Safe Zones and Political Correctness

[Life]

I need to talk about this. Or more like rant about it.

What the absolute fuck is this shit? Safe zones? Places where "people won't be offended"? Are you fucking kidding me? People are killing others over religion and money (which is no different to 2000 years ago) and you get "offended"?

There are so many issues here that make me want to slap people silly but this one takes the cake.

Students at Yale attempted to equate sexual harassment (which now apparently means staring at a woman for over 15 seconds) with the rape and slavery of Yazidi women.

You mean to tell me that a Yazidi woman who is sold like cattle and treated as a sexual slave can get rescued, brought to the USA because it is a country of "freedom" and decide to get an education only to be told by other students that their plight is no worse than your average college girl who wants to go out and accuse people of sexual harassment because they think that she's pretty and are looking at her?

My best friend had an argument with someone over Facebook who told him that (and this is verbatim) "even though he is Jewish, he is still a white male which therefore gives him more privilege than anyone else". What the fuck are you smoking?

Now you want "safe zones"? No. Just no. You deserve to have your feelings hurt and a lot more if I had a real say in the matter. This is despicable and makes me want to vomit.

[Radiant head]

Someone rename this thread Trump 4 President

[Rehab]

You're sounding like the person they want a safe space from.

[Rapier]

What the absolute fuck is this shit? Safe zones? Places where "people won't be offended"? Are you fucking kidding me? People are killing others over religion and money (which is no different to 2000 years ago) and you get "offended"?

Find a beggar in the streets and, if they complain about hunger, tell them African children are starving in Africa, and thus that they have no right to complain about hunger. Your argument would be just as logical. I wouldn't reply this topic, but I dislike this logical error so much because people keep drilling into it every time, both the left and the right-wing. And also I am stupid for getting into this, bash at me.

I don't see what is wrong with zones that are more tolerant to people that suffer from intolerance (although I am skeptical of "informational programs" because sometimes they're mere social demagoguery. I don't trust political movements). I detest political correctedness because me thinking or saying [person/group of persons] is [bad adjective] is not a war crime worth of death by hanging, it is just opinion, but people so love to sugarcoat social interactions (and intolerantly shoot everyone who disagrees). Can we go back to Voltaire's philosophy? "I may disagree with every single word you may say, but I shall defend to death your right to say it" sounds like a reasonal motto.

But I'll give you this:

Students at Yale attempted to equate sexual harassment (which now apparently means staring at a woman for over 15 seconds) with the rape and slavery of Yazidi women.

Yes, I also hate SJWs, and the fact that people seem to agree with this. That's when I activate the False Symmetry trap card and watch them fall for their own discourse.

If this topic gets renamed to vote 4 trump topic, can I advocate for the building of a Wall of Trump around SJWs?

Edited December 1, 2015 by Rapier

[I.M. Gei]

i love how conservatives allegedly emphasize personal responsibility but are invariably the first to whine about how they can't say or do whatever the fuck because of the "pc thought police" cabal keeping them down

like from my perspective, nobody's actually stopping you from saying whatever, or sending social justice police to whisk you off to mandatory sensitivity training reeducation camps; y'all are personally cowards who can't stomach the thought of other people exercising their right to free speech and criticizing you back

Edited December 1, 2015 by I.M. Gei

[Rapier]

like from my perspective, nobody's actually stopping you from saying whatever, or sending social justice police to whisk you off to mandatory sensitivity training reeducation camps; y'all are personally cowards who can't stomach the thought of other people exercising their right to free speech and criticizing you back

Yeah, pretty sure people don't sue each other for this kind of thing, and I'm pretty sure there is no coercion behind this at all...

except they do, and there is coercion

Edited December 1, 2015 by Rapier

[peener weener]

I need to talk about this. Or more like rant about it.

What the absolute fuck is this shit? Safe zones? Places where "people won't be offended"? Are you fucking kidding me? People are killing others over religion and money (which is no different to 2000 years ago) and you get "offended"?

There are so many issues here that make me want to slap people silly but this one takes the cake.

Students at Yale attempted to equate sexual harassment (which now apparently means staring at a woman for over 15 seconds) with the rape and slavery of Yazidi women.

You mean to tell me that a Yazidi woman who is sold like cattle and treated as a sexual slave can get rescued, brought to the USA because it is a country of "freedom" and decide to get an education only to be told by other students that their plight is no worse than your average college girl who wants to go out and accuse people of sexual harassment because they think that she's pretty and are looking at her?

My best friend had an argument with someone over Facebook who told him that (and this is verbatim) "even though he is Jewish, he is still a white male which therefore gives him more privilege than anyone else". What the fuck are you smoking?

