Psychology/Psychiatry

How Trigger Warnings Make College Students Helpless, Humorless, and Stupid

Cognitive disorders of college students

|

Depression
Dreamstime

Picture a conference that exists for the following purpose: to give student-leaders of various colleges the opportunity to preview stand-up acts and decide which comedians they would like to invite to their campuses. No, you are not picturing some imaginary hell. You are picturing a very real event: the annual convention of the National Association for Campus Activities.

This convention takes center-stage in a riveting, recent article by The Atlantic's Caitlin Flanagan, who explains why students' excessive deference to political correctness obligates comedians to self-censor if they want to play the lucrative college circuit. A snapshot:

A young gay man with a Broadway background named Kevin Yee sang novelty songs about his life, producing a delirium of affection from the audience. "We love you, Kevin!" a group of kids yelled between numbers. He invited students to the front of the auditorium for a "gay dance party," and they charged down to take part. His last song, about the close relationship that can develop between a gay man and his "sassy black friend," was a killer closer; the kids roared in delight, and several African American young women in the crowd seemed to be self-identifying as sassy black friends. I assumed Yee would soon be barnstorming the country. But afterward, two white students from an Iowa college shook their heads: no. He was "perpetuating stereotypes," one of them said, firmly. "We're a very forward-thinking school," she told me. "That thing about the 'sassy black friend'? That wouldn't work for us." Many others, apparently, felt the same way: Yee ended up with 18 bookings—a respectable showing, but hardly a reflection of the excitement in the room when he performed. …

As I listened to the kids hash out whom to invite, it became clear that to get work, a comic had to be at once funny—genuinely funny—and also deeply respectful of a particular set of beliefs. These beliefs included, but were in no way limited to, the following: women, as a group, should never be made to feel uncomfortable; people whose sexual orientation falls beyond the spectrum of heterosexuality must be reassured of their special value; racial injustice is best addressed in tones of bitter anguish or inspirational calls to action; Muslims are friendly helpers whom we should cherish; and belonging to any potentially "marginalized" community involves a crippling hypersensitivity that must always be respected.

A similarly excellent, just-published companion article written by Foundation for Individual Rights in Education President Greg Lukianoff and psychologist Jonathan Haidt explores the trends that have normalized such a repressive intellectual environment for campus comedy. Students' desires for emotional protection from ideas that might offend them—institutionalized as trigger warnings, microaggressions, and the like—mimic certain cognitive disorders, Lukianoff and Haidt claim. Vindictive protectiveness—their name for the new regime of speech-curtailing measures on campuses—leaves students unprepared for the real world and may actually worsen their social anxieties:

There's a saying common in education circles: Don't teach students what to think; teach them how to think. The idea goes back at least as far as Socrates. Today, what we call the Socratic method is a way of teaching that fosters critical thinking, in part by encouraging students to question their own unexamined beliefs, as well as the received wisdom of those around them. Such questioning sometimes leads to discomfort, and even to anger, on the way to understanding.

But vindictive protectiveness teaches students to think in a very different way. It prepares them poorly for professional life, which often demands intellectual engagement with people and ideas one might find uncongenial or wrong. The harm may be more immediate, too. A campus culture devoted to policing speech and punishing speakers is likely to engender patterns of thought that are surprisingly similar to those long identified by cognitive behavioral therapists as causes of depression and anxiety. The new protectiveness may be teaching students to think pathologically.

Vindictive protectiveness hurts all students by depriving them of the considerable intellectual benefits of a campus that tolerates controversial speakers—from offensive comedians like Chris Rock to political extremists like Bill Ayers. It also hurts the faculty, who increasingly feel compelled to self-censor if they want to keep their jobs.

But ultimately, vindictive protectiveness even harms the very people it is intended to protect—emotionally-fragile students—by teaching them unhealthy avoidance tactics.

Related: Reason TV interviews Northwestern University Professor Laura Kipnis about feminism and emotional fragility on campuses.

NEXT: Augur May Become the Greatest Gambling Platform in History. Is There Anything the Government Can Do to Stop It?

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. And that’s not okay.

      1. Its okay to share your feelings about things you don’t find okay

        but not too much, or with the wrong words, because that’s not okay

        also, not outside the free-speech box, or on tuesdays

        1. *nominates Gilmore H&R’s poet laureate*

          1. You would displace Agile Cyborg?!

            1. I just assumed that Agile wouldn’t be around forever. We need a succession plan.

              1. Hmmm… OK, that does make sense.

                *stamps form, moves to out box*

                1. *throws everything in the incinerator*

                  1. No, no, no. How many times do I have to tell you, copy in triplicate, put in the wrong archives for fifty years, shred then incinerate. You can’t skip the intermediate steps just because they take a long time.

                    How do you expect to get anywhere in the bureaucracy if you try to be efficient?

                    1. Sorry – too many years in private industry!

                      I’ll try less hard.

                    2. That’s Iron Mountain’s problem.

            2. AC is more our beat poet. He’s too underground and inaccessible for laureate candidacy.

        2. Just on Fridays.

          TGIF!

        3. “also, not outside the free-speech box, or on tuesdays”

          Why, what happens on Tuesdays?

          “That’s your turn in the barrel.”

          The free-speech barrel?

          “Not exactly.”

      2. I disagree. But we’re just friends.

      3. This whole discussion is problematic.

      4. Then where’s Rico’s article about me, huh?

        1. Be more interesting. Or, to put it another way, be less boring.

          1. I could talk endlessly about shitty girly craft beer, but I have dignity.

      5. Hey, Hey, Hey, Hey, Eight, Skate, Seven on the Rotate!
        If I could stand
        Beside myself
        Would I see me or maybe someone else
        ‘Cause it’s hard to please
        Most everyone
        When your spirit’s got you on the run, on the run
        They say do your best
        But don’t cause a fuss
        Don’t make waves be like the rest of us
        But I can feel the tide is turning fast
        ‘Cause deep inside I know that I can’t last
        Another day
        Not another day!
        ‘Cause I’m O.K.
        I finally found the person I’ve been searching for
        I’m alright
        I’m feeling good about myself and that’s for sure
        ‘Cause I believed them when they said I must do things their way,
        They tried to cast me in their mold
        But I just had to say,
        That I’m O.K.
        I’m O.K. this way yes I’m O.K. Yes I’m OK!

