I suspect we agree on more than you'd think. I agree that legal sex from almost 3 decades ago should not necessitate a full blown investigation, although if someone started throwing around the words abuse I would at least look into it/hear them out and a prof having a predilection for teen girls/students is concerning, particularly given MSUs current troubles.
In the world we live in, however, I dont think MSU would have handled it any differently if it were any other professor because they would get crucified for doing so at a time when they can least afford that type of publicity(not to mention the impending billion dollar civil litigation..).
Agree to disagree though and glad we arent going further down this rabbit hole.
I largely agree that what we know of these allegations should not cost her her job and if MSU finds her guilty, I will believe that she is just another victim of the political expediency that has been happening increasingly on such matters.
My point, and I believe the central point at issue, is that MSU is not retaliating for her critical remarks and that they would have likely handled complaints against any professor the exact same way because of the current climate and the situation in which they find themselves.
Thanks for the pedantry on pederasty(and pedophilia more broadly), but I am aware of the age of majority laws, which vary from state to state, but I didnt think I needed to get into that minutiae since those variations/specifics had nothing to do with the point I was making there.
You are also getting pretty far afield from the actual central debate here: whether MSU is looking into her as a form of retaliation.
The obvious answer is no.
Regardless of what you think of the accuser and her claims, MSU simply is not going to dismiss allegations of sexual impropriety by a current professor from a former student of hers without looking into it. That people believe they would do so, and then tell the press that, are delusional.
In a world where where Aziz Ansari is viewed by many as an assailant and millions(billions?) of dollars are at stake for MSU(not to mention every reporter out for blood), they would have done the exact same thing for any other professor on campus.
MSU would look into any allegation that comes through the doors right now and when asked by the media, they would tell them that they are looking into it and taking it seriously.
The notion that anything they have done, at least publicly, so far constitutes retaliation is moronic. The people who are sure of it are letting their judgement be clouded by sports rivalries, which is embarassing.
The bar for sexual impropriety for teacher/student relationships has never been "is she 18?".
Many High School girls are "legal".
Given how much MSU is being hammered by many for "merely" cooperating with the authorities rather than conducting their own investigations and having a higher standard, looking into a complaint of sexual impropriety here does not end with the fact that her student was 18.
The complaint came in and the complainant has been vocal. MSU either ignores the woman alleging abuses at the hand of one of their active faculty(the Mad Hatter plan) or looks into it. They are either honest and transparent when asked about this or they obfuscate.
The incident I am referring to in that sentence was when her relationship with a young girl that had been her student became sexual in nature. That should be fairly obvious from the context here...
The Det News article we are discussing has Carter herself claiming that the incident happened 25 years ago.
Sue Carter joined MSUs faculty in 1991
So do the simple math and apologize.
Now could Carter be lying to age up her victim? Sure, but using her own figure to determine whether or not she was at MSU at the time hardly seems unfair to her. Its her own timeline.
Also, the far more relevant matter is that she is active faculty at MSU today and determining whether her admittedly "untoward" sexual behavior represents a threat moving forward. MSU just doing their due dilligence.
Susan Carter is not a martyr. It is routine and obvious to at least look into something like this regarding an active professor. Given the current controversy and climate, it is more than obvious from MSU's perspective.
Nice "gotcha moment" though. You are fake news and failing.
You are 100% in the right here. Embarassingly, people are wrong on numerous core facts throughout this thread(for instance, she actually was an MSU employee at the time of the incident and she remains a faculty member to this day, having merely stepped down from her seperate role as athletic rep)
When an accusation that a current MSU professor used her role at MSU to pray upon a barely legal student(who was at her most vulnerable due to her parents plane crash death) comes across MSUs desk, investigating it is the most obvious choice in the world. Even if the prof claims the relationship wasnt consumated until after the class was finished.
Given not only their current internationally publicized failings in this area, but also the "#metoo moment", not investigating this relationship, which the prof herself refers to as untoward, would be a deathwish(And a horrible decision regardless of that).
The fact that things have devolved to the point that people are using an article they barely skimmed to decry MSU of all places for OVERinvestigating sexual assault (lol) and calling anyone who politely disagrees a "pedophile defender" because they dont like the rival sports team is embarassing and I hope this person didnt graduate from UM.
