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

Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 370 posts

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#301

Post by unityByFreedom »

chatmasta wrote: post #108
Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw this firsthand with a former flatmate of mine. He passionately studied Semitic languages and Persian at uni, spent a lot of time traveling or studying abroad in Israel, Arab countries, and Iran. His social circle in Europe was heavy with immigrants from those countries and with them he seemed to be the best of friends. And yet he loved to visit 4chan and collect anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim memes to repost else…

Why do we need to decide if someone is "really racist" in the first place? To make ourselves feel good about being morally superior? To feel offended on behalf of people who we may not even understand? Political correctness really has gotten out of hand, and the sooner people realize this, the sooner they'll begin to understand how we ended up with Trump as president. The pendulum swings both ways. Be careful how har…

Trump is also politically correct, just not the kind we're used to. He didn't say anything about the Portland knife attack and had a lot to say about the London one. Doing so kept his base happy.

Don't be fooled into thinking Trump is not a politician.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#302

Post by julianmarq »

vinceguidry wrote: post #172
pvnick wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Folks always make this argument which this kind of thing comes up. Just because you as a private entity can limit free speech, doesn't mean you should . Censorship is generally a bad idea, and I as a private entity can be upset at Harvard for doing it.

The Internet has shown all of us that simple restrictions on speech go a long way towards creating a welcoming and friendly atmosphere. Attacking basic civility and hate speech restrictions on speech is putting principles before reality. You don't want to make any laws restricting truly public speech, but censuring private entities for that is counter-productive.

> Attacking basic civility and hate speech restrictions on speech is putting principles before reality.

Now this is quite the 180° turn from how things really work. Setting in place "rules" because they might or might not "offend" someone isn't putting principles before reality how, exactly? It is, of course that's exactly what it is, but I'm curious to how you'd rationalize the opposite.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#303

Post by yawaramin »

a_puppy wrote: post #276
vinceguidry wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The civil rights movement itself exposed the need for specific legal protections for minorities, because leaving it all up to the "marketplace of ideas" only ensures that patterns of systemized oppression continue. What happens when you don't restrict along protected grounds is that entire industries collude to exclude those classes of people. Mass hatred drowns out the whole marketplace.

And right now the entire university education industry is colluding to suppress certain types of speech; an incident like this could happen at most universities, not just Harvard. So why doesn't freedom of speech also deserve specific legal protection? You still haven't justified treating freedom of speech differently from freedom from discrimination.

It's different because minorities can't choose to not be minorities any more. Racists can choose to not be racist--at least in public (or in 'private' chat groups which, let's face it, are leaky sieves).

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#304

Post by julianmarq »

pyre wrote: post #89
std_throwaway wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People go to the toilet to get the crap out. Same for many online forums.

As much as you say that, repeating something over and over eventually normalizes it no matter how much you try to remain conscious of this process.

... According to you. You don't get to police or interpret how anyone else thinks.

Maybe "repeat it often enough and it will be true" applies to you, but you don't get to project your thought processes onto others.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#305

Post by julianmarq »

objclxt wrote: post #134
misterbowfinger wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that what they posted was offensive. But we can't start holding graduating high school students to the same standards we hold world and business leaders. Ironically, we didn't for Trump, but that's certainly the idea. Revoking one's admission to Harvard is a really rough way to teach the lesson of what you're supposed to and not supposed to say. College is the time to not only learn new ideas, but also to un-…

Counterpoint: say you had been admitted to Harvard and were coming from Mexico, or were the victim of a sexual assault during high school. How would you feel if you found out that your new classmates had been sharing racist images, or memes about the abuse of children? What if one of those students had been placed as your freshman roommate? > College is the time to not only learn new ideas, but also to un-learn thing…

> Counterpoint: say you had been admitted to Harvard and were coming from Mexico, or were the victim of a sexual assault during high school. How would you feel if you found out that your new classmates had been sharing racist images, or memes about the abuse of children? What if one of those students had been placed as your freshman roommate?

