Yale student screaming at professor for not providing safe space

[werepossum]

http://www.vox.com/2015/11/11/9715194/college-speech-censorship

I know this particular story is older and a little bit before the rise of social media, but it's interesting to see - groups in power find all sorts of justification to suppress speech they don't like.

Just look at Ben Carson - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ben-carson-police-speech-colleges_5627b787e4b02f6a900eebbb
He'd push for a federal department to police speech and use the power of withholding money to suppress speech he finds offensive.

These people, both the ones screaming at the professor at Yale, the groups trying to keep the media out at Missouri, and conservative actors from days past and present don't really believe in the Constitution and the 1st Amendment's protection of free speech and press. They only care about that when it's their view that is facing suppression, but they are more than happy to bludgeon dissidents into silence when they are in control.

College students do not need to be coddled and colleges need to stand up for academic freedom and allow different people the opportunities to speak and debate in a civil fashion. But college students (and frankly, a lot of post-college students) do need to learn that facing alternative views is part of life and you need to be able to deal with that in the real world.

You probably want to check out this thread: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2454228

Damned well said. And although I'm a conservative, I'll say it - the right wing versions are wrong about even more things than are the progressives.

We have people way too polarized on all sides. Just about every group out there hates and looks down on the other. Most people, given power, would gladly use it to "fix" the other side.

Hopefully people calm the fuck down and start talking shit out. If not, then things will come to a head and a side will win.

Sadly that is true; both sides are enamored of using the armed might of government purely to control behavior. Government is far too powerful, and not only are the majority on both sides in favor of this (as long as they have the reins anyway) but due to the vastly increased power of corporations I'm not at all sure we could safely reduce government power to where ideologically I'd like it to be.

As far as one side winning, I'd say rather that one side will lose less. Government is a bludgeon, not a scalpel, and loosing it is a lot easier than controlling it.

EDIT: On a side note, in the post you quoted please note that I was referring specifically to them liking the ChiComs. There is a reason that the Party star (and therefore the government star) is many times bigger than the stars of the people.

 

[shira]

I don't see how this will ever go away unless the american way of life becomes unsustainable and these babies have to cope with tough decisions and - maybe - learn the value of being sensible about the world and its different people.

Looking at this as an outsider, well it reads like an Onion piece. Hard to believe such people actually exist in the "top" universities.

I worry about the "values" of the speech-suppressors making their way into the workplace. Can you imagine working in an environment where the hyper-sensitivities of the lowest common denominator determine who should lose their jobs for creating a "threatening" work environment?

 

[BoberFett]

I worry about the "values" of the speech-suppressors making their way into the workplace. Can you imagine working in an environment where the hyper-sensitivities of the lowest common denominator determine who should lose their jobs for creating a "threatening" work environment?

You'd prefer it if we could silence "climate change deniers" wouldn't you?

Is it really all that big a leap to think that we should silence anybody with a "wrong" opinion?

 

[werepossum]

I worry about the "values" of the speech-suppressors making their way into the workplace. Can you imagine working in an environment where the hyper-sensitivities of the lowest common denominator determine who should lose their jobs for creating a "threatening" work environment?

Agreed. Although as has been pointed out, it's the same principle as an environment where you can't mention dinosaurs unless Jesus is riding them.

 

[Svnla]

More and more people are concern about "their rights" but less and less about "their responsibilities".

 

[shira]

You'd prefer it if we could silence "climate change deniers" wouldn't you?

Is it really all that big a leap to think that we should silence anybody with a "wrong" opinion?

No, I wouldn't. I'm a strong believer in fighting speech with speech.

What I see happening on college campuses disgusts and horrifies me.

 

[Pulsar]

So, out of curiosity....

Why don't these Universities simply use their own regulations that students have already agreed to:

http://yalecollege.yale.edu/campus-life/undergraduate-regulations

And discipline the students acting like this? Protesting is ok. Screaming at your professor is clearly intimidating, and could easily be considered violence and abuse under the Yale handbook.

They already have a remedy for the situation, but they choose not to use it. The blame partially rests on the gutless university administrators for not spelling it out to the students and enforcing it. Likewise - the university should have stood behind the professor who decided to still hold classes. If students are saying that they don't feel safe going to class because of the protestors, then call the police and have the protestors dispersed. If the situation doesn't warrant the police to disperse them, then hold the class and have the exam and fail the kids who don't show up.

