9 ms·

An obsession with safe spaces is not just bad for education

152 points by kevindeasis 11y ago

seibelj 11y ago
If you are so weak that words hurt you, that the mere speaking of words makes you damaged, I am afraid that you need psychological help. I feel for men and women who face real dangers. I don't feel for Yale students who must listen to scary ideas.
- rabino 11y ago
  I totally empathize with people that are truly affected by words or ideas. What I can't tolerate is people trying to impose me what I should be offended by.
  - striking 11y ago
    This article says a little about that: http://hlrecord.org/2015/11/fascism-at-yale/ http://hlrecord.org/2015/11/fascism-at-yale/ I realize it's an inflammatory article (Harvard and Yale having their differences, what else is new) but it's definitely a unique take on this phenomenon from a historical perspective.
  - jasonszhao 11y ago
    Like what? Can you give a concrete example?
  - moonchrome 11y ago
    >What I can't tolerate is people trying to impose me what I should be offended by. Nobody really gives a shit until you start policing others so you can't get offended.
- hackuser 11y ago
  > so weak that words hurt you Abstractly, I see the idea that words are intangible and can't possibly hurt you. But we are social animals and it doesn't work that way in reality. Words can get you loved or hated, married or fired, can put you in jail or set you free, start wars and end them, destroy someone's ego and life or elevate it. Words are the most hurtful things there are. The pen is far mightier than the sword.
  - SFLemonade 11y ago
    "Words are the most hurtful things there are." I understand what you're getting at, but that is hilariously untrue and a perfect representation of the delusion that the social justice movement operates under.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
  - Retra 11y ago
    Words are immensely powerful, but they are not that hurtful unless you're a child who expects everyone to love them. The pen is mightier than the sword because a pen will move armies with swords. Not because someone might get their feelings hurt. Addendum: Speech is probably more thoroughly weaponized by calling for censorship that it is by calling someone by offensive phrases.
    - quanticle 11y ago
      >The pen is mightier than the sword because a pen will move armies with swords. And that is exactly what the right words will do. If it's seen as socially acceptable to insult someone, then it's not far from that to having it be socially acceptable to commit physical violence against them. Historically, that's the way it's always worked. I've never once seen or read about an instance of a marginalized group where the insults stopped at racial or ethnic slurs.
      - Retra 11y ago
        You really have to measure these things against the numbers involved though. One person using racial slurs is just one person being a fool. One person with thousands of followers might be a problem.
  - seibelj 11y ago
    This is anecdotal (is it really that anecdotal?), but I have been called so many names throughout my life, and my response is almost always "go fuck yourself", whether said out loud (in so many words) or internally. I honestly don't care, and the bullies don't stop me. Adults don't need institutions to protect them from name calling and hurtful words. Children do.
- thejosh 11y ago
  This is what people should have learned on the playground.
- colmvp 11y ago
  I can't recall the last compliment I received over the last month, but I can tell you with vivid detail the racist words that have been thrown at me over the last ten years for being non-white. One of my friends who is black can recall the exact time years ago when he was sitting on a bus and a complete stranger from across the street called him a nigger. But hey, words don't hurt right?
  - seibelj 11y ago
    Should someone be arrested for saying a racist slur? I'm honestly curious about your opinion.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - vacri 11y ago
      Whoah, that's a bloody wide gap you have there, stretching from "doesn't hurt at all" to "should be imprisoned". The world is nowhere near that polarised.
      - seibelj 11y ago
        I think it would give me a good perspective on the comment author's mindset, which is why I am curious. But do you, vacri, see a huge gap between completely destroying a professor's life, i.e. forcing them to resign their position, give up their salary, tenure, and reputation (which is what these students were asking), and going to prison? Going to prison implies all of the former, it's just an extra debasement on the other penalties, although an extreme one.
        vacri 11y ago
        You're mixing up your arguments. colmvp said that words can hurt - and in response, you're retorting that students are asking for imprisonment of a professor? What? How is that a rebuttal? Regardless of whether the students are successful or are laughed out of college, it has no bearing on colmvp's comment that words can hurt. Basically you're trying to force a false dichotomy, where the options are "nothing at all" and "complete destruction of life". Someone's opinion on such a ridiculously polarised fantasy isn't going to grant any useful insights.
- tedks 11y ago
  This is absolute bullshit. If you yourself think that ~the mere speaking of words~ is so powerless, post your phone number on 4chan and see how long you can stand it. You're a white man, so I can see how you fail to empathize with marginalized groups, but that isn't an excuse.
  - seibelj 11y ago
    An email about costumes and culture vs. hundreds of 4channers threatening physical violence and assault are entirely different things. An idea, which is free speech, and harassment, which is what you are suggesting, are entirely different things.
    - onion2k 11y ago
      An email about costumes and culture vs. hundreds of 4channers threatening physical violence and assault are entirely different things. So some words actually could have an impact then, despite being "just words"?
      - seibelj 11y ago
        Shouting fire in a crowded theater is not covered by free speech. An email explaining an idea about halloween costumes and culture is.
        onion2k 11y ago
        I can certainly agree with that, but the nuance that some words might have an impact while others won't (or shouldn't) was lost in your original statement that "If you are so weak that words hurt you, that the mere speaking of words makes you damaged, I am afraid that you need psychological help." It depends on the words. Absolute statements are never right. ;)
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - dang 11y ago
- rajacombinator 11y ago
  Words convey meaning. It is meaning that hurts, not words themselves. (Or rather, it should be.) However, in this case, it is obviously some moronic brainwashed stormtrooper-students.
hackuser 11y ago
Before discussion takes off, maybe we can have a factual basis for talking about this issue and learn something too: Could anyone who knows describe specifically how 'safe spaces' are implemented? Obviously we would need to talk about particular campuses because each school operates independently and has its own rules. Perhaps a link to the rule itself? I humbly request that you don't respond with a general impression or with memes or things you read or heard about. We're overwhelmed with unreliable information already; more won't make the facts any more clear.
- tedunangst 11y ago
  What do you mean? I would not expect to find the words "safe space" in the mizzou bylaws.
  - hackuser 11y ago
    > What do you mean? I would not expect to find the words "safe space" in the mizzou bylaws. I'm guessing it's defined someplace, if not in the by-laws then either by the school or by the groups that use them. Maybe it's a statement of principles of some group. Also, the idea of a 'safe space' may be based on certain papers or books or research. And that would apply to other issues besides 'safe spaces', such as the effects of racism on the educational environment, etc. It would be useful to see links to some of the student groups' own statements; I only see second-hand information and not even many quotes or interviews with the protesters themselves.
- nickff 11y ago
