Unpopular opinion: PC policing is going WAY TOO far.

[ram2008]

I know this may be unpopular here, but three videos which are going viral on Reddit and Twitter are showing just how out of control this is getting.

The first video shows a photographer from the video trying to snap photos on a college campus where he is told he is not allowed to, and that he's violating everyone's "safe space" all while getting verbally assaulted and threatened by students saying he doesn't have a right to take their picture, at the end of the video one professor calls out that she "needs some muscle here" to get rid of the guy filming the encounter. He was completely in the right being there considering he is a journalist and a student at the University..

&app=desktop

The second video is a professor parrying a verbal assault by a student who is upset about an e-mail going out saying that students have the right to free speech with their costumes, but should avoid wearing stuff that offends others. She freaks out about how allowing these costumes somehow makes students feel unsafe at the university etc. Apparently the administrations efforts were not enough for her...:

"It is not about creating an intellectual space, it is about creating a home here!" No sorry, it's about creating an intellectual space, that's what university is about, going out of your comfort zone and growing as a person.

&feature=youtu.be

And finally, we have the voice of reason as the Professor defends his position and gives the students a lesson in free speech in this video, the students yell about how offensive speech should be banned, the professor responds: Who gets to decide its offensive? and another student cries out "When it hurts me, when it's offensive to me!." Yikes, so anything that is offensive should not be allowed under free speech?

I'm sorry but I just don't see how this type of behavior helps anyone. Shouting over opposing views, trying to silence free speech, safe spaces, attempting to ban everything deemed offensive. I recognize the need for increased consideration towards minorities as I'm one myself, but not like this-- this type of stuff only hurts the cause. The real world is not like this... these students and some faculty need a reality check.

I'd welcome everyones thoughts and a discussion about this...

[LeftyMom]

1. That's not an "unpopular opinion," it's very popular among society's dimmer bulbs.

[ram2008]

2. Your post is a shining of example of the problem.

Personal attack while not addressing the substance of the post or discussing the issue at hand.

[LeftyMom]

5. How much time do I need to waste on answering trite nonsense, exactly?

[ram2008]

6. None, leave the thread if you have nothing to contribute. n/t

[pinboy3niner]

8. Some call objecting to holocaust denial, use of N-word and sexist slurs "PC policing"

People have differing views on what is PC/PC policing and what is not.

[ram2008]

10. Right, but the title was how it's going too far

As in, policing less serious things that hurt other peoples feelings are deemed offensive. Like halloween costumes... and then actively trying to stifle free speech by using physical and verbal force to that end.

[kcr]

49. It's so easy for some to think it's going too far

For example, the letter that set off the reaction you think is going too far was about Halloween costumes. I read that letter and it was one hot mess. She's so concerned that such policies are condescending and controlling of college students, yet she compares them to the preschoolers she once taught. You don't get much more condescending than that. The whole thing was conceptual for her, and she refuses to see that it isn't for those who are targeted. Very easy for her and those who share her perspective to think things have gone too far.

[Trajan]

126. You select a subject area with some gray areas ..

And then castigate posters for walking outside the lines you yourself had drawn?


Really ... I don't have time for your nonsense now or in the future ...

So you are gone

[ram2008]

128. Retreat to your safespace!

...instead of debating a difference of opinion. Familiar.

Who have I castigated?

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

16. There are a couple astronomical units between holocaust denial and any halloween costume

No sane person struggles with these boundaries, unless they're making a spectacle of their "tolerance" for the like-minded.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

42. +100 for the use of AUs.

[Renew Deal]

7. None. If you don't care, why are you here?

[840high]

14. None - just leave.

[Logical]

30. I doubt you actually can really communicate your point on this topic. nt

[TipTok]

21. Well.. That was nicely in line with the stereotype...

Way to color inside the lines...

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

73. Good point. Ad hominem attacks are still PC

[JackInGreen]

12. So state your case instead of giving the finger

Unless you'd like that to be your input, in which case duely noted.

[Logical]

29. Wow, really, explain why the first video is a good one. nt

[romanic]

31. LMAO

you just proved the OP's point.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

3. How are these mooks going to survive in the workforce?

Thinking of some of the psychos I have worked for over the years, these kids will need to be institutionalized after just a few minutes in the same room as Rhonda, Dennis or Lorne.

[cwydro]

20. I can't imagine them out in the wide, wild world.

Little precious snowflakes who are in for a rude awakening.

[hifiguy]

70. That's always my very first thought.

How the fck are these pwecious widdle darlings going to last two weeks in a real world that is not predigested, carefully screened and is filled to the brim with shrieking assholes.

Learning to deal with things and people you don't agree with or who "offend" your pwecious self is called GROWING UP and BECOMING AN ADULT.

These kids are lagging way, way behind. By the time I was a teenager my parents taught me the world was NOT going to rearrange itself to suit me. Looks like these spoiled brats need to lear that lesson ASAP.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

45. This is Yale. Normal rules don't apply.

[cherokeeprogressive]

108. And since it IS Yale, these goofs will be seen as somehow superior. I have a problem with that. n/t

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

57. They won't and don't

They likely don't even make it through the first interview. Then wonder what their 50,000 a year education bought them.

