LBGTQ

[Willfully Horn 8204]

Daughter just texted and said UT is shuttering their DEI program effective immediately.

Here is the communication from Hartzell:

 

 

Edited April 2 by Willfully Horn

[Brisketexan 106607]

35 minutes ago, troph said:

 

Flowers have sex too. Doesn’t sound terrible fun but it happens.

Yep.  You ain't lived till you've fucked an orchid.  At least, that's what orchids say.  But who knows...orchids lie.

[Captainant 28374]

Shot:

On 2/27/2024 at 12:55 PM, immamac said:

DEI isn't politics what are you even talking about? 

Chaser:

5 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

Daughter just texted and said UT is shuttering their DEI program effective immediately.

Here is the communication from Hartzell:

 

 

 

[TexPx 2330]

Flowers have sex too. Doesn’t sound terrible fun but it happens.

[immamac 44197]

17 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Shot:

Chaser:

 

So like 15 people who were exclusively focused on DEI with no legal overlap somewhere else where they could broaden scope are out and all the other programs are just being absorbed and expanded effectively having no change to the DEI mission without specifically calling it DEI? cool, cool, cool. 

[DixonHur 11938]

25 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Yep.  You ain't lived till you've fucked an orchid.  At least, that's what orchids say.  But who knows...orchids lie.

I've fucked a Rose, a Daisy, a Lily, and an Iris, but never met anyone named Orchid so I'll have to take your word for it.

[Brisketexan 106607]

1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

I've fucked a Rose, a Daisy, a Lily, and an Iris, but never met anyone named Orchid so I'll have to take your word for it.

You thought we wouldn't notice you skipping right past the time you banged Petunia, didn't you?

[royiv 9674]

22 hours ago, safe sex said:

Lmao, Mildred is pretty tame as far as chosen names for trans people go.

I've lost track of the number of trans Leafs, Rivers, Siriuses, Jupiters, Lucifers, Mosses, Herculeses, Ramseses, Rains, etc etc that I've met while both working in queer healthcare and being a big gaymo myself

I have two Nirvanas in my neighborhood orbit.

[safe sex 11912]

I met a Toast at Cheer-Ups the other night. Might be my new fave

[Foosters 18220]

doesn't that mean you're having a stroke?

[royiv 9674]

2 minutes ago, safe sex said:

I met a Toast at Cheer-Ups the other night. Might be my new fave

I know a dog named Toast.

[DixonHur 11938]

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

You thought we wouldn't notice you skipping right past the time you banged Petunia, didn't you?

Not gonna lie, she does look tasty.

[royiv 9674]

20 minutes ago, immamac said:

So like 15 people who were exclusively focused on DEI with no legal overlap somewhere else where they could broaden scope are out and all the other programs are just being absorbed and expanded effectively having no change to the DEI mission without specifically calling it DEI? cool, cool, cool. 

If what you suppose is the case, and maybe it will turn out that it is, why did our elected politicians need to pass a law to address it? That just feels to me like we made university administrators do a lot of work to restructure programs all in the name of politics.

[Willfully Horn 8204]

2 minutes ago, royiv said:

If what you suppose is the case, and maybe it will turn out that it is, why did our elected politicians need to pass a law to address it? That just feels to me like we made university administrators do a lot of work to restructure programs all in the name of politics.

It is a carefully worded statement, but Hartzell does say some “student facing programs” will not exist next semester, as well as admit that all remaining programs will be become broader. Which limits the effectiveness of targeted efforts. It would be nice to think, like Imma, there will be no change, but I guess I am more cynical.

[royiv 9674]

4 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

It is a carefully worded statement, but Hartzell does say some “student facing programs” will not exist next semester, as well as admit that all remaining programs will be become broader. Which limits the effectiveness of targeted efforts. It would be nice to think, like Imma, there will be no change, but I guess I am more cynical.

Count me in the more cynical camp. I’m just curious about his opinion that this isn’t political when these changes are being brought on in response to legislation that was passed and signed into law by politicians.

[WhatTheBuck 28904]

21 minutes ago, royiv said:

I know a dog named Toast.

A musician friend of mine used to play in a band called Toast.

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2692]

wait, what? Everything about academia has been politicized as of late, and DEI is so obviously conflated with "CRT." 

 

1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

The strangest trans name I've ever experienced was also my first.  She was my professor in the ACTLab at UT back in the early 90's so she was definitely a trailblazer.  Anyway, her name was Allucquére, which kinda sounded like "All Look Queer" to me, so I used to wonder if that's why she chose it.  Of course, most people just knew her as Sandy.