      6. I’m not ok,You’r not OK.

  2. “That thing about the ‘sassy black friend’? That wouldn’t work for us.”

    What about that thing about the ‘assholes’?

    1. Iowa is even whiter than Minnesoda and that’s saying something.

      I’m going to cut them some slack because I’m sure that they are having to work from a purely theoretical standpoint because they have never had an opportunity to have a black friend – sassy or not – in real life.

      1. These are the kids that have no HAVE NO FRIENDS.

  3. The college experience has devolved into a retarded farce. Bernie Sanders wants to make college free for everyone.

    Coincidence? I think not.

    1. As do Obama and Hillary Clinton, for some reason.

      1. Well, statistics show that those with college degrees earn more in their lifetimes.

        To politicians, who can’t seem to differentiate correlation and causation, this means that everyone with a college degree automatically gets rich.

  4. Oh, and fuck hat tips.

    1. Robby “shove your hat tip* Soave.

  5. “We love you, Kevin!” a group of kids yelled between numbers. He invited students to the front of the auditorium for a “gay dance party,” and they charged down to take part

    So, a live Barney show?

    1. Oh shit, I should have read further in. They didn’t like this guy? Jesus. When a gay man can’t be gay because it’s triggering… I just…

      I’m gettin’ off the Merry-go-round.

      1. No, Mr Silly, it was bad because a gay man being gay is perpetuating a stereotype. If he was a gay man with a conservative political schtick, then it would have been triggering.

        1. So…I…they just….

          *head melts like Nazis’ at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark*

          1. Gotta keep your eyes closed, bro.

    2. No, no, no.

      Elmo was the one who got caught banging boys.

      1. And Grover was the one with the little girls right?

        “Grover wears no clothes…why does Jamie?”

        1. You’re better at that than Old Man With Candy.

          1. +1 for backhanded compliment.

      2. It’s because of his abuse by Mr. Jeff. He was acting out.

        Don’t ask me how I know.

    3. I like that even when they’re not being humorless scolds they’re still ridiculously childish.

    1. Federal record retention is more important than individual privacy, Mrs. Clinton, especially since you volunteered to host your own email server.

      1. How is it even okay for her to do fedgov business on her own server? Did she have to get a waiver or did she just do it, knowing no one would call her on it?

        1. I think the Obumbles whitehouse called her on it but she just did it anyway.

          1. I think there were several WH and DoS IT staffers who threw up some red flags, to be fair. They were ignored.

            (Of course they SHOULD have then proceeded to report it, as it is “adverse information” [on a huge scale] which anyone with a clearance has an obligation to report)

        2. It’s not.

          If it WERE okay, she’d have had her IT folks pull the audit logs and the NISPOM-equivalent compliance plan(s) for government departments (as opposed to industrial security) for the server throughout the period in question. The fact that this hasn’t happened tells me that it’s overwhelmingly likely that it never was in compliance in the first place and thus many, many data spills have happened and they have been actively covered up.

          1. They’re using the default cert on the firewall and the OWA site is using TLS 1.0 (but not TLS 1.2), a SHA-1 cert, RC4 encryption, and no Forward Secrecy.

        3. “How is it even okay for her to do fedgov business on her own server?”

          Because, I’m Hillary Clinton and I don’t have to follow the rules that apply to the proles. And FYTW. /Clinton 2016

    2. “While I do not know what information may be ‘responsive’ for purposes of this law suit”

      All of it, bitch. Every last email. Hand over the fucking server.

        1. I bet she regrets not producing *500,000* pages.

            1. Hell, if you are going to produce emails solely on paper, just go with Comic Sans.

              1. Wing Dings. Just to put the little people in their place.

                1. And then you print out hard copies and send that over. You don’t give them anything that they can easily search.

  6. These beliefs included, but were in no way limited to, the following: women, as a group, should never be made to feel uncomfortable; people whose sexual orientation falls beyond the spectrum of heterosexuality must be reassured of their special value; racial injustice is best addressed in tones of bitter anguish or inspirational calls to action; Muslims are friendly helpers whom we should cherish; and belonging to any potentially “marginalized” community involves a crippling hypersensitivity that must always be respected.

    Welcome to modern day America??

    1. women, as a group, should never be made to feel uncomfortable

      OTOH, a *specific* woman ….

    2. people whose sexual orientation falls beyond the spectrum of heterosexuality must be reassured of their special value

      Not, like, their intrinsic value as moral, productive exemplars of humanity, but the special value for being such special little people.

      How anyone can stomach the unapologetic patronizing condescension, I don’t understand.

      1. being judged against everyone else in the world would be tough. it’s much better for people’s self esteem to be judged against the smallest group possible, and skin color is a really easy, obvious way to sort people into groups

        1. being judged against everyone else in the world would be tough

          This is why so many people hate capitalism.

          1. Which is infuriating because being a marginal producer in a capitalist society is much more comfortable than being a marginal producer in a feudal or communist country. These idiots actually fantasize about living hand-to-mouth performing backbreaking labor in an agricultural society. That alone should qualify them for intellectual euthanasia.

        2. – “it’s much better for people’s self esteem to be judged against the smallest group possible”

          Well, yeah…unless that smallest-possible-group is you and…say…Buzz Aldrin.

      2. Indeed. Preferring to stick your willy in a guy’s pooper, or vice versa, automatically makes you a more valuable human being for all purposes.

        Duh.

  7. “vindictive protectiveness even harms the very people it is intended to protect?emotionally-fragile students?by teaching them unhealthy avoidance tactics.”

    Travel back in time a whole hour and a half

    “They are young men, uneducated about mature relationships, responsible drinking, and laws relating to consent. They can be taught better behavior?and that, in some sense, should be the university’s mission

    So, its colleges mission to teach ‘better behavior’…. just NOT THE *WRONG* WAY.

    which, naturally, turns out to be every way they try and “teach behavior”.

