Good for UChicago. These young snow flakes need a comeuppance.
http://chicagoist.com/2016/08/25/a_letter_sent_by_the.php
http://chicagoist.com/2016/08/25/a_letter_sent_by_the.php
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
A letter recently sent by the University of Chicago to incoming freshman notifies students that the school does not support “so-called ‘trigger warnings’” or “condone the creation of intellectual ‘safe spaces.’” The note has prompted vigorous debate among students, alumni and outside observers.
The letter, delivered from the Office of the Dean of Students, states that the decision is rooted in “our commitment to academic freedom.” It also states “we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial,” which is perhaps a reference to DePaul’s denial to host Ben Shapiro, founder of The Daily Wire, earlier this month.
The letter was also accompanied by a monograph called Academic Freedom and the Modern University: The Experience of the University of Chicago, by Dean John W. Boyer. According to John (Jay) Ellison, Dean of Students, the book “recounts the history of debate, and even scandal, resulting from our commitment to academic freedom.”
I don't think that's a "comeuppance", as such. Still sounds like a fair deal to me, though.
Still not seeing how that's a "comeuppance", but anyway.It is the way it is supposed to be. Colege is supposed to be about learning and being exposed to other ideas with a skillset of being able to degend a point.
A comeuppance for the little brats that think the world revolves around them.
Still not seeing how that's a "comeuppance", but anyway.
I don't either. Frankly, the generation in question doesn't seem all that bratty to me. They seem like good kids who want to work hard and produce in big ways but also demand a fair work/life balance. I can respect that. They aren't draft dodgers or homosexuals who lie to get into the military or cokeheads or any of the problem children I remember from when I was growing up. They generally accept responsibility. The interns and co-ops I've been privilaged to be selected to help groom for professional life have been class acts to the last. Certainly this generation has its bad apples like they all did, but these are generally good kids. The primary thing many of them lack is an invested male role model, that's why it's so important today for decent Christian men to give back by raising kids, adopting kids, fostering kids, and coaching kids - academically or otherwise. We all have a role to play in forming this generation. It reeks of hypocrisy when you see people who can't be bothered to raise children in some way complain about the people they grow into.
How prevalent an issue is it? I thought the whole "safe space" thing only happened at a couple of colleges and was highly controversial wen it did. You seem to think it's commonplace. Any idea percentage wise how many colleges have :safe spaces" and all that in the US?Nor are they men who get drunk and cheat on their wives.
The story is about the college addressing the prevalent issue with the young kids being overly sensitive and demanding certain speakers and certain speech be banned from campus and wanting safe spaces.
To not hav known this is a common issue is to not read much.
Nor are they men who get drunk and cheat on their wives.
The story is about the college addressing the prevalent issue with the young kids being overly sensitive and demanding certain speakers and certain speech be banned from campus and wanting safe spaces.
To not hav known this is a common issue is to not read much.
How prevalent an issue is it? I thought the whole "safe space" thing only happened at a couple of colleges and was highly controversial wen it did. You seem to think it's commonplace. Any idea percentage wise how many colleges have :safe spaces" and all that in the US?
Cheating sounds so dishonest. I'd have a hard time respecting someone who did that. An agreement of mutual trust allowing some infidelities I could see - though it falls far short of the Christian ideal. And getting drunk? No thanks, that's just a bad life choice. I can see imbibing and having a nice time but yuck, who wants to get drunk?
I don't think what you're talking about is nearly as common as you'd think. Not a week goes by that I'm not on close proximity to current college students and recent grads. They don't seem half as sensitive and weak as the previous generation. Again though, we as men have been given a great opportunity and a great responsibility to mold younger generations. Each generation will have its flaws, but we as respected community leaders can help comb our youth to be the best they can be.
How many of those "hundreds of examples and articles" are about the same instances, though? Come on, nationwide, how many "safe space" universities are there? Is it really a common thing, or is it just a rare idea that's overreported because of how many papers stories about "political correctness run amok!" sell?Cheating is dishonest, I agree.
Safe spaces are quite prevalent in academia. The simple thing to do for those less tech savvy is to do a query on safe spaces and speech code.
Here is a NYT"s article describing this very issue.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/22/opinion/sunday/judith-shulevitz-hiding-from-scary-ideas.html?_r=0
I found hundreds of examples and articles on safe space and speech code on campus.
But this is known by anyone who reads and has a pulse on the media.
How many of those "hundreds of examples and articles" are about the same instances, though? Come on, nationwide, how many "safe space" universities are there? Is it really a common thing, or is it just a rare idea that's overreported because of how many papers stories about "political correctness run amok!" sell?
I just asked for a number. Is that so hard?Maybe you should read them and find out instead.
I just asked for a number. Is that so hard?
You're the one who is telling us what an issue it is, seems you should have the facts to hand alreay.Is it so hard for you to do your own research ?
Soooo... no number of universities that have safe spaces then?I don't want to trigger anyone and force them to seek a safe space.
The facts are there and copious . Start with the the top Ivy league schools, all of them have speech codes and go into hysterics when more conservative speakers come on campus. Check out Milo Yiannopoulos videos on youtube .and .
These schools have even held counseling sessions after Milo has come on campus.
- Brown University.
- Columbia University.
- Cornell University.
- Dartmouth College.
- Harvard University.
- Princeton University.
- University of Pennsylvania.
- Yale University.
You're the one who is telling us what an issue it is, seems you should have the facts to hand alreay.Soooo... no number of universities that have safe spaces then?
Speech code =/= "safe space", either. I think you'll find just about any large organisation has something similar.
Speech Codes and Political Correctness Never Went Away
Scholars, including First Amendment expert Robert O’Neil, claim that politically correct speech codes were given a “decent burial” in the mid-90s. But despite being repeatedly defeated in court, speech codes became the rule rather than the exception on campus.
FIRE has been tracking and rating speech codes at hundreds of colleges and universities since 2006. Eight years ago, 75 percent of the institutions we surveyed maintained policies worthy of FIRE’s “red light” rating, meaning they clearly and substantially restricted freedom of speech. Since then, the percentage of schools with red light speech codes has steadily declined each year.
This good news is due, at least in part, to FIRE’s aggressive campaigning and lawsuits. Over the past few years, the number of campuses with red light policies decreased from 62.1 percent (2013) to 55.2 percent (2015). And, in FIRE’s 2016 speech code report, that figure is below 50 percent (49.3 percent) for the first time. Unfortunately, this may be only a temporary high-water mark; pressure from students and the federal government makes the resurgence of speech codes almost inevitable.
Good article from the CATO Institute:
It is a good informative article. I checked out the website. So out of the 440 universities that they analyzed throughout the nation 49.3% still are in the red light (with written speech codes. That is still a significant number. Who knows what is going on in other colleges and universities that weren't surveyed). The number has decreased mainly due to litigation (and I assume the work that organizations such as this).
Although:
<While speech codes declined overall, FIRE did see a continued increase in restrictive harassment policies in response to the federal government’s unprecedented intervention into universities’ handling of sexual harassment claims. Between September 2014 and September 2015, FIRE downgraded 10 universities from a “yellow light” rating to a red light rating for adopting overly restrictive definitions of sexual harassment students and faculty members being punished for the free expression of constitutionally protected speech......even in the absence of a written policy.>
Thankfully there are organizations that are working to keep these matters in check.
What's wrong with speech codes? I have never experienced an employer or educator that did not have at least some rules, weather written or just generally understood, limiting speech that would be likely to hurt others. Everyone posting in this forum is voluntarily subjecting themselves to one.
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?