Sandy Stone (artist) - Wikipedia

I remember her, an ex took her class. I had no idea that UT faculty in the RTF dep't were such cunts to her. Pathetic. She was well-liked and well-respected by her students as far as I knew.

[YGIFS 19456]

Cinnamon Toast or Raisin Toast?  Because one violates anti-DEI legislation and the other doesn't.

Levity aside, I wouldn't fault Hartzell for this.  He didn't want this, but his hands are tied by the Board of Regents, most of whom are Abbott stooges (two were against this bullshit but couldn't do much about it).  I will give Hartzell additional credit.  He and his team worked their ass off to rework the structure of our academy for high school kids that will become first generation students of color to attend 4-year university.  We got it done so it's technically protected from this and will endure.  But yeah, there's gonna be a lot of other fall-out for current students in need of DEI services and community and engagement.  But hey, this is Texas, right?  Why should people be exposed to the liberty to onboard new ideas?  

[immamac 44197]

32 minutes ago, royiv said:

Count me in the more cynical camp. I’m just curious about his opinion that this isn’t political when these changes are being brought on in response to legislation that was passed and signed into law by politicians.

 

37 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

It is a carefully worded statement, but Hartzell does say some “student facing programs” will not exist next semester, as well as admit that all remaining programs will be become broader. Which limits the effectiveness of targeted efforts. It would be nice to think, like Imma, there will be no change, but I guess I am more cynical.

So I guess it's all in what you think DEI should be focused on and how it should work.

I think it should be representative and focused on gearing up clearly underrepresented diversity, equity or inclusive policies. What DEI has become synonymous with is overrepresentation by targeted efforts with KPI's that aren't really about aligning it with anything in particular except "MOAR DIVERSITY". More diversity isn't necessarily a "good" thing when its starts to no longer be representative of what is actually going on in and around the institution/world/whatever. 

Do I think that some aspects are underrepresented and thus will have a negative impact from this? absolutely. I also think that this balances out some of the egregious overrepresentation that some are getting with targeted programs. 

Inclusion should be a very broad sweeping, deeply integrated plan and culture throughout an organization. == "Include everyone who is qualified to be included in what is available"

Equity likewise should be something that everyone strives for as it leads to more consistent and predictable results. == "Treat all participants the same regardless of outside influences based on available data"

Diversity is harder to just say "oh yeah more of that" as a tuning knob because it's the hardest to measure accurately/in a consistent manner for what people are defining as diversity. Is there such a thing as "too much diversity?" that seems stupid to say, but there is something to say about certain populations being over and under represented vs the real/natural world. I think it's most important to focus on the outcome of a diversity program (typically diversity of thought and background) moreso than a hard number of a diversity program (% representation of race/gender/creed/religion/orientation/etc). == ?? this one goes different ways depending on how you want to define, promote and measure diversity

[royiv 9674]

5 minutes ago, immamac said:

 

So I guess it's all in what you think DEI should be focused on and how it should work.

I think it should be representative and focused on gearing up clearly underrepresented diversity, equity or inclusive policies. What DEI has become synonymous with is overrepresentation by targeted efforts with KPI's that aren't really about aligning it with anything in particular except "MOAR DIVERSITY". More diversity isn't necessarily a "good" thing when its starts to no longer be representative of what is actually going on in and around the institution/world/whatever. 

Do I think that some aspects are underrepresented and thus will have a negative impact from this? absolutely. I also think that this balances out some of the egregious overrepresentation that some are getting with targeted programs. 

Inclusion should be a very broad sweeping, deeply integrated plan and culture throughout an organization. == "Include everyone who is qualified to be included in what is available"

Equity likewise should be something that everyone strives for as it leads to more consistent and predictable results. == "Treat all participants the same regardless of outside influences based on available data"

Diversity is harder to just say "oh yeah more of that" as a tuning knob because it's the hardest to measure accurately/in a consistent manner for what people are defining as diversity. Is there such a thing as "too much diversity?" that seems stupid to say, but there is something to say about certain populations being over and under represented vs the real/natural world. I think it's most important to focus on the outcome of a diversity program (typically diversity of thought and background) moreso than a hard number of a diversity program (% representation of race/gender/creed/religion/orientation/etc). == ?? this one goes different ways depending on how you want to define, promote and measure diversity

Great summary of your thoughts. I agree with pretty much everything you state here with a slight nit to pick with “egregious over representation.” That’s going down a Newsmax path, IMO, even if I don’t think you’re taking it to that extreme.

