No Safe Space For You! U of Chicago warns students.

[Shibito]

Say what you want it is kinda catchy.

Funny that they had permission slips from the girls they slept with

[jellmoo]

The difference is that two people can support the same thing, but have radically different views on how to obtain their goal - this is what is traditional in such clubs and societies, it encourages debate and actually helps you to overcome arguments from those who do not support the same thing as you.

In comparison, the current safe spaces are designed to eliminate all differences, which naturally stifles debate. Dissenting voices are not welcome, nuance is not welcome, it is my way or the highway.


If, for example, I believe the best way to proceed with a policy is Way X and someone else thinks it is Way Y, then I want to hear Way Y as I may be wrong, or they may have ideas that I could integrate into Way X, etc.

Thanks for the explanation, it helps. I'm not quite sure how the concept is feasible though when it comes to practical application. It sounds like each disagreement could create a new need for a "Safe Space", even amongst people that are usually on the same page. I can't see how this is healthy or condusive to a Univeristy experience...

I guess that's the point though.

[Deleted]

So I should stop letting the vicitms of sexual violence know when I lecture on the subject

I don't really mind content warnings as much as the other things that are happening, actually, but I am curious - shouldn't the content of a course already be obvious or discernible with a bit of basic prodding into your module descriptions? If I'm studying criminal law, shouldn't there be a reasonable expectation on my part that, at some point, sex crimes are going to be discussed?

Furthermore, what do you believe a trigger warning is meant to achieve? So you've told me at the start of the lecture we're covering rape. Now what? I can't skip the class (nor should I expect to be able to) because I need to know the shit you're about to tell me. So what is it achieving; how does a warning prevent someone having a (real) panic attack? In my experience, no amount of "mental preparation" can prevent someone having an involuntary reaction. How is it better than simply forgoing the warning but still allowing a student to request a brief moment to step outside and collect themselves if they get upset?

[Shibito]

People reject employment automatically from universities that have condoned safe spaces? Wow, hundreds of thousands of innocent students who were never "PC" that get fucked because of someone's stupid bias against a few PC individuals.

Cmon dark crusader for once act like batman!

[Finith]

I understand it very clearly, and I stick to my statement: people who need trigger warnings like that have serious mental issues, and people who need safe spaces are childish and unemployable

People who can't cope with disagreement and criticism will view any feedback as a personal attack, and so will be unable to learn and grow in the real world

If someone can't cope with some ideas in an academic circle, they should leave the discussion rather than ask for the discussion to end

Again, because you don't seem to be reading very well. The entire point of issuing the warning is to provide those potential individuals with the opportunity to "leave the discussion" if the discomfort becomes too much. These people are not asking me not to to talk about it, they are not asking me to lecture on something else, and they are not asking me to respect their wishes ahead of any other students. I am providing THEM with the opportunity to do what they must to best cope with the potential for discomfort during the discussion of issues sensitive to their life experience. There is no problematic here, it is what any reasonable person would do.

I'm not going to attempt to explain safe spaces any longer, it is painfully obvious the well is thoroughly poisoned here. I teach, I employ them, deal with it.

- - - Updated - - -

If you actually think this you'd be against safe spaces.

Why? Our university doesn't have 100 videos posted to youtube of faux outrage at PC culture. They seem to work fairly well here, barring the inevitable of some conflict. It is not my fault that people have allowed their understanding of something to be informed by one outrageously skewed perspective while simply ignoring other possibilities.

[Eleccybubb]

Again, because you don't seem to be reading very well. The entire point of issuing the warning is to provide those potential individuals with the opportunity to "leave the discussion" if the discomfort becomes too much. These people are not asking me not to to talk about it, they are not asking me to lecture on something else, and they are not asking me to respect their wishes ahead of any other students. I am providing THEM with the opportunity to do what they must to best cope with the potential for discomfort during the discussion of issues sensitive to their life experience. There is no problematic here, it is what any reasonable person would do.

I'm not going to attempt to explain safe spaces any longer, it is painfully obvious the well is thoroughly poisoned here. I teach, I employ them, deal with it.

- - - Updated - - -



Why? Our university doesn't have 100 videos posted to youtube of faux outrage at PC culture. They seem to work fairly well here, barring the inevitable of some conflict. It is not my fault that people have allowed their understanding of something to be informed by one outrageously skewed perspective while simply ignoring other possibilities.