Now you want "safe zones"? No. Just no. You deserve to have your feelings hurt and a lot more if I had a real say in the matter. This is despicable and makes me want to vomit.

it's funny that you seem ridiculously offended at people being offended.

@bolded: honestly? if you actually think those things you said are reasonable and logical and in compliance with the working of the actual, real world, then you are wildly delusional. i think rehab said it pretty well.

Yeah, pretty sure people don't sue each other for this kind of thing, and I'm pretty sure there is no coercion behind this at all...

except they do, and there is coercion

1) who, where, and when

2) who cares

3) there are actually anti-pc groups who sue universities for creating things akin to these safe spaces

what is your point?

[blah the Prussian]

I honestly don't care that much about this issue, but I will say that students having a say in the running of universities should stop, because they obviously aren't mature enough to make reasonable decisions. Also, the notion of white privilege is dumb for reasons I will talk about later because class is about to start.

[dondon151]

relevant article: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/

[Irysa]

The concept is not terrible, but like most things to do with current progressive movements, especially among student bodies, there's a lot of idiots who give the whole thing a bad rep.

I mean really, the idea of a "safe space" has been around forever anyway, it's not new. When I struggled with anxiety issues in Secondary School (that's High School to you yanks) I went to the Nurse's office to unwind and calm down. The problem these days is that some people (and professors for that matter) are seeking to push the concept to apply to the Campus at large, hence situations like in dondon's article;

Jeannie Suk’s New Yorker essay described the difficulties of teaching rape law in the age of trigger warnings. Some students, she wrote, have pressured their professors to avoid teaching the subject in order to protect themselves and their classmates from potential distress. Suk compares this to trying to teach “a medical student who is training to be a surgeon but who fears that he’ll become distressed if he sees or handles blood.”

Trigger Warnings are basically like a different subset of the idea of a Safe Space; the idea is to avoid causing distress and to make sure everyone feels relaxed and comfortable at all times. Or you have crazy rule enforcers who told a Columbian Kid he couldn't wear a mariachi outfit at Halloween because it was cultural appropriation and might be offensive (despite it being his own culture). Or a Yoga class for disabled students being canceled because of oppression and cultural genocide.

I think that Student Unions are within their rights to do things like ban particular newspapers or have a no platform for particular speakers for the actual SU building themselves, but I think their arguably good intentions are ultimately bad when applied to systems at large.

Edited December 1, 2015 by Irysa

[Life]

Jeannie Suk’s New Yorker essay described the difficulties of teaching rape law in the age of trigger warnings. Some students, she wrote, have pressured their professors to avoid teaching the subject in order to protect themselves and their classmates from potential distress. Suk compares this to trying to teach “a medical student who is training to be a surgeon but who fears that he’ll become distressed if he sees or handles blood.”

I want to point out the obvious problem with this.

The study of rape law should never be difficult to teach. It is the legal way of combating rape (teaching the intricacies of the law). Anyone who wants rape law not to be taught is actually helping rapists rather than the victims.

I have a simpler solution. Why don't students who don't want to learn simply stop learning? A law degree is far from mandatory and if they feel uncomfortable with said subject matter, they could --- oh, I don't know --- not attend the class or even the institution.

[blah the Prussian]

So, why the concept of white privilege is moronic: it lumps in all white people into one group, which is absolutely asinine. It also identifies white people as this mythical group that has never experienced oppression, which, seriously, we all know is false, guys. Ask the Europeans taken as slaves by the Barbary pirates, or the Greeks murdered by the Ottoman Empire, or even whites oppressed by other Whites, like the Poles and the Irish. What really bugs me is that the concept is ridiculously centered on the US, and essentially ignores European history entirely. As I'm sure you all know by now, I HATE Amerocentrism.

[Alazen]

Relevant:

http://michtig-von-baum.tumblr.com/post/131233820100/potmbottm-mug-rug-michtig-von-baum

http://stirringwind.tumblr.com/post/118793309240/class-privilege-is-rarely-discussed-on-this-site

http://janiedean.tumblr.com/post/92184928043/i-was-a-teenage-anarchist-transfuturist

http://justintaco.tumblr.com/post/74248008556

Anyway, looking at haplogroups shows that there aren't ''white people'' in the way tumblr posters use it. There are too many distinct populations in West Eurasia. The populace in Greece is distinct from France's, for example.

Edited December 1, 2015 by Alazen

[Rapier]

1) who, where, and when

2) who cares

3) there are actually anti-pc groups who sue universities for creating things akin to these safe spaces

what is your point?

1) thanks for providing me a link at 3. I confess I have no idea about what is going on in the US - I only know it happens a lot in my country and I'm getting fucking tired of this, but I obviously can't link these cases.

2) hoi, i'm rapieR!! maybe you haven't seen the post I quoted, where he says there is no coercion whatsoever to opinion, that being obviously false.

