Research: 40% of Millennials would censor offensive speech

[glenn1]

This might add more context to the threads about the protests at U of Missouri and other places, but thought it was worthy of its own thread due to the implications. Without turning this into a flamefest about the relative merits of different generations, what implications does this have on future politics and the social fabric? Obviously other nations generally considered free and democratic censor/limit speech to some extent; e.g. German restrictions on pro-Nazi speech, widespread prohibitions on Holocaust denial, and arguably the very plaintiff-friendly rules about slander/libel in the United Kingdom (where the speech being truthful isn't a legal defense against those charges).


http://thedailywhat.cheezburger.com/share/8587952384

A new study by Pew Research shows that American Millennials are far more likely to support the government banning offensive speech about minority groups than other generations.

Of those aged 18-34, 40 percent support censoring offensive speech.

"We asked whether people believe that citizens should be able to make public statements that are offensive to minority groups, or whether the government should be able to prevent people from saying these things. Four-in-ten Millennials say the government should be able to prevent people publicly making statements that are offensive to minority groups, while 58% said such speech is OK."

 

[cbrunny]

You can't say the f-word on daytime TV. Just sayin.

 

[sm625]

I would say what I'd like to do to that 40%, but doing so would be offensive. Apparently, lighting the constitution on fire and laughing as it burns is not offensive to these people. But make a joke about their mama, and hoo boy watch out they will go all Nazi on yo butt.

 

[Ackmed]

I'm a little surprised actually. And very saddened that this is the case. I may not like what someone says, but I fully support someones right to free speech. Even in public, where often times it gets very annoying.

Case in point, where I live at every college football game, other big events, or just downtown randomly, there is a group of people who yell at people telling them they're going to hell, their women dress like whores, and call out random people on whatever comes to mind. They've been doing it for years, always the same ones. They have a man dress on with a head wrap. One of the three always records, because he is looking for something to post, someone getting upset by it. They intentionally annoy people and their families to get a reaction. It is very annoying when due to a crowd you can't really get away.

But like other movements lately, when someone stands up to them, yells back at them, they get upset. They tell them to move along, get out of the way. You see, they like free speech, until someone else gets in their way. They want their "safe space" like we've seen recently where they can say whatever they want, and be protected by free speech. But if you get into their area, well then all the sudden it's wrong. They're fucking hypocrites likes so many on campus now.

What they say can be offensive, but I still support their right to say it. Suppressing their right or anyone else's is wrong. These little new age babified fucks need to stop pretending everything hurts their little feelings. Man up, grow a set, and move on with life.

 

[waggy]

You can't say the f-word on daytime TV. Just sayin.

sure you can. in fact i can turn on HBO and such and hear it.

 

[realibrad]

I would say what I'd like to do to that 40%, but doing so would be offensive. Apparently, lighting the constitution on fire and laughing as it burns is not offensive to these people. But make a joke about their mama, and hoo boy watch out they will go all Nazi on yo butt.

Bro, going Nazi on yo butt is offensive. It normalizes the idea that male homosexual acts are somehow bad. You marginalizing an entire group with your microagressions.

 

[master_shake_]

we can only hope that the when the time comes that 60 percent are the ones ruling the country.

 

[Newell Steamer]

I don't agree with censoring offensive speech.

I encourage it frankly, it will make it easier to ID who the real problem is. And, hopefully the real problems will stop hiding behind Bibles, the 1st Amendment and 'reality'.

 

[waggy]

I don't agree with censoring offensive speech.

I encourage it frankly, it will make it easier to ID who the real problem is. And, hopefully the real problems will stop hiding behind Bibles, the 1st Amendment and 'reality'.

LOL thats what i told my kids. someone being racist? or stupid? great let them. now we know who not to be with.

 

[Ackmed]

Not only speech is offensive now, Yoga class is.

Jennifer Scharf, who has been offering free weekly sessions at the university’s Center for Students with Disabilities since 2008, told the Ottawa Sun that she was informed in September that the program would not come back for the fall semester.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/1...s-cultural-issues-could-offend/?intcmp=hplnws

a student wrote that “while yoga is a really great idea and accessible and great for students... there are cultural issues of implication involved in the practice"

Yoga has been under a lot of controversy lately due to how it is being practiced," the email continues, and which cultures those practices "are being taken from."

The Student Federation, which operates the center, went on to say that many of those cultures “have experienced oppression, cultural genocide and diasporas due to colonialism and Western supremacy... we need to be mindful of this and how we express ourselves while practicing yoga.

I agree with this instructor;

But Scharf, who instructed about 60 students each week in the program, said, "people are just looking for a reason to be offended by anything they can find."

I honestly can't even believe this is actually happening. Free classes for disabled students.. being shut down. Because it "may be offensive" to some people. Seriously? At a loss for words to describe how idiotic this is.

 

[blankslate]

I'm pretty sure this is because Civics in elementary school through high-school has been cut back drastically in public schools.

I have a millennial acquaintance who was sort of an outlier in that he is fairly informed about politics, can summarize the structure of the U.S. government, and actually did well in U.S. history and Politics courses at the local community college. I doubt people who are actually informed about the U.S. Constitution would ban offensive speech.

at least it's not 60% of millennials would ban offensive speech.



____________________

 

[IronWing]

Fine. Us coots will ban spandex in retaliation. There'll be naked young people everywhere.

