There is an interesting case out of Oregon where Judge Marco Hernández has ruled for a Portland State University Professor Bruce Gilley who was excluded from a Diversity Twitter page by the Communication Manager of the Division of Equity and Inclusion at the University of Oregon. (The manager is identified as “tova stabin” who the court notes “spells her name with all lowercase letters.”). Stabin has now left the school. The court rejects a critical motion to dismiss and said that Gilley has raised sufficient evidence to go to trial after stabin blocked Gilley for responding to a tweet with “all men are created equal.”
In Gilley v. Stabin, Judge Hernández offered this background:
Defendant tova stabin {[who] spells her name with all lowercase letters} was previously the Communication Manager for the Division of Equity and Inclusion … at the University of Oregon….
On or about June 14, 2022, Defendant stabin, in her capacity as Communication Manager, posted a “racism interruptor” to the Division’s Twitter page, @UOEquity. The Tweet read “You can interrupt racism,” and the prompt read, “It sounded like you just said_________. Is that really what you meant?”
Plaintiff Bruce Gilley, a professor at Portland State University, responded to the Tweet the same day it was posted with the entry “all men are created equal.” Plaintiff is critical of diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) principles, and intended his tweet to promote a colorblindness viewpoint. Plaintiff tagged @uoregon and @UOEquity in his re-tweet. Also on June 14, 2022, Defendant stabin blocked Plaintiff from the @UOEquity account. Once he was blocked, Plaintiff could no longer view, reply to, or retweet any of @UOEquity’s posts….
Plaintiff later filed a public records request with the University of Oregon to inquire about the policy VPEI uses to block Twitter users. … The University initially responded that there was no written policy and that “the staff member that administers the VPEI Twitter account and social media has the autonomy to manage the accounts and uses professional judgment when deciding to block users.” …Plaintiff also asked whether other Twitter users had been blocked from @UOEquity, and the University responded that two other users were blocked. … Plaintiff asserts that “[b]oth of the other users have expressed politically conservative viewpoints, including criticizing posts of the @UOEquity account.” Am. Compl. ¶ 70.
On June 27, 2022, Defendant stabin responded to an email from University of Oregon employee Kelly Pembleton, who was helping respond to Plaintiff’s public records request. Defendant stabin sent the following in response to Pembleton’s request for a list of the users she had blocked on @UOEquity:
“Doesn’t take real long. I’ve only ever blocked three people. Here is the list. I’m assuming the issue is this guy Bruce Gilley. He was not just being obnoxious, but bringing obnoxious people to the site some. We don’t have much following and it’s the social I pay least attention to. Here’s a screenshot of everyone I’ve ever blocked. I hardly do it (and barely know how to).”
Minutes later, Defendant stabin sent another email to Pembleton about the records request. The email reads, in pertinent part:
“Oh, I see. It is Bruce who brought it. Not surprising. He was commenting on one of the “interrupt racism” posts, as I recall talking something about the oppression of white men, if I recall. Really, they are just there to trip you up and make trouble. Ugh. I’m around at home for a quick zoom about it.’
The court found that the record was sufficient to go forward after finding that this is indeed a limited public forum, including the following analysis:
[A] Twitter page is a forum designed for expressive activities. Garnier, 41 F.4th 1178 (“Social media websites—Facebook and Twitter in particular—are fora inherently compatible with expressive activity.”). Defendant stabin testified at the hearing that the Racism Interruptor prompts she posted were intended to serve as tools for individuals to use when they encountered discrimination in their daily lives, rather than to promote discussion on the Twitter page as such. Ultimately, however, the expressive activity on the Twitter page is not “incidental” to its operations, unlike ads on metro buses whose primary function from the government’s perspective is to generate revenue. …
… the Court concludes that @UOEquity is a limited public forum. The University adopted and published guidelines restricting the content that can be posted on the page and permitting administrators to block users who violate them. Those guidelines have been reinforced to faculty and staff who manage the accounts. The degree of enforcement appears less rigorous than in Seattle Mideast Awareness, but the nature of the forum is different, and the Court declines to find on the record before it that the University has abdicated responsibility for enforcement. The Court concludes that the University did not affirmatively open @UOEquity as a designated public forum. Therefore, any restrictions on speech in @UOEquity must be reasonable and viewpoint-neutral. Hopper, 241 F.3d at 1075.
