3 ms·

>> "C1. Transgender people have a mental disorder." >> "C2. Abortion should be completely illegal." >> "C3. Black Lives Matter is a hate group." I really don

by Kye 3y ago

>> "C1. Transgender people have a mental disorder." >> "C2. Abortion should be completely illegal." >> "C3. Black Lives Matter is a hate group." I really don't understand people whose idea of free speech is "tolerating" yet another repeat of the same damned argument we've heard a million times over. We heard you. We weren't convinced. Free speech is intact, we just want to move on. Try literally any other argument. Come up on stage and say something novel or you're wasting the students' time and the platform. You're not a bold defender of free speech saying this stuff. You're a hack. You're no different from the street preacher screaming lines from Leviticus at me as I pass by.

hotnfresh 3y ago
I posted more about this elsewhere in the thread, but I wonder how much of the poll response isn't about wanting to silence opposing views, but about perceptions of the motivations and likely quality of speakers with those views. Maybe it's more about perceived likelihood that the speaker's just going to be a professional IRL troll. I wonder if adding context that reduced the perceived likelihood of that, while leaving those statements intact, would change the results significantly.
- Kye 3y ago
  I would not be surprised if a blind taste test of sorts were devised to compare the past free speech people long for to the free speech of people pushing intellectualized bigotry, the classics would win every time. >> "I wonder if adding context that reduced the perceived likelihood of that, while leaving those statements intact, would change the results significantly." I've taken a lot of research surveys that play with wording and context to test bias. It's interesting to look back at my own answers to see how framing around the questions affects the response.
Georgelemental 3y ago
If you are not interested in listening to a speaker that a group on campus invited, feel free not to attend the event. Nobody is forcing it on you.
keyboard_slap 3y ago
The liberal talking points used in the survey (2nd Amendment should be repealed, religious liberty is used to justify discrimination, structural racism exists) are also just repeats of the same argument we've heard a million times over. While I agree that novelty should be an important factor in choosing a campus speaker, it's clear that most respondents to the survey don't; they support unoriginal talking points from one side of the political spectrum and not the other.
- Kye 3y ago
  L1 is the only one I really have trouble with. L2 and L3 are in desperate need of nuance to be remotely persuasive, but that's the thing: the kids they're asking already get it without that nuance. No nuance can save C1-3. The poll results actually seem to reflect their familiarity with the positions and the typical weakness of arguments for certain ones. I don't think it says anything about their position on free speech.
  - keyboard_slap 3y ago
    > No nuance can save C1-3. Sure it can, at least for C1. If gender dysphoria isn't a mental disorder, then its treatment doesn't need to be covered by health insurance.
    - Kye 3y ago
      Secret third option: all medical care, including gender affirming, should be collectively funded. That includes gender affirming care for cis people like breast enhancement and Viagra. Problem solved.
      - bbbing 3y ago
        [flagged]
pie_flavor 3y ago
You talk of being tired of a particular line of argument, in defense of shutting up all arguments for a particular idea. If you're tired of a particular idea, to the point of wanting to shut it out from being argued for (even in novel ways), that's called being anti-free-speech. Have you, in fact, listened to an argumentative speech on one of those questions, or others you feel this way about? Not even counting whether some new guy could have something new to say, can you honestly be said to have heard the full-length intelligent argument for the position and found the evidence lacking? Or is there nothing being 'moved on' from at all?
- Kye 3y ago
  >> "You talk of being tired of a particular line of argument, in defense of shutting up all arguments for a particular idea." No. Try again. >> "Have you, in fact, listened to an argumentative speech on one of those questions, or others you feel this way about?" Yes.

by Kye 3y ago

hotnfresh 3y ago

I posted more about this elsewhere in the thread, but I wonder how much of the poll response isn't about wanting to silence opposing views, but about perceptions of the motivations and likely quality of speakers with those views. Maybe it's more about perceived likelihood that the speaker's just going to be a professional IRL troll. I wonder if adding context that reduced the perceived likelihood of that, while leaving those statements intact, would change the results significantly.

Kye 3y ago
I would not be surprised if a blind taste test of sorts were devised to compare the past free speech people long for to the free speech of people pushing intellectualized bigotry, the classics would win every time. >> "I wonder if adding context that reduced the perceived likelihood of that, while leaving those statements intact, would change the results significantly." I've taken a lot of research surveys that play with wording and context to test bias. It's interesting to look back at my own answers to see how framing around the questions affects the response.

Georgelemental 3y ago

If you are not interested in listening to a speaker that a group on campus invited, feel free not to attend the event. Nobody is forcing it on you.

keyboard_slap 3y ago

The liberal talking points used in the survey (2nd Amendment should be repealed, religious liberty is used to justify discrimination, structural racism exists) are also just repeats of the same argument we've heard a million times over. While I agree that novelty should be an important factor in choosing a campus speaker, it's clear that most respondents to the survey don't; they support unoriginal talking points from one side of the political spectrum and not the other.

Kye 3y ago
L1 is the only one I really have trouble with. L2 and L3 are in desperate need of nuance to be remotely persuasive, but that's the thing: the kids they're asking already get it without that nuance. No nuance can save C1-3. The poll results actually seem to reflect their familiarity with the positions and the typical weakness of arguments for certain ones. I don't think it says anything about their position on free speech.
- keyboard_slap 3y ago
  > No nuance can save C1-3. Sure it can, at least for C1. If gender dysphoria isn't a mental disorder, then its treatment doesn't need to be covered by health insurance.
  - Kye 3y ago
    Secret third option: all medical care, including gender affirming, should be collectively funded. That includes gender affirming care for cis people like breast enhancement and Viagra. Problem solved.
    - bbbing 3y ago
      [flagged]

pie_flavor 3y ago

You talk of being tired of a particular line of argument, in defense of shutting up all arguments for a particular idea. If you're tired of a particular idea, to the point of wanting to shut it out from being argued for (even in novel ways), that's called being anti-free-speech. Have you, in fact, listened to an argumentative speech on one of those questions, or others you feel this way about? Not even counting whether some new guy could have something new to say, can you honestly be said to have heard the full-length intelligent argument for the position and found the evidence lacking? Or is there nothing being 'moved on' from at all?

Kye 3y ago
>> "You talk of being tired of a particular line of argument, in defense of shutting up all arguments for a particular idea." No. Try again. >> "Have you, in fact, listened to an argumentative speech on one of those questions, or others you feel this way about?" Yes.