Once again - the University has the solution to this problem right in front of them. Therein lies part of the problem though. These administrators are politicians not managers..... most of them wouldn't last long in the private sector.

 

[shira]

Agreed. Although as has been pointed out, it's the same principle as an environment where you can't mention dinosaurs unless Jesus is riding them.

Of course people can mention dinosaurs with Jesus riding on them. And they absolutely have the right to approach students on college campuses and make this claim. In fact, it happened to me on campus more than once, back in the day.

But having a point of view and the free-speech right to say it doesn't mean that you have a right to teach it as science as part of a science course.

In the same vein, "all views" aren't necessarily entitled to "equal time." For example, no one should be prevented from writing books or giving speeches denying the Holocaust, or should be kicked out of school for openly holding such beliefs. But that doesn't mean that a colloquium on Nazi Germany is required to allocate a slot to a holocaust denier.

 

[BoberFett]

No, I wouldn't. I'm a strong believer in fighting speech with speech.

What I see happening on college campuses disgusts and horrifies me.

Well cheers to you on that then.

 

[Blue_Max]

More and more people are concern about "their rights" but less and less about "their responsibilities".

I think we need a good shot of:

 

[werepossum]

Of course people can mention dinosaurs with Jesus riding on them. And they absolutely have the right to approach students on college campuses and make this claim. In fact, it happened to me on campus more than once, back in the day.

But having a point of view and the free-speech right to say it doesn't mean that you have a right to teach it as science as part of a science course.

In the same vein, "all views" aren't necessarily entitled to "equal time." For example, no one should be prevented from writing books or giving speeches denying the Holocaust, or should be kicked out of school for openly holding such beliefs. But that doesn't mean that a colloquium on Nazi Germany is required to allocate a slot to a holocaust denier.

Agreed. I was just pointing out that we get this from both sides, it's just that the left is ascendant now (especially on college campuses) and thus has more power to enforce its will.

I think we need a good shot of:

Unfortunately that has been replaced with "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" as our favorite JFK quote. And these flowers are squirming bundles of need.

 

[crashtech]

I'm having trouble finding the transcribed text of this Yale student's outburst.

 

[UglyCasanova]

It just keeps on going, see here for the Amherst demands.

5. President Martin must issue a statement to the Amherst College community at large that states we do not tolerate the actions of student(s) who posted the “All Lives Matter” posters, and the “Free Speech” posters that stated that “in memoriam of the true victim of the Missouri Protests: Free Speech.” Also let the student body know that it was racially insensitive to the students of color on our college campus and beyond who are victim to racial harassment and death threats; alert them that Student Affairs may require them to go through the Disciplinary Process if a formal complaint is filed, and that they will be required to attend extensive training for racial and cultural competency.

Wtf? This has to stop, someone needs to take a stand. If I were the Amherst president I would let all of these "protestors" know that making threats to incite riots is crossing several lines, they can go fvck themselves, and if anyone disagrees they are more that welcome to sign up for a newly enacted class on the Bill of Rights that we will be teaching (free of charge!).

 

[TechBoyJK]

1. President Martin must issue a statement of apology to students, alumni and former students, faculty, administration and staff who have been victims of several injustices including but not limited to our institutional legacy of white supremacy, colonialism, anti-black racism, anti-Latinx racism, anti-Native American racism, anti-Native/ indigenous racism, anti-Asian racism, anti-Middle Eastern racism, heterosexism, cis-sexism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, ableism, mental health stigma, and classism. Also include that marginalized communities and their allies should feel safe at Amherst College.

holy shit.

I hope that president drops a hammer on these sandy vaginas.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

holy shit.

I hope that president drops a hammer on these sandy vaginas.

That is an awesome "apology"! :thumbsup:

They should copyright it!

 

[mizzou]

I just watched the south park safe space episode, made me think of this thread lol

 

[TechBoyJK]

I just watched the south park safe space episode, made me think of this thread lol

It's pretty bad. With all due respect, if I was looking at attending Mizzou I would have absolutely canceled my application by now.

 

[Exophase]

holy shit.

I hope that president drops a hammer on these sandy vaginas.

Well I take back what I said earlier, that is one comprehensive list that somehow didn't include plain old sexism (for those who don't know, heterosexism and cis-sexism are not sexism) Possibly because all those people are minorities, as opposed to women (or men)

Also left out body shaming. Tsk tsk. When you drop so many things it's the ones you omit that start standing out.