3) thanks for making my point for me

my point is that no one should be coerced for offenses when offense is something subjective and arbitrariously judged, although clearly visible in radical cases - I'll give you that. Who knows if my avatar is offensive, for example. And being this the case, how can it be judged as such.

I think I am perfectly justified at being annoyed on people that make offense about anything they dislike BECAUSE they attempt to coerce others in basis of this.

EDIT: dondon's article is excelent. I wish I could've written this on a better way, like in the article.

Edited December 1, 2015 by Rapier

[Makaze]

I agree with something a friend of mine said: I might be more passionate about defending politically incorrect humor if that wasn't so often just code translated roughly to "safe space for men to giggle about rape."

Translated more generally:

I might be more passionate about defending politically incorrect statements if that wasn't so often just code translated roughly to "safe space for people to justify rape."

I might be more passionate about defending politically incorrect statements if that wasn't so often just code translated roughly to "safe space for people to justify genocide."

I might be more passionate about defending politically incorrect statements if that wasn't so often just code translated roughly to "safe space for people to be an asshole."

Edited December 1, 2015 by Makaze

[I.M. Gei]

I agree with something a friend of mine said: I might be more passionate about defending politically incorrect humor if that wasn't so often just code translated roughly to "safe space for men to giggle about rape."

Translated more generally:

I might be more passionate about defending politically incorrect statements if that wasn't so often just code translated roughly to "safe space for people to justify rape."

I might be more passionate about defending politically incorrect statements if that wasn't so often just code translated roughly to "safe space for people to justify genocide."

I might be more passionate about defending politically incorrect statements if that wasn't so often just code translated roughly to "safe space for people to be an asshole."

yeah someone upthread mentioned trump, and there's a particular irony in how for all his bluster about how politically incorrect he is and how he "tells it like it is", his rallies are basically "safe spaces" for otherwise-closeted bigots, where he can "tell it like i think it is" and they can bellow "white power" without fear of onlookers looking at them in disgust

especially some two weeks ago when trump gave the ok at his alabama rally for supporters to beat up a black man who happened to be wearing a blm shirt

[Phoenix Wright]

I honestly don't care that much about this issue, but I will say that students having a say in the running of universities should stop, because they obviously aren't mature enough to make reasonable decisions. Also, the notion of white privilege is dumb for reasons I will talk about later because class is about to start.

lol ok

So, why the concept of white privilege is moronic: it lumps in all white people into one group, which is absolutely asinine. It also identifies white people as this mythical group that has never experienced oppression, which, seriously, we all know is false, guys. Ask the Europeans taken as slaves by the Barbary pirates, or the Greeks murdered by the Ottoman Empire, or even whites oppressed by other Whites, like the Poles and the Irish. What really bugs me is that the concept is ridiculously centered on the US, and essentially ignores European history entirely. As I'm sure you all know by now, I HATE Amerocentrism.

you're inconsistent in your own beliefs. your (frankly dumb) position on whether students have the right to participate in the operation of their own universities directly contradicts your position on white privilege, even though the two ideas are roughly similar. not all university students are dumb, and not all white people are privileged to the degree that is typically claimed.

but with respect to white privilege, you're missing the key arguments that defend the phrase. it's a generalized statement that's meant to convey the fact that in certain countries having lighter skin will generally put you in a better place than having darker skin. in the us, this is generally true. in addition, the concept only holds bearing in nations where white privilege can exist in the first place (like the us!). it's "amerocentrism" because it's the us and other countries that have the issue in the first place.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Phoenix Wright

[Tryhard]

but with respect to white privilege, you're missing the key arguments that defend the phrase. it's a generalized statement that's meant to convey the fact that in certain countries having lighter skin will generally put you in a better place than having darker skin. in the us, this is generally true. in addition, the concept only holds bearing in nations where white privilege can exist in the first place (like the us!). it's "amerocentrism" because it's the us and other countries that have the issue in the first place.

While I agree, it serves no purpose to bring it up as a way to attempt to shut up, blame or shame people who would otherwise share an opinion, which is generally in the context that it is used online, at least from my personal experience. Can't stand that, closed minds mean we learn nothing. Other times, though, it is used in ways that are true; an example is racial profiling (in the US, again).

[blah the Prussian]

I don't have a problem when it's used in the US, but more often than not I do see it applied to Europe. That's when I have a problem with it. Also, can you say perhaps why my position is dumb?

[Phoenix Wright]

I don't have a problem when it's used in the US, but more often than not I do see it applied to Europe. That's when I have a problem with it. Also, can you say perhaps why my position is dumb?

as it should, as far as i can tell. it's fair to assume that in many countries in europe white privilege is a thing.

aside from the blatant contradiction in your own beliefs? well, i suppose it stems from two things

1. university students, generally, are not children. adults get to make decisions that impact their work environment, academic environment, etc.

