<p>Anything is possible, but some things are a lot more possible than others.</p>
<p>" Actually, the comments were likely just as prompted, if not possibly moreso by his higher SES status.</p>
<p>Especially considering he mentioned this issue was prompted by being compared with Tea Partiers by discussions of “government debt” and in high likelihood social spending*, he grew up in a well-off NYC suburban area, and Ucbalumnus found he omitted the fact his father’s an investment banker."</p>
<p>In your view, I don’t think affluent students can win for losing. Either they have to walk around telling everyone that their parents are affluent or they are accused of “omitting relevant detail,” or they have to say nothing because even asking if anyone wants to go grab a cup of coffee could be “offensive” to other people who don’t have the money for coffee.</p>
<p>In any case, it is crystal clear from the totality of your posts that you are as “prejudiced” - in the true sense of the word pre-judge – against anyone whom you know or suspect to be affluent, just as much as other people may be prejudiced against minorities. You stereotype them all into Preston Weatherby at the cricket club and you routinely dismiss what you think they’re going to say because it’s more fun to poke fun at them. If your behavior were directed towards other groups, you’d be rightly accused of being prejudiced. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I wrote that in response to your impressions that “it’s humorless” and “sucks air out of the room”. </p>
<p>The reaction I’d have is ok…they’re trying to acknowledge and be inclusive of transgender people, and move on. Not “it’s humorless” or “sucks air out of the room”.</p>
<p>Incidentally, your reaction is very similar to those I’ve seen on computer/techie forums and news articles when the issue is on topics such as discussing ways to make the computer/techie field more inclusive of women or in newsarticles about criticism of derogatory racist/ethnic displays in public life like the following incident:</p>
<p><a href=“UND Students' 'Siouxper Drunk' Shirts Denounced - CBS Minnesota”>http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2014/05/13/und-students-siouxper-drunk-shirts-denounced/</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Princeton is considered a “green light” campus for conservatives by the conservative <a href=“http://www.collegeguide.org”>http://www.collegeguide.org</a> .</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.collegeguide.org/itemdetail.aspx?item=486fb85a-5d15-4d1f-a8f5-5ce2804c3129&page=4”>http://www.collegeguide.org/itemdetail.aspx?item=486fb85a-5d15-4d1f-a8f5-5ce2804c3129&page=4</a></p>
<p>If everyone at Princeton is conservative (they are not), then the objection to Fortgang’s comments must not be politically based, as suggested by Hunt and cobrat. </p>
<p>Princeton may be a little more conservative on average than some other Ivies, but I think the “Princeton Tory” is pretty much to the right of center at Princeton.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I assume you wouldn’t be ROTFLOLing (sic) if a Fortgang had said “shut up, this is a financial issue and we with the money will decide how society will handle it”. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In that case, I’m wondering if he’ll be writing a whiny article about being labeled a plutocrat, possibly a feudalist depending on how he makes his argument, and/or being reminded of the fact that for the first few decades one had to own a minimum amount of land to be eligible to vote along with being a White male to vote and is thus, undemocratic and trying to disenfranchise the vast majority of Americans.:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/presentationsandactivities/presentations/elections/voters.html”>http://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/presentationsandactivities/presentations/elections/voters.html</a></p>
<p>And precisely because of the above, I would actually be ROTFLOLing at how he’s calling for a return to political and social practices of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. </p>
<p>But that’s not “because of his privilege,” because other privileged people would be sensitive, or would get the hint. The guy was a jerk. No law against that.</p>
<p>right.
thats my point.
