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

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

#601

Post by ForHackernews » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 7:45 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…

> They are absofuckinglutely not cudgels of fear.

Relevant reading:

https://popehat.com/2015/11/09/safe-spaces-as-shield-safe-sp...

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/how-camp...

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

#602

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 7:48 PM UTC

darkr wrote: post #468

travisby wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for opening my eyes. I'm renouncing my religion tomorrow. You should write a book! You are very convincing. Let's not use HN as a place to destroy religion -- there's plenty of other venues for that.

I'm not trying to get you to renounce your religion, I'm just saying that there is no such thing as ghosts.

[deleted]

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

#603

Post by ForHackernews » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 7:51 PM UTC

maldusiecle wrote: post #565

belovedeagle wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

For this I'd like citations. I'd point out, though, that even if a handful of people have been using the idea of "safe spaces" wrongly, that doesn't delegitimize the concept itself. If a few students are doing wrong in the name of "safe spaces," the answer is to argue against those particular students, not against other, unrelated safe spaces.

> For this I'd like citations.

I linked this above, but since you asked:

https://popehat.com/2015/11/09/safe-spaces-as-shield-safe-sp...

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/how-camp...

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

#604

Post by wpietri » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 7:52 PM UTC

noobermin wrote: post #577

wpietri wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My problem with this line of argument is that people who aren't well-off straight white guys like myself are already scared of expressing opinions. They have been for centuries. The only thing that has changed is that people with privilege, on rare occasion, can no longer say certain things without any consequence. As Popehat writes, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. There's an important ques…

I think the proper response is to not silence or discourage any speech, but to make sure non-straight white (non-){0,1}guys have no fear of speaking just like their straight white brethren.

I agree almost entirely. I think there's a fair bit of speech that's worth discouraging with other speech. (For example, my part of California is dense with anti-vaxxers. To the extent that they're capable of rational discussion of the topic, I prefer that. But I'd rather have them afraid of pushing their nonsense then let them make other people afraid of vaccinating.) But I definitely think we should be striving for a standard that's equal with respect to things like race and gender.

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

#605

Post by doktrin » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 8:02 PM UTC

warfangle wrote: post #552

mkrfox wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what's so annoying. Everyone's having this big screaming conversation about something and using the words for something else, like they're working with some kind of bilingual dictionary. The entries for "safe space" and "trigger warning" got mixed up with a Sudoku puzzle, and everyone's pretending it makes perfect sense instead of looking for a better dictionary.

Trigger warnings are important, in the context of a safe place. I'm coming from the direction of a) being genderqueer and b) having survived sexual assault. Safe places have been remarkable in giving me a place to discuss my feelings about gender without ridicule or hate. Trigger warnings have been pivotal in me recovering from being molested as a pre-teen. I'm actively scared of coming out in the developer community…

> I love that I just got down-voted for coming out to the community as both queer and victim of sexual assault!

Do you really think that's why you were downvoted?

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

#606

Post by joeclark77 » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 8:07 PM UTC

splawn wrote: post #469

joeclark77 wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't contain the word "Creationism". The word "Creation" simply means "the universe", i.e. that which is created.

The word "Creation" only means "the universe" in the context of Creationism... so ,assuming you are correct about its meaning, the word "Creationism" isn't actually necessary to show that the sentence was created by a creationist.

No, pretty much any Christian of any denomination understands Creation to mean "all that is created by God", i.e. the whole universe and all therein. The Catholic church, by far the largest "denomination", does not teach young-earth creationism, and I doubt that belief is shared by any more than a small minority even of Protestants.

Perhaps they join the concepts because they know that the opponents of their faith often try to falsely imply that theories of evolution are proofs of atheism.

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

#607

Post by warfangle » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 8:07 PM UTC

doktrin wrote: post #605

warfangle wrote: post #552

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trigger warnings are important, in the context of a safe place. I'm coming from the direction of a) being genderqueer and b) having survived sexual assault. Safe places have been remarkable in giving me a place to discuss my feelings about gender without ridicule or hate. Trigger warnings have been pivotal in me recovering from being molested as a pre-teen. I'm actively scared of coming out in the developer community…

> I love that I just got down-voted for coming out to the community as both queer and victim of sexual assault! Do you really think that's why you were downvoted?

I mean, it's either that or people who really really hate the idea of someone getting their mental health together with useful tools like safe spaces and trigger words :)

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

#608

Post by shiitake » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 8:07 PM UTC

tristor wrote: post #571

warfangle wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holding the opinion that safe spaces are cudgels of fear used to intimidate people probably indicates exactly what I said it did.