The fact that such obvious sentiments elicits "Are you or have you ever been a member of NAMBLA?" shows that people might be letting the rivalry cloud their judgment and risk overstepping from deserved calls for justice to a wider ranging witch hunt.
If I care about those who are unjustly afflicted...I should conform to the cartoon preferences of priviliged upper middle class clods who don't belong to (and directly contradict the opinion of) the group in question. I see...
I would love to see our society evolve to provide opportunity for every child born into a tough situation, and I dont need to sift through millenia and adjudicate humanity's neverending string of tribalistic wars to do so.
I also don't think the best way to do so is to channel so-called activists energy into nitpicking cartoons and deluding themselves into thinking that matters, but youre the Genius at Work
Save some tofurkey for me at the next Un-Thanksgiving (this is a real holiday, google it)
Your comment is somewhat non-responsive, but I will take it as an opportunity to condemn the entirely of human history for, tragically, being largely violent, warring, and tribalistic.
I would also like to condemn the present for its ... cartoons.
I think having peoples urge to help the less fortunate and the oppressed diverted to "taking on Big Cartoon" is not helpful, is infantiile, and distracts from real issues and standing up to actual power/structural problems.
I am sure your Cartoon War Victory will provide a great psychological boost to the Natives who you admit dont give a shit. I am told it will alter the collective psychology, and I look forward to you citing your sources or breaking that down a bit more because surely its a big win for Trickle Down Social Justice.
There are people who are well-intentioned who get sucked into this, usually very young and naive, and there are people like yourself who just use it to feel morally superior to people who don't read Tumblr everyday to find out the new language so they can avoid WrongSpeak
Which brings me again to how dumb you are. You attempt to feel superior to me because I used the term Indian to describe Indians.
The typical Cartoon Warrior starts with being offended with Redskins, but it quickly devolves into a race to see who can be most offended until someone like you chastises me for referring to Indians as...Indians..
Bad news though:
Why don't you checkout the literal first google result on the matter, courtesy of the Alt-Right Hate Site PBS.com:
Nor did the word Indian fall out of favor with the people it described. A 1995 Census Bureau survey that asked indigenous Americans their preferences for names (the last such survey done by the bureau) found that 49 percent preferred the term Indian, 37 percent Native American, and 3.6 percent "some other name." About 5 percent expressed no preference.
Moreover, a large number of Indians actually strongly object to the term Native American for political reasons. In his 1998 essay "I Am An American Indian, Not a Native American!", Russell Means, a Lakota activist and a founder of the American Indian Movement (AIM), stated unequivocally, "I abhor the term 'Native American.'"
My position is that I dont really give a shit about a cartoon one way or the other.
The vast majority of ACTUAL INDIANS dont give a shit either, so actually some people do agree with me.
Maybe you can civilize these "ignorant" ..native americans...about how offensive they are being...to themselves.....
I am sure the real Indians, who polling shows don't give a shit, will appreciate the Trickle Down Social Justice they will receive once you and your comrades win the Cartoon Wars.
Yeah the guy whose poltiical praxis doesnt center around policing cartoons is the child
And the people who all "find Jesus" on whatever cartoon at the exact same time it becomes fashionable to do so are the free thinking "adults in the room"
I hate having politics here, but at some point I may have to start bursting child-like group think bubble that has pervaded my university(and thus my football message board)
Theres a team called the Fighting Irish and no one gives a shit
Im not necessarily agreeing with his argument from equivalency, but your suggestion that Italians would be offended en masse if Cleveland changed their team name to the Cleveland Italians is almost certainly wrong.
I have not seen a single conservative make that extremely inflammatory statement on this board
I have seen the equivalent said about Trump innumerable times on this board.
The topic at hand is this board.
Another thing you are wrong about: I did not endorse the political statement, and in fact was using it as an example of a statement I would consider wildly inappropriate for a football board. It was chosen because it is the other side of the same coin of the incessant "Drumpf is an orange rapist" crowd.
I even used the qualifier "conservatives perceived" before lesser evil, lest I get accused of calling Hillary evil....
I had a good mind to make obvious political statements in response to what I view as unchecked vacuity from the semi-literate crowd like yourself, but I believe I restrained myself. For the record, vacuity is nails on a chalkboard to me, and it spans the entire political spectrum.
The only affirmative point I was making is that this football board is not the place for "bumper sticker politics" of any kind and I believe this line of thinking is in line with the rules.
