Mississippi State University students list of demands

[Jaskalas]

Sorry, I'm not seeing the connection between having an area only for like-minded people and the reference to America's history with regard to racial segregation.

Read the OP before commenting next time.
The explicit demand from students is to segregate.

 

[elitejp]

Oddly enough it would actually be what the black students at this campus want.

 

[realibrad]

I already acknowledged that point if you cared to read the thread before jumping in.

Then dummy, what did you mean by this?

You'll have to make an argument as to how creating a space space for a group of people is "prejudicial" or "stereotyping". Unless the proponents of the safe space were advocating it "because you can't trust so-and-so", I don't see what you can make an argument with on this point.

If they started arguing for (for example) everyone-but-whites car parks, guarded by non-white security guards, then I would agree with you. However, they're not arguing for anything like that.

They are making a prejudicial judgement that if they let white people in, they will not be safe. Did you not think about that at all?

 

[mikeymikec]

Then dummy, what did you mean by this?

They are making a prejudicial judgement that if they let white people in, they will not be safe. Did you not think about that at all?

Where did they say that? The term "safe space" does not generally mean that. Here's what came up when I googled for it:

Safe space is a term for an area or forum where either a marginalised group are not supposed to face standard mainstream stereotypes and marginalisation, or in which a shared political or social viewpoint is required to participate in the space.

Read the OP before commenting next time.
The explicit demand from students is to segregate.

Do you think white people not being allowed in one place while having complete access and privileges everywhere else is just like racial segregation that has happened in America's past? Do you think whites will risk life or limb by peacefully protesting the existence of such a facility? Do you think that this is a "slippery slope" scenario where whites will have to have their own drinking fountains or serve at the non-white's table? Seriously, I'm trying to see what connection you're making here.

 

[Blue_Max]

Should we provide "safe places" in the back of buses as well?

There's a reason these SJW chuckleheads are being called "regressives". 🙄

Safe space is a term for an area or forum where either a marginalised group are not supposed to face standard mainstream stereotypes and marginalisation, or in which a shared political or social viewpoint is required to participate in the space.

...except if they're NOT marginalized, one has to be aggressively dishonest to manufacture said marginalization.

 

[PokerGuy]

Woosh! There goes the point, far over your head. Read about why they want the safe space. If a bunch of people who want the same thing aren't like-minded on that point, what the heck would you describe them as?

You are saying they are "like minded", but they are creating these "safe spaces" and limiting them to people based on race. If these "safe spaces" are for "like minded people", then the implicit assumption has to be that everyone of a certain race is "like minded", which of course is a load of crap.

You'll have to make an argument as to how creating a space space for a group of people is "prejudicial" or "stereotyping". Unless the proponents of the safe space were advocating it "because you can't trust so-and-so", I don't see what you can make an argument with on this point.

They are using race to define "safe spaces". That means you are specifically including/excluding people based on race, which means you are making judgements about people based on their race and stereotyping. There's absolutely no getting around that fact. If they make a "safe space" based on a certain political belief or other characteristic, then you could argue that they want a space for like minded people. By excluding/including people specifically based on race, there is absolutely no way around the racism/prejudice/stereotyping.

Congratulations for missing my point entirely. Nothing like a bit of reducio ad absurdum to make you think you're in the right.

There's no reductio ad absurdum here. It's simple racism, plain for all to see except those who are OK with racism as long as it's in the name of something they agree with or perpetrated by a group they consider victims.

 

[realibrad]

Where did they say that? The term "safe space" does not generally mean that. Here's what came up when I googled for it:

Area intended for Black students but open to all other minority students on campus.

Unless whites are a minority, they would be excluded.

Also...

Safe space for Black students on campus that are away from the daily stresses of navigating white spaces and the work/responsibilities associated with the HCDC office. This space can either be an expansion of the HCDC office or an

I would assume that white spaces are white spaces because there are whites there. If those whites were in a different space, that space would become white too. So they would have to be excluded from the safe space, and would be excluded based on the color of their skin.

Still being dumb here.

