Am I the only one who sees the glaring flaw in the "logic" here?

[P@triot]

I agree it's not a good idea. It insulates a person from outside view.

Ever since the advent of social media and cable television. We can now retreat into our own private Safe Spaces (i.e. Echo Chambers) where all our ideas receive affirmation and support and agreement with never a contrary opinion allowed to permeate the sacred space.

And to be honest - I don't even mind that. After all, we are free to live our lives as we wish (including in echo chambers and/or ignorant). But I do think it's a problem when universities are creating the safe spaces for them. How many times have universities blocked a certain speaker who had been invited? While they have the right to do that - it's not a healthy thing to do. If I were a parent looking at colleges, one of my first questions would be about their history of restricting speech. If they had any history of blocking speakers, I would let them know that they just lost my business.

 

[Coyote]

I agree it's not a good idea. It insulates a person from outside view.

Ever since the advent of social media and cable television. We can now retreat into our own private Safe Spaces (i.e. Echo Chambers) where all our ideas receive affirmation and support and agreement with never a contrary opinion allowed to permeate the sacred space.

And to be honest - I don't even mind that. After all, we are free to live our lives as we wish (including in echo chambers and/or ignorant). But I do think it's a problem when universities are creating the safe spaces for them. How many times have universities blocked a certain speaker who had been invited? While they have the right to do that - it's not a healthy thing to do. If I were a parent looking at colleges, one of my first questions would be about their history of restricting speech. If they had any history of blocking speakers, I would let them know that they just lost my business.

I kind of feel the same about it both in Universities and in our choice of media because the end result is the same - echo chambers. Consider, for example, when print media was the main. Newspapers carried articles on a broad spectrum of events, and editorials and letters to the editors likewise representing various sides - you can say it tilted left or right, but even that was not consistent because it depended on the issue being covered (for example politics might have one tilt, economic coverage another) - it was harder to avoid reading stuff that you might not agree with - in fact, I did - and bitched as I read it

But remove that variety and what do you have? Material selected for you by algorythums that determine what views you prefer. Or, because we can now choose from hundreds of sources, we choose those that agree most with our views - a natural human tendancy unless you consciously go against it.

In Universities - I agree with you totally. College is when you should expect to be challenged - your views, your way of thinking, your ideas, your preconceptions. That's the foundation of a university education. Creating "safe spaces" means those ideas are protected from challenge. And it doesn't mean they are bad ideas - but putting them forward for debate and challenge is like putting them through the test of fire. You either realize that they might be faulty, might be totally wrong or - might be right and come out stronger for it because you have a wider span of knowledge. Protecting college age students from this is stunting their growth and I oppose that.

I was proud of the university I work for - they had Milo Y as an invited speaker for the Young Republicans Club. He's controversial, and in fact behaved very badly - so much so that the Dean and President sent out an apology to faculty and staff for his conduct - HOWEVER, they also emphasized the university's tradition of free speech and providing a platform for a wide variety of speakers that allowed Milo to come and speak, and that would continue in that vein. There were protests - and I have no problem with peaceful protests, because those people are also allowed to make their views known and be heard - but they shouldn't allowed to shut down opposing views.

 

[regent]

I remember high school and the need for many of us to hire body guards, not because of what we were but because of safety. I remember my guard, Bell, and it was a sad day for some of us, when Bell drew a knife on a teacher and he became one of the 75% that left school before graduation.

 

[P@triot]

Creating "safe spaces" means those ideas are protected from challenge. And it doesn't mean they are bad ideas - but putting them forward for debate and challenge is like putting them through the test of fire. You either realize that they might be faulty, might be totally wrong or - might be right and come out stronger for it because you have a wider span of knowledge.

And that is a really key point that you just hit on. It doesn't have to change their mind - it might actually make their view stronger like you said. Well put.

 

[P@triot]

I remember high school and the need for many of us to hire body guards, not because of what we were but because of safety. I remember my guard, Bell, and it was a sad day for some of us, when Bell drew a knife on a teacher and he became one of the 75% that left school before graduation.

WTF? Please tell me that this was just supposed to be sarcasm and it simply missed the mark...

 

[Foxfyre]

So Mr. Sean Ryan here of Columbia University is on to discuss (promote?) a couple of "safe spaces" that Columbia has set up for their African-American students and their homosexual students. Tucker Carlson of Fox News wisely points out that this is going back to the days of segregation - and defeats the argument that diversity is critical.