[PatrickforO]

78. Who are Rhonda, Dennis and Lorne?

Tea Party yuckos?

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

115. I know nothing of their politics

So lets just call them walking macro-aggressions.

They're former bosses I suffered over the course of my career who seem in retrospect to be very unlikely to accommodate one's requirement for "safe spaces", gender neutral pronouns or theatrical displays of outrage.

[PatrickforO]

116. Oh. I have one of those. We'll call her 'B' just for chuckles.

But there was NOTHING funny about working for her.

[Amishman]

103. we see them at work periodically

they don't last long

several have left for lunch on their first day and did not come back. My project manager got in touch with one afterwards and they said they could not imagine working in such a pressured environment with deadlines every two weeks (Agile) and did not know how to tell someone, so they just did not come back.

a few last longer and usually log a complaint with HR about each person training them before flaming out

blows my mind, we are a lot lower pressure than most places; no punching in or out on a time clock, casual dress, free coffee and soda, free snacks...

we only hire them because we have a chronic developer shortage

[villager]

4. One wonders if "student protest" has become so solipsistic because the world itself seems insoluble?

In other words, where is the anger about how Yale's endowment is invested? The "space spaces" for the factory workers that made their iPhones? Are they forgoing fossil fuel and industrialized meat?

It just seems that such solipsism is actually self-marginalizing. The 1%, in other words, don't have to worry about any serious critique of their practices emerging from campuses where protest energies are frittered away not even on specific Halloween costumes (unless I missed something?), but on emails calling for conversations about those costumes.

[1939]

27. Maybe the question

of how the college endowment is invested is not within the purview of the students at the college (or the faculty). Both the faculty and the students should spend their productive time getting an education.

[ljm2002]

41. Wow, really???

I guess those campus sit-ins during the Vietnam war were all wrong too -- after all, military policy is certainly "not within the purview of the students at the college (or the faculty)"...

Your view is a very narrow one. Many of us felt that our education was enriched greatly by participating in issues beyond those that were taught in class.

[villager]

62. Just as long as they don't apply that education to the world at large, eh?

Including the one they currently inhabit....

[closeupready]

77. South African divestment was a huge 80's student movement

that demanded endowments be expunged of any investments in South African concerns as long as apartheid existed.

So, no, you're flat-out wrong.

[PatrickforO]

80. Boy I think of some of the costumes I wore during my younger days...

I'd REALLY be in trouble now. I'd have to sit and explain my costumes in detail to naive college students. Ick.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

117. how about two weeks ago?

I went for Halloween as a headless panhandling Times Square Elmo.

[PatrickforO]

120. I didn't dress up, though I did joke with co-workers that I'd come as

a businessman.

[alcibiades_mystery]

9. Many people claim to be free speech absolutists...very few are in practice

For Mill, even, speech that produced (consequentially, that is) physical harm could be prohibited, while everything else was fair game for argument. This is the liberal theory of "free speech" that we live under today. Of course, the question of consequential harm can be parsed out any number of ways, which is, as they say, what the fighting's all about. There is certainly a problem in the execution of the theory in many of these cases. But it is symptomatic of a problem in the liberal theory of free speech itself, which is bound to a narrow version of harm that no longer comports with the way we view harm more generally. Mill, for example, simply could not have conceived of the extension of "trauma" that we understand today - psychology as we know it did not even exist when our major notions of free speech were developed. Mill would not recognize verbal bullying - even relentless - as a speech-produced harm. The theory simply doesn't account for it.

In part, our understanding of free speech's inability to accept these sorts of harms as harms is historical: those who invented it didn't have the data, even the forms of knowledge that we have today. It can also be argued that its limitations are specific to a majority position: it explicitly excludes harms that affect minority and disempowered populations. The liberal understanding of free speech, it might be said, is precisely the theory of speech that bullies would develop. OK, maybe that's overstating, but the point should be clear: it may not be simple historical accident that the theory can't account for harms that don't tend to affect those in power (but accounts for all those that do!). We can certainly yuck it up at these wacky college kids and academics with their trigger warnings and safe spaces, and insist on a Millean marketplace of ideas. Yes, fine, it's worked this long, so...

But that's really just talking past one another. The problem is that there's a complete mismatch between an Enlightenment and 19th century theory of speech/harm (on the one hand) and a post Enlightenment theory of speech/harm on the other. To simply insist on one or the other is not particularly helpful. The liberal theory of free speech, after all, didn't fall from the heavens. It was invented, and fairly recently at that.

[HereSince1628]

33. The limitations of free-speech are specific to a majority position...yes, but why?

Speech is a cultural tool which serves individuals and groups. Language is the vehicle for transference of ideas which assist in establishing majorities of shared attitudes and maintaining them.

Our gregarious nature requires our lives to exist within social structures. Whether we are born into existing groups or organize individuals into new groups, groupness must be maintained.