  Every debate takes place under a constraint of limited information; if you do not wish to base the argument on what may be anecdotal or flawed data, it would be advisable to debate the principle of safe spaces. Which is to say, that it may be more productive for you to ask or answer the questions 'are safe spaces moral if we assume a perfect implementation (as described by the proponent)?', and 'what conditions are required for a good safe space, or what makes a safe space bad?'.
  - 11y ago
_Marak_ 11y ago
I've been following a lot of this develop over Twitter and Youtube. It's both sad and terrifying to see what is transpiring on these college campuses. There was a video filmed ( now taken down from youtube ) where a Yale Silliman College professor was trying to reason with some of these students. The professor vehemently defended the rights to free-speech, while the students screamed at him that offensive speech should not be allowed on campus. When the professor asked, "Who should be responsible for determining what is offensive speech?", a student replied with, "Anything that offends me!".
- peterhadlaw 11y ago
  That professor was mistakenly expecting reason from those students. He behaved and treated them with respect only to be completely disrespected (to put it lightly) himself. It was quite disappointing seeing him try to be honest and fair only to be belligerently yelled at.
  - icanhackit 11y ago
    It was quite disappointing seeing him try to be honest and fair only to be belligerently yelled at. I assume you mean the way he was treated was disappointing, not that he acted as a role-model for young, inexperienced and still developing students. When you say he was mistakenly expecting reason, I think if he was having a discussion with each individual he would have been convincing. When it comes to hanging out with people I live by a (perhaps mean-spirited) rule - the larger the group of people you're talking to, the fewer topics you can delve into deeply. If you have one person you can find a common topic that you can share and dive into. However if someone else joins the two of you, you now need to find a common topic between the three of you. The likely outcome is that it will need to be more popular and less esoteric, thus probably less interesting. Now have a group of people: discussion will be centered around what's on TV etc and political or philosophical discussions need to be watered down heavily or cut out of the discussion. I think a similar thing is going on here - the crowd, collectively, is dumb. Even if it's composed of smart individuals.
- x0x0 11y ago
  Is this where we pretend that there's no history of racial grievances at Yale (or Mizzou), and that history started afresh the minute before this confrontation? An honest accounting of what happened starts with the fact that there is a long history that had people simmering. Free speech is a wonderful principle, but it conflicts with making students, particularly minority students, not feel alienated. This started when someone at Yale sent a relatively anodyne email suggesting (but not ordering!) students be reasonably racially conscious in their costume choices (ie no blackface) [0], and someone who is "charged with setting the 'intellectual, social, and ethical tone of the College'" [1] decided to salt the wound and mocked the idea that students may be legitimately offended by cultural appropriation [2]. As mostly male white people, it's easy to defend free speech when it isn't your people or culture being treated as a costume. If you're curious about Yale, imagine, for starters, how living in, say, Calhoun hall would feel if you're black [3]. Calhoun College, one of the 12 residential colleges at the heart of the university’s undergraduate life. It is named for John C. Calhoun, a Yale valedictorian-turned-politician from South Carolina and one of the 19th century’s foremost white supremacists, who promoted slavery as "a positive good." [1] http://pastebin.com/TLGSdaTg http://pastebin.com/TLGSdaTg [1] http://silliman.yalecollege.yale.edu/people/masters-office http://silliman.yalecollege.yale.edu/people/masters-office [2] https://www.thefire.org/email-from-erika-christakis-dressing-yourselves-email-to-silliman-college-yale-students-on-halloween-costumes/ https://www.thefire.org/email-from-erika-christakis-dressing... [3] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/nyregion/yale-in-debate-over-calhoun-college-grapples-with-ties-to-slavery.html http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/nyregion/yale-in-debate-ov...
jasonszhao 11y ago
The only way to resolve a conflict is to face it, not pretend it isn't there. I think people these days are overly sensitive to sensitive topics. As a (maybe isolated example), just today, I was called closed minded by a few attendees for asking a question during a "open" Q&A session about Islam and terrorism at school. Can't we just get over it and talk maturely?
learc83 11y ago
I think it's becoming evident that 18 is no longer an appropriate age to consider someone an adult. This isn't really even unprecedented, the age at which children were considered adults has shifted throughout history, and to me, it looks like it's shifting again. These problems seem to arise because children are demanding to be treated like children, but we're making the mistake of thinking of them as adults.
- striking 11y ago
  As someone who recently turned 18, I disagree. From my perspective, these children are coddled to hell and back. They're expecting colleges to parent rather than to teach. That's just how they grew up, that's just how they'll try to shape the environment. They don't want to fit the environment, they want the environment to fit them. I've been a competent programmer since I was 16 and not having a degree means no one cares. What does it even mean to be an adult?
  - sosuke 11y ago
    > What does it even mean to be an adult? I've thought of that often. The more time went by the more I found the adults around me were ultimately fallible. The older I've gotten I've questioned my capacity as well. Am I being a good adult? What qualities to I aspire to have? The people I see make it the farthest have the toughest hides. Life doesn't just throw shit at you from time to time it is a waterfall of crap. There is never a right time and waiting for it doesn't help. The adults I like the most set boundaries on life and work. They generally complain a great deal less. They have just as much to complain about, but choose not to waste time on trying to change the things they can't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_Prayer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_Prayer O God, give us the serenity to accept what cannot be changed, The courage to change what can be changed, and the wisdom to know the one from the other I've fallen back to that recently. I've focused my energy on things that I can do to make a difference. For me, for my family and friends. I haven't figured it out. You've no doubt heard of the programmer's imposter syndrome? Well I'm starting to believe that some of the best adults feel like adult imposters. I could ramble for a while on this I guess.
hackuser 11y ago
Let's remember that these are students in their world, college, and an essential part of college and learning is to experiment with ideas and ways of doing things. It has two implications: 1) This is their world, college, even if it's talked about on HN they should not be conforming to our standards. Education, like software development, is about experimenting and failing and learning from it all. College is the place where they can do that. Step back and give them room to grow up. 2) They would be poor students if they weren't doing things that challenge everyone else, especially the older generation. This is where innovation and innovators will come from. I hope they don't give %!#@! what everyone is saying about them; it would be tragic if we quashed their spirit.
- etwigg 11y ago
  I agree that college is a chance to experiment and make mistakes. But I hope that they fail in making the changes they're advocating for. It's good to hear people you disagree with. The students at Yale have been preventing opportunities to hear people they disagree with.
- moonchrome 11y ago
  >This is where innovation and innovators will come from. That's the really scary part - you'll have to sift trough these guys to hire someone one day, fortunately this doesn't represent 100% of student population.
