Ok. So one of the issues the left seems to be most divided about are these so called "safe spaces" and "speech codes" popping up on college campuses. The argument against such seems to be simple, the first amendment, along with the fact that some safe spaces only allow only spacific "marginalized groups" to participate. (ie if you are either white, male, straight, and so on you can be prevented from such.) Essentially blatant discrimination on race, gender, and sexual orientation.
I haven't heard a solid argument for any of the above. I am interested if anyone on here can make a solid case for any of the below.
Speech codes don't violate the first amendment.
Speech codes don't suppress other political opinions.
Establishing Safe Spaces is a valuable utilization of resources for college campuses.
Discrimination against "non marginalized" groups is not still discrimination.
There are other problems as well, but didn't want this post to be to long.
Thanks!
At a private college.Speech codes don't violate the first amendment.
I used to defend colleges, but I have to be real. Try expressing a conservative opinion at a college, or try to find a conservative professor in a place like cali. Anyways, back to the speech codes.. You do know about students literally screaming when people tried to hold a honest conversation about political correctness? Or the students who acted like scared children when they heard about "TRUMP"Speech codes don't suppress other political opinions.
Uhh... no.Establishing Safe Spaces is a valuable utilization of resources for college campuses.
???Discrimination against "non marginalized" groups is not still discrimination.
I have a feeling i'm gonna really hate college because of stuff like this. I'm personally open to any form of discussion and debate, but all these 'speech codes' and 'safe spaces' are just there to shoot that all down, so everyone's feelings can be coddled to and no one can be offended.
I have a feeling i'm gonna really hate college because of stuff like this. I'm personally open to any form of discussion and debate, but all these 'speech codes' and 'safe spaces' are just there to shoot that all down, so everyone's feelings can be coddled to and no one can be offended.
Well, you should be fine if you're going to a college in Texas. -
Yeah that far left liberal **** doesn't fly down here even on college campuses
At least you're not north carolina.
As a pretty neutral outsider, maybe I can give that a shot;I haven't heard a solid argument for any of the above. I am interested if anyone on here can make a solid case for any of the below.
That would depend on the specifics and implementation. There are clearly legitimate conditions and limitations and speech that universities can legitimately impose on their campus (no 3am parties, no music during lectures, no explicitly threats or intimidation etc.) so it’s just a question of where the constitutional line is drawn and how close any given “speech code” comes to that line.Speech codes don't violate the first amendment.
I think it would have to be a pretty extreme speech code to prevent legitimate political expression. There are obvious legitimate restrictions though (for example, someone objecting to nudity laws might be prevented from walking naked around the campus). So again, it’s not an automatic thing but conditional.Speech codes don't suppress other political opinions.
If they’re improving the quality of life for some students, not actively harming anyone else and the costs isn’t excessive, that could be a worthwhile utilisation. I personally suspect the concept has become too politicised to be of much real benefit now and I’m not convinced it was the best approach to these problems but as fundamental concept it wasn’t automatically without value.Establishing Safe Spaces is a valuable utilization of resources for college campuses.
Only if they’re (generally we’re as it happens) actually being discriminated against. Provision for actually marginalised students because they’re marginalised isn’t discriminatory by definition. I’m not being discriminated against because disabled people get to drive around in electric wheelchairs.Discrimination against "non marginalized" groups is not still discrimination.
I have a feeling i'm gonna really hate college because of stuff like this. I'm personally open to any form of discussion and debate, but all these 'speech codes' and 'safe spaces' are just there to shoot that all down, so everyone's feelings can be coddled to and no one can be offended.
No opposition of free speech so far. Possibly because most people here, unlike most, try to genuinely understand the other side of the argument.
The liberal / progressive left are planting these seeds for future society in the young adults.
Once introduced to, and forced to comply with these BS excessive PC controls, the young won't object to them later in their adult lives, which makes these now adults all the easier to control and manipulate.
All the left has to do is spin the excessively PC dial on some facet of life they don't like, and vuala! Instant banishment of that facet, and instant social punishment for those that participate in that facet.
Exactly the control the left end of the political spectrum wants of the common, (and believed to be) less intelligent population (read, anyone that disagrees with them and their ideology).
Ok. So one of the issues the left seems to be most divided about are these so called "safe spaces" and "speech codes" popping up on college campuses. The argument against such seems to be simple, the first amendment, along with the fact that some safe spaces only allow only spacific "marginalized groups" to participate. (ie if you are either white, male, straight, and so on you can be prevented from such.) Essentially blatant discrimination on race, gender, and sexual orientation.
I haven't heard a solid argument for any of the above. I am interested if anyone on here can make a solid case for any of the below.
Speech codes don't violate the first amendment.
Speech codes don't suppress other political opinions.
Establishing Safe Spaces is a valuable utilization of resources for college campuses.
Discrimination against "non marginalized" groups is not still discrimination.
There are other problems as well, but didn't want this post to be to long.
Thanks!
This ^^^^ These attitudes are ultimately what I believe is preventing any kind of productive discussion on campus. A general hostility towards and exclusion of those with dissenting opinion.What should concern you more is the message being instilled in the students that certain peoples feelings can be ignored, and some people can be offended. That is the flip side of this very warped trend taking place across college campuses.
This ^^^^ These attitudes are ultimately what I believe is preventing any kind of productive discussion on campus. A general hostility towards and exclusion of those with dissenting opinion.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
This sort of Draconian, get used to being watched and controlled by the authority, Big Brother, Big Thought Control style crap is not due just to the left.
You know, I'm trying to recall instances of other than the left, and the only thing I can think of is the Patriot Act, which has been limited to a more reasonable stance.
Do you have a few more examples for due consideration?
At this point, I am firmly of the same persuasion as Milo: any student who requests a safe-space, speech-code, or trigger-warning should be immediately expelled. By doing this, the student demonstrates that they are unable to function properly in the real world and deal with conflicting viewpoints. There are no safe-spaces/trigger-warnings/speech-codes (at least, not yet) in real life, nor should there be. If you cannot conduct yourself even remotely like an adult, you don't belong at a university; take a few years and come back when you are ready. College is not about coddling students and protecting their sensitivities; college is about learning and interacting with views which differ from your own.
I think it would have to be a pretty extreme speech code to prevent legitimate political expression. There are obvious legitimate restrictions though (for example, someone objecting to nudity laws might be prevented from walking naked around the campus). So again, it’s not an automatic thing but conditional.
It's been 3 decades since I graduated college but isn't the point - or at least one of the major points - of college to make you uncomfortable? To challenge your notions of how the world works? I went into college a rather sheltered 18 year old whose world view was pretty much formed by my parents' ideas of how the world worked. Let's just say I came out of college being able to think for myself and rejecting much of what I believed when I went in.
Speech codes at private universities don't violate the first amendment since the first amendment doesn't apply to them. The real question is how can a college do it's job if it doesn't allow for the free flow of ideas?
Yeah that far left liberal **** doesn't fly down here even on college campuses
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?