#the mcelroys did it again | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

snapscube · 1 year

Note

Remember when people were calling you the "long lost McElroy sister"? Do you see the similarity at all, or do you think it's just because you share a similar creative niche (gaming/streaming/comedy) with the McElroy brothers?

Lol, "when" people were doing it.

I still get it to this day, friend, despite my constant protests.

I used to understand, and it was even expected initially if not personally encouraged! There was definitely a period of time where they were my biggest comedic/creative inspirations, and the truth of the matter is that I am a mannerisms sponge. I mimic people around me, and people that inspire me, and whether or not it's more than the average person I have no clue, but I will go through seasons of daily watching a particular personality or creator I'm fond of and/or inspired by and usually come out the other end having picked up certain tendencies VERY quickly, a large portion of those being speech patterns.

There's definitely a segment of my content around 2017/2018 or so where, yeah, you can very much tell I adopted a McElroy-esque speaking pattern directly (like what felt like 70% of other Tumblr users also did lol) and it was both because of how much of their content I was into at the time AND also because at the time I found their output inspiring as someone who was used to more... Loud Gamer forms of comedy, to put it bluntly. So at first I took the comparisons in stride and saw it as a signal of my own growth as an entertainer, and my ability to be funny in a way that wasn't just Loud = Funny.

But the thing you have to know about me, and my time as even a minor public figure, is that this comparison was not the first of its that was constantly levied at me, and it unfortunately was not the last one in the slightest. Some will remember the days in which I was a reasonably renowned "Bill Cipher" impersonator in the Gravity Falls fandom, and the pattern was very similar at the time. I dealt with people CONSTANTLY telling me that, despite all of my attempts to separate myself from the voice work I did as the character, I always sounded Just Like Bill even when I was just using my casual speaking voice. If this sounds familiar to those of you who have only been around since the dubs popped off, it's likely because I also go through the same thing ever since I became known for Sonic impressions.

And then outside of voice work I've had my style of content continue to be compared to the McElroy's body of work and even beyond to the likes of Jerma and other big-name-of-the-era content creators. And I have to once again stress: I am completely self-aware that it is not entirely unfounded. I mean, the most recent one I got was just the other day when on stream someone told me I had a speech pattern similar to Northernlion. And like, I even admitted right then and there.... yeah! That makes sense! I've had NL compilations going into my ears and brain for hours upon hours on end lately. So I don't mean to only complain and say "this makes no sense" with delusions that it's completely baseless. BUT, I guess if I do have to circle around to a point, it would be that, though I can occasionally understand comparisons, I would hope y'all in turn can understand why it might not be an easy thing for someone like me to hear, especially in the way it never really seems to go away? Even if one like Bill Cipher fades out, the whole "SnapCube is just a female version of [insert larger male peer in the content space]" thing is something that cycles along regardless. And I get it, it's human nature to compare and contrast. I do it too! But as someone who is always trying to stand out in what I do and make my own value as an individual known above the cacophony of content saturation, I do implore people to think twice about the language they use when making otherwise favorable comparisons. Recommending my content by saying something like "if you like Jerma/McElroys/NL/etc., then SnapCube gives off similar vibes" makes of a WORLD of a difference compared to "This stream is just something Jerma would do" or "Penny is just a female Griffin McElroy" (both things I have heard almost verbatim, constantly). They approach the same ideas, but one gives me so much more of a chance to like... start off a first impression as My Own Person and not just a derivative Girl Alternative, if that makes sense.

Whoops I talked about this way too much :) Can you tell I think about this a lot LMAO

Anyway here's the obligatory joke response that's been spread before

1K notes · View notes

anistarrose · 1 year

Text

please listen to taz steeplechase. there's good heists, there's nasty crime boys, and there's whatever the hell this was (no plot spoilers, just a goof)

transcript:

[faint calm music]

Griffin: Roll that beautiful bean footage, Dad.

Clint: I'm doing it, I'm doing it, I'm trying to —

Travis: Roll your beans!

[crosstalk, multiple McElroys]: One click —

Travis: Roll it, big beautiful bullet —

Griffin: That mouse — that mouse button gets heavy sometimes — oh my goodne — wait, no, Dad, you just —

Justin: Nope, nope, you just rolled a 6, apropos of nothing.

[clapping begins in the background]

Griffin, hysterical: I didn't know you could do that! Dad just rolled...[crosstalk] the number six!

Travis: The number six!

Justin: Yeah, Dad just — [wheezes]

Griffin: Dad just essentially typed "six" in —

Clint: That was my roll!

Travis: [crosstalk] Did you roll a D 6? Or the number six?!

Justin, laughing: No, I think — no. [laughter]

Clint: I typed in "roll d6!"

Griffin: No, you typed "rolling 6!"

Justin: And then it rolled a 6!

Griffin: Equals 6!

Clint: Well, then... yay for me!

Justin: No, Dad!

Griffin: No, Mac!

Travis: You basically just typed "6" into the chat, and then hit "send!"

