OT: Mizzou black football players taking a stand

[Carl Spackler]

I know white families in rural CT, who have kids that go to school with duct tape shoes and tell their teachers that they eat roadkill for dinner when they can and live within a short walk from affluent black families that are living the American dream and have kids in the same schools. I'm not f---king joking now.

Your life is what you choose to make of it, regardless of what choices life makes for you. As an adult. Children don't have the same choices and are often happy under any circumstances no matter how awful. Somewhere in between are teenage high schoolers and college students.

Once again it was foolish of me to write something here drawing a comparison to adults mired in a racially oppressive mindset to battlefield medicine and exxpect it to be understood.

Better I had just cited the numerous examples of black professional athletes who failed to cut loose people and we're dragged down, while others cut people loose as they become successful and may even be vilified for it.

That would probably have been a better choice on my part.

Please stick this in cesspool.

 

[tzznandrew]

I know white families in rural CT, who have kids that go to school with duct tape shoes and tell their teachers that they eat roadkill for dinner when they can and live within a short walk from affluent black families that are living the American dream and have kids in the same schools. I'm not f---king joking now.

Your life is what you choose to make of it, regardless of what choices life makes for you. As an adult. Children don't have the same choices and are often happy under any circumstances no matter how awful. Somewhere in between are teenage high schoolers and college students.

Once again it was foolish of me to write something here drawing a comparison to adults mired in a racially oppressive mindset to battlefield medicine and exxpect it to be understood.

Better I had just cited the numerous examples of black professional athletes who failed to cut loose people and we're dragged down, while others cut people loose as they become successful and may even be vilified for it.

That would probably have been a better choice on my part.

Please stick this in cesspool.

To be clear, I understood your point. I find it utterly naive and divorced from our reality. As you find mine point of view. Perhaps it's best to leave it at that and not turn this into a pissing contest about who "understands" whom.

 

[Stainmaster]

Its clear that all quotas and Affirmative Action programs need to end and just for the reasons that Stairmaster outlined:. Blacks are seldom given credit for intellectual achievement. These programs have long since passed any useful purpose.. There are quite literally four major groups in this country: whites,blacks, Hispanics and Asians. No group should be given preferential treatment. Status has to be earned on an individual basis, not group preference or grievance

If Affirmative Action didn't exist, people in power would become almost unanimously white again. It protects against racists in HR departments/admissions offices who believe that whites are more deserving simply because they are white. Eliminating Affirmative Action enables those actions.

 

[Stainmaster]

There so many things that are totally wrong with what you say, I don't even know where to start. "White privilege means you aren't held accountable for the actions of your race as a whole" So, we impose collective punishment for historical wrongs long since passed? Do we ignore statistical reality that blacks year over year commit a disproportionate amount of crime? Do we ignore that black kids are disproportionately failing in our schools in front the same teachers and with the same resources? Do we ignore a black thug culture which holds up disrespect for woman, drugs and crime as a good? Do we ignore that the black family structure has disintegrated? Do we ignore that college admission standards for blacks are substantially lower than white persons in every academic measure? And, yes, I'm damn tired of working my ass off for able bodied folks irrespective of color, race or creed with a thousand excuses why they cant work when we have an administration saying we need to bring in immigrants because Americans wont do hard labor jobs. What is really racist is the assumption that white males get things easily like there some secret handshake and money is bestowed on you. The people I know struggle, work hard and sacrifice in ways that make a little feces seem irrelevant. On the point, I distinctly remember digging out sewers during college for a contractor and that, my friend, is the difference in a nutshell. Sadly, there is nothing more that I would like to see is every person succeed, but somehow when you suggest that maybe its starts with culture and character you're a racist. Racism has been dead a long time and I don't think there are many who want to see another man put down or denied opportunity. But there is a whole grievance industry built on perpetuating the myth of bias and disadvantage. I know of no black person who does the rights things that is not well regarded and frankly advantaged beyond a white person in todays world in almost every way whether in college admissions, affirmative action quotas in hiring and advancement, contract set asides, etc.. To sum up, I think you are full of crap.

So racism has been dead for a long time, but you list a bunch of reasons that make it seem as if you believe that blacks are inherently inferior. I would at least have a little respect if you owned up to what your views actually meant.

