ITT: we complain about political correctness
01-17-2016, 02:35 PM
#61
Elite Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Detroit (the part with no rules or laws)
Posts: 5,677
Total Cats: 800
Joe,
Everyone is a winner, there are no losers. No one person is wrong and no one person is right.
We must make everyone happy and equal.
Instead of teaching our youth to be tough and try to do the best we can on an individual level so we can move on with our own lives. We have to teach them that everyone elses feelings are just as important as your own and you need to be mindful of them so we don't "hurt" them.
Thank you PC.
Everyone is a winner, there are no losers. No one person is wrong and no one person is right.
We must make everyone happy and equal.
Instead of teaching our youth to be tough and try to do the best we can on an individual level so we can move on with our own lives. We have to teach them that everyone elses feelings are just as important as your own and you need to be mindful of them so we don't "hurt" them.
Thank you PC.
Reply
0
0
01-31-2016, 04:40 PM
#63
Boost Pope
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,020
Total Cats: 6,588
Christen Brandt:
"A stranger complimented and thanked me in public the other day, and I'm terribly offended by that. Society needs to realize that I'm only OK with people saying nice things about me on Facebook, not in real life."
"A stranger complimented and thanked me in public the other day, and I'm terribly offended by that. Society needs to realize that I'm only OK with people saying nice things about me on Facebook, not in real life."
Reply
0
0
02-14-2016, 06:38 PM
#64
Boost Pope
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,020
Total Cats: 6,588
Liberal intolerance is on the rise on America’s college campuses
By Catherine Rampell, February 11
Georgetown University students conduct a sit-in in November in solidarity with other student protests across the country protesting racial discrimination on campus.
Today’s students are indeed both more left wing and more openly hostile to free speech than earlier generations of collegians.
Don’t believe me? There are hard data to prove it.
For 50 years, researchers have surveyed incoming college freshmen about everything from their majors to their worldviews. On Thursday, the Higher Education Research Institute at the University of California at Los Angeles released the latest iteration of this survey, which included 141,189 full-time, first-year students attending about 200 public and private baccalaureate institutions around the country.
Free speech is flunking out on college campuses.
According to the findings, the current crop of freshmen can lay claim to multiple superlatives. Among them: most willing to shut down speech they find offensive.
About 71 percent of freshmen surveyed in the fall said they agreed with the statement that “colleges should prohibit racist/sexist speech on campus.” This question has been asked on and off for a couple of decades, and 2015 logged the highest percentage of positive responses on record. For comparison, the share in the early 1990s hovered around 60 percent; also high, but not as high as today.
What speech counts as “racist” or “sexist” is of course in the eye of the beholder, as evidenced by recent attempts to silence public discourse on racially and sexually charged topics at Wesleyan, Yale (Perez comment: Yale? Really?!?) and Northwestern universities.
A related survey question, which has been asked most years since 1967, inquired whether “colleges have the right to ban extreme speakers from campus.”
About 43 percent of freshmen said they agreed. That’s nearly twice as high as the average share saying this in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. It was surpassed only once, just barely, in 2004. But in general, support for banning speakers from campuses has trended upward over time.
Recent incidents suggest students (and sometimes their professors) may have rather expansive views of what constitutes an “extreme speaker.” Among those disinvited or forced to withdraw from campus speaking engagements in the past few years are feminism critic Suzanne Venker, former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde and Narendra Modi, now the Indian prime minister.
Another survey question asked freshmen whether they would participate in student demonstrations while in college; 8.5 percent said there was a “very good chance” they would.
That, too, was the highest share on record, higher even than responses recorded during the years of Vietnam protests. In 1968 — the year of a tumultuous Columbia University student takeover — just 4.5 percent of freshmen nationwide said they expected to protest.
This question saw a big spike in positive responses just in the past year, perhaps reflecting the spate of demonstrations sweeping schools around the country.
Some of these protests have been quite successful. Students at the University of Missouri, for example, demanded that their president resign over the administration’s poor handling of racial tensions. The school’s celebrated football team threatened not to play unless he complied. Ultimately the president stepped down.
Student groups from at least 76 schools have now issued their own “demands” (not suggestions!), according to lists compiled by the website thedemands.org. A FiveThirtyEight analysis found that the modal “demand” related to increasing diversity (greater diversity of professors and students, more diversity sensitivity training, etc.), but many “demands” also involved speech codes, public apologies and resignations.
One last freshman survey finding of interest: The highest share of students since 1973 now consider themselves left of center. And the highest share of college freshmen ever (or at least since this question was first asked in 1970) call themselves “far left.”
All of which is to say that — while I support and admire students’ efforts to make the world a better place — I also kind of understand the right’s fear that student activism may be disparately used to muzzle conservative viewpoints.
Heck, some students are trying to muzzle liberal and moderate viewpoints. I’m hardly an arch-conservative, and whenever I write things that college students disagree with, I get a lot of email demanding retraction, recantation, apology, prostration. Some younger readers — not all that much younger than I, mind you — have accused my writing of “taking away” both their voices and their agency, as if free speech were zero-sum.