Justin, laughing: I can't even make what he did happen!

Travis: You gamed the system!

Justin: Yeah, you just typed 6, Dad!

Travis: I don't even know how you did it! [crosstalk] You got inside the matrix!

Clint: Wait a minute, wait a minute! I typed in "forward slash roll d6"...

Travis: I think you mighta left out the D!

Clint: No, I did not! 'Cause I just typed in — I did the exact same thing

Griffin: [crosstalk] watch what happens, watch what happens, Justin just did "rolling d6" and I did "roll 6". Do you see the — the sort of syntactic difference —

Clint: Okay, but go up! Go up three, where I rolled d6 again, and it gave me 2!

Griffin, after a pause: Yea—yes! Cause that's a die! You wrote "rolling 6" in the first chat, not rolling d6!

Travis: And then I wrote "roll 2" and I got a 2, do you see? And now roll... 4...

Griffin: I just rolled a hundred thousand!

Justin, losing it: Okay, guys, we got other stuff to do —

Travis: Roll... Travis.

#taz #taz steeplechase #taz steeplechase spoilers #audio #sorry if the transcript is bad bc my ability to process audio stops functioning whenever there's crosstalk #also sorry that this post is so long but i couldn't bear to leave out any of this

424 notes · View notes

multifandommess0818 · 3 months

Text

So im re-listening to TAZ: Balance and im remembering the whole Magnus clone thing and a thought occurred to me...

I hope beyond hope that they keep the reason of why Garfield created a Magnus clone a secret. Keep us guessing. Because, unless I've missed something (which is entirely possible) Griffin never said what the hell Garfield was doing.

Like did Garfield wanting bits of Magnus DNA start as a bit, and it just happened to come in handy as an explanation for when Magnus needed a new body? Was it a backup plan for if Magnus died as a way to keep him in the story, because of Magnus being Magnus? Why Magnus specifically? Again, was it a bit? Like with Taako and Leon? Then how did it come so in handy?

Did Griffin know? At the time at least? Like I'm sure after all these years he's got a solid explanation in his head, but at the time? Was he just saying he wasn't going to tell because he didn't have a full explanation himself?

Do I want to know the answers to all of this? Yes. Do I hope they explain it in some form in the graphic novel? Absolutely fucking not.

Keep us guessing McElroy.

#taz balance #the adventure zone

55 notes · View notes

junotter · 1 year

Text

Griffin McElroy, you did it again

#taz steeplechase #steeplechase #montrose pretty #taz #taz fanart #my art #ive litch just started steeplechase so im HELLA behind however masked character my beloved #girls be like i will not draw characters with blonde hair

183 notes · View notes

fatphobiabusters · 3 months

Text

I'm absolutely shocked to learn that one of the McElroy brothers actually knows what fatphobia is.

I enjoy listening to the podcast My Brother My Brother and Me by the McElroy brothers but have been extremely disappointed at how much fatphobia is in the podcast, especially the episodes before the past few years. Some of the episodes were so fatphobic that I genuinely could not listen to them. Granted, those were older episodes, but it was extremely disappointing how they were still saying fatphobic "jokes" during episodes in the 300s and 400s, meanwhile they had already long ago turned around to become very inclusive of other oppressed groups.

Sadly, the main brother who would say most of the fatphobic comments was Justin, who is fat himself. So many episodes also include Justin supporting diet culture, talking about his attempts to lose weight, etc. An episode in the 300s or 400s was actually the first time I'd ever heard the diet culture rhetoric that fat people shouldn't be allowed to eat fruit, and the person who said that and was in support of that was fellow fat person Justin. Though of course, Griffin and Travis were not innocent of this problem either.

I was so disappointed and tired of the fatphobia, especially because of how hypocritical it felt due to the brothers now being very well known for their support of equality, that some time in the past few months I sent an email explaining the issue. I didn't expect a reply or for them to mention it on the podcast, I knew there was a chance they might not even see the email. That's why I never mentioned me sending an email about it even on social media like this blog.

But then, to my most unfathomable shock, I was listening to episode 417 of their podcast on YouTube. Keep in mind the context that the brothers are now nearly at episode 700 of MBMBAM, so this episode was made even before the 2020s began 4 years ago. At minute 17:30, during a bit about the characters of Friends that I was only half listening to because I've never watched the original show, Travis actually says BY NAME "fatphobia." Not even "fat shaming." He literally said the word "fatphobia."

I had to fumble with my phone to pause the video and listen to that part again because there was no way I heard him say fatphobia, especially in an episode released in 2018! But he did! So I guess this leaves me stunned and confused. The fatphobia in the podcast has indeed gotten better, but it still needs work. So I guess I should feel hopeful? Since at least one of them knows what fatphobia is? I'm still just so shocked.

-Mod Worthy

#MBMBAM #McElroys #fatphobia #fat liberation #Mod Worthy

48 notes · View notes

utilitycaster · 11 months

Note

From all the TTRPG shows you've watched so far, do you have any favourite player character builds, or builds that you think were especially well suited to the campaign/setting that the character was in?