As for your original statement of DEI isn’t politics, I think maybe what you’re saying is DEI shouldn’t be politics, because what we’re seeing DEI has very much been a target of politicians. If that’s what you’re saying, I agree, DEI shouldn’t be politics, but when we have shitheel politicians actively attacking diversity, I think we have to have some guardrails and protections in place.

[atomheartbevo 90538]

1 hour ago, TexPx said:

Is this from a Pink Floyd video?

[atomheartbevo 90538]

2 hours ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

I am not a Mildred nor do I happen to know any personally but I see nothing wrong with it.

It means gentle strength and that seems rather charming if you ask me (not that anyone did but this is Surly).

Mildred is a great name, but the only Mildred’s I knew were all in their 60s and up.  They were wonderful ladies and the name crossed my radar when we were looking at girl names.

[immamac 44197]

7 minutes ago, royiv said:

Great summary of your thoughts. I agree with pretty much everything you state here with a slight nit to pick with “egregious over representation.” That’s going down a Newsmax path, IMO, even if I don’t think you’re taking it to that extreme.

As for your original statement of DEI isn’t politics, I think maybe what you’re saying is DEI shouldn’t be politics, because what we’re seeing DEI has very much been a target of politicians. If that’s what you’re saying, I agree, DEI shouldn’t be politics, but when we have shitheel politicians actively attacking diversity, I think we have to have some guardrails and protections in place.

yeah we are in agreement. The topic of DEI isn't politics, but it has been made political clearly by policy specifically calling out these types of programs by public institutions, even though it's common and standard practice for any global corporation or private sector company.

What I mean by egregious over-representation is the stuff that is in the outrage cycle that is getting full on programs related to it, when in reality it's essentially a nothingburger that should be monitored, but not actively targeted. This is why the affirmative action thing turned into a bit of a nothing burger, there are ways once you balance out everything that you don't have to "overcompensate" anymore to balance it out. Some things are never out of balance and just get into the conversation by nature of existing, those things have a strange effect of getting more attention than they deserve for problems that may or may not actually exist if you are holding true to the inclusion and equity portions of DEI. 

[Brisketexan 106607]

15 minutes ago, immamac said:

 

So I guess it's all in what you think DEI should be focused on and how it should work.

I think it should be representative and focused on gearing up clearly underrepresented diversity, equity or inclusive policies. What DEI has become synonymous with is overrepresentation by targeted efforts with KPI's that aren't really about aligning it with anything in particular except "MOAR DIVERSITY". More diversity isn't necessarily a "good" thing when its starts to no longer be representative of what is actually going on in and around the institution/world/whatever. 

Do I think that some aspects are underrepresented and thus will have a negative impact from this? absolutely. I also think that this balances out some of the egregious overrepresentation that some are getting with targeted programs. 

Inclusion should be a very broad sweeping, deeply integrated plan and culture throughout an organization. == "Include everyone who is qualified to be included in what is available"

Equity likewise should be something that everyone strives for as it leads to more consistent and predictable results. == "Treat all participants the same regardless of outside influences based on available data"

Diversity is harder to just say "oh yeah more of that" as a tuning knob because it's the hardest to measure accurately/in a consistent manner for what people are defining as diversity. Is there such a thing as "too much diversity?" that seems stupid to say, but there is something to say about certain populations being over and under represented vs the real/natural world. I think it's most important to focus on the outcome of a diversity program (typically diversity of thought and background) moreso than a hard number of a diversity program (% representation of race/gender/creed/religion/orientation/etc). == ?? this one goes different ways depending on how you want to define, promote and measure diversity

Lemme give you the simple example of my profession, law.

Young people are inspired to pursue law, and mentored, primarily by people they know or are connected with in the field.  That is, family members, friends of family members.  By virtue of both past patterns (yeah, we were an openly racist society, so the ranks of older minority lawyers are smaller than the ranks of older white lawyers ON PURPOSE) and socioeconomics (being a lawyer is a higher-earning job; that means that lawyers are more common among the higher socioeconomic brackets (and thus are more accessible to people in those same brackets) than they are among the lower socioeconomic brackets).  And we know that, in large part because of the effect of generational racism and the lack of accumulation of generational wealth as a result, minorities are overrepresented in the lower brackets and underrepresented in the higher brackets.

