WLU APOLOGIZES TO STUDENT

It hasn't hit the news yet, but all of us who are students there received this email from the President of Laurier:

1/2
>This email is sent on behalf of Laurier President and Vice-Chancellor Deborah MacLatchy to Laurier faculty, staff and students.

>I’m writing to make an apology on behalf of the university.

>Through the media, we have now had the opportunity to hear the full recording of the meeting that took place at Wilfrid Laurier University.

>After listening to this recording, an apology is in order. The conversation I heard does not reflect the values and practices to which Laurier aspires. I am sorry it occurred in the way that it did and I regret the impact it had on Lindsay Shepherd. I will convey my apology to her directly. Professor Rambukkana has also chosen to apologize to Lindsay Shepherd about the way the meeting was conducted.

>I remain troubled by the way faculty, staff and students involved in this situation have been targeted with extreme vitriol. Supports are in place at the university to support them through this situation.

Other urls found in this thread:

wlu.ca/news/spotlights/2017/nov/open-letter-to-my-ta-lindsay-shepherd.html
youtube.com/watch?v=9YdFlKaJv4g
complexsingularities.net
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

2/2
>The university has engaged an independent party to assess the facts of the matter including a review of related processes going forward. The review is intended to support improvement in our processes. The university is committed to ensuring that the vitally important role of Teaching Assistant supports an enriched learning environment for all students.

>Let me be clear by stating that Laurier is committed to the abiding principles of freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Giving life to these principles while respecting fundamentally important human rights and our institutional values of diversity and inclusion, is not a simple matter. The intense media interest points to a highly polarizing and very complicated set of issues that is affecting universities across the democratic world. The polarizing nature of the current debate does not do justice to the complexity of issues.

>Laurier is prepared to engage with these important discussions in a thoughtful and determined way. I have announced a task force to delve into these issues. Further details will be announced in the days ahead. I look forward to the process and I am confident that the outcome will contribute to a better understating of these issues for Laurier and the broader community.

four spaces after a line then press enter, please think of the wasted real estate otherwise.

Thanks for sharing the story anyways

In addition, the professor who Lindsay TA's for also apologized. The link is ( wlu.ca/news/spotlights/2017/nov/open-letter-to-my-ta-lindsay-shepherd.html ) but here it is anyway:

>Dear Lindsay,

>I wanted to write to apologize to you for how the meeting we had proceeded. While I was not able to do so earlier due to confidentiality concerns, including your privacy as a grad student, now that the audio of the meeting is public I can say more. While I still cannot discuss the student concerns raised about the tutorial, everything that has happened since the meeting has given me occasion to rethink not only my approach to discussing the concerns that day, but many of the things I said in our meeting as well.

>First, I wanted to say that when I was made aware of the concerns, I was told that the proper procedure would be to have an informal meeting to discuss it. In the process of arranging this, others indicated they should attend as well. This is one of the facets of working at a university, that meetings can often become de-facto committees due to relevant stakeholders being pulled in. My main concerns were finding out why a lesson on writing skills had become a political discussion, and making sure harm didn’t befall students. However, in not also prioritizing my mentorship role as the course director and your supervisor, I didn’t do enough to try to support you in this meeting, which I deeply regret. I should have seen how meeting with a panel of three people would be an intimidating situation and not invite a productive discussion. Had I tried harder to create a situation more conducive to talking these issues through, things might have gone very differently, but alas I did not.

1/?

2/3

>Second, this entire occasion, and hearing from so many with passionate views on this issue from across the political spectrum, has made me seriously rethink some of the positions I took in the meeting. I made the argument that first-year students, not studying this topic specifically, might not have the tool kit to unpack or process a controversial view such as Dr. Peterson’s, saying that such material might be better reserved for upper-year or grad courses. While I still think that such material needs to be handled carefully, especially so as to not infringe on the rights of any of our students or make them feel unwelcome in the learning environment, I believe you are right that making a space for controversial or oppositional views is important, and even essential to a university. The trick is how to properly contextualize such material. One way might be through having readings, or a lecture on the subject before discussion, but you are correct that first-years should be eligible to engage with societal debates in this way. Perhaps instead of the route I took I should have added further discussion in lecture, or supplementary readings. But instead I tried to make a point about the need to contextualize difficult material, and drew on the example of playing a speech by Hitler to do it. This was, obviously, a poorly chosen example. I meant to use it to drive home a point about context by saying here was material that would definitely need to be contextualized rather than presented neutrally, and instead I implied that Dr. Peterson is like Hitler, which is untrue and was never my intention. While I disagree strongly with many of Dr. Peterson’s academic positions and actions, the tired analogy does him a disservice and was the opposite of useful in our discussion.