You'd have to narrow this down - there's a lot (I stopped keeping my massive spreadsheet of character races and classes in actual play updated bc it was getting ridiculous but it's at over 100) so I'm just going to call out a few players who consistently hit this mark in everything they do.

Surprising no one, Emily Axford. Truly one of the biggest reasons why I get annoyed at the "haha Emily will DESTROY this DM" is that Emily has an incredibly good eye towards party composition and collaboration with DMs while also pulling off some wild multiclasses. This serves her in NADDPod especially, since they're a small party and everyone needs to be versatile. I will say that while I love Callie's build and think it mechanically works very well and made sense for her background in Mothership, it feels like it needs more in-story explanation that we haven't quite gotten to, but I also trust that we will.

Surprising no one with taste, Travis Willingham. Even in cases where we know it was off-the-cuff (Grog) he did a lot of work establishing why Grog was the class he was and how he felt about it; and in cases where it was pre-planned, the amount of backstory and mechanics work he does before and during the story is admirable to the point of ridiculousness (updating Chet's backstory to accommodate what Matt said in a flashback sequence? bananas). His multiclass choices always fit both the base build and the story admirably, and always fit a niche within the party that is very much needed, and the choice to play someone like Cerrit in Calamity or Fjord in general would put him here on their strength alone.

Again surprising no one, Aabria Iyengar; DMs make the best players. Capable of some great optimization (Deanna, Laerryn, whatever the hell Antiope had going on) or just playing a character with a simple build but with a strong understanding of the setting (Myrtle the Bitch; Suvi). Really, Suvi alone puts her here in that Aabria maybe more than anyone (though she might be tied with Emily Axford) understands wizards and understands that your character is a part of the DM's worldbuilding and needs to reflect that, while also serving as your contribution to that world.

And finally, Lou Wilson. He often does fairly simple builds - Nydas and late-game Fabian are the only ones with significant multiclassing beyond barbarian/fighter level dips - but he always knows precisely what his character is here to do from the start and why, can adapt on a dime, and he has a fantastic eye for subclass choice.

Honorable mentions:

Zac Oyama tends not to go for incredibly complex mechanics, but he has a great understanding of building a character who fits into the world in a way that both reflects and expands upon it, and has a great sense of subtlety, restraint, negative space, and comedic timing. (I've been meaning to make a negative space/comedic timing post but honestly just watch Zac and Travis.)

Grouping Taliesin Jaffe and Siobhan Thompson together because they are both very strong mechanically and not afraid of a wild min-maxed triple multiclass on occasion, but more specifically because they've both made at least one character I really did not vibe with and also absolutely could not fault in any way other than "not my thing, personally." Related to that, both of them bring an "I'm a generous and skilled player and I don't really give a fuck what the audience thinks" vibe that I (the audience) respects the hell out of.

Jake Hurwitz is the rare player who 100% knows his wheelhouse and embraces it whole-heartedly, and he puts in the character and setting work to keep it interesting.

Justin McElroy is mechanically competent but nothing impressive, but he absolutely thinks about his characters and the setting and how they fit together in a deep and interesting way and which sets him apart in TAZ. Kind of with Jake in that he 100% writes what he knows; I think this kind of player is underrated and having played with some, they shouldn't be.

And on the rare chances Brennan Lee Mulligan gets to play, not only is he min-maxed to the hilt but he always is working with the DM in a truly admirable way, even as he builds a little guy who cannot roll below a 25 deception or who has somehow managed to get sneak attack twice per round or something wild like that.

#answered #Anonymous #long post #actual play

67 notes · View notes

captainsophiestark · 1 year

Text

GOD DAMN JUSTIN MCELROY FUCKING DID IT AGAIN. I CAN’T.

Straight up if you’re not listening to Steeplechase, go check it out. That’s 2/3 BANGERS of semi-cliffhanger reveals that made me look insane in public when I listened to them

#sophie speaks #taz #taz steeplechase #the adventure zone #the adventure zone steeplechase #justin mcelroy #the mcelroys

87 notes · View notes

bipirate · 4 months

Text

favourite things: 2023 edition

last year i made one of these and i thought it'd be fun to make another one. i have a notion spreadsheet with all the media i watch/read/play throughout the year (not just things that came out this year!) and i give them ratings. these are the highs (and some of the lows) of 2023 (not in order).

