Campus Free Speech

Chris Rock Stopped Performing for Students Because Everything Offends Them

|

Chris Rock
David Shankbone / Wikimedia Commons

There's plenty to dissect in Frank Rich's comprehensive interview with Chris Rock. The comedian covers everything from Bill Cosby (he hopes the allegations are false) to the federal bailout of the auto industry (he was against it).

I found Rock's remarks about why he no longer performs at college campuses most illuminating:

What do you make of the attempt to bar Bill Maher from speaking at Berkeley for his riff on Muslims?

Well, I love Bill, but I stopped playing colleges, and the reason is because they're way too conservative.

In their political views?

Not in their political views — not like they're voting Republican — but in their social views and their willingness not to offend anybody. Kids raised on a culture of "We're not going to keep score in the game because we don't want anybody to lose." Or just ignoring race to a fault. You can't say "the black kid over there." No, it's "the guy with the red shoes." You can't even be offensive on your way to being inoffensive.

When did you start to notice this?

About eight years ago. Probably a couple of tours ago. It was just like, This is not as much fun as it used to be. I remember talking to George Carlin before he died and him saying the exact same thing.

Provocative comedians avoiding the college scene? The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education's Susan Kruth explains why this is a lamentable development:

Just as college campuses are meant to be "marketplaces of ideas" generally, they should be places where comedians and other performers are especially able to play with new acts. It's disappointing to see that this is not so, and that the atmosphere for freedom of speech and comedy in particular on campuses has gotten bad enough that noted comedians are avoiding student audiences altogether. That is a real loss for them—after all, everybody could use a laugh.

Anyone who thinks that there are no consequences for trigger warnings, speech codes, free speech zones, crackdowns on taco night, or general feelings-protection at the modern American university should consider Rock's comments. University administrators are teaching students that it is proper for them to crave insulation from contrarianism and controversy. The result is a kind of de facto censorship, where someone like Rock—a worthwhile speaker, whether one agrees with him or not—has little incentive to share his perspective.

What better way is there to drain universities of their intellectual potency than to dissuade all interesting people from setting foot on a college campus?

NEXT: President Wants New Spending to Monitor Militarized Cops, Americans Anticipate Government Gridlock, Hong Kong Cracks Down on Protesters: P.M. Links

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. These 18-to-22-year-old legal adults are apparently easier to babysit if they are coddled and protected from any viewpoint that might make them uncomfortable.

    1. They’ll soon be coddled and protected from offensive viewpoints in the corporate world, if they’re lucky enough to get a job. And once in the corporate world, they still won’t be visited by Chris Rock. This world is even more restrictive than college.

      1. CorporashuuuunZZZZ, BOOOOSSH, blah, blah…

        Chris is right, Progs have totally fucked up everything they get their evil controlling mitts on.

        1. Yep, and there’s no better book about it than “The Shadow University” by Kors and Silverglate. …As far as first-hand knowledge, I’ve been arrested and held (a form of mild torture) in holding cells for circulating nominating petitions on 2 different college campuses in two occasions (then released without being charged with a crime). In both cases, the universities depended 99% on federal stafford “loans” and “Pell Grants” and portrayed their campuses as “open campuses.” But really, they’re anything but.

          You are free to set up desks that urge people to save the whales at such universities. You are free to play frisbee, or blast a boombox with music. You are free to have unchained dogs on the sprawling green. Thousands of people are speaking in loud tones of voice, having conversations, and handing out pamphlets.

          …You are NOT FREE to engage in EFFECTIVE political speech (ballot access nomination petitions that challenge the existing status quo prohibitionist government).

          The two shithole universities that brutalized me were: Northwestern Illinois University, and Washington University in St Louis.

          Fuck them, and everyone who thinks that “there’s nothing wrong with higher education” in the USSA.

        2. As “The Shadow University” reveals, the American university has been a breeding ground for totalitarian paternalism since the early 1900s. That’s where rebellious young people still have a chance at becoming system-breakers. …And that’s where an army of Nurse-Ratched type “slave breakers” still work to undermine and destroy individualism, irreverence, independence, and innovation.

          George Carlin, Doug Stanhope (in his comments on charity shows), and Chris Rock are all 100% right. Avoid collectivist, servile, humorless, mainstream, easily-offended venues.

        3. “CorporashuuuunZZZZ”

          You mean the corporashuuuunZZZZ that continue to pay a premium to those who’ve graduated from the colleges that Chris Rock and others have given up on?

    2. A what about the pros; the 23-to-89-year-old infantilenistas?

  2. Coincidentally, “about 8 years ago” was right about the time I was leaving college. I had a great time, and in 4 years nobody freaked out about being offended or “othered.” What has changed in that short time?

    1. The tentacles of political correctness got longer and extended more deeply. Every campus has a “Diversity Officer. “Diversity training” is no longer an unusual thing. The kids of the left-wingers and single mothers of the ’70s and ’80s got into college and positions of power.

      Plus, PC thought (like many reform movements) tends to become more radical over time. So now we have Third Wave feminism and intersectionalism and increasingly broad definitions of “racism.”

      Hopefully, there will be pushback. Gamergate was a start.

      1. It has to get so shrill that even the dumbest of the dumb can see it for there to be real push-back. We aren’t there yet, UCLA just announced everybody must attend a diversity reprogramming class as a requirement. Hopefully somebody will be able to sue to stop it – it is a religion after all.

      2. Simply to perform work as contractor I’ve been required to sit through hours of “sensitivity training” and other ridiculous, unnecessary, humiliating and expensive nonsense.

        Well, sure glad I’m old and my time is over. Best of luck to those of you who aren’t.

        See ya! Sure wouldn’t want to be ya!

    2. Same here. Just as I left there was weird shit happening like smokers being corralled around those funny shaped cone thingies.

    3. Diversity Training is just another leftist phrase that means the opposite of what it says.

      1. Absolutely correct.

    4. Me too. We are the same age… that is neat.
      I went to a private Christian college with a politically moderate climate and I was pretty apolitical at the time so I’m totally sure about how things at major universities have changed, but if I had to guess, and I’m not being facetious here, I think it probably has something to do with Obama’s presidential campaign and subsequent election. At the very least it stirred the pot for young people to go all warboner for mainstream politics and find some raison d’?tre to get impassioned about.