Professor Gilley maintained that the other two barred individuals posted conservative viewpoints. The Court does not rule on the merits, which will have to be addressed at trial.
The case is interesting since many on the left support the censorship programs at Twitter and other social media. However, if the same censorship is carried out directly on state-related accounts, it can trigger First Amendment challenges.
What was notable is that the General Counsel’s office took action to defuse the situation but only after the filing of the lawsuit. It sought to open the account and pay the nominal fees sought to end the litigation.
On August 11, 2022, Plaintiff sued Defendant stabin for violating his First Amendment rights in blocking him on @UOEquity. Compl., ECF 1. The University’s Office of General Counsel learned of the lawsuit the following day. … Also on August 12, 2022, the Division unblocked Plaintiff’s Twitter account from @UOEquity.
On August 16, 2022, Kevin Reed, the University’s general counsel, sent a letter to Plaintiff’s counsel, Del Kolde. Id. ¶ 5, Ex. 2. This letter read, in part:
“In any event, Prof. Gilley (@BruceDGilley) was unblocked from the Twitter account at issue (@UOEquity) last Friday, August 12, 2022, and the Division of Equity and Inclusion does not intend to block him or anyone else in the future based on their exercise of protected speech. My office has reinforced to our colleagues who control the University’s multiple social media channels that, if they open such channels to comments, they may not block commentary on the basis of the viewpoints expressed. I have further confirmed that those social media channels controlled by UO’s central communications unit have no blocked users.
Finally, enclosed with the hard copy of this letter to Mr. Lee is $20 to cover the nominal damages of $17.91 alleged in your complaint. Ordinarily the University would issue a check; however, we are enclosing cash to avoid the administrative hassle and delay of issuing a check. Accordingly, your lawsuit is now moot, as there is no longer any effective relief that the federal court can grant, and we ask that you voluntarily dismiss it.”
It was a smart effort by the General Counsel’s office but came too late. What is curious is that the court says that the office only learned of the lawsuit after it was filed. There are generally intent to sue letters and other communications before an actual complaint is filed. It is not clear why the General Counsel was not aware of the expected lawsuit.
Ultimately, the court ruled that the assurances of the university is not sufficient to moot the case and that both injunctive relief and declaratory judgment are still possible in the case.
Equal Justice !!!! Yess May Tovin see the error of her way.
I think we have enough proof to declare that white people were and are the most inventive, creative, original thinkers and prolific doers on the planet. Everyone else envies, hates and want to destroy white people who gave the world modernity. Not sure why but there you have it.
“Bishop” Desmond Tutu developed Tutu’s Theory of General Relativity. The Ugandans developed atomic bombs and nuclear power. The Zimbabweans landed on the moon, or was that Pluto, no, no, Neptune, am I right? Why are communist (liberal, progressive, socialist, democrat, RINO, AINO) Americans so insane, and bound and determined to give it all away? God said thou shalt not covet. God said thou shalt not steal. God said thou shalt not bear false witness. I think he said thou shalt not lie (i.e. on your “fake,” fraudulent asylum claim forms), cheat, steal, kill and illegally invade another man’s house (i.e. country) too, didn’t he? Thou shalt not be dependent parasites. Asylum my —! Asylum from the enormous task of building your own country – look at the long-suffering, hard-working, hard-fighting, resolute Ukrainians, sacrificing all to build their country. It does take a modicum of capacity, acumen and gumption, however.
