|
|
Â
|
| Quote: |
| Examples of abuse include an annual midnight band practice at Ohio Stadium in which men and women were expected to march wearing only their underwear. In one recent year, a student suffered alcohol poisoning at the practice. Students led the rehearsal, but staff members, including Waters, were there, too. Some other traditions: All new band members, or “rookies,” were given nicknames, many of which were sexually explicit. Rookies were forced to perform “tricks” on command. In one case, a female student was told to imitate a sexual act on the laps of other band members, including her brother. Several witnesses said that students performed a “flying 69” on tour buses, in which band members hung from the luggage racks and posed in a sexual position. Waters was on the bus when that happened as recently as last fall, according to a band staff member who quit last year. The staff member told investigators she resigned from the band because Waters would not address alcohol abuse on that trip. An “unofficial” songbook was part of the evidence that investigators provided to university leaders, with raunchy lyrics set to school songs at other colleges. |
Not being a dick, but you obviously didn't read the article. He turned the other cheek, it seems. He didn't make anyone do anything.
Don't forget, he also allowed [underage] students to abuse alcohol.
Of all the school/workplace firings you hear about, this is about as justified as it gets.
Quote:
that's in a position of authority would be fired for making students do sexually expicit things? Cmon now.
Not being a dick, but you obviously didn't read the article. He turned the other cheek, it seems. He didn't make anyone do anything.
He knew, but turned the other cheek. Where did you stand on the Paterno thing?
You might be tongue in cheek but I would say the same thing in earnest, except without trying to ascribe causality.
He was the school representative and the ostensible authority figure. If he allowed that to happen under his watch, he's culpable.
That's not a hard one to figure out.
But read the examples. The kids dangled from the bus rack in the 69 position. Oh boy. They made freshman do practice in their underwear once a year... oh the humanity. They gave each other sexually explicit nicknames. Really? College kids?
I dunno. Much ado to me.
All that shit wreaks of sexual harassment, isolates anyone who is uncomfortable with such behavior, and contributes to the environment in which 1 in 5 college women get raped on campus.
It's a violation of Title IX. Failure to stop that shit is as bad as if he had initiated and required such garbage in the first place.
If you're the band director, you should DIRECT the fucking BAND.
Nobody EVER gets "turning the other cheek" correct. It's not about just "taking it" as most people use it.
It's about demanding to be recognized as an equal.
vibe4giants : 3:07 pm : link : reply
It's turning a blind eye. Let's get our idioms right.
He turned his other cheek and revealed his blind eye
Turning the other cheek is about non-retaliation, answering hatred with love.
right?
Quote:
Also, that's not 'turning the other cheek'.
vibe4giants : 3:07 pm : link : reply
It's turning a blind eye. Let's get our idioms right.
He turned his other cheek and revealed his blind eye
Sexy euphemism!!
Perhaps "looked the other way" was intended?
Perhaps "looked the other way" was intended?
I think it's meant to be "turn a blind eye" and it's a ridiculous excuse to avoid being fired.
Perhaps "looked the other way" was intended?
yeah, that's what I meant... multitasking
Turning the other cheek is about non-retaliation, answering hatred with love.
The verse is:
Easily misinterpreted to mean what you (and most) think.
If you think about it, though- to be slapped on the right cheek would mean the "evil person" is striking you with his left hand. Not many folks strike with their left hand.
Unless of course you are being back-handed- which is a way one would express to another that they are a lesser person (bitch slapped if you will).
The act of turning the other cheek and exposing the left side of your face rather than the right would force the person to strike you as he would strike an equal- with an open palm from the right hand instead of a back-hand.
So, yes- it is somewhat about non-retaliation, but I think it is more about demanding to be treated as an equal- not a lesser.
I have no proof of this other than it makes sense to me and I'm the only one I need to convince.
Had a meeting just now and came back.. did not see the discussion going that way.
Read right after that, it's all about non-retaliation and loving your enemy and nothing about equality.
"And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you."
There is a very fine Director of Bands at that school that has absolutely fuck-all to do with the athletic bands.
Yeah sorry, that's fucking gross. Asshole should be fired.
I'm surprised you guys are satisfied with firing and don't want him to wear a scarlet letter on his shirt.
The guy was in a position of authority and let the juvenile delinquents "call the tune".
The guy was in a position of authority and let the juvenile delinquents "call the tune".
Blackbeard, sorry I just can't agree.
These are college kids. If you read the listed offenses, there's really only one that pops out at me (the brother sister thing) but fuck that. If someone asked me to do that it just simply wouldn't happen.
The other stuff? The sexual nicknames? The ONCE A YEAR freshman-practicing in their underwear? I don't want to get into a debate on this because I'm not trying to change anyone's mind. I just think sometimes we have to remember these are kids having fun. It definitely seems that it got carried away... but an "over-sexualized culture?" Welcome to fucking college.
Perhaps he had been warned to buckle down on this in the past and he never did. That would be another story. But with the information available as of now... firing a guy for not to stop slightly-above-moderate freshman hazing? Too much.
If the director knew of this (he obviously did) and did nothing, he grossly abandoned his responsibility to the students and the university.
oipolloi : 4:35 pm : link : reply
alive and well on BBI
This has nothing to do with Puritanism and everything to do with a school employee allowing potentially actionable harassment to happen under his watch.
When he's got them on a bus or at a practice, he is responsible for the group's behavior ultimately. It's no different than if a professor allowed this type of thing to happen in a classroom or a coach to allow it in a lockerroom.
You don't have to explicitly endorse it to be responsible for it.
You are part of the moral problem that this country is having in the past two generations.
One complaint (from a parent or student), one news article, and the University is faced with a situation where a school employee at a school sanctioned event allowed behavior whose only defense is "it's not really all that bad".
Not to mention, this spills into adjacent hot button topics of binge drinking, sexual harassment and hazing. There was no way the University couldn't fire this guy.
I still weep for the future that he has any part in educating the future generations of adults...no matter how small that group may be.
You are part of the moral problem that this country is having in the past two generations.
Mike isn't part of any moral problem (unless crappy posting is a moral problem:)), and based on your past posts its pretty clear you long for the 1950s and every wonderful little bit of that decade.
This isn't about morality, its about liability.
if this stuff goes on and no one reports on it, does anyone care?
no, and that's the way it used to be. hazing, orientation, bonding, takes shape in many forms - many of them crossing a moral and legal line, but there is a case to be made for them strengthening a team. Not saying that's the case here, but in some related cases.
Many of our high school and college sports teams, etc..
The problem is that the director took no steps to stop it. If the director says, "you're not doing X, Y, or Z at any band event, practice, or meeting, or at any other function of or related to the band, and if we catch you you're kicked out," and then makes at least some attempt to enforce those rules, he's probably still employed. Band directors don't lose their jobs because a bunch of band members get busted for underage drinking in a dorm or at a house party, but they do get fired if a bunch of band members get busted for underage drinking at an event that is implicitly or explicitly his responsibility.
But yeah, if kids are in danger (and that danger is always there with alcohol involved) and a school official is on watch, OSU is on the hook for anything that happens regardless of what moral outlook anyone has.
I stated in my OP that I hadn't formed a concrete opinion. These are some very fair points (except Blackbeard).
The only problem is : "Don't get caught!"
How many of you assholes have vulnerable daughters?