Result:

Generic white kid has a statistically higher chance of getting guidance, mentorship, and advice from a lawyer they are connected to somehow than generic black or brown kid.

So, to make up for that, programs exist to put members of the legal profession in contact with students who are interested in the law, but haven't had any real connection to it.  UT had such a program.  It wasn't all minority students -- there were lower-income white students as well, the kids were mostly first-gen college students across the board.  It was fantastic.  It helped make up for their lack of access to attorneys in their home lives.

It is also dead, killed by the legislature's anti-DEI bill.

That's the problem we're talking about.

For fuck's sake, I saw the dichotomy in two snapshots.  At my 10th high school reunion of a private preparatory school (so, mostly middle class on up, although we did have scholarship kids too), fucking half of my class was lawyers or doctors - which was little surprise, as half their parents were doctors or lawyers.  And at a career day at a local low-income (and mostly minority) middle school, where I set up the "talk to a lawyer" booth, I was the only lawyer most of those kids had ever met.  It hadn't even occurred to them that they could be lawyers too.  That ain't about merit.  It's about unequal opportunity, from the get-go.  "DEI," done remotely right, addresses that unequal opportunity.

[Willfully Horn 8204]

1 hour ago, royiv said:

Great summary of your thoughts. I agree with pretty much everything you state here with a slight nit to pick with “egregious over representation.”

I was wondering about the same sentence.
 

I guess it speaks to my lack of awareness, but I assumed these programs were about identifying marginalized groups, and supporting individuals in practical day to day issues, as well as assistance in class work and, as per Brisket, mentoring abut future options, but also about informing the broader community about those on the margins. 
 

Details on these programs would be helpful. I’ll look into it.
 

Edited to say that I see Imma already spoke to the question.

Edited April 2 by Willfully Horn

[abuelo gringo 326]

1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

Not gonna lie, she does look tasty.

Taco tastes like bacon?

[Brisketexan 106607]

1 minute ago, abuelo gringo said:

Taco tastes like bacon?

[Willfully Horn 8204]

Today’s missive from Hartzell must not acknowledge UT already closing the decades old Multicultural Engagement Center. 
 

“To wit, the university bulldozed the many programs that the Multicultural Engagement Center housed, including: the New Black Student Weekend, Adelante, CultivAsian, Bloq Party, Four Directions, the Leadership Institutes, Afrikan American Affairs, the Asian Desi Pacific Islander American Collective, Latino Leadership Council, Native American and Indigenous Collective, Queer Trans Black Indigenous People of Color and Allies, Students for Equity and Diversity, and signature graduation ceremonies like Black Graduation, Latinx Graduation, GraduAsian, Lavender Graduation, the Monarch Center. The Gender and Sexuality Center was also replaced by the Women’s Community Center.”

https://www.texasobserver.org/anti-dei-law-implementation-has-been-a-disaster/

[DixonHur 11938]

2 hours ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

I remember her, an ex took her class. I had no idea that UT faculty in the RTF dep't were such cunts to her. Pathetic. She was well-liked and well-respected by her students as far as I knew.

I didn't know about any of the faculty drama surrounding her, but I, and my classmates, really liked her.  

To be honest her sexual identity was never discussed.  I assume we all "knew" she was trans, or at least had our suspicions based on her size, build, and appearance, but someone being out as trans wasn't super common back then, so I'm sure the medical care, in terms of hormone treatments and reassignment surgery, was much more limited than it is today.

[TexPx 2330]

Is this from a Pink Floyd video?

Georgia O’ Queef

[YGIFS 19456]

5 minutes ago, TexPx said:

Georgia O’ Queef

If you set their plantings  to the Dark Side of the Moon, it synchs up really nicely 

[NameAlreadyInUse 5162]

 

On 3/2/2024 at 9:00 AM, troph said:

parading around and fucking total strangers sounds horrible. 

I'm with you sister!  It sounds fun in theory but the few times I went down that road it was not at all fun.

On 3/13/2024 at 10:25 PM, troph said:

 

interesting fact the upside down pink triangle that is now (or recently was as now we’ve moved to variations of rainbow flags) a symbol of queer folk was a symbol of the nazis for lgbtq people. They made (mostly) gay men  but also trans women and cross dressers to wear a pink triangle patch for identification in camps.

Yep, I have that pink triangle tattooed on my back, because it represents that we were marked for slaughter, and I want to make sure to always remember that those days could come back if we don't remain vigilant. 

[YGIFS 19456]

You know, you could have just written yourself a note to carry around instead of a back stamp.    