You have to think a lite bit to understand the context of “all men are created equal” Lots of hateful implications to a woke world. 1. Men in this case is inclusive of women or in other words :mankind”. Only two genders as they are created. Created implies a Creator and in the context of the Declaration of Independence it refers to the Creator God of the Bible. Being created equal in this context is God created human beings in His image and all should share in His Creative and Redemptive acts of grace and mercy. It does not mean we are created all the same with all the same abilities and talents and even intelligence, beauty, innate skills or talents. Yet by God’s standards we are equal in His sight we are all sinners we all need salvation and God will not discriminate against us. Now if you are full of unbelief, hatred and resentment this statement will really upset you. Very likely: 1. You don’t believe in God or a Creator. 2. You don’t believe in the biological scientific evidence of only two genders. 3. You cannot comprehend or refuse to accept the word “men” as an inclusive term for all of humanity. 4. You are unwilling to accept that equality of standing has nothing to do with the equality of biology, genetics or even nurture. That kind of equality does not exist even for twins.
I would expect nothing less from that third world pile of crap Portland. To have “Equity” all people of higher intelligence would have to be dumbed down to the IQ of the lowest, s thoroughly STUPID idea.
Equity is a pipe dream. Everyone supports equity of opportunity but you’ll never have equity in outcome because people are not equal. I have a 143 IQ and had to work much less than my peers in school. I grasped things they could not. There are people smarter than I, though. I am also over 6’5″ and could bench press over 450 lbs. There are people stronger and bigger than me, though. Life isn’t fair, it never was and it never will be fair.
Equity is freedom from bias or favoritism.
For example, no affirmative action, quotas, forced busing, welfare, Obamacare, public housing, WIC, SNAP, TANF, HAMP, HARP, HUD, etc., etc., ad infinitum, oh and no different or superior “civil rights.”
Merriam-Webster
equity
noun
eq·ui·ty ˈe-kwə-tē
plural equities
1a: justice according to natural law or right
specifically : freedom from bias or favoritism
Diversity [dogma] (i.e. color judgment, class-based bigotry), Inequity, Exclusion, distancing (DIEd) #HateLovesAbortion
I pray that these people wake up and realize that the rich elites want to stop them from having babies and loving for God, it’s all about bill gates and Klaus shwab taking everything from everybody except fellow Jews and giving everything stolen from us to their fellow Jews, don’t believe me? Read the Talmud, gentile!
RE: ‘It’s all about Bill Gates and Kay’s Schwab..” I nor do any of my ilk within my ken have expectations of receiving anything from that lot, though I do expect that the machinations of the WEF, if come to fruition will not pass over my door. There is no present day ‘lamb’s blood’ with which to color the doorposts and lintel as in days of yore. ‘Epstein’s List’ and lips have forever been sealed. ‘The New Order’ has no cause for concern from that quarter. As to the Jews, God’s ‘Chosen People’, the ‘People of The Book’, they know what they were chosen for. He chose to raise from among them His only son as a blessing and a gift to humankind, an act which, for millennia, the recipients of which have endeavored to destroy them utterly. In defiance, and to the frustration of many, the Jews have dared and continue to prevail, bestowing their manifold gifts from God for the betterment of the human condition. Individuals who have issues with same are free to return those of which they have personally benefited. I sorely fear for their survival after having done so.
Dear Prof Turley,
In the final analysis, no man’s Division of Equity and Inclusion can be conditioned by anyone but Joe Biden. He’s the president of Equity and Inclusion, like it or lump it. The Equity and Inclusion buck$ stop there.
The history of Joe’s equity and inclusion is too long to list here, but at least everybody knows if ‘you don’t vote Joe, you ain’t black’. .. even if you are.
*you ain’t, are you?
On a sad note and off topic, Bobby Hull passed away today. My childhood idol and one of the greatest hockey players ever.
Ok, now back to Svelaz and Anonymous calling day night, up down and saying 2 plus 2 equals 5.
Sad day indeed knowing Bobby Hull died today. Out of respect, shouldn’t you stop taking his name and polluting it with your butt breath opinions?
Anonymous using the death of a great athlete to make a disgusting comment. Sounds about right. I’m just surprised you didn’t blame Trump for the Golden Jet’s demise. NINE FOREVER!
Impressed you use this opportunity to tongue hole trump. You got skillz hullbobby.
Does anyone agree with me that the term “tongue hole” is inappropriate for this site?
Anonymous, you just showed your true colors.
Sorry, but I really do not want JT to be adding to the list of words that can get you blocked.