You shouldn't have to explain safe spaces because they should not exist. As this University that is in the OP has done.

[TrumpIsPresident]

1. If you believe a video on youtube can capture the totality of anything, then you have successfully shut off the part of your brain responsible for critical thinking.

2. Let me reiterate for you, I work and teach in a university (something I will presume you do not) there are policies in place in regards to both safe spaces and trigger warnings. Students still learn, they still graduate, and debate still happens. You can continue to construct this fantasy where the blight of humanity is the regressive left all you like, that will never make it true, that will never make your outrage logical.

3. And here's a final caveat for you. Despite all of your vitriol and anger, and your misguided understandings, there is literally nothing you can do about it. I will still respect the virtue of a platform which provides all voices the opportunity to speak openly, and I will still offer warnings to students before I teach sensitive material because I respect that their trauma can be very real.

4. I don't coddle children, I ask them to think before they speak and respect one another, whatever has so poisoned the well in your mind has clearly blinded you to reality on this subject. I don't care if Ann Coulter comes and spouts her idiotic nonsense here, I don't care if a student group works tirelessly to get BDS through the senate committee, I don't care if pro-life groups host tables in the student centre and attempt to engage students in a dialogue. I care that universities not silence speech which has been historically oppressed. Diversity of opinion is true learning, because it reveals the difference that experience makes on an individuals context of the world around them. No, you don't shout down bad ideas, just like you don't shout over the trans speaker, you engage in a dialogue.

1. I could spend the time to locate and link another 500 videos that capture the totality of what SJWism has created but I'm guessing you wouldn't watch them.

2. No I'm not a teacher, I'm an automation engineer. And yes I understand what you're saying. You deploy safe spaces, you instill SJW mindsets, you condition and program these kids to believe that victimization is the essence of life, and then you "graduate" them and send them to me. I completely understand what it is you are doing. Do you understand ...that what I'm saying ...is that what you're doing ...is a huge problem for me and every other employer out there? You are creating troublemakers that are incompatible with the business world. We need applicants that understand and respect the market driven team-centric business world, not special snowflakes who will walk in on day 1 and lecture us over not being able to have a "casual dress day".

3. Oh believe me friend there is plenty that can -and is- being done about this. I, and other employers, can simply reject applicants holding degrees from institutions that have proven to be little more than indoctrination factories. Oh and, ha, we're already doing it. of course its not exactly something that is being advertised because sooner or later somebody is going to pick up on the trend and label it as some form of discrimination. But take it from me, a random voice on the internet, its happening and its critical to our success.

4. And to that I say...

[Finith]

I don't really mind content warnings as much as the other things that are happening, actually, but I am curious - shouldn't the content of a course already be obvious or discernible with a bit of basic prodding into your course content? If I'm studying criminal law, shouldn't there be a reasonable expectation on my part that at some point sex crimes are going to be discussed?

Furthermore, what do you believe a trigger warning is meant to achieve? So you've told me at the start of the lecture we're covering rape. Now what? I can't skip the class (nor should I expect to be able to) because I need to know the shit you're about to tell me. So what is it achieving? How does a warning prevent someone having a (real) panic attack? In my experience, no amount of "mental preparation" can prevent someone having an involuntary reaction.

I mean, they are actually welcome to leave the class, so I'm not sure why you would think otherwise. I would never force someone to stay in a lecture if it were evident to me that it was making them very uncomfortable. I work to accommodate them in other ways so that they can still get the necessary material, perhaps in a context that is far less likely to cause discomfort (giant lecture halls are nerve racking even for most students regardless of any personal trauma they might deal with). But then, I don't see this as coddling, because I believe trauma is real and can have a devastating effect on a person if it isn't treated with compassion.

[Post]

Why? Our university doesn't have 100 videos posted to youtube of faux outrage at PC culture. They seem to work fairly well here, barring the inevitable of some conflict. It is not my fault that people have allowed their understanding of something to be informed by one outrageously skewed perspective while simply ignoring other possibilities.

Because they exist to remove diversity of opinion. Their entire purpose is a place where people can go to not worry about others telling them things they disagree with. There's no discussion or debate in a safe space, it's just an echo chamber.