Do you think white people not being allowed in one place while having complete access and privileges everywhere else is just like racial segregation that has happened in America's past?

Do you not know about separate but equal? That is literally what happened in our past dummy. You had white water fountains and colored water fountains.

Do you think whites will risk life or limb by peacefully protesting the existence of such a facility? Do you think that this is a "slippery slope" scenario where whites will have to have their own drinking fountains or serve at the non-white's table? Seriously, I'm trying to see what connection you're making here.

Uh, they want spaces where whites are excluded from based on being white. How is it not that?

 

[VtPC83]

I was going to respond Mikey but these folks have answered for me.

This is racism, no way to cut around it. If you separate a race from another based on race that is racism. There are literally no excuses you can come up with that would get around this basic fact.

If you had whites demanding a space that blacks could not be because they want a 'safe space' from blackness, that would be condemned as racism, why isn't this? Its the same thing, just replacing colors.

 

[PokerGuy]

Do you think white people not being allowed in one place while having complete access and privileges everywhere else is just like racial segregation that has happened in America's past?

Whether it's the same as the past is not relevant. The bottom line is that restricting access to a place based solely on race is racist/bigoted/prejudicial/stereotyping. Such behavior is only tolerated because the PC crowd can't see the obvious hypocrisy in advocating tolerance while practicing racist exclusion.

 

[Jaskalas]

Do you think white people not being allowed...

Is racial segregation? Yes.
As widespread in the past? No - but every racist movement has gotta start somewhere. The point is to confront it before it expands or gains social acceptance. To ask if we've gotten to the point of going back and undoing 50 years of working against racism.

To ask these students if they really think so little of Martin Luther King Jr?

 

[glenn1]

Protip for future protesters, if you're going to issue a list of demands then you should take care to make them quantifiable, unambiguous, and testable/subject to verification. Remove all subjective and undefined terms like "Equal and fair treatment of our events, concerts, and programs." You're in college for crying out loud, if nothing else you can pretend that you can accomplish reasonably professional looking writing output; use Google if you must. Remember to use your mnemonics like SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound) or INVEST (Independent, Negotiable, Value Creating, Estimable, Small, Testable) if you prefer using an Agile/Adaptive methodology model to iteratively design the solution.

 

[Spungo]

You're in college for crying out loud, if nothing else you can pretend that you can accomplish reasonably professional looking writing output

You might have been sleeping for the last 50 years, but college is the new elementary school. Public schools are not allowed to expel retards or criminals, so kids can't learn anything until after they've finished high school. Once they are in university, they can start learning things like the alphabet, adding and subtracting, sentence structure, and American geography.

 

[Blue_Max]

I highly suspect that ridiculous "protests" like the ones we're seeing these days is due to the 'profs' (not to be confused with actual Professors) demanding it of their students.

"Lead a political movement - get an A!" The right ones will even be rewarded with media exposure, Hero status, and cash & prizes! (See Emma Sok..socu..er.. Mattress Girl.)

These types of classes deserve to be exposed for the fraudulent brainwashing tools they are. It goes against free speech to ban a class that teaches utter falsehood and fuels rage, but they're causing so much civil unrest...

At least it's optional in our colleges... these same graduates then move to our elementary schools to program kids their agendas earlier and earlier... hence the gender-confusion, etc, we're now getting out of it.

 

[ElFenix]

• Other schools provide these spaces for their students: o E.g.: Malcom X Lounge UT Austin

huh. apparently i walked right by that 100s of times while at UT. never saw it. though, i was usually just trying to get out of jester center as fast as possible.*












*except chicken fried chicken day. that day was awesome.

 

[realibrad]

huh. apparently i walked right by that 100s of times while at UT. never saw it. though, i was usually just trying to get out of jester center as fast as possible.*












*except chicken fried chicken day. that day was awesome.

And that is the real take away from this. Fried chicken is indeed fucking awesome.

I really do need to pull the trigger on chicken and waffles. it seems like a horrible/awesome idea.

 

[Spungo]

I highly suspect that ridiculous "protests" like the ones we're seeing these days is due to the 'profs' (not to be confused with actual Professors) demanding it of their students.