      1. I’m *not* totally sure, even.

  3. What better way is there to drain universities of their intellectual potency than to dissuade all interesting people from setting foot on a college campus?

    This may be the goal. College administrators would probably have a much easier job if the only students in their care are thousands of unquestioning little tonys.

    1. Except it isn’t the administrators, it’s the students themselves fostering this environment.

      1. After 18-20 years of being marinated in hypersensitive PC victim-cult bullshit, they tend to become excellent foot soldiers for defending the cult.

        1. I think you guys are confusing administrators with faculty.

      2. False. Individualist students are generally shocked and horrified if they find out the lengths administrators go to crush free speech, individuality, and yes, _libertarianism_ on campus. Universities have campus police departments that hire cops who “didn’t meet the moral standards of the local police department.” As anyone who regularly reads Reason (or anything by Radley Balko) should know, that’s a chilling thought.

        To find tyranny, you need only go as far as the “Office of Student Affairs.” You will generally find that there’s someone very similar to Nurse Ratched sitting behind a desk there, and that she gets her jollies on crushing speech, demanding that nobody engage in speech without a “permit.”

        This country is over. Time to pack up and look for a new “America.”

  4. “I stopped playing colleges, and the reason is because they’re way too conservative.”

    Wait, what?

    1. He explains. And I agree that, in that instance, “Conservative” is exactly the right term. But then, the term “Liberal” hasn’t really been appropriate for anybody opt the Political Left for some decades.

      1. I don’t see how “their social views (which I assume he means the ‘everyone’s a winner, there are no losers’ crap) and willingness not to offend anyone” is conservative.

        If anything, I would argue that, to some extent at least, what he’s describing are attitudes and behaviors shaped by modern liberalism, especially through such policies at colleges mentioned by the author near the end of the piece.

        1. Part of his use of the term, I think, is the tendency of people on the left (which Rock is AFAIK) to apply the term “conservative” to anything they don’t like which is not obviously leftwing radical/reformist. (E.g. the Communist opposition to Yeltsin was called “conservative” by the US MSM, on the grounds that they were “conserving” Communism.)

          But the situation Rock describes is sorta-kinda “conservative” in the socially-conservative sense of Victorianism and Ms. Grundy and Anthony Comstock: objections to anything that might upset or offend, anything “immoral” or “improper.” (However, note that the left loves to offend their political opponents. They just get a stick up their collective butts when they get offended.)

          1. Conservative also means a narrow perpective which fits in his usage.

            1. Conservatism as a political and social philosophy promotes retaining traditional social institutions in the context of the culture and civilization.

              I think it’s a good sign when people realize that politically correct speech is now a traditional social institution.

              IOW, something part of the status quo, which would be rethought and questioned. Because, nothing says progressive like progress.

            2. I don’t think that is what it means at all. That is a meaning that you ascribe to it.

              Goddamn you can’t even get a simple word right. Fuckin’ idiot.

              1. Webster says “tending to or maintaining existing views”. It is a perfect fit you bayou-billy.

                1. That is not the definition you offered above. Neither the word nor the concept of “narrow” is part of the dictionary definition.

                  1. PB is amazing. He can’t even read a dictionary without putting a political spin on it.

                    It shows you how brainwashed the proggies are.

              2. I agree, Suthenboy. Any political viewpoint can be a “narrow perspective.”

                1. PB makes the typical (empty) leftoid argument from pretentiousness.

                  1. PB is a turd who should be treated with contempt.

              3. Verbicide is the murder of the meaning of words to fit the offenders narrative.

            3. Exactly, Buttplug. It’s not a political statement. He means conservative as close and restricted. Politically, it’s almost more liberal, but that’s not how he meant it. I’m a little surprised that anyone is confused about his meaning.

              1. ButtPlug has no mind…just a robotic Proggy.

            4. Conservative only means “narrow perpective” to people who have been Grubered enough to think that way.

              Conservative means relying on traditional ways of doing things. You know, like things that have been proven to work in the past. It might look narrow to the casual observer but it’s no more narrow than the strict orthodoxy currently being pushed by the authoritarian left.

          2. I see what you are saying, but I do think the thing he is describing is the result of liberal policies, not some new “Victorianism.”

            It’s also possible that these kids just don’t find him funny.

            Speaking of which, it’s interesting to see whom Rock finds funny. In an interview with Frank Rich, Rock says that Dennis Miller is not funny because he is too conservative. He says Jon Stewart is funny because he was “middle-to-left, but he’s still more in the middle.” Rich and Rock agreed that Miller, who pokes fun at President Obama, was a mouthpiece of the powerful, while Stewart, who regularly sides with with the Obama administration and the media, speaks truth to that power.

          3. Communist opposition to Yeltsin was called “conservative” by the US MSM, on the grounds that they were “conserving” Communism

            That is actually a very appropriate use of “conservative”. Conservative has nothing to do with any particular political views. It is all about context. After having communism for 80 years, it is appropriate to call the people who want to go back to the old system conservative. Conservative is not the opposite of liberal. It is the opposite of progressive.

      2. The correct term is Reactionary or maybe Neo-Medievalist. Progs have a turn of the century attitude of racism, bigotry, eugenic tendencies that they would like to maintain.

      3. Incorrect. “Conservative” is the optimal term, and Chris Rock is 100% right.
        http://www.cato.org/pubs/artic…..vative.pdf

    2. I think he means close-minded. Also, one could say uptight. Look at the comments in this thread, for instance. Very uptight, very righteous. There is more close-mindedness on the left and on the right on campus, and in our culture generally, these days (lock-step!). That said, from what I observe directly, students tend to be very right-wing today compared to 15 years ago or so, and so are many of the professors. Politically conservative? Absolutely.