some people are just clueless, doesn’t mean they are racist.</p>
<p>I think part of the “check your privilege” equation is an element of judgment. A glaring example would be Katrina. Why didn’t those people just leave? Well, no car, no relatives not in NOLA, no money for a hotel someplace else, end of the month and no money left from paycheck or social security benefit . . . Sometimes policies are made based on assumptions about what is possible from a perspective of a degree of privilege that not everyone shares. </p>
<p>Uhm, and a corrupt mayor who left a parking lot full of buses sitting a puddle while he hid out in a fancy hotel. Let’s not forget that part of the unfortunate Katrina story. I believe he is now on his way to prison.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not to mention there were serious questions as to whether some NOLA cops were racially profiling those they shot as a means to discourage them from going into more well-off and White outskirt areas in news reports about the following:</p>
<p><a href=“Danziger Bridge shootings - Wikipedia”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danziger_Bridge_shootings</a></p>
<p>I think people who are unaware of certain issues because of their background should be treated kindly, and the fact that their views may be colored by privilege should be pointed out to them politely. Many nice people will respond by increasing their understanding. On the other hand, people who like to be deliberately provocative don’t need to be handled with kid gloves–they should be able to take it as well as dish it out. And because there are mean and snooty people of all stripes, I am prepared to believe that it sometimes happens that a kid who is simply uninformed says something that shows a failure to grasp the role of race, gender, or wealth in various situations, and that somebody might rudely tell him to “check his privilege.” That wouldn’t be nice. But I haven’t read an article about this by anybody who seems to fit that profile.</p>
<p>Another good example is the Supreme Court case that involved a group of adults at a middle school searching the underwear of a middle school girl. Adults, but male adults in particular, need to think about what that’s like for a 13-year-old girl when they’re evaluating the reasonableness of the search. Being an adult is a privilege, too. Just because we all used to be kids doesn’t mean we all do the work of remembering the vulnerability and humiliation of middle school.</p>
<p>“Incidentally, your reaction is very similar to those I’ve seen on computer/techie forums and news articles when the issue is on topics such as discussing ways to make the computer/techie field more inclusive of women or in newsarticles about criticism of derogatory racist/ethnic displays in public life like the following incident:”</p>
<p>You do this all the time - and it’s not a relevant argument. “Your reaction sounds like that of …” and then you list someone or something that you don’t like very much, and thus by extension imply that I’m just like that someone or something that you don’t like very much, which is supposed to invalidate an argument. It doesn’t work. </p>
<p>“Even being told to shut up would have been exceedingly polite compared with the likely responses he would have gotten.”</p>
<p>Which you would have applauded, right? Because there’s nothing like ensuring that only the politically correct points of view get expressed and everything else gets shut down. </p>
<p>"wrote that in response to your impressions that “it’s humorless” and “sucks air out of the room”.</p>
<p>The reaction I’d have is ok…they’re trying to acknowledge and be inclusive of transgender people, and move on. Not “it’s humorless” or “sucks air out of the room”."</p>
<p>Well, it’s humorless and sucks air out of the room when it’s directed to girls who are just trying to let everybody know that the XYZ club is meeting at 8 pm at the campus center and please won’t you all join us. It’s just off, cobrat. I recognize that’s hard for you, but it’s just off in the context of normal social discourse. </p>
<p>I asked my son if the phrase is used at his school and he answered it’s used some, but not as much as at another campus he has friends at. He didn’t really think it was “a thing” at his campus. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not necessarily. A given student might be much more conservative than other conservatives at Princeton, and/or may be more obnoxious and trollish about it, baiting the typical (often not very smart) campus leftists at every opportunity.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The problem is that statement is a response to what could easily be viewed as an exclusionary announcement by transgendered students who may no longer identify as female after being admitted. </p>
<p>Your feeling that it’s “humorless” and “sucks air out of the room” shows a bit of tone-deafness about this factor…especially at Women’s colleges where there has been heated controversies on this very issue by alum and student groups. </p>
<p>Hence, my reason for drawing parallels between your reaction and dismissive comments I’ve seen on the techie/computer forums when the topic is making the tech/computer field more inclusive of women or those who are angered/criticize by folks like the UND students in that article are “humorless” and “can’t take a joke”. </p>