Plan B Forum

the prevailing wisdom on college campuses seems to be that the first amendment should not protect offensive speech or any actions which offend someone or makes them uncomfortable in the public space. the public should be a "safe zone" where rainbows and unicorns reign and butterflies are farted from one s ass.

Yeah, it seems like the so-called safe zone is the antithesis to this:

Only for you Wes. Only for you

nah crackpot, with my luck the unicorn would attack the butterflies and take me over the rainbow impaled on his horn.....

That would be lucky!

College campuses are places of intellectual and social exploration and conflict.


Don't get your panties in a twist.


These are 18 - 22 year olds trying to sort out a big and complicated world. Don't be an asshole about it. Give them the room to work it out.


Yrs,
Rubato

that was then this is now..., ponyboy

I would like to say that having been raised by a terrible bigot, I had certain phrases in my language base that I didn't realize were bigoted until somebody educated me on the history. Like, saying "I was gypped" - I didn't realize that was a bigoted phrase toward Roma and/or Jews until I was in my mid-20s. And any of my friends of any race would tell you I'm about the least bigoted white person they know; I'm sure I still experience some racial bias as is measurable in almost any WASP no matter how liberal, but it's tiny compared to many in this society.

That said, my point is that I was on more than one occasion 'called on the carpet' for my innocent ignorance about certain issues in history, language, etc. as I was transforming from leftie-hearted daughter of bigoted Rush Limbaugh fan into enlightened citizen in college/grad school/law school. That was 25-15 years ago, so I can only imagine that PC speak and conformist pressure from the PC majority on college campuses is even more widespread and powerful - I went to a state university in Maine, so can only imagine it's been the norm far longer for places like Yale.

On the point of racial minorities feeling unrepresented and marginalized on campuses like Yale; I can only imagine that's true. The ideas/language I grew up around is still the atmosphere in many American homes where even Ivy League students are being raised, most often by educated parents.

Clearly PC-speak doesn't do away with prejudice, it only makes the school & workplace safe from them. I think that's little enough for all citizens to enjoy, at every stage of life. So I'm on the side of somewhat regulated speech, if that means letting schools, universities and workplaces/employers prohibit their patrons from using such speech where it is potentially offensive to others.

You don’t believe in freedom of speech. So you must approve what these freedom fighters did. To liberals the speech that deserves protection is the speech that liberals approve of. So how do you all differ from communist? ???


http://myinforms.com/en-us/a/18705571-b ... g-sticker/

Six African-American men in Salt Lake City could be charged with a hate crime–after beating a white man unconscious, over an argument about a Confederate flag sticker.
Kelly Leeper, the white man who was knocked out in the fight, was in town for a Garth Brooks concert. The Confederate flag sticker was on the back of the truck that belonged to his friend.
On Sunday, Leeper looked out the window of his hotel room to notice a group of black men standing around his friend’s truck.
Since there was expensive work equipment in the back of the truck, Leeper and his friend went down to check on their property.
Turns out, the group of black men weren’t interested in the equipment–they instead demanded to know why a “racist” Confederate flag sticker was on the back of the truck.
After Leeper defended his friend’s right to put anything he wanted on the back of his truck, a fight quickly broke out–with racial slurs being flung at him, before the knockout blow.
The fight was caught on video, which has been turned over to the police in Salt Lake City. Another witness was also able to supply a partial license plate number and a car description of the attackers.
Police are confident that, between the video and what they know about the car, they’ll have enough information to eventually track down the suspects. But, so far, they have not yet been found or identified.
When they are found, however, Leeper’s attackers might be facing much more severe charges than simply as…

Clearly PC-speak doesn't do away with prejudice, it only makes the school & workplace safe from them. I think that's little enough for all citizens to enjoy, at every stage of life. So I'm on the side of somewhat regulated speech, if that means letting schools, universities and workplaces/employers prohibit their patrons from using such speech where it is potentially offensive to others.

While I don't like restriction of free speech generally, I can understand it in the workplace. But institutions of higher learning are places where ideas, even those which make some uncomfortable and which are not polite and often offensive, can be discussed and explored. Give the campus authorities the power to ban some speech based on content and, however well intended the policy is, you erode that mission. By all means let the students discuss and argue about it, even let them form clubs and social oprganizations where such dissent is not tolerated, but don't move to quash the speech. Imagine where the antiwar movement would have gone if the college administrations had said you can't discuss things like whether the war is genocide or not because it makes those who lost loved ones uncomfortable.

over the past few days bigsky, you have mentioned ....,

"...abolish religion?"

"...regulate speech..."

and have you advocated repeal of the 2nd amend. or not? I can t remember, but you have not been pro-2nd amend at the very least.

I m just observing and reporting my observations, don t get all "ban the press" too...

Wes--is that referring to me? I don't see it if it is.

Only if you became "bigsky" overnight.

rubato wrote:College campuses are places of intellectual and social exploration and conflict.


Don't get your panties in a twist.


These are 18 - 22 year olds trying to sort out a big and complicated world. Don't be an asshole about it. Give them the room to work it out.


Yrs,
Rubato

I agree. And with what BigRR said, minimal content-based regulation. But talking about speech and prejudice and hate and fear *is* the exercise of free speech.

if I had gone back and put that comma in, like I thought about doing, all would have been clear.


a comma would have framed the name more properly and made the name more evident in my post. I take full blame for the mix up , as my punctuation was inadequate.

Well it might have caused me to pause briefly and read the name. Sorry.

In the words of Emily Litella, "Never Mind".

I agree that college is a place where there should be open discussion about difficult issues and ideas, but I also feel that the college should do its utmost to cultivate diversity in faculty and student body, and certain language can be regulated as far as its used by individuals to intimidate and oppress, rather than to facilitate a discussion in the educational setting.

I don't think that means I'm against free speech.

Would you argue that the fraternity members who sang about keeping blacks out of the fraternity or raping women should not have been barred from campus for such free speech?

BSG--while I think your post was directed to wes, I'd like to reply. If particular individuals are being targeted, we have harassment laws and regulations to deal with the problem; we don't need blanket bans on speech or ideas. In a diverse campus you are always going to have ideas stated that make some people or groups feel uncomfortable, but that is inevitable. We cannot and should not make certain no one ever feels uncomfortable--often it is out of the discomfort that new ideas arise.

Again, I raise the antiwar movement and ask whether colleges should have been able to ban speech against the war and US policy as it made those who lost friends and family members or who served uncomfortable? I don't think so, and think we would have lost a lot had they been able to do so.

As for your examples, I'd have to know more about what exactly occurred and where. I'm sure there are times when such would be harassment, and others when it would be seen as just despicable garbage. Again, I don't think we need a ban on the ideas expressed in the songs, abhorrent as they might be.

These are the stories I was thinking of; I think we discussed them here when it happened (but I'm no LJ and not so great at searching the forums):

http://gawker.com/sae-frat-bros-sing-ra ... 1690214205

http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.s ... ended.html

bigskygal wrote:I agree that college is a place where there should be open discussion about difficult issues and ideas, but I also feel that the college should do its utmost to cultivate diversity in faculty and student body, and certain language can be regulated as far as its used by individuals to intimidate and oppress, rather than to facilitate a discussion in the educational setting.

I don't think that means I'm against free speech.

Would you argue that the fraternity members who sang about keeping blacks out of the fraternity or raping women should not have been barred from campus for such free speech?

I understand that the rape of women is a common theme in Rap music; so, would you support banning rap music on college campuses?