Exactly. I can't imagine a class of engineering students caring about stupid shit like trigger warnings. Maybe engineers are just cynical, but we would think of weird home defense schemes and how to kill people with electricity. In one of the classes about electrical safety, the teacher had lots of images of people fried on power lines. We would go through it and examine what went wrong, why that person got fried, and what could be done to prevent that. We're looking at pictures of dead people. No trigger warnings, no hurt feelings. It was a fun class.

 

[mikeymikec]

You are saying they are "like minded", but they are creating these "safe spaces" and limiting them to people based on race. If these "safe spaces" are for "like minded people", then the implicit assumption has to be that everyone of a certain race is "like minded", which of course is a load of crap.

Wrong: If someone is not of the same opinion as the others wanting this safe space (yet of a skin colour or some other requirement that entitles them access to the safe space), they're under no obligation to use it.

They are using race to define "safe spaces". That means you are specifically including/excluding people based on race, which means you are making judgements about people based on their race and stereotyping.

No, they're not. What judgement is going on here? Furthermore, where's the "stereotyping"?

If you had whites demanding a space that blacks could not be because they want a 'safe space' from blackness, that would be condemned as racism, why isn't this? Its the same thing, just replacing colors.

If some white people want to put forward an argument for giving them safe space from whatever then by all means let them do so, however if they're going to try and argue that they need safe space from non-whites based on some argument with substance as opposed to some knee-jerk "they've got safe space, I want one too" reaction.

Lots of things go on in society that have requirements that (on the face of them) perhaps shouldn't be required. For example, I was listening to BBC Radio 4 on the way home, talking about a survey of British Muslims that has made the news recently. It was said that Muslim researchers were sent out to knock on doors of British Muslims and survey them. Shock horror! That sounds like discrimination to me! Should that honestly be allowed? Couldn't a non-Muslim person do a job like this perfectly well? Yes, very likely. However, if you have a minority that you wish to survey, would you consider it wise to send out someone like me (white, male, shaven head) to survey them? Do you think that someone who is part of a minority is going to respond as well to someone who fits stereotypical criteria of someone who might shove poo through their letterbox or throw a brick through their window?

On the other hand, if you were surveying white people, such considerations are not so important because chances are that they haven't experienced unwarranted prejudicial hostility/marginalisation.

 

[PokerGuy]

Wrong: If someone is not of the same opinion as the others wanting this safe space (yet of a skin colour or some other requirement that entitles them access to the safe space), they're under no obligation to use it.

You keep going back to opinions or other characteristics, but the simple fact is they are excluding people based on race, not some other characteristic. Race. So, unless you want to stereotype and say that everyone of a race has the same opinions and beliefs, the whole "like minded" thing goes out the window. You can't determine "like minded" based on someone's race.

No, they're not. What judgement is going on here? Furthermore, where's the "stereotyping"?

What do you mean no, they're not? They EXPLICITLY state that they want it to be a place where there are no whites. That's exclusion based on race. You simply can't dance around that fact.

 

[mikeymikec]

You keep going back to opinions or other characteristics, but the simple fact is they are excluding people based on race, not some other characteristic. Race. So, unless you want to stereotype and say that everyone of a race has the same opinions and beliefs, the whole "like minded" thing goes out the window. You can't determine "like minded" based on someone's race.

I determined "like-minded" several times already. Do you need a Venn diagram drawn, or do you just want to keep bleating "racism!"?

What do you mean no, they're not? They EXPLICITLY state that they want it to be a place where there are no whites. That's exclusion based on race. You simply can't dance around that fact.

Ok, let me make this simple. You keep using words like "stereotype" and "judgement". These words have respective meanings. Either justify your use of each of those respective words or stop using them.

I also find it hilarious that you're accusing me of "dancing around a fact" that I explicitly acknowledged in my first post on this thread.

 

[Zaap]

Maybe in an old closet somewhere on campus they still have the old Whites Only signs stashed. (They'll have to make new ones for Blacks Only or Minorities Only since the old ones probably said Colored).