    Dwell on this paradox while working on your one-handed clapping exercises.

    1. The progressive vision: To build a better man person, and subsequently, build a better society.

      1. We’ll tear you down, have lunch, and if there’s time, build you back up again.

          1. You don’t just become a cop overnight. It takes a full weekend of training.

            1. Like, the whole weekend?

              1. look people may not have changed much in 4000 years or whatever, but this time we’ll get it right

  8. How Trigger Warnings Maker College Students Helpless, Humorless, and Stupid

    I think that is one among a long list of things, like for instance, being intellectually naive and credulous, taking themselves too seriously, etc.

    1. I think “stupid” covers all that.

  9. The Lukianoff/Haidt article is sooooo worth it. It’s really, really fascinating stuff.

  10. Controlling speech gives them such a rush. WHO ARE YOU PEOPLE TO DENY?

  11. How about a blanket trigger warning? Say, “The slightest shock may kill you”?

    1. there should be a road sign every hundred feet warning you you might have to slow down ahead

  12. I posed this question in the Trump thread – what if someone went through 4 years of college and refused to speak to anyone, about anything? Would they then be prosecuted by the college’s kangaroo court for being offensive by literally not saying anything?

    1. what if someone went through 4 years of college and refused to speak to anyone

      Ima go out on a limb and suggest that this has happened at least once.

      1. I think that guy lived on my hall.

        1. Don S – we called him “Tron”. Cause he was THAT weird.

    2. If you refuse to engage in social politics, you are literally denying social issues exist. Because mere tolerance is not an option.

    3. Re: Kristen Bids No Trump,

      what if someone went through 4 years of college and refused to speak to anyone, about anything?

      Refusal to participate would be taken as a sign of hostility and aggression against the group. You will be remanded to a reeducation camp where you will learn to integrate better with the group and abide by its needs and wants.

      1. Wait… Since you’re already in college, then… you’re already in a reeducation camp.

        1. THE OTHERING IS COMING FROM INSIDE THE DORM!!!

      2. That’s what I’m sayin’. You’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t. You can’t speak for fear of anything you say causing some pussy irreparable psychological damage, and my guess would be if you literally don’t say a word, you’d be brought up on charges of being a racist and probably some kind of rapist, too.

        1. Resistance is futile. We will add your technological and biological distinctiveness to our own.

          1. *slaps Bernie 2016 sticker over the apple logo on the laptop*

        2. I think that’s the idea: if all members of *insert perpetrator group* are successfully convinced that they have sinned egregiously, then they are owned. You can use their guilt to make them do whatever you want, in order for them to atone.

          That’s what the whole victimhood cult is about, imo. It’s about creating a ‘moral debt;’ convincing some people that they have wronged you, and therefore owe you special treatment, money, a job, a vote, whatever.

          But, they can’t just come out and say ‘by virtue of being white/make/whatever, you are guilty of original sin and must atone to use ‘ethnic minorities/women/whatever.’ That degree of collectivism isn’t quite broadly accepted. So, they make rules that contradict each other, guaranteeing that everyone breaks the rules, thereby giving the enforcers the discretion to punish whoever they want. “Problem” solved.

      3. you will learn to integrate better with the group and abide by its needs and wants

        “Fuck the needs of the many.”

        ~ Mirror Spock

    4. As an introvert people would comment on my not being verbose. I would guess yes as you are not participating in the collective project.

      1. Not being verbose is far different than literally saying nothing to anyone, ever, for 4 years.

        Being an introvert myself, I’d be willing to sig up as a guinea pig for such an experiment if I were college-aged. As long as my legal fees were paid by whoever sponsored the experiment, because we all know anyone engaging in such behavior would be subject to campus courts at best, and DHS secret court terrorist prosecution at worst.

        1. Im contemplating going back to college, stirring up a bunch of shit, and then suing that college for every fucking penny of its endowment.

  13. A young gay man with a Broadway background named Kevin Yee

    and a non-Broadway background named Winston Porter.

  14. I dunno, I’m having second thoughts. I say we give the kids what they want. Then we roll them in the parking lot when they graduate from college. Imagine how easy that’ll be.

    1. “Hey, kid… ‘Sexual dimorphism.'”

      “DON’T HURT ME PLEASE DON’T HURT ME.”

    2. “I’m the Federal Wallet Inspector”

  15. Here’s one “cognitive behavioral therapy is culturally insensitive and racist!!” (I’m pretty sure I heard a similar quote about the importance of STEM recently)

    1. (this comment seems like a non-sequitur. The Lukianoff/Haidt article recommends teaching students how to engage in cognitive behavioral therapy.)

      1. Great comment and I find it interesting that the VA is putting more resources into teaching veterans about CBT/REBT. Can’t argue with results (although I guess you can argue with them if you’re an idiot)

        For anyone else interested, I’d like to recommend as a good starting point the book A New Guide to Rational Living by Albert Ellis.

  16. Related: Want to gaze into the cold black heart of modern left-wing authoritarianism? Here’s a New York Magazine article saying it’s a moral imperative that men should stop working to decrease the wage gap.

    There’s just one hitch: What if the only people who took advantage of an unlimited leave policy were women? What if those women were mommy-tracked away from the most intense, remunerative parts of a business, toward more marginal, lower-paying positions? The truth is that this already happens in many businesses. Unlimited does not mean “consequence-free,” after all.

    No, for more generous parental-leave policies to really tackle the broader problem of women seeing their paychecks shrink and careers derailed by having a child during their peak earning years, norms need to change, too. Men do not just need more generous paternity policies. They need to use them. It needs to become normal for men to take weeks or months off, and to require more flexible schedules to accommodate their new family member’s needs when they return.

    They then discuss how we could use policy to manipulate men into not working, even if they want to. Note: This would not result in women making more money, it would result in men making less. So they’re actively arguing that making men poorer in order to lower the wage gap is a good thing because equality.

    1. Y’know, if we handed children over to the government as God intended, this wouldn’t be an issue.

    2. What the fuck is wrong with these people?

      1. My favorite part is that they coerce people into doing things they otherwise wouldn’t want to do, and then say that it’s totally okay because they’re not forcing anyone to do anything.