 

[michal1980]

It just keeps on going, see here for the Amherst demands.







Wtf? This has to stop, someone needs to take a stand. If I were the Amherst president I would let all of these "protestors" know that making threats to incite riots is crossing several lines, they can go fvck themselves, and if anyone disagrees they are more that welcome to sign up for a newly enacted class on the Bill of Rights that we will be teaching (free of charge!).

Liberalism on display. And the left here claims the right has a brain defect. Ha

 

[werepossum]

It just keeps on going, see here for the Amherst demands.

Wtf? This has to stop, someone needs to take a stand. If I were the Amherst president I would let all of these "protestors" know that making threats to incite riots is crossing several lines, they can go fvck themselves, and if anyone disagrees they are more that welcome to sign up for a newly enacted class on the Bill of Rights that we will be teaching (free of charge!).

I'd prefer that the Amherst president issue a statement that Amherst will not tolerate such demands and attacks on free speech, and thus every student signing that petition should feel completely free to enroll in an institution more to their liking such as, say, commonly offered in North Korea or the People's Republic of China. And if you bothered to actually attend any classes and completed the oppressive racist misogynistic course requirements, your transcripts will be cheerfully forwarded to whatever institution will accept you.

Hey, if you're gonna be a bear, be a grizzly. With these prats anything less than instantaneous full-on groveling is seen as a vicious attack anyway.

 

[Exophase]

President Martin must issue a statement to the Amherst College community at large that states we do not tolerate the actions of student(s) who posted the “All Lives Matter” posters, and the “Free Speech” posters that stated that “in memoriam of the true victim of the Missouri Protests: Free Speech.”

Oh god, the irony...

 

[Brainonska511]

I'd prefer that the Amherst president issue a statement that Amherst will not tolerate such demands and attacks on free speech, and thus every student signing that petition should feel completely free to enroll in an institution more to their liking such as, say, commonly offered in North Korea or the People's Republic of China. And if you bothered to actually attend any classes and completed the oppressive racist misogynistic course requirements, your transcripts will be cheerfully forwarded to whatever institution will accept you.

Hey, if you're gonna be a bear, be a grizzly. With these prats anything less than instantaneous full-on groveling is seen as a vicious attack anyway.

Or he could just reiterate Amherst's commitment to academic freedom and freedom of speech. I don't think there is any gain in denigrating them. I would think that such a harsh statement might only entrench people in their apparently ridiculous position and "us vs them" mentality. I don't see any harm in the administration remaining civil. After all, they're supposed to be the educated adults.

 

[BoberFett]

Or he could just reiterate Amherst's commitment to academic freedom and freedom of speech. I don't think there is any gain in denigrating them. I would think that such a harsh statement might only entrench people in their apparently ridiculous position and "us vs them" mentality. I don't see any harm in the administration remaining civil. After all, they're supposed to be the educated adults.

The left is beginning to find freedom of speech to be a hateful concept.

 

[mizzou]

It's pretty bad. With all due respect, if I was looking at attending Mizzou I would have absolutely canceled my application by now.

Last year or whenever that was, Mizzou was a spearhead in tolerance of homosexual preferences. I don't understand how now, all of a sudden, it's thrown in this turmoil of being an intolerant environment. It just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[Exophase]

Or he could just reiterate Amherst's commitment to academic freedom and freedom of speech. I don't think there is any gain in denigrating them. I would think that such a harsh statement might only entrench people in their apparently ridiculous position and "us vs them" mentality. I don't see any harm in the administration remaining civil. After all, they're supposed to be the educated adults.

Yeah, taking some kind of antagonistic or retaliative stance against them would be a fairly stupid move.

But acquiescing to threats, from what's probably a minority position within the university? Mizzou's opened Pandora's Box on this one, I can only see where this will go if other universities follow suit...

The demand on the mascot is especially perplexing to me. Apparently "Lord Jeff", a little white colonial guy, is inherently racist because it's based off of Jeffrey Amherst who had some pretty horrifying practices towards Native Americans. But if they oppose the mascot for vaguely invoking his likeness wouldn't they take even greater issue for the university being named after the guy?

The university is in a pretty difficult position. The administration definitely shouldn't give in to all of this, but at the same time it's really hard to appear sensitive while not acquiescing. Saying nothing at all would be even worse. And now that the ultimatum has been set this movement will feel that they have no choice but to follow through with their threats. This is probably not going to end very well.