Oh yes, Ned Hill, you white male conservatives with traditional values are just soooooo oppressed. How ever do you stand it?!??
Thank you for breaking this all down so well. McConnell's appointment was a sham from the get-go. The Board was going to do what it was going to do. As the self-proclaimed "fiscal guardians" of the institutions (which they were very keen on when they were throwing academic freedom under the bus with the "Fun Home" debacle), they should all open their pockets to repay the $100K of College funds they wasted on this farce. The College has already lost a considerable number of donors due to McConnell's appointment. Honestly, if the man "loves" the College so much (and if he has a shred of decency - which I doubt), he would not take a single dollar from the foundation account and allow that to be used to repair the damage he has done to the ability of the College to attract donors.
dp4, apparently, members of our regressive and bigoted legislature. The response of this senator is particularly telling (and disgusting) in a quote from the Post and Courier:
"State Sen. Larry Grooms, R-Charleston, an outspoken opponent of "Fun Home" being selected for the freshman reading program, said that he has heard about the play and believes it is a direct response to the House's decision to cut funds due to the college's controversial summer reading choice.
That "protest" move is not wise, Grooms said, and he plans to bring it up as the Senate debates this year's budget.
"If lessons weren't learned over there, the Senate may speak a little bit louder than the House. There would be a number of members in the Senate that would have a great interest in fixing the deficiencies at the College of Charleston," Grooms said.
He declined to say specifically what action or cuts he had planned."
SC politicians have no shame. This is a blatant threat of retribution. The idea that this neanderthal was even elected to office is a sad reflection on the state of SC. And, of course, I would doubt very much that our new fearless leader would lift a finger to defend the institution he claims to love so much.
Actually ursus, bless YOUR little heart. Get your facts straight. This program was largely paid for by a student fee that was assessed on acceptance. These fees paid for all but about $8K needed for the program, which was paid for by other revenue. So, the ever so enlightened people of the "state" did NOT pay $52K for the program. HOWEVER, the "state" decided to "punish" (their term, not mine) the College for daring to focus their attention on a book about homosexuality.
Let me ask you this, if the book had a scene focused on heterosexual sex, do you think there would be this uproar? These representatives have shown their true bigoted colors - and so have many of the good "citizens" who have chosen to comment. It is the 21st Century, folks. Wake up and learn to accept that the world has changed. . .even in SC.
I am sure Mr. Ford has a wonderful relationship with McConnell and I certainly appreciate the fact that Mr. McConnell does not openly promote and exhibit racist tendencies. That's wonderful. The problem here is that he has chosen to align himself with an inherently problematic symbol (and vigorously defend it). Association is one of the most powerful means of persuasion. I see someone associated with something I like or I dislike and that relationship sticks in my mind.
Mr. McConnell's associations are a problem at a school a) which has significant diversity challenges; b) which has a problematic history on the subject of race; c) which has students who come from states where such a symbol is inherently associated with hatred and intolerance; d) which has donors who do not wish to support such a symbol; e) which has faculty and students who do not support such a symbol (and who, frankly, have read the history books and understand that no matter the spin, it is fundamentally a racist symbol).
CofC has already lost a major donor over this. How many more will go by the wayside in the coming months? As a politician, Mr. McConnell should be well acquainted with problems of perception. The perception of him as a public figure has and will continue to damage the ethos of the school. Period.
Then there is the slight concern that he has no actual qualifications to be president (which I actually think is a bigger issue) and was appointed to the position through sketchy political maneuvering.
All Comments »
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2017,
Charleston City Paper