        So they purposefully use the law to manipulate men into working less and then say ‘well, you still have the choice to work as much as you want, we’re just kind of changing incentives to make it more likely you’ll choose not to work!’

        It’s an incredibly authoritarian worldview where when they think something would be nice, they’re allowed to use the law to manipulate everyone else into doing what they want.

      2. How statistically parents actually choose to live their lives is screwing up all their grand social theories on how to make the world a better place. Real people behave as if there are differences between men.and women, this is unacceptable.

    3. So they’re actively arguing that making men poorer in order to lower the wage gap is a good thing because equality.

      Margaret Thatcher explained that very thing 25 years ago here.

    4. I read here recently that France requires Uber drivers to wait 15 minutes before embarking to pick up clients.

      1. If that’s actually the case, we have a living, breathing (and French) demonstration of Bastiat’s Negative Railroad (stage 1).

        1. So you’re, like, going Marianas Trench-deep on our asses, right?

      2. So as not to make cab drivers look bad?

    5. Related: Want to gaze into the cold black heart of modern left-wing authoritarianism? Here’s a New York Magazine article saying it’s a moral imperative that men should stop working to decrease the wage gap.

      I agree. When the bitches gon’ start gettin’ me my money?

      1. Call me Pimp Daddy from now on.

    6. Warty suggested to me the other day that this sort of reactionary attitude towards the arguments of “New York Liberals” might make one a de-facto TEAM RED MOUTHBREATHER

      He didn’t at the time point me to any examples of incredibly wise and insightful things that New York liberals actually say or do. Just that… jeez man, come on, what are you like Republican or something? I’m sure they make some decent points sometime. Like, during the Bush Administration, maybe. Or in regards to diet advice.

    7. It needs to become normal for men to take weeks or months off

      cuz that’s what bitches love? oh.

    8. Unlimited does not mean “consequence-free,” after all.

      Man, the way these people sidle right up to the edge of sanity, and then run screaming . . . .

    9. I see the requisite ‘look at Scandy-navia’ angle was used.

      These people are quite insane; and ignorant.

      The idea is akin to trying to remove oil from water.

    10. That’s not all that new – that’s John Rawl’s Theory of Justice, 1971. A more equal society is a more just society – even if the members of that society actually prefer inequality. A society where everybody makes $20,000 per year is superior to one where 80% of the people make $50,000 per year and 20% make $100,000 per year. Seriously, the guy actually wrote an entire serious book that’s seriously taken seriously that equality in poverty is preferable to inequality in wealth. (And it’s actually hard to argue with him that many if not most people do indeed prefer that. But we are generally taught that when you have one cow and your neighbor has eight praying to God that, if He can’t send you seven more cows, at least send some wolves to kill off seven of your neighbor’s cows is a perfectly natural thought but one we should strive to rise above. It’s not considered a morally good thing to wish to see others brought low if you cannot be raised up even if such a thought is perfectly normal.)

      1. +1 ultimatum game

      2. With no disrespect meant to Jerry’s actual kids: “Look at us, we’re walking/look at us, we’re talking…”

        Isn’t it a tragedy that some people struggle to talk, and others like Rawls who had nothing to say wouldn’t shut up? At least, until 2002.

      3. But we are generally taught that when you have one cow and your neighbor has eight praying to God that, if He can’t send you seven more cows, at least send some wolves to kill off seven of your neighbor’s cows is a perfectly natural thought

        This is not a ‘perffectly natural’ thought. We should not be taught that such hateful envy is correct.

        This is pathological.. The fact that I had to corpse fuck the thread to call you out on it shows how deep the rot goes.

        The quiet intrusion of Marxist thought into every aspect of life has made this hideously envious thought ‘normal’.

    11. So they’re actively arguing that making men poorer in order to lower the wage gap is a good thing because equality.

      If you make the pie small enough, eventually everyone’s share of it will be equal.

    12. Maybe women should start killing themselves in order to reduce the life expectancy gap?

      Oh right, forgot: according to the UN, the longer women live relative to men, the *more* ‘equal’ that country is. Which I guess means men should kill themselves to increase the life expectancy gap in women’s favor, thereby making society infinitely more ‘equal’?

      This is what progs call math.

      May I add, btw, that I begin to think these people may just be even more retarded than young earth creationists?

  17. I find the serial avoidance of alt-text triggering.

  18. “a comic had to be at once funny?genuinely funny?and also deeply respectful of a particular set of beliefs. These beliefs included, but were in no way limited to, the following: women, as a group, should never be made to feel uncomfortable; people whose sexual orientation falls beyond the spectrum of heterosexuality must be reassured of their special value; racial injustice is best addressed in tones of bitter anguish or inspirational calls to action; Muslims are friendly helpers whom we should cherish; and belonging to any potentially “marginalized” community involves a crippling hypersensitivity that must always be respected.”

    Much of this is simply a reactive form of hatred for Christian fundamentalists.

    I suspect a comedian who built an act around ridiculing fundamentalist Christianity–especially if Christianity were juxtaposed against female empowerment, tolerance of LGBT, and the friendly helpfulness of Muslims–would be a big hit with the Intercollegiate Comedic Tolerance Committee.

    Making fun of Christianity as the center of your act has been done before, too, perhaps most famously and best by Sam Kineson, who was once a Pentecostal preacher.

    http://tinyurl.com/og8s53t

    Give the people what they want.

    1. Did you read the paragraph prior to the one you quoted? They also rejected a gay Asian who talked about race and gender in an innocuous, poorly-written sit-comy way. Basically these people are against humor in all its forms.

      1. They don’t even object to racial discrimination so long as the victims are white Christian fundamentalists.

    2. Beating the shit out of SJW punk dbag college kids is true comedy. Or at least a legitimate form of performance art.

  19. Also related: Tory mayor of Toronto wants to make absolutely sure that you know he disapproves of Roosh V. being allowed to give a talk in the city.

    “I am calling on those hosting this tour to do the right thing ? cancel this show,” Tory tweeted Monday. In another tweet, Tory said “@rooshv and his hate speech have no place in our city and should have no platform here either.”

