Live data from Hacker News

In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

nytimes.com

1–10 of 157 posts

Re: In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

#2
Is this phenomenon observable in cultures that are generally accepted as more progressively feminist than the US? (e.g. northern European countries, Germany, etc)

I'm not American and I don't know much about feminism, so for me it's hard to tell the proportions with which these ideas come from US culture vs feminism (there are accounts of UK based initiatives, but there is heavy cross pollination between the US and UK student worlds).

Re: In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

#4
Creating a safe space seems very reasonable, but I'm not sure I agree that the implication is that the remaining space is therefore fundamentally "unsafe." Emotional topics can definitely benefit from intellectual discussion, but it is not unreasonable to say that a portion of the population may very well not want to be a part of it

Re: In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

#5
"Ms. El Rhazoui replied, somewhat irritably, “Being Charlie Hebdo means to die because of a drawing,” and not everyone has the guts to do that (although she didn’t use the word guts)."

Amusing that the NYT's fusty policy for censoring profanity pokes its nose into THIS quote, of all things.

Re: In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

#7
post #2

Is this phenomenon observable in cultures that are generally accepted as more progressively feminist than the US? (e.g. northern European countries, Germany, etc) I'm not American and I don't know much about feminism, so for me it's hard to tell the proportions with which these ideas come from US culture vs feminism (there are accounts of UK based initiatives, but there is heavy cross pollination between the US and U…

Anecdotally, yes.

Re: In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

#8
It wasn't so long ago that "trigger warning" wasn't even a common phrase. I remember thinking about this in college, though, because I was in a relationship with someone who would get angry at people for expressing input that was too closely related to recent private trauma she had been through. I didn't really understand it because I had always trained myself to judge the producer of input by the intent of the producer, rather than by how it affected me (an effect the producer would have had no way of knowing ahead of time). It should always be fine for an affected person to remove themselves from a situation that feels unsafe to them, but it shouldn't necessarily mean additional regulation.

I am totally in support of educating people to speak sensitively in the sense of it meaning not to speak flippantly or hurtfully about charged subjects - for instance, I will still object to jokes about prison rape - but for it to progress to the point of avoiding provocative subjects entirely, that just seems like anti-progress and willful ignorance.

Re: In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

#9
I can definitely relate first hand to this as a current college student. To borrow some jargon, I absolutely feel 'unsafe' discussing many of these topics in public, and I don't hold controversial or polarizing opinions. Some people quickly label others as racist or misogynistic for presenting contrary viewpoints. Granted, those who seek to shut out debate by this sort of censorship are probably not worth debating, it's worrying that this rhetorical strategy is becoming mainstream.

Relevant smbc: http://smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=2164

Re: In College and Hiding from Scary Ideas

#10
What is most disturbing about this trend is the concept that some arguments are unassailable, that some ideas are not up for debate and discussion. "Safe space", while an admirable concept at first glance, has been co-opted by people who just want a rhetorical nuclear option to protect weak or unfounded arguments.

It quickly becomes a race to the bottom to see what is the crassest idea you can successfully firewall by accusing its opponents of oppression.

Ironically, this concept meant to bring to the fore the lived experiences of individual people (not an invalid goal when discussing social science topics) is most commonly used to suppress and silence - wait for it - the lived experiences of others.

Post reply on HN