U of Chicago sends letter to incoming students

[mjr]

partisan shitposting

You mean posts like yours?

Angry much, dude?

[KabeRinnaul]

You mean posts like yours?

I think he means mocking someone for using a term when you don't understand its actual origins or usage and implying that they unthinkingly repeat opinions fed to them by Clinton and the "liberal media".

[Gravekeeper]

You mean posts like yours?

Angry much, dude?

I think he means mocking someone for using a term when you don't understand its actual origins or usage and implying that they unthinkingly repeat opinions fed to them by Clinton and the "liberal media".

^ What Kabe said.

You're going to have to do better than "I know you are but what am I?". You made a mistake born of ignorance and then blamed others for it. I'm afraid that taking a page Pee Wee Herman's pocket debate guide isn't going to change that. ;p

Projecting isn't a good look.

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

The phrase "play the ball, not the man" comes to mind.

I actually had an entire thing on topic but Fratching ate it and I didn't really have the patience or energy to retype so shortest short version: There's a difference between "safe space" in theory and "safe space" in practice. The disconnect is where your fighting occurs. And when arguing about it, proponents are using rarified "in theory" (although even some of them tend to... well miss large groups of people in terms of empathy) and critics tend to use the worst examples of in practice.

[Canarr]

Actually, given what a safe space is --a place that is free from personal attack on basis of ethnicity, gender, sexuality, etc -- I should be able to fully expect public spaces to be like that. It's called not being an ass.

As you say - that's just not being an ass, meaing: everyone gets basic respect. The same letter even explicitly mentions that:

Civility and mutual respect are vital to all of us, and freedom of expression does not mean the freedom to harass or threaten others.

Which means, you get to move about campus without being harassed for being a woman, or black, or LGBT+. But neither do you get to harass a speaker, or disrupt their lecture, even if they're denying the Armenian Genocide.

The letter simply says, you don't get to use the argument of "safe space" to block lectures, or demand that the curriculum be adapted, or disrupt speakers. Which means, you don't get to harass others, even if you think you're right and they're wrong.

Trigger warning... I'd say it depends on the circumstances. If you're attending a course on Criminal Law, you should reasonably expect that this will involve crimes, and that you will be confronted with the results of criminal behavior. And - afaik - in most cases, the professor will be announcing the lesson's topic in advance, anyway. I don't think it should be necessary to add, "We will be discussing the various crimes of robbery today. You may be exposed to mentions of the word, robbery, as well as to reiterations of people committing robbery." That last part should be self-evident.

If, however, you're attending a subject where you should not have to reasonably expect to be confronted with something potentially traumatizing, then a trigger warning would certainly be appropriate. "You will now see the University's orientation slides. Please be aware that the topic of sexual assault on campus is included, and references will be made."

I'm not agains safe spaces, per se, nor am I against trigger warnings. But I am against the abuse of both concepts in order to shape discourse and discussions on campus. And we've all read about that happening in articles over the past 1-2 years. There've already been threads here on Fratching on that. And while, yes, these may be singular occurrences, it is appropriate that a University makes it clear that such abuse will not be tolerated.

[Gravekeeper]

Which means, you get to move about campus without being harassed for being a woman, or black, or LGBT+. But neither do you get to harass a speaker, or disrupt their lecture, even if they're denying the Armenian Genocide.

Well, if you're going to allow controversial speakers in the name of free speech you must also allow protesting said speakers in the name of free speech. Same goes for "trigger warnings". Whether or not a professor wants to provide a content warning about the course material should be up to the professor. You can't really limit free speech in the name of free speech.

Honestly though the whole letter is probably just a pointless reassurance to their ( conservative ) donors. Its not like they're actually vowing to do anything in the letter. Students are the ones that set up safe spaces, not universities. Can you imagine the legal shit storm that would erupt if a university forcibly tried to shut down student run groups like that? Free speech minefield.

I'm not agains safe spaces, per se, nor am I against trigger warnings. But I am against the abuse of both concepts in order to shape discourse and discussions on campus. And we've all read about that happening in articles over the past 1-2 years. There've already been threads here on Fratching on that. And while, yes, these may be singular occurrences, it is appropriate that a University makes it clear that such abuse will not be tolerated.

