SLUperman
-
Posts
288 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by SLUperman
-
-
Just now, Quality Is Job 1 said:
Makes sense.
Giving it the ol eye test, they looked tired the last 4-5 minutes. Lack of off ball movement, lotta one on one ball. Rotation seemed slower on D.
-
Seems like teams always make runs on us at the end of the half. Gotta wonder if fatigue plays a factor with such a short roster.
-
Seems like DJ always gets that herky jerky shot to go
-
Didn't need that from Roby. Better shot selection, guys
-
TO are killing us...
-
Team looks motivated! Love seeing it.
-
16 minutes ago, Curious Observer said:
Just signed up for forum after reading many pages on this topic. Not an alumni, not really a fan, go to perhaps 3-5 games per year when friends with season tickets give them to me. so I am totally neutral on this subject. I was told of this board by a season ticket holder. I am amazed by the passion. I am interested in board's feelings on the following. Assume all actions known and unknown were totally and 100% consensual, including taking and posting videos, pictures etc. Further assume that someone, likely one of the females changed their mind and filed a formal complaint with the university. Further assume that no law was violated, and that there really is no actual proof of a Title IX violation. If all those things are true, does a private Catholic Jesuit university have the right to say something along the lines of "SLU does not approve of individuals participating in 4 on 3 group sex and posting it on social media. While we recognize the right of the individuals to behave as they choose within the boundaries of law , we will not allow students who demonstrated this behavior, which we believe to be morally wrong, to continue to represent our school ?" Obviously this would have to apply equally to male and female participants. Thanks so much for the very interesting content on this topic.
If their grounds for the ruling were based in morality and school guidelines, then it would have to punish the girls as well in some manner for their participation in what was deemed an immoral act. The punishment would still be excessive imo, but it would be "equal." This is where the feminist movement loses me big time. A large portion of feminists are in it for the advocation for special female privilege, rather than female egalitarianism.
-
2 minutes ago, Billiken Rich said:
I don't know. To a full boat, social justice warrior, wouldn't being African American be almost a mitigating factor?
Not in this instance. For a full blown SJW, you'd be running circles in your head trying to decide who is more "privileged" in this instance, but Title IX is there to protect female sex assault victims, color of the man be damned.
-
I'm open to hear otherwise, but I also have a hunch that we wouldn't be at this juncture if the boys in question were scrawny and white. Just take a look at statistics on sentencing for similar crimes if you are black vs white in this country. While improvement is being made, unfortunately, being black inherently makes you a feared figure in today's society still, and I think it'd be remissive of SLU to overlook the fact that the last two "Situations" have involved excessively harsh punishments for large, imposing, black men. If Title IX wants to play the their social victimization card, I think Rosenblum and Co. have an extremely valid card of their own in their back pocket.
Spoon-Balls likes this -
So... If it's going to come to this, match their victim card with your own. If they're going to ramp things up and make the "she said" a public statement, get your "he said" statement out in the public eye as well and let them decide. Too often the female plays this as their trump card. They wanna play in the mud, start throwing some mud.
-
What bothers me most is that the Title IX office is not acting to rehash the details and correct any biases or deviances from what most would presume to be a fair process and outcome for the boys. They are acting to affirm their decision and give the appearance that no bias was imparted on the outcome whatsoever. It's a lack of self awareness at best and otherwise vindictive and manipulative. Actually terrifying that these are adults in positions of power acting in this manner.
joe_davola and HoosierBilliken like this -
Long time lurker and Bills fan who's been getting progressively more vocal on Twitter about Pestello's incompetence. Always been supportive of SLU and talk highly of my experience there, so I hate seeing my alma mater driven into the ground. I'm realizing we need to rebuild from the ground up as we have a full blown systemic failure on our hands, meaning Pestello and his cronies need to be driven out. We may be playing a bit out of our ballpark here, but if there ever was a chance to put heavy pressure on an administrative change, this is it. To those of you with the screenshots, send those things in with the backstory to national media (Fox News, CNN, USA Today, NYT, anyone who'll listen) and see if we can't put the full court press on this. As always, Roll Bills!
GDT: The Billikens ground the Hawks
in Billikens.com Main Board
Posted
If the man can keep the ship steady sailing through Stormy Weathers, he 100% deserves some sort of Medal of Honor.