Here is where things get really bizarre - Sean Ryan states that these spaces are vital because "isolationism" has caused a host of serious issues for students - including suicide. Yet neither he nor Tucker Carlson saw the obvious flaw here: creating these spaces is causing the isolation. When you take a subset of people out of their community and place them in rooms with a small group of people exactly like them - you have isolated them from the rest of their community.

Yes, I see the questionable logic here as well as the total disconnect from reality. When I was in college, segregation was still legal, but many, if not most, places had already desegregated. Certainly that was the case with most universities. So among my classmates in college were black people, brown people, Asian people, local Indians, a smattering of foreign student, along with white people who made up the majority.

But that was in the days before political correctness became a religion, but good manners and courtesy was expected of all in the culture. So bullying was not a blood sport and the student body did not go out of their way to make the minority students feel different or in need of a safe space.

That was also when universities encouraged critical thinking, logic, reason, and consideration and exchange of all manner of ideas. We had speakers on campus ranging from everything from the Temperance Society, Birchers, Communists, environmentalists, and military experts, and would you believe not a single student needed a 'safe space' to protect them from unpopular theories or ideology different from their own? And nobody would presume to be unkind or hostile to or treat any of those speakers with anything other than the utmost respect.

I long for higher education to return to a culture of good manners and respect and allow exchange of ideas and differences of opinion instead of being high priced indoctrination centers.

a culture of good manners and respect and allow exchange of ideas and differences of opinion
If that were the case, no one would be asking for safe spaces. Respect, good manners and allowing for the exchange of ideas goes both ways. The people here calling college students "weenies" for asking for a place they won't be harassed is an indication of how intolerant some people still are. I think.

I think I may have been unfair to your point in my last response to this post. I do agree that people should have a place safe from bullies and people who go out of their way to insult you for whatever reason.

But when I was in college that was not tolerated by anybody. Not the administration or faculty. Not by the students. THAT is the culture that universities should be cultivating--respect for everybody including those who are different from (the rhetorical) you or who hold opinions different than you hold.

It simply was not done at our university. Anybody who presumed to get in somebody's face over a social or political issue would have been advised he or she was out of line and to cool it. It was an amazing, invigorating, stimulating community in which everybody felt safe regardless of their race, ethnicity, religion, or sociopolitical views. We were truly educated and not indoctrinated in any form.

Nobody should need a 'safe place' at the university. Anybody who is too sensitive to hear an opinion contrary to what he/she believes should be considered too immature and unprepared for college. And to treat anybody badly just because they held an unpopular point of view or were different should not be tolerated at all.

 

[bripat9643]

I agree it's not a good idea. It insulates a person from outside view.

Ever since the advent of social media and cable television. We can now retreat into our own private Safe Spaces (i.e. Echo Chambers) where all our ideas receive affirmation and support and agreement with never a contrary opinion allowed to permeate the sacred space.

And to be honest - I don't even mind that. After all, we are free to live our lives as we wish (including in echo chambers and/or ignorant). But I do think it's a problem when universities are creating the safe spaces for them. How many times have universities blocked a certain speaker who had been invited? While they have the right to do that - it's not a healthy thing to do. If I were a parent looking at colleges, one of my first questions would be about their history of restricting speech. If they had any history of blocking speakers, I would let them know that they just lost my business.

These are public universities we are talking about - tax supported institutions. I don't think they do have the right to deny conservatives from speaking in them.

 

[Mac1958]

The subject sure has been changed a lot on this thread.

Understandable. Predictable.
.

Actually I'll gently disagree. The thread has remarkably stayed on topic for the most part--seeing the disconnect with 'safe spaces' on campus as opposed to those who are defending them. Okay the member just before your post decided to throw in a Donald Trump straw man, and others are dealing with the predictable red herrings, but hopefully those will be ignored. But I so agree with your Post #69.

To me it is criminal and unjustifiable to provide safe spaces where university students are protected from anything that makes them uncomfortable or might cause them to question what they think they know. And heaven forbid that they understand there will always be people who judge them and there will always be people who think differently than they do.

I always thought college was the place to learn to think critically, analyze, and figure out things. It was the place to learn to work with, associate with, talk with, and perhaps understand those who are different from themselves.

It should not be a place to hide from what's scary or never be exposed to any kind of challenge to what the students have decided is true.

Those students who have been so indoctrinated instead of educated should be able to demand their money back.