But there are many groups, and they compete.

A critical basic algebra of between group attitudes is 'we good - they bad'. If you go along with 'we good', you get to be part of Us, and stay in the group, if you don't, you become one of Them.

Consequently, behaviors which manifest that we are in Us and not one of Them must be demonstrated. Speech provides the important mechanisms to do that.

There must also be within groups patterns of language use that facilitate communicating the badness of Them. This pretty much requires the generation of a bias toward bigoted speech whose use is a display that the speaker has group membership and that the speaker is loyal to the group, even capable of chauvinistic loyalty.

What does that mean here on DU?

On DU there is pretty much universal disapproval for use of stigmatizing and demeaning terms of ethnicity, gender, religion, because we define ourselves as open and tolerant to those identifiers. Defense of those groups is a feature of Us, because we see members of those groups as within Us.

But like every other human group on the planet (good or bad, us or them) WE still need language that can convey our sense of superior goodness to Them and their badness.

It doesn't take much more than a look at subject lines on GD menu to see that communicating our superiority and goodness is contrast against Their mental defects. This is widely accepted on DU, and DUers vigorously defend their 'free-speech' rights to use language that stigmatizes, demeans, and propagates social attitudes that reinforce discrimination against the mentally ill within society.

I don't think this is so much because DUers actually consciously hate the mentally ill, and want to insult other DUers who feel the sting of that language, but, DUers -really need- language that can be used to demean persons and ideas belonging to alternate political groups. Within the context of American society the mentally ill are iconic models of the 'Dysfunctional Other'.

I think you are right that what speech is socially acceptable, and thereby 'free-speech, depends on majority positions. But I would say that can be parsed into majority positions within groups. Because across the globe there are many ways to construct group membership there will be conflicts in speech; identity of membership within groups and group identity demand such language.

So, if a society is multi-cultural it will have multiple cultural groups with internal rules of language that serve one group at the expense of another. If a society divides into sub-groups supporting competing guiding ideas and proposing different competing leaders each sub-group will develop rules and patterns of language use for at least that many sub-groups and give rise to what is seen from outside the groups as between group rudeness.

Seems to me this makes conflict involving language almost a certainty. I suspect these competing group dynamics and the demands placed on language use in groupness are why GDP looks like it does.

[alcibiades_mystery]

39. Adding the group dimension and the problem of belonging is certainly relevant

The liberal theory of free speech was developed to deal with dissent and faction within (relatively) homogeneous groups. After all, who was it that could speak at all? It focused primarily on disagreement rather than the sorts of (cultural/ethnic/group dynamic/belonging) language slippage you're describing.

No doubt conflicts in speech are inevitable, and much of that attributable to group dynamics. That said, we should acknowledge the problems of the liberal version of free speech as a normative principle. That begins by not falling back on it in a reactive way every time it appears to be challenged (as happens, I'd suggest, in the OP). That, of course, doesn't mean that every challenger is right either. But neither is every challenger wrong.

Great post.

[tkmorris]

40. Interesting perspective

I think you are absolutely correct in your observations of the differences in what is permissible currently when referring to Them as opposed to Us, and those differences are similar regardless of what subgroup you are observing at any given time.

What seems quite obvious to me however is that what is needed is a change in thinking. We need to challenge our all too human need to sequester ourselves into isolated groupings, and then engage in the familiar patterns of Us versus Them behavior. The groupings themselves may or may not be unavoidable; what is not necessary is the manner in which we speak of, speak to, and otherwise perceive those who are not members of the group.

We can be Liberals, without the hyperbolized denigration of those who are Conservative. We can be American (citizens of the United States) and not hate Russians. We can be Christian, but not fear Muslims. We can be Yankees fans, while admitting that the Red Sox are a pretty good baseball team. And so on.

I most emphatically do NOT believe that we "need" language which denigrates those who are not members of our Group, however we define that group. What we need is the strength to overcome the desire to believe that membership in any given group somehow grants us the right to perceive others as lesser.

If we can learn to as a matter of course treat EVERYONE with empathy, as worthy of our respect, than the entire notion of what is PC or not will become about as relevant as a trebuchet repair manual.

[HereSince1628]

99. Groups actively police in-group language

Last edited Tue Nov 10, 2015, 08:57 PM - Edit history (1)

There are dynamics about social belonging that work against -everyone- being able to be in one all inclusive in-group. In the absence of a global threat, perhaps global atmospheric destruction, a death asteroid, perhaps alien domination, it runs against the interpersonal dynamics that sustain groups to have -everyone- identifying with a global group.

These things are quite apparent in christianity...the universal church breaks into subdivisions, the subdivisions break into orders, denominations etc, each with specific enforced rules that can be seen as the 'discipline' that identifies the group, and whose policed sharing holds the orders and denominations together as groups... until new subgroups emerge that refuse the discipline...