3/3

>Finally there is the question of teaching from a social justice perspective, which my course does attempt to do. I write elsewhere about reaching across the aisle to former alt-right figures as possible unexpected allies in the struggle to create a better more just society for all. But hearing all of the feedback from people and looking at the polarized response I am beginning to rethink so limited an approach. Maybe we ought to strive to reach across all of our multiple divisions to find points where we can discuss such issues, air multiple perspectives, and embrace the diversity of thought. And maybe I have to get out of an “us versus them” habit of thought to do this myself, and to think of the goal as more than simply advancing social justice, but social betterment and progress as a whole. While I think that such a pedagogical approach must still work not to marginalize some students, I think the issues are too complex to leave as a binary with protection of students on one side and protection of speech on the other. We should be striving for both, which is why I look forward to participating in Dr. MacLatchy’s task force looking into these issues at Laurier, and I hope perhaps you might consider doing the same so we could together work towards an even stronger institutional future.

>I’m sorry this came to pass the way it did, and look forward to moving past this and continue working with you as my TA and perhaps in the future.

>Yours sincerely,

>Dr. Nathan Rambukkana

I just copy pasted it bro

give us the cliffynotes faggot nobody is going to read alll that.

>>The conversation I heard does not reflect the values and practices to which Laurier aspires. I
LIes.

> I am sorry it occurred in the way that it did
I'm sorry the conversation leaked out

im from kitchener and wtf is this

what a spineless fuck

>Uni administration did not know she recorded the convo
>They realize that they are in danger now because of the way that the faculty acted
>President weasels out and says that Laurier must stand for freedom of speech

>Prof apologizes for acting like a dick
>Admits that he needs to stop teaching his courses like they're social justice campaigns
>Begins to openly question his entire world view and how he teaches
>Apologizes again


Nothing will change.

any more pics of her, I think shes qt

I read all of that. I still have no fucking clue what this thread is about.

Sooooo wtf happened. Quick rundown please.

>TA shows Jordan Peterson video, likely just to exemplify argumentative writing being something that can be done,correctly from any point of view, that the point of view is not inherent to the technique being taught or some such. >danger hairs complain
>an ad-hoc tribunal of SJW harries descends on the TA for,demonstrating that alternate viewpoints exist and can be presented in formal, correct, and persuasive methods (thus demonstrating the power of writing, in a writing class).
>TA records the insane hen-pecking by said harpies
>releases video
>uni and professor forced to apologize for being harpy enablers.

Always shine the public light on what the Jew keeps behind closed doors.

You're both idiots

So it seems that a minority cuck is more privileged than a cute grill. Or the other way around.

Though, it is good to see a student win over the machine.

I didn't follow this, what bullshit was said in the recording?

tl;dr:
>We're sorry we got caught (but we absolutely would have been okay with what we did if evidence hadn't gotten out)
>We'll be making a couple of meaningless investigations to make it look like we're doing something about it (we're not)
>We totally like free speech, nothing to see here, citizen.
>We won't be taking any disciplinary action against our darling marxist propagandists, so they'll be free to do this again.

There. Now you don't have to waste your time.

Literally just autistic screeching that a TA demonstrated that opposing viewpoints can both be well argued, to demonstrate how writing works.

Bump

Wheres the video?

>being this illiterate

Surprisingly nuanced reply, although the professor should never have been hired in the first place.

They are trying to avoid a possible lawsuit?

