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

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

#521

Post by angersock » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 5:39 PM UTC

warfangle wrote: post #498

aggieben wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a stark difference between a free and voluntary association of like-minded people and a so-called "safe space", which uses a pretext of "victimization" to capriciously thought control others who simply committed the offense of disagreeing or criticizing. If you hate Christianity, why would you go to this school? If you aren't willing to follow behavioral rules, why would you go to this school? If you think ph…

There's a stark difference between what people who dislike the concept of "safe space" think a "safe space" is and what a "safe space" actually is. A "safe space" is a place where you know you aren't going to be singled out and harmed (verbally or physically) by someone telling you that you're a queer faggot and deserve to die. A "safe space" is a place where people can discuss the actual issues of hatred, bigotry an…

I don't think the disdain for these safe spaces is necessarily from sexism and hatred (though HN has issues with those).

The basic "problem" from developer culture is that it is heavily rooted in systems logic, and frankly safe spaces as proposed and as advertised and as popularly understood are illogical.

Very simply, using your definition, the safe space both proclaims to allow discussion and then by its very definition excludes one side of that same discussion.

If the claim was "Hey, look, we just need a separate place where we don't fear bullying, violence, and microaggressions" that would be understandable and not a problem.

However, the claim is invariably appended with "And we can have useful discussions here, and no other place can have useful discussions, and we accept everyone--except these other people that we decide have badthink" and once that amendment is made it triggers the developer bullshit alarm.

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

#522

Post by danans » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 5:42 PM UTC

yummyfajitas wrote: post #170

EthanHeilman wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linking to a post on the website of a White Supremacist organisation such as AmRen (American Renaissance) will probably hurt your argument more than help it. >Jared Taylor founded The New Century Foundation[0], a self-styled white supremacist think tank known primarily for American Renaissance, its online journal. The journal promotes pseudo-scientific studies that attempt to demonstrate the intellectual and cultural…

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…

The problem is that they are highlighting a far less significant phenomenon (cross racial violent crime) to further their white supremacist agenda.

The vast majority of homicides (which the DOJ data excludes) committed against whites are committed by whites, and the vast majority against blacks are committed by blacks. The number of cross-racial homicides are an order of magnitude less in either direction. Don't take my word for it, look at the diagonal at the top left of this table:

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/...

According the DOJ data you posted, 44% of the victims of white offenders are not white. Should they all be terrified of white people? Probably not.

So the situation in the data is more complicated than the white supremacists would care to admit.

But more importantly, people's perception of safety is not a direct reflection of the data, but instead, a reflection of the way the data is presented, either by the mass media, or by choose-your-own-agenda websites like the kind you linked.

It also tends to be heavily skewed for the local crime situation in which they live, rather than national crime stats.

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

#523

Post by Domenic_S » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 5:44 PM UTC

wan23 wrote: post #509

aggieben wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a stark difference between a free and voluntary association of like-minded people and a so-called "safe space", which uses a pretext of "victimization" to capriciously thought control others who simply committed the offense of disagreeing or criticizing. If you hate Christianity, why would you go to this school? If you aren't willing to follow behavioral rules, why would you go to this school? If you think ph…

The idea of a safe space is very much similar to the way a christian university might work. There are clubs and groups on campus that declare that the room in which they operate, while they are in session, as a place where they are free to be themselves. Like if for example, there were a meeting of comic book lovers and someone comes in and says "maybe you guys should get out more" they might ask that person to leave…

> if for example, there were a meeting of comic book lovers and someone comes in and says "maybe you guys should get out more" they might ask that person to leave

The story in the article is more like if there were a meeting of comic book lovers and someone comes in and says "your love of comic books is offensive and victimizes me because I don't love comic books, you need to stop right away" and then pulls the fire alarm.

Having a private place where certain views are protected is fine. My house is a 'safe space' for my family. But to voluntarily enter my house and then tell me I'm victimizing you is just silly.

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

#524

Post by zaroth » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 5:44 PM UTC

javajosh wrote: post #391

coderdude wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By weeding out I simply mean to ignore. Though weeding out also suggests identifying them as well.