I am about the furthest thing from aligned with Trump politically, but The MGoResistance stuff is embarassing
I applaud conservatives (or moderates who voted their perceived "lesser evil") for not insinuating that Bill Clinton is a rapist on here despite a slew of imbeciles shoehorning the latest EPIC Samantha Bee TAKEDOWN of "DRUMPF" into their dreck on a daily basis.
Youre not witty or edgy or informed. If you want a proper debate, go find someone who disagrees with you on a forum appropriate for political discussion and have your bubble burst by someone with a clue about the various misdeeds of various politicians.
Listening to brainless buffoons babbling their generic political takes is what one comes to a football board to avoid.
The previous posters analogy is not intended to suggest that Canadas career runs perfectly paralel and is identical to Harbaughs. To imply that the clearly intended point of his analogy was broader is intelectually lazy or dishonest.
The clear point was that bouncing around is not not ipso facto good or bad and requires closer inspection. People failed to do this with Harbaugh and you are doing the same with Canada.
This closer inspection was provided by him and largely ignored by you. Disagreements with Dave "The Dumbass" Doeren, Bert Bielema, and Coach Orangutan aren't necessarily a bad thing. They are actually a mark of having an IQ.
As for ending up with DJ Durkin at Maryland, it may just be that he had "better" offers, but was tired of working with morons(of which there are many in the coaching ranks).
With excellent coaching on both sides of the ball and decent $ backing, Maryland may end up being a team that can overachieve relative to their historical standards and springboard Canada to a head coaching gig if he so desires. Certainly dealing with bright young guy like Durkin vs Coach 0 and co will improve quality of life and prevent meddling/fucking things up.
Recent Comments
Off the top of my head, Dabo Swinney and Bobby Williams(for my purposes...)
Appreciate the posts and hope they continue. One of only reasons I even come to this site.
What a pseudointellectual, ignorant, and meanspirited thing to say.
He is saying that she proved 'em all wrong because they all thought she was good
She is decidedly not good.
We're all on the same page here.
I suspect we agree on more than you'd think. I agree that legal sex from almost 3 decades ago should not necessitate a full blown investigation, although if someone started throwing around the words abuse I would at least look into it/hear them out and a prof having a predilection for teen girls/students is concerning, particularly given MSUs current troubles.
In the world we live in, however, I dont think MSU would have handled it any differently if it were any other professor because they would get crucified for doing so at a time when they can least afford that type of publicity(not to mention the impending billion dollar civil litigation..).
Agree to disagree though and glad we arent going further down this rabbit hole.
I largely agree that what we know of these allegations should not cost her her job and if MSU finds her guilty, I will believe that she is just another victim of the political expediency that has been happening increasingly on such matters.
My point, and I believe the central point at issue, is that MSU is not retaliating for her critical remarks and that they would have likely handled complaints against any professor the exact same way because of the current climate and the situation in which they find themselves.
Thanks for the pedantry on pederasty(and pedophilia more broadly), but I am aware of the age of majority laws, which vary from state to state, but I didnt think I needed to get into that minutiae since those variations/specifics had nothing to do with the point I was making there.
You are also getting pretty far afield from the actual central debate here: whether MSU is looking into her as a form of retaliation.
The obvious answer is no.
Regardless of what you think of the accuser and her claims, MSU simply is not going to dismiss allegations of sexual impropriety by a current professor from a former student of hers without looking into it. That people believe they would do so, and then tell the press that, are delusional.
In a world where where Aziz Ansari is viewed by many as an assailant and millions(billions?) of dollars are at stake for MSU(not to mention every reporter out for blood), they would have done the exact same thing for any other professor on campus.
MSU would look into any allegation that comes through the doors right now and when asked by the media, they would tell them that they are looking into it and taking it seriously.
The notion that anything they have done, at least publicly, so far constitutes retaliation is moronic. The people who are sure of it are letting their judgement be clouded by sports rivalries, which is embarassing.
The bar for sexual impropriety for teacher/student relationships has never been "is she 18?".
Many High School girls are "legal".
Given how much MSU is being hammered by many for "merely" cooperating with the authorities rather than conducting their own investigations and having a higher standard, looking into a complaint of sexual impropriety here does not end with the fact that her student was 18.
The complaint came in and the complainant has been vocal. MSU either ignores the woman alleging abuses at the hand of one of their active faculty(the Mad Hatter plan) or looks into it. They are either honest and transparent when asked about this or they obfuscate.