      1. They are? In what way are they?

      2. There are quite a few conservative/libertarian professors. We are just concentrated in business, science, math, and engineering, and are too busy actually working to spend time arguing with colleagues who have made political disputation their full-time jobs. They write rambling nonsense and it’s called “scholarship.” We write a response pointing out all the logical flaws and hidden assumptions in their rantings and it’s called “wasting time.” One counts toward promotion, the other not so much. I have seen professors in other departments list their newspaper op-eds as scholarship.

        1. This comment gives me hope for the future.

    3. He means conservative as “afraid of change” which is exactly what the modern left is. They are scared shitless of having their views challenged in the slightest, and scared of any change in society that is not directed by them.

      Basically “do what we tell you” rather than “do your own thing”.

      1. He means “conservative” the way the best minds have defined it, as a psychological predilection built into limited intelligence: http://www.cato.org/pubs/artic…..vative.pdf

  5. What better way is there to drain universities of their intellectual potency than to dissuade all interesting people from setting foot on a college campus?

    Well, isn’t that actually the point? It’s not like the people who push these policies actually want people exposed to differing viewpoints, and they sure don’t want anyone to have “intellectual potency”. They hate that; it punctures their idiotic ideas too easily.

    1. agreed.

      1. All colleges are under perverse government incentives that are Marcusean, and idiotic, and that do not tolerate free speech. That’s what the book “The Shadow University” reveals with careful scholarship.

  6. “…drain universities of their intellectual potency…”

    lol whut

    This presumes ‘intellectual potency’ to begin with. Undergraduates are basically killing 4 years occasionally showing up to class, learning to drink and (hopefully) get laid without going to jail.

    If anything ‘intellectual’ happens in that period of time, i assure you, it probably happened in a dorm room around around a bong, or in a coffee-shop on ‘open mic’ night. *if* you’re lucky.

    This also presumes ‘intellectual’ stuff is a desirable good.

    When in fact, i’d argue that the best thing an undergraduate education college can do is simply emphasise and reinforce =
    a) a Strong Work Ethic, and
    b) *Very Basic* Core Skills. Vocabulary/Literacy, Numeracy, some ability to research and manage a wide variety of information sources.

    “Intellectual” stuff is probably at best ‘nice to have’; even then, i’d question whether the average liberal arts student really needs that course on Derrida and Foucault when they still can’t fucking write a simple argumentative essay properly. Better to make them re-do “Logic and Rhetoric” until they actually get it right.

    1. That said = I find the current status-quo, where universities are basically bubble-worlds terrified of Hate Speech or Thought Crimes, or any smell of political-incorrectness… almost *incomprehensible*

      I went to college during the peak of the 1990s political-correctness fad, and in my mind that PC shit was on the way ‘out’

      College was where you had excuses to engage in the most obscene and ridiculous activities/forms of expression and justify it in the spirit of ‘free expression’. Most people were nonplussed by… anything. Maybe it was a Gen X thing. We were almost bored with ‘controversial’. It was too easy. Jokes about “Dead Nigger Babies”? passe. people who harped about ‘being offended’ were losers.

      I can only understand it by thinking of who these students *parents* are. They reflect the ‘helicopter’ moms/dads for whom ‘words can hurt’ and Safety is more important than ‘testing boundaries’.

      I sort of think they deserve whatever world they allow to crop up around them.

      1. Well, I think a lot of what you see is the result of the loud, obnoxious professional grievance scum being loud and obnoxious, while the majority of students don’t get offended and don’t care much. I’d say the difference between, say, college in the early 90s (when I was also there) and now is that the professional grievance scum have entrenched themselves, whereas before they hadn’t yet (though they were just beginning to start to try).

        You have to remember that these people, the ones who complain about jokes being “hate speech” or that “words hurt” is that they’re bullies. They’re bullies who rely on beating people over the head and neck for relatively innocent shit until those people are now afraid to possibly draw the ire of the bullies. And like all bullies, they are craven cowards who go after the softer targets. And even more cowardly, they couch their actions in the language of “tolerance” which is all just a semantic smokescreen to deflect people from realizing what they actually are.

        They’re the wedgie-giving bully who figured out that if you tell people you are giving people wedgies because the target was “intolerant”, people don’t call you a bully. They call you “concerned”. It’s just a repulsive sleight of hand that’s become an entire tactic for a particular type of asshole.

        1. Change “professional grievance scum” to “professional inquisitor” and your post is also a perfect description of drug prohibition.

        2. Spot on! Ie: “The Water Buffalo Affair”

      2. PC shit was on the way out

        Yeah, it appears PCU was just foreshadowing and not an actual turning point.

        http://www.imdb.com/title/tt01…..lmg_act_68

        1. Good cite! I’d forgotten about that, but that’s exactly what i meant = we were already *mocking* it in the mid 90s.

      3. Trouble is, that world is cropping up around us as well. It’s called “totalitarianism.” …That’s the goal of Herbert Marcuse’s many sociopathic and bureaucratic followers.

    2. Yup. From what I’ve seen you can even graduate while barely knowing how to write and read.
      “Don’t take Professor (something)’s history class. He like makes you actually read the textbook!”

      1. (that was an actual quote from someone I worked with a few years ago)

      2. “In 100 years we’ve gone from teaching Latin and Greek in high school to teaching Remedial English in college.”

        –Joseph Sobran

        1. But the leftoids are so much more intelligent than everyone else, just ask them.

        2. Greek and Latin are just phallocentric languages of Dead White (although not necessarily heterosexual) Men

          1. So women did not speak these languages? Or are they phallophobic like you?

            Etymology is important! Word origins not only shed light on their current meaning, but offer clues to their usage.

            Perhaps we should consider retaining students instead of passing them on and herding them into remedial classes. Of course, we might have to build much larger parking lots in the elementary schools.

            1. Etymology is important! Word origins not only shed light on their current meaning, but offer clues to their usage.

              Well there’s the “problem:” students who know the meanings of words are a lot less likely to be manipulated by progressives attempting to change definitions for their own social/political agendas.

    3. I think it’s sad that high school kids don’t learn logic. Any of it they learn is in mathematics, possibly proofs.

      All they learn is extremely basic reading, writing, and math. Just enough to be a great worker bee in a factory.