TL;DR

youtube.com/watch?v=9YdFlKaJv4g

TA plays a Jordan Petey clip in a critical thinking class about grammar, specifically the use of they in a singular manner
Uni thinks it is problematic
"One or more" students have hurt feelings
Uni meet with TA
TA records the talk
Uni goes ohshit.pg
Apologies all around
Nobody mean it. Nothing will change.

I am about to get a masters degree in aerospace engineering and I still don't know what this clusterfuck is about.

...

>The university has engaged an independent party to assess the facts of the matter including a review of related processes going forward
>(((independent party)))

Gee, I can't wait to see who that will be.

Bump
See

I didn't know the ability to see your own dick was a privilege.

the jew shit is boring

What a hero. We need to give her a medal.

>Libtard teaching assistant shows class excerpts of one of JP's TV appearances
>Aims to prove he's a Nahtzee Whyt Supremiss ofcourse
>Snowflakes in the class get triggered, rat her out to the school head
>School head calls the teaching assistant and reprimands her, of course her career is over
>Joke's on him, she recorded their discussion, now he is under fire
>JP becomes more relevant

>>I remain troubled by the way faculty, staff and students involved in this situation have been targeted with extreme vitriol. Supports are in place at the university to support them through this situation.
WTF?! They need to be fired, not supported.

>MA in Theory, Culture and Politics
>PhD in Communication

Jesus Christ, do we really have to call these types of people "Doctor" or "Professor"? How about we come up with a different term to differentiate those who went to college to study something meaningful in the real world as opposed to those who went just to wax on about a subject that will only land you a job in the very institution you went through to obtain it.

>played a speech by Hitler to show an example

Why do dumb libs always go to Hitler? He's their go-to when it comes to ANY argument they have. I imagine that when the Peterson clip was over, ol Rambukkana held up some cards, pulled one slowly above the rest,

>You just activated my Hitler card.

is this worth watching?

It's about the creeping tentacles of Marxist Communism. It's about the continuation of the Bolshevik and Maoist Revolutions. It's about the enemy at and within the U.S. border.

It's about your grandchildren not starving in gulags.

That's what it is about, rocket man.

Make no mistake, nothing about the power structures at Laurier has changed. Next time, they'll just be more careful not to get caught. These professors are still marxists and they're still going to do their best to indoctrinate students. From now on, they'll just be more careful.

The professors in the recording convey a capricious glee that they take in launching such an inquisition. Their paranoia is so entrenched that they actually ask if the TA is a plant by Dr. Peterson. Furthermore, they deny that there is any basis for his views while basically admitting that they would gladly excommunicate any academic who failed to toe the line. They have the audacity to suggest that left wing domination of institutions is a myth while exercising said institutional power against somebody.

The doublethink on display here demonstrates that these people are completely mentally broken. They are two faced serpents who wear a smile and speak of tolerance, but sadistically torture anyone who disagrees.

These things don't change with a backhanded apology. These institutions won't change until we replace the people within them.

>those who went just to wax on about a subject that will only land you a job in the very institution you went through to obtain it.


...Bushes?

>no one is punished for their actions
>only apologies

so it's literally nothing?

what a bullshit PhD, education was a mistake

>be sjw cuck prof
>show jordan peterson video in class
>don't specifically denounce peterson but leave it to students to denounce peterson
>school chimps out
>threatens action against sjw prof for not denouncing peterson
>sjw prof chimps out at sjw faculty
>gigantic shitshow goes down and none of it was caused by us
>feelsgood.jpg

nope, will only get you angry

> (((they))) will arrive at an ambiguous conclusion with no fault found

or

> (((they))) will forget to hire a 3rd party

>a poo
>area of expertise
>digital intimacies
show bobs and vegana

didn't they fire him? wtf is wrong with you leafs

So more liberal retardation? Figures.
Thanks for the rundown.

yfw the left literally destroys itself and we just have to sit on the sidelines with popcorn and watch

like pottery

Lol you fags suck at football

They're only sorry they got caught out, not sincere at all.

They apologized because they were caught.

If she had not tape recorder the meeting they would have thrown her down the well.

"Unpacking" other peoples words is just bullshit for putting my own spin on it.