What almost none of them have learned from history is the first thing their idols do in order to glean loyalty is they give up their family and friends who are "different."  Be they Jews, Gays, Elderly, Disabled, Retarded, Mixed Race, et. al.  As a show of allegiance, they start with the "different" people that their supporters know and 'loved.'  Once they see who is loyal and who is not, then the real work begins.  We are seeing it already just here in Texas.  Literally bounties upon people getting abortions, teaching DEI, LGBTQ+ books and medical care, people seeking political asylum.  The last gasp of a dying way of life.  But they are not out of fuel yet.  They're demanding people start turning on their neighbors.  And a frightening number of people are going along with it.  

We came this far only to quite possibly collapse and die in sight of the finish line.  

[DixonHur 11938]

25 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

Be they Jews, Gays, Elderly, Disabled, Retarded, Mixed Race, et. al.

[troph 25088]

1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

if it's a proper noun it's ok?

[4th&Five 41900]

 

[HenryJames 67113]

17 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

 

 

[RDCanecutter 26851]

On 4/2/2024 at 2:15 PM, Willfully Horn said:

Daughter just texted and said UT is shuttering their DEI program effective immediately.

Here is the communication from Hartzell:

 

 

Hello option football.

[Brian Fantana 6856]

1 hour ago, HenryJames said:

 

Dawn Staley is awesome. She knows she's the best in the business and what the fuck are they gonna say to her so she's going to speak the truth. Saying all of this while also living in fucking South Carolina. I love her. Absolute queen.

[956 Worldwide 35512]

On 4/3/2024 at 5:00 PM, troph said:

if it's a proper noun it's ok?

 Not really, and I know it wasn’t meant is malice in this post. The people hurt by it are the least likely to come after you, so I’ve noticed it’s come back into fashion among people who’d never think of using a racial or LGBTQ slur. 

[troph 25088]

9 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

 Not really, and I know it wasn’t meant is malice in this post. The people hurt by it are the least likely to come after you, so I’ve noticed it’s come back into fashion among people who’d never think of using a racial or LGBTQ slur. 

I was trying to be irreverent and highlight the absurdity of the use of the word.

i agree 100%.

my best friends daughter has Rett Syndrome - while she would squarely fit in the slur if used by someone - she is hardly deserving of such a name. Though unable to control her body and unable to speak she is a nuanced and complex person with emotions, thoughts, hopes and desires and someone that knows she’s not like the others and has done the hard work to cope with her condition. Hardly what I would consider “retarded”  it’s a terrible word.

[956 Worldwide 35512]

35 minutes ago, troph said:

I was trying to be irreverent and highlight the absurdity of the use of the word.

i agree 100%.

my best friends daughter has Rett Syndrome - while she would squarely fit in the slur if used by someone - she is hardly deserving of such a name. Though unable to control her body and unable to speak she is a nuanced and complex person with emotions, thoughts, hopes and desires and someone that knows she’s not like the others and has done the hard work to cope with her condition. Hardly what I would consider “retarded”  it’s a terrible word.

Got it, need to adjust my meter. I’ve just noticed that one was always favored by the shithead right but recently adopted by the asshole dirtbag left to prove they can be edgy too. It really just shows they’re mean and too cowardly to use slurs that might get them punched or canceled.

Not putting Lobo in either category, I know it’s not malicious just a linguistic relic we can afford to toss.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

6 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I know it’s not malicious just a linguistic relic we can afford to toss.

Just as intelligence occurs on a spectrum, so do emotions and one thing I've observed is that many humans on one end of the intelligence spectrum (especially those with chromosomal disorders) are some of the most loving people out there and forgive trespasses easily. Such is the gift of the human species.

[troph 25088]

2 hours ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Just as intelligence occurs on a spectrum, so do emotions and one thing I've observed is that many humans on one end of the intelligence spectrum (especially those with chromosomal disorders) are some of the most loving people out there and forgive trespasses easily. Such is the gift of the human species.

True and it makes Rett syndrome that much more heart breaking - debilitating physical disabilities and unable to speak - yet many girls and women with Rett have the internal thought life of a preteen by the time they are adults. My friends daughter has had crushes, has cried because she wasn’t able to have a normal prom, and the list goes on and on. Truly someone trapped in a body that doesn’t function. Anyway, dehumanizing slurs can all DIAGF.

Edited April 7 by troph

[pacman 7485]

[troph 25088]

The hypocrisy is infuriating.

