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

In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 116 posts

Re: In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

#41

Post by maxerickson »

Kalium wrote: post #34
maxerickson wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My mind is open, much like a sieve. I find these discussions of tolerance fascinating. The core message of people that preach tolerance is that we shouldn't give people are hard time for views and beliefs that don't harm others, not that we should accept all views and beliefs as being equally useful. Of course the issue most comes to a head in situations like gay marriage, where a large group of people see it as caus…

When "harm" is in the eye of the beholder, anything can be rationalized as harmful for political gain.

You really think that harm isn't in the eye of the beholder?

Re: In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

#42

Post by duaneb »

fnovd wrote: post #11
iplaw wrote: post #4

This article is from March 2015, and shows that the writing has been on the wall for quite a while. The "safe spaces" movement is a plague, and I am sick of it. I hold extremely diverse viewpoints which span the political spectrum. Socially liberal and fiscally conservative. How can liberals claim to be accepting of all viewpoints but, in reality, only accept those that align with their pseudo-personal-Utopia outlook…

I don't have a problem with safe spaces. To me, they're like office break rooms. Sometimes you just need a minute to disengage. But, if you're spending your whole day in there, I'm going to question why you show up to work in the first place.

Sure. Do you think they are a right? Everyone can choose their environment to some extent.

Re: In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

#44

Post by angersock »

st3v3r wrote: post #18
iplaw wrote: post #4

This article is from March 2015, and shows that the writing has been on the wall for quite a while. The "safe spaces" movement is a plague, and I am sick of it. I hold extremely diverse viewpoints which span the political spectrum. Socially liberal and fiscally conservative. How can liberals claim to be accepting of all viewpoints but, in reality, only accept those that align with their pseudo-personal-Utopia outlook…

You realize that these places are supposed to be breaks where people don't have to deal with others constantly saying they shouldn't exist, right? That's what the LGBTQ spaces are for, that's what the POC spaces are for, and that's what the immigrant spaces are for.

The position of "constantly saying they shouldn't exist" is an overexaggeration that only serves to make tolerating them more of a chore.

It is hard to respect people that constantly treat you as an aggressor.

Re: In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

#46

Post by PKop »

iplaw wrote: post #4

This article is from March 2015, and shows that the writing has been on the wall for quite a while. The "safe spaces" movement is a plague, and I am sick of it. I hold extremely diverse viewpoints which span the political spectrum. Socially liberal and fiscally conservative. How can liberals claim to be accepting of all viewpoints but, in reality, only accept those that align with their pseudo-personal-Utopia outlook…

And they want to conflate "words" with physical action; offense with violence. Thus the need for a safe space because hearing something that upsets you or you disagree with is the same as being physically assaulted.

This is what you do when you are afraid of debate, afraid of being wrong and unable to defend your ideas... when you know you might lose or are losing in the arena of ideas.

You criminalize differing opinions in the name of diversity, and effectively outlaw free speech.

This is why Trump won.

Re: In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

#47

Post by yareally »

aaronchall wrote: post #39
yareally wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's a group of users on HN, including myself that wishes politics were not on the site. One can go almost anywhere to find political discussions because the threshold to join them is so low. Sometimes tech related politics gets a pass on here, but anything else tends to lead down a path of a low signal to noise ratio for insightful site content.

Are you saying this post is likely to be flagged as well? Tut tut.

I only flag abusive comments, so it won't be flagged or downvoted by me at least.

Re: In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

#48

Post by Zikes »

fnovd wrote: post #11
iplaw wrote: post #4

This article is from March 2015, and shows that the writing has been on the wall for quite a while. The "safe spaces" movement is a plague, and I am sick of it. I hold extremely diverse viewpoints which span the political spectrum. Socially liberal and fiscally conservative. How can liberals claim to be accepting of all viewpoints but, in reality, only accept those that align with their pseudo-personal-Utopia outlook…

I don't have a problem with safe spaces. To me, they're like office break rooms. Sometimes you just need a minute to disengage. But, if you're spending your whole day in there, I'm going to question why you show up to work in the first place.

Safe spaces as I've seen them implemented are exclusionary and discriminatory.

A women-only safe space is sexist, as the implied "safety" of not allowing men implies that men are inherently unsafe. A POC-only safe space is racist, as the implied "safety" of not allowing whites implies that whites are inherently unsafe.

If anyone were to even suggest the opposite implementation, a men-only or whites-only "safe space", then the discriminatory nature is immediately apparent and everyone rallies to shut down the idea before it ever reaches implementation.

Edit: Oops, I've invaded HN's safe space. Disagree with me all you like, but as we learned earlier this week it's not the votes that matter. Tell me why I'm wrong, I'm genuinely interested in hearing your opinion.

Re: In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

#49

Post by dominotw »

ashearer wrote: post #19
dominotw wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>one of the most respected news sources Trump only has 20% chance of winning. Dow is going to tank a million points on Trump victory.

If they predict a 20% chance of rain, and it does rain, that doesn't show dishonesty. The second point needs a citation.

>that doesn't show dishonesty.

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/4213

Not disclosing the 'veto' in the article is pretty dishonest. don't you think?

Running 20 front page anti-trump articles everyday and no criticism of Clinton doesn't show any dishonesty?

Post reply on HN