2. it just so happens that (at least in the united states), universities are democratic (the student body gets to vote on numerous things happening at the university), and to take away those rights because a few people are dumb is ridiculous.

[blah the Prussian]

as it should, as far as i can tell. it's fair to assume that in many countries in europe white privilege is a thing.

aside from the blatant contradiction in your own beliefs? well, i suppose it stems from two things

1. university students, generally, are not children. adults get to make decisions that impact their work environment, academic environment, etc.

2. it just so happens that (at least in the united states), universities are democratic (the student body gets to vote on numerous things happening at the university), and to take away those rights because a few people are dumb is ridiculous.

But the situations of Europe and the United States are completely different. For one thing, Europe is natively white, while America is not. The nations of Europe are defined by their people, by their ethnicity, while the US is not. Further, white people in the US are far easier to group into one homogenous group. Do you think that Poles in the Russian Empire had white privilege? That Bosnians murdered by the Serbs had white privilege? Hell, that Poles in the United Kingdom today have white privilege? Of course not. I'm also going to close the subject of student democracy because it stems from my beliefs on democracy in general and I have already made those opinions clear in the monarchist thread, and I know what it will devolve into.

[Phoenix Wright]

But the situations of Europe and the United States are completely different. For one thing, Europe is natively white, while America is not. The nations of Europe are defined by their people, by their ethnicity, while the US is not. Further, white people in the US are far easier to group into one homogenous group. Do you think that Poles in the Russian Empire had white privilege? That Bosnians murdered by the Serbs had white privilege? Hell, that Poles in the United Kingdom today have white privilege? Of course not.

i'm not sure why you're generalizing it to the continent when i've already stated it applies only to countries.

I'm also going to close the subject of student democracy because it stems from my beliefs on democracy in general and I have already made those opinions clear in the monarchist thread, and I know what it will devolve into.

it really doesn't even need to go that deep. if i'm paying you 40k a year for something, and i'm signing a contract (which you do in a statement of intent to register, and in many other instances), aspects about the thing i'm buying should be negotiable.

who decides if sports will be important? if student-handled money should go towards one thing or another? some aspects of university are better handled by the student body rather than administrative body.

the student body doesn't get a say in how ethical/judicial processes are carried out (cheating, committing crimes, etc.), but they do get a say in how some of their money is allocated.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Phoenix Wright

[blah the Prussian]

i'm not sure why you're generalizing it to the continent when i've already stated it applies only to countries.

Well, look at it like this: in the UK, Polish immigrants are often treated just as poorly as Syrian immigrants, or blacks. "White" in Europe doesn't mean "White" in America, because in Europe, ethnicity matters.

it really doesn't even need to go that deep. if i'm paying you 40k a year for something, and i'm signing a contract (which you do in a statement of intent to register, and in many other instances), aspects about the thing i'm buying should be negotiable.

who decides if sports will be important? if student-handled money should go towards one thing or another? some aspects of university are better handled by the student body rather than administrative body.

the student body doesn't get a say in how ethical/judicial processes are carried out (cheating, committing crimes, etc.), but they do get a say in how some of their money is allocated.

I was thinking specifically about that incident where the Feminist Critic of Fundamentalist Islam was barred from speaking, things like that. I do suppose I agree with having some say in how the money is spent, so long as they don't have too much power. I do support managed democracy.

[Irysa]

Well, look at it like this: in the UK, Polish immigrants are often treated just as poorly as Syrian immigrants, or blacks. "White" in Europe doesn't mean "White" in America, because in Europe, ethnicity matters.

Eh, that's an oversimplification, and I'd like to clarify a little. The deal with Poles in Britain is a bit weird because in general, Brits actually quite like individual Poles, and see them as very compatible with Britain in terms of values and traditions. However there's a weird dissonance present since anti immigrant sentiment amongst the working class has been on the rise here, and Polish people as a group (being one of the more predominant migrant communities) end up being targeted because they're immigrants, not because they're Polish. I realise that doesn't sound like it makes sense, but it's true.

It gets even messier when you consider things like this; typically it's the right who are "supposed" to dislike immigrants, correct? When it comes to the working class, there's no real distinction right or left, but when you get to the bourgeoisie tier of society you'll find it's more likely that the left dislike the Polish because of Poland's government being too right wing and too nationalistic for them, and the right liking the Polish for things like going to church and being hard working.

Also not forgetting this varies rather drastically depending on where you are in the country.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Irysa

[Naughx]

^ Well there are no countries that is a monolithic block there are regional differences everywhere even inside specific countries.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Naughx