|
Trabisnikof posted:That's not really responsive to the post you're quoting at all. well, it's indicative of a chilling effect on free speech if you make up reasons as to why the university rescinded the invitation. the trick is to make up reasons that, get this, align with what you already choose to believe and a lot of people mess up that part
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 7, 2024 02:02 |
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:well, it's indicative of a chilling effect on free speech if you make up reasons as to why the university rescinded the invitation. the trick is to make up reasons that, get this, align with what you already choose to believe and a lot of people mess up that part Hahahaha oh pleeeeeeeeeease give me a lecture about confirmation bias. Why did they rescind it, btw?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:Only with the caveat that they should be ignored. It's not a caveat at all. I personally don't think that it is good to protest with the goal of denying a political enemy the privilege to speak at a university. I personally don't think that it is good for a political speaker to have their privilege to speak taken away by the administration. If I was the administration I would not do that. Your question is dumb as hell.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:It's not a caveat at all. I personally don't think that it is good to protest with the goal of denying a political enemy the privilege to speak at a university. I personally don't think that it is good for a political speaker to have their privilege to speak taken away by the administration. If I was the administration I would not do that. See, I don't know if you realize this but it is impossible to change people's minds through good argumentation. It does not happen. It can't happen. People need to be protected from terrible yet somehow irresistable ideas.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
Secular Humanist posted:Why did they rescind it, btw? the university's student union said it was a process and administrative error, which seems like a pretty weird thing to get so freaked out over
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
Secular Humanist posted:See, I don't know if you realize this but it is impossible to change people's minds through good argumentation. It does not happen. It can't happen. People need to be protected from terrible yet somehow irresistable ideas. If you actually don't get how victim blaming about rape gives encouragement to rapists trying to justify to themselves that it's not actually rape (for example, that clothing is totally consent), as an example, you really should just ask for an explanation. If you don't grasp that some of the people on a college campus have views that can cause severely harmful effects, and a university backed speaker making some arguments has the potential to seriously undermine efforts to protect the health and well-being of students, that's the frame of reference we're working from, not some squeaky clean utopia where sticks and stones is actually true.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:the university's student union said it was a process and administrative error, which seems like a pretty weird thing to get so freaked out over http://quillette.com/2015/12/06/the-shame-and-the-disgrace-of-the-pro-islamist-left/ Please excuse the dramatic language in this, it is by no means unbiased, but it does contain the actual details. "Administrative error" is probably what you'd say once you realize you basically smeared a Muslim feminist invited speaker as a Nazi white supremacist with your disinvitation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:If you actually don't get how victim blaming about rape gives encouragement to rapists trying to justify to themselves that it's not actually rape (for example, that clothing is totally consent), as an example, you really should just ask for an explanation. Free speech is a dangerous but necessary policy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:If you actually don't get how victim blaming about rape gives encouragement to rapists trying to justify to themselves that it's not actually rape (for example, that clothing is totally consent), as an example, you really should just ask for an explanation. We should organize our society around what potential rapists might do. Got it. Also "some of the people on a college campus have views that can cause severely harmful effects" is so loving vague as to be almost meaningless. This is textbook postmodernist horseshit that feels nice and means nothing. VVVV Naw you can. Secular Humanist fucked around with this message at 23:33 on Sep 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
Secular Humanist posted:http://quillette.com/2015/12/06/the-shame-and-the-disgrace-of-the-pro-islamist-left/ can you point out the part where it explains why the invitation was rescinded in the first place because all i see is a bunch of sneering about how the event went down and the aftermath and i already don't care at all about this to begin with
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:33
|
|
|
it is kind of telling though that at this point we're dug into an extremely boring he said she said example of suppression of free speech for an event where someone was actually allowed to speak, so
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:33
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:it is kind of telling though that at this point we're dug into an extremely boring he said she said example of suppression of free speech for an event where someone was actually allowed to speak, so But you aren't offended enough!
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:it is kind of telling though that at this point we're dug into an extremely boring he said she said example of suppression of free speech for an event where someone was actually allowed to speak, so Yeah man keep on handwaving this away. She was allowed to speak,.after all! This couldn't possibly happen again via the exact same mechanisms that it almost did in her case.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:But you aren't offended enough! then the students for solidarity called the international islam council a bunch of buttholes, and the lgbta alliance stood up in the cafeteria and yelled no more war, then becky called susan a bitch and really you had to be there. it was nuts. also it was a telling example of the downfall of western liberal values Secular Humanist posted:Yeah man keep on handwaving this away. She was allowed to speak,.after all! This couldn't possibly happen again via the exact same mechanisms that it almost did in her case. well given that i'm not sure what the exact mechanisms are but you assure me that in this soap opera of student politics there are some really good ones i'm just going to apply my "someone recommending homestuck to me" filter and just sure man i'll do that i mean the student council said administrative error, you're assigning me homework, so i'm going to occam's razor this sucker and assume you're really twisted up over something inconsequential boner confessor fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Sep 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:then the students for solidarity called the international islam council a bunch of buttholes, and the lgbta alliance stood up in the cafeteria and yelled no more war, then becky called susan a bitch and really you had to be there. it was nuts. also it was a telling example of the downfall of western liberal values Lol, okay!