I think there's something to the idea of "consensual communication". It's odd that we don't allow people to shove food into your mouth without asking but we surely allow people to shovel words into your brain without asking. "Safe spacers" just want a generalization of an ad blocker, and I for one support their right to it (even the ones that go way too far, because determining that is not up to me.)

What's wrong with this line of thinking is shoveling food in someone's mouth without permission is physical assault and voicing an opinion in a public space is not even close. You do not have a right not to hear ideas you don't agree with, because if such a right existed in a world with such diverse opinions, no one could ever open their mouth. Censorship of opposing ideas carries a very real and very significant cost which I believe outweighs, by orders of magnitude, any perceived benefits. The real world doesn't come with trigger warnings pasted on every surface and prefacing every human interaction, and I think neither should a university.

Obviously there are shades of gray depending on the particular speech, and we've collectively drawn a line around certain speech (call it "hate speech") which we do believe should be censored. Otherwise, the correct response to speech you don't agree with is more speech ideally in the form of reasoned and well-informed debate of the issues.

What I find the most perplexing is how, in many cases it seems like the original speech which was deemed offensive or victimizing, which typically itself was not even directed at the "victim", is answered in return with extreme prejudice and hate directly aimed at the original speaker. This can also be combined with a social media campaign to attempt to politicize the whole event and inflict maximum damage. This is why I am often confused as to who is the real victim in these cases.

The ad blocker analogy is interesting. Even blocking ads is somewhat contentious (e.g. lawsuits against DVRs with 30-second skip buttons, site owners saying their revenue stream has been decimated, etc.) and this is simply users controlling what their own devices are doing! Blocking an ad might deprive a site of revenue, but it doesn't deprive anyone else of their voice -- no one is being censored.

You say we surely allow people to shovel words into our brains... Hearing speech you don't like is one thing, but what about someone else taking their own inability to function in a diverse culture, and using it to dictate the words anyone who happens to be around them are allowed to speak? This sounds like a case where the medicine is worse than the disease.

The biggest problem with "safe spaces" is that they are not actually limited to small rooms in the student union with play-dough and elevator music, but I think a lot of people are very concerned that the intent is ultimately for the entire campus to be policed like one. And I do mean policed, because stepping afoul of the mythical safe space code of conduct is taken as a capital offense, to which you may see literal rioting in response.

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

#525

Post by jonknee » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 5:44 PM UTC

aggieben wrote: post #411

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…

There's a stark difference between a free and voluntary association of like-minded people and a so-called "safe space", which uses a pretext of "victimization" to capriciously thought control others who simply committed the offense of disagreeing or criticizing. If you hate Christianity, why would you go to this school? If you aren't willing to follow behavioral rules, why would you go to this school? If you think ph…

> Really? Citation please; I simply don't believe this. Most Christian universities that I have any knowledge of invite (or at least aren't averse to it) tough discussion, and allow for a pretty wide range of critical thought about interpretations of the Bible, how Christianity should relate to politics, culture, science, and many other subjects.

You have missed out on the wave of evangelical schools that market to parents as babysitters. Here are some quotes from the OKWU student handbook:

http://www.okwu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/2013-2014-Stu...

> Students should understand that all traffic on the Internet on campus is capable of being viewed, monitored, and logged by OKWU

View porn and you can be expelled. Might not want to search for birth control either.

> Possession or use of alcohol on or off campus, contributing to the use of alcohol by other OKWU students, and/or being present in an environment where alcohol is being consumed is prohibited. Use, possession, purchasing, etc. of tobacco is prohibited.

Note the on or OFF campus bit. This is where the evangelical babysitting really kicks in.

> By virtue of their voluntary enrollment, all students, regardless of age, residency, or status agree to engage in sexual behavior exclusively within the context of marital heterosexual monogamy.

> Gambling, pornography, immodesty, profanity, crude, vulgar, or offensive language, and disrespectful behavior, such as gossip, dishonesty, and malice are also viewed as inappropriate behavior for all students. The University supports the stance of The Wesleyan Church on the issue of dancing.

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

#526

Post by Frondo » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 5:44 PM UTC

philh wrote: post #519

Frondo wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A smart, capable community manager like Josh Olin should have no problem finding work with another game studio--one that would be OK with his public defense of the bigoted views of that basketball team owner. Maybe there aren't a lot of employers around who want to hire someone who promotes the view that "bigotry is OK," but surely there's at least one.