Games

Tunic - such a great and beautiful game that i do not want to spoil. seriously, play it. if you like zelda, exploration, solving puzzles, and cute little foxes, then it's a must

Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom - what can i say, i love a zelda

Portal 2 - just an even more excellent sequel to an excellent game

Alice in Borderland - i didn't know what to expect at first but it was excellent and highly addictive

Not Me - my introduction to thai BL (for better and also definitely for worse lol). anyway this show changed my brain chemistry. it has everything: gays, a twin switch situation, leftism, arson, rooftop kiss... you know

Bad Buddy - speaking of rooftop kisses...... if you know you know. anyway this is also a thai BL and it's still rotating in my brain. i rewatched it almost immediately, that's how good it was

The King's Affection - cheesy historical kdrama about a crown prince who is secretly a woman, with a swoon-worthy romance and political intrigue. this one's for the bisexuals (after all, the male love interest falls in love with the prince before he finds out it's a woman)

Vinland Saga - this anime fucking wrecked me. season 2 had me crying every single episode. thorfinn is my new child and i WILL name my future cat after him

The Devil Judge - a kdrama about a dystopian south korea with a fucked up justice system. anyway kang yohan character of all time. oh and also toxic homosexuality (affectionate)

Books

The Poppy War trilogy by R. F. Kuang - what an excellent series to get me back into fantasy series. it was not without faults, but i was hooked anyway

Babel by R. F. Kuang - i read this brick in 5 days straight. it's beautifully written and has such interesting things to say about language and colonialism. again, it has flaws but i wasn't bothered, i was obsessed with this book

The Priory of the Orange Tree by Samantha Shannon - i didn't realise how much i missed high fantasy until i read this. it has lesbians, dragons, a bitter old homosexual, magic, and did i mention dragons and lesbians?

He Who Drowned the World by Shelley Parker Chan - the sequel to She Who Became the Sun, my favourite book of last year. this sequel fucking DELIVERED. i went insane about it multiple times. it's a must read

Graphic novels/manga

Witch Hat Atelier by Kamome Shirahama - i started this manga 2 years ago, but since it's still ongoing and I've read new chapters this year, it counts for this year as well

JoJo's Bizarre Adventure: Steel Ball Run by Hirohiko Araki - not finished with it yet but it is truly as good as everyone says it is

The Adventure Zone: The Eleventh Hour by the McElroys and Carey Pietsch - i know not everyone likes the taz comics, but i do, i think theyre great adaptations, and this one looked incredible

Movies

Spiderman: Across the Spiderverse - not as good as the first one, but still really good. beautifully animated and extremely entertaining

Bonus: the lowest of the low, titles that earned my 'sucked shit' rating

Theory of Love - amazing that out of the 3 thai BLs ive watched, 2 managed to make it on my favourites list, and one of them was some of the worst television i've ever seen

Where the Crawdads Sing - read the book for book club last year, we all hated it, and now we decided to watch the movie for a laugh. it also sucked

#special shoutout to boys planet (the kpop variety show) which i rated both 'bad' and 'good' at the same time.#i didnt actually watch many movies this year oops #if only interview w the vampire was available to watch in my country otherwise i'd have watched it already #and itd probably be on the list. next year i'll try to watch it somehow

16 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 9 months

Text

Last month, as they sought details on what happened in a failed hiring effort, members of the Texas A&M University Faculty Senate suspected they weren’t getting the full story from top administrators.

President Kathy Banks pleaded ignorance in the hiring debacle surrounding Kathleen McElroy, telling faculty members she was unsure what led to McElroy’s claims that Texas A&M offered her a position—with tenure—in a newly formed journalism department only to change the terms of the deal due to concerns over her race (Black), her research and her past work at The New York Times.

Banks, over and over again, claimed to have no knowledge of a change in the contract. But by the time she left the online meeting, faculty members felt strongly the president wasn’t providing straight answers.

“We’re being lied to on a lot of fronts,” one professor said in the July 19 meeting.

“It cries out that we’re not being told a straight story,” another faculty member said.

A day later, on July 20, Banks retired abruptly, citing “negative press” over the hiring spectacle. She made no mention of the distrust expressed by faculty members or the pushback she had faced.

By July 21, the faculty’s concerns had been validated in a report from the Texas A&M system’s Office of the General Counsel that showed Banks’s direct involvement in the McElroy case, with the president’s fingerprints all over the decision to yank the offer and replace it with a nontenured option. The report spelled out, in clear facts, that Banks—under pressure from legislators and regents to drive Texas A&M in a conservative direction—was the architect of the failed hire.

(Banks did not respond to a request for comment from Inside Higher Ed.)

Even on its own, the dishonesty Banks displayed in the McElroy case would have likely sunk any presidency. But for Banks, the McElroy situation came two years into a contentious term, marked by clashes with professors and a top-down leadership style that eroded support from constituents across campus.

At the campus level, the story can be taken as one of hubris and dramatic missteps, but zooming out, the Banks tenure reflects the perils of the modern presidency amid increasing politicization of higher education, especially in red states where skepticism of academe is high.

Two Years of Tensions

Banks assumed the presidency in June 2021 after nine years at the helm of the engineering department. Banks had joined Texas A&M in 2012, coming over from Purdue University.

As dean of the College of Engineering at Texas A&M, Banks was celebrated.

“I must state that initially, when she was named president, I was very optimistic,” Raymundo Arróyave, a Texas A&M materials science and engineering professor, said by email. “In balance, despite the fact that I disagreed with some of the policies that she implemented as dean (this is usual, faculty do not agree with administration 100 percent of the time), I thought that she had been a transformational dean. Our college doubled in the number of students, faculty, footprint, etc. So, she was very effective at elevating the college and had similar hopes for the university.”