      That would be great, if the economy of the 1950’s was coming back, which it isn’t.

      Too bad we’re stuck with the 1950’s idea of what a good education is.

      1. “Progressive education” was born from the philosophy of John Dewey, the father of American pragmatism who was heavily influenced by the German collectivist edukashun system.

        1. Dewey was an evil mother fucker who probably fantasized about being a Prussian ruler.

        2. Add Marcusean speech codes to that (with a big helping of sociopathic Nurse Ratched type bureaucrats), and you’ve described the whole picture. That’s basically what the book “The Shadow University” does. Well worth a read.

      2. The amazing thing is the ubiquity of computers and yet the dearth of computer programming classes.

        But pedagoguery has a spotless track-record of making learning and knowledge a horrible task. It’s amazing how many children like to read and then grow to hate reading because it is coerced by the formal education system.

        1. In the 80s and early 90s computer classes were about programming computers. Then they became mostly about how to use Microsoft Office. I have no idea what they are about now, if they still exist.

          1. Engineers learn MatLab now. Most of the computer science majors are reasonably proficient in Java and/or C# but have a REAL HARD time with C++.

    4. what is worse is that they are not even taught basic economics or the scientific method in high school. The “econ” they learn is Keynesian/Marxist BS and the science they learn is environmentalist propaganda.

      1. ^this

        or, like, they could just take more french and read Shakespeare that they don’t give a flying fuck about.

        God, high school is such a bloody waste. I learned 90% of what I went to college with on my own, borrowed from the library, in my free time. And then proceeded to be disappointed that college was more or less more of the same.

        The upside of college was that you could choose what you wanted to take, and it made all the difference.

        1. For me, College was 100x better than high school. The quality of instruction was measurably better, as was the subject matter. I had some great professors but also had a few duds as well.
          I went to college in the late 1980s and early 1990s so perhaps it was before the progs took complete control.

          1. For me, College was 100x better than high school. The quality of instruction was measurably better, as was the subject matter. I had some great professors but also had a few duds as well.

            Same here.

            I like to think it’s getting a little better. There was a course whose teacher espoused a theory with which I disagreed. He did not try to shout me down, threaten to fail me, or anything else. He actually engaged with me fairly.

            Still, to paraphrase Chris Rock, you don’t get a cookie for doing shit you’re supposed to do.

  7. Imagine how fun it would be being a comedian when you can’t utter a single word that might offend someone somewhere. Fuck, I thought part of the job of a comedian was to offend at least someone.

    Fuck these bunch of pussies and shrill harpies on these university campuses. They should be shunned and their idiots should be laughed out of the country. They deserve no respect at all and only ridicule.

    1. Bill Maher routinely offends conservatives and you guys mass shit your pants.

      1. ButtFace once again proves that he can’t read and understand the English language.

      2. People criticize Maher here and you throw a little hissy fit over people mocking your favourite D-list comedian. Note that no one here wants Maher’s show taken off the air due to his views, they specifically criticize his positions and arguments. It’s the difference between ‘shut up’ and ‘I disagree with you’. Not that you’re capable of such complex distinctions.

        To paraphrase Hitchens, clap, you trained seal, clap!

        1. Yeah, it’s not like I spend even 3 seconds a year thinking about what Bill Mayer says.

          Proggies, like ButtFace seem to put a lot of weight into what comedians think about politics. I guess Jon Stewart is like their grand guru of political enlightenment, even though he’s pretty much dumber than a box of dog shit politically. For proggies, since all of their beliefs are based on some pretty comical fantasies, I guess it makes sense to look to comedians for their political news.

        2. I liked Maher in the 90s because he liked drugs and hated religion and told the truth. I didn’t care about his political views back then and still don’t.

          Likewise Carlin and both their resistance to authority.

          1. ‘he liked drugs and hated religion’

            Glad to see you have such a profoundly complex worldview there, Buttplug. Still doesn’t explain why you’re so whiny about people not liking a comedian.

            1. The same reason why he’s so bitchy about people not liking his idol, Obama. He’s a psychophant loser. When you see no value at all in yourself, you can only find hope by projecting it onto some chosen savior.

              That in a nutshell, is ButtPig.

              1. His constant attempts to elevate various people into hero-worship amuses me, especially since he claims to be a ‘rationalist’. He deliberately crafts his own little secular saints to hold up as praiseworthy, and then gets whiny when someone insults his faith.

                1. As a humanist my only “faith” is in man’s ability to reason.

                  1. Well based on your complete lack of reason, you’d need faith to believe in it.

                    I’d really like to do some BEAM tests on you while to argue here, I’d bet your brain’s electrical patterns would be similar to a religious fundamentalist.

                    1. My god! Why do you people waste time trying to debate something that is cognitively less capable than a chat bot?

                      It’s not sentient! It’s so obvious that the poor creature has no idea what words mean. Like a donkey fruitlessly walking towards a carrot suspended from its collar, Shriek comments here hoping to be mistaken for something that can think. This is impossible; an Earthworm could out-think it. So when you interact with it you are cruelly taunting something that is the degraded remains of what was once a human beings with the unrealistic possibility that it matters.

                    2. It’s totally sentient, it’s just coke-addled and fundamentally broken, possibly has a delusional disorder.

                  2. As a humanist my only “faith” is in man’s ability to reason.

                    Well, so much for being your own god, eh?

                  3. Awesome, Soooo, are you going to start learning to reason any time soon?

              2. I think you mean “sycophant,” but “psychophant” works for Buttplug, too.

                1. No, I actually meant a sycophant with psychological problems, but I might have the definition wrong.

            2. Shreek liked Maher because he confirmed Shreek’s biases and never challenged them.

          2. Your total obedience to Prog authoratah figures does not jive with Carlin. I think you likely misunderstood him.

      3. Maher doesn’t offend me and no I don’t mass shit my pants.

        I just think he is a moron who has no idea what he is talking about just like the people who like him.

        The blind leading the blind………….

    2. Just remember, those folks might end up in actual positions of power a few years down the road. Ponder that for a minute.

      1. Why would I have to ponder it? The dumbest people in the country are now being put into positions of power. Not even one of them are competent enough to operate a push broom, let alone a position of national importance.