    And of course this is backfiring horribly because Roosh V. can now play the victim card against the evil feminazis. Or, as Roosh V. puts it:

    “Hardened from battle in Montreal, we come to Toronto as righteous victors,” he tweeted. “We won’t stand down, we won’t apologize.”

    God. I hate everyone in this story so much.

    1. Ok, social signal: received.

      1. You just signaled. Right. There.

        1. Is it signaling all the way up?

          1. I can’t answer you without signaling.

            1. Just throw Schroedinger’s Cat in a bag, and I’ll promise to not look in it.

    2. Who the fuck is Roosh V.? (yes, yes, I’m going to Google it now)

      1. Oh.

        1. Do tell, ’cause I ain’t googlin’ it.

          1. One of those fucking pick-up-artist douchebags.

      2. Google me while you’re at it. I need the hits.

    3. Clearly the bitch organizing the protest against thei Roosh person is merely signaling her need for a deep dicking from him.

  20. O, Utopia. Why must your sweet governance always turn so quickly from the Edenic to the Stalinist? The college revolutions of the 1960s?the ones that gave rise to the social-justice warriors of today’s campuses?were fueled by free speech. But once you’ve won a culture war, free speech is a nuisance, and “eliminating” language becomes a necessity.

    What will happen when the college revolutions today’s students push for come to fruition years from now?

    1. By then we’ll just be brains in a jar…

      1. contained liberation of identity?

        So crazy it just might work!

      2. I STILL WON’T HAVE BODY ISSUES.

      3. Or maybe a head in a jar. We need the body less head of Nixon and the headless body of Agnew running things.

    2. “The college revolutions of the 1960s?the ones that gave rise to the social-justice warriors of today’s campuses?were fueled by free speech.”

      They never had any loyalty to the idea of free speech, except as a means to the end of total power.

      1. They did back then.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Speech_Movement

        They changed.

        There really used to be honest liberals.

        When they converted to progressivism, the honest part went out the window.

        1. Man, that’s just like, so groovy. It’s beautiful, really.

          *turns back to finish watching “Woodstock” again*

        2. You can say whatever you want in Berkeley, as long as you’re standing on this tiny circle.

        3. I think they did a little too much LDS.

          1. It always comes down to the Mormons, doesn’t it?

    3. The revolutionary foot soldiers will fill a lot of graves.

      As is traditional for useful idiots.

    4. As one of the great thinkers said:

      “Isn’t it ironic, dontcha think? A little too ironic, I really do think.”

    1. Honestly, at this point, I can’t imagine this being news to anyone. The Clintons exist on an entirely different plane of political reality and are judged by the masses on a different set of criteria. Hell, even Trump admitted during the debate he bought them and no one gave a fuck.

    2. “…donations…came from another super political action committee, called Fair Share Action. Its two lone contributors are Fair Share Inc. and Environment America Inc., according to records…”

      Do we really need to know anything more than this?

    3. Isn’t that, um, illegal? Do they have to at least report the sources of their donations? I would think at least for a reliable tax return, right?

      “Tell us again, Mrs. Clinton, about your opinion on Citizens United?”

  21. Topic EPA spill that EPA was trying to clean up because it was toxic but claimed it wasn’t toxic after the EPA spilled it, is apparently toxic:

    http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/10/…..index.html

    1. If the EPA was an oil company this would be a major disaster warranting 24 hour coverage with helicopter footage of the spill followed by numerous lawsuits stretching over 10-20 years.

      Instead, CNN pretty much takes the EPA’s word for it that everything will be fine.

      1. You have to pass the toxic waste to find out what’s in it.

        1. I passed some toxic waste this morning.

          1. Curse you Taco Bell!

          2. +1 Sriracha Helper

      2. Exactly this. They’d have 24×7 interviews with locals hurt by the spill, congressional hearings, senate investigations. This is fucking proof that almost everything you see in the news is just fucking theater.

        1. Yes. And they wouldn’t just believe whatever local officals says about the health effects.

          There would be some Erin Brockovish chick running around screaming about radiation and birth defects, scientifically warranted or not.

    2. Aw’ cmon, the EPA isn’t at fault. They made an honest mistake because they’re underfunded.

      The EPA did fuck up, but it’s not their fault, they have only so many resources. Odds are if they had more funding they would’ve called in more resources to look over this mess and it would’ve been determined that the top mine was really in a bad state, and they needed to do more to fix it than what we’ve seen.

      In that vein I appreciate that the EPA is taking responsibility, but I don’t blame them completely. They did with the resources they had at their disposal the most they could do. If anything the takeaway should be to give the EPA more funding. They underestimated 3 times over. A few more tens of thousands of dollars of research may have prevented it.

      1. A private contractor probably wouldn’t have made this mistake for fear of being sued.

        If the odds of an accident were high, a private insurer probably wouldn’t have insured this project.

        The people who make these decisions at the EPA don’t have to worry about being sued or insurance–which is an excellent reason why they shouldn’t be making decisions like this that put other people’s property at risk.

        1. Exactly. There will be no firings, no reorganization, no blame assigned.

          A few “no one could possibly have predicted this” and “process and procedure reviews” and they will continue on their business.

          1. Hell, they will be rewarded. They are already fishing for more money, and you’ll know they’re going to get it.

            So, do everything right, funding stays flat.

            Fuck up everything in sight, get more money.

            And people wonder why government fucks up everything in sight. Its literally what they get paid for.

            1. this is a very good point

      2. Oh, the poor, poor, EPA.
        I wonder if this excuse would work for a for-profit mining company.

        “it’s not our fault! We were losing money and had to cut costs.”

      3. I don’t know much about DU. Is that where progressives try to out-retard each other?

        1. I think it was the worst of the internet 10 years ago, but there are so many more choices these days.

        2. Yes. And they all win, which means they all lose.

        3. ,iIs that where progressives try to out-retard each other?

          Yes, and they vote.

          1. Yes, and they vote.

            Several times each, I’m sure.