But, he added, “Dr. Banks quickly made it clear that her presidency was going to be [one] of dramatic changes. Many of those changes were poorly justified and poorly communicated (lack of effective communication was a common shortcoming of her tenure as dean, by the way).”

The first controversy of the Banks presidency began behind closed doors. Early in her presidency, Banks sought to establish her vision and introduce sweeping changes at Texas A&M. Those changes came in the form of recommendations from MGT Consulting in fall 2021 that included academic consolidation and reorganization, restructuring of certain administrative positions, and various programmatic changes.

But some with direct knowledge of those conversations suggest the recommendations from MGT Consulting were largely dictated by Banks. The president saw the recommendation process as a way to put forth her own ideas and let MGT Consulting take the heat when those proposals were met with resistance, said a source who served in the president’s cabinet.

“She said, ‘Our job is to tell them what we want to do, they’ll write it up in a report, and then, when there’s public criticism, we’ll say we’re following the advice of the consultants,’” the former cabinet member said, speaking anonymously due to concerns about career repercussions.

In conversations in the summer of 2021, senior leaders allegedly dictated to MGT Consulting the recommendations that the firm would later put forth as their own ideas, the source alleges.

“President Banks directly said, ‘Let’s put some things in there that we know the faculty will not like. And then we can reject them so it will look like we’re listening to them.’ The whole process was a PR sham to begin with,” the former cabinet member told Inside Higher Ed, noting that they were unsure of what poison pills were inserted since they did not work on faculty issues.

(MGT Consulting did not respond to a request for comment from Inside Higher Ed.)

Blowback to the MGT Consulting recommendations was immediate. Faculty raised concerns about combining the College of Liberal Arts, the College of Science and the College of Geosciences into a new College of Arts and Sciences. While the university offered little public rationale for the change, recent public documents released by Texas A&M related to the McElroy scandal indicate that—according to a text message from Jay Graham, a member of the Board of Regents—Banks had said the academic consolidation was “to control the liberal nature that those professors brought to campus.” (Neither Graham nor system officials responded to questions about that claim.)

Plans to eliminate tenure for librarians also prompted objections from faculty, particularly as administrators refused to explain the rationale for months before eventually making the argument that a reorganization of the library was needed to streamline and simplify operations to emphasize student needs. Despite the objections of faculty, nearly 30 librarians lost tenure or tenure-track status last year. Others decamped to different departments to maintain tenure.

Outside of the controversy generated by the MGT Consulting report, Banks also stirred anger on campus by announcing plans to kill the print edition of the student newspaper in February 2022 before backing away from that decision. Two months later, Banks defunded Draggieland, an annual drag show run by student organizations in partnership with the university. That decision, made with no initial explanation, prompted outcry from students and LGBTQ+ organizers. Officials would later assert that Draggieland was self-supporting due to ticket sales.

Last July brought changes to Texas A&M Qatar, an overseas outpost operated in conjunction with the Gulf nation’s government. Texas A&M reorganized the Qatar campus, eliminating rolling contracts for faculty in favor of fixed-term deals while consolidating power under one dean and limiting research activities for professors in non-degree-granting units, as outlined in a Banks memo.

Faculty members decried the top-down decision-making, arguing that the elimination of rolling contracts would undercut recruiting efforts and academic freedom at A&M Qatar. As these changes played out, faculty members on the main campus accused Banks of ignoring shared governance and leaving them out of important decisions as she pursued her own agenda.

A Faculty Senate resolution last August accused Banks of a “lack of commitment to meaningful shared governance” that was “promulgating a mistrust of future administrative decisions.” The “absence of shared governance” was “exacerbated by a lack of transparency,” the resolution stated.

As discontent with Banks continued, Karen Wooley, a distinguished professor in the department of chemistry, wrote a letter to Banks in December accusing her of “causing substantial disruptions and threatening the integrity” of Texas A&M, according to various media reports.

In January, Banks announced efforts to increase communication and provide more face time for faculty and staff with university administrators as well as the formation of two new committees to “improve our continuous evaluation and feedback” led by senior administrators, among other changes.

But the January olive branch from Banks did little to settle faculty concerns. By April of this year, frustration with the president’s top-down management style had reached a boiling point. A poll of members of the Council of Principal Investigators, a group of faculty members who help guide research efforts at Texas A&M, found “widespread discontent” and alleged that administrators had created an environment rife with fear and intimidation, The Texas Tribune reported. The poll, inspired by Wooley’s letter, found 89 percent of CPI members had similar concerns.

A Faculty Senate Showdown

By the time Banks met with the Faculty Senate on July 19, tensions on campus were high. The story of how McElroy’s hiring fell through was opaque at the time, and the faculty wanted answers. Instead, Banks deflected their concerns, downplaying her role in and knowledge of the hiring debacle.