- justinsingh 11y ago
  The problem I identify is that such "safe places", from what I understand, discourage experimentation and new ideas by shaming concepts that may offend them. I am interested in hearing your logic behind how this specific movement is going to generate innovation & innovators, as I think you are claiming (correct me if I'm wrong please). I think you may be mistaken if you believe this is just a challenge against the older generation- it seems to be a challenge against the ideas that do not conform to their criteria of having to be inoffensive.
  - rtpg 11y ago
eridius 11y ago
I find it really hard to believe this article is presenting a fair argument when it makes claims like: > People as different as Condoleezza Rice, a former secretary of state, and Bill Maher, a satirist, have been dissuaded from giving speeches on campuses, sometimes on grounds of safety. There are some really good reasons why students protested to prevent the school from paying $35k for a 35-minute speech (Condoleezza's speaker fee for the speech in question), such as the fact that many people consider her to be a war criminal (which IIRC was in fact the basis for the protest, that and her role in an administration that promoted torture, not some unsubstantiated claim about feeling unsafe). I was unfamiliar with the Bill Maher speech issue before, but a quick search shows that the protest there was about remarks Bill made on his show that students felt were racist towards Muslims.
- hackuser 11y ago
  The essential point is that it's a grey area. We won't accept people behaving just any way at all but also we want to maximize people's freedom. As much as people want to apply a hard rule, there is no simple answer to how to draw that line.
- nickff 11y ago
  I can come up with moral and ethical objections for any given speaker; if one does not want money going to morally debatable speakers, they should object to all paid speakers. I believe objecting to all paid speakers on campus to be a defensible position, but paying for a variety of speakers also seems to be a strong position.
  - thedz 11y ago
    Everyone has their own lines for when a speaker is too objectionable, I honestly don't have a problem with someone protesting some speakers but not others. I mean, isn't that precisely what protesting something is? (That said, there are definitely I think good and bad ways to protest, and also reactionary protests that escalate way past what's acceptable)
    - 11y ago
thedz 11y ago
As with many articles on the subject, I think it's important to define what precisely "safe spaces" mean. The Economist attempts to define a "good" version: > Like many bad ideas, the notion of safe spaces at universities has its roots in a good one. Gay people once used the term to refer to bars and clubs where they could gather without fear, at a time when many states still had laws against sodomy. I've seen it written elsewhere that there are many existing safe space where people can come together and talk: an Asian American gathering, or Black Student Union meetings, or LGBT support groups, etc. I think these spaces are critical for the comfortable discussion and sharing of some pretty private details about a person's struggles and thoughts. These spaces aren't meant to dissuade dissenting opinion so much as provide a place where people feel safe to express their thoughts with others who understand, empathize, or have undergone similar situations/thoughts. But there's always going to be impletations taken to extremes, and the Economist article appears to be targeting those. But I wonder: exactly how prevalent are safe spaces that act as "justification for shutting out ideas"? At least anecdotally, I haven't seen that many. This feels like taking what seems to me a minority of safe spaces and painting the entire idea with broad strokes. I worry that people are strawmanning the idea of safe spaces by only using egregious examples as examples of bad, while ignoring the (IMO) vast amounts of good they have helped foster.
- rashkov 11y ago
  That's a really interesting historical perspective, thanks for bringing it up. That concept of safe spaces seems wholly constructive and positive. However I think the concept has been coopted by an illiberal leftist movement on college campuses. Its practitioners seek to shut down dissent on the topics of race and sexuality in particular. It seems to be a return of the political correctness movement. There was an interesting article on it recently: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/secret-confessions-of-the-anti-anti-pc-crowd.html http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/secret-confessi...
- aetherson 11y ago
  My only real experience with "safe spaces" has been a continuing call for an internet forum that I frequented to be a "safe space." In my experience with that, 100% of the time "safe space" meant "throw out anyone who disagrees with me even a little on this topic."
KayEss 11y ago
This sort of attitude is a really scary thing -- the west seems on the brink of losing all of its values. How on earth am I going to make sure that my 5 year old doesn't end up this way?
- newjersey 11y ago
  Probably the most important thing you can do is you can try to NOT be a helicopter parent.
  - hanniabu 11y ago
    I've never heard that term before...is that an over protective parent?
    - Abraln 11y ago
      Kind of, but also "hovering" nearby to prevent every scraped knee and to step in whenever the child faces any difficulty.
- littletimmy 11y ago
  Frequent trips to the third world. Let your child not be so coddled that he/she thinks the greatest misfortune that can befall a person is seeing an offensive costume.
  - KayEss 11y ago
    Actually, we already live in the third world :) (Thailand), but the attitude exists here too. When university professors suggested that there should be less censorship the university students rose up against them.
Pxtl 11y ago
Is it really infantilizing people to ask them not to wear offensive costumes? Is a polite request so absurd between adults?
- lingben 11y ago
  So who decides what is or is not offensive? Can anyone? How is one to predict what may or may not offend someone? What if I find your comment and tone offensive? does that mean that you have to now remove it? or that you'll censor youself in the future, lest you continue to offend me? And if you attempt to question the genuineness of my offense, then I take further offense at you attempting to de-legitimizing my original offense taken. To ground my point by way of example, consider this lunacy about the cry of "Japanese cultural appropriation" and how that is 'offensive': http://cheshireinthemiddle.tumblr.com/post/131407267302/ginzers-spoopy-roxxi-ginzers http://cheshireinthemiddle.tumblr.com/post/131407267302/ginz... Happily it was put to rest (by an ethnically Japanese person) but this is typical of the insanity that has taken over most campuses in the US right now Yes, it is infantalization to request that others self-censor just in case they may cause offense to you. there is no 'right to not be offended': https://youtu.be/fHMoDt3nSHs?t=201 https://youtu.be/fHMoDt3nSHs?t=201
  - Pxtl 11y ago
    Hypothetically, if somebody went out to halloween as Foetus-Eating Penis Hitler, I'd think we'd agree it's tasteless and inappropriate. At that point, everything is a spectrum between the banal and the monstrous. You just draw the line in different spots from others.
    - lingben 11y ago
      Actually, I'm not sure we'd agree. Personally I'd probably find that costume hilarious (depending on how well it was executed) but then I have a dark sense of humor. For example, I find this anecdote from John Cleese about his mother hilarious: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f74L2hRZE1Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f74L2hRZE1Y But let's assume that I found that costume 'offensive'. What would I be entitled to do? that is, what should I be able to do? Nothing. That is, other than get offended, I don't have a right to do anything other than that. I certainly don't have a right to not be offended. Taking offense is so subjective that it is meaningless. Think of it this way, you may not like mayo on your french fries but a lot of people do. Does that mean that you have to force others to not enjoy their french fries with mayo? No. It just means that you eat what you like and leave others to enjoy the foods they enjoy. Gosh... now that I've typed that out I hardly can believe that it has become so irrational that we have to actually spell out such things to one another as adults in the year 2015. sigh