Nathan Pooinloo writes an open letter to libtard qt

complexsingularities.net

reproducing:
-----------------------------------------
Dear Lindsay,

I wanted to write to apologize to you for how the meeting we had proceeded. While I was not able to do so earlier due to confidentiality concerns, including your privacy as a grad student, now that the audio of the meeting is public I can say more. While I still cannot discuss the student concerns raised about the tutorial, everything that has happened since the meeting has given me occasion to rethink not only my approach to discussing the concerns that day, but many of the things I said in our meeting as well.

First, I wanted to say that when I was made aware of the concerns, I was told that the proper procedure would be to have an informal meeting to discuss it. In the process of arranging this, others indicated they should attend as well. This is one of the facets of working at a university, that meetings can often become de-facto committees due to relevant stakeholders being pulled in. My main concerns were finding out why a lesson on writing skills had become a political discussion, and making sure harm didn’t befall students. However, in not also prioritizing my mentorship role as the course director and your supervisor, I didn’t do enough to try to support you in this meeting, which I deeply regret. I should have seen how meeting with a panel of three people would be an intimidating situation and not invite a productive discussion. Had I tried harder to create a situation more conducive to talking these issues through, things might have gone very differently, but alas I did not.

>he is... uhhh.. a figure with the alt.... right
*pause*
>yes....
hmm

I can smell the soy from here

seriously, anyone that willingly goes to a university and gives these loonies thousands of dollars to be brainwashed is a fucking cuck

(Cont.)

Second, this entire occasion, and hearing from so many with passionate views on this issue from across the political spectrum, has made me seriously rethink some of the positions I took in the meeting. I made the argument that first year students, not studying this topic specifically, might not have the tool kit to unpack or process a controversial view such as Dr. Peterson’s, saying that such material might be better reserved for upper-year or grad courses. While I still think that such material needs to be handled carefully, especially so as to not infringe on the rights of any of our students or make them feel unwelcome in the learning environment, I believe you are right that making a space for controversial or oppositional views is important, and even essential to a university. The trick is how to properly contextualize such material. One way might be through having readings, or a lecture on the subject before discussion, but you are correct that first-years should be eligible to engage with societal debates in this way. Perhaps instead of the route I took I should have added further discussion in lecture, or supplementary readings. But instead I tried to make a point about the need to contextualize difficult material, and drew on the example of playing a speech by Hitler to do it. This was, obviously, a poorly chosen example. I meant to use it to drive home a point about context by saying here was material that would definitely need to be contextualized rather than presented neutrally, and instead I implied that Dr. Peterson is like Hitler, which is untrue and was never my intention. While I disagree strongly with many of Dr. Peterson’s academic positions and actions, the tired analogy does him a disservice and was the opposite of useful in our discussion.

(Cont.)

Finally there is the question of teaching from a social justice perspective, which my course does attempt to do. I write elsewhere about reaching across the aisle to former alt-right figures as possible unexpected allies in the struggle to create a better more just society for all. But hearing all of the feedback from people and looking at the polarized response I am beginning to rethink so limited an approach. Maybe we ought to strive to reach across all of our multiple divisions to find points where we can discuss such issues, air multiple perspectives, and embrace the diversity of thought. And maybe I have to get out of an “us versus them” habit of thought to do this myself, and to think of the goal as more than simply advancing social justice, but social betterment and progress as a whole. While I think that such a pedagogical approach must still work not to marginalize some students, I think the issues are too complex to leave as a binary with protection of students on one side and protection of speech on the other. We should be striving for both, which is why I look forward to participating in Dr. MacLatchy’s task force looking into these issues at Laurier, and I hope perhaps you might consider doing the same so we could together work towards an even stronger institutional future.

I’m sorry this came to pass the way it did, and look forward to moving past this and continue working with you as my TA and perhaps in the future.

Yours Sincerely,

Dr. Nathan Rambukkana
____________________________

shiiiiieeeeeet

You leaf students should start recording everything in class.

That audio really pissed me off

Did the people in the meeting resign and forgo their pensions? Yes or No?

literally meme education

with all this university horse shit going around I am really glad I became an apprentice and learned a trade

It's been all over the news for hours now you stupid leaf.

Anyway this qt is gonna be on Rubin Report next week so that should provide some fap material.