Arróyave, the materials science professor, pressed Banks with hard questions, later telling Inside Higher Ed that there was “too much confusion as to who wrote the offer letters, who modified them, who was aware of the additional contract negotiations, etc.” Based on his experience with Banks as engineering dean, Arróyave said he “found it difficult to believe that she was not aware of the contract negotiations.”

The distrust of Banks by faculty members in the meeting was palpable.

Concerns swirled about the influence of outside organizations such as the Rudder Association, a powerful conservative alumni group, and others who were celebrating the failed hire. What faculty didn’t know at the time was that Banks had worked with José Luis Bermúdez, interim dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, to restructure McElroy’s offer. Bermúdez—who resigned amid the scandal—schemed with Banks on the plan to change the role McElroy was stepping into, as demonstrated in documents later released by the Texas A&M system.

Emails and text messages between university officials, including Banks, indicate that McElroy’s past as a Black woman who worked for The New York Times and researched diversity, equity and inclusion issues was a potential headache for Texas A&M. Banks stressed that it was important to slow-walk the hire until after the end of the legislative session in May, and Bermúdez told a subordinate that it would be “poor optics” to hire McElroy with DEI under fire in Texas. (Lawmakers implemented sweeping restrictions on college DEI offices and work last session.)

As administrators deliberately delayed the process, McElroy dropped out of the running.

“I believe that KM has pulled out. Department just got query from Texas Tribune. I’ll make sure that everything is referred over to Kelly,” Bermúdez texted Banks on July 10, seemingly referring to Kelly Brown, associate vice president of marketing and communications at A&M.

In the exchange that followed, Banks would go on to call McElroy an “awful person” for going to the press and noted, “we have a lot of skeptics about the whole concept of journalism,” while directing Bermúdez to pause the search for a director of the nascent program.

Text messages between regents, released as part of Texas A&M’s internal review, demonstrated that board members also seemed to be exerting influence over the departmental hiring decision.

“Please tell me this isn’t true,” Graham texted Banks and system chancellor John Sharp about plans to hire McElroy. “But since it’s not April Fools Day, I assume it is. I thought the purpose of us starting a journalism program was to get high-quality Aggie journalist[s] with conservative values into the market. This won’t happen with someone like this leading the department.”

Another regent, Mike Hernandez, questioned McElroy’s résumé—calling The New York Times “biased and progressive leaning” and suggested tenure approval would be “a difficult sell.”

(Neither Graham nor Hernandez replied to requests for comment.)

Texas A&M would soon settle with McElroy for $1 million. (McElroy, who remains in her position as a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin, did not respond to a request for comment.)

Outside Influence in Texas

The McElroy hiring controversy has since been followed by another scandal at Texas A&M in which opioid researcher Joy Alonzo was suspended by system officials and investigated for comments she allegedly made about Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick, a powerful figure in Texas.

The investigation ultimately cleared Alonzo of wrongdoing, and system officials claim that all policies were followed appropriately. But the two controversies combined have raised lingering questions about the political influence exerted on Texas A&M by state lawmakers and others.

A spokesperson for the flagship campus largely deferred questions to system officials but emphasized, in response to an inquiry about outside political influence, that “Texas A&M prioritizes maintaining an environment that encourages academic freedom, critical thinking and intellectual diversity.”

A Texas A&M system spokesperson did not answer a list of detailed questions from Inside Higher Ed, instead sending a link to a news release summarizing the recent legislative session. Pressed for answers, system spokesperson Laylan Copelin deferred questions to the university.

In a recent editorial, however, Sharp discussed the dual scandals with McElroy and Alonzo.

“Regarding the events in Dr. McElroy’s hiring process, it is difficult to recognize the alma mater I dearly love and to which I owe so much. Texas A&M is far better than this!” Sharp wrote in an opinion piece for The Austin-American Statesman. “A few, however, forgot our Core Values.”

Sharp touched lightly on academic freedom concerns, defending his actions in the Alonzo controversy, and pointed to legislation to codify tenure in state law—after it came under attack from legislators—which he noted was a win for both “academic freedom and accountability.”

But some faculty members worry less about outside influence and more about what direction a politicized Board of Regents and university officials want to take the university and system.

“This is not outside influence. It is clear that (at least some of) the maximum authorities of the system would prefer a more conservative disposition by the faculty and university. Frankly, I think it is highly contradictory to denounce identity politics and then call for the production of ‘conservative journalists’ out of the new journalism school,” Arróyave said, noting broad concerns about the worrisome “interference of politics and ideology into academia.”

Since both the Alonzo and McElroy controversies, university and system officials have stressed the importance of academic freedom and resistance to outside influence on the institution. But as recent documents made clear, the pressure isn’t just from Texas lawmakers—it is also coming from the inside, with regents appointed by Republican governor Greg Abbott, many of whom donated generously to his campaign, intent on pushing Texas A&M in a conservative direction.