jagger27 11y ago
The last I had heard of the term was in high school where a handful of teachers and administrators had a small rainbow sticker on the windows of their doors indicating that the room was a place where one would feel safe from discrimination. It was an anti-bullying movement that not provided a place to eat lunch, do work, etc. but more importantly gave victims a place to seek help and privately report offences. Bear in mind the system came into existence to fight homophobia. The beast this movement has evolved into, if it has any relationship to the system I knew, has come completely off the rails and seems to me to be turning into the bully.
MCRed 11y ago
For the record, in the 1980s I started a campus liberal organization that eventually went nation wide. The Progressive Student Network. Our positions were totally in favor of free speech and totally defending "offensive speech" in particular. One thing todays liberals don't seem to get is that marginalized people are the ones who get silenced when free speech isn't protected. I never thought I would say this, but without Jesse Helms to kick around, liberals seem to have forgotten what they stood for. (we stood for human rights, unequivocally back then. But there was no right "not to be offended.")
picklesman 11y ago
I'm reminded of this piece from a year ago. Called "Everything is problematic" it's written from the perspective of someone heavily involved with the radical left/queer scene and how they increasingly noticed a certain brand of anti-intellectualism that has taken hold. somewhat long, but well written http://www.mcgilldaily.com/2014/11/everything-problematic/ http://www.mcgilldaily.com/2014/11/everything-problematic/
thex10 11y ago
Ugh! I'm so sick of seeing the media flip out over.. all of this. Did I miss something, or is this piece not attributed? If the author is not an educator than I'm not gonna trust their opinion on what's good for education. If they're not a minority I'm not gonna trust their opinion on safe spaces. Just a matter of having the right qualifications. The title statement claims to have some insider knowledge as to what's a "worthwhile" protest, while at the same time dismissing concerns for space space as worthless. What in the ever living hell. > The University of Missouri episode shows how damaging this confusion can be: some activists tried to prevent the college’s own newspaper from covering their demonstration, claiming that to do so would have endangered their safe space, thereby rendering a reasonable protest absurd. That's "damaging" only to the media wanting to tear into the story so quickly. CRY ME A RIVER.
- seibelj 11y ago
  The Economist has its quirks, one of which is to never assign attribution. The newspaper itself stands behind everything printed. If you disagree with the article, you disagree with the institution's opinion.
  - thex10 11y ago
    Thanks for that clarification. That is perfectly ok with me.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
setra 11y ago
Looks to me like academia his now facing the consequences of the ideology many individuals in it push.
- lexcorvus 11y ago
  Indeed, there's a lot of Schadenfreude going on here. The chickens are coming home to roost.
JumpCrisscross 11y ago
Is there a link between the changing socio-economic makeup of our nation's elite college student bodies and these phenomena?
hguant 11y ago
This is the result of a privileged class (if you're going to college, any college, in America, you're doing better than the vast majority of the world) wanting to be part of what it perceives as the revolution of our time. Whether or not this was based on legitimate claims or not, this has devolved into a completely arbitrary "revolution for revolution's sake" morass of nonsense. It's shameful thinking that this is how my generation is going to be perceived in years to come.
- bjkbjkvjkvkj 11y ago
  If you ask me, it's more of a diversionary revolution to distract from the current corporate power grab and disappearing civil liberties. Controlled opposition, if you will. Major political donors will tend to lean toward candidates that support these social justice policies rather than ones which might endanger their position of power. When that happens, the ideology of an entire political platform, and that of everyone associated with it, is up for grabs. It may not be intentional, but these are the results that we're left with.
  - CM30 11y ago
    Thank you for posting this, because it's something I've personally suspected for quite a while. If you want to destroy a counter movement or opposing political side/class, the best thing to do is to turn them against each other. Now notice how just before this whole privilege/safe spaces/other crap started, things like Occupy were pointing out income inequality and perhaps making a few people nervous... I don't think it's a coincidence.
    - malandrew 11y ago
      That's basically what is happening with rent in SF. The landlords and other owners have basically turned the middle and lower class against newcomers to distract everyone from the real problem, which is a lack of supply.
lexcorvus 11y ago
I believe that many people genuinely feel unsafe when in the presence of someone whose political beliefs offend them. The problem arises when that person, or those beliefs, do not in fact represent a threat. In such a case, feeling unsafe is delusional. Indulging this delusion just invites more delusion, which predictably spirals out of control. The solution is to explain that feeling unsafe is unjustified when there is no credible threat. This strategy is not presently a reliable route to political power, which is why it's not being pursued. On the contrary, every concession to the delusion—e.g., the creation of "safe spaces" to protect people from largely imaginary threats—is testament to the present power of complaint. As long as there are special "protected" classes under the law (in the name, of course, of equality), we can expect more of the same.
venomsnake 11y ago
Question - doesn't that give wonderful options for further discrimination? While excluding someone for his race is a non starter, not hiring him because of activities he was involved, especially causing unrest in college could fly.
malandrew 11y ago
What I find most strange in this is that safe spaces used to be places where individuals voluntarily gathered to be insulated from something and to feel comfortable opening up to their peers. The classic examples are supports groups. The problem as I see is it that people who appreciate having a safe space are now trying to change the venue to one where participation is no longer consensual. Take three locations, A, B and C. A and B are empty and C is a large room with all of society. Now take two groups, a majority and a minority group. Members of the minority group wants a space where they can relate to other members of their group and avoid those who aren't members and can't relate. This is space A and what most people are calling a "safe space". Members of the majority group do the same. This is space B. Members of the majority group call this a "club/clubhouse". There really isn't much difference between a safe space and a clubhouse. Both are places where likeminded people can gather, relate to one another and conveniently ignore everything around them that they don't have to interact with. The tragedy now is that space C, the public space is crumbling because it contains people from both groups trying to "improver the public clubhouse" from their perspective, ignoring the perspectives of the others. You simply can't take a public space and make it a more comfortable/safe place for one group without likely alienating some of the people already occupying that same public space. A lecture hall on campus can be a safe space, but designating an entire campus as a safe space without enthusiastic consent from everyone already occupying that public space is oppressive to anyone that disagrees.

