da!" It's like using "genius" for the same purpose. It's like sarcastically calling Frank Wilson a book editor. Someone who is indeed woke is 'alert to racial prejudice and discrimination' and a book editor is a book editor. What's so bad about that? Those who aren't just aren't.
ReplyDeleteFrom the "UMass Lowell Acceptable Use Policy" pdf, here are the only 2 "prohibitive actions" when using university resources, which contain the term "offensive":
j. Use information technology resource irresponsibly or in a manner that needlessly affects the work of others. This includes transmitting or making accessible offensive, or harassing material; intentionally, recklessly or negligently damaging any system (i.e. by the introduction of any virus, worm, or trojan-horse program); intentionally damaging or violating the privacy of information not belonging to you; or intentionally misusing or allowing misuse of system resources
k. Use information technology resources or services for intentionally transmitting, communicating or accessing pornographic or sexually explicit material, images, text or other offensive material except when clearly required to do so in the course of their work
If the university were to unconstitutionally define something as offensive, then it would not be able to enforce the rule. So in the context of j, this would mean "offensive, or harassing material." I actually know someone in New Jersey, working at a public library, who was sending our mutual friend Judith "offensive, or harassing material." From Ontario, Judith used such a rule, to put a stop to it. In context, it seems to mostly go back to earlier in the pdf, when it was stated that a certain amount of personal emailing is okay, but don't let it interfere with your work.
On item k, I do not believe sending photos of people wearing "Trump Won" t-shirts would come under the category of pornography. It would be quite the court case.
I see no reason to call the University where I got my AS and where I studied for an MA, to edit their policy statement. To note, Rivier where I got my BA is not Jesuit, but is Catholic.
This is more horn bowing than whistle blowing. This is a non-issue.