15 ms·

I have a few questions: 1. Why aren't there very many conservative administrators? Are they not interested in these sorts of jobs, or is there discrimination/b

by geofft 8y ago

I have a few questions: 1. Why aren't there very many conservative administrators? Are they not interested in these sorts of jobs, or is there discrimination/bias in the hiring process? 2. Why does having such events threaten the free and open exchange of ideas? Shouldn't it be quite the opposite? Incoming conservative students are being exposed to viewpoints they haven't heard before; isn't that a good thing? 3. Why aren't conservatives organizing similar events? The only group I can think of is Turning Point USA, which is hardly acting as a serious ideological advocate for conservative viewpoints. 4. The author calls "justice for women" a progressive cause. Does he believe conservatives are not interested in justice for women? Should conservatives run events about injustice for women to provide ideological balance, and if they do, is that good for society?

fjsolwmv 8y ago
1. There may be biological reasons why people with conservative psychology are better suited for other jobs than University administrator. 4. By the literal meanings of the words, justice for women is progressive, not conservative. Giving women civil rights wss please.
- geofft 8y ago
  1. I'd like to see the author explore that. 4. Ok, then, is it not a moral imperative for those of us who agree with progress to silence conservatives, and vice versa? Who is the author appealing to by extolling the virtues of an open and well-represented conversation?
  - smsm42 8y ago
    > Who is the author appealing to by extolling the virtues of an open and well-represented conversation? I guess to people that still think that a functioning civil society, composed of diverse viewpoint engaged in productive policy debate, is better than a zero-sum tribal civil war.
smsm42 8y ago
1. Probably because if you're very liberal and 100% of your peer group is very liberal, you will have a lot less chance to network with somebody non-liberal and thus less chance to hire such person. And if you never hire one, there would not be one in your organization. 2. Yes, presence of liberal viewpoints is certainly beneficial for conservative students. Presence of 100% liberal viewpoints and nothing else - not so much. That's the whole point of diversity - or should be - 100% of the same perspective is not as good as the mix of different ones. 3. They do. But then there are protests, huge security fees, demands to fire whatever administrator allowed the unperson to speak on campus, death threats, speakers cancelling out of fear for their physical security, property damage, hostile environment complaints against organizers, etc. etc. Swimming downstream is a lot easier than swimming upstream. 4. That depends on what you call "justice for women". As it happens in politics, people choose very appealing brands for their ideas, but the underlying reality may or may not be appealing. If "justice for women" means a woman accusing a man in sexual harassment leads to automatic expulsion of the accused man, on her words alone, no due process - is that something that the man would get behind? If "justice for women" means that since women have been discriminated in hiring in the past, now men should be discriminated instead, to achieve summarily just outcome - that would be a very controversial opinion. A lot of things can be called "justice for women", it all depends what is under the brand name.

by geofft 8y ago

fjsolwmv 8y ago

1. There may be biological reasons why people with conservative psychology are better suited for other jobs than University administrator. 4. By the literal meanings of the words, justice for women is progressive, not conservative. Giving women civil rights wss please.

geofft 8y ago
1. I'd like to see the author explore that. 4. Ok, then, is it not a moral imperative for those of us who agree with progress to silence conservatives, and vice versa? Who is the author appealing to by extolling the virtues of an open and well-represented conversation?
- smsm42 8y ago
  > Who is the author appealing to by extolling the virtues of an open and well-represented conversation? I guess to people that still think that a functioning civil society, composed of diverse viewpoint engaged in productive policy debate, is better than a zero-sum tribal civil war.

smsm42 8y ago

1. Probably because if you're very liberal and 100% of your peer group is very liberal, you will have a lot less chance to network with somebody non-liberal and thus less chance to hire such person. And if you never hire one, there would not be one in your organization. 2. Yes, presence of liberal viewpoints is certainly beneficial for conservative students. Presence of 100% liberal viewpoints and nothing else - not so much. That's the whole point of diversity - or should be - 100% of the same perspective is not as good as the mix of different ones. 3. They do. But then there are protests, huge security fees, demands to fire whatever administrator allowed the unperson to speak on campus, death threats, speakers cancelling out of fear for their physical security, property damage, hostile environment complaints against organizers, etc. etc. Swimming downstream is a lot easier than swimming upstream. 4. That depends on what you call "justice for women". As it happens in politics, people choose very appealing brands for their ideas, but the underlying reality may or may not be appealing. If "justice for women" means a woman accusing a man in sexual harassment leads to automatic expulsion of the accused man, on her words alone, no due process - is that something that the man would get behind? If "justice for women" means that since women have been discriminated in hiring in the past, now men should be discriminated instead, to achieve summarily just outcome - that would be a very controversial opinion. A lot of things can be called "justice for women", it all depends what is under the brand name.