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:then the students for solidarity called the international islam council a bunch of buttholes, and the lgbta alliance stood up in the cafeteria and yelled no more war, then becky called susan a bitch and really you had to be there. it was nuts. also it was a telling example of the downfall of western liberal values You sure like saying "bitch" a lot, and like the idea that a feminist speaker has a higher barrier to entry than others. Maybe you're not the progressive icon you imagine yourself to be? Do we just add women to the list of people you believe should kill themselves, along with veterans?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
Secular Humanist posted:Yeah man keep on handwaving this away. She was allowed to speak,.after all! This couldn't possibly happen again via the exact same mechanisms that it almost did in her case. For someone who accuses other of being unable to handle things you sure are doing your best Chicken Little impression here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:For someone who accuses other of being unable to handle things you sure are doing your best Chicken Little impression here. If only you were more outraged and Purple Thug Drink was more PC!
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:For someone who accuses other of being unable to handle things you sure are doing your best Chicken Little impression here. So you're good with the idea that micro aggressions are some terrible thing that must be confronted with the full weight of administrative power, but a Muslim feminist should have to face harassment from those who oppose her, and indifference from the administrators? I mean I know someone asking you where you're from is 10,000 times worse than threats from the Muslim student association, but you would think we could be at least philosophically consistent
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
Secular Humanist posted:The campus feminist society, in a shameless display of virtue signalling, went on a crusade "in solidarity" with the conservative Muslim council to get her disinvited. . At this point most people born in the developed world are feminists, but the people who identify as feminists are just idiots looking for a community to be hyperbolic with. That said, the gbs shutdown basically brought me here an it's good to see the freepers of the left kicking rear end an taking names for the cause of speech crime an micro-aggressions. You fellas keep it up. Alienating people with the emotional fortitude to tolerate idiots/being offended might give us a Trump Presidency, but on the bright side, you will have so many actual problems to complain about. Sethex fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Sep 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
gobbagool posted:So you're good with the idea that micro aggressions are some terrible thing that must be confronted with the full weight of administrative power, but a Muslim feminist should have to face harassment from those who oppose her, and indifference from the administrators? I mean I know someone asking you where you're from is 10,000 times worse than threats from the Muslim student association, but you would think we could be at least philosophically consistent I already told you I don't support actually interrupting speeches. You could at least try to read what I post.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
Sethex posted:At this point most people born in the developed world are feminists, but the people who identify as feminists are just idiots looking for a community to be hyperbolic with them. The ones who get used as examples in their opponents' circles are, there's a huge number who are entirely chill people whose views are hugely at odds with the views of the ones that get latched onto. Who What Now posted:I already told you I don't support actually interrupting speeches. You could at least try to read what I post. If he does without prodding the universe will combust.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
Sethex posted:At this point most people born in the developed world are feminists, but the people who identify as feminists are just idiots looking for a community to be hyperbolic with. You should start a feminism thread since you seem to want to post about it a lot
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:38
|
|
|
Sethex posted:That said, the gbs shutdown basically brought me here you dont say
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
i mean you post with the exact same Gomer-Pyle-on-the-Toilet cadence of every other vitriolic GBS person who has ever wandered in here with a chip on their shoulder, so you really didnt need to specify
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
Sethex posted:You fellas keep it up. Alienating people with the emotional fortitude to tolerate idiots/being offended might give us a Trump Presidency, but on the bright side, you will have so many actual problems to complain about. trying to guilt trip people into agreeing with you with the threat of a trump presidency might actually work on someone who doesn't argue like a middle school girl if trump had a nonzero chance of victory. as is this is just 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
Sethex posted:You fellas keep it up. Alienating people with the emotional fortitude to tolerate idiots/being offended might give us a Trump Presidency, but on the bright side, you will have so many actual problems to complain about. Oh no, whatever will the left do without the oh so important demographic of "GBS dipshits"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
Someone should disinvite all the posters from this thread.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 01:50
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:And yet, if Koch Industries was monitoring employees' facebook for "anti-Christian" statements and firing them for it, we'd be hearing nothing but clucking about how terrible they are and how the conservative thought bubble is real. Tell me, why is it only OK when people you agree with do it? Why are you suddenly switching from what I said to what nebulous others would say in a different situation? I don't have any problem with firing people for undermining their employer's ideological stance in their private life, as long as employment and discrimination laws are followed. I also don't have a problem with the public raising holy hell when they find out about it, whether the person fired was a lefty or a righty. I'm confident that people on the right side of history will win out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
Would you consider yourself a liberal?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 02:06
|
|
|
Depends who's asking, I guess. Sure