The Regressive Left is enabling this behavior, and even though I realize that ideologues will do anything to "win", it's repellent to me that they would use kids like this.

Bad enough they do this to the kids at all, but at such a critical time in the kids' lives. There aren't many better examples of why I find partisan ideology so fucking abhorrent.
.

 

[OldLady]

So Mr. Sean Ryan here of Columbia University is on to discuss (promote?) a couple of "safe spaces" that Columbia has set up for their African-American students and their homosexual students. Tucker Carlson of Fox News wisely points out that this is going back to the days of segregation - and defeats the argument that diversity is critical.

Here is where things get really bizarre - Sean Ryan states that these spaces are vital because "isolationism" has caused a host of serious issues for students - including suicide. Yet neither he nor Tucker Carlson saw the obvious flaw here: creating these spaces is causing the isolation. When you take a subset of people out of their community and place them in rooms with a small group of people exactly like them - you have isolated them from the rest of their community.

Yes, I see the questionable logic here as well as the total disconnect from reality. When I was in college, segregation was still legal, but many, if not most, places had already desegregated. Certainly that was the case with most universities. So among my classmates in college were black people, brown people, Asian people, local Indians, a smattering of foreign student, along with white people who made up the majority.

But that was in the days before political correctness became a religion, but good manners and courtesy was expected of all in the culture. So bullying was not a blood sport and the student body did not go out of their way to make the minority students feel different or in need of a safe space.

That was also when universities encouraged critical thinking, logic, reason, and consideration and exchange of all manner of ideas. We had speakers on campus ranging from everything from the Temperance Society, Birchers, Communists, environmentalists, and military experts, and would you believe not a single student needed a 'safe space' to protect them from unpopular theories or ideology different from their own? And nobody would presume to be unkind or hostile to or treat any of those speakers with anything other than the utmost respect.

I long for higher education to return to a culture of good manners and respect and allow exchange of ideas and differences of opinion instead of being high priced indoctrination centers.

a culture of good manners and respect and allow exchange of ideas and differences of opinion
If that were the case, no one would be asking for safe spaces. Respect, good manners and allowing for the exchange of ideas goes both ways. The people here calling college students "weenies" for asking for a place they won't be harassed is an indication of how intolerant some people still are. I think.

I agree with that to some extent - that there is a new culture of rudeness and open hate disguised as "opposing PC", but I think that the idea of "safe spaces" has gone beyond that. It has evolved into protecting one from opinions that are in opposition to one's beliefs. That's not a good thing. Student groups and organizations used to provide a sort of safe space where people with similar ideas could meet and discuss them - but it wasn't about hiding from anything.

I'm not sure it IS about "hiding" as much as having a place to take a break. It wasn't my understanding that they lived in their "safe space." I have a sneaking suspicion that the way these safe spaces are being presented to us is skewed and twisted to make it seem as negative as possible. I could be wrong.

You may be right that this is just more indication of the polarization that the whole country is experiencing. If the adults are doing it, why should the college kids be expected to behave any differently? I don't like it that we're all dividing against each other over ideology, but as far as black kids or homosexual kids kicking off their shoes and having a relax, no I have nothing against it.

 

[P@triot]

I agree it's not a good idea. It insulates a person from outside view.

Ever since the advent of social media and cable television. We can now retreat into our own private Safe Spaces (i.e. Echo Chambers) where all our ideas receive affirmation and support and agreement with never a contrary opinion allowed to permeate the sacred space.

And to be honest - I don't even mind that. After all, we are free to live our lives as we wish (including in echo chambers and/or ignorant). But I do think it's a problem when universities are creating the safe spaces for them. How many times have universities blocked a certain speaker who had been invited? While they have the right to do that - it's not a healthy thing to do. If I were a parent looking at colleges, one of my first questions would be about their history of restricting speech. If they had any history of blocking speakers, I would let them know that they just lost my business.

These are public universities we are talking about - tax supported institutions. I don't think they do have the right to deny conservatives from speaking in them.

Well...Cornell is not. But you have a point with state institutions.

 

[Foxfyre]

I agree it's not a good idea. It insulates a person from outside view.

Ever since the advent of social media and cable television. We can now retreat into our own private Safe Spaces (i.e. Echo Chambers) where all our ideas receive affirmation and support and agreement with never a contrary opinion allowed to permeate the sacred space.