31 notes · View notes

todaysdocument · 14 days

Text

Memorandum of Conference with the President Authored by Andrew J. Goodpaster

Collection DDE-WHOSS: White House Office, Office of the Staff Secretary: Records of Paul T. Carroll, Andrew J. Goodpaster, L. Arthur Minnich, and Christopher H. RussellSeries: Alphabetical Subject FilesFile Unit: Intelligence Matters (10)

[strikethrough] TOP SECRET [/strikethrough]

[stamp in circle] The Dwight D. Eisenhower Library

MEMORANDUM OF CONFERENCE WITH THE PRESIDENT

April 7, 1959

Others present: Secretary McElroy

Mr. Bissell

General Goodpaster

The President said he had asked Mr. McElroy and Mr. Bissell to come in to tell them that he had decided not to go ahead with certain reconnaissance flights for which he had given tentative approval the preceding day. He said he wanted to give them his thinking. First, we now have the power to destroy the Soviets without need for detailed targeting. Second, as the world is going now, there seems no hope for the future unless we can make some progress in negotiation (it is already four years since the Geneva meeting). Third, we cannot in the present circumstances afford the revulsion of world opinion against the United States that might occur -- the U. S. being the only nation that could conduct this activity. Fourth, we are putting several hundred million dollars into programs for more advanced capabilities.

In summary, the President said he did not agree that this project would be worth the political costs.

He added that he had called Secretary Dulles who had taken the view that if the planned action were in the East he would see no objection but in the North and South of their sector he would not do it. Mr. Dulles had added that if the current negotiations fail, we must at once get the most accurate information possible.

The President said he agreed on the need for information. This need is highlighted by the distortions several senators are making of our military position relative to that of the Soviets, and they are helped in their "demagoguery" by our uncertainties as to Soviet programs. He was concerned over the terrible propaganda impact that would be occasioned if a reconnaissance plane were to fail. He added that there is some evidence that the Soviets really want a Summit Meeting. The President himself feels that there is need

[strikethrough] TOP SECRET [/strikethrough]

[stamp]

DECLASSIFIED

E.O. 12958. SEC. 3.6(b)

^[MR93 - 173#1]

BY ^[LKS] DATE ^[9/11/96]

^[[4/11/59]]

[strikethrough] TOP SECRET [/strikethrough]

[stamp in circle] The Dwight D. Eisenhower Library

- 2 -

to make some kind of progress at the summit, even though we cannot be sure that this is possible. There are, however, some straws in the wind indicating the prospect is not wholly hopeless. He told the group that if at a later time they think the situation has changed, or if a crisis or emergency occurs, or new equipment becomes available, they could raise the matter with him again.

Mr. McElroy said it is far easier for Cabinet officers to recommend this activity than for the President to authorize it, and that he accepted President's decision very willingly. Mr. McElroy added that currently the Soviet long-range Air Force, which is of very limited size, is the threat. Later, if we do not have solid information, we will have to put our forces on air alert. In addition, there is a need to base our missile program on the hardest possible information regarding the Soviet program.

Earlier the President had discussed this matter at length with me. In response to his request for my advise, I analyzed the proposal as to the importance of possible costs and possible gains, and indicated I would be disposed to favor the two particular actions proposed. I added that, while I had confidence in my analysis of the costs and gains, I felt less sure of the evaluation of their relative importance and would readily defer to the President's own assessment in this respect.

^[G.]

A. J. Goodpaster

Brigadier General, USA

[strikethrough] TOP SECRET [/strikethrough]

#archivesgov #April 11 #1944 #1940s #cold war

16 notes · View notes

themadknightuniverse · 1 year

Note

im literally so sorry for this but hi is nachos name pronounced like the food. I followed you a month back or so and since then my dash has been haunted by incredibly sincere and emotional posts about a guy who is a savoury snack and his love affair with another guy. I haven't seen better call Saul and I just need to ask you this. cos your tag is just bcs I assumed for ages that this was like guys from a mcelroys dnd campaign because they're the only people I can think of who would make a guy called Chips N Dip and then get emotional with him. is his name pronounced like the food or like something else. apologies for this again I know you care for him I'm just going insane not knowing the answer here. I can accept if he is nacho the food I just need to know

Hi! First of all, this ask got me into a laughing fit for a good 10min so thank you for that. "a guy who is a savoury snack and his love affair with another guy." I'm never forgetting that EVER. Second of all, the answer to your question in video with the worst introduction possible to Nacho's character ever (I swear he's a babygirl who did nothing wrong ever in his life) :

youtube

Thirdly, from what I know, Ignacio's nickname "Nacho" doesn't refer to the food. There is no explanation given in canon about how he ended up with this nickname tho. We could assume that "Nacho" is a short version for "Ignacio". Also, some reddit specialists said:

To conclude, is "Nacho" pronounced like the food?

but there is no "s"

#asks #nacho varga #bcs

37 notes · View notes

gadunkie · 10 months

Text

spiderverse 2 sucked shit and was performative twitter.com fuckery. hi reddit in this rant Im going to talk about why I think the second spiderverse movie gave me a queasy uneasy feeling after I left the theater. spoiler warning and all that.