        It can’t last, that’s the bright side of it. Beautiful collapse is coming. Hey, that’s ugly, but it’s the best we can hope for if this continues much longer.

        1. You think they’re the dumbest, but I think you’re underestimating people. Wait until people who take ‘triggering’ seriously end up in office or a high ranking bureaucracy and get back to me.

          1. No, I don’t think they are dumb, I know that they are. People who take ‘triggering’ seriously are insane and self destructive as hell. They are an experiment in genetics that went seriously wrong. Like the luddites before them, they will become extinct. I have no fear of these people. A lot of loathing and maybe even some pity, but no fear. They’re destroying themselves.

            1. I think you’ve got way more optimism for this generation than I. I think when the spawn of helicopter parents starts to take over from Gen X and the Boomers it’s going to be very nasty.

              1. That’s the collapse that I was referring to. I’m not saying that this cannot happen, I won’t be surprised at all, but those who bring it about and bring the suffering upon themselves as well as everyone else are not smart, they’re very stupid. And they might very well be the targets of people who are pissed off and not quite so ‘sensitive’ as they are.

                Who’s going to protect these poor ‘triggered’ babies when ISIS or some other crazies come after them? The evil patriarchy that they were trying so hard to destroy? Yeah, good luck with that.

                1. Ha, now you’re starting to sound like Paglia, with her “everyone shits on men until OH NO BAD PEOPLE SAVE US MEN” argument.

                  But I agree that ‘triggering’ is only a thing that can emerge in a developed country with very little violence. If there’s massive starvation or hyperinflation or whatever those ‘concerns’ are pretty quickly shoved away.

                  1. But I agree that ‘triggering’ is only a thing that can emerge in a developed country with very little violence

                    Really? Tell that to a Pakistani after you show him that Youtube video.

                    1. Wouldn’t that be Libyan?

                    2. Mob violence is a totally separate thing. There’s a difference between just whining about something ‘triggering’ you and actually committing violence over it (which, as we saw with that attack on the anti-abortion protester, still results in legal punishment).

                    3. There’s a difference between just whining about something ‘triggering’ you and actually committing violence over it

                      Yeah, it’s better when you have the government commit the violence for you, right?

                      Please don’t tell me that you do not believe that the goal of these triggered freaks is not to have the government commit violence against the ‘triggerers’? Because that is clearly the goal.

                    4. Yes but that’s deliberately there to separate themselves from the process. I don’t see ‘trigger’ people capable of grand scale rioting or say, actively going out and murdering their offenders. These are people who don’t want to get their hands dirty. There isn’t a moral distinction, but there is a psychological one.

                    5. I don’t see ‘trigger’ people capable of grand scale rioting or say, actively going out and murdering their offenders

                      Of course not, they’re cowards. They want the government to do it for them.

            2. Luddites are extinct?

              1. Luddites are extinct?

                Nope, they’re called ‘progressives’ these days.

                1. and environmentalists – they would have us eating nuts and berries and living in caves to save the world from fake global warming.

                  Hunter/gatherer is the ONLY sustainable lifestyle on the planet…….

            3. “Oh that ole uppity triggerer….”

          2. I’ve seen the future, know what it is? It’s a 47-year-old virgin in beige pajamas drinking a banana broccoli shake, singing “I’m an Oscar-Meyer Wiener.”

            1. Welp, time to go back to post-apocalyptic future Florida, this timeline’s fucked.

            2. And if you only marry her, she’s going to allow you a tofurkey burger once a month with your obligatory broccoli shake. That’s if you have sex with her. Lucky you, welcome to the bold new future, it’s going to be great.

            3. you mean like “pajama boy” from the Obamacare advertisement?

          3. Wait until people who take ‘triggering’ seriously end up in office…

            I wish I didn’t agree with you, but people once laughed at the idea that some stereotypically narcissistic Boomer could ever achieve high office, and now look at us.

          4. “Wait until people who take ‘triggering’ seriously end up in office or a high ranking bureaucracy and get back to me.”

            And the legislature and court system.

            It is too far entrenched to try and fight back through either the legislature or through the courts.

            Our only hope is through push back at the local level. Specifically through the power of the County Sheriffs office. Sheriffs are elected by the people and answer to no bureauracy or political office as is a police chief.

            They are elected by the local people and are sworn to uphold the Constitution and answer to no one but the people who elect them.

            Everyone should begin to take a special interest in your local sheriffs office and bring attention to this unique loophole to push back upon those who want the Federal Government to pass laws ordering us to tie our shoes in a specificl and politically correct manner.

            1. those who want the Federal Government to pass laws ordering us to tie our shoes in a specificl and politically correct manner.

              And chances are, it will be ludicrously complicated and not actually stay tied for long.

        2. Peak Derp you believe? Destroyed by Derp you will be.

          1. That’s probably the most subtle but best post I’ve seen her tonight.

            +1 Peak Derp

  8. I wonder if when Chris Rock is inevitably attacked by the shreeking SJW hordes and they try to force him to apologize if he will do it, or if he will prove that he actually has balls?

    This will be worth watching. If he tells them to piss the fuck off, then he is my new favorite celebrity.

    1. Don’t hold your breath. Remember, this is the guy who retired his “Niggas vs. Black People” bit because it was too controversial. It was also really popular, but Rock said retiring the bit was a good thing because “some people who were racist thought they had a license to say nigger.” Pure leftie nonsense.

      1. I believe the bit was “I hate niggers!” (Not “niggas.” Pronouncing the “R” meant that he was saying the exact same thing that the average Alabama idiot says, …but with an entirely different follow-up, explanation, and meaning.)
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tkZuLixZOk

  9. I generally don’t miss college, but I am glad I went right before the SJWs became prominent. Really the beginning of the current golden age of sluts, but before all the rape-talk got out of control.

    And that’s what we should focus on. All the feminists in Jezebel are losing because of technology. All the Jezzies’ cats and pints of ice cream can’t change the fact that hot girls love to take pictures of themselves in thongs and put them on instagram, snapchat and tinder for us men to look at. Anal is now de riguer for relationships, to the point where girls who don’t do “butt stuff” are relegated to secondary picks on tinder. Things have never been better for men because of technology showing women what the competition for the best among us is up to. Brave new world.