And to be honest - I don't even mind that. After all, we are free to live our lives as we wish (including in echo chambers and/or ignorant). But I do think it's a problem when universities are creating the safe spaces for them. How many times have universities blocked a certain speaker who had been invited? While they have the right to do that - it's not a healthy thing to do. If I were a parent looking at colleges, one of my first questions would be about their history of restricting speech. If they had any history of blocking speakers, I would let them know that they just lost my business.

These are public universities we are talking about - tax supported institutions. I don't think they do have the right to deny conservatives from speaking in them.

Well...Cornell is not. But you have a point with state institutions.

But even the private schools should know better. When you plunk down what amounts to a year's salary for many if not most Americans to attend one year at a prestigious school, a person should expect to be educated. They won't be if only one point of view, one way of looking at things, one way of expressing oneself, one way to think and believe is allowed.

 

[Foxfyre]

So Mr. Sean Ryan here of Columbia University is on to discuss (promote?) a couple of "safe spaces" that Columbia has set up for their African-American students and their homosexual students. Tucker Carlson of Fox News wisely points out that this is going back to the days of segregation - and defeats the argument that diversity is critical.

Here is where things get really bizarre - Sean Ryan states that these spaces are vital because "isolationism" has caused a host of serious issues for students - including suicide. Yet neither he nor Tucker Carlson saw the obvious flaw here: creating these spaces is causing the isolation. When you take a subset of people out of their community and place them in rooms with a small group of people exactly like them - you have isolated them from the rest of their community.

Yes, I see the questionable logic here as well as the total disconnect from reality. When I was in college, segregation was still legal, but many, if not most, places had already desegregated. Certainly that was the case with most universities. So among my classmates in college were black people, brown people, Asian people, local Indians, a smattering of foreign student, along with white people who made up the majority.

But that was in the days before political correctness became a religion, but good manners and courtesy was expected of all in the culture. So bullying was not a blood sport and the student body did not go out of their way to make the minority students feel different or in need of a safe space.

That was also when universities encouraged critical thinking, logic, reason, and consideration and exchange of all manner of ideas. We had speakers on campus ranging from everything from the Temperance Society, Birchers, Communists, environmentalists, and military experts, and would you believe not a single student needed a 'safe space' to protect them from unpopular theories or ideology different from their own? And nobody would presume to be unkind or hostile to or treat any of those speakers with anything other than the utmost respect.

I long for higher education to return to a culture of good manners and respect and allow exchange of ideas and differences of opinion instead of being high priced indoctrination centers.

a culture of good manners and respect and allow exchange of ideas and differences of opinion
If that were the case, no one would be asking for safe spaces. Respect, good manners and allowing for the exchange of ideas goes both ways. The people here calling college students "weenies" for asking for a place they won't be harassed is an indication of how intolerant some people still are. I think.

I agree with that to some extent - that there is a new culture of rudeness and open hate disguised as "opposing PC", but I think that the idea of "safe spaces" has gone beyond that. It has evolved into protecting one from opinions that are in opposition to one's beliefs. That's not a good thing. Student groups and organizations used to provide a sort of safe space where people with similar ideas could meet and discuss them - but it wasn't about hiding from anything.

I'm not sure it IS about "hiding" as much as having a place to take a break. It wasn't my understanding that they lived in their "safe space." I have a sneaking suspicion that the way these safe spaces are being presented to us is skewed and twisted to make it seem as negative as possible. I could be wrong.

You may be right that this is just more indication of the polarization that the whole country is experiencing. If the adults are doing it, why should the college kids be expected to behave any differently? I don't like it that we're all dividing against each other over ideology, but as far as black kids or homosexual kids kicking off their shoes and having a relax, no I have nothing against it.

I have no problem with spaces in which certain topics are off limits. Something like the Coffee Shop where all people who choose to do so can get together without fear that the tensions created by their differences will follow them there.

But I have a huge problem with designated spaces that are restricted to whites only, blacks only, gays only or whatever on college campuses. Such organized segregation can only exacerbate speculation about what they are REALLY doing or talking about and will increase tensions.

 

[saveliberty]

So Mr. Sean Ryan here of Columbia University is on to discuss (promote?) a couple of "safe spaces" that Columbia has set up for their African-American students and their homosexual students. Tucker Carlson of Fox News wisely points out that this is going back to the days of segregation - and defeats the argument that diversity is critical.

