[martyup]

Memo to Admins:  Don't get band members angry!

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2016/12/13/...l-assault/

IMO, the administration is being cowardly.  They say that they worry about liability, but I believe that they really are worried about the band offending someone.  The satire of the LSJUMB has always been offensive to someone.  All satire is offensive to someone, by definition.  The administration has decided that they must rid this "offensive" organization from Stanford and they are using alcohol and alleged mysogyist incidents achieve this goal.  Without a major change in the administration, I believe that the LSJUMB, as we know it, is toast.

This is very similar to the ban of Kevin Hogan's fraternity.  There were some jokes made at a party,  drinking was involved, followed by a complaint, a Title IX investigation with little chance to defend, and then the ban hammer came down.  IIRC, there were no allegations of physical sexual assault.  Just words.

The new age assault on speech at Stanford that "offends" someone has been used to go after institutions and traditions widely considered to be conservative and/or male dominated.  The irony is that this speech cleansing tactic is now being turned on those who championed it.

[martyup]

Memo to Admins:  Don't get band members angry!

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2016/12/13/...l-assault/

IMO, the administration is being cowardly.  They say that they worry about liability, but I believe that they really are worried about the band offending someone.  The satire of the LSJUMB has always been offensive to someone.  All satire is offensive to someone, by definition.  The administration has decided that they must rid this "offensive" organization from Stanford and they are using alcohol and alleged mysogyist incidents achieve this goal.  Without a major change in the administration, I believe that the LSJUMB, as we know it, is toast.

This is very similar to the ban of Kevin Hogan's fraternity.  There were some jokes made at a party,  drinking was involved, followed by a complaint, a Title IX investigation with little chance to defend, and then the ban hammer came down.  IIRC, there were no allegations of physical sexual assault.  Just words.

The new age assault on speech at Stanford that "offends" someone has been used to go after institutions and traditions widely considered to be conservative and/or male dominated.  The irony is that this speech cleansing tactic is now being turned on those who championed it.