At this point, I realize you're trolling, but in the interest of anyone else reading I feel it's appropriate to reply. I'm someone who pretty universally supports the rights of others to be themselves, however that might be, and be treated with respect as a human being. That said, the term "safe space" is something I've never personally encountered being used in the context you present it in. When a group of like-min…

this!

thank you for the articulate reply.

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

#609

Post by wpietri » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 8:08 PM UTC

philh wrote: post #551

wpietri wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My problem with this line of argument is that people who aren't well-off straight white guys like myself are already scared of expressing opinions. They have been for centuries. The only thing that has changed is that people with privilege, on rare occasion, can no longer say certain things without any consequence. As Popehat writes, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. There's an important ques…

Let's be clear. You're saying it's okay to fire people for saying "it's not okay to fire people for bigotry". Yes? If you're not okay with that, if you think Josh Olin should not have been fired, please say so. I can see your argument, here. I disagree with you, but that's not what I want to get at here. What I want to get at is this: it's one thing to be scared of making racist jokes. It's another thing to be scared…

I am not in fact saying that particular incident is or is not ok. (I also don't think his tweets are fairly characterized by your summation.) As I mentioned, I am addressing the line of argument, not the case.

What I amsaying is that when the "freedom of speech" flag only gets hauled out for pro-bigotry straight white guys, I think it's not really about freedom of speech but instead defense of privilege. If defenders of free speech want to convince me they're serious, they'll be just as vigorous in defending unpopular opinions of people not in their demographic.

That may even be you, in which case, congrats. But unlike you, I don't think it's unconditionally bad that some people are afraid to express opinions because they may face social consequences for them. E.g., if some of the Donald Sterlings of the world are now afraid to express their bigotry, that's ok by me. And if some people are afraid to publish something because they aren't sure whether or not it's bigoted, I also have a hard time seeing that as bad. That seems like a fine opportunity for them to consider their opinions before publishing them.

In fact, I think that's what most people do. The only thing that's different is that straight white guys now have to do the same sort of self-managing that everybody else has always done, because they're now slightly less insulated from the consequences of their actions.

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

#610

Post by zaroth » Tue, Dec 01, 2015, 8:09 PM UTC

alexqgb wrote: post #561

angersock wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 defin…

You've mistaken discussion in general—which encompasses a fairly broad range of exchanges—with a particularly narrow subset that is characterized by clearly defined and opposing positions, along with acceptance of adversarial engagement from "both sides" of the issue. There's a time and a place for that, to be sure, but there are many more cases in which the forceful imposition of a binary outlook has effects that ar…

I really don't understand what you're saying in the first two paragraphs. What's interesting is I don't think the goal of these "safe spaces" is at all to foster "free discussion" or "open development of ideas". What you see people rallying against is that the SJWs are shutting down any free discussion through these tactics.

For example, these "safe spaces" apparently are to protect against "micro-aggressions" (a term I only recently learned) which if I understand correctly means to "take offense where none was given" aka to put words into someone's mouth? So now it's not even what someone is saying but how someone in the audience might feel, because of their own personal history, indirectly because a word the speaker used. And this is the speaker's responsibility now that someone in the audience was made to feel this way because they were confronted with a disagreeing opinion?

I think this is where the accusations of mollycoddling come in. It sounds like these kids aren't ready for serious academic discourse. They're stuck in a world where there is only one "right" and they paint caractures of their racist and bigoted antagonists to support their view.

What I find noxious is warfangle's claim that we must all be sexist and bigots to raise questions around academic freedom and censorship in colleges / universities... I think this is a typical parlor trick to try to shut down productive discussion. Frankly I would have liked to see a rebuke from dang in response. Why is it ok to attack a group saying a viewpoint is "disgustingly indicative of the inherent sexism and flat-out hatred that worms its way through developer culture." All the same, I'll let warfangle speak for themself and I don't expect HN to be free from dissenting opinions or even vitriol. Because in an attempt to shut down a "narrow and combative approach" it's impossible not to have a chilling effect on the overall discussion. In your safe spaces you might be spared from some of the bad, but it comes at a significant cost to others around you who aren't triggered and are capable of having adult conversations on difficult topics.

Frankly I've been waiting for an article like this to hit the front page because I am very interested in seeing the varying perspectives and actually having a chance at productive conversation on HN, which you won't find in the comments anywhere else that's for sure!