Blog

USC Suspended a Communications Professor for Saying a Chinese Word That Sounds Like a Racial Slur

Greg Patton is a professor of clinical business communication at the University of Southern California. During a recent virtual classroom session, he was discussing public speaking patterns and the filler words that people use to space out their ideas: um, er, etc. Patton mentioned that the Chinese often use a word that is pronounced like nega.

“In China the common word is ‘that, that that that,’ so in China it might be ‘nega, nega, nega, nega,'” Patton explained to his class. “So there’s different words you’ll hear in different cultures, but they’re vocal disfluencies.”

But because the Chinese word nega sounds like nigger, some students were offended and reported the matter to the administration. Patton is now suspended, according to Campus Reform:

On Tuesday evening, the USC Marshall School of Business provided Campus Reform with a statement, confirming that Patton is no longer teaching his course.

“Recently, a USC faculty member during class used a Chinese word that sounds similar to a racial slur in English. We acknowledge the historical, cultural and harmful impact of racist language,” the statement read.

Patton “agreed to take a short term pause while we are reviewing to better understand the situation and to take any appropriate next steps.”

Another instructor is temporarily teaching the class.

USC is now “offering supportive measures to any student, faculty, or staff member who requests assistance.” The school is “committed to building a culture of respect and dignity where all members of our community can feel safe, supported, and can thrive.”

This is ridiculous. It seems clear that Patton did not mean to harm anyone, and that the point he was making was perfectly valid. The resemblance between these two words is purely coincidental, and adults should be perfectly capable of hearing the Chinese version without fainting in front of their computer screens. Anyone who is this prepared to be bothered all the time needs to turn down their outrage dial.

“I’ll say this ten thousand times, but if anyone thinks they’re helping the cause of racial equality by engaging in absurd, over-the-top speech policing of innocent people, then they’re sadly mistaken,” wrote The Dispatch‘s David French.

Keep reading

Conspiracy Theorist Decries Dinosaur Statue Outside McDonald’s in Arizona

A McDonald’s restaurant in Arizona found itself the target of an agitated conspiracy theorist who took issue with them having a massive dinosaur statue in front of the building because, he contends, such creatures never existed! The bizarre dispute reportedly began last month when a man named Josh Brown took to the Facebook group Christians Against Dinosaurs to express his concern about the huge Tyrannosaurus Rex which sits outside the establishment in Tuscon. “Please help! This McDonald’s has this dinosaur and refuses to remove it,” he declared, urging group members to “call the manager and demand the removal of this blasphemy!”

Brown, it would appear, is a believer in the fairly obscure, but still very real conspiracy theory that dinosaurs did not exist and that the creatures are actually a creation of nefarious forces intent on misleading the public about the ‘true’ history of the planet. While some suspected that the Facebook post was some kind of clever satirical message, it turns out that was not the case as a local media outlet tracked down the man behind the post and he confirmed that it was genuine.

“It seems to me that every dinosaur story and display or dinosaur-themed event is furthering the myth that the Earth is much older than the Bible says it is,” he explained, “the dinosaur should go unless they’re willing to compromise with a plaque of some kind stating that it’s a fictional character.” For their part, the McDonald’s at the center of the ‘controversy’ say that, despite Brown’s best efforts, they have yet to receive any complaints about the dinosaur statue other than his Facebook post and have no plans to remove it.

Keep reading

Court Refuses Qualified Immunity for Alabama Cop Who ‘Insulted’ and Killed Man Who Was Trying to Help Stray Dog

A federal appeals court on Thursday declined to grant qualified immunity to an Alabama police officer who shot and killed a man “without warning” for failing to show identification after he attempted to help a stray dog his family found in a parking lot.

Robert Earl Lawrence was shot in the stomach by Dothan Police Sergeant Adrianne Woodruff and he bled out on the pavement “on the next to last day of the year” in 2014. His three young children and his girlfriend were in the car–screaming while it happened.

Prior to his death and altercation with police, Lawrence, reportedly a sovereign citizen, was just trying to help the dog his family found near the local Walmart by taking it to the Dothan Animal Shelter.

But Lawrence’s attempt to help quickly went askew.

“The receptionist told Lawrence that they accepted dogs only from residents of Houston County,” the court notes. “He told her that he was from nearby Geneva County but had found the dog in Houston County. She agreed to take the dog but asked for his identification. He refused to provide it, claiming that being required to do so would violate his federal privacy rights.”

A brief argument ensued and Woodruff entered the room–reiterating the shelter’s policy about accepting strays and advising Lawrence to fill out an intake form. He declined and left the shelter, “carrying the dog with him,” saying he would just leave the animal on the road.

Woodruff followed Lawrence out and warned him that dumping the dog would be considered a crime. She also copied down his tag number–in line with a policy for people who threaten to dump animals the shelter refuses to take in. As Lawrence got into his car, Woodruff grabbed him from behind and said “You’re not leaving.”

Keep reading