This Is Not a Day Care. It’s a University • Hacker News Board

Re: This Is Not a Day Care. It’s a University

#251

Post by laotzu » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 3:09 PM UTC

coldpie wrote: post #95

wmichelin wrote: post #5

I think that this article is fantastic. It highlights what is wrong with all the political correctness going on. To an extent, it is necessary. People shouldn't be made to feel bad about race, gender, or sexuality, but once you start to coddle them, you aren't helping them grow as individuals. People in the real world will treat you like crap, no matter what.

> People in the real world will treat you like crap, no matter what. Why should we accept this?

Sincere question: why should you not accept it?

>Any person capable of angering you becomes your master; he can anger you only when you permit yourself to be disturbed by him.

-Epictetus

To answer your question, we should accept it because that is the way reality is fundamentally. Go ahead and try to eternally fight to erase all darkness so that there is only light. Spoiler alert: it's impossible. If there were no darkness there would be no such thing as light because light implies the presence of darkness and darkness implies light.

Re: This Is Not a Day Care. It’s a University

#252

Post by kelukelugames » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 3:09 PM UTC

intortus wrote: post #227

lghh wrote: post #199

I have a friend who attended OKWU a few years ago. She shared this piece on Facebook in approval. From what I know from her education there, this place is essentially a "safe-space" for Christians. If you say anything negative about the religion or its teachings, you are kicked out. If you don't follow its rules, you are kicked out. If you drink, smoke, have premarital sex, are lgbtq, don't follow their strict ethics…

Doesn't matter. There's an anecdote about a student being a crybaby and that's the biggest threat facing humanity today. Get with the program. We can deal with the Christians once we sort out the safe spacers.

I recommend adding a /s tag. The other poster didn't catch the sarcasm.

Re: This Is Not a Day Care. It’s a University

#253

Post by yummyfajitas » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 3:10 PM UTC

ebola1717 wrote: post #207

yummyfajitas wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand - a white supremacist took a quantity from the DOJ, then took a percentage from the DOJ, and multiplied them together to get a new quantity. Does multiplication become invalid when a white supremacist does it? Or do DOJ stats become false when a racist cites them? Please, I would like to understand your logic. I do find it a bit scary that when I google "black on white crime", only racist sites sho…

White on white crimes are 5x common than black on white crimes. It's obvious cherry-picking.

And the lynchings maaku described are less common today than drowning in a swimming pool. What's your point?

Note that I linked to it for the content of the first data table. My link is not an endorsement of every single viewpoint that someone at that URL might hold - I actually just spent 2 minutes googling for a fact I had seen before and pasted the first link that had the data table.

Re: This Is Not a Day Care. It’s a University

#254

Post by noxToken » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 3:10 PM UTC

frobozz wrote: post #132

victorhooi wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any evidence of this claim (that it's a troll or "doesn't exist"), other than just your assertion that no normal person would do this? I can assure you that I know plenty of young people who would do something like this - heck, I'm a young person (and also a Christian), and whilst I probably wouldn't be brave enough to actually approach a lecturer and voice such thoughts, I am sure that in a moment of wea…

No, I have no evidence at all. It's just my assertion. Would you really attend a sermon at the chapel of either your own chosen faith or someone else's and lodge a complaint that the cleric's commentary on love made you feel bad for not showing love? What, exactly, would motivate you to do such a thing? Surely, in the context of a religious sermon, either you're a believer and you should feel bad for not obeying the…

But that's the thing about it. A sermon does not hit the same topic every time. Take homosexuality. As I was growing up, homosexuality was not a topic that was often covered. In most biblical circles (at least of the denomination that I attended) homosexuality was a black-and-white issue: it's wrong 100% of the time regardless of circumstances.

In my high school years, I knew of 3 closeted gay people that attended my church. Since homosexuality was rarely talked about, you could reasonably assume that it may get talked about once a year - if that. On those days, however, I'm sure it felt as if the were being publicly lambasted for something they had no control over. I have never even considered myself bisexual, but it always made me extremely uncomfortable listening to sermons about homosexuality. I can only imagine how those people felt.

This is a situation in which I feel that someone who otherwise attends a service regularly would feel the need to speak out.

Re: This Is Not a Day Care. It’s a University

#255

Post by nmrm2 » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 3:10 PM UTC

HelloNurse wrote: post #161

EthanHeilman wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Exactly, I don't get why people are trying to make universities, workplaces, clubs, or anywhere else "safe places". I'm not directly disagreeing with you here or putting words in your mouth. I realize you are not saying safe spaces should not exist. Instead I want to make the argument that having safe spaces is reasonable. People make safe spaces _within_ universities and other institutions for the same reason some…

There is a big difference between having a problem with fireworks and having a problem with religion, like in the OP. Asking for a "safe space" where you don't have to deal with your conscience is horribly absurd.

> Asking for a "safe space" where you don't have to deal with your conscience is horribly absurd.

You act as if "conscience" is an objecively good thing, and not just the result of a bunch of totally arbitrary social expectations.

Gay people who grew up in conservative families often have a conscience that makes them feel bad about being gay. Gay people looking for safe spaces where they aren't reminded that they spent 18 years being told they are bad people is imminently reasonable.

Abused wives often feel guilty about leaving their husbands. Finding safe spaces where they don't have to feel guilty about doing the right thing is imminently reasonable.