To be bluntly honest I have seen far more screeching about what people imagine both terms to be than I have seen of said terms actually implemented anywhere in an abusive fashion. The internet invented the term "trigger warning" and turned it into a lightning rod for political shithats before the weekend was out.

Everyone acts like college students haven't been coming up with questionable ideas they think will solve all the world's problems since higher education was invented. -.-

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

I think the thing is, this is the first generation of people that have generationally used the internet. I'm technically a millenial (but really I'm the midpoint between X and Millenial) and the thing is, no generation before such as Gen X had this type of megaphone as they were growing up. GenX also didn't deal with economic downturn in the same way.

So it's not so much that College kids started doing stupid things. It's that college students have been politically less noticeable up until this point. I'm not suggesting its good or bad, but it is in fact a different flavor. The last group like this ironically was the boomers that have a lot of the same counter-culture streak (until they became the culture that is.)

And it's one that has had odd effects as colleges have created their own norms which are a bit insular. I remember watching one documentary about young comedians vying for positions on the college comedy circuit and it was amazing how savvy the vets were about what they could and could not say. The colleges and (everywhere else) were just very different rooms.

Re: protests - that's double edged sword. And to some extent its always going to put the college in an awkward position. Colleges attempt to create that market of ideas so that students can learn and assimilate new data as well as built the critical thinking skills to reject bad ones. If all it takes to knock those out are political will, then every cause really should do their level best to knock out opposing ideas through protest. That's not really cynical, that's the precedent that gets set. And the college has to mitigate risk - there are legal implications for not doing so.

I value protests but I think they are best served when what you're dealing with is an imbalance of power. I'm not sure students at a college actually suffer from that. Not only do they make up the salary of the institution, they represent the next line of academics. Organized students will always win. In other words, colleges will always conform to the students and that's as true for UC Berkeley as it is for Liberty University. Equal power or even power advantages should be dealt with "at the table" because that power is accessible. Students self-select where they want to go within the restriction of where they've been accepted. So ultimately, no I tend to view college protest really as more of a natural occurrence of "first steps" in political activism in a safe environment that is generally without lasting consequences. It is a place of privilege and ultimately the faculty has more to lose than the students. What the students are getting in school are ultimately skills and contacts. The college can't retroactively remove those. It can however sack professors with tenure for cause.

I think peoples feelings on the protests themselves tend to have more to do with if they have a dog in the race or not. Because for the rest of the population, only the faculty suffers the consequences and we (as a citizenry) undersell just how destablizing that would be in reality especially with the viral power of the internet.

It's when those students try to take those ideas AND that sense that they have the power they do in that artificial environment into the real world that you see the conflict immediately. They don't have that power. So when those ideas get tested and meet the resistance of much larger demographic cohorts with their own "skin in the game", kaboom. All they can do is vote and try to get their own skin in the game. And eventually, they'll displace the previous generation. But by then, whatever we call the post-millenials will be nipping at their heels and who knows what they'll be like.

[Canarr]

Well, if you're going to allow controversial speakers in the name of free speech you must also allow protesting said speakers in the name of free speech.

Protest, yes. Disrupt, no.

Sure, if there's a presentation in your local University - or anywhere else in public - that you don't like, by all means, go down to protest. Stand outside and hold up signs, put up flyers, organize a counter-presentation.

But don't try to drown the speaker in screams or other noise. Don't tear down posters and flyers, don't harass the audience.

Same goes for "trigger warnings". Whether or not a professor wants to provide a content warning about the course material should be up to the professor. You can't really limit free speech in the name of free speech.

That must be another difference between Europe/Germany and the US/Canada: here, a professor's lesson planning isn't covered by free speech, since they're required to conform to the curriculum, lesson plans, follow approved publications, stuff like that.

Honestly though the whole letter is probably just a pointless reassurance to their ( conservative ) donors. Its not like they're actually vowing to do anything in the letter. Students are the ones that set up safe spaces, not universities. Can you imagine the legal shit storm that would erupt if a university forcibly tried to shut down student run groups like that? Free speech minefield.

That's been my point from my first post in this thread: I didn't understand the letter as, you cannot have safe spaces at all, but you cannot have them everywhere. And most important, you cannot use them as an argument against people presenting ideas that you disagree with.

