Or perhaps they are having a different conversation? As I said before, if the ppl planning the session meant it to be A, it makes no 1/
-
-
Replying to @ADMedievalist @dorothyk98 and
sense to criticise them for doing B badly. Among other things not unpackable in this format.
8 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
The frame is racist and has been discussed as such in numerous peer reviewed publications.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Repeating. No sense in this discussion in this format, especially at this time, when there is no genuine interest in dialogue.
6 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Never discussed what they said b/c I & no one else not there does not know. If they want a full convo, why not say what they said
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Yet despite knowing nothing, you felt justified in implying colleagues would be DOIN IT RONG, & that s'one should report back on Twitter.
12 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Instead, they upset enough of us in conference encounters that some of us did not want to go to this session at all. I was in another panel.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
In 5 seconds IRL he confirmed my reservations abt anything his session would do. Pattern based on CFP & alienating comments throughout conf.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
I never saw the CFP, only the panel description. I am not surprised at the rest, sadly.
7 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ADMedievalist @JonathanHsy and
Implies panel is aligned w/ support the problematic ppl, issues seen in CFP. More later in thoughtful long format /7
7 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
The fashioning of white European self against the non-white other as so many critics have discussed. So stop deciding you know what we are
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.