The same phenomenon happened on DU in GDP. As different emphases and different candidates emerged, and because there is an open competition involved, competing groups that view others as ruled by 'incorrect' emphasis, and proposing the 'wrong' leadership -must- find expressions of acceptable language that reinforces within-group goodness as something better than that of out-groups who are promoting the 'wrong options'. Acceptable words to suggest options are wrong range from erudite to down-right vulgar and insulting.

If a group forms that says it's tolerant, refuses to stereotype, or demean out-groups...those rules would be policed. The group would identify it's own existence with those things.

On edit I had to run to make dinner so I hit post, but I have edited this closing...


But, I think the dynamic is ultimately going to be the same, even if the words -seem- gentler. --There is going to be a -need- to say the in-group is better and more right than the out-group. Obviously the out-group is going to feel that being told they are wrong demeans them, insults them, and must be defended against...

[kwassa]

102. Not just GDP.

This is true throughout DU, based on varied slices of exactly what it is to be a true progressive. How many times have I heard here "I can't believe that someone with views like this can call themselves a progressive"? Those progressive slices can be quite different than each other, based on the agenda of the subgroup in DU, and their issues of ultimate importance. What also goes along with membership of this subgroup is frustration that the rest of DU doesn't understand the truth of their slice as being the correct slice. Some subgroups perceive DU as slanted against them, because the rest of DU doesn't share the precise priority that they do.

These differences are expressed in language, and many of those battles that occur here are over exact language.

( I love this whole subthread, by the way. Keep going!)

[HereSince1628]

105. No it's not just GDP...

Not too long ago the Feminist topic group underwent between subgroup struggles that had this dynamic, resulted in people getting defensive and iirc ended up splitting the group three-ways.

I really don't have too much more to say on this. If someone with a developed understanding of sociology would jump in, I'm sure the things I've said could be corrected and the topic better explored.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

11. America is becoming a nation of infantilized adults.

Robust debate is one thing, but basic ignorance of 1st amendment rights at the level of institutions of higher learning is frankly insane.

Yes, I understand that they are there to learn, but it's Yale. One would believe that the youth that go to ivy league schools would have a basic level of understanding that is at least above average, but then again I must be reminded that Bush II went to Yale.


Sometimes I wish for the grit of the previous generations without all the baggage attached.

[Duppers]

22. +10

[Bonobo]

25. +100. nt

[hifiguy]

71. + a brazilian. nt

[meow2u3]

110. The PTB treat Americans like children

and they wonder why they act like little kids.

Earth to the folks in authority: get a clue. If you want us to act like adults, treat us like adults. Quit spoon-feeding us pablum and dole out the truth in large doses. We can handle the truth, even if it's unpleasant.

[TwilightGardener]

114. +1000

[bluestateguy]

127. +10000

nt

[6000eliot]

13. The professor should have asked the logical follow up question,

"How do you expect to learn anything new if you are never challenged intellectually?"

[Skittles]

15. that would go WAY over their heads

oh yes

[dogknob]

17. "It is not about creating an intellectual space, it is about creating a home here!"

Sez a lot, don't it?

[Ex Lurker]

19. Well, "Shrieking Girl" has been identified down to the value of her family home

and occupations of her parents, and has been busy trying to scrub the internet of her social media and other presences. So I guess she's learning what not having a "Safe Space" is really like. Not that I approve of what's happening to her, but it was very predictable.

[redgreenandblue]

123. I feel sorry for her.

She is just a confused kid. She doesn't deserve the rage of the internet.

[fishwax]

18. That's hardly an "unpopular opinion." Also, I don't think we can really know enough to judge, based

on the videos alone.

In the first video, the photographer certainly has the right to take pictures. The protester who says he is not allowed to take their picture is not correct, since generally speaking people in public don't have a right to not have their picture taken. But I don't know whether the photographer is right in his claim to that particular space. I have a right to take pictures of public spaces, but I don't have the right to go up to anyone i want to, just because they are in a public space, and stand chest to chest, block their path, etc.

"It is not about creating an intellectual space, it is about creating a home here!" No sorry, it's about creating an intellectual space, that's what university is about, going out of your comfort zone and growing as a person.

The space in question is a residence, so it actually is, at least in part, about creating a home. That's where they live. And the man in question is not acting in his role as professor, but in his role as Master of that residential college.

The administration of the university sent out an email suggesting students be sensitive in their halloween costumes. The associate master of Silliman (and the partner of the man in the video) sent out an email in response questioning whether it's the role of administrators to encourage/control sensitivity. Some of the students in Silliman found the decision to send that email frustrating, and voiced their frustrations. They, too, were exercising their freedom of speech. Yay, freedom of speech!

The students are protesting because they are offended by an exercise of free speech. The many critics of the students, too, are reacting in offense to an exercise of free speech. People get offended by free speech all the time. They react by saying "a master of our residential college shouldn't be using speech for that purpose" or "students on campus shouldn't be using speech for that purpose."