As a gay person who has suffered quite a bit of discrimination and bullying from other people and who hails from a different Latin American country I advise you to stop being offended on behalf of other people. Nobody needs this patronizing attitude. It literally helps nobody.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#306

Post by julianmarq »

fao_ wrote: post #291
misterbowfinger wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But at the same time, there must be a line drawn somewhere, surely? Yes - it's fully reasonable for Harvard to rescind admission for someone who's a convicted felon, for example. But posting offensive memes on the internet isn't illegal. Saying racist/sexist things isn't illegal. It's certainly something to have a conversation about, but not to totally alter their future. If I write an extremely offensive admissions…

> or a chance to explain themselves. You imply that media condoning racism, and sexual violence can be justified.

> You imply that media condoning racism, and sexual violence can be justified.

You imply that sharing memes in a private group is equivalent to a KKK meeting or actual sexual assault.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#307

Post by yawaramin »

geebee wrote: post #168
vinceguidry wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would I want that? The government funds private institutions all the time. Doesn't make them less private. If the government wants to run Harvard, then it can tell Harvard who it can and can't admit.

Ok, now I can see why we disagree. Private/public is, to me, not binary. There are degrees. A homeowner, for instance, does get a favored tax status where it comes to income taxes (though the home owner also pays heavy property taxes that largely offset this). Yet we wouldn't regulate what people are allowed to talk about in their own home. But on this continuum, Harvard is pretty far toward the "public" side of priv…

Aren't you forgetting something? Money never comes with no strings attached. Harvard's government funding already came with conditions. Controlling Harvard's admittance policy (which has been in place for a long time) is evidently not something the government cares about.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#308

Post by julianmarq »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #75
metaphorm wrote: post #22

I'm so conflicted right now. On the one hand, yeah, that shit is offensive and I'm not too keen on elevating a person who makes jokes about sexual assault or violence against minorities. On the other hand I'm terrified at the creeping surveillance society that has institutions examining all of our utterances for "wrong speech", which is much too close for comfort to "wrong think", which is much too close for comfort…

Dystopian fiction has given so much terrorizing weight to the concept of "thoughtcrime" and "wrong think" that I think people forget how much positive effect a culture can have on widespread mindsets and stopping ignorance. There are some ignorant thoughts that have almost entirely fallen out of the collective consciousness (in terms of serious belief, not abstract discussion of the past). (As a random example, there…

> Dystopian fiction has given so much terrorizing weight to the concept of "thoughtcrime" and "wrong think" that I think people forget how much positive effect a culture can have on widespread mindsets and stopping ignorance.

I didn't read past this. Were you under the impression that thought policing is only a matter of fiction? You don't read world news, do you? I wouldn't be surprised since only an echo chamber would spouse this kind of view but you should read a little more about places like North Korea.

Thought policing is not a good thing, it will never be a good thing.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#309

Post by misterbowfinger »

fao_ wrote: post #291
misterbowfinger wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But at the same time, there must be a line drawn somewhere, surely? Yes - it's fully reasonable for Harvard to rescind admission for someone who's a convicted felon, for example. But posting offensive memes on the internet isn't illegal. Saying racist/sexist things isn't illegal. It's certainly something to have a conversation about, but not to totally alter their future. If I write an extremely offensive admissions…

> or a chance to explain themselves. You imply that media condoning racism, and sexual violence can be justified.

Not justified, explained. I.E. "I didn't know that it was hurtful", "it was just a joke", "won't do it again", etc.

Perhaps "redeem" is a better word choice there.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#310

Post by julianmarq »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #259
metaphorm wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lets have a more realistic conversation about the consequences of shunning and ostracizing people, even if those people are noxious (in some way). does it really work? it seems to work in-so-far-as it purges specific communities of specific people. it doesn't remove those people from larger society and it most certainly doesn't change their mind. it makes them feel aggrieved to the point where they lash out with redo…

> it seems to work in-so-far-as it purges specific communities of specific people I'll take that; that's progress. If the only effect is to improve such communities, that's a good enough reason. And if we can get people to stop making "but free speech!" arguments against it, and start talking about free association, it'll have a much more widespread effect.

Gotta love how the inherent human nature of tribalism is alive and well, hm?
Post reply on HN