        4. Pretty much. It’s Sanders Central these days.

        5. I figured they called it “DemocraticUnderground” because that’s where all the shit flows.

  22. Another OT: Wendy’s talks minimum wage & automation

    (lots of good libertarian red meat in the media today)

    1. You are such a racist.

      I can’t believe the government lets people like you speak.

      1. I know. I’m almost the worst.

        1. DON’T TALK ABOUT… wait, is that the right line?

    2. Strangely none of it is making it into the boring Reason articles.

      Lately all Reasons talks about is police abuse, the war on drugs, and campus rape.
      Every once in a while Suderman posts something about Obama care, or Bailey has something to say about GMOs.

      1. Reason has kind of been off the economics track for a while. Honestly, I am disappoint.

          1. I’ve lost track of how many times I’ve canceled.

        1. It seems like the economics articles are less likely to lead to in-fighting. It’s almost like they prefer when the comments sections blow up. Maybe the emotional stuff is better for SEO or something.

          1. That’s so Tulpa can view all the ads everyone else blocks.

            1. *scoots chair back, stands slowly, begins to applaud vigorously*

        2. *teh disappoint.

          You’re welcome 😉

        3. I just read econlog now, and Greg Mankiw’s blog,though he doesn’t blog much. Probably because unlike Krugman, Mankiw is actually an economist and has work and research to do.

      2. And minimum wage is an easy topic for a broad spectrum of people to digest. I don’t get most of the arcane talk of currencies and devaluations and pork belly futures, but minimum wage can be easily popularized, even for my feeble brain.

        1. What about orange juice futures?

        2. The problem is it’s easily and routinely popularized the opposite direction, and it’s even easier and less cerebrally taxing than our way.

      3. don’t forget Trump!

        /cuckservative
        /or someone who says cuckservative, I don’t even know anymore

    3. Do you have one that isn’t behind a sign-in screen?

      1. I wasn’t asked to register to read that.

        1. Female privilege. I have to buy my own drinks.

      2. Go to google, search “wendy’s minimum wage backfires”, click on the WSJ link from Google… there is no paywall when coming in from Google.

  23. lucrative college circuit

    Another reason to attend college in a real city. Small towns limit your dating and comedian options.

    1. So THAT’S why we always got Yakov Smirnoff….

    2. a real city

      What do you call a ‘real’ city?

      1. Kolkata. Or Shanghai. Neo-Tokyo, maybe.

        1. Sao Paulo. As I said a couple of days ago, there are cities that take shits bigger than New York.

          1. Mexico City. Cairo. Lagos. Kuala Lumpur.

          2. I just looked it up. The US isn’t even in the top ten. Try harder, progressives.

      2. What do you call a ‘real’ city?

        E.g. Buffalo was a real city. No shortages in the dating or entertainment departments.

        1. Or: if your town has more college students than non-college students, it’s not a real city. It’s a college town; and best avoided.

          1. Thanks Rhywun, it is always interesting to find out what other people think.

  24. I assume that attending these shows is mandatory and that’s why the performers have to be vetted, right? I mean, everyone is forced to attend and no one can walk out if they don’t like what they are hearing. Because that’s the only situation in which this even comes close to making any sense.

    1. They want to have the Right Sort of comedian rather than the Most Common Sort.

  25. From the Lukianoff/ Haidt article:

    What exactly are students learning when they spend four years or more in a community that polices unintentional slights, places warning labels on works of classic literature, and in many other ways conveys the sense that words can be forms of violence that require strict control by campus authorities, who are expected to act as both protectors and prosecutors?

    To be unthinking fascist shitheels.

  26. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8596 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…
    http://www.jobnet10.com

    1. YOU’RE NOT FUNNY GET OFF THE STAGE

      1. BUT ENOUGH ABOUT TRUMP! AMIRITE?! I’ll be here all weak! Too bad for you!

        1. get it – “all weak” – HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

          1. A single tear rolls down Belinda Carlisle’s cheek Ironeyes style.

      2. Wouldn’t that make him/her/it a shoo-in for Friday Funnies?

        1. I wonder what that pays?

    2. fuck you, carity567, and your othering ways.

      1. You would think that they’d have a filter by now.

      2. Show some respect, DAMMIT!!! Carity567 is trying to SHARE with us!

  27. How Trigger Warnings Maker College Students have consciously decided to be Helpless, Humorless, and Stupid

    fixed – you’re welcome, Rico

    PS You misspelled “Make” – that’s on you to fix

  28. “Vindictive protectiveness” – what an awesome phrase! Nurse Ratched armed with the sword of sedation and the shield of “for your own good”. How fucking great is it that you get to indulge your sick sadistic fantasies on helpless victims, and people will applaud you for your noble selflessness?

  29. “Take my speech… please.”

  30. Progressives (in general and the ones that peddle this “micro-aggression” and “trigger-warning” nonsense) are, basically, petulant toddlers that lack emotional governance and want to be coddled/sheltered their whole lives rather than joining the adults in the real world.

  31. ERMAHGERD! Have you all seen the Jeannine Garafalo meme going around?

    LOL.

    1. For progressives who outsource their violence as a central philosophical tenet, this almost isn’t a contradiction.

      1. ?

        there were, like, a jillion other awesome ones on that page.

        1. Yeah, I saw them, but I thought the big one about guns was the best one.

          1. I got a different one.

            Btw, here’s a fun app called ‘the virtual academic’. It does, well, exactly what academics usually do:

            http://writing-program.uchicag…..msentence/

  32. OT: Plumbed from the depths of Derpbook and submitted for your enjoyment, witness the spectacular left wing implosion currently underway.

    Fuck that racist ass Bernie Sanders motherfucker! I’ma burn this shit to the ground!!!

    Bernie’s not racists! The black lady that interrupted him is the real racist!

    1. Seattle Times doing front-page hand-wringing for the last two days.

      White progressives have been accused of being racist– an impossible-to-defend charge usually leveled at icky Republicans.

      It’s good times.