I would rather judge people on what they write than block them.
HullBobby,
Till now I did not know what your handle meant.
Having doing some research, my hat off to you in your recognition of Bobby Hull.
In regards to your comment on that particular Anonymous, I like what John Say commented on,
“I would rather judge people on what they write than block them.”
That particular Anonymous did in fact showed their true colors.
Classy eh? (sarc off)
One of the themes that I regularly repeat here is that we are ach judged on what we write here.
That is how it SHOULD be.
If I actually make a fool of myself,
If I lie and I am reckless with facts,
if I refuse to correct blatant mistakes.
I create my own reputation and those who read this blog can and will judge me based on that.
I have openly admitted I am careless with spelling and gramar – and typing.
I earned the criticism of those who attack my spelling and gramar.
Fortunately my self worth is not tied to the quality of my spelling here.
Regardless, I have a well earned reputation for sloppy gramar and spelling.
And I do not intend to do anything about that.
But spelling and grammar are not the only criteria we judge others by.
Finally, as I constantly remind verious anonymous’s.
A reputation is something that is built by a person with an identity.
If you post anonymously – you have no identity,
and you can not build a reputation.
You are not entitled to trust – you did not earn that.
You are not entitled to respect – you did not earn that.
My reputation for sloppy spelling and grammar and typing will follow me so long as I post as JBSAY
Which I have been doing for over a decade.
An anonymous posters reputation for anything ends with that post.
Then you would be able to point out the specific lies and demonstrate exactly how they are lies.
Regardless, when you make a claim of moral failure against another person and you fail to provide the proof of that failure
and worse as you have done fail to provide any evidence.
The moral failure is YOURS.
You are really bad at understanding how trust and trustworthyness, respect and credibility work.
ATS, consistently shows off his true colors and what he shows off is worse than you suggest. He criticized you for using the name hullbobby since Hull just died. You are honoring Hull’s name while ATS pisses on it for his ideological reasons. Hats off to Bobby Hull . Continued use of the name is something to be cheered.
Hullbobby, it is inappropriate for this site, but I’ll bet anonymous is probably a child molester.
I still remember with pain the 1960 Stanley Cup playoffs when Hull almost single-handedly destroyed the Detroit Red Wings. But it was Chicago’s only Stanley Cup for the rest of Hull’s career.
While it’s great to get these wins from the courts, the time and effort it takes to get rights restored is where the most damage is done.
Reading Prof. Turley’s site on a daily basis has convinced me that the reserve of extreme left faculty is inexhaustible. I mean this in a literal sense. In order to change this, the pre-college and college level indoctrination would have to cease, and then we’d have to wait for the existing faculty and administration to die off. This process cannot be implemented and even if it could this would take many generations. Since the American educational system, K through college, is irredeemable, all we can do is to focus on what we can eventually change. The most obvious area would be media, both legacy and social, as this provides information outside of the classroom setting. The left has a tremendous head start with their control of this area, but we have the advantage of most people still being unwoke and receptive.
I say we can start by promoting school choice, getting students out of public indoctrination education and into private, charter, or home schooling that focuses on the basics, STEM, history in context, civics, and real home economics.
And form colleges that follow suit.
As for MSM/legacy media, alt-media has shown to be more reliable, and in some cases, have larger audiences than MSM, e.g. Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss etc.
Departments or Divisions of ‘Complexion Management’. Another example of abuse of student loan funds, a self righteous, self satisfied and self aggrandizing social engineer, they of the prismatic colored hair, pierced skin, and gender confusion, who identify with pronouns written in lowercase letters determined to remake the world in the ‘It Collective’s’ own image. The ‘Pandora’s Box’ which was opened in the name of human rights, dignity, with liberty and justice for all, has morphed into an uncontrollable fire storm, overseen by a ‘Cancel Culture Gestapo’ threatening to engulf the entire cultivated field.. DEI just can’t die fast enough to save us from this counterculture fifth column infiltrating the educational establishment at all levels, and twisting our culture and society into an unrecognizable shape.