These are obvious choices from MSU's perspective.
The incident I am referring to in that sentence was when her relationship with a young girl that had been her student became sexual in nature. That should be fairly obvious from the context here...
The Det News article we are discussing has Carter herself claiming that the incident happened 25 years ago.
Sue Carter joined MSUs faculty in 1991
So do the simple math and apologize.
Now could Carter be lying to age up her victim? Sure, but using her own figure to determine whether or not she was at MSU at the time hardly seems unfair to her. Its her own timeline.
Also, the far more relevant matter is that she is active faculty at MSU today and determining whether her admittedly "untoward" sexual behavior represents a threat moving forward. MSU just doing their due dilligence.
Susan Carter is not a martyr. It is routine and obvious to at least look into something like this regarding an active professor. Given the current controversy and climate, it is more than obvious from MSU's perspective.
Nice "gotcha moment" though. You are fake news and failing.
You are 100% in the right here. Embarassingly, people are wrong on numerous core facts throughout this thread(for instance, she actually was an MSU employee at the time of the incident and she remains a faculty member to this day, having merely stepped down from her seperate role as athletic rep)
When an accusation that a current MSU professor used her role at MSU to pray upon a barely legal student(who was at her most vulnerable due to her parents plane crash death) comes across MSUs desk, investigating it is the most obvious choice in the world. Even if the prof claims the relationship wasnt consumated until after the class was finished.
Given not only their current internationally publicized failings in this area, but also the "#metoo moment", not investigating this relationship, which the prof herself refers to as untoward, would be a deathwish(And a horrible decision regardless of that).
The fact that things have devolved to the point that people are using an article they barely skimmed to decry MSU of all places for OVERinvestigating sexual assault (lol) and calling anyone who politely disagrees a "pedophile defender" because they dont like the rival sports team is embarassing and I hope this person didnt graduate from UM.
The fact that such obvious sentiments elicits "Are you or have you ever been a member of NAMBLA?" shows that people might be letting the rivalry cloud their judgment and risk overstepping from deserved calls for justice to a wider ranging witch hunt.
Good thing I already said I wasnt agreeing that they are equivalent in the short post to which you are reponding.
Reading is fundamental.
If I care about those who are unjustly afflicted...I should conform to the cartoon preferences of priviliged upper middle class clods who don't belong to (and directly contradict the opinion of) the group in question. I see...
I would love to see our society evolve to provide opportunity for every child born into a tough situation, and I dont need to sift through millenia and adjudicate humanity's neverending string of tribalistic wars to do so.
I also don't think the best way to do so is to channel so-called activists energy into nitpicking cartoons and deluding themselves into thinking that matters, but youre the Genius at Work
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQH2rmQ5-vk
Save some tofurkey for me at the next Un-Thanksgiving (this is a real holiday, google it)
Your comment is somewhat non-responsive, but I will take it as an opportunity to condemn the entirely of human history for, tragically, being largely violent, warring, and tribalistic.
I would also like to condemn the present for its ... cartoons.
I think having peoples urge to help the less fortunate and the oppressed diverted to "taking on Big Cartoon" is not helpful, is infantiile, and distracts from real issues and standing up to actual power/structural problems.
I am sure your Cartoon War Victory will provide a great psychological boost to the Natives who you admit dont give a shit. I am told it will alter the collective psychology, and I look forward to you citing your sources or breaking that down a bit more because surely its a big win for Trickle Down Social Justice.
There are people who are well-intentioned who get sucked into this, usually very young and naive, and there are people like yourself who just use it to feel morally superior to people who don't read Tumblr everyday to find out the new language so they can avoid WrongSpeak
Which brings me again to how dumb you are. You attempt to feel superior to me because I used the term Indian to describe Indians.
The typical Cartoon Warrior starts with being offended with Redskins, but it quickly devolves into a race to see who can be most offended until someone like you chastises me for referring to Indians as...Indians..
Bad news though:
Why don't you checkout the literal first google result on the matter, courtesy of the Alt-Right Hate Site PBS.com:
Nor did the word Indian fall out of favor with the people it described. A 1995 Census Bureau survey that asked indigenous Americans their preferences for names (the last such survey done by the bureau) found that 49 percent preferred the term Indian, 37 percent Native American, and 3.6 percent "some other name." About 5 percent expressed no preference.