    1. Every swipe on tinder is a slash at the SJW horde.

      Keep it sticky player

  10. Rock’s most insightful quote today was “white people were crazy but are not as crazy now. To say that black people have made progress is to say they deserved what happened to them in the past.”

    1. The fact that makes no sense at all would explain your fondness of it.

  11. Or just ignoring race to a fault. You can’t say “the black kid over there.” No, it’s “the guy with the red shoes.” You can’t even be offensive on your way to being inoffensive.

    How long before noticing the color of somebody’s shoes becomes racist as well? Over/under?

    1. Noticing the color of someone’s shoes could offend them, right? Is it impossible that it could offend them? No? Then it’s the same as rape.

    2. Well people were apparently saying that the guy in the security cam footage wasn’t Michael Brown, even though they were wearing a fairly unique combination of socks and shoes, so now I guess?

    3. It’s already “racist” to refer to many things that might be linked to race in some way. Terms like “Chicago,” “inner cities,” “public housing,” “saggy pants,” “thugs,” and recently “charging” have been said to be racially-provocative terms. So if a specific color of shoes ever becomes linked to blacks, then yes, referring to that color of shoes will become “racist.”

      1. Been done. Some conservative said that all black people wanted were “loose shoes and a warm place to shit”.

        1. Some “conservative” in Jimmy Carter’s administration. I think he was the Minister of Agricultural Planning.

          1. Nixon and Ford. Earl Butz. I looked it up.

            1. While I am pleased that you are able to look things up, you need to be more critical of labels like “conservative”.

              Nixon and Ford were not really conservative in any meaningful sense. Remember these guys did the wage and price controls regime. Serious central planning (AKA Socialist) drones with a veneer of prudery.

      2. There are words and then there are racial code words. The latter are invented not by minorities but by dog-whistling racists. In what inner portions of cities do black people congregate these days? It means nothing as words, but it sure does conjure an image, however outdated (thus appealing to the geriatric set these are being sold to).

        1. Yay, Tony!

        2. If you can hear the dog whistle, you’re a dog.

          Now get back to your Klan meeting, Tony.

        3. more quotes that sound intelligent but are in fact completely false and meaningless.

          “Academic Speak” -say anything in a erudite fashion and it will sound correct although it is not.

          Tony is obviously enamored by it. Most “college educated” liberal morons are mesmerized by it.

          The rest of us that live in the real world (not the theoretical one) know that it is nothing but gobbledygook.

        4. So? Even if what you say were true, it assumes that racism is evil or forbidden. So people are racist; so the fuck what? Thought: still not a crime. Humans make judgments based on observed patterns in the behavior of other humans.

          You know who else is racist, besides the “geriatric set”? Blacks. Hispanics. Asians. Middle Easterners. Yes, believe it or not, people have ways, subtle and not-so-subtle-at-all, of making sure that their own kind gets the wheat and other kinds get the chaff. It’s been this way since we all walked with our knuckles.

          It’s okay to use “racial code words,” just like it’s okay to use any other kind of speech, or hold any opinion. “Racial code words” can only be bad if you assume that the speaker has some obligation to the perceived target of the speaker’s metaphor…for example, if you believe that white people have some obligation to give money/opportunity/free stuff to brown people. They don’t. Brown people–and by this, I mean black people–are owed nothing, and if they want money and stuff, they need to get up off their stinking black asses and get it themselves.

          When you stop assuming that white people have some obligation to pick up the tab for everyone else’s laziness, corruption, and stupid choices, it suddenly becomes a lot less important who thinks or says what bad-meanie things about dem po’ negroes.

        5. So essentially, any word that conjures a thought of race is racist. Any reference that reminds another person that there are differences between humans is racist. Any person who fails to pretend that there is no physical difference between races is racist.

          This is political correctness to the absurd.

  12. Chris Rock is a cunt.

  13. About the only thing I know about Chris Rock is that he hates niggers.

  14. can we just finally give Millennials a binky and a blankie and be done with it?

  15. Students suck, thats all.

    http://www.Anon-Rocks.tk

  16. “Probably a couple of tours ago.”

    This little d-bag talks like he’s in the military. What a joke.

    1. Comedians have been doing club tours for a LOOOONG time. Get over yourself.

  17. Mr. Rock, of course, had great advice that Michael Brown probably should have heeded…
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj0mtxXEGE8

    1. Mike Brown is the worst poster-boy for police brutality possible. Almost as if it was planned that way. No better way to undercut a movement than by championing a weak cause and then discrediting it.

  18. It does really suck for the majority of students not in the left wing power structure. This is just a hint at what totalitarianism looks like.

  19. The whole interview is great. The Puritanical left (which is supposed to be a contradiction) does stifle free thought. It’s also the vanguard of tolerance for minorities. So the problem is overreach and being counterproductive. The onus should always be on the bigots to change (or die off), and the left doing speech codes is no excuse for being a bigot. But being so hypersensitive that you police comedy for its political correctness is to, at the least, commit the worst crime of all in peaceably winning converts: having no sense of humor.

    Policing speech is a part of the strategy, no doubt about it. That people can’t in polite company make racial slurs is an aspect of increased equality. But the left can’t neglect the important role of the satirist. It’s denying humor as a basic function of human social healing.

    1. Tony|12.2.14 @ 12:20AM|#
      “The whole interview is great. The Puritanical left (which is supposed to be a contradiction) does stifle free thought. It’s also the vanguard of tolerance for minorities.”

      Gee, asshole, you thought you could drop your pile of bullshit here and no one would notice!
      No, it is not any “vanguard” at all; it simply stifles thought in the name of supposed superiority while proving its inherent stupidity.
      As do you, asshole.

      1. I’m criticizing the left you unfathomable void. It’s not college fucking republicans at the front lines of the racial equality battle, is it?

        My point is that the left should speak more forcefully–less carefully. Nitpicking at phrases turns me off, and I’m a sympathizer, so I can only imagine what it does to morons like you.

