Adjunct Instructor At UVA In Trouble For Calling BLM Racist

   ...or...'rasist', actually...
   So...there's clearly some racism associated with BLM. BLM is motivated on the intellectual side by the post-post-modern mish-mash. Anti-white racism is just part of that mix. Whether it's really a significant component, I really don't know. It may even just be an affectation. But it's clearly in there.
   However...I guess it goes without saying that BLM is, um, obviously not the most racist organization since the KKK. I'd be pretty surprised if it cracked the top 1000.
   So anyway: dude writes something false on his Facebook page. I don't do the Facebook, but I'm led to believe that this is...not uncommon. And the university comes down on him for it and, seemingly encourages him to "take a leave." And here's a chilling statement by the engineering school:

While free speech and open discussion are fundamental principles of our nation and the University, Mr. Muir’s comment was entirely inappropriate. UVA Engineering does not condone actions that undermine our values, dedication to diversity and educational mission. Our faculty and staff are responsible for upholding our values and demonstrating them to students and the community. Mr. Muir has agreed to take leave and is preparing his own statement to the community.

   Holy crap...

   UVA Engineering "does not condone" private actions by it's adjunct instructors that "undermine [their] values, dedication to diversity, and educational mission." Think about that for a bit.

  Mr. Muir, incidentally, was ratted out by another C'ville resident who saw his comment on Facebook, screen capped it, and sent it to UVA.

   Muir may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, or he may have just been having a bad day, or he may have been fed up in that moment by some of the copious bullshit in BLM. It doesn't matter. He's got a right to his political opinions, and I sincerely hope that he sues the shit out of UVA for giving him the boot over this.

The Rolling Stone / UVA Rape Hoax One Year Later

Here's something in the Washington Post.
It's referred to as a 'debacle' in the the title, but the more accurate term is 'hoax.'

   Several morals might reasonably be drawn from this case and the reaction to it. It goes without saying that the following is not one of them: there is no sexual assault problem on campuses. It's absurd that we'd need to say that. It's also absurd that some freak out if it isn't said...
   Some of the most important morals have to do with rape crisis feminism and rape crisis hysteria. Rape is a terrible crime. But that doesn't mean that it is impossible to exaggerate its frequency. And that is exactly what a certain sector of the PC left / feminism is dedicated to doing. So far as I know, just as an example, Amanda Marcotte has never explicitly admitted that "Jackie" was lying--and has dissembled several times. (For that matter, she has never explicitly admitted that the accuser in the Duke lacrosse case was lying...and she's suggested at least that she doesn't believe that she was.) Somebody at Shakesville claimed, basically, that even though Jackie is lying, anyone who didn't initially believe her is a "rape denialist"... Perhaps most significantly, Jackie's story was represented by many feminists as conclusive evidence of "rape culture" and so forth when they thought it was true...but when it was shown to be false, they refused to count it as evidence that their claims are overblown. This is almost definitive of pseudoscience--evidence is only evidence when it proves what we want it to prove; otherwise, it's irrelevant...
   One thing many feminist writers on the web have gotten right, though, is that this case doesn't tell us a lot about false accusations of rape. "Jackie" didn't accuse a real person--she made up a guy and accused him. The writers in question are probably wrong that the case tells us nothing about false accusations...but if it tells us anything about false accusations against real people, it doesn't tell us a lot.
   Anyway. There's that.