Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The idea of a university as a free space rather than a safe space is vanishing

blogs.spectator.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 62 posts

Re: The idea of a university as a free space rather than a safe space is vanishing

#51

Post by loup-vaillant »

hartpuff wrote: post #19
loup-vaillant wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, I'm lost: why the downvotes? This sounds like reasonable comment, even useful (the first sentence is a good summary of the article's subject). I see no attack to any particular group. What in this comment could possibly rub HN the wrong way?

> why the downvotes? This sounds like reasonable comment Happens all the time here, unfortunately, but questioning why is a waste of time. Half the posts in this thread - ironically about free speech - are grey. The surprising thing is that your post isn't, simply for mentioning the D-word.

That reminds me: http://lesswrong.com/lw/mm/the_fallacy_of_gray/

Re: The idea of a university as a free space rather than a safe space is vanishing

#52

Post by Houshalter »

tomlock wrote: post #20

The author seems to reminisce about a time when universities were pure outlets of free thought. At that time women were vastly outnumbered by men in universities. The time when universities were pure and free for everyone exists only in the authors imagination.

I don't see any contradiction in what you are saying. Perhaps the demographic change caused this, or it could be entirely unrelated.

Re: The idea of a university as a free space rather than a safe space is vanishing

#53

Post by loup-vaillant »

over wrote: post #23
loup-vaillant wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, I'm lost: why the downvotes? This sounds like reasonable comment, even useful (the first sentence is a good summary of the article's subject). I see no attack to any particular group. What in this comment could possibly rub HN the wrong way?

I think it's just that there's a lot of dramatic and hyperbolic words and phrases in there, here's a list from a quick pass: > religion, anyone, conviction, enemy, must, silenced > most, pitiful, cowardice, all, should, every last one of us, ever, surrendered, tyranny, fighting, capitulate, cower, fear > my own country, America; disgusts, good men, put down their lives, secure, blessings, liberty, lack, confidence, c…

Oh. Reminds me of that one time, where some jerk went all wise on me, by picking individual words from my post then responding "strong words".

On the surface, I was the angry stampede, and he was the voice of reason. Except he didn't seem to notice that my "strong words" tended to cancel each other (some of the words he cited actually restricted the scope of the others).

It's like the tone is more important than the message. Can't people read, before they take offence to surface details? I hope this is a loud minority problem.

Lesson learned: thou shalt not use strong words, even to express a fair and balanced position. What a mess.

Re: The idea of a university as a free space rather than a safe space is vanishing

#54

Post by hjhgjtyhgdf »

hartpuff wrote: post #42
hjhgjtyhgdf wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't be ridiculous. There are tons of videos you can find on YouTube of leftists shutting down conservative speech. Look at Milo and Ben Shapiro for instance. Can you provide some examples of the right doing the same on university campuses?

Can you post under a more obvious sock?

Why the ad hominem attack? Show me instances of conservatives shutting down speech like liberals have done with Milo and Ben Shapiro. Even Michael Blomberg has spoken about how liberals have essentially shut down conservatives on university campuses in his Harvard commencement speech.

Re: The idea of a university as a free space rather than a safe space is vanishing

#55

Post by hjhgjtyhgdf »

hartpuff wrote: post #41
angersock wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternately, the accepted shorthand for some groups may well be "the left" and "the right". Similarly, there are people who will use the term "Social Justice Warrior" while identifying with the movement, because it is a decent shorthand. "What do those groups represent then, "the right"?" It is possible to have other disagreements with those viewpoints despite what others might believe. For example, it is absolutely…

"The Jews" is an accepted shorthand for some people, and like "the left" you can be fairly certain the argument around the term is not going to focus on what a great bunch of lads they are. As to the other point, if both groups are "the left" (even though in this case one group is not behaving that way) then why argue that "the left" is censoring/repressing, when it's at least equally true (I'd say more true) that "t…

Which universities have shut down feminists and gay rights activists from speaking? Even the most hard core conservative campuses in the South haven't done so. On the contrary, there are tons of campuses across America who have shut down conservative speakers from speaking.

There were Bernie Sanders protesters in Chicago just last week who shut down Donald Trump's right to speak. Can you name instances when Hillary or Bernie Sanders speeches were shut down from conservative protesters?

Re: The idea of a university as a free space rather than a safe space is vanishing

#56

Post by wildmusings »

dalke wrote: post #48
wildmusings wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm inclined to agree that "running things like a business" is part of the reason why no one wants to make a stand. But I have to disagree with this: > Or to repurpose your phrase, "When business and profits are your religion, anyone with moral conviction is your enemy and must be silenced." It's not the businessmen who are trying to shut down free speech and debate on college campuses. > See, that's the sort of sexi…

The phrases "good people", "good souls", "good citizens", "good soldiers" and "good Americans" all would have been better than "good men", depending on your focus. I think "good souls" would have been the most poetic of these phrases for your intent. If you mean to include the members of the Merchant Marine or the CIA who have died to support US military policies, then "soldiers" doesn't work. If you mean to include…

I was being supremely sarcastic with my quote rewriting.

>Tell me, do you still use the terms "aviatrix" and "authoress", "poetess" and "doctress", or have you embraced that butchering of the English language?

I'd only ever use the male form for all of those (poet, author, doctor etc.), but I still use "actress" and "actor". "Actor" for the gender-generic sense.

The bigger point is that chastising people over language is stupid. So what if someone uses different constructions than you? Even if it is a political statement, do you really think it's warranted to throw around the word "sexism"? That accusation is used to scare people into silence and to misdirect attention away from content of their ideas.