        1. It’s not college fucking republicans at the front lines of the racial equality battle, is it?

          Actually, yes, it is. Unless you define “equality” as being “unequal treatment depending on ethnicity.” Then again, you may well be an anti-Asian bigot, which wouldn’t be surprising given the common jealousy that stupid and lazy people have for people who succeed through intelligence and diligence.

          1. Absolutely. Tony: Read “The Shadow University,” by Kors and Silverglate, and you’ll better understand the harsh reaction. Perhaps you don’t understand just why free speech absolutism is the only way to preserve civilization. Force is never called for, speech shouldn’t be suppressed. That’s the opposite of free society, it’s rolling back the enlightenment to the dark ages. And what of the “liberal vanguard” that doesn’t believe in Sharia law, and the stoning to death of homosexuals? Should their criticisms of the very real, actual violence, repression of women, and intolerance be suppressed?

            Speech =/= Force. That’s why it has to remain free.

        2. Sevo’s the resident backbencher. He’s paid to scream at the opposition, not to add anything to the argument.

          1. When it comes to Tony et al., that’s okay. None of them are truly human. Real people listen to new information, process it, and incorporate it into a worldview. Actual people are ruled, at least to a large extent, by logic and reason.

            But as near as anyone can tell, at some point Democrat talking points became attracted to each other (a la planet formation), congealed, and became sentient. That’s how the resident Reason trolls came into being. They do not listen or think. They only behave according to progressive programming, reacting according to partisan loyalty and feelings.

            Insult away. They deserve nothing better. (Though there is a special place in paradise for those who take the time to demolish progressive belief with rational thought.)

    2. Masters of the Prog Plantation more like it.

  20. This is Rock’s assessment, and there may be some truth to it. It may also be that people just don’t find him funny.

    1. I find him funny, and I find his assessment spot-on. Perhaps it’s you who are unaware of the reality he references.

  21. If current university climate is any kind of future indicator, we’re in for some seriously problematic shifts in the Modern Left’s sensibilities.

    The intellectual intolerance, political correctness run amok and hyper-sensitivity to EVERYTHING is destroying any faint semblance to “liberalism”….modern or classical.

    Rather they are descending into ever-increasingly angry illiberalism with a giant stick up their collective ass about everything and everyone.

  22. “Way too conservative”? The rest of it I’m in agreement, but he’s putting the blame in the wrong area.

    1. As society changes, I can actually see the current “left” becoming the new “conservative” shortly…if you use the strict definition of the term. Priggish, narrow minded, and totally lacking in humor. We may be on the cusp of a huge political shift similar to what happened in the 60’s.

  23. wait a sec, free speech? really?? are the students blocking chris rock from talking in universities? are these shows being censured?
    what a crying baby… the students have the right to not like his jokes. It seems to me that chris is complaining because they don’t like his shows. what the hell does it have to do with free speech? if I dont like something, im not censuring it. it doesnt make sense.

    1. Nobody’s crying here, except you. He was asked a question about a current event and expressed his opinion. Rock doesn’t like college audiences, so he chooses not to perform at them. He also never used the phrase “free speech.” If you can’t take the time to actually read the article, keep your idiocy to yourself.

      1. calm down, boy! you dont have to be a dick about it. we`re just talking here..
        anyway, youre right – i`m wrong by saying rock said about free speech. i take that back, though the article said it… then, maybe the article is being childish about it.
        anyway, rock said those students are being concervative because they don`t laught at his joke… it`s about childish too.
        again, about the article, it`s funny to put the college people down calling it a “marcketplace of ideas”, like if standups and tv shows weren`t just the same case.

        1. “again, about the article, it`s funny to put the college people down calling it a “marcketplace of ideas”, like if standups and tv shows weren`t just the same case.”

          Sorry, didn’t realize English wasn’t your first language.

    2. It makes sense to not subject yourself to stupid audiences if better audiences (ones more grounded in reality) exist. That’s just good business sense. His observations about the bed-wetting Marcuse-indoctrinated college campuses are accurate.

      There are greater nuances possible than “legal and approved of” and “banned and disapproved of.” There can be “legal but worthless/unprofitable.” His point was that the quality of the soil is bad, and crops won’t grow in it. …Not that he’s angry at being prohibited from planting seeds.

      His was a cultural critique, and political only to the extent that political organization emerges from the culture.

      His critique was more along the lines of “Kids these days! …Buncha lilly-livered dipshits!”
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2n34eeXWjUQ

  24. Faculty at colleges are also prevented from speaking their minds. The pressure from administration is variously subtle and overt. Those who speak their minds risk losing their jobs under the guise of downsizing. I have seen it happen so many times. I blame this on corporate inroads. Companies give the schools money, and they expect a certain message to emanate from the academy. This culture trickles down to the students. It’s very pervasive.

  25. This is everywhere, even on this website where comments simply “disappear. Yes, Reason owns the site but if it wishes to live up to its ideals then it shouldn’t remove comments that it doesn’t like or agree with.

    As annoying as socialist “Tony” is he still has the right to post even if nothing he says makes any real sense.

    1. The only comments I’ve ever seen removed are Mary sockpuppets and references to Arthur Alan Wolk, the former because she is an actually toxic animal, the latter because they’re afraid of expensive and pointless litigation.

      1. Apropos of nothing:

        http://www.amazon.com/Bailey-E…..ejaculator

        1. So you’re telling me that I can get goats to ejaculate WITHOUT fucking them? If only I’d known this a couple of years ago.

          1. You can get ANYTHING on Amazon.

  26. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link,
    go to tech tab for work detail ????????????? http://www.jobsfish.com

    1. That’s a pretty cheap BMW.

  27. I’m a Muslim, and I hate it when liberals pretend to stand up for me. Liberals are some of the biggest racists out there.

    I hate Bill Maher, too.

    1. I think I just found something I like about Bill Maher.

      Despising your grotesque mind virus in no way makes me “racist.” I have many friends from the Middle East: they are not religious, they are enlightened. I don’t shy away from shaking their hands, I don’t view their genetics as unattractive, I don’t think they’re stupid –far from it.

