Sunday, August 12, 2018
Every snowflake is different
How is this complaint about NFL player protests from the head of the Broward County PBA different from the complaints from liberals (on- and off-campus) who are derided as "snowflakes" for objecting to Richard Spencer, Milo Yiannapoulos, Chick Fil-A, et al. The PBA is calling on members to boycott and not do business with the team. It is demanding that the Dolphins no-platform the players, calling on an entity to deny a speaker the opportunity to present his message. And the complaint is that the speaker's message is a "slap in the face" to the complainer, who is offended by the speech. There is no practical difference between the two situations.
This is all ridiculous. In what other business would employees be allowed to hijack the employer's place of business to push their own political issues? What would happen to a barista at Starbucks who lectured every customer on how great it is that Trump is making America great again? Would any of the people leaping to the defense of the NFL anthem protestors do the same thing for NFL players who engaged in on-field demonstrations to protest the legalization of abortion by the Supreme Court? No on is stopping any NFL player from doing or saying whatever he wants, outside the stadium where he is being paid a millionaire's wage to perform for paying customers.
Posted by: Douglas Levene | Aug 20, 2018 1:17:24 PM
I agree, the term snowflake is wholly appropriate for the PBA boss you mentioned.
Posted by: Jr | Aug 14, 2018 5:20:55 AM
A quick Google for "PBA" shows that taking precedence over police benevolent association are --
Pseudo Bulbar Affect (presumably purchased)
Professional Bowlers Association
Professional Beauty Association
Posted by: Mark Regan | Aug 13, 2018 11:29:31 AM
Well, to the extent there's hypocrisy as to private boycotts of both, I join you in comparing them, and I condemn the hypocrites on both sides.
But since this is a legal blog, it's worth noting that the private boycotters on both sides are distinct from the public actors, or those calling for public acts. That includes state universities that have content-based double standards and mayors threatening to block Chick-fil-A from operating in their cities.
Also, since this is a prof blog, it's worth noting that only one side of this two-way hypocrisy dominates academia. Let's call out our friends and institutions at least as much as we do "them," and preferably more so.
Posted by: Joe Cynic | Aug 13, 2018 10:25:29 AM
As long as the Seattle Seahawks win, I can't complain!
Posted by: Seattle | Aug 12, 2018 6:05:12 PM
Fortunately, the commenting is top-notch.
Posted by: Bruce Boyden | Aug 12, 2018 5:28:37 PM
Paul: In the announcement linked in the post, the PBA urges its members and those of other unions not to purchase tickets (or to request a refund for tickets already purchased) from the Dolphins. It is canceling a partnership with the Dolphins because the Dolphins will not prevent players from engaging in some expression that the PBA regards as offensive.
If both groups got their way, Milo would not be heard at Berkeley to say whatever he wants to say because Berkeley would uninvite him and Doplphin players would not be heard at games protesting what they are protesting because the team would force them to stand at attention.
Any difference is one of degree and detail, not kind.
Posted by: Howard Wasserman | Aug 12, 2018 5:25:44 PM
Can we change the site's slogan now?
This post is both intellectually dishonest and motivated by partisanship.
Posted by: YesterdayIKilledAMammoth | Aug 12, 2018 5:06:53 PM
The PBA head is urging his members to refuse to volunteer for overtime (which is paid for by the NFL team and not an assignment from their local agency). The examples of left wing protestors given are those who demand that no one be allowed to hear speakers or partake of businesses that the activists dislike. You really think there's no practical difference between these two situations?
Posted by: PaulB | Aug 12, 2018 4:44:42 PM