On edit: I think this WaPo column provides some interesting and useful texture to the situation: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/11/09/a-clash-between-administrators-and-students-at-yale-went-viral-why-that-is-unfortunate-for-all-concerned/

[snagglepuss]

46. Thanks for posting WP link. Well worth the read. The observation

that some knowledge is local is important.

[tishaLA]

23. Oh those damned kids! Everything would be great if they weren't so coddled!

and other bullshit like that.

I have the pleasure of teaching lots of fine college students who, in their intellectual development, take a lot of extreme (and sometimes ridiculous) positions. And that's part of growth: testing boundaries and expanding them, coming up against walls and sometimes crashing them down. I have no problem with any of that. This past year, one of my brightest students decided he wanted to read several books by a someone I think is beneath him and my initial response was, "Really? You want to read HER? She's so reductive and you always know the answer is going to be the same." But then I corrected myself and said, "You know what? I'm wrong. You have to believe in things before you can unbelieve them, so go ahead and enjoy her, but realize that you have a whole journey to complete after her. And if you want voices critical of her theories, come back to me and I'll be more than happy to help you."

As I said, that's all part of intellectual growth.

The more reprehensible people in that first video IMO are the adults who are supporting the kids who seem excited about escalating the situation even though they have to know better--the people who live vicariously through the passions of the students. The woman at the end, especially, who wants "some muscle over here" to deal with the reporter is especially noxious. Thankfully the first video is entirely dissimilar to the others.

But overall I think the haggling over what is and isn't appropriate, what should and shouldn't be said, is fine. It allows both sides to grow, even in their frustration.

[Bonobo]

24. South Park nailed it with "PC Principal".

This is why many people think the Left is loony.

[beevul]

87. Yup.

[earthside]

101. Ironic.

Since we have 'safe spaces' here on DU where reality is not allowed to intrude.

[Boudica the Lyoness]

104. That is so true.

Reality and facts are not allowed in some of those 'safe spaces'.

[hifiguy]

107. There are places on DU that are policed with a thoroughness

and intensity that would make a Stasi agent's eyes water in admiration.

[earthside]

112. I've been here a long time ...

... and I believe that the creation of these 'safe space' forums has indeed contributed to the churlish and petulant posts we see too often now in the general discussion areas.

Besides, it is just plain undemocratic and contrary to the whole notion of open discourse and debate to promote exclusion zones.

It is fascinating how the encouragement of tolerance can so easily be turned into complete intolerance for views that are provocative and/or avant garde.

As the videos in the OP demonstrate, there is a real danger in demanding 'safe spaces' -- whether the term is 'political correctness' or some other more acceptable word, it is antithetical to freedom and genuine diversity.

[romanic]

26. There's a difference

between whining about PC ( aka the Starbucks cups and the imaginary war on Christmas) and expressing concern about outrage culture. Obviously the points you made OP fall in the latter category. The students in those videos are completely indoctrinated and infantile to the world around them They're like right-wingers; hard headed and full of emotion just waiting to blow up at the first slight they experience. Scary that this zealous think in regards to social justice is taking over our college campuses.

Who should we blame for this? Society? Helicopter parents? College professors? Frankly i think its a combo of all three. This generation of student activists are fucked because they refuse to debate other viewpoints and learn from it.

[The2ndWheel]

32. How about the internet?

It's great and all, but there's a downside to everything. It's increased the seemingly never ending trend toward abstraction in human life. It's nothing but our minds on a screen. How easy is it to filter out anything you don't like? Now you have the kids that have grown up on nothing but the internet going to college.

[romanic]

59. Good point.

[Quantess]

122. That's a really good point. (no text)

[Depaysement]

28. I dunno

I agree that this seems to be an abrogation of free speech, but . . .

If you are going to Yale the school probably is your home because you probably live on campus. Certainly students spend most of their time there.

In a world with 24 hr news and 24 hr marketing, surveillance cameras, NSA snooping, phone photos and Instagram, is it a wonder that some kids would rather not have their photos taken and want a safe space? In the land of Fox and Twitter, it really surprising that kids are offended by some pretty vile speech? Would that Professor put up with a crowd yelling Greek slurs at him, all day every day?

I hear what you're saying and I mostly agree but it might be a bit more complicated than we think.

[Truprogressive85]

34. Unpopular opinion

Students created a media free zone,but its not more important than the issue the students are protesting
The media only cares about issues when it benefits them or when it's too late


1. Don't feel a bit sorry for the professor because students are fed up ! racism doesn't belong on campus nor should black students or any student feel like they do not belong

2. Media can take pictures and interview students from a distance

[Lee-Lee]

38. "Students created a media free zone"- yeah, you can't just declare things to be

Public campus, public space. No group of students can just up and declare that suddenly some people are barred from it or that Constitutional rights are limited in public spaces on it just because they say so.

Students can't declare it a media free zone any more than a hate group could show up and declare it a "negro free zone" or "Muslim free zone".