152 points by kevindeasis 11y ago

If you are so weak that words hurt you, that the mere speaking of words makes you damaged, I am afraid that you need psychological help. I feel for men and women who face real dangers. I don't feel for Yale students who must listen to scary ideas.

rabino 11y ago
I totally empathize with people that are truly affected by words or ideas. What I can't tolerate is people trying to impose me what I should be offended by.
- striking 11y ago
  This article says a little about that: http://hlrecord.org/2015/11/fascism-at-yale/ http://hlrecord.org/2015/11/fascism-at-yale/ I realize it's an inflammatory article (Harvard and Yale having their differences, what else is new) but it's definitely a unique take on this phenomenon from a historical perspective.
- jasonszhao 11y ago
  Like what? Can you give a concrete example?
- moonchrome 11y ago
  >What I can't tolerate is people trying to impose me what I should be offended by. Nobody really gives a shit until you start policing others so you can't get offended.
hackuser 11y ago
> so weak that words hurt you Abstractly, I see the idea that words are intangible and can't possibly hurt you. But we are social animals and it doesn't work that way in reality. Words can get you loved or hated, married or fired, can put you in jail or set you free, start wars and end them, destroy someone's ego and life or elevate it. Words are the most hurtful things there are. The pen is far mightier than the sword.
- SFLemonade 11y ago
  "Words are the most hurtful things there are." I understand what you're getting at, but that is hilariously untrue and a perfect representation of the delusion that the social justice movement operates under.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- Retra 11y ago
  Words are immensely powerful, but they are not that hurtful unless you're a child who expects everyone to love them. The pen is mightier than the sword because a pen will move armies with swords. Not because someone might get their feelings hurt. Addendum: Speech is probably more thoroughly weaponized by calling for censorship that it is by calling someone by offensive phrases.
  - quanticle 11y ago
    >The pen is mightier than the sword because a pen will move armies with swords. And that is exactly what the right words will do. If it's seen as socially acceptable to insult someone, then it's not far from that to having it be socially acceptable to commit physical violence against them. Historically, that's the way it's always worked. I've never once seen or read about an instance of a marginalized group where the insults stopped at racial or ethnic slurs.
    - Retra 11y ago
      You really have to measure these things against the numbers involved though. One person using racial slurs is just one person being a fool. One person with thousands of followers might be a problem.
- seibelj 11y ago
  This is anecdotal (is it really that anecdotal?), but I have been called so many names throughout my life, and my response is almost always "go fuck yourself", whether said out loud (in so many words) or internally. I honestly don't care, and the bullies don't stop me. Adults don't need institutions to protect them from name calling and hurtful words. Children do.
thejosh 11y ago
This is what people should have learned on the playground.
colmvp 11y ago
I can't recall the last compliment I received over the last month, but I can tell you with vivid detail the racist words that have been thrown at me over the last ten years for being non-white. One of my friends who is black can recall the exact time years ago when he was sitting on a bus and a complete stranger from across the street called him a nigger. But hey, words don't hurt right?
- seibelj 11y ago
  Should someone be arrested for saying a racist slur? I'm honestly curious about your opinion.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - vacri 11y ago
    Whoah, that's a bloody wide gap you have there, stretching from "doesn't hurt at all" to "should be imprisoned". The world is nowhere near that polarised.
    - seibelj 11y ago
      I think it would give me a good perspective on the comment author's mindset, which is why I am curious. But do you, vacri, see a huge gap between completely destroying a professor's life, i.e. forcing them to resign their position, give up their salary, tenure, and reputation (which is what these students were asking), and going to prison? Going to prison implies all of the former, it's just an extra debasement on the other penalties, although an extreme one.
      - vacri 11y ago
        You're mixing up your arguments. colmvp said that words can hurt - and in response, you're retorting that students are asking for imprisonment of a professor? What? How is that a rebuttal? Regardless of whether the students are successful or are laughed out of college, it has no bearing on colmvp's comment that words can hurt. Basically you're trying to force a false dichotomy, where the options are "nothing at all" and "complete destruction of life". Someone's opinion on such a ridiculously polarised fantasy isn't going to grant any useful insights.
tedks 11y ago
This is absolute bullshit. If you yourself think that ~the mere speaking of words~ is so powerless, post your phone number on 4chan and see how long you can stand it. You're a white man, so I can see how you fail to empathize with marginalized groups, but that isn't an excuse.
- seibelj 11y ago
  An email about costumes and culture vs. hundreds of 4channers threatening physical violence and assault are entirely different things. An idea, which is free speech, and harassment, which is what you are suggesting, are entirely different things.
  - onion2k 11y ago
    An email about costumes and culture vs. hundreds of 4channers threatening physical violence and assault are entirely different things. So some words actually could have an impact then, despite being "just words"?
    - seibelj 11y ago
      Shouting fire in a crowded theater is not covered by free speech. An email explaining an idea about halloween costumes and culture is.
      - onion2k 11y ago
        I can certainly agree with that, but the nuance that some words might have an impact while others won't (or shouldn't) was lost in your original statement that "If you are so weak that words hurt you, that the mere speaking of words makes you damaged, I am afraid that you need psychological help." It depends on the words. Absolute statements are never right. ;)
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- dang 11y ago
rajacombinator 11y ago
Words convey meaning. It is meaning that hurts, not words themselves. (Or rather, it should be.) However, in this case, it is obviously some moronic brainwashed stormtrooper-students.

hackuser 11y ago

Before discussion takes off, maybe we can have a factual basis for talking about this issue and learn something too: Could anyone who knows describe specifically how 'safe spaces' are implemented? Obviously we would need to talk about particular campuses because each school operates independently and has its own rules. Perhaps a link to the rule itself? I humbly request that you don't respond with a general impression or with memes or things you read or heard about. We're overwhelmed with unreliable information already; more won't make the facts any more clear.

tedunangst 11y ago
What do you mean? I would not expect to find the words "safe space" in the mizzou bylaws.
- hackuser 11y ago
  > What do you mean? I would not expect to find the words "safe space" in the mizzou bylaws. I'm guessing it's defined someplace, if not in the by-laws then either by the school or by the groups that use them. Maybe it's a statement of principles of some group. Also, the idea of a 'safe space' may be based on certain papers or books or research. And that would apply to other issues besides 'safe spaces', such as the effects of racism on the educational environment, etc. It would be useful to see links to some of the student groups' own statements; I only see second-hand information and not even many quotes or interviews with the protesters themselves.
nickff 11y ago
Every debate takes place under a constraint of limited information; if you do not wish to base the argument on what may be anecdotal or flawed data, it would be advisable to debate the principle of safe spaces. Which is to say, that it may be more productive for you to ask or answer the questions 'are safe spaces moral if we assume a perfect implementation (as described by the proponent)?', and 'what conditions are required for a good safe space, or what makes a safe space bad?'.
- 11y ago