...annnnnnnd things can just go full circle.

Simply amazing some of the breathtaking stupidity manufactured outrage produces.

But then again, those that don't actually know history...

 

[VtPC83]

If some white people want to put forward an argument for giving them safe space from whatever then by all means let them do so, however if they're going to try and argue that they need safe space from non-whites based on some argument with substance as opposed to some knee-jerk "they've got safe space, I want one too" reaction.

This is perhaps the biggest load of crap I have EVER heard. Whites would NEVER be allowed to do this, even if they had legitimate reasons for creating a safe space. They would be torn apart, completely torn apart.

If you don't get or see this then you have your head in the sand, just like most people who espouse what you do.

 

[BoberFett]

mikeymikec

Do you wear skinny jeans?

 

[mikeymikec]

This is perhaps the biggest load of crap I have EVER heard. Whites would NEVER be allowed to do this, even if they had legitimate reasons for creating a safe space. They would be torn apart, completely torn apart.

I think you misunderstand me. I said what my reaction would be. I don't doubt that a lot of people would prejudicially judge a group of white people saying they need safe space from non-whites; TBH I would mostly hear them out because I'd enjoy hearing their (likely bullshit) excuse, so I'm prejudicial too in that respect.

 

[realibrad]

Wrong: If someone is not of the same opinion as the others wanting this safe space (yet of a skin colour or some other requirement that entitles them access to the safe space), they're under no obligation to use it.



No, they're not. What judgement is going on here? Furthermore, where's the "stereotyping"?



If some white people want to put forward an argument for giving them safe space from whatever then by all means let them do so, however if they're going to try and argue that they need safe space from non-whites based on some argument with substance as opposed to some knee-jerk "they've got safe space, I want one too" reaction.

Lots of things go on in society that have requirements that (on the face of them) perhaps shouldn't be required. For example, I was listening to BBC Radio 4 on the way home, talking about a survey of British Muslims that has made the news recently. It was said that Muslim researchers were sent out to knock on doors of British Muslims and survey them. Shock horror! That sounds like discrimination to me! Should that honestly be allowed? Couldn't a non-Muslim person do a job like this perfectly well? Yes, very likely. However, if you have a minority that you wish to survey, would you consider it wise to send out someone like me (white, male, shaven head) to survey them? Do you think that someone who is part of a minority is going to respond as well to someone who fits stereotypical criteria of someone who might shove poo through their letterbox or throw a brick through their window?

On the other hand, if you were surveying white people, such considerations are not so important because chances are that they haven't experienced unwarranted prejudicial hostility/marginalisation.

This was already explained to you.

Area intended for Black students but open to all other minority students on campus.

They are not asking for a place to have people who think the same, they are basing it on race. If you are not of a minority race, then you are not allowed in. The prejudice comes in because the reason they want that space is because they want a place to be safe from white people.

You dont want to address that, or you are not able to understand that.

 

[mikeymikec]

This was already explained to you.

Please point out where (however I'm unsure what exactly you're referring to with this since you quoted my entire post).

They are not asking for a place to have people who think the same, they are basing it on race. If you are not of a minority race, then you are not allowed in. The prejudice comes in because the reason they want that space is because they want a place to be safe from white people.

You've simply repeated yourself or what others have said, and I disagree with you calling it prejudice precisely because of the definition of safe space and its implications here. I'd repeat the definition of safe space, but we're going in circles.

I'm finding it somewhat baffling that people here honestly seem to be arguing that safe space for non-whites is bad because if whites asked for it then that would be bad. I swear, terms like "racial segregation" seem to mean nothing more than a dictionary definition to you.

Not once has any naysayer evaluated or criticised the reasons why they're asking for the safe space. That's what you should be looking at. It's one thing to say "discrimination" (or terms used in similar ways), is another thing entirely to ignore (or at least not factoring it into this request) when equality isn't occurring just to point out and complain about one of the few scenarios when it's occurring in the opposite direction.

Also, I'd look at the likely consequences. One person has implied that this is a slippery slope situation, which I find somewhat laughable, in Mississippi of all places.