Turley doesn’t mention that the reason for blocking Gilley was because he was going off topic. That was a rule that did allow the administrator to block the individual. The other two were supposedly blocked not because of their views, but because they were going off topic and had the potential to bring more people posting off topic. Just as it happens on this blog. Posts often end up going off topic and turn into runaway arguments that have nothing to do with the article. Blocking such comments is not viewpoint discrimination when the person posting is deliberately going off topic which is against the rules.
Responding to the prompt “You can interrupt racism” with “All men are created equal” is an eloquent response to the prompt and directly pertinent to the topic of the page, I.e., diversity. The fact that the response might not comport with the implied left-wing slant of the prompt should not matter if your organization is truly interested in a diversity of ideas.
Here’s a clearer explanation of what happened.
“There is some force to Defendant stabin’s testimony. She testified that the purpose of the prompt was to give people tools to use to respond to discriminatory comments they might hear in their daily lives. The text announcing the prompt when it was posted reads “You can interrupt racism,” which supports her testimony. Inserting Plaintiff’s response of “all men are created equal” into the blank in the Racism Interruptor prompt yields the following result: “It sounded like you just said ‘all men are created equal.’ Is that really what you meant?” The phase “all men are created equal” could reasonably be said to appear inconsistent with the purpose of the prompt and off topic.
A limited public forum may impose subject-matter limitations. At least one district court has held that a rule restricting off-topic posts on a public university’s social media account was reasonable and viewpoint-neutral. Krasno v. Mnookin (W.D. Wis. 2022). Without the benefit of full briefing on the reasonableness of the off-topic provision, the Court believes at this point that a jury could reasonably conclude that Defendant stabin did not violate Plaintiff’s First Amendment rights.”
…”Furthermore, the circumstances indicate that Defendant stabin’s blocking of Plaintiff was an anomaly. Blocking is rare on the @UOEquity Twitter account. Since 2017, there have been a combined 2,558 replies and retweets by other users on the @UOEquity Twitter account. Only three users have been blocked since the account was created, and currently no users are blocked.”
https://reason.com/volokh/2023/01/27/lawsuit-over-blocking-of-portland-state-prof-bruce-gilley-from-uoequity-twitter-feed-can-go-forward/
Sevvy:
“Here’s a clearer explanation of what happened.”
**************************
No that’s the civil rights violator’s (allegedly) version. The Court gave the clear one. Objectivity is a real blind spot for you, eh?
Mespo, the case linked by Turley confirms what I posted. Turley didn’t mention the part where the court noted this particular point.
Read the whole case.
Mespo,
“Reviewing the three factors, the Court concludes that @UOEquity is a limited public forum. First, the University did adopt guidelines governing posting on social media. The pertinent part of the guidelines was posted online for anyone to view, and was also part of a larger internal document. Larson Decl. I ¶¶ 3-5, Ex. 1 at 2; Larson Decl. II ¶¶ 5-7, Ex. 1 at 8-9. The guidelines provide that comments within certain categories, including off-topic posts, can be deleted, and that users who violate the guidelines can be blocked. Id. Plaintiff points out that these guidelines appear more easily changed than a formal policy and that they have in fact been changed since he filed suit. Pl. Supp. Br. 3, ECF 43. Plaintiff is correct that the guidelines have been regularly altered; Defendants have acknowledged as much. Larson Decl. III ¶¶ 8-9, Exs. 2-3 (versions of internal guidelines from 2019 and February 2021); Larson Decl. II ¶¶ 8-12, Exs. 1- 2 (versions of internal guidelines from October 2021 and October 2022). However, all of these versions of the guidelines use almost identical wording in listing the categories of posts that can be blocked or deleted. Larson Decl. II Ex. 1 at 8-9, Ex. 2 at 9-10; Larson Decl. III Ex. 2 at 8-9, Ex. 3 at 3-4.