One parting observation: Remember that these survey questions were asked of newly matriculated college freshmen. That is, students are setting foot on campus already more liberal, more protest-happy and more amenable to speech restrictions than their predecessors.
Which suggests that colleges themselves are not wholly responsible for rising liberal and illiberal tendencies on campus — even if they do sometimes aid and abet both trends.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...9ad_story.html
By Catherine Rampell, February 11
Georgetown University students conduct a sit-in in November in solidarity with other student protests across the country protesting racial discrimination on campus.
Today’s students are indeed both more left wing and more openly hostile to free speech than earlier generations of collegians.
Don’t believe me? There are hard data to prove it.
For 50 years, researchers have surveyed incoming college freshmen about everything from their majors to their worldviews. On Thursday, the Higher Education Research Institute at the University of California at Los Angeles released the latest iteration of this survey, which included 141,189 full-time, first-year students attending about 200 public and private baccalaureate institutions around the country.
Free speech is flunking out on college campuses.
According to the findings, the current crop of freshmen can lay claim to multiple superlatives. Among them: most willing to shut down speech they find offensive.
About 71 percent of freshmen surveyed in the fall said they agreed with the statement that “colleges should prohibit racist/sexist speech on campus.” This question has been asked on and off for a couple of decades, and 2015 logged the highest percentage of positive responses on record. For comparison, the share in the early 1990s hovered around 60 percent; also high, but not as high as today.
What speech counts as “racist” or “sexist” is of course in the eye of the beholder, as evidenced by recent attempts to silence public discourse on racially and sexually charged topics at Wesleyan, Yale (Perez comment: Yale? Really?!?) and Northwestern universities.
A related survey question, which has been asked most years since 1967, inquired whether “colleges have the right to ban extreme speakers from campus.”
About 43 percent of freshmen said they agreed. That’s nearly twice as high as the average share saying this in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. It was surpassed only once, just barely, in 2004. But in general, support for banning speakers from campuses has trended upward over time.
Recent incidents suggest students (and sometimes their professors) may have rather expansive views of what constitutes an “extreme speaker.” Among those disinvited or forced to withdraw from campus speaking engagements in the past few years are feminism critic Suzanne Venker, former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde and Narendra Modi, now the Indian prime minister.
Another survey question asked freshmen whether they would participate in student demonstrations while in college; 8.5 percent said there was a “very good chance” they would.
That, too, was the highest share on record, higher even than responses recorded during the years of Vietnam protests. In 1968 — the year of a tumultuous Columbia University student takeover — just 4.5 percent of freshmen nationwide said they expected to protest.
This question saw a big spike in positive responses just in the past year, perhaps reflecting the spate of demonstrations sweeping schools around the country.
Some of these protests have been quite successful. Students at the University of Missouri, for example, demanded that their president resign over the administration’s poor handling of racial tensions. The school’s celebrated football team threatened not to play unless he complied. Ultimately the president stepped down.
Student groups from at least 76 schools have now issued their own “demands” (not suggestions!), according to lists compiled by the website thedemands.org. A FiveThirtyEight analysis found that the modal “demand” related to increasing diversity (greater diversity of professors and students, more diversity sensitivity training, etc.), but many “demands” also involved speech codes, public apologies and resignations.
One last freshman survey finding of interest: The highest share of students since 1973 now consider themselves left of center. And the highest share of college freshmen ever (or at least since this question was first asked in 1970) call themselves “far left.”
All of which is to say that — while I support and admire students’ efforts to make the world a better place — I also kind of understand the right’s fear that student activism may be disparately used to muzzle conservative viewpoints.
Heck, some students are trying to muzzle liberal and moderate viewpoints. I’m hardly an arch-conservative, and whenever I write things that college students disagree with, I get a lot of email demanding retraction, recantation, apology, prostration. Some younger readers — not all that much younger than I, mind you — have accused my writing of “taking away” both their voices and their agency, as if free speech were zero-sum.
One parting observation: Remember that these survey questions were asked of newly matriculated college freshmen. That is, students are setting foot on campus already more liberal, more protest-happy and more amenable to speech restrictions than their predecessors.
Which suggests that colleges themselves are not wholly responsible for rising liberal and illiberal tendencies on campus — even if they do sometimes aid and abet both trends.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...9ad_story.html
Reply
0
0
02-15-2016, 09:30 AM
#66
Moderator
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 20,650
Total Cats: 3,010
The Left won. They got to the teachers and then the curriculum and now control the future. Touche'. Very well played.
I might make it to retirement age before I need to implement an exit strategy. I'm gonna miss the old America and the ideal of personal liberty.
I might make it to retirement age before I need to implement an exit strategy. I'm gonna miss the old America and the ideal of personal liberty.
Reply
0
0
02-15-2016, 09:48 AM
#67
Boost Pope
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,020
Total Cats: 6,588
What's worrysome is that the students of today will be the political leaders of 30 years from now.
