Dramacow Kevin Allred - Professor of Beyoncé Studies (no, seriously), arrested for threats to kill Trump voters.

upload_2017-2-11_9-51-59-png.179995

Oh dear. Kev fails constitutional law AGAIN.

Methinks he should go and read the 1969 case of Brandenburg -v- Ohio in which the Supreme Court found that "the mere abstract teaching of the moral propriety or even moral necessity for a resort to force and violence, is not the same as preparing a group for violent action and steeling it to such action."

A little learning, Kev, is a dangerous thing.
 
Oh dear. Kev fails constitutional law AGAIN.

Methinks he should go and read the 1969 case of Brandenburg -v- Ohio in which the Supreme Court found that "the mere abstract teaching of the moral propriety or even moral necessity for a resort to force and violence, is not the same as preparing a group for violent action and steeling it to such action."

A little learning, Kev, is a dangerous thing.
Another "fighting words" case I've seen cited by these SJWs is Chaplinsky v New England. See if you can spot the irony:
The complaint against Chaplinsky stated that he shouted: "You are a God-damned racketeer" and "a damned Fascist". Chaplinsky admitted that he said the words charged in the complaint, with the exception of the name of the deity.

For this, he was charged and convicted under a New Hampshire statute preventing intentionally offensive speech being directed at others in a public place. Under New Hampshire's Offensive Conduct law (chap. 378, para. 2 of the NH. Public Laws) it is illegal for anyone to address "any offensive, derisive or annoying word to anyone who is lawfully in any street or public place ... or to call him by an offensive or derisive name."

Chaplinsky appealed the fine he was assessed, claiming that the law was "vague" and that it infringed upon his First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights to free speech.

The [Supreme] Court, in a unanimous decision, upheld the arrest. Writing the decision for the Court, Justice Frank Murphy:

"There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting" words those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality."
 
Oh dear. Kev fails constitutional law AGAIN.

Methinks he should go and read the 1969 case of Brandenburg -v- Ohio in which the Supreme Court found that "the mere abstract teaching of the moral propriety or even moral necessity for a resort to force and violence, is not the same as preparing a group for violent action and steeling it to such action."

A little learning, Kev, is a dangerous thing.

And not even just that. How is what Milo does fighting words and what Kevin says not?
Really gets the noggin joggin.
 
:story: I love it, he thinks his old employers still want to use him for promotional purposes :lol:

Here's the statement he was complaining about:
http://womens-studies.rutgers.edu/e...der-studies-statement-on-politicizing-beyonce
In which they pretty much say "Yes, we cancelled this course but we're professionals who know what we're doing".

Really, it seems like Rutgers is handling this about as professionally as you could hope to expect from a women's studies department.
 
Really, it seems like Rutgers is handling this about as professionally as you could hope to expect from a women's studies department.

I was actually almost shocked they did handle it this way, considering it's one of the most leftist institutions in the country, and is the most leftist department in that institution. If you fuck up so badly that even this department doesn't have your back, you done goofed. Bigtime. Consequences will never be the same.
 
"I bring punk rock aesthetics and methods to academia."
I don't even want to know what that means.

He doesn't seem to get that punk rock started with shit like the Sex Pistols, who literally were a gimmick band to sell Malcolm McLaren's clothing line.

Or maybe he does. But he somehow thinks he should get street cred for being a complete piece of shit.

Fuck Beyonce.
 
He doesn't seem to get that punk rock started with shit like the Sex Pistols, who literally were a gimmick band to sell Malcolm McLaren's clothing line.

Or maybe he does. But he somehow thinks he should get street cred for being a complete piece of shit.

Fuck Beyonce.

Punk rock started in NYC with the ramones and smaller lesser known bands. And the ramones were anything but sell outs that don't get the credit they deserve.
 
He doesn't seem to get that punk rock started with shit like the Sex Pistols, who literally were a gimmick band to sell Malcolm McLaren's clothing line.
McLaren reputedly told Steve Jones, guitarist of the Sex Pistols, not to play so well.
Perhaps deliberately fucking up is what Kevvie boy means by "punk rock aesthetics and methods in academia".

Punk rock started in NYC with the ramones and smaller lesser known bands. And the ramones were anything but sell outs that don't get the credit they deserve.
No matter how you dice it, Punk is essentially white.
 
Punk rock started in NYC with the ramones and smaller lesser known bands. And the ramones were anything but sell outs that don't get the credit they deserve.

I could nitpick some details but fuck that. The Ramones were literally God.

(Still I hope you're not referring to the New York Dolls as smaller.)
 
Back