[mjr]

Here is, actually, a great example article as to why "trigger warnings" are stupid:

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/28672/

Because, according to the author, damn near anything can be a "trigger".

[Gravekeeper]

But don't try to drown the speaker in screams or other noise. Don't tear down posters and flyers, don't harass the audience.

Normally I would agree but with the current climate in the US I'm not entirely sure some college/uni group wouldn't invite someone that shouldn't be allowed out of a basement cell never mind speaking to other human beings. -.-

That must be another difference between Europe/Germany and the US/Canada: here, a professor's lesson planning isn't covered by free speech, since they're required to conform to the curriculum, lesson plans, follow approved publications, stuff like that.

This is mainly a US thing to be honest. Free speech is a Big Thing(tm) down there as is the "political correctness is responsible for every single problem in the world" counter culture. So there's lots of noise and internet shrieking.

In Canuckistan we've had "safe spaces" on campuses for years without any problems. But they're not called "safe" spaces and neither get attacked ideologically nor are used as a bludgeon against others.

That's been my point from my first post in this thread: I didn't understand the letter as, you cannot have safe spaces at all, but you cannot have them everywhere. And most important, you cannot use them as an argument against people presenting ideas that you disagree with.

Yes, it sounds more like posturing for donors than any sort of meaningful statement. U of C is a more right leaning school if I remember correctly. I don't remember any of the big safe space/trigger word/whatever controversies occurring there.

Here is, actually, a great example article as to why "trigger warnings" are stupid:

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/28672/

Because, according to the author, damn near anything can be a "trigger".

I don't think "stupid shit people say on Facebook" is a particularly credible source of evidence for this or any other topic. Saying stupid shit is basically 75% of the point of Facebook. The other 25% is harvesting your personal information for corporate marketing. -.-

[Rapscallion]

I've been thinking about the whole safe space issue of late.

I can understand that there needs to be reasonable accommodation for those who have suffered trauma in the past. Victims of sexual assault, for example.

The problem I run into is that, from what I understand, students are the ones declaring safe spaces and what can be discussed or done within them. A college/school/university has a duty to teach its students above all else. It has the authority. I'm troubled when I think that a partisan group could of students could make their own authority without challenge by those who are actually in charge. Am I reading it wrong in how these things happen?

Rapscallion

[Gravekeeper]

I'm troubled when I think that a partisan group could of students could make their own authority without challenge by those who are actually in charge. Am I reading it wrong in how these things happen?

"Safe spaces" aren't afforded anymore powers or rights over any other student group. There's nothing official about the term.

[Rageaholic]

I am so tired of hearing people use safe place and trigger warning as derogatory terms. heaven forbid we show people with trauma some basic fucking compassion. it's bad enough that people are being attacked online for even using the words trigger warning it's now being used as a mocking terms in situations like this.

also some context on this school and events the asshole dean is referencing http://armenianweekly.com/2016/04/26...ty-of-chicago/

I'm in agreement here. While I'm sympathetic to some of the concerns of safe spaces being abused to shut down other opinions, (such as here), I can at least get behind the idea that people shouldn’t have to put up with assholery. Whenever I hear comments like “The world is not a safe space”, it’s usually in response to people who are dealing with obvious harassment and bullying. As if not wanting hundreds of commenters telling you to kill yourself is unreasonable.
I don’t agree with some of the cultish behavior found on universities, but the alt right/MRAs are just cancer.

[Rapscallion]

"Safe spaces" aren't afforded anymore powers or rights over any other student group. There's nothing official about the term.

Good. I don't mind if they are made more official, as long as there's oversight to make sure whoever's organising it isn't being an arse in either direction.

Rapscallion

[Kheldarson]

Good. I don't mind if they are made more official, as long as there's oversight to make sure whoever's organising it isn't being an arse in either direction.

Rapscallion

The only times I've heard of official safe spaces has been when it's in conjunction with Resident Asisstant programs. Basically the school trains the RAs to be active listeners/frontline therapists, teaching them how to create a safe space in their dorm for students on their floor. They're there, then, to listen, provide support, a safe environment, and resources if issues are that bad. And it's open to any student.