The idea that these students were justified in the use of bully tactics against a member of the media just because they "created" a mythical "media free zone" is absurd. Those students had no more right or authority to restrict that reporters rights than anyone else did to restrict their First Amendment rights- and I find the fact that they had no problem declaring First Amendent rights restricted in a public space just by declaration and then using bullying tactics to enforce that bogus restraint of Constitutional rights very troubling. And I find that some here are perfectly fine with the use of mob bully tactics to enforce restrictions on the exercise of Constitutional rights just because the mob said so very troubling also.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

48. Remember Bush's "free speech zones"?

Think about that. Taking cues from the right.

[tnvoter]

35. racism is alive

No, I do not agree. Your definition of "policing gone too far" is one shared by racists - the sort that think the civil disobedience of the 60s demanding civil rights was "going too far."

You asked for an opinion: here's mine: Asking people to refrain from wearing racist costumes that mock the "otherness" or inferiority of a minority that has been oppressed and persecuted is not "policing."

[bullwinkle428]

36. How about acknowledging it's a two-way street? (Starbucks Christmas cup controversy)

[cwydro]

37. I couldn't even watch the entire first video.

They complain about the photographer being in their space, yet think nothing of putting their hands on him again and again.

[cherokeeprogressive]

109. All the while recording his harassment with their cell phones.

It's a crazy, mixed-up world we live in... and their degrees (which in most cases aren't worth the parchment they're printed on) will mark them in some peoples' eyes as people who would be qualified to lead the world into its future.

[mindwalker_i]

43. There's a saying that an armed society is a polite society

While that's true, an armed society is a dead society, and not just literally. A democracy should be full of people who express their opinions, argue about them, and evolve from the conflict. In an armed society, people will be too afraid to express opinions because it could get them killed, so this leads to a dead, unevolving society.

Similarly, having too many social controls on what people can say or do because someone else doesn't feel "safe," leads to the same result. We end up not being able to express ideas and emotions, but with just bland statements that don't have any effect. That limits our ability to solve problems.

[gollygee]

44. I don't see this as political correctness

I don't really like the term even, but as I understand it, it's about making the world a kinder place for others - those who are dealing with oppression.

What I see on college campuses too much is people trying to create a comfortable bubble for themselves to live in. It seems to be more about people working for their own comfort than to be kind to other people. I've said it about other issues and I'll say it here as well: Discomfort is not a problem. Discomfort leads to growth.

For instance, I don't mind trigger alerts but they don't mean that people assigned to read a book in class should be able to avoid the book if it triggers them. The trigger alert can help them emotionally prepare for whatever issue is in the book that they might find triggering, and then they can still read the book and do their assignment. There's a kindness in a teacher warning victims of sexual assault that there is sexual assault in a book and they might want to be prepared for that. But it is self-insulating to refuse to do an assignment if a book you're assigned to read talks about something you find triggering.

[geek tragedy]

56. yeah, this is privileged kids taking a sensible idea way too far.

Saying there's a need to be racially inclusive and cognizant of psychological traumas is common sense.

Wanting to be constantly surrounded by a "safe space" forcefield is infantile.

[beevul]

86. Well said.

Wanting to be constantly surrounded by a "safe space" forcefield is infantile.

Well said.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

47. The girl screaming "HOW DO YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT!!!????" seems like performance art to me

I read the email, and I still cannot figure out what the issue is, or what would cause someone to act so violently, when they are apparently concerned about "triggering". What she did should trigger anyone.

[deutsey]

81. I'm baffled to the response to the email as well

I can understand someone disagreeing with it (even though I didn't see anything wrong with what was in the email); the screaming and demands for an apology are way over the top, imo.

[closeupready]

83. Or just a garden-variety drama queen.

[geek tragedy]

50. "free speech for me but not for thee" is actually a pretty popular opinion nt

[Nolimit]

51. This is how you ruin a perfectly valid and necessary movement

Kudos to the student reporter for standing his ground. Seeing that and reading his Twitter leads me to believe that he has a bright future ahead of him. The sign "No Media Safe Space" is a hoot. Journalists are kidnapped, beaten, harassed, and killed all over the world, no &*#@ there is no media safe space in this world. The professor at the end, Melissa Click, had even asked for the media to come:


?quality=65&strip=all&strip=all

I foresee some fallout from this one on her and that other school employee, the woman with sunglasses who kept grabbing at and walking into the reporter.

As far as the Yale temper tantrum girl, Jerelyn Luther, it's funny how she shrieked, "Who the fuck hired you?" to Nicholas Christakis because she was on the search team that hired him to be Master of the college. He absolutely smoked them with his lecture on the 1st amendment. You think they would know what free speech is. Has Yale lowered its academic standards for admission?

[geek tragedy]

53. Ivy league schools compete annually for the " most unbelievably stupid statements by overprivileged

undergraduates" trophy.

One doesn't hear about "safe spaces" in working class neighborhoods of any ethnicity, race, etc.

[romanic]

60. The Yale student

got a harsh slap of reality in being identified (like so many who act out in viral videos ) and taken to task for her behavior. The internet isnt and never will be "a safe space".