Here is where things get really bizarre - Sean Ryan states that these spaces are vital because "isolationism" has caused a host of serious issues for students - including suicide. Yet neither he nor Tucker Carlson saw the obvious flaw here: creating these spaces is causing the isolation. When you take a subset of people out of their community and place them in rooms with a small group of people exactly like them - you have isolated them from the rest of their community.

More to the point, why have campus diversity when you create opportunities to not interact? The whole point of diversity is to show different views.

What we are seeing is affirmative action didn't work, in part because it rested on a belief only opportunity was missing. In fact, poor education yields low opportunity on a consistent basis. Lowering standards hurts everyone.

 

[hadit]

And then they think home schooled kids are not well adjusted. Somehow I don't think those demanding safe spaces were home schooled.

 

[Mac1958]

More to the point, why have campus diversity when you create opportunities to not interact? The whole point of diversity is to show different views.

These people are not after real diversity.
.

 

[Coyote]

And then they think home schooled kids are not well adjusted. Somehow I don't think those demanding safe spaces were home schooled.

Isn't home schooling in and of itself a "safe space"?

 

[Coyote]

So Mr. Sean Ryan here of Columbia University is on to discuss (promote?) a couple of "safe spaces" that Columbia has set up for their African-American students and their homosexual students. Tucker Carlson of Fox News wisely points out that this is going back to the days of segregation - and defeats the argument that diversity is critical.

Here is where things get really bizarre - Sean Ryan states that these spaces are vital because "isolationism" has caused a host of serious issues for students - including suicide. Yet neither he nor Tucker Carlson saw the obvious flaw here: creating these spaces is causing the isolation. When you take a subset of people out of their community and place them in rooms with a small group of people exactly like them - you have isolated them from the rest of their community.

More to the point, why have campus diversity when you create opportunities to not interact? The whole point of diversity is to show different views.

What we are seeing is affirmative action didn't work, in part because it rested on a belief only opportunity was missing. In fact, poor education yields low opportunity on a consistent basis. Lowering standards hurts everyone.

Agree with the first part, but I wouldn't say affirmative action didn't work. It did what was intended - broke down barriers.

 

[Coyote]

I agree it's not a good idea. It insulates a person from outside view.

Ever since the advent of social media and cable television. We can now retreat into our own private Safe Spaces (i.e. Echo Chambers) where all our ideas receive affirmation and support and agreement with never a contrary opinion allowed to permeate the sacred space.

And to be honest - I don't even mind that. After all, we are free to live our lives as we wish (including in echo chambers and/or ignorant). But I do think it's a problem when universities are creating the safe spaces for them. How many times have universities blocked a certain speaker who had been invited? While they have the right to do that - it's not a healthy thing to do. If I were a parent looking at colleges, one of my first questions would be about their history of restricting speech. If they had any history of blocking speakers, I would let them know that they just lost my business.

These are public universities we are talking about - tax supported institutions. I don't think they do have the right to deny conservatives from speaking in them.

Ah. So free speech only applies to some. I disagree, they should all be held to the same standards.

 

[hadit]

And then they think home schooled kids are not well adjusted. Somehow I don't think those demanding safe spaces were home schooled.

Isn't home schooling in and of itself a "safe space"?

If they are, they are for real children, not adults who should be learning to deal with viewpoints from all ends of the spectrum.

 

[Foxfyre]

And then they think home schooled kids are not well adjusted. Somehow I don't think those demanding safe spaces were home schooled.

Isn't home schooling in and of itself a "safe space"?

I don't see it that way. I see it as a practical alternative to an education system that indoctrinates instead of educates, that teaches by rote instead of encouraging critical thinking and analysis, that moves at the pace of the slowest student, that loses much of the teaching day to disruption in the classroom or activities that do not teach but proselyte for a particular ideology.

One of my great nephews was homeschooled by his mom who had no more than a highschool education. But she studied along with him and employed tutors in the areas she lacked the necessary expertise to teach. When he was old enough to enter highschool they sent him to the public school. Within two weeks he was begging to come home. They waste so much time, he said. And when we learn something we have to wait until everybody else figures it out or catches up.
He came home and completed highschool as a home schooler. He was ready for college at 15 but they sent him when he was 17. He completed college in four years summa cum laude while being extremely active in his church and obtaining two grand championships on the national collegiate rodeo circuit. He had more than a 1000 Facebook friends.

You won't find a gentler, more socialized, more well adjusted, greater person on Earth than this kid is.