Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
Or not 
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-the-term-jedi-is-problematic-for-describing-programs-that-promote-justice-equity-diversity-and-inclusion/
The only point I agree with is the bit about bloodlines. However, the midi-chlorian idea came out of the prequels which I reject. The rest of the article is rubbish.
The issue I have is that instead of saying the term JEDI may be problematic, the article asserts that the term is problematic.
This is an absolute statement. Only the Sith deal in absolutes.
The only point I agree with is the bit about bloodlines. However, the midi-chlorian idea came out of the prequels which I reject. The rest of the article is rubbish.
The issue I have is that instead of saying the term JEDI may be problematic, the article asserts that the term is problematic.
This is an absolute statement. Only the Sith deal in absolutes.