_Marak_ 11y ago

I've been following a lot of this develop over Twitter and Youtube. It's both sad and terrifying to see what is transpiring on these college campuses. There was a video filmed ( now taken down from youtube ) where a Yale Silliman College professor was trying to reason with some of these students. The professor vehemently defended the rights to free-speech, while the students screamed at him that offensive speech should not be allowed on campus. When the professor asked, "Who should be responsible for determining what is offensive speech?", a student replied with, "Anything that offends me!".

peterhadlaw 11y ago
That professor was mistakenly expecting reason from those students. He behaved and treated them with respect only to be completely disrespected (to put it lightly) himself. It was quite disappointing seeing him try to be honest and fair only to be belligerently yelled at.
- icanhackit 11y ago
  It was quite disappointing seeing him try to be honest and fair only to be belligerently yelled at. I assume you mean the way he was treated was disappointing, not that he acted as a role-model for young, inexperienced and still developing students. When you say he was mistakenly expecting reason, I think if he was having a discussion with each individual he would have been convincing. When it comes to hanging out with people I live by a (perhaps mean-spirited) rule - the larger the group of people you're talking to, the fewer topics you can delve into deeply. If you have one person you can find a common topic that you can share and dive into. However if someone else joins the two of you, you now need to find a common topic between the three of you. The likely outcome is that it will need to be more popular and less esoteric, thus probably less interesting. Now have a group of people: discussion will be centered around what's on TV etc and political or philosophical discussions need to be watered down heavily or cut out of the discussion. I think a similar thing is going on here - the crowd, collectively, is dumb. Even if it's composed of smart individuals.
x0x0 11y ago
Is this where we pretend that there's no history of racial grievances at Yale (or Mizzou), and that history started afresh the minute before this confrontation? An honest accounting of what happened starts with the fact that there is a long history that had people simmering. Free speech is a wonderful principle, but it conflicts with making students, particularly minority students, not feel alienated. This started when someone at Yale sent a relatively anodyne email suggesting (but not ordering!) students be reasonably racially conscious in their costume choices (ie no blackface) [0], and someone who is "charged with setting the 'intellectual, social, and ethical tone of the College'" [1] decided to salt the wound and mocked the idea that students may be legitimately offended by cultural appropriation [2]. As mostly male white people, it's easy to defend free speech when it isn't your people or culture being treated as a costume. If you're curious about Yale, imagine, for starters, how living in, say, Calhoun hall would feel if you're black [3]. Calhoun College, one of the 12 residential colleges at the heart of the university’s undergraduate life. It is named for John C. Calhoun, a Yale valedictorian-turned-politician from South Carolina and one of the 19th century’s foremost white supremacists, who promoted slavery as "a positive good." [1] http://pastebin.com/TLGSdaTg http://pastebin.com/TLGSdaTg [1] http://silliman.yalecollege.yale.edu/people/masters-office http://silliman.yalecollege.yale.edu/people/masters-office [2] https://www.thefire.org/email-from-erika-christakis-dressing-yourselves-email-to-silliman-college-yale-students-on-halloween-costumes/ https://www.thefire.org/email-from-erika-christakis-dressing... [3] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/nyregion/yale-in-debate-over-calhoun-college-grapples-with-ties-to-slavery.html http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/nyregion/yale-in-debate-ov...

jasonszhao 11y ago

The only way to resolve a conflict is to face it, not pretend it isn't there. I think people these days are overly sensitive to sensitive topics. As a (maybe isolated example), just today, I was called closed minded by a few attendees for asking a question during a "open" Q&A session about Islam and terrorism at school. Can't we just get over it and talk maturely?

learc83 11y ago

I think it's becoming evident that 18 is no longer an appropriate age to consider someone an adult. This isn't really even unprecedented, the age at which children were considered adults has shifted throughout history, and to me, it looks like it's shifting again. These problems seem to arise because children are demanding to be treated like children, but we're making the mistake of thinking of them as adults.

striking 11y ago
As someone who recently turned 18, I disagree. From my perspective, these children are coddled to hell and back. They're expecting colleges to parent rather than to teach. That's just how they grew up, that's just how they'll try to shape the environment. They don't want to fit the environment, they want the environment to fit them. I've been a competent programmer since I was 16 and not having a degree means no one cares. What does it even mean to be an adult?
- sosuke 11y ago
  > What does it even mean to be an adult? I've thought of that often. The more time went by the more I found the adults around me were ultimately fallible. The older I've gotten I've questioned my capacity as well. Am I being a good adult? What qualities to I aspire to have? The people I see make it the farthest have the toughest hides. Life doesn't just throw shit at you from time to time it is a waterfall of crap. There is never a right time and waiting for it doesn't help. The adults I like the most set boundaries on life and work. They generally complain a great deal less. They have just as much to complain about, but choose not to waste time on trying to change the things they can't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_Prayer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_Prayer O God, give us the serenity to accept what cannot be changed, The courage to change what can be changed, and the wisdom to know the one from the other I've fallen back to that recently. I've focused my energy on things that I can do to make a difference. For me, for my family and friends. I haven't figured it out. You've no doubt heard of the programmer's imposter syndrome? Well I'm starting to believe that some of the best adults feel like adult imposters. I could ramble for a while on this I guess.

hackuser 11y ago

Let's remember that these are students in their world, college, and an essential part of college and learning is to experiment with ideas and ways of doing things. It has two implications: 1) This is their world, college, even if it's talked about on HN they should not be conforming to our standards. Education, like software development, is about experimenting and failing and learning from it all. College is the place where they can do that. Step back and give them room to grow up. 2) They would be poor students if they weren't doing things that challenge everyone else, especially the older generation. This is where innovation and innovators will come from. I hope they don't give %!#@! what everyone is saying about them; it would be tragic if we quashed their spirit.