Moreover, a large number of Indians actually strongly object to the term Native American for political reasons. In his 1998 essay "I Am An American Indian, Not a Native American!", Russell Means, a Lakota activist and a founder of the American Indian Movement (AIM), stated unequivocally, "I abhor the term 'Native American.'"
Who is problematic now?
My position is that I dont really give a shit about a cartoon one way or the other.
The vast majority of ACTUAL INDIANS dont give a shit either, so actually some people do agree with me.
Maybe you can civilize these "ignorant" ..native americans...about how offensive they are being...to themselves.....
I am sure the real Indians, who polling shows don't give a shit, will appreciate the Trickle Down Social Justice they will receive once you and your comrades win the Cartoon Wars.
Yeah the guy whose poltiical praxis doesnt center around policing cartoons is the child
And the people who all "find Jesus" on whatever cartoon at the exact same time it becomes fashionable to do so are the free thinking "adults in the room"
I hate having politics here, but at some point I may have to start bursting child-like group think bubble that has pervaded my university(and thus my football message board)
Theres a team called the Fighting Irish and no one gives a shit
Im not necessarily agreeing with his argument from equivalency, but your suggestion that Italians would be offended en masse if Cleveland changed their team name to the Cleveland Italians is almost certainly wrong.
I have not seen a single conservative make that extremely inflammatory statement on this board
I have seen the equivalent said about Trump innumerable times on this board.
The topic at hand is this board.
Another thing you are wrong about: I did not endorse the political statement, and in fact was using it as an example of a statement I would consider wildly inappropriate for a football board. It was chosen because it is the other side of the same coin of the incessant "Drumpf is an orange rapist" crowd.
I even used the qualifier "conservatives perceived" before lesser evil, lest I get accused of calling Hillary evil....
I had a good mind to make obvious political statements in response to what I view as unchecked vacuity from the semi-literate crowd like yourself, but I believe I restrained myself. For the record, vacuity is nails on a chalkboard to me, and it spans the entire political spectrum.
The only affirmative point I was making is that this football board is not the place for "bumper sticker politics" of any kind and I believe this line of thinking is in line with the rules.
I am about the furthest thing from aligned with Trump politically, but The MGoResistance stuff is embarassing
I applaud conservatives (or moderates who voted their perceived "lesser evil") for not insinuating that Bill Clinton is a rapist on here despite a slew of imbeciles shoehorning the latest EPIC Samantha Bee TAKEDOWN of "DRUMPF" into their dreck on a daily basis.
Youre not witty or edgy or informed. If you want a proper debate, go find someone who disagrees with you on a forum appropriate for political discussion and have your bubble burst by someone with a clue about the various misdeeds of various politicians.
Listening to brainless buffoons babbling their generic political takes is what one comes to a football board to avoid.
The previous posters analogy is not intended to suggest that Canadas career runs perfectly paralel and is identical to Harbaughs. To imply that the clearly intended point of his analogy was broader is intelectually lazy or dishonest.
The clear point was that bouncing around is not not ipso facto good or bad and requires closer inspection. People failed to do this with Harbaugh and you are doing the same with Canada.
This closer inspection was provided by him and largely ignored by you. Disagreements with Dave "The Dumbass" Doeren, Bert Bielema, and Coach Orangutan aren't necessarily a bad thing. They are actually a mark of having an IQ.
As for ending up with DJ Durkin at Maryland, it may just be that he had "better" offers, but was tired of working with morons(of which there are many in the coaching ranks).
With excellent coaching on both sides of the ball and decent $ backing, Maryland may end up being a team that can overachieve relative to their historical standards and springboard Canada to a head coaching gig if he so desires. Certainly dealing with bright young guy like Durkin vs Coach 0 and co will improve quality of life and prevent meddling/fucking things up.
or did you just not comprehend it?
What an excellent use of Kid Pix 3d
This mock draft is laughably bad.
I'd give examples, but its the whole thing. #content
S&P+ adjusts for strength of schedule, so a 50th rated offense in the SEC West isn't any more impressive than it would be otherwise.
Ed Feng is actually fine and provides an interesting perspective
Harsh response and insults for a fairly innocuous comment
No
I cant upvote because I never post but you are 100% correct. I cant even think of any other staff that comes close in terms of being overrated.