The funniest thing of this entire trainwreck is that the person they raged on was one of their own. They literally chimped out on some SJW because they didn't think she was SJW enough. These people are part of a cult

Did those in the meeting resign and forgo their pensions...if not it is meaningless.

>"problematic"
who else wants to crush the heads of their inferiors?

If this chick was smart and wanted revenge, she could just say this prof groped her or at the very least, claim oppression. Only then would this fudge-packing poo actually get flushed like we all want.

...

Did those in the meeting resign? If they did not it is all just HOLLOW AND BS.

...

shes a qt desu

>dem mis-aligned eyes

IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER:

>no student in her tutorial complained
>it was a third party that isn't even in the course that heard about Peterson and complained

My bet is on the Trans, women, black peoole United group that we have at the school. They have been exercising a disturbing amount of influence on the school recently. Before this, they got a pro-life chalk display shut down for (((literally being violent)))

This recording is proof of many things. First and foremost, it proves that our tactics are working and we're getting inside the heads of our enemies.

In addition to the obviously relevant Jordan Peterson, this guy also namedrops Richard Spencer, Rebel Media, and "white supremacist posters around campus" (IOTBW). The inquisition panel fears that she is a covert alt-right agent provocateur, sent to drum up controversy. The fact that we could be anywhere and anyone has these people terrified.

If you actually want to make a difference, here's what to do:
>Stay anonymous
This is the most important point. You can't single out and bring the power of the establishment upon an enemy that you can't identity. Plus, this obscures our numbers and allows a few dedicated individuals to "punch above their weight" in terms of media impression.
>Use slogans that are provocative, but innocuous
IOTBW is a great example of this. Come up with your own slogans and hit a wide variety of locations. Stuff like "make white privilege real" and "racists have more fun" illustrates our point in a way that makes our enemies look like humorless curmudgeons.
>Target weak links
You're much more likely to get a reaction if you put your posters near the feminist society than if you put them up in the engineering building. Part of why we get so much publicity from our online activities is that Twitter gives us a direct pipeline into the heads of professors, journalists, and politicians. These are the people whose heads we need to get inside. We need to make them scared and aggravated so that they make mistakes like this one.

>Nobody mean it. Nothing will change.
This is the most important part.
Also she was hoping for a teaching position there (or in any leaf or american uni) she can kiss her chances goodbye.

Tldr is Laura is still a leftist. The left was attempting to eat one of their own but she was able to be spared

It is rage inducing

>Yours sincerely,
Nothing sincere in this apology

It's an age old story that's played out countless times before throughout history.

So
>I should've brought better arguments
>I should focus less on social justice policing and call it "social betterment" and "progress" instead
>also I'm on the SJW hitsquad now lmao

So she is retarded and learned nothing.
>oh, those leftists with all the institutional power setting the agenda are not the real leftists
>people like me that are left in the cold and reviled by everyone else in the left
>we are the real left
I promise she will never use Peterson or anyone tangentially related to the right ever again.

This.

I attended UWaterloo years ago and always went to WLU to study. Phils Grandsons was the best place to get laid in Waterloo

I was also almost ecspelled for telling a SJW to suck my dick sarcastically (a guy). I was accused of rape and had a full-blown Senate trial (faculty of judges, multiple lawyers, audio taped, video taped)

I was found guilty of rape but was allowed to graduate
>literally got convicted of raping a man by telling him to suck my dick sarcastically

AMA

If I was her id reply 'Too long, didn't read' - You're sorry because you got caught, and look like the assholes publicly that you actually are.... now take your apology and go fuck yourself.

You got to be joking. THATS IT?!

JBP needs to hear about this

...

>wtf is wrong with you leafs
pic related

>All hail the new Queen Of /pol

>we need to
>gives us
>we need to
>we
>us
fuck off m8

Son, in case you haven't been paying attention, the lunatics run the asylum. Rare that they dismiss those running the reeducation camps.

She should bring them to court and take them to the cleaners, make an example out of them uni's shouldn't be suppressing free speech

>AMA

you up?

I thought with all the media attention there would be pitchforks and tiki torches guess I underestimated the leafs retardation

This