      The Middle Eastern “apostates” I am friends with do not believe that homosexuality or abortion is “an abomination.” They are classical liberals who know the meaning of the term better than those mis-educated in the USA. Abortion and homosexuality are facts of life that rational people deal with rationally. As is pornography (and other forms of photography that one such friend had to reclaim from the garbage when the totalitarians in the east claimed it was “sinful” to have photos of any kind in the house). My Middle Eastern friends have rejected praying five times a day, in the same way that I don’t throw salt over my shoulder for good luck.

      “Pro-life” is really Luddite enslavement to flesh. Take your mental virus, and shove it right next to your claim that those who hate Islam are “racist.” Nothing could be further from the truth. I don’t think Ayaan Hirsi Ali hates her own race, but she very much hates Islam. …And with excellent reason.

      Also, the claims of religion are obviously false.

      1. You made some good points, but I disagree with your stance on abortion. You make it sound as if all pro-life people arrive at that conclusion through religion. I’ve met many who do, but most of the people who were pro-life that I know and myself included see abortion as murder, not because of a god or religion. It seems pretty simple to see that if you don’t want kids, then choose not to have sex or go through other ways of artificially inseminating yourself. I mean, I could choose to gamble, but the choice would mean that I accept possibly losing whatever I bet. I would have no right to steal money from somebody else, just because I lost. I certainly wouldn’t have the right to steal from the person who won, because I would have accepted the results before gambling, elsewise I should not have done so. In other words, don’t bet what you can’t afford to lose, don’t do what you cannot accept responsibility for.

        1. Now I realize that some children are conceived from rape. But abortion is not a solution in that cases either. Because essentially, rapists get off mostly free. Rapists generally serve between five and six years in prison and or castration. They certainly don’t get executed. And yet, if rape is enough to invalidate a child’s rights, then I am to assume that the punishment for rape is death? But why is it the rapist gets off easy? Why is the innocent child the one who gets the punishment? Doesn’t sound like justice to me. While I can sympathize with somebody becoming pregnant through rape, I can’t condone doing something wrong to another, just because somebody wronged me. If somebody robs me, that doesn’t give me justification to rob somebody else. My beef is with my aggressor, not with an innocent person.

          So anyway, while I agree with you that homosexuality is not an abomination, or even wrong, I disagree with abortion on NAP grounds. At most, that would be something that is between two people, a fight perhaps, but stepping in and killing one of them is unethical at best, outright murder at worst.

          I also think less of the “mental virus” talk would get your point across. Debate viewpoints based on logic, not insults.

  28. Too conservative? Sounds more like PC liberal to me. Especially having three kids having come out of Columbia,NYU, and Amherst. Way too sensitive for me in my home. We all must learn to discriminate not in a bad judge mental way, but only to differentiate and describe. It’s my fault for wanting them to be educated. The schools have failed to be the marketplace of ideas. They, frankly, suck.

  29. Intolerance in the name of tolerance is a special kind of stupid.

    When words are dangerous, discussions cease and people are left with the ignorance they have.

  30. How can Chris rock say college students have conservative views when it comes to social issues and they’re offended by everything. Everywhere I turn its progressive putting labels on everyone and now every group has a grievance. I’m very conservative in my views, I’m never offended. Sorry I am offended by one thing, Obama being elected twice.

  31. I am no fan of “politically correct fascism”….but, nor am I a fan of court jesters posing as serious social commentators…one whose favorite word is “fuck,” repeated ad nauseam, as subject, predicate, and object in almost every sentence, like some hostile sub-literate.

    Isn’t it enough that Americans receive their “political education” from a grand collective of court jesters…Maher, Colbert, Miller, Stern, et al…who enthrall our distressed society in the absence of any substantive education in history, humanities, social sciences, etc?

    What should rightly offend students and administrators are not the ideas but the presentation. College students are supposed to study the disciplines of higher education, and if they wish to submerge themselves in the swamp, then no need to attend college…instead, just go straight from high school to a porn set. In theory, college, as the “ivory tower,” is supposed to focus upon exceptionalism, rather than the mainstream toilet.

    I would recommend Rock learn something about lexicon…the art of language….before he steps in front of a college audience. He may not get as many laughs as his “fuck” approach but, in his improved choice of words, he certainly will be more cogent…and reducing his obscene fuckophilia will gain far more respect….because there is nothing more depressing than transitioning from elegantly expressed text by Dostoevsky into a gutter of crude epithets, delivered in a manner any 9 year old child could master.

  32. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.jobsfish.com

    1. I’d love to know if anyone…ESPECIALLY anyone from this particular website, which is filled to the brim with skeptical, fairly intelligent beings–has fallen for this scammy horseshit.
      Seriously, THIS IS YOUR LIFE???
      This is what you do?
      How fucking sad.
      Name ONE person who has clicked on your link.
      Do it now.
      Name one person.
      I’m waiting.

  33. First time I’ve ever seen PC in the academy and social conservatism conflated.

    I guess it’s true that, quoting Ty Webb (Caddyshack), “In one physical model of the universe, the shortest distance between two points is a straight line in the opposite direction.”

  34. As a former stand-up comic — I don’t blame Rock one bit.
    He’s correct in his assessment.
    Thinking about these liberal, pansy-ass, absurdly-fucking-retarded, egg-shell-walking-on/zombie-college-kids, really pisses me off…I need a damn drink.

  35. The students aren’t too conservative Chris. They are progressives. That can’t tolerate politically incorrect thought, speech, etc…Get a clue.

  36. If your opinion doesn’t piss someone off it’s not really an opinion.
    It’s sterile.

  37. Every so often, Rock shows a glimmer of getting it. This first such was his routine “Niggas v. Black People”.

  38. I just got paid $ 7500 working off my computer this month. And if you think that’s cool, my divorced friend has twin toddlers and made over $ 8 k her first month. It feels so good making so much money when other people have to work for so much less. This is what I do,,

    COPY THIS URL IN YOUR BROWSER..

    ??????? http://WWW.PAYFLAME.COM

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.