etwigg 11y ago
I agree that college is a chance to experiment and make mistakes. But I hope that they fail in making the changes they're advocating for. It's good to hear people you disagree with. The students at Yale have been preventing opportunities to hear people they disagree with.
moonchrome 11y ago
>This is where innovation and innovators will come from. That's the really scary part - you'll have to sift trough these guys to hire someone one day, fortunately this doesn't represent 100% of student population.
justinsingh 11y ago
The problem I identify is that such "safe places", from what I understand, discourage experimentation and new ideas by shaming concepts that may offend them. I am interested in hearing your logic behind how this specific movement is going to generate innovation & innovators, as I think you are claiming (correct me if I'm wrong please). I think you may be mistaken if you believe this is just a challenge against the older generation- it seems to be a challenge against the ideas that do not conform to their criteria of having to be inoffensive.
- rtpg 11y ago

eridius 11y ago

I find it really hard to believe this article is presenting a fair argument when it makes claims like: > People as different as Condoleezza Rice, a former secretary of state, and Bill Maher, a satirist, have been dissuaded from giving speeches on campuses, sometimes on grounds of safety. There are some really good reasons why students protested to prevent the school from paying $35k for a 35-minute speech (Condoleezza's speaker fee for the speech in question), such as the fact that many people consider her to be a war criminal (which IIRC was in fact the basis for the protest, that and her role in an administration that promoted torture, not some unsubstantiated claim about feeling unsafe). I was unfamiliar with the Bill Maher speech issue before, but a quick search shows that the protest there was about remarks Bill made on his show that students felt were racist towards Muslims.

hackuser 11y ago
The essential point is that it's a grey area. We won't accept people behaving just any way at all but also we want to maximize people's freedom. As much as people want to apply a hard rule, there is no simple answer to how to draw that line.
nickff 11y ago
I can come up with moral and ethical objections for any given speaker; if one does not want money going to morally debatable speakers, they should object to all paid speakers. I believe objecting to all paid speakers on campus to be a defensible position, but paying for a variety of speakers also seems to be a strong position.
- thedz 11y ago
  Everyone has their own lines for when a speaker is too objectionable, I honestly don't have a problem with someone protesting some speakers but not others. I mean, isn't that precisely what protesting something is? (That said, there are definitely I think good and bad ways to protest, and also reactionary protests that escalate way past what's acceptable)
  - 11y ago

thedz 11y ago

As with many articles on the subject, I think it's important to define what precisely "safe spaces" mean. The Economist attempts to define a "good" version: > Like many bad ideas, the notion of safe spaces at universities has its roots in a good one. Gay people once used the term to refer to bars and clubs where they could gather without fear, at a time when many states still had laws against sodomy. I've seen it written elsewhere that there are many existing safe space where people can come together and talk: an Asian American gathering, or Black Student Union meetings, or LGBT support groups, etc. I think these spaces are critical for the comfortable discussion and sharing of some pretty private details about a person's struggles and thoughts. These spaces aren't meant to dissuade dissenting opinion so much as provide a place where people feel safe to express their thoughts with others who understand, empathize, or have undergone similar situations/thoughts. But there's always going to be impletations taken to extremes, and the Economist article appears to be targeting those. But I wonder: exactly how prevalent are safe spaces that act as "justification for shutting out ideas"? At least anecdotally, I haven't seen that many. This feels like taking what seems to me a minority of safe spaces and painting the entire idea with broad strokes. I worry that people are strawmanning the idea of safe spaces by only using egregious examples as examples of bad, while ignoring the (IMO) vast amounts of good they have helped foster.

rashkov 11y ago
That's a really interesting historical perspective, thanks for bringing it up. That concept of safe spaces seems wholly constructive and positive. However I think the concept has been coopted by an illiberal leftist movement on college campuses. Its practitioners seek to shut down dissent on the topics of race and sexuality in particular. It seems to be a return of the political correctness movement. There was an interesting article on it recently: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/secret-confessions-of-the-anti-anti-pc-crowd.html http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/secret-confessi...
aetherson 11y ago
My only real experience with "safe spaces" has been a continuing call for an internet forum that I frequented to be a "safe space." In my experience with that, 100% of the time "safe space" meant "throw out anyone who disagrees with me even a little on this topic."

KayEss 11y ago

This sort of attitude is a really scary thing -- the west seems on the brink of losing all of its values. How on earth am I going to make sure that my 5 year old doesn't end up this way?

newjersey 11y ago
Probably the most important thing you can do is you can try to NOT be a helicopter parent.
- hanniabu 11y ago
  I've never heard that term before...is that an over protective parent?
  - Abraln 11y ago
    Kind of, but also "hovering" nearby to prevent every scraped knee and to step in whenever the child faces any difficulty.
littletimmy 11y ago
Frequent trips to the third world. Let your child not be so coddled that he/she thinks the greatest misfortune that can befall a person is seeing an offensive costume.
- KayEss 11y ago
  Actually, we already live in the third world :) (Thailand), but the attitude exists here too. When university professors suggested that there should be less censorship the university students rose up against them.

Pxtl 11y ago

Is it really infantilizing people to ask them not to wear offensive costumes? Is a polite request so absurd between adults?

lingben 11y ago
So who decides what is or is not offensive? Can anyone? How is one to predict what may or may not offend someone? What if I find your comment and tone offensive? does that mean that you have to now remove it? or that you'll censor youself in the future, lest you continue to offend me? And if you attempt to question the genuineness of my offense, then I take further offense at you attempting to de-legitimizing my original offense taken. To ground my point by way of example, consider this lunacy about the cry of "Japanese cultural appropriation" and how that is 'offensive': http://cheshireinthemiddle.tumblr.com/post/131407267302/ginzers-spoopy-roxxi-ginzers http://cheshireinthemiddle.tumblr.com/post/131407267302/ginz... Happily it was put to rest (by an ethnically Japanese person) but this is typical of the insanity that has taken over most campuses in the US right now Yes, it is infantalization to request that others self-censor just in case they may cause offense to you. there is no 'right to not be offended': https://youtu.be/fHMoDt3nSHs?t=201 https://youtu.be/fHMoDt3nSHs?t=201
- Pxtl 11y ago
  Hypothetically, if somebody went out to halloween as Foetus-Eating Penis Hitler, I'd think we'd agree it's tasteless and inappropriate. At that point, everything is a spectrum between the banal and the monstrous. You just draw the line in different spots from others.
  - lingben 11y ago
    Actually, I'm not sure we'd agree. Personally I'd probably find that costume hilarious (depending on how well it was executed) but then I have a dark sense of humor. For example, I find this anecdote from John Cleese about his mother hilarious: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f74L2hRZE1Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f74L2hRZE1Y But let's assume that I found that costume 'offensive'. What would I be entitled to do? that is, what should I be able to do? Nothing. That is, other than get offended, I don't have a right to do anything other than that. I certainly don't have a right to not be offended. Taking offense is so subjective that it is meaningless. Think of it this way, you may not like mayo on your french fries but a lot of people do. Does that mean that you have to force others to not enjoy their french fries with mayo? No. It just means that you eat what you like and leave others to enjoy the foods they enjoy. Gosh... now that I've typed that out I hardly can believe that it has become so irrational that we have to actually spell out such things to one another as adults in the year 2015. sigh

jagger27 11y ago

The last I had heard of the term was in high school where a handful of teachers and administrators had a small rainbow sticker on the windows of their doors indicating that the room was a place where one would feel safe from discrimination. It was an anti-bullying movement that not provided a place to eat lunch, do work, etc. but more importantly gave victims a place to seek help and privately report offences. Bear in mind the system came into existence to fight homophobia. The beast this movement has evolved into, if it has any relationship to the system I knew, has come completely off the rails and seems to me to be turning into the bully.