[Eleccybubb]

Meanwhile in the UK our universities don't have safe spaces and you know why? Because we know that it's a fucking moronic concept.

[Finith]

1. I could spend the time to locate and link another 500 videos that capture the totality of what SJWism has created but I'm guessing you wouldn't watch them.

2. No I'm not a teacher, I'm an automation engineer. And yes I understand what you're saying. You deploy safe spaces, you instill SJW mindsets, you condition and program these kids to believe that victimization is the essence of life, and then you "graduate" them and send them to me. I completely understand what it is you are doing. Do you understand ...that what I'm saying ...is that what you're doing ...is a huge problem for me and every other employer out there? You are creating troublemakers that are incompatible with the business world. We need applicants that understand and respect the market driven team-centric business world, not special snowflakes who will walk in on day 1 and lecture us over not being able to have a "casual dress day".

3. Oh believe me friend there is plenty that can -and is- being done about this. I, and other employers, can simply reject applicants holding degrees from institutions that have proven to be little more than indoctrination factories. Oh and, ha, we're already doing it. of course its not exactly something that is being advertised because sooner or later somebody is going to pick up on the trend and label it as some form of discrimination. But take it from me, a random voice on the internet, its happening and its critical to our success.

4. And to that I say...

But I'm not against a diversity of opinion, or contentious dialogue. It's like you aren't even reading.... Which would suggest there is no point in continuing.

[Deleted]

I mean, they are actually welcome to leave the class, so I'm not sure why you would think otherwise. I would never force someone to stay in a lecture if it were evident to me that it was making them very uncomfortable. I work to accommodate them in other ways so that they can still get the necessary material, perhaps in a context that is far less likely to cause discomfort (giant lecture halls are nerve racking even for most students regardless of any personal trauma they might deal with). But then, I don't see this as coddling, because I believe trauma is real and can have a devastating effect on a person if it isn't treated with compassion.

Nothing here answered my questions. A whole paragraph sprung from a nit-pick of the phrasing of one line in a hypothetical setting. Amazing.

[unfilteredJW]

I was always under the impression one should want their views in life challenged. It's how you grow, and learn more about why you have the views you have.

But, on the other hand, people use this same reasoning to be just utter trash to others. So, unfortunate, I have begun to see why they exist.

It's almost like I'm following the original line of thinking.

[Kalis]

Thanks for the explanation, it helps. I'm not quite sure how the concept is feasible though when it comes to practical application. It sounds like each disagreement could create a new need for a "Safe Space", even amongst people that are usually on the same page. I can't see how this is healthy or condusive to a Univeristy experience...

I guess that's the point though.

They end up being dogmatic groups, which might be acceptable for religious universities, but bubble wrapping students is not going to help them outside of university, nor is it useful for society after they have graduated.

It used to be that universities were where people cut the apron strings, now they are being encouraged to tie them tighter.

[Eleccybubb]

But I'm not against a diversity of opinion, or contentious dialogue. It's like you aren't even reading.... Which would suggest there is no point in continuing.

Ok then you don't like our opinions. You might as well leave the discussion as you have expressed there is no point. I mean not like the internet has a safe space

[socanyou]

Let me reiterate for you, I work and teach in a university (something I will presume you do not) .

This makes you less qualified to make any meaningful point on safe spaces than if you were a student or recent graduate, not more. You're just a facilitator, you have nothing to directly lose or gain from the toxic influence of social justice warriors. Also, all of your self righteous frustration about diversity and opinion is completely misplaced. You seem to confuse witch hunts and disruption of any discussion as "respect," or else you are talking about something else entirely. As for how sensitive your students are and how courageous and amazing you are for allowing their ***potential*** sensitivity to direct your presentation of curricula, remind yourself that you are a teacher, not a therapist, and at some point the added cost to everyone who isn't "traumatized" by the idea of bad things happening in the world just prepares them for failure.

[TrumpIsPresident]

But I'm not against a diversity of opinion, or contentious dialogue. It's like you aren't even reading.... Which would suggest there is no point in continuing.

Surely you've noticed all along that I've been constantly referring to the product or the outcome or what has been caused by safe-space SJWism, right?

Whatever the original intent was is irrelevant at this point because Dr Frankenstein has lost control of his monster.