 

[Stainmaster]

It's this kind of talk that makes me want to go buy a gun and shoot myself in the face. Good Lord.

I wish I could be proven wrong. But Joe the Plumber's position is held by far too many people for that to be done.

 

[Carl Spackler]

To be clear, I understood your point. I find it utterly naive and divorced from our reality. As you find mine point of view. Perhaps it's best to leave it at that and not turn this into a pissing contest about who "understands" whom.

The only thing divorced from reality is the content of your #276 post in response to what you quoted from me. It smacks of college age knowledge and will to make theveorld a better place with complete failure to acknowledge that there are things within your control, and things that aren't, the wisdom, kniwledge and experience to know the difference.

Its discussions like this one that makes me wonder WTF is happening with our educational system in this country. Beyond my scope though.

I can say with utmost certainty though, that anyone reaching adulthood regsrdlrss of background, color, or whatevef that is capable of organizing and leading people toward productive goals based on their own skill sets is going to be light years ahead of the current demographic coming out of u.s. colleges.

Its thd children in tnis country that are brought up without the guidance to have a chance that breaks my heart.

 

[raf46]

well.. the University does happen to be in Missouri...

Hopefully there were problems that needed to be fixed. My only problem is the use of the term "white male privilege" That is too blanket a statement to be thrown around. My feeling is that 99% of those of us on the Bone-Yard, have worked very long and hard, for what we have.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

I wish I could be proven wrong. But Joe the Plumber's position is held by far too many people for that to be done.

You're interpreting other people's position to meet your own opinion about them. I sincerely doubt that if you could guarantee people would stop dying at the hands of guns if everyone simply "gave them up", they wouldn't do it in a heartbeat.

Your statement is akin to Waylon's sick argument that if you vote Republican then you are for dead kids in schools. Only not as patently offensive.

 

[tzznandrew]

The only thing divorced from reality is the content of your #276 post in response to what you quoted from me. It smacks of college age knowledge and will to make theveorld a better place with complete failure to acknowledge that there are things within your control, and things that aren't, the wisdom, kniwledge and experience to know the difference.

Its discussions like this one that makes me wonder WTF is happening with our educational system in this country. Beyond my scope though.

I can say with utmost certainty though, that anyone reaching adulthood regsrdlrss of background, color, or whatevef that is capable of organizing and leading people toward productive goals based on their own skill sets is going to be light years ahead of the current demographic coming out of u.s. colleges.

Its thd children in tnis country that are brought up without the guidance to have a chance that breaks my heart.

Lolz. I gave us an out here to agree to disagree. You're not going to change my mind here, at least not with these arguments. Facts matter, and when I tell you that qualified black men are called back for a job interview less than white felons and you just tell me some platitude about "everyone is capable of leading productive lives," I have to wonder what world you live in.

Telling me I'm divorced from reality--which I already assumed you thought--doesn't change my mind. Nor does it change the fact that it seems to me you live in that fantasy world you accuse me of. In your world, either all are treated equally by the law and by society and have equal chances to succeed (which is objectively untrue even if it is, legally speaking, potentially true) or even worse, you don't care that our society doesn't live up to its high and noble ideas and merely suggest that people should deal with the injustices and muddle on without complaining. Perhaps there is a third option. I find the first naive and divorced from reality, and I find the second callous and unjust.

I am not college age.

I understand there are things that I can control and things I can't.

You seem to think organizing against racism is not "a productive goal."

Lastly, the students coming out of school these days are fantastic. The older generations always denigrate the younger, and while the millenials are not perfect, they get a bad rap. They get guidance, and they'll be just fine.

 

[tzznandrew]

You're interpreting other people's position to meet your own opinion about them. I sincerely doubt that if you could guarantee people would stop dying at the hands of guns if everyone simply "gave them up", they'd do it.

Your statement is akin to Waylon's sick argument that of you vote Republican then you are for dead kids in schools. Only not as patently offensive.

God, Waylon's arguments are the absolute worst.

Guns are a separate argument, and I'm certainly much more sympathetic to @Stairmaster 's argument here. But we can here both unite in thinking that Waylon's mixture of strawman and reductio ad absurdum is a giant frustration.

 

[tzznandrew]

Hopefully there were problems that needed to be fixed. My only problem is the use of the term "white male privilege" That is too blanket a statement to be thrown around. My feeling is that 99% of those of us on the Bone-Yard, have worked very long and hard, for what we have.