[NaturalHigh]

52. It's an unpopular opinion here, but it's absolutely correct.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

54. i could wear a KKK costume and walk through NYC, and the cops should probably do nothing about it

but what i can't do is pretend that private institutions and individuals do not have a right to respond to my costume.

if a bar blocks me from coming in, that is their right. these institutions have a responsibility to protect minority students, and have every right to do so. people shouting have every right to do so, because that is their free speech.

what eventually every bigot wants, is to do whatever the fuck they want to say and do, and have no criticism of it. that is not free speech at all. that's just cowardice and bullying behavior.

[riderinthestorm]

55. I'm outta time for DU today but want to bookmark for later

K&R and thanks for a valid discussion.

[B Calm]

58. Republicans, Again, Endorse Political Correctness When It is Convenient

http://gawker.com/5445370/republicans-again-endorse-political-correctness-when-it-is-convenient

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

92. Republicans think they're being funny

Since O got elected, they are determined to criticize him at any turn so when they are called on it they can scream "THIS IS WHAT YOU DID TO BUSH!!!!". The same goes now for their flap with Starbucks. Some think their being funny, and others amongst them are true believers.

[MisterP]

61. safe space + Farrakhan = ???!!!!!

[redgreenandblue]

63. Just watched the first video. Good grief, what a bunch of losers.

Granted, I don't know exactly what started the confrontation, but from what the video shows the guy with the camera was clearly being harassed by a mob.

If the point of their gathering was to make themselves look like a bunch of assholes to the world, they clearly have succeeded.

[SolutionisSolidarity]

64. As is known at DU, there is no thing as a SJW.

No matter how poorly argued, insulting, violent, or just plain stupid an activist is, we must line up behind them 100% to root out the scourge of Bigotry. Surely allowing the most obnoxious of us to define our public image is the clear path to cultural victory.

[ram2008]

66. Right? Unfortunately this type of behavior is what can get Trump elected.

If we continue to bend over backwards for people who act like this for fear of being labelled racist, sexist, etc, and If there's no one on the left willing to tell these individuals to tone it down and change their tactics, then there will be a backlash among the general public. We're already seeing it.

Keep it up and we'll have President Trump or worse President Carson.

[Romulox]

65. Staggering ignorance from college students and instructors. Embarrassing and scary. nt

[Romulox]

67. That's a professor shrieking "I need some muscle over here!"????

[Dr. Strange]

74. Professor of Communications.

I guess, technically, she was communicating.

[Romulox]

79. My god the irony! nt

[closeupready]

84. Wow. There's a 1984, George Orwell joke here, ripe for the taking.

[cwydro]

113. I saw she made the news tonight.

And may be in danger of losing her jog.

Looks to me like she wanted to be popular with the kids there.

Amazing that this is taking place in our universities.

Used to be a place you could count on free speech...um, not so much anymore.

[hunter]

68. The most inappropriately "politically correct" movement you know is nothing...

... in comparison to the demons who are consuming you.

[ram2008]

69. I'm not sure what you mean? nt

[hunter]

88. "Politically correct" has never been a part of my personal language.

I've never felt any compulsion to measure my own words by any "politically correct" standard.

Whenever I've fucked up, and I do often, I might re-examine my own position and apologize.

Or not.

As an adult absurdly-strong-tall-blue-eyed-blond-haired-white-guy with a very hard-core-university-science education, I acknowledge my privilege.

My wife, almost in every way my opposite, size height, skin color, everything, she's had to work ten times as hard as I ever did for the same privileges, and she has. You can call her Medical Doctor. You can call her Big University Professor.

My own little sister is a similar sort. Fierce woman. So's my mom.

I'm the child of a matriarchal society. Any of my great grandmas, and back beyond, could've killed your own bad male ancestors. Maybe the survivors had good sense to run away, or maybe they just got lucky. Thrown off the family train. in a not so bad spot.

I succumbed and signed onto Facebook. Many of my family are still living in comfortable cluelessness. Acceptable to the oligarchy.

Sad.

Life is not fair. Libertarians in this U.S.A., especially the white privileged sort, are most frequently the "useful" idiots.

[PatrickforO]

82. These demons...

are they...

politically CORRECT ones?

[hunter]

89. Not in my political universe.

That's always lacked any kind of traction control.

Whatever you do, don't touch it.

I've touched it.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

72. Yep.

[theboss]

75. Some of this bullshit has been happening on campuses for 30 years....

The real danger I see in 2015 is that a half-formed idea can destroy a person's life in a matter of hours.

I'm bad at determining "offensive versus non-offensive" and anyone in that position could find themselves in a viral video that circles the glob in a matter of moments.

[closeupready]

76. I just see a lot of needy people shouting at each other, demanding respect,

demanding silence and safe space/home.

At the UW-Madison years ago, there was a woman who called herself Sister Pat. I don't think she was affiliated with any religious organization, but was just some crazy bigot who'd get on a soapbox in front of the library near the student union, and scream about gays going to hell, abortion being murder, etc.