I've said that someone shouldn't have been fired for what they said, and you've said they can get another job. That is not reassuring. You've also turned a defense of a person into a defense of their views. You've turned "someone shouldn't be fired for bigotry" into "bigotry is okay". That is not reassuring either.

No one should ever be fired for saying anything?

Or just "bigotry is OK, leave this bigot alone" is something someone should not be fired for?

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

#527

Post by belovedeagle » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 5:45 PM UTC

maldusiecle wrote: post #486

aggieben wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a stark difference between a free and voluntary association of like-minded people and a so-called "safe space", which uses a pretext of "victimization" to capriciously thought control others who simply committed the offense of disagreeing or criticizing. If you hate Christianity, why would you go to this school? If you aren't willing to follow behavioral rules, why would you go to this school? If you think ph…

Gee, think you have enough scare quotes around? There absolutely are victims on college campuses--victims of sexual assault, of racist acts of violence, of acts of intimidation based on their sexual orientation. I knew people who suffered these things. It's crap to act as if this is all made up. The purpose of safe spaces isn't to impose thought control, it's to allow people who have suffered a chance to recover. You…

The recent outcry against "safe spaces" has been against those established in public spaces and enforced with calls for violence. That's far from a case of free association.

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

#528

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 5:45 PM UTC

maldusiecle wrote: post #486

aggieben wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a stark difference between a free and voluntary association of like-minded people and a so-called "safe space", which uses a pretext of "victimization" to capriciously thought control others who simply committed the offense of disagreeing or criticizing. If you hate Christianity, why would you go to this school? If you aren't willing to follow behavioral rules, why would you go to this school? If you think ph…

Gee, think you have enough scare quotes around? There absolutely are victims on college campuses--victims of sexual assault, of racist acts of violence, of acts of intimidation based on their sexual orientation. I knew people who suffered these things. It's crap to act as if this is all made up. The purpose of safe spaces isn't to impose thought control, it's to allow people who have suffered a chance to recover. You…

[deleted]

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

#529

Post by nkassis » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 5:45 PM UTC

warfangle wrote: post #498

aggieben wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a stark difference between a free and voluntary association of like-minded people and a so-called "safe space", which uses a pretext of "victimization" to capriciously thought control others who simply committed the offense of disagreeing or criticizing. If you hate Christianity, why would you go to this school? If you aren't willing to follow behavioral rules, why would you go to this school? If you think ph…

There's a stark difference between what people who dislike the concept of "safe space" think a "safe space" is and what a "safe space" actually is. A "safe space" is a place where you know you aren't going to be singled out and harmed (verbally or physically) by someone telling you that you're a queer faggot and deserve to die. A "safe space" is a place where people can discuss the actual issues of hatred, bigotry an…

I was following your argument until this part: "All the anti-safe-space discussion on Hacker News lately is truly, horribly, fucking disgustingly indicative of the inherent sexism and flat-out hatred that worms its way through developer culture." I don't see how you made this connection. The way it's worded seems to imply that holding opinions that safe space have issues in practice would lead to being sexist and have hatred (which I presume you meant against oppressed groups generally for which safe spaces are added). I disagree strongly with this.

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

#530

Post by Nadya » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 5:47 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #490

yummyfajitas wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In reality we have no practical way to take the DOJ's data table to find the number of black on white crimes? Let me introduce you to data science. First I'll read the numnbers in row 2 column 2 and row 2 column 5. Then I'll plug them into ipython: $ ipython ... In [4]: 4091971*0.137 Out[4]: 560600.027 Do the same for row 3 col 2 and row 3 col 4: In [6]: 955800 * 0.104 Out[6]: 99403.2 Looks like the article was right…

That's not data science, that's middle school multiplication. Data science would be trying to find out why and putting it into context, especially if there are variables in play that aren't shown by a cursory look. Which a white supremacist has little interest in.

Nobody wants to study why because they'd be labeled as racists and lose their job the moment any group of crybullies discovered what they were researching. So it goes largely untouched, which only does the actual racists more benefit because they can use and represent the data to fit their narrative because there is no other narrative because nobody wants to touch the data.

It's a self-feeding loop.