I think the term is poorly named. It really in no way should suggest that white males don't work hard. Really the issue at hand is that white males start with certain advantages that we have no control over, and that women and people of color do not have. I don't love the term as it is.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Lolz. I gave us an out here to agree to disagree. You're not going to change my mind here, at least not with these arguments. Facts matter, and when I tell you that qualified black men are called back for a job interview less than white felons and you just tell me some platitude about "everyone is capable of leading productive lives," I have to wonder what world you live in.

Telling me I'm divorced from reality--which I already assumed you thought--doesn't change my mind. Nor does it change the fact that it seems to me you live in that fantasy world you accuse me of. In your world, either all are treated equally by the law and by society and have equal chances to succeed (which is objectively untrue even if it is, legally speaking, potentially true) or even worse, you don't care that our society doesn't live up to its high and noble ideas and merely suggest that people should deal with the injustices and muddle on without complaining. Perhaps there is a third option. I find the first naive and divorced from reality, and I find the second callous and unjust.

I am not college age.

I understand there are things that I can control and things I can't.

You seem to think organizing against racism is not "a productive goal."

Lastly, the students coming out of school these days are fantastic. The older generations always denigrate the younger, and while the millenials are not perfect, they get a bad rap. They get guidance, and they'll be just fine.

I wrote "smacks of college age knowledge". Doesn't matter how old you are in dog years.

I remain focused on the discussion at hand here, which is about a university population of students, a very impressionable and almost a poin of no return impressionable actual age - having engaged in a powerful activity, and by their own words and video images, both not going into it, or coming out of it with positive learning experience and any sort of positive change to demonstrate.

I have written extensively about the student motivated action being problemstic because of no apparent thought and foresight to consequences. I wrote that I have little patience for complainers who do not work to better themselves and those around them. I don't care if its a racial oppression issue on a college campus or a problem with the duty list on a rotation of grunts at a supply base in Bahrain.

I made a statement that I believe to be true, in that it is very difficult to teach an old dog new tricks. Adults that are ired in a mindset of racial oppression are in a very difficult place. Children, and that includes up to college age, are still able and willing to learn new tricks. Children will becomd though, what thet are educated and brought up to be. Adults very seldom change. I used an analogy of bsttlefield medicine, which if anyone knows anything about, involves serious decision making.





You took something I wrote and turned it into an issue of police brutality, and a political statement that's totally disconnected,and refldctive of your own views of racial oppression projected at me.

But go ahead, call me the racist. Wouldn't be thr first time. No skin off my back. In my life and work, the color of a mans skin, means nothing.

 

[tzznandrew]

I wrote "smacks of college age knowledge". Doesn't matter how old you are in dog years.

I remain focused on the discussion at hand here, which is about a university population of students, a very impressionable and almost a poin of no return impressionable actual age - having engaged in a powerful activity, and by their own words and video images, both not going into it, or coming out of it with positive learning experience and any sort of positive change to demonstrate.

I have written extensively about the student motivated action being problemstic because of no apparent thought and foresight to consequences. I wrote that I have little patience for complainers who do not work to better themselves and those around them. I don't care if its a racial oppression issue on a college campus or a problem with the duty list on a rotation of grunts at a supply base in Bahrain.

I made a statement that I believe to be true, in that it is very difficult to teach an old dog new tricks. Adults that are ired in a mindset of racial oppression are in a very difficult place. Children, and that includes up to college age, are still able and willing to learn new tricks. Children will becomd though, what thet are educated and brought up to be. Adults very seldom change. I used an analogy of bsttlefield medicine, which if anyone knows anything about, involves serious decision making.





You took something I wrote and turned it into an issue of police brutality, and a political statement that's totally disconnected,and refldctive of your own views of racial oppression projected at me.

But go ahead, call me the racist. Wouldn't be thr first time. No skin off my back. In my life and work, the color of a mans skin, means nothing.

Where did I call you a racist?

You seemed to suggest that that agitating against social injustice is not "productive," right? I'd argue that demonstrating that organizing and ousting a president who actively neglected their community is "positive learning experience" with some sort "of positive change demonstrate." Additionally, it certainly was done with the intention of better their community, a community they felt was being hurt by a negligent president.