      1. I wonder if they’ll actually learn anything from this? A lot of people just go along because they want to be considered non-racists. Once accused, though, there is really nothing you can do to get back inside the non-racist category. Some people will go along the self-flagellation route and consider themselves terrible people, but most people don’t think they are a bad person. I see them either redefining ‘racist’ once again so it can’t include themselves (like the whole black people can’t be racist meme in academia) or considering the charge meaningless in the future.

        How do ya’ll think this will go?

        1. How do ya’ll think this will go?

          The same way it always has… white progressives will quadruple down on their policies to make sure their intentions are properly signaled. Bernie’s doin’ right though:

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..cbf1e54fec

          1. That gets Bernie off the hook, but his supporters have been pissed about the protests at his rallies. The namecalling has gotten pretty bad between the two factions in comments and on facebook.

            1. Can’t imagine all those dumb socialists are happy about job-stealin’ Mexicans showing up to protest Bernie. Race war between white socialists and, um, other socialists!

    2. Some snippets:

      ? In the Seattle Globalist, writer Ijeoma Oluo argues that angry social-media reaction to the protests reveals “the hidden Seattle that most black people know well ? the Seattle that prefers politeness to true progress, the Seattle that is more offended by raised voices than by systemic oppression, the Seattle that prioritizes the comfort of middle-class white liberals over justice for people of color.”

      ? In a blog published by The Stranger, State Senator Pramila Jayapal writes that “watching what unfolded” with the Black Lives Matter protest made her “heartbroken.” She said the disappointed “crowd (mostly white) turned ugly.” Important issues like Social Security and Medicare were “eclipsed by what happened.”

      ? Connor Friedersdorf, who writes for The Atlantic, argues interrupting the senator was “a self-inflicted blow to Black Lives Matter” movement.

      Friedersdorf writes that many of Sanders’ views align closer to the movement than Sanders’ challenger Hillary Clinton. A less alienating approach, where the activists sought Sanders as an ally, could have worked:

      1. the Seattle that prefers politeness to true progress, the Seattle that is more offended by raised voices than by systemic oppression, the Seattle that prioritizes the comfort of middle-class white liberals over justice for people of color.

        So… Seattle is Minnesota?

  33. Not understanding what comedy is, or the purpose of it, is the very definition of stupidity.

    1. I don’t get…HEY! WAIT A MINUTE!

  34. The new protectiveness may be teaching students to think pathologically.

    But hey, it’s necessary to create the New Soviet Man and the glorious Communist future an improved future society free of racism, sexism, homophobia, and all other forms of oppression.

  35. Jon Stewart: Goodbye to the Last Honest Newsman

    America will miss Jon Stewart. But it’s fair to say we miss him already, because his America is gone. The political climate ? angrier, more bitter, more violently divided ? is radically different from the one he signed up to make fun of. Political satire, as Stewart defined it on The Daily Show, requires him to appear equally tough on the left and the right. But that means he has to pretend there’s such a thing as a moderate center.

    *puke*

    1. It’ll be an uglier world without Stewart ? but then, that’s the main reason he’s bailing: It’s an uglier world already. So you have to suspect Stewart doesn’t care all that deeply whether The Daily Show can carry on without him. It looks like he’s more worried about whether America can carry on at all.

      *retch… hurl*

      1. Progressivism really does lend itself to mindless hero worship.

        I can’t imagine writing something like that about anyone. If I tried to write an obituary for my dad that was that sappy, he’d reach up from hell and bitch slap me.

        1. The superficial Jon Stewart-worship in the media I think reflects a deeper, more-complex real concern for the future of the progressive Left

          The millenials take great comfort in the apparent unanimity of their own political attitudes being reflected back at them by the media they consume. “This is real common-sense” they think.

          But there’s an underlying discomfort with the realization that there’s little to nothing *beyond that* in the wider reality. That the progressive view is in fact, very narrow, shallow, and not widely shared, and that they don’t actually have any political leadership waiting in the wings

          Obama gave everyone such a sugar-high from the Great Social Accomplishment of “electing a black guy”… that it took some time to realize…. uh, Warren aint running, Sanders is like….an old-school Socialist….Hillary is like, more-corporate and Hawkish than most Republicans….wait a second… Stewart is LEAVING??

          There is no “second act”. There’s no convenient transition to the even-better progressive future. Obamacare actually sucks, Green Energy is a boondoggle, and we’re actually still at war in Iraq.

          The moaning about Stewart echoes their fear that their best moment already passed.

      2. It’ll be an uglier world without Stewart

        A world that does not instantly and blithely affirm all my preconceptions about the world.

      3. It’s Jon Stewart’s world, we’re just livin’ in it.

      4. So now the leftists are doing the whole “America might not survive another 5 minutes unless we get everything we want” song and dance? In addition to the ‘weren’t things wonderful back in the ’50s’ one?

        It’s as though self-contradiction were a virtue.

    2. The political climate ? angrier, more bitter, more violently divided ? is radically different from the one he signed up to make fun of.

      Hilarious.

      1. Yeah, there clearly weren’t any angry and bitter political fights occurring very shortly after Stewart signed up for that position.

        I certainly can’t think of any.

        1. These articles are clearly written by people whose political memory goes back maybe five years.

        2. You mean, you think that, after a writer writes a sentence, they should, like, show evidence that it’s true? What fucking planet are you from?

    3. It’s Rolling Stone. Barfing will help purge the derp.

      The vomit must flow.

    4. Jon Stewart: Goodbye to the Last Honest Newsman

      *puke*

      He’s neither honest nor a newsman!

      He’s not dodging sniper fire to get the facts or crash-landing in helicopters brought down by RPG to bring you the latest from the front line. He waits for events to happen and then makes fun of them. If accuracy or honesty have to be rounded off for comedic effect, so be it.

      *If* he does news, he is the proverbial vulture, or hack. He is, and this is giving him a lot of credit, The Onion read aloud.

    5. RS is very lame. Very.

      /flashes ‘L’ on forehead.

    6. Jon Stewart: Goodbye to the Last Honest Newsman

      right down to his made up last name to not sound too jewy to his tolerant audience.

      1. * golf clap *

  36. Tell me:

    Is there any sentence that would have its meaning materially changed if you substituted “narrow-minded” for “progressive”?*

    *Where progressive is used as an adjective, not a noun.

