nfreeman

For the record, I think LTS, AudSmell, TBPhd, D4rk and the others in this thread who have effectively stated that it's OK to slur whites, and only whites, are all good and honorable guys. (Or at least as good as can be reasonably hoped for in light of their toxic whiteness.) I just completely disagree with them on this point, for reasons I've expressed many times. And with that, I'm signing out of this one.

Have you done any research as to the frequency with which non-whites engage in similar behavior, and how that frequency compares with that of whites? Is it reasonable to expect someone to do so before throwing around assumptions that this behavior is associated with whiteness? Or is it OK to make those assumptions -- and state them in public -- and if they turn out to be incorrect, well, that's OK because it's only whites who were slurred, not a different race?

Well, I don’t agree with your description of the circumstances in which I push political talk to the politics club (I don’t think I’ve done so more than a couple of times since the opening of that club, so I don’t think there is a discernible trend), nor do I think of pushing back against racial slurs as political in the same way as a Kavanaugh discussion is — more as sociological — but I recognize that others may differ.

Your post was not the one I was referring to. I neither started nor turned the conversation. Someone opined that Gilbert’s alleged harassment of a young woman was somehow related to whiteness, and others agreed. I called BS. That’s got zero to do with Kavanaugh, other than the fact that purveyors of the “toxic whiteness” worldview heavily overlap with the group that opposed Kavanaugh.

What culture is that? And what door was opened?

The Kavanaugh temper tantrum belongs in the politics club and as a bonus has literally zero to do with the nonsensical and gratuitous introduction of racial slurs into the workplace harassment discussion upthread that I was referring to.

Let's keep this thread limited to actual trades not involving the Sabres, and use the trade speculation thread for hypothetical trades.

If Gilbert were black or Latino, would his conduct have been equally deserving of opprobrium?

All of this is fair -- and again, it has zero to do with whiteness. It has 100% to do with the fact that he was her boss. If he were black or Latino, would you or LTS have thrown "black" or "Latino" into your earlier posts? Again, the question answers itself.

Well, I suppose we'll need to ask him, but the part about banning analytics seemed like a joke to me (not the part about decrying analytics though).

PA was joking you hoser.

Of course being a white male in the US is easier on average than being a desperately poor POC in Africa or Venezuela or wherever. But that has literally zero to do with the gibberish that is being spouted in this thread about sexual harassment in US workplaces.

Overall, I thought the Sabres played pretty well in the 1st and 2nd, but played like they knew they were going to lose in the 3rd, and got bailed out by a couple of soft goals on point shots in the 3rd, plus a great conversion on a breakaway by Jack in OT. I thought Ullmark made some great saves but overall looked kinda shaky. I didn't come away thinking he should get the next start, although I'm fine if he does get it. I'm not feeling very confident about where the Sabres are. As I posted last night, I think something is wrong with Eichel. He was mostly ineffective last night until the GWG, and I don't think the Sabres can win consistently if he isn't a major force. I also think the goaltending has regressed from excellent to average. OTOH, I think the D is still playing pretty well and there have been signs of life in the bottom 9 forwards from Pommer and ERod. Let's see how they do vs the Canucks.

Maybe the "cohort" doesn't need to improve its behavior. Maybe it's just certain individuals who behave badly that need to do so. Maybe the idea that "the cohort needs to act better" is nonsense, as is the concept of "middle-aged white dudes" having "positions of privilege and power."

Y'know, I like having Jack and Dahlin on the opposite half-walls, and I like Risto there to blast away from the point and Reino behind the net and Skinner below the dots for putbacks -- but for whatever reason the whole is less than the sum of the parts.

Having defended Howie yesterday, I will also note that the PP is a freaking disaster right now, and that he needs to bear some of the blame for that.

Boom goes the dynamite. Care to elaborate?

Thank you for your thoughtful response. I don't think it really addresses my core point, which is that it is for some reason a substantial portion of the population thinks it's OK to slur white people (especially white men), without appreciating the destructive effects of these slurs and the worldview behind them, but I appreciate the respectful conversation in any event. As to the bolded question -- I agree that most corp executive sexual harassers are probably white men -- but that is because most corp executives are white men.

Which report? Was the PSE report published somewhere?

Of course, there's no way of knowing this, but what we do know is that Guhle has never, in any of his callups, earned any extended NHL time -- and IMHO has looked pretty far from being ready.

What in the world does whiteness have to do with this? Do you think non-whites don’t enagage in this kind of behavior? (They do, and the stats on, say, rape are appalling.) More importantly, why is it OK to throw this kind of slur around? Would you have said the same thing about a different racial or ethnic group? The question answers itself. Not to mention the fact that no one here has any idea what Gilbert did.

BTW, while I appreciate @GASabresIUFAN‘s doggedness with the Beaulieu narrative, there is NFW that Guhle is ahead of him in the D rotation.

Eichel needs to show up in OT. This is one of the worst games I can remember him playing this season.

Something is wrong with Eichel.

While I understand the apprehension about 2 guys wanting to bail, I'd be much more concerned if even one of them were getting regular ice time. Beaulieu is in a contract year and is probably worried about getting another multi-year NHL contract, let alone a high-paying one. And Bergy appears to have had something else going on in his life as he seems to have more or less quit the game. I can appreciate Beaulieu's concerns, and this might end up getting him what he wants, but it could easily backfire on him too.