I'm still actively confused about how they are mere complainers. I stand by my point about your logic here: you don't think there is injustice in this country (hence talking about it is complaining) or you don't care. I don't mean to mischaracterize, but I don't see any other way that it is not "complaining."

Also, what do you mean a "mindset of racial oppression"? This is just absolutely confusing to me, because--once again--I can provide you facts about how society systematically does oppress people. When you say to work to better yourself, and I respond with "even when African-Americans do, they receive fewer call backs than white felons," there doesn't seem to be a coherent response on your end...at least not one I'm seeing.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Where did I call you a racist?

You seemed to suggest that that agitating against social injustice is not "productive," right? I'd argue that demonstrating that organizing and ousting a president who actively neglected their community is "positive learning experience" with some sort "of positive change demonstrate." Additionally, it certainly was done with the intention of better their community, a community they felt was being hurt by a negligent president.

I'm still actively confused about how they are mere complainers. I stand by my point about your logic here: you don't think there is injustice in this country (hence talking about it is complaining) or you don't care. I don't mean to mischaracterize, but I don't see any other way that it is not "complaining."

Also, what do you mean a "mindset of racial oppression"? This is just absolutely confusing to me, because--once again--I can provide you facts about how society systematically does oppress people. When you say to work to better yourself, and I respond with "even when African-Americans do, they receive fewer call backs than white felons," there doesn't seem to be a coherent response on your end...at least not one I'm seeing.

Write something that's not full of your projections and assumptions and I'm happy to engage in decent discussion. At least you're asking questions, and that's a good sign.

Pretty much every single one of your conclusions/assumptions in what you jyst wrote about me is wrong and you're not separating and relating real world examples from ideologic concepts very well. I would argue against your conclusions,especially your views about thd positive aspects of forcing domeone outbof a leadership role outside of estsblishing and acting upon proper accountability and review processes.

 

[Stainmaster]

You're interpreting other people's position to meet your own opinion about them. I sincerely doubt that if you could guarantee people would stop dying at the hands of guns if everyone simply "gave them up", they wouldn't do it in a heartbeat.

Your statement is akin to Waylon's sick argument that if you vote Republican then you are for dead kids in schools. Only not as patently offensive.

I don't think this is true. The pro-gun spectrum is a wide one; you have the people who are against excessive government regulation in general, those for whom guns are are a party of their culture and family traditions, those who need them to provide for their own sustenance, and those who carry to ameliorate their personal safety, all of whom seem amenable to certain forms of compromise with those looking for some type of gun control. Then you have the hardcore folks -- those who want absolutely zero restriction on type of firearm, amount of ammunition any of that. Most of the people in the first few subgroups I listed could at least be persuaded that the average American doesn't need a plethora of AR-15s or tens of thousands of military-grade bullets. But the nuts believe in the 2nd Amendment for a different reason; they want their guns for the purpose of fighting off the U.S. Army in a hypothetical hostile government takeover of civil society. This is a legitimate concern of theirs, and they're dead set in their beliefs. They will not back down no matter how many lives are at stake, because they believe that if gun control exists, even more lives will be lost at the hands of a totalitarian state being established in this country. These are the men and women who thought that Operation Jade Helm was the precursor to a military invasion of our own country. They aren't concerned with issues like civilians dying at the hands of other civilians because they are thinking in terms of what they see as the big picture. For them, losing the ability to gain completely unfiltered access to weaponry is a threat to their very existence. Granted, I may be over-representing how prevalent these "Joe the Plumber" types are compared to more moderate gun owners. If that's true, then shame on me for propagating a misleading argument. But they exist, and they make their voices heard as loud as (heck, probably louder) than anyone else in the conversation.

Like you, I detest Waylon's argument. I know that not all Republicans agree on guns, and each Republican legislator has a difference relationship with the gun lobby. As you can tell, I am against those who are actually ambivalent towards "dead kids", which makes up a subsector of likely Republican voters. How big or small that minority is, I don't know.

 

[Jax Husky]

There is no subset of Republicans that are ambivalent towards child deaths. Come on man.

Just like I don't believe there is a subset of Democrats that are ambivalent towards police and soldiers being killed.

I find myself more and more disheartened all the time at just how divisive this Republican/Democrat divide has become. It is a terrible thing in this country right now that both sides push out to the extremes with the type of thought process exhibited above.