Plaintiff points to Kimsey v. City of Sammamish, 574 F. Supp. 3d 911, 919-920 (W.D. Wash. 2021). Pl. Post-Hearing Mem. 5. In Kimsey, the district court held that a city’s Facebook page was a designated public forum, in part because the city did not require prior approval before allowing comments on the page. 574 F. Supp. 3d at 918, 920. The Court respectfully disagrees with this analysis. In Garnier, the Ninth Circuit focused on whether the government defendants had “established any rules of etiquette or decorum regulating how the public was to interact with their social media account.” 41 F.4th at 1165. Garnier did not suggest that requiring prior approval for comments was necessary to create a limited public forum. It also recognized that “analogies between physical public fora and the virtual public fora of the present are sometimes imperfect, and courts applying First Amendment protections to virtual spaces must be mindful of the nuances of how those online fora function in practice.”
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ord.168385/gov.uscourts.ord.168385.57.0.pdf
Svelaz will defend anything that the vast majority of normal people think is wrong. This is what a contrarian oddball does.
Says the child molestoor.
The historical ‘all men are created equal’ is recognized by the educationally enlightened as a reflection of the social standing of women in the time the phrase was crafted. That it has evolved into the more generally recognized and understood by the same as ‘people’. Much like others of that ilk, that the histrionic history-cancelling stabin opted to gut Gilley for the unpardonable sin of failing to retire the objectionable phrase to the dust bin is truly what is at the core of all this yada-yada, pretenses and legal airy persiflage notwithstanding. It remains to be seen whether or not what you cite in ‘Krasno’ will also apply in ‘Gilley’.
“The phase “all men are created equal” could reasonably be said to appear inconsistent with the purpose of the prompt and off topic.”
That phrase is nearly identical to, The phase “all men are created equal” could reasonably be said to appear CONSISTENT with the purpose of the prompt…”
Do you actually understand what you copy? Diversity of opinion means some will accept the first sentence and others will accept the second.
Here’s why American colleges cost so much. They have a “Communication Manager of the Division of Equity and Inclusion.” How about classic subjects and teachers knowledgable thereof. For guidance, go back to the cirriculum, staff levels, and price structure, of 1950 and try to imitate them.
In the 1950’s. The state percentage of funding for colleges and universities was higher and tuition much lower even free in some states. When state funding for higher education kept getting cut tuition kept increasing.
Progressive prices were forced by single/central monopolistic solutions in medical, and educational industries, construction industry that placed aesthetics over function at any cost, and government subsidies that sustain their viability.
Yes, administrative costs are integral to progressive prices in each industry, then sustained through redistributive change (“shared responsibility”) schemes.
What did Gilley say that set the whole thing off? Without knowing what was said it’s hard to determine if he actually violated the rules set by the school.
“All men are created equal.” Obviously very hurtful.
Kicking myself for feeding what’s probably a hired troll, but, it’s been reported, and is quoted in the linked decision.
The lowercase person of undertain pronouns who has left her/its position, posted:
“You can interrupt racism.
‘You said ____________________. Is that what you meant?'”
Gilley, filling in the blank, replied, “All men are created equal.” and was blocked for that.
I don’t quite understand your constantly-demonstrated inability to retain facts. Or perhaps it’s an inability to absorb them.
I can only pity you.
There’s the problem of what exactly was the topic being discussed. If Gilley was going off topic according to the ruled tabin had the right to block the comment on that basis. Even the court acknowledged as much.
Ellen, Svelaz is very proud of how he puts things together using copy and paste, along with erroneous paraphrasing. Grammatically he is generally proper, but many of his ideas make little sense in follow-up or comparison to other things said earlier. He even learns to paraphrase some of the arguments used on this blog, but he misuses them frequently while conflicting with his previous comments.
He needs a lot of help.
January 30, 2023
“Racism Interruptor”: Court Rules for Professor Blocked from Twitter Page for Posting “All Men Are Created Equal”
Do you want everyone to read the op-ed for you?
“What did \Gilley say that set the whole thing off??” Couldn’t be more apparent. The ‘Tweet’ invited a respondent to ‘fill in the blank’. Gilly did so as observed by the court. Quite consistent with the theme and purpose of the ‘Tweet’. Hardly ‘off topic!” to this reader.