[1978horn 904]

Dripping Springs isd has an agenda item for Monday(Aprill 22nd)  to remove gender identity and sexual orientation as protected from discrimination...

[Brisketexan 106607]

Because -- and this is very, very important -- the Bible commands that you be as fucking cruel and vindictive against thuh gayz as you possibly can be.  It's right there, in the Bible.  What, you didn't read that part, atheist libtard?

 

Truly.  It's amazing to watch people fight so hard for the right to be absolutely fucking mean without repercussions.  Why the fuck is it so important to you to have the right to harass and abuse gay people?  Seriously....why?  What the fucking fuck is fucking wrong with you sick fucks?

Edited April 18 by Brisketexan

[troph 25088]

they don't want to be mean, they want us dead or gone. but if they have to be mean to achieve their goals, they'll do that too.

['stache 22115]

"Never back down" as he's literally backing down, taking his ball and going home. Pussy ass bitch.

Go Pokes!

https://kfor.com/news/local/upset-audience-brings-ryan-walters-speaking-event-to-abrupt-end/

‘Never back down to a woke mob!’ Upset audience brings Ryan Walters speaking event to abrupt end

STILLWATER, Okla. (KFOR) — A town hall event with State Superintendent Ryan Walters, hosted on OSU’s campus by a campus conservative organization, only lasted about 15 minutes Wednesday after some in the audience incessantly shouted at Walters.

Walters began the event telling the audience to “never back down to a woke mob.” 12 minutes later, organizers ushered Walters out of the room.

The event was put on by the OSU chapter of national conservative Group Turning Point USA (TPUSA).

TPUSA billed the event as a “town hall” with Walters on flyers it posted around campus.

Walters has only participated in Q&A style events with the general public a handful of times since taking office in January 2023.

The event attracted well over 100 students and community members to a lecture hall inside OSU’s engineering building, some of whom told News 4 they supported Walters, and others who said they did not.

But they all did have one thing in common: they came to the event, because it was a rare opportunity to hear from Walters, and ask him questions.

“I just kind of wanted to see, honestly what he had to say,” OSU student Ryann Sadler told News 4.

“OSU has a very big queer community, and we want to make sure we show up for them,“ said OSU student John Johnson, who helped lead a protest outside the lecture hall hosting the event before it began. “We have people inside who are going to ask them some very hard questions.”

“Even myself, who considers myself a Democrat, I still think it’s very important to hear what he has to say,” OSU student Victoria Anton said.

“I was happy to hear what he had to say,” OSU student Ryan Williamson said.

But hearing what Walters had to say proved easier in theory than in practice.

Walters entered the lecture hall greeted by a mix of roughly 40 percent cheers, 60 percent boos.

Soon, many who opted for the latter greeting began shouting at Walters from the audience.

“You’re a murderer!”

“Nex Benedict’s blood is on your hands!”

“You’re the one that’s scared!”

“55 percent of Oklahomans want you impeached!”

—Are just some of the many things they shouted.

At first, Walters persisted.

“They’re gonna yell, they’re gonna scream, they’re gonna say outrageous things,” Walters said of the hecklers. “There’s a few of them that are crying right now.”

Walters then turned, and addressed the shouters directly.

“I don’t care about your feelings,” he told them.

They responded with more shouts, laughs and eye rolls.

“Where are the grants!”

“Where’s your budget Mr. Walters!”

—They loudly questioned.

Walters responded back.

“There’s two genders,” he told the crowd.

The back and forth between Walters and the crowd continued over, and over, and over again.

“If you back down to a mob, they will get their way,” Walters declared at one point.

“Answer our questions!” someone shouted back.

“Let’s talk about a woke mob,” Walters later said.

“Let’s talk about facts!” several audience members shouted back.

Later, Walters repeated one of his earlier points.

“Never, never back down to a woke mob,” he told the audience.

A few minutes in, TPUSA leaders handed a microphone to students they’d chosen to ask Walters questions.

“I asked him what advice he had for someone looking to enter the field of politics,” Sadler said.

“I asked him how he responded to leftist media and activists,” Williamson said.

Of course, the shouting continued throughout all of this, and Walters chose to not use a microphone when responding to their questions.

News 4 was unable to hear Walters’ answers to their questions from the back of the lecture hall.

Then came more shouting.

The abruptness left students from both groups in the audience, yearning for more.

“I wish that I would have heard more of what he had to say because you know, that’s why I came,” Sadler said.

“It just felt like I wanted to hear more,” Anton said.