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:You think they should protest, but that the administration should not be allowed to listen to them and act on their protests. "allowed." At a state school, yes, political speech is a protected right no matter how much you dislike the other people's opinions or think their rabble-rousing might influence someone to maybe be a bad person or do bad things. The only way they can deny a Milo is to deny also deny all other student-organized speakers, which means that the LGBTQ and BLM, plus all the other student groups that are non-political, can't have speakers. At a private school, they're "allowed" to give or take away platforms to whoever they want. I personally think they should listen to the protests and then choose not to give into them, because academic institutions run on free expression and ideas. Which gets back to the larger point that many people who aren't conservative trolls or Trumpers are unhappy with, that there's a political movement which has adopted suppression as a main tactic in colleges. Some people think that's a lovely movement and fight against it even though they'd agree on many of the aims that the movement espouses.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 03:06
|
|
|
woke wedding drone posted:Depends who's asking, I guess. Sure A radleft. I was just curious though that probably makes sense from a liberal perspective.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
Klyith posted:At a private school, they're "allowed" to give or take away platforms to whoever they want. I personally think they should listen to the protests and then choose not to give into them, because academic institutions run on free expression and ideas. Which gets back to the larger point that many people who aren't conservative trolls or Trumpers are unhappy with, that there's a political movement which has adopted suppression as a main tactic in colleges. Some people think that's a lovely movement and fight against it even though they'd agree on many of the aims that the movement espouses. We have a winner.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
gobbagool posted:The point is, and there's a lot of intentionally obtuse posters here, that if you're OK with Milo, or George Will, or that Muslim woman being shouted down and denied the stage, you also, logically, have to be ok with Al Sharpton, or Madeline Albright, or any other figure on the other side of the aisle being shouted down as well, even to the extent that similar tactics like threats of violence are used to prevent the discussion. Alternatively, you could (should) not be OK with either, and be consistent. I don't expect anyone here to agree, or at least the professional contrarians. holy poo poo is this how you people actually think? you're loving using scoreboard mentality about this poo poo? are you serious jesus christ are you for loving real is that really all this is about??? seriously please tell me there's more to it than that because ive achieved nirvana with this loving post and all i got from it is that santa claus doesnt exist
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 07:31
|
|
|
It's kind of funny that two of the biggest supposed proponents of free speech in this thread advocate a cargo cult interpretation of it when it is actually applied to real situations in real life. Protest all you want, but it will never change anything. While we're at it, let's make the fifth amendment be an automatic declaration of guilt, after all you're free to use it, but only if the law system assumes you're using it because you're guilty.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 07:38
|
|
|
Friendly reminder that Secular Humanist doesn't know jack and that Namazie has been addressed in a previous post:SSNeoman posted:You left out a little tidbit friend; this poo poo takes place in Britain. You know, home of the loving EDL. Muslim students have good reason to be afraid of this sort of rhetoric since it charges violence against them. She still should have been able to speak, but maybe she should go with a softer approach rather than literally calling it "Apostasy, Blasphemy and Free Expression in the Age of ISIS" I really am impressed you decided MILO YIANNOUPOULIS is the hill you chose to die on. Well done. Well done indeed. satire truly is dead
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 07:39
|
|
|
falcon2424 posted:The word "microagression" is stupid. But the concept is reasonable enough. It's describing a kind of repeated annoyance. everyone at college gets asked where they're from it's called smalltalk
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 09:59
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:It's kind of funny that two of the biggest supposed proponents of free speech in this thread advocate a cargo cult interpretation of it when it is actually applied to real situations in real life. Again you're confusing a right to speak with a right to be taken seriously or have your preferences implemented when demanding unreasonable changes that are fundamentally unacceptable to the foundational values of the organization or polity being protested, and it continues to be just as asinine as it ever was. Again, if a bunch of people decide to protest really hard in favor of implementing an official religion on a state or local level would you consider them disenfranchised if a judge or the legislature tells them to gently caress off and never gives their suggestion any real consideration? e: SSNeoman posted:Friendly reminder that Secular Humanist doesn't know jack and that Namazie has been addressed in a previous post: Oh whoa the title of her speech mentioned ISIS, a major, noteworthy, and topical Islamic religious and political movement she was discussing, truly she is a monster beyond the pale. Until the EDL is abolished forever it is obvious that open acknowledgment of ISIS's existence or religious dimension is act of aggression that will inevitably foster violence. We know this person didn't mean that sort of harm though, so maybe their speech would have been acceptable if it only alluded to its author's actual thoughts and was couched in more pro-social language? This is definitely a crushing counterargument on your part and not a near-perfect illustration of why censorship by anyone claiming offense is dangerous. LGD fucked around with this message at 10:50 on Sep 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 09:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 7, 2024 02:02 |
|
|
Absolutely not. The difference being that under the system proposed by The Kingfisher any protest, regardless of intent, would be automatically dismissed out of hand because in an ideal world all protests are worthless. In that sort of world the civil rights movement wouldn't exist etc. You can protest but it will never change anything. You can have your vote but don't expect it to count for anything. You can plead the fifth but we're always going to take it as an admission of guilt. These are the kinds of ridiculous statements that would be laughed out of any honest discussion about rights. When you take away the purpose for a right to exist but keep the mechanism in play what you've essentially done is neutered it to the point of mere ritual, no more than a bunch of tribesmen setting up a bamboo runway for a plane that's never coming.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 10:10
|
|