The UW-Madison has a reputation for being one of the most left-wing colleges in the country, but despite that, students would listen to her, and then counter. It was actually amusing, and not threatening to me at all, even though I'm gay - I'd most of the time just walk on by to class or work or whatever. Sort of like that preacher's corner in Trafalgar Square (IIRC). Sometimes, I think perhaps she was merely a clown, hired by People for the American Way or something like that.

But that was a very different era when college was cheaper, and people were more relaxed.

In the first video, the reporter was doing nothing wrong, IMO, and the students and especially professors should be deeply ashamed.

[Jimbo S]

111. Sister Pat, tell me how to find a good wife

Good entertainment

[closeupready]

119. Ah! A fellow Badger!

Hello Do you happen to know what happened to her? I'd HATE to think she disappeared, lol. She was such a good foil! LOL

[jwirr]

85. One of the PC issues that I think illustrates acceptable PC

very clearly is regarding person who are developmentally disabled. This is one of the PC that started this movement and it is still necessary. Back in the 60s and 70s when special education was moved out of the church basements into the public schools it was horrible the way they were treated by the other students. Name calling was very cruel and blatant. Words like "retard" became the curse words of the day. Until PC called this kind of action out. So there you see one of the first uses of PC.

The reason I see this one as being justified is because the name calling was cowardly aimed at defenseless people who could not protect themselves from the hate.

I think that would not be a bad way of determining what is offensive and what is not. Is it aimed at a less powerful group by a powerful group where the first group has no way of defending themselves.

[loyalsister]

95. I talked with a man with an intellectual disability about bullying

He remembers his brother using the word repeatedly as he punched him repeatedly. He can't help but remember the threat and pain he felt when he hears it.

I see this as similar to the N-word and the context in which it was historically used. It isn't used in our modern lexicon nearly as often, but youth still know it and they know when to use it for maximum effect.

[jwirr]

98. I totally agree. The pain that this caused was not only to the

person with the illness but to the parents and everyone who loved them.

And I also think that it is very like the N word and many other names we have used against people in the past.

As someone who worked for civil rights one of the worst aspects of the hate today is the return of these hate words.

[Cassiopeia]

90. Joseph Goebbels would be proud.

When did stupidity become something to take pride in?

[mike_c]

91. speaking as a university professor, I have to agree with you....

Of course, it's inappropriate to broad brush a large group of diverse people, but it's also apparent that the students I work with today are, by and large, the most intellectually coddled group of students I've ever known. Naturally, university administrations are interested in giving them what they want so that they have a "positive university experience" and stick around, pay tuition, and graduate rather than challenging their preconceptions and pushing them out of their comfort zones. They enforce this mainly through the student course evaluation process, denying tenure or renewed contracts to faculty who students complain about, who are often the faculty who challenge and push students the most.

Learning is often an uncomfortable process. It forces us to confront failure, or at least the risk of failure, which is often far more uncomfortable than actual failure. It doesn't let us hide behind entrenched ideas, values, or ethics without examining them in a critical light. Increasingly, university administrators are demanding that students be "protected" from being challenged and discomfited.

[Ex Lurker]

93. It's a shame DU's posting format puts your comment at the bottom of the page

where few will read it.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

94. It's seems like Universities now treat students as "customers"

And because the customer is always right, you never do anything to piss them off. It is not serving America well.

[WinkyDink]

100. Because the students (and parents) started demanding a commercial transaction ($$$ = Good Grades).

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

118. Earlier this year an english professor showed me her course evaluations

These were YouTube comments level bullshit.

How do you teach English when apparently everything ever written in English is too offensive to public airing?

[backscatter712]

96. I'm with the OP.

People need to toughen up and stop acting like babies.

[Vinca]

97. Nothing to discuss. I agree with you completely.

All I can figure is these young students grew up during a time when every kid was told how wonderful they were even when they weren't, when every kid got a trophy even though they sucked at the game, when parents kept them hermetically sealed in a box so their tender ears wouldn't be assaulted. They're now finding the real world is a whole lot different.

[Marr]

106. That's what passes for thought at *Yale*?

They all seem like sheltered dimwits.

Jesus. I think I just lost all respect for Ivey League schools.

[Recursion]

121. The Mizzou students didn't want their pics taken because they're getting death threats

and being doxed by Breitbart types. The prof probably needs to go ("we need some muscle here"? Really?) but it's not like this is coming out of a vacuum.

[redgreenandblue]

124. Yeah. The thing is, at its root, protesting is always about communication.

Like most people who saw the video, I have/had no idea on the back story of this. I had no idea what they were protesting about or whether I agree with them on the issues or not. The only thing I saw is a reporter who managed to stay admirably calm during a confrontation with a very hostile crowd, who was doing its best to provoke a physical confrontation. And that is the message that will be received by 99% of viewers.

At best, this is an utter marketing fail. Quite possibly some laws were broken as well. I am not a lawyer but I would guess that what they did to the reporter may constitute assault.

[bluestateguy]

125. You're damn right

There is no constitutional right to not be offended.