• quo@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    They actually said it, though.

    Calling for the genocide of an ethnic group is not ok, and it is harassment.

    There’s nothing manipulative here, they didn’t have to support Israel or Zionism, only to acknowledge what should be common sense.

    Why can’t they just say “Yes, of course”?

    • megopie@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because it is a loaded question, to answer it is to imply that this is a common or large scale issue on US campuses, which it clearly isn’t.

    • derbis@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      From this garbage article

      The chanting, I think, calling for intifada, global revolution, [is] very disturbing,” Magill said during questioning. “I believe at minimum that is hateful speech that has been and should be condemned.

      Intifada means “resistance.” Every occupied people has a right to resist. Except, apparently, Palestinians.

      … grilled Gay on Harvard’s Middle East Studies courses, which she claimed included “false accusations that Israel is a racist, settler colonialist, apartheid state

      Well, it is. No amount of trying to conflate support for human rights with antisemitism is going to change that.

      If this is what they mean by “hate” nobody should be surprised that lots of people aren’t buying it.

    • Heresy_generator@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      As the university presidents were trying to explain to Clown Shoes, sorry, I mean Elise Stefanik: Harassment is conduct that is severe or pervasive enough to create an environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive. A one-time generalized statement calling for genocide not targeted at a specific individual would not usually rise to the level of harassment per se, but can certainly be part of a pattern of harassment. Similarly, actual bullying is a pattern of abusive behavior and cannot be defined by any single act as it is often used colloquially.

      That’s the game Stefanik is playing: She knows these universities’ policies are bound by the actual, legal definitions of “harassment” and “bullying” but she’s counting on her ignorant audience not knowing those definitions and instead thinking the words are defined as what they use them for in their own lives: someone being mean.