Honestly, I'm shocked everytime I read this stuff from american universities.
Why is this happening? Because it's not the first nor second time that I read about events similar to this one.
Why is this happening? Because it's not the first nor second time that I read about events similar to this one.
So too do students with authority issues enjoy exerting newfound power over the authorities they oppose by complaining to their risk-averse boss.
This specific case, I would bet dollars to donuts, happened because: (1) The administration is hypersensitive in light of the wave of race related protests and associated two-sided violence occurring in the country. (2) Someone aware of the likelihood of that deliberately trolled the administration, probably under a false flag, to produce an incident.
Possibly just for lulz, more likely than that in the hopes of benefiting a particular domestic political faction, but even money it was done on behalf of (though not necessarily at the direction of) a foreign power.
To some students, the word sounded like the N-word in English. The next day a group of Black master’s candidates in the class of 2022 wrote a letter to Marshall Dean Geoffrey Garrett.
“There are over 10,000 characters in the Chinese written language and to use this phrase ... is hurtful and unacceptable to our USC Marshall community,” the letter said. “The negligence and disregard displayed by our professor was very clear.”
Why on earth would you assume that? What are the relatively likelihoods of it being Satanists, alien mind-worms or Marxist-Feminists versus an agent of a foreign power?
Cancel Culture.
Thankfully, we have a media source that is willing to call out stupid examples of suffocating over-liberalism. Most other people don't, all their news is being filtered by traditional (and clickbait) media, and fewer and fewer people are actually looking to get the real story from the primary sources.
That said, I don't think this particular moniker is going to help much. It's already been polluted.
I think there's a difference between honest people saying honest things - even if those things are incorrect or not fully justified - and people with a history of dog-whistling and flat-out repugnant behaviour using it as a get-out-of-jail-free card.
And there is language on both sides that get this treatment - for example "gaslighting" or "racist", both can be used by vile individuals who would use their power to divert from lies and bad behaviour. But if the term has a good head-start, before its more controversial uses, it's more likely to have benevolent connotations in people's heads, and is less likely to be labelled a "hate-word" from the start.
So while I think that cancel-culture may make a genuine point, unfortunately that word was saddled with baggage from the start, and may never mean what you want it to mean again. As is often the case, we need not just better words, but words with a better history.
One word: lawsuits. And the unpredictability of juries.
on what grounds?
>And the unpredictability of juries.
AFAIK if you're the defendant you can opt for trial by judge rather than trial by jury.
Discriminations, of various genres.
> AFAIK if you're the defendant you can opt for trial by judge rather than trial by jury.
And in a civil trial you're going to need the other party to agree.