 

[JSt0rm]

but if that happened P&n would be empty

 

[IronWing]

but if that happened P&n would be empty

I'm only offensive to stupid people. :sneaky:

 

[cbrunny]

I'm pretty sure this is because Civics in elementary school through high-school has been cut back drastically in public schools.

I have a millennial acquaintance who was sort of an outlier in that he is fairly informed about politics, can summarize the structure of the U.S. government, and actually did well in U.S. history and Politics courses at the local community college. I doubt people who are actually informed about the U.S. Constitution would ban offensive speech.

at least it's not 60% of millennials would ban offensive speech.



____________________

That's a reasonable explanation.

I think the question isn't exactly worded properly. It doesn't explicitly state "free speech." In a world that is full of censorship already, particularly with obscenities, it isn't that much of a stretch to think the generally socially liberal millennial population would equate this kind of hate speech that is explicitly stated with obscenities. This is what they're used to.

Put another way, if you ask that question and get 40% saying they'd be in favour of allowing the government to act as such, and then immediately following asked a question that says "Are you in favour of the Government enacting limitations on freedom of speech" you will not get 40% in favour. Guaranteed. I'd put it less than 5%.

 

[woolfe9998]

I'm pretty sure this is because Civics in elementary school through high-school has been cut back drastically in public schools.

I have a millennial acquaintance who was sort of an outlier in that he is fairly informed about politics, can summarize the structure of the U.S. government, and actually did well in U.S. history and Politics courses at the local community college. I doubt people who are actually informed about the U.S. Constitution would ban offensive speech.

at least it's not 60% of millennials would ban offensive speech.



____________________

It certainly has to do with ignorance of some kind:

There's also a difference in education levels and support for limiting speech. Those with a high school degree or less are 9-percentage-points more likely to support censorship.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

tumblr culture in action.

 

[master_shake_]

Not only speech is offensive now, Yoga class is.



http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/1...s-cultural-issues-could-offend/?intcmp=hplnws



I agree with this instructor;


I honestly can't even believe this is actually happening. Free classes for disabled students.. being shut down. Because it "may be offensive" to some people. Seriously? At a loss for words to describe how idiotic this is.

fat girls jealous of hot girls in yoga pants.

nothing to see here.

 

[IGBT]

The Bill Of Rights simply acknowledges what already exists..jack boot millennials want to deny what already exists.

 

[Victorian Gray]

That's a reasonable explanation.

I think the question isn't exactly worded properly. It doesn't explicitly state "free speech." In a world that is full of censorship already, particularly with obscenities, it isn't that much of a stretch to think the generally socially liberal millennial population would equate this kind of hate speech that is explicitly stated with obscenities. This is what they're used to.

Put another way, if you ask that question and get 40% saying they'd be in favour of allowing the government to act as such, and then immediately following asked a question that says "Are you in favour of the Government enacting limitations on freedom of speech" you will not get 40% in favour. Guaranteed. I'd put it less than 5%.

That's an insightful analysis and I think you might be right although I suspect it would be closer to 10% than 5%. But that's a quibble.

 

[werepossum]

Not only speech is offensive now, Yoga class is.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/1...s-cultural-issues-could-offend/?intcmp=hplnws

I agree with this instructor;

I honestly can't even believe this is actually happening. Free classes for disabled students.. being shut down. Because it "may be offensive" to some people. Seriously? At a loss for words to describe how idiotic this is.

Get the feeling that Internet trolls have moved to trolling real life?

Fine. Us coots will ban spandex in retaliation. There'll be naked young people everywhere.

lol +1

That's a reasonable explanation.

I think the question isn't exactly worded properly. It doesn't explicitly state "free speech." In a world that is full of censorship already, particularly with obscenities, it isn't that much of a stretch to think the generally socially liberal millennial population would equate this kind of hate speech that is explicitly stated with obscenities. This is what they're used to.

Put another way, if you ask that question and get 40% saying they'd be in favour of allowing the government to act as such, and then immediately following asked a question that says "Are you in favour of the Government enacting limitations on freedom of speech" you will not get 40% in favour. Guaranteed. I'd put it less than 5%.

Problem is people are stupid. If you can get them to give up free speech by calling it offensive speech, the net effect is the same.

 

[SP33Demon]

Generation Vagina - figuratively, chemically (less testosterone than any gen), ideologically (grrrlpower! and youcantsaythatinmysafespace!)

 

[cbrunny]

Get the feeling that Internet trolls have moved to trolling real life?


lol +1


Problem is people are stupid. If you can get them to give up free speech by calling it offensive speech, the net effect is the same.

Of course. But this is a poll and not a referendum. In any referendum the national discourse is as important as the vote itself. This poll has no discourse at all.

 

[CPA]

Oh, look, guess what political affiliation is more apt to agree to government sponsored censorship. Shouldn't surprise anyone given the party has passed several censorship laws in the past, including the Communications Decency Act of 1996, COPA and DMCA. This doesn't include the agreement between the entertainment industry and the PMRC (Tipper Gore - yes, young ones, that is Al Gore's wife) that led to Parental Advisory stickers still in use today. The alternative surely was legislation.

 

[boomerang]

Let me know when the numbers flip and 60% want to do away with the first amendment. Should this need a "solution" it's an easy solution. You just make these pea-brains live by their own rules. You turn the tables on them and accuse them of offensive speech every time they take a breath.

Higher education is shooting itself in the foot. It remains to be seen how long it takes these highly educated academics to figure that out. If they don't, the problem will correct itself. Higher education is big business. When the bottom line starts getting affected, things will change and these children will be patted on the head and told to run along.