MCRed 11y ago

For the record, in the 1980s I started a campus liberal organization that eventually went nation wide. The Progressive Student Network. Our positions were totally in favor of free speech and totally defending "offensive speech" in particular. One thing todays liberals don't seem to get is that marginalized people are the ones who get silenced when free speech isn't protected. I never thought I would say this, but without Jesse Helms to kick around, liberals seem to have forgotten what they stood for. (we stood for human rights, unequivocally back then. But there was no right "not to be offended.")

picklesman 11y ago

I'm reminded of this piece from a year ago. Called "Everything is problematic" it's written from the perspective of someone heavily involved with the radical left/queer scene and how they increasingly noticed a certain brand of anti-intellectualism that has taken hold. somewhat long, but well written http://www.mcgilldaily.com/2014/11/everything-problematic/ http://www.mcgilldaily.com/2014/11/everything-problematic/

thex10 11y ago

Ugh! I'm so sick of seeing the media flip out over.. all of this. Did I miss something, or is this piece not attributed? If the author is not an educator than I'm not gonna trust their opinion on what's good for education. If they're not a minority I'm not gonna trust their opinion on safe spaces. Just a matter of having the right qualifications. The title statement claims to have some insider knowledge as to what's a "worthwhile" protest, while at the same time dismissing concerns for space space as worthless. What in the ever living hell. > The University of Missouri episode shows how damaging this confusion can be: some activists tried to prevent the college’s own newspaper from covering their demonstration, claiming that to do so would have endangered their safe space, thereby rendering a reasonable protest absurd. That's "damaging" only to the media wanting to tear into the story so quickly. CRY ME A RIVER.

seibelj 11y ago
The Economist has its quirks, one of which is to never assign attribution. The newspaper itself stands behind everything printed. If you disagree with the article, you disagree with the institution's opinion.
- thex10 11y ago
  Thanks for that clarification. That is perfectly ok with me.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

setra 11y ago

Looks to me like academia his now facing the consequences of the ideology many individuals in it push.

lexcorvus 11y ago
Indeed, there's a lot of Schadenfreude going on here. The chickens are coming home to roost.

JumpCrisscross 11y ago

Is there a link between the changing socio-economic makeup of our nation's elite college student bodies and these phenomena?

hguant 11y ago

This is the result of a privileged class (if you're going to college, any college, in America, you're doing better than the vast majority of the world) wanting to be part of what it perceives as the revolution of our time. Whether or not this was based on legitimate claims or not, this has devolved into a completely arbitrary "revolution for revolution's sake" morass of nonsense. It's shameful thinking that this is how my generation is going to be perceived in years to come.

bjkbjkvjkvkj 11y ago
If you ask me, it's more of a diversionary revolution to distract from the current corporate power grab and disappearing civil liberties. Controlled opposition, if you will. Major political donors will tend to lean toward candidates that support these social justice policies rather than ones which might endanger their position of power. When that happens, the ideology of an entire political platform, and that of everyone associated with it, is up for grabs. It may not be intentional, but these are the results that we're left with.
- CM30 11y ago
  Thank you for posting this, because it's something I've personally suspected for quite a while. If you want to destroy a counter movement or opposing political side/class, the best thing to do is to turn them against each other. Now notice how just before this whole privilege/safe spaces/other crap started, things like Occupy were pointing out income inequality and perhaps making a few people nervous... I don't think it's a coincidence.
  - malandrew 11y ago
    That's basically what is happening with rent in SF. The landlords and other owners have basically turned the middle and lower class against newcomers to distract everyone from the real problem, which is a lack of supply.

lexcorvus 11y ago

I believe that many people genuinely feel unsafe when in the presence of someone whose political beliefs offend them. The problem arises when that person, or those beliefs, do not in fact represent a threat. In such a case, feeling unsafe is delusional. Indulging this delusion just invites more delusion, which predictably spirals out of control. The solution is to explain that feeling unsafe is unjustified when there is no credible threat. This strategy is not presently a reliable route to political power, which is why it's not being pursued. On the contrary, every concession to the delusion—e.g., the creation of "safe spaces" to protect people from largely imaginary threats—is testament to the present power of complaint. As long as there are special "protected" classes under the law (in the name, of course, of equality), we can expect more of the same.

venomsnake 11y ago

Question - doesn't that give wonderful options for further discrimination? While excluding someone for his race is a non starter, not hiring him because of activities he was involved, especially causing unrest in college could fly.

malandrew 11y ago

What I find most strange in this is that safe spaces used to be places where individuals voluntarily gathered to be insulated from something and to feel comfortable opening up to their peers. The classic examples are supports groups. The problem as I see is it that people who appreciate having a safe space are now trying to change the venue to one where participation is no longer consensual. Take three locations, A, B and C. A and B are empty and C is a large room with all of society. Now take two groups, a majority and a minority group. Members of the minority group wants a space where they can relate to other members of their group and avoid those who aren't members and can't relate. This is space A and what most people are calling a "safe space". Members of the majority group do the same. This is space B. Members of the majority group call this a "club/clubhouse". There really isn't much difference between a safe space and a clubhouse. Both are places where likeminded people can gather, relate to one another and conveniently ignore everything around them that they don't have to interact with. The tragedy now is that space C, the public space is crumbling because it contains people from both groups trying to "improver the public clubhouse" from their perspective, ignoring the perspectives of the others. You simply can't take a public space and make it a more comfortable/safe place for one group without likely alienating some of the people already occupying that same public space. A lecture hall on campus can be a safe space, but designating an entire campus as a safe space without enthusiastic consent from everyone already occupying that public space is oppressive to anyone that disagrees.