Ive been seeing a lot of praise for this movie lately and a lot of fan stuff and while that is cool I think spiderverse 2 really doesnt deserve it. to me it feels like baffling performative bullshit where they checked off certain "woke" categories and forgot about everything else. Im bad at formulating rant posts so Im just gonna randomly bring up my feelings on certain things.

ok so first of all the number one thing that pissed me off was the in-movie dialogue of people telling miles, the first black spider-man, that he was never supposed to be spider-man in the first place. that is incredibly tone deaf, especially when the first movie's message was that anyone could be a hero, regardless of who you are. you could argue that this story beat is used to reinforce that message being that miles' reaction to that line is rejection and finding his own way to become spider-man after all. but thats stupid because, again, anyone could be a hero no matter what, even if theyre not supposed to be 'canonically' a spider-man. what this tells me is that theyre going for the same fucking message, again, but this time its padded out in 2 movies rather than the one that weve already seen.

second, and this one was much more brief, there was a disabled spider-man amidst the roster of the multiverse spider-mans whose only line of dialogue was making fun of their own disability. thats some travis mcelroy bullshit, I thought we were past the point of making disabled character's only personality being their disability. to me that was also incredibly tone deaf and just completely unneeded.

third, there was an Indian spider-man by the name Pavitr Prabhakar whose only personality was that he was Indian. of course theres nothing wrong with Indian culture or just being an Indian person, but to me its like if they had a Japanese spider-man and made them only talk about katanas and sushi. theres no way that indian people act like that and constantly boost about their own nation, it just rubs me the wrong way and makes them feel less human.

fourth, that "gwen is trans" shit is utter queerbait, I cant believe anyone is fucking falling for this shit. it literally infuriates me that I see fellow queer people look at the most basic off to the side decoration in a room / police officer's uniform and jump to the conclusion that what we are seeing is trans representation. like sure she could be trans! but it can also be read as her just being an ally, same with her father. "what ally has a trans flag in there room?" are you fucking kidding me? like are you being serious? hey heres famous content creator Ludwig, who is cis and has a trans flag in his room:

fucking anyone, literally anyone could have trans iconography anywhere in their house regardless of their gender. side bonus, heres how you can have a real confirmed trans character in your art without it being bait! - have them taking transition medication in a scene - have them wear gender affirming clothing, like chest binders - have them tell another character that theyre trans - have them literally look into the camera and say "Im trans." crazy how easy it is to do all of these things and yet gwen did none of it! dont fucking search for crumbs and pretend that its a feast.

fifth, theres a character called spider-punk who goes by Hobie and his entire character is being a punk and making fun of The Establishment™ and Capitalism™. I thought he was dumb because it just reminded me that anti-capitalism is just a form of entertainment now and not a real message to start a change.

sixth, there was so much fucking nostalgia pandering and repetitive dialogue. there were many scenes showing footage of older movies, cartoons, or real life actors that were only there to be pointed at the screen by audiences. next, the dialogue was so expository that any time miles' parents were on screen they would only talk about miles and how worried they were about him. I swear to god that 70% of spider-man 2099s dialogue was about his disturbed past and wanting to capture miles. at several times throughout the movie I thought "ok I get it" and hoped that were was something new to be seen in the next 5 minutes, which wasnt the case most of the time.

seventh, evil miles was fucking stupid. you cant just reveal such an easy counterpart villain and expect me to believe that he has any bearing on the story whatsoever. that shit was so laughably bad that I can easily imagine him getting defeated in the same old hero vs villain shit in the next movie. here let me have some fun and say that miles is going to do the most predictable "Im going to fix you to become good" trope only for evil miles to deny it and fuck off forever in some weird way.

anyway this post is already too fucking long so Im just gonna add personal peeves onto it because Im on a roll. I had a hard time paying attention to several fight scenes because they were mixing with too many visual styles, like the vulture scene at the beginning of the movie was too disorienting for me. I think there shouldve been subtitles, sometimes characters were inaudible for me and the audio mixing during some scenes didnt help either, unless there was a slow moment in the film I just couldnt understand what the characters were saying.

I thought the movie sucked so bad that what they got right in certain aspects (cast diversity, parent and child struggles, etc.) felt like nothing to me after how they treated the parts that Ive listed. its like they fucking checked off a Progressive Bingo Sheet and left everything else in the dust.

I left the theater disappointed and feeling worthless because all I felt was that these movies were just trying to sell me something and didnt push for a change like the first one did. what a fucking shit show.

conclusions. if you liked the movie, awesome Im glad, and you should decide for yourself how you feel about it and what it means to you. Im simply just putting my frustrations into a little text post because that is how I feel. Im not in charge of your enjoyment and you should decide that on your own regardless of my opinions. be responsible with your enjoyment.

but I wont, if you try to argue with me on any of these topics then Im blocking you forever and if you dare type "let people enjoy things" on my post then Im killing you,

#gadunka is fucking pissed

22 notes · View notes