And while it's understood that political tendencies tend inherently to be left-leaning at the university level, and that liberal college students in general become slightly more conservative after graduation as they enter the workforce and mature, the fact that the baseline number for "free speech should be prohibited" among college students has risen by nearly 20% in 20 years is troubling.
And while it's understood that political tendencies tend inherently to be left-leaning at the university level, and that liberal college students in general become slightly more conservative after graduation as they enter the workforce and mature, the fact that the baseline number for "free speech should be prohibited" among college students has risen by nearly 20% in 20 years is troubling.
Reply
0
0
02-25-2016, 03:22 PM
#70
Dang it. That was catworthy and the cats are gone!
I got my diploma from Ronald Reagan. He did it for "free," and he stayed up there and handed a diploma to every single graduate -- even though he was only supposed to hand diplomas to the top 100 in the class. You could tell he was filled with pride and was really enjoying himself as he performed that function. Those were the days!
I got my diploma from Ronald Reagan. He did it for "free," and he stayed up there and handed a diploma to every single graduate -- even though he was only supposed to hand diplomas to the top 100 in the class. You could tell he was filled with pride and was really enjoying himself as he performed that function. Those were the days!
Reply
1
1
02-25-2016, 03:50 PM
#71
Boost Pope
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,020
Total Cats: 6,588
I don't think we ever had cats in the Politics section. Or if we did, it was short-lived. I prefer it this way; unpopular opinions, even Braineak's, can be expressed without fear of catcount-based reprisal.
And I can't remember who handed me my undergrad diploma. It was probably the dean or someone like that. Second biggest university in the country at the time (UF), and we didn't have any memorable speakers.
And I can't remember who handed me my undergrad diploma. It was probably the dean or someone like that. Second biggest university in the country at the time (UF), and we didn't have any memorable speakers.
Reply
0
0
06-02-2016, 01:21 PM
#73
Newb
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Mississauga Ontario Canada
Posts: 29
Total Cats: -9
Sow the seeds of political correctness, reap the harvest of Generation Wuss.
I recall one company I was at where the Human Resources person was always politically correct in her speech, using terms like person of colour in place of non-white, but she successfully kept the office white because she was a full-blown racist. Think about who benefits from political correctness: would some 5'2" boy have gotten more dates by being vertically challenged rather than being short? Does a person of colour get the job a black person would not have gotten? No, and that's a hell no, not even close to reality. The only "benefit" is that it is coded speech that identifies the speaker to a listener with the same views. The company hired on a new CFO whose first action was to fire this HR person and nobody missed her.
Now students need "safe spaces" because they feel endangered by new ideas. Here's the thing - a school should be a place of dangerous thoughts. And as for safe spaces, there used to be washrooms marked "white" and "coloured" in the former slave states which were safe spaces for each race. My generation thought that was a bad idea. But Generation Wuss has as its greatest imperative, the right to create, maintain and defend the bubble of narcissism and explode in self-righteous indignation that anyone could actually assert different views from their own.
There have been laws passed making it a crime to deny the Holocaust. I would rather not have any prohibition, because such a statement would immediately let me know I was listening to a wacko. **** record-keeping was meticulous and the evidence, both physical and documented is irrefutable. Recently, a law put before parliament in the Province of Ontario failed to pass that would have criminalized any objection to actions of the modern State of Israel as being anti-Semitic. Guess what, guys, the Arabs are also Semitic. You don't hear about anyone defending their rights.
I recall one company I was at where the Human Resources person was always politically correct in her speech, using terms like person of colour in place of non-white, but she successfully kept the office white because she was a full-blown racist. Think about who benefits from political correctness: would some 5'2" boy have gotten more dates by being vertically challenged rather than being short? Does a person of colour get the job a black person would not have gotten? No, and that's a hell no, not even close to reality. The only "benefit" is that it is coded speech that identifies the speaker to a listener with the same views. The company hired on a new CFO whose first action was to fire this HR person and nobody missed her.
Now students need "safe spaces" because they feel endangered by new ideas. Here's the thing - a school should be a place of dangerous thoughts. And as for safe spaces, there used to be washrooms marked "white" and "coloured" in the former slave states which were safe spaces for each race. My generation thought that was a bad idea. But Generation Wuss has as its greatest imperative, the right to create, maintain and defend the bubble of narcissism and explode in self-righteous indignation that anyone could actually assert different views from their own.
There have been laws passed making it a crime to deny the Holocaust. I would rather not have any prohibition, because such a statement would immediately let me know I was listening to a wacko. **** record-keeping was meticulous and the evidence, both physical and documented is irrefutable. Recently, a law put before parliament in the Province of Ontario failed to pass that would have criminalized any objection to actions of the modern State of Israel as being anti-Semitic. Guess what, guys, the Arabs are also Semitic. You don't hear about anyone defending their rights.
Reply
0
0
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
TonyV
General Miata Chat
25
11-29-2015 11:23 PM
wannafbody
Suspension, Brakes, Drivetrain
6
11-26-2015 02:08 PM