So, no, it's not unreasonable to find places where you don't have to "deal with your conscience"

Re: This Is Not a Day Care. It’s a University

#256

Post by 6stringmerc » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 3:10 PM UTC

lghh wrote: post #199

I have a friend who attended OKWU a few years ago. She shared this piece on Facebook in approval. From what I know from her education there, this place is essentially a "safe-space" for Christians. If you say anything negative about the religion or its teachings, you are kicked out. If you don't follow its rules, you are kicked out. If you drink, smoke, have premarital sex, are lgbtq, don't follow their strict ethics…

This is a really important observation. Also, in the US, it's quite relevant to the current state of political rhetoric - I know the 'outrage half-life' is pretty short these days, but pointing to the Starbucks Red Cup "manufactured controversy" can, I think, reasonably be referenced to illustrate the hypocritical victimization tendency alive and well in modern (fundamentalist-oriented) Christianity. I think it's no coincidence that OKWU's official stance would be to decry "victim culture" when convenient, and embrace it when expected to conform to the will of society at large (e.g. Hobby Lobby vs. Obamacare).

Re: This Is Not a Day Care. It’s a University

#257

Post by coldpie » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 3:11 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #235

coldpie wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you suggesting people should not learn to cope with uncomfortable ideas? No one is arguing for this.

While I tend to agree with you there are a bunch of things that are not being taught because students have said their feelings are important. Suicide dropped from sociology lessons: http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/jun/15/suicide-dro... (A-level students are 16 to 18 years old) I agree that teaching suicide to children is going to be difficult, and that most of the reason is about actual harm, not feelings -…

Insightful comment, and I agree that's a difficult problem. I think there's room for a conversation about that, and I'm not sure where I fall. If people made their arguments like this instead of "We must protect bullies/racists!" I'd find them much more convincing :)

Re: This Is Not a Day Care. It’s a University

#258

Post by SolaceQuantum » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 3:11 PM UTC

PedroBatista wrote: post #160

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm asian. I don't feel threatened by black crime when it's also shown that police target black people for arrest more than whites and that the system is often stacked against black people. I'm more uncomfortable that white males are shooting up schools in my country several times a year because there's nothing being done pointing this demographic out. Your experience doesn't reflect the experience of all others.

That's why there is something called Statistics and they show that you are objectively wrong. Now, about your feelings and uncomfortableness it's up to you.

Statistically speaking, police stop and look for crime disproportionately to minorities. no? http://m.nydailynews.com/news/crime/nypd-targets-minorities-...

Re: This Is Not a Day Care. It’s a University

#259

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 3:11 PM UTC

strickjb9 wrote: post #182

jellicle wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're being generous to the author. I'd be amazed if anyone at all had complained to the university president about their sermon. "The complaining student" is now a trope along the lines of the cab driver who always speaks to New York Times columnists in a way that is convenient for their column.

Except, in this scenario, the cab driver is OKWU and the new york times is also OWKU. It's reasonable for OWKU to make this announcement. They are laying out their expectations for their student body. It is inconvenient but students who dislike their position are free to transfer. OWKU is a private institution and also a religious one (even greater protection). They are well within their means and rights. I'm startin…

> It's reasonable for OWKU to make this announcement. They are laying out their expectations for their student body.

It may be reasonable for OWKU to make an announcement of their expectations of student receptiveness to uncomfortable sermons, the particular details and manner in which Dr. Piper did so in this case, however, taken as presented, shows a lack of both the general adult ability to maturely deal with uncomfortable situations and the specific Christian virtues it pretends to be concerned with.

> OWKU is a private institution and also a religious one (even greater protection). They are well within their means and rights.

I don't think anyone has argued that OKWU's actions here were either unaffordable (outside of the University's means -- not sure why that would even be relevant) or illegal (outside of the University's rights).

The negative responses I've seen have all be skepticism about the accuracy of the presentation of the situation and arguments that, even if the situation was presented accurately, the piece is a poor response to the situation it describes. (The comment you responded to was explicitly the former -- raising the idea that the "complaining student" has become a common fictional foil to set up rhetorically, whether or not a real complaint exists.)

Not that it is outside of the University's "means and rights".

Re: This Is Not a Day Care. It’s a University

#260

Post by ebola1717 » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 3:11 PM UTC

stupidcar wrote: post #48

maaku wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I sympathize with your viewpoint, perhaps I can shed some clarity on the other side. The concern is not feelings getting hurt, but rather physical security as a person of minority status. This is something that a white heterosexual middle-class male (such as myself) can probably never fully appreciate, but I try to sympathize. Imagine what it is like to be black in a country where just a few generations back yo…

But this explanation does not seem to match the facts. For example, many law professors are having to stop teaching rape law, because so many students say it makes them uncomfortable[1]. Surely college students are capable of distinguishing between the threat of rape, and the discussion of relevant law in a classroom environment? So what is the safety issue here? Indeed, the end result will likely be a net lowering o…

First of all, no one in that article is uncomfortable because they can't distinguish between "the threat of rape and and the discussion of relevant law." We're talking about survivors of sexual assault, for whom the often very explicit discussions of rape law can be emotionally taxing.

You're right that we do need to teach rape law, now more than ever, and we need to be able to have these nuanced and explicit discussions - but there's ways to do that with empathy for survivors of sexual assault. And honestly, I don't see how warning the class about the content of a discussion beforehand or a few people abstaining (one's that likely wouldn't be participating much anyway) will drag down the entire system.