 

[upstater]

Right. Because pointing out that people who look like you are being shot by the police is complaining. Pointing out that when you apply for a job and are fully qualified, you are skipped over is complaining.

They should just work harder. Thanks Jurgis.

Wasn't our whole country founded on "complaining"? No taxation without representation! Get to work, complainers! I'd say that it ceases to be complaining when it is based in lived-reality and advocating for justice.

Also, I fail to see how living in Kentucky or West Virginia exempts people from white privilege. There are many different types of privilege they don't have--economic for instance--but that doesn't mean that they don't have societal advantages.

Also, you can talk about "cold hard facts" all you want on this...any political system built on valuing those who are "useful, and productive and successful" is a little concerning to me. The very basis of that logic goes in all sorts of places I'm not comfortable.

Exactly. You can be poor and white and have very little privilege and also be discriminated against, but that doesn't mean you experience racism against blacks.

 

[Stainmaster]

There is no subset of Republicans that are ambivalent towards child deaths. Come on man.

Just like I don't believe there is a subset of Democrats that are ambivalent towards police and soldiers being killed.

I find myself more and more disheartened all the time at just how divisive this Republican/Democrat divide has become. It is a terrible thing in this country right now that both sides push out to the extremes with the type of thought process exhibited above.

Did you read the article I posted? Yes, there are people who are ambivalent towards child deaths. "Your dead kids don't trump my guns" - how much more plain can it get?

I made a distinct point in my longer response that these people are a minority, something I did not mention while making the first post in the heat of the moment. But this is not partisan hatemongering. They do exist. Pointing out extremists on the right doesn't make me an extremist on the left.

 

[upstater]

I think the term is poorly named. It really in no way should suggest that white males don't work hard. Really the issue at hand is that white males start with certain advantages that we have no control over, and that women and people of color do not have. I don't love the term as it is.

I actually think it's a good term in that we can beyond having "no control over" it, but we enjoy and use those privileges.

It's unfathomable to me what this has to do with working hard? Why do people keep saying that? Are you saying the kids at U. Missouri didn't work hard to get there? Working hard is irrelevant when it comes to race.

 

[Jax Husky]

Did you read the article I posted? Yes, there are people who are ambivalent towards child deaths. "Your dead kids don't trump my guns" - how much more plain can it get?

I made a distinct point in my longer response that these people are a minority, something I did not mention while making the first post in the heat of the moment. But this is not partisan hatemongering. They do exist. Pointing out extremists on the right doesn't make me an extremist on the left.

I wasn't saying g that you are a leftist extremist, just generalizing about the sad political climate in this country that does not allow for positive debate.

Joe the Plumber, first of all, is 1 person. That is not a "subset". His quotes also do not reflect ambivalence towards dead kids, or in this case dead adults is what they were referring to, You say dead kids, I think elementary or high schoolers. In his extended quotes, he says he is sorry for their losses. He may think his rights are stl greater, but you can't claim he is necessarily ambivalent because of that.

 

[J187Money]

Wow.

It's always interesting to me that someone who talks about "black thug culture" could then turn around and say this.

The rough part about systemic racism in our culture is that some white people and some black people live in parallel universes, universes where something like this is somehow not racist, where the legacies of our federal policies that systematically impoverished black citizens (put them in poverty because of redlining and white flight), where we live in a country where a qualified black man is less likely to get called back than a white felon for a job interview, where...god, I can go on and on...

But racism is over, and blacks should stop being thugs and leaching off the system. Got it.

I just think, on some level, too, if you're white you really just don't get it. Racism on the personal level happens to all of us at some point, but racism on the systemic level is much deeper, and that's what often gets ignored.

Systemic racism (IMO) is not so much about keeping someone down. It is the effect of protecting the majority. This is why I think people don't think they are being racist (or maybe they aren't in their hearts). But when you push through policies that protect one group of people, by definition you are harming another group of people. It isn't always intentional.

As an example, lots of fights going on in Milford about zoning / apartment complexes / affordable housing. The arguments are all about traffic / school congestion / property values / taxes / etc. But the end effect of that is trying to keep lower income / minorities out of their neighborhoods. BTW some of the people in my neighborhood that are most vocal about it ARE minorities. Are they racist? No. I think most of what people deem as racist is really about class / economic status and behavior. It just so happens that the vast majority of those that are disenfranchised by these policies are those on the lower economic rung, which are disproportionately minorities in many parts of the country.