  37. So what does H&R think about that guy at the gym who sweats maybe a little too much? I’m asking for a friend…

      1. I always clean… I mean, my friend always cleans up the machine after I’m done. But I also tend to leave small puddles underneath.

        1. Long time ago a buddy’s girl got the nickname Sweatbox. Maybe you’d want to wipe the seat before you sat at the machine or maybe lick it. Up to you.

        2. Are you talking about cardio or weights?

          If you’re getting puddles of sweat from 3 sets of 10, you’re doing it wrong.

          If you’re getting puddles of sweat from an hour on the treadmill, just spray it with the disinfectant and wipe the machine down with paper towels. You’re no different than anybody else in that regard. The person who doesn’t have at least some sweat on the machine by the end of the workout is a person wasting their time.

          1. No excretion no accretion?

          2. Nah, cycling. I don’t even lift, bro 🙁

            1. Have you tried doing squirts?

  38. “Vindictive protectiveness”

    It’s the usual modus operandi of the Progressive Theocracy – rationalizing their lust for power with claims that they’re protecting the downtrodden.

    1. It’s the usual modus operandi of the Progressive Theocracy – rationalizing their lust for power with claims that they’re protecting the downtrodden…while simultaneously stomping the downtrodden into the ground.

  39. BTW: For those keeping score at home, this is that time of day known as The Great Reason Siesta.

    1. Did you people think there would be no consequences so Woodergate? Is that what you thought?

      1. Get Reason posts faster with this one weird trick!

        1. I tried the one weird trick, but now my dick won’t come out of the DVD drive!

    2. shhhhhhh.

      1. Goddammit people! This coke ain’t gonna snort itself!

        1. Let’s call brother Bill. He’s got a nose like a vacuum cleaner.

  40. Marty Robbins has got to be one of the worst lip-syncers ever.

  41. Illustration of the “no good cops” idea – the “good” cops protect and/or ignore the bad ones, making them all bad.

    1. Baltimore Police are notorious for their ruthlessness and intimidation, but one officer stepped over the line

      Because normal ruthlessness and intimidation are tolerated.

    2. conservative ? 3 hours ago
      he should have shot at them. punks and thugs

      Goddammit.

      riker tower ? 15 hours ago
      if someone was throwing glass bottles at me I would pull a gun on them too.

      Goddammit.

  42. I posted on this in my blog, with the post “Liberal Professor Fears Liberal Students”. A ridiculously fragile student complained about a “pornographic” picture I drew in class. I link to the pic there, though I assure the pic is SFW.

  43. Bruce Campbell came to my college for a stand up act one time, about 10 years ago now. He came out on stage marching and waving our state flag while yelling at us that there was a naked boobie on it, and it only got better from there. I can only imagine the horrific triggers all of the kids would feel today listening to his utterly hilarious routine.

    1. Humor isn’t funny!

    2. College is no laughing matter.

  44. How Trigger Warnings Maker College Students Helpless, Humorless, and Stupid

    I wouldn’t have noticed this embarrassing headline typo if you lazy bastards would post something new.

    Welch needs to come back from his European vacation and kick some ass. This never happened when Postrel was running things.

    1. Hello! We’re still in the eye of the Great Reason Siesta!

      1. I’m a Siesta denier, so shove it progtardo!

    2. Ugh. I’ll see myself out now.

    3. Things sucked when Postrel was in charge.

  45. I say we send all of these people that can’t handle challenging ideas to Salusa Secundus. There we will breed a new kind of human.

  46. I predict that in 10-15 years, millennials will have a staggeringly high suicide rate. The coping mechanism of last resort is more quickly arrived at if there are no others in your repertoire to try.

    1. So, you’re saying we should invest in rope.

  47. College students today = Eloi

    1. You know I like? Technology, bacon, and avoiding sunlight. I don’t hunt, but I’ve wanted to learn. This might just work out.

      1. *what I like

  48. The purpose of liberal education today is to create parrots and sheep, the better to ensure liberal political domination in the future. The less students think, the more they simply regurgitate what their liberal instructors have “taught” them. And that’s exactly the way liberals want it to be.

  49. Actually the problem of brain dead collage students is caused by the progressive’s running said schools……Remove them and their destructive policies and the ship will right it self

  50. This is the modern reincarnation of the Hayes (?) codes that would require editing out anything offensive. Gone with the Wind’s penultimate Damn made the cut only after great effort.
    In the roaring ’20s, movie producers went to jail when theynshowed too many pants falling down to expose underwear (glimpse of stocking would be considered shocking).

    Now we have a new form.

    Personally I find a lot of thing offensive, but all pale in comparison to censorship. (In public where it can’t be avoided is different).

  51. This is the modern reincarnation of the Hayes (?) codes that would require editing out anything offensive. Gone with the Wind’s penultimate Damn made the cut only after great effort.
    In the roaring ’20s, movie producers went to jail when theynshowed too many pants falling down to expose underwear (glimpse of stocking would be considered shocking).

    Now we have a new form.

    Personally I find a lot of thing offensive, but all pale in comparison to censorship. (In public where it can’t be avoided is different).

  52. Can we just start composting these dumb kids? Or turn them into something like ‘Soylent Dipshit’?

    1. “Mechanically separated Millenials”

    2. Pretty sure plans are already in making to do exactly that with you old geezers.

    3. I’ll get the woodchipper.

  53. */sac By all means, make sure our thirteenth-graders never grow up. Mommy knows best. */sac

    I work in an advanced research laboratory associated with a major institution. Every summer, many undergrads and some grad students come to intern here at the Laboratory.
    Many of these young men and women look like deer caught in the headlights at their first real taste of the working world, abet tempered, we are still part of academia, so it’s not baptism by fire. At the same time they are expected to be productive and professional (no crying over minutia) Not everyone makes it, those that don’t are simply not invited back. Hopefully the ones that did, grew a little, leaned a thing or two and made the best of their experiences here.
    At some point, school is out and the real work of life begins, the next 50 some-odd years of it.
    Put on your alligator skin, find your inner lion, because at some point you are going to need it.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.