This SJWism plague infecting colleges/universities is a mechanism of population control masquerading under the banner of tolerance and using "diversity" as a human shield for indoctrinating students with highly radicalized beliefs.

To accomplish that goal certain people have to be made to "shut up" and certain ideas have to be labeled as "trigger warnings" and blocked.

You can not limit information and then call it an education.

Having limited information is the antithesis of being educated.

[Finith]

Nothing here answered my questions. A whole paragraph sprung from a nit-pick of the phrasing of one line in a hypothetical setting. Amazing.

I'm sorry, was your primary contention not that you don't see how trigger warnings are effective if the student cannot simply leave (they can)? A brief moment is usually all it takes, sometimes this is not the case, most of the time it is. I don't know where the confusion is, I am not telling students not to contend with difficult issues, I am respecting that some things can have a very personal element to some students, that is all. I still expect that they will find a way to know the material, and I try to work with them if I need to find an alternative method.

Of course a syllabus will contain outlines of all lectures and appropriate materials, this does not mean that it is useless to emphasize when a particular discussion has the potential to raise issues for students.

- - - Updated - - -

Surely you've noticed all along that I've been constantly referring to the product or the outcome or what has been caused by safe-space SJWism, right?

Whatever the original intent was is irrelevant at this point because Dr Frankenstein has lost control of his monster.

This SJWism plague infecting colleges/universities is a mechanism of population control masquerading under the banner of tolerance and using "diversity" as a human shield for indoctrinating students with highly radicalized beliefs.

To accomplish that goal certain people have to be made to "shut up" and certain ideas have to be labeled as "trigger warnings" and blocked.

You can not limit information and then call it an education.

Having limited information is the antithesis of being educated.

Well this then is the obvious point of departure. I don't believe this is the biggest issue facing our universities, you obviously do.

I am able to teach freely, and incorporate difficult and contentious topics of discussion in my classrooms easily, and rigorous debate is never a problem. I ask that students think before they speak and maintain a respectful atmosphere, I don't demand any special rules of them and they don't of me. Have you ever considered that this problem has been wildly sensationalized by a rabid media? I've been teaching for 5 years here, I've never had a problem.

- - - Updated - - -

This makes you less qualified to make any meaningful point on safe spaces than if you were a student or recent graduate, not more. You're just a facilitator, you have nothing to directly lose or gain from the toxic influence of social justice warriors. Also, all of your self righteous frustration about diversity and opinion is completely misplaced. You seem to confuse witch hunts and disruption of any discussion as "respect," or else you are talking about something else entirely. As for how sensitive your students are and how courageous and amazing you are for allowing their ***potential*** sensitivity to direct your presentation of curricula, remind yourself that you are a teacher, not a therapist, and at some point the added cost to everyone who isn't "traumatized" by the idea of bad things happening in the world just prepares them for failure.

No, I just haven't had the experience of toxic safe spaces that you have. It is possible that in some cases it works, while in others it does not, you know. Perhaps its useful in a place like this when a topic like this comes up (which it does endlessly) to see someone who actually teaches in one of these places telling people they haven't suffered from the horrible blight of safe spaces, just so it isn't a universal spinning of the wheel where everyone is in a frenzy to agree with each other hardest.

[Deleted]

I'm sorry, was your primary contention not that you don't see how trigger warnings are effective if the student cannot simply leave (they can)? A brief moment is usually all it takes, sometimes this is not the case, most of the time it is.

No. My contention is that a trigger warning is pointless if the student can excuse themselves. A warning isn't going to prevent a legitimate panic attack and you don't need a warning if the student has the presence of mind to know they are becoming emotional enough that they need to step outside. The trigger warning is pointless because they have to confront and learn the material eventually, even if it is in a different setting. It doesn't achieve anything, as far as I can see, and you have yet to explain the purpose of it.

[anon5123]

Glad to see someone finally taking a stance against this SJW "safe space" bullshit.

Really, I never understood these types that go apeshit over being "offended". So you're offended. Okay? Nobody has a right to not be offended. If you don't like something, go ahead and make an argument against it; don't just stomp your feet and cry that it should be banned because you don't like it. I hate all sorts of shit, but you do see me trying to ban it? No, I simply get away from it because I'm not an emotionally frail pansy that feels the need to ban everything that "triggers" me.