This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"I used to be a highly respected Watcher. Now I'm a wounded dwarf with the mystical strength of a doily."
11981 members | you are not logged in | 27 April 2018


October 06 2011

Postergate is over: UW-Stout relents. The university's administration has reversed its decision regarding the Mal poster. Fan opinion was split over the rights and wrongs of the situtation.

That's not a very objective article.

I have no idea if this was the right decision or not, considering I know nothing off how the mood is on american campuses and if the students would dilikes posters like these, I just know I'm personally fine with posters like that. I would however not like to have that professor running one of my classes. I read his e-mails, and he has some growing up to do.

I wonder if the university was simply bullied into doing this, or if they feel like they actually made a misstake.
So that Chief of Police that a Chief of Poilce for the University itself?!

Anyway I'm glad to see this has happened. It's not a massive issue really, it's just one example of the tendency for people to lay blame for violence at the feet of the most easy to identify and least influential targets.

I think if you're trying to combat violence in America you could do worse that looking the way violence is systematised (is that a word?), but oh! wait that takes a modicum of intelligence and amounts to biting the hand that feeds. Guess we'll just keep picking on innocuous professors then!

Compared to this poster, I'd be much more likely to think being able to carry a concealed weapon on campus is an incitement to violence.

[ edited by digupherbones on 2011-10-07 12:49 ]
I saw that Adam was tweeting about it but didn't Nathan try to calm things down? If so, I wouldn't say he applied pressure over the matter.
Two things influenced my opinon on this issue. Number one, I read that the professor's point in posting it in the first place was to express his enthusiasm for fair play. I get it. It does that.

Second, in the article just posted:
"Today, Baldwin (co-star of Firefly) wrote about Stout's apparent double standard in censorship. Baldwin noted that earlier this year, Stout apparently had no problem with "Kill the Bill" posters based on the film Kill Bill, which depicted Uma Thurman with a sword and advocated against Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's budget bill."

Double standards are the opposite of fair play.
Agree about point 1, Xane. Not so sure about point 2. Killing people and bills surely isn't the same thing, right?
I kind of think if they allow the Kill Bill thing they should allow the Firefly poster. Or maybe they missed the Kill Bill poster?
I'd see the double standard if they'd been a 'Kill Scott' poster. Advocating killing a bill is very different from advocating killing a person and I can't see the two as equivalent in any meaningful way.
The poster wasn't advocating killing people, helcat. The quote from Mal is saying "I'm not the sneaky type to kill you in your sleep - I believe in being fair in combat." In other words, he's got a...code of conduct when it comes to fighting - he won't shoot an unarmed man, or a man who is asleep, or a man who isn't facing him.

The whole thing is really sad. I really want to know what was actually in the mind of that Chief of Police when she pulled the first poster. Did she honestly think that college students would be prone to violence because of a quote from a science fiction television show? Way to have faith in people, lady!

Also...someone in the comments said Nathan Fillion is gay. HUH? What does that have to do with ANYthing?? (I believe that comment was in the Adam Baldwin article.)
I don't think any of this is about fear of violence or free speech or any type of lofty ideal or goal. It was an immature dick measuring contest. The dean lost. The whole thing is ridiculous.
The poster wasn't advocating killing people, helcat. The quote from Mal is saying "I'm not the sneaky type to kill you in your sleep - I believe in being fair in combat." In other words, he's got a...code of conduct when it comes to fighting - he won't shoot an unarmed man, or a man who is asleep, or a man who isn't facing him.

And that's all well and good in the context - personally I don't see it as a helpful statement to have in a workplace. I'd not dream of calling the police about something like that but I'd certainly have no problem telling the person who put it up why I thought it was a stupid thing to display on an office door in a university.
And I would imagine the prof would have been happy to at least discuss his reasoning with anyone who raised it as a concern, helcat, even if he refused to take it down and it led to a valid complaint that went to the campus police.
Who knows BlueEyedBrigadier it'd be nice to think he would - his behaviour in the current situation hardly makes me want to bet that'd have been the outcome.

I got the idea she took down the poster because it could make people uncomfortable, not that it would lead to violence, which would be sillt. But maybe I got that wrong.
That's not a very objective article.

Well that's not exactly shocking from the FIRE website. It's essentially a web trophy case because they won.

I agree with Irrational on what this was in reality. I suspect the administration realized that too, since this should have been a simple internal affair and the Drama professor was enlisting every external group he could find to pressure the school about something extremely trivial.

I do find the contradiction that Adam Baldwin found intriguing though. Although in fairness, the context of that poster was not ambigious where as this one was.

Long story short: we're meddlesome.

[ edited by azzers on 2011-10-07 22:19 ]
Though I think the man intended no harm and the posters should not have had them removed, the way he conducted himself in those emails... he does need to grow and I although I don't agree with her reasoning, she was quite polite and was open to privately discussing it.

[ edited by Nathan on 2011-10-08 01:17 ]
Speaking of not being objective, check out the article Adam Baldwin co-wrote in defense of the Professor and the First Amendment. Don't get me wrong, it's a great piece that's intelligently written and thought-provoking but man, is it ever didactic and one-sided! :)
If I had seen the poster in the hallway on someone's door, I would have geeked out and laughed and felt no threat whatsoever. I've seen many and more comics (Farsides, PhD Comics, XKCD's, Dinosaur Comics) posted on doors that could be considered inappropriate if taken completely literally. Spending a lot of time in the biology department, I also see a lot of Darwin-centric posters that can be insulting to creationists if taken literally as well. In general, I have found that most departments, chairs and otherwise, are mature enough to understand that no harm is meant. It reflects more of a high school classroom how this was taken and dealt with.

This thread has been closed for new comments.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.

joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home