“On or about June 14, 2022, Defendant stabin, in her capacity as Communication Manager, posted a “racism interruptor” to the Division’s Twitter page, @UOEquity. The Tweet read “You can interrupt racism,” and the prompt read, “It sounded like you just said_________. Is that really what you meant?”
Plaintiff Bruce Gilley, a professor at Portland State University, responded to the Tweet the same day it was posted with the entry “all men are created equal.” Plaintiff is critical of diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) principles, and intended his tweet to promote a colorblindness viewpoint.
Hence, promoting a colorblindness viewpoint is deemed a pathway to ‘interrupting racism’. In this case however, a mere mention of ‘all MEN” which, to the enlightened means ‘all PEOPLE”, without the need to erase history, to a member of the ‘It Collective’, is sufficient cause to alert the ‘Cancel Culture Gestapo’ to engage in a ‘pissing match’. Thus, the reason we are in court. A contest which the plaintiff is, by virtue of secondary sex characteristics alone, far better equipped to go the distance and prevail.
Tova Stabin is an Ashkenazi lesbian feminist from a working-class family. She’s a writer, activist, educator and librarian. She’s been published in anthologies such as Best Jewish Writing, Award Winning Poems on the Jewish Experience, Queerly Classed, and many print and online publications. She was long time editor of Bridges: A Journal for Jewish Feminists and our Friends. She creates diversity trainings, and workshops and talks on topics ranging from Jewish Women Poets to Whose Class Is It? She has a Masters of Library and Information Science, a Master’s Certificate in Integrative Administration, and BA’s in English and Women’s Studies. Her awards include a Jewish Women’s Research Award from Brandeis; Oregon Literary Arts Fellowship; Rosenberg International Award for Poetry on the Jewish experience; and Eugene Human Rights award. She is an active member of Temple Beth Israel where she gives D’vrei Torah. Born and raised in Brooklyn in a multi-generational family with conservative Jews on one side and secular communists on the other, she now lives in Oregon with her partner (and now spouse) of thirty years. They are the proud parents of a son who is a professional ballet dancer.
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/eli-talks/from-the-back-of-the-room-the-jewish-working-class/
“Tova Stabin is” is a power-luster who uses DEI as a pretext for censorship.
Sam, the video above talks about inclusion. I agree with many of the points she states to an audience and live by them. She is a typical leftist hypocrite who believes she is superior to the rest of us and do not have a right to their own voice.
Precisely as I have suggested in my prior comments: an over-educated, over-celebrated, self-important, self-satisfied, and self-aggrandizing, social engineer intent on remaking history in satisfaction of the agenda of the ‘It Collective’. The recent Merit Scholarship debacle goes to further support the argument that DEI advocates do not raise the tides, they merely lower the boats.
I’ve been in the land of woke for 28 yrs. These are not citizens in good faith. These are anti-American, anti-God, and personally stunted people, most of whom only know social workers and other pretend activists in their world turned in upon themselves.
It’s time for Masterpiece Cakeshop to win a decisive victory over their attackers and put an end to the abuse they are suffering. The Supremes need to end this fiasco once and for all. This will be a victory on the level of Oberlin College and it needs to happen.
Hopefully with these tiny victories, particularly those of late in the Ninth Circuit, we are getting some precedent. It is absurd that we need to in the first place, but here we are. Woke death by a thousand tiny cuts, I hope. Eventually perhaps people will begin to think twice.
One thing is for certain – we have to keep our courts – we must protect our Constitution, and we need to keep the courts from being packed at any cost.
Think twice?
More like think in the first place.
Baby steps to mitigate, not abort, social progress, progressive prices, and human rites performed for social, redistributive,clinical, political, criminal, and fair weather progress in a liberal society.
OK that one down -only about 10,000 more censoring universities and leftist social media sites left to go…
Free markets.
When something is in need, the market will provide.
As leftist colleges crank out woke, indoctrinated bots, corporations will suffer from hiring these useless bots. Corporations will start to seek grads whom can do THE JOB.
New colleges will open that focus on education and not indoctrination. These grads will perform well in school as reflective in their grades. Corporations will favor and hire those grads.
Woke bots will continue their careers slinging coffee, living rent free in their parents basement.