-----

All of that aside, I see evidence of actual racism quite frequently. It isn't dead. It is far less overt, but it lurks in the shadows. The good news is that with every generation this should get better. I know people would love to undo hundreds of years of attitudes in 20 years, but that just isn't practical. Have to keep fighting, and making sure that you are doing the right things in your corner of the world.

 

[noeynox]

Systemic racism (IMO) is not so much about keeping someone down. It is the effect of protecting the majority. This is why I think people don't think they are being racist (or maybe they aren't in their hearts). But when you push through policies that protect one group of people, by definition you are harming another group of people. It isn't always intentional.

As an example, lots of fights going on in Milford about zoning / apartment complexes / affordable housing. The arguments are all about traffic / school congestion / property values / taxes / etc. But the end effect of that is trying to keep lower income / minorities out of their neighborhoods. BTW some of the people in my neighborhood that are most vocal about it ARE minorities. Are they racist? No. I think most of what people deem as racist is really about class / economic status and behavior. It just so happens that the vast majority of those that are disenfranchised by these policies are those on the lower economic rung, which are disproportionately minorities in many parts of the country.

-----

All of that aside, I see evidence of actual racism quite frequently. It isn't dead. It is far less overt, but it lurks in the shadows. The good news is that with every generation this should get better. I know people would love to undo hundreds of years of attitudes in 20 years, but that just isn't practical. Have to keep fighting, and making sure that you are doing the right things in your corner of the world.

Isn't this in essence what the Missouri kids are doing? A small fight started by them that gained all kinds of momentum when the MU football players got involved?

 

[J187Money]

Isn't this in essence what the Missouri kids are doing? A small fight started by them that gained all kinds of momentum when the MU football players got involved?

Here is the thing. I applaud what they did PRIMARILY because it was done in a non-violent manner and all done legally. I'm not sure that they didn't create more of a mess, but that is tangential to my point.

What I mean by that is that the people who ACTUALLY have the power need to get up every day, recognize they have power, and use that power to do the right thing. Every decision that I make at work is made through the lens of what is fair to all people. But you actually have to specifically challenge yourself to do that. Make decisions that are not the comfortable ones, etc.

It appears that the Mizzou President was NOT doing that, or at least not effectively.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

I'm sure systemic racism exists in some forms to this day in the US; especially in other parts of the country and possibly more so with the older generations.

I actually think it's more of a socioeconomic privilege where the main issue lies. Just also happens that public housing houses more people of color and being born into that puts you at a disadvantage from the start.

My main issue with all of this is that there doesn't seem specific courses of action or solutions in mind. People are angry at the status quo and making it known.

Now that the awareness part is done, what's next? More protest? Making a President admit "white privilege"? What does that solve?

There are legitimate socioeconomic and racial issues but I think they are being lost in the wash in all of this "protest cuture" and moral outrage on twitter.

In the end I think people are still going to be angry and I think not much will change. There's no direction.

Just my $.02

Also the "people would rather have dead kids than no guns" being a subset is patently aburd. See the article? You could get anyone to say anything, doesn't mean it's a subset of a group.

 

[upstater]

I'm sure systemic racism exists in some forms to this day in the US; especially in other parts of the country and possibly more so with the older generations.

I actually think it's more of a socioeconomic privilege where the main issue lies. Just also happens that public housing houses more people of color and being born into that puts you at a disadvantage from the start.

My main issue with all of this is that there doesn't seem specific courses of action or solutions in mind. People are angry at the status quo and making it known.

Now that the awareness part is done, what's next? More protest? Making a President admit "white privilege"? What does that solve?

There are legitimate socioeconomic and racial issues but I think they are being lost in the wash in all of this "protest cuture" and moral outrage on twitter.

In the end I think people are still going to be angry and I think not much will change. There's no direction.

Just my $.02

Also the "people would rather have dead kids than no guns" being a subset is patently aburd. See the article? You could get anyone to say anything, doesn't mean it's a subset of a group.

This is a long thread, so I'm sure you missed it, but we've already discussed the specific courses of action requested, like changes to the code of conduct and diversity and racial sensitivity courses. Those requests were made by the same group two years ago--and ignored.