6 ms·

You've mistaken discussion in general—which encompasses a fairly broad range of exchanges—with a particularly narrow subset that is characterized by clearly def

by alexqgb 11y ago

You've mistaken discussion in general—which encompasses a fairly broad range of exchanges—with a particularly narrow subset that is characterized by clearly defined and opposing positions, along with acceptance of adversarial engagement from "both sides" of the issue. There's a time and a place for that, to be sure, but there are many more cases in which the forceful imposition of a binary outlook has effects that are socially inhibiting, making it a serious impediment to free discussion and open development of ideas. If a person cannot (or will not) recognize when taking a narrow and combative approach just makes them an asshole, then the "logical" response is to keep them far enough away to prevent their noxious manner from derailing otherwise productive exchanges.

angersock 11y ago
I would suggest that the most people would have a decent chance of having non-combative discussion; however, the construction of the spaces tends to throw out those folks along with the more toxic and dedicated trolls and harassers. Moreover, even attempts at polite discussion are often dismissed as sealioning or whatnot--and thus, by being hypersensitive and assuming a victim stance, truly productive and civil discourse is prevented. Additionally, these spaces do not facilitate a "productive" exchange: we can wager that few really new ideas are being exchanged. Politely, it's a chance to reaffirm values and provide a sense of belonging and comfort. Impolitely, it's a circlejerk. If people need a place to find comfort, that's great! To claim anything other than that, especially that it somehow is some setting for honest and fair discourse, is a misrepresentation.
- zaroth 11y ago
  I think this was very well said (better than my reply) and I'm happy for it to be my first use of the "vouch" feature.
zaroth 11y ago
I really don't understand what you're saying in the first two paragraphs. What's interesting is I don't think the goal of these "safe spaces" is at all to foster "free discussion" or "open development of ideas". What you see people rallying against is that the SJWs are shutting down any free discussion through these tactics. For example, these "safe spaces" apparently are to protect against "micro-aggressions" (a term I only recently learned) which if I understand correctly means to "take offense where none was given" aka to put words into someone's mouth? So now it's not even what someone is saying but how someone in the audience might feel, because of their own personal history, indirectly because a word the speaker used. And this is the speaker's responsibility now that someone in the audience was made to feel this way because they were confronted with a disagreeing opinion? I think this is where the accusations of mollycoddling come in. It sounds like these kids aren't ready for serious academic discourse. They're stuck in a world where there is only one "right" and they paint caractures of their racist and bigoted antagonists to support their view. What I find noxious is warfangle's claim that we must all be sexist and bigots to raise questions around academic freedom and censorship in colleges / universities... I think this is a typical parlor trick to try to shut down productive discussion. Frankly I would have liked to see a rebuke from dang in response. Why is it ok to attack a group saying a viewpoint is "disgustingly indicative of the inherent sexism and flat-out hatred that worms its way through developer culture." All the same, I'll let warfangle speak for themself and I don't expect HN to be free from dissenting opinions or even vitriol. Because in an attempt to shut down a "narrow and combative approach" it's impossible not to have a chilling effect on the overall discussion. In your safe spaces you might be spared from some of the bad, but it comes at a significant cost to others around you who aren't triggered and are capable of having adult conversations on difficult topics. Frankly I've been waiting for an article like this to hit the front page because I am very interested in seeing the varying perspectives and actually having a chance at productive conversation on HN, which you won't find in the comments anywhere else that's for sure!
- warfangle 11y ago
  You've never been to a safe place have you? :)
  - zaroth 11y ago
    My only personal experience with "safe places" is in "safe place imagery" which is a very cool visualization technique used for relaxation, meditation, and even in therapy along with amazing tricks like EMDR for helping to manage or eliminate triggers and "zero out" extremely stressful memories. Quite as it should be, the best "safe place" is the one we create for ourselves in our mind. I never imagined students would demand a real-world physical equivalent that somehow everyone else in the room is supposed to comply with.

by alexqgb 11y ago

angersock 11y ago

I would suggest that the most people would have a decent chance of having non-combative discussion; however, the construction of the spaces tends to throw out those folks along with the more toxic and dedicated trolls and harassers. Moreover, even attempts at polite discussion are often dismissed as sealioning or whatnot--and thus, by being hypersensitive and assuming a victim stance, truly productive and civil discourse is prevented. Additionally, these spaces do not facilitate a "productive" exchange: we can wager that few really new ideas are being exchanged. Politely, it's a chance to reaffirm values and provide a sense of belonging and comfort. Impolitely, it's a circlejerk. If people need a place to find comfort, that's great! To claim anything other than that, especially that it somehow is some setting for honest and fair discourse, is a misrepresentation.

zaroth 11y ago
I think this was very well said (better than my reply) and I'm happy for it to be my first use of the "vouch" feature.

zaroth 11y ago

I really don't understand what you're saying in the first two paragraphs. What's interesting is I don't think the goal of these "safe spaces" is at all to foster "free discussion" or "open development of ideas". What you see people rallying against is that the SJWs are shutting down any free discussion through these tactics. For example, these "safe spaces" apparently are to protect against "micro-aggressions" (a term I only recently learned) which if I understand correctly means to "take offense where none was given" aka to put words into someone's mouth? So now it's not even what someone is saying but how someone in the audience might feel, because of their own personal history, indirectly because a word the speaker used. And this is the speaker's responsibility now that someone in the audience was made to feel this way because they were confronted with a disagreeing opinion? I think this is where the accusations of mollycoddling come in. It sounds like these kids aren't ready for serious academic discourse. They're stuck in a world where there is only one "right" and they paint caractures of their racist and bigoted antagonists to support their view. What I find noxious is warfangle's claim that we must all be sexist and bigots to raise questions around academic freedom and censorship in colleges / universities... I think this is a typical parlor trick to try to shut down productive discussion. Frankly I would have liked to see a rebuke from dang in response. Why is it ok to attack a group saying a viewpoint is "disgustingly indicative of the inherent sexism and flat-out hatred that worms its way through developer culture." All the same, I'll let warfangle speak for themself and I don't expect HN to be free from dissenting opinions or even vitriol. Because in an attempt to shut down a "narrow and combative approach" it's impossible not to have a chilling effect on the overall discussion. In your safe spaces you might be spared from some of the bad, but it comes at a significant cost to others around you who aren't triggered and are capable of having adult conversations on difficult topics. Frankly I've been waiting for an article like this to hit the front page because I am very interested in seeing the varying perspectives and actually having a chance at productive conversation on HN, which you won't find in the comments anywhere else that's for sure!

warfangle 11y ago
You've never been to a safe place have you? :)
- zaroth 11y ago
  My only personal experience with "safe places" is in "safe place imagery" which is a very cool visualization technique used for relaxation, meditation, and even in therapy along with amazing tricks like EMDR for helping to manage or eliminate triggers and "zero out" extremely stressful memories. Quite as it should be, the best "safe place" is the one we create for ourselves in our mind. I never imagined students would demand a real-world physical equivalent that somehow everyone else in the room is supposed to comply with.