Re: The idea of a university as a free space rather than a safe space is vanishing

#57

Post by dalke »

wildmusings wrote: post #56
dalke wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The phrases "good people", "good souls", "good citizens", "good soldiers" and "good Americans" all would have been better than "good men", depending on your focus. I think "good souls" would have been the most poetic of these phrases for your intent. If you mean to include the members of the Merchant Marine or the CIA who have died to support US military policies, then "soldiers" doesn't work. If you mean to include…

I was being supremely sarcastic with my quote rewriting. > Tell me, do you still use the terms "aviatrix" and "authoress", "poetess" and "doctress", or have you embraced that butchering of the English language? I'd only ever use the male form for all of those (poet, author, doctor etc.), but I still use "actress" and "actor". "Actor" for the gender-generic sense. The bigger point is that chastising people over langua…

Saying that people butcher a language is a form of chastising people over language.

Why should others follow your suggestion when you don't do it yourself?

Why should others respond with thought and respect when you offer only supreme sarcasm?

And no, I will not let people like my wife stay faceless in the background of "the good men." How would you prefer that I correct usage like this in the future? Do you have a better term than "sexist"?

Re: The idea of a university as a free space rather than a safe space is vanishing

#58

Post by wildmusings »

dalke wrote: post #57
wildmusings wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was being supremely sarcastic with my quote rewriting. > Tell me, do you still use the terms "aviatrix" and "authoress", "poetess" and "doctress", or have you embraced that butchering of the English language? I'd only ever use the male form for all of those (poet, author, doctor etc.), but I still use "actress" and "actor". "Actor" for the gender-generic sense. The bigger point is that chastising people over langua…

Saying that people butcher a language is a form of chastising people over language. Why should others follow your suggestion when you don't do it yourself? Why should others respond with thought and respect when you offer only supreme sarcasm? And no, I will not let people like my wife stay faceless in the background of "the good men." How would you prefer that I correct usage like this in the future? Do you have a b…

>Why should others respond with thought and respect when you offer only supreme sarcasm?

Revisionist history doesn't work when the history is two scrolls up. I made a joke, but I also gave you a serious response along with it.

>Saying that people butcher a language is a form of chastising people over language.

That's my opinion but I don't go around correcting people every time they drop a "he or she". I certainly don't start making insinuations about their character over it. I was responding to a completely unwarranted attack.

>And no, I will not let people like my wife stay faceless in the background of "the good men." How would you prefer that I correct usage like this in the future? Do you have a better term than "sexist"?

This isn't how you have discourse. You don't pick out two words that someone says, make it about your wife, and call them a sexist. Especially when it's abundantly clear that the role of women in the military wasn't even part of the discussion. But if your goal was to derail discussion, you were somewhat successful.

Re: The idea of a university as a free space rather than a safe space is vanishing

#59

Post by wildmusings »

rhyzomatic wrote: post #47
wildmusings wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Good people" would have worked fine, though at some cost to dramatic impact. The really barbarous constructions are things like "he or she" as the third-person singular pronoun. There's five camps I can think of on this: 1) Keep using "he" as the gender-generic third-person singular pronoun. This was the only accepted option for a long time. I think this is the best sounding, but some crowds might give you grief for…

For points 1) and 4), just so you are aware, "they" as a singular pronoun has been in popular use since the 14th century. The idea that the "correct" gender neutral singular pronoun is "he" came about in the 19th century. I find it much harder to support the idea that "'they' is supposed to be plural" with this in mind.

Today I learned. Thanks for correcting me.

Re: The idea of a university as a free space rather than a safe space is vanishing

#60

Post by dalke »

wildmusings wrote: post #58
dalke wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that people butcher a language is a form of chastising people over language. Why should others follow your suggestion when you don't do it yourself? Why should others respond with thought and respect when you offer only supreme sarcasm? And no, I will not let people like my wife stay faceless in the background of "the good men." How would you prefer that I correct usage like this in the future? Do you have a b…

> Why should others respond with thought and respect when you offer only supreme sarcasm? Revisionist history doesn't work when the history is two scrolls up. I made a joke, but I also gave you a serious response along with it. > Saying that people butcher a language is a form of chastising people over language. That's my opinion but I don't go around correcting people every time they drop a "he or she". I certainly…

"but I also gave you a serious response"

And I followed up on your serious response with the suggestion of "good souls", plus an analysis of the alternatives. I then addressed to your sarcastic response, taking it serious to show the different ways to analyze alternatives.

"You don't pick out two words that someone says, make it about your wife, and call them a sexist"

What I wrote started "See, that's the sort of sexist language that encourages knee-jerk reactions, and gets people like me labeled "PC". I did not call you a sexist. You may think that's only a technical point. I can accept that, though I disagree. It certainly wasn't meant as an attack on your character. (That said, would you prefer a safe area where you won't get your feelings hurt?)

If you can suggest a better way to object - one more likely to lead to effective change, let me know.

As it was, when my wife was demobbed and we went to the Army FRG meetings (https://www.armyfrg.org/), even a few of the external (civilian) presenters would refer to the returning soldier as a "he". They were quickly corrected, and not just be me. And when I did object, the presenter did not turn around and call me PC or accuse me of besmirching their character.

It's almost as if the way towards good discourse is to respond to an objection rather than double down on the original viewpoint despite a warning that it's a sensitive subject.

Post reply on HN