Campus Free Speech

Emory Students Want Professors Evaluated on Number of Microaggressions They Commit

Students say microaggressions are 'racist actions' and should be punished.

|

If Emory University students got their way, end-of-semester course evaluations would ask them to indicate whether their professors had committed "microaggressions" against them.

The explicit goal of such a question on evaluations would be to punish professors who engaged in speech that offended students. According to student-protesters, as reported by The Emory Wheel:

We demand that the faculty evaluations that each student is required to complete for each of their professors include at least two open-ended questions such as: "Has this professor made any microaggressions towards you on account of your race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, language, and/or other identity?" and "Do you think that this professor fits into the vision of Emory University being a community of care for individuals of all racial, gender, ability, and class identities?" These questions on the faculty evaluations would help to ensure that there are repercussions or sanctions for racist actions performed by professors. We demand that these questions be added to the faculty evaluations by the end of this semester, Fall 2015.

Students certainly have the right to denounce racism in the classroom, but not all microaggressions equate to "racist actions." Indeed, there's no standard for what counts as a microaggression—they are, by their very nature, vague, subjective, and inconsequential. As Reason has previously reported, uttering phrases like where are you from? and America is the greatest country in the world is considered microaggression by certain university administrations. If a professor made one of these statements in class, would we really want his transgression recorded as "racist action" on an offended student's course evaluation?

As the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education's Catherine Sevcenko wrote:

Note that a microaggression can be unintentional. So these students are proposing that faculty members be penalized for any comment made sometime during the semester that the professor didn't even know was problematic when it was uttered. Furthermore, professors would be subject to the subjective assessment of each student as to what constitutes a microaggression—something even students themselves don't agree on. University-level teaching would simply be impossible under such conditions.

Meanwhile, the faculty at Occidental College are considering a motion that would create a mechanism for students to report professors who commit microaggressions to the administration. If professors have to worry about being investigated by bureaucrats for the crime of saying the wrong thing, the result will be a meaningful reduction in the practical amount of academic freedom on campus. This is not a wise path for any institution that actually values free expression.

NEXT: Dear GOP: Dump Trump

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. YESSSS! KILL YOURSELVES YOU USELESS IVORY TOWER PARASITES!!!

    /whipes spittle off of lips.

    1. Did I say that out loud!

      I apologize! It wasn’t me.

      I think someone hacked my reason account!

      1. “This was a prank intended to derail me or distract me, whatever it is. It is not a federal case. Now maybe it will turn out, maybe it will turn out, forgive me, maybe it will turn out that this is the point of Al Qaeda’s sword and that this is the effort that is going to, this is where it’s going to begin…”

        1. I’d like to congratulate Huma Abedin’s husband for his command of rhetoric and the rules of good grammar.

          1. Also, basic logic: “the point of Al Qaeda’s sword” would very much make it a federal case.

            1. You do realize that ISIS didn’t really take off until Anthony Weiner’s career collapsed?

              Shit was real, yo.

              1. The marriage of a white Westerner like Weiner to a Muslim woman like Abedin represented a meshing of worlds, and when Anthony betrayed Huma he betrayed the Islamic world.

                Or something.

  2. What do you win if you commit the most microaggresions?

    1. A bonus poopstika?

      1. Autographed by Shitler himself!

    2. A session with the Emory Board, and you’d best believe *that’s* a paddlin’!

    3. If I were a professor, I would wear each complaint as a badge of honor… right up until they dragged me out for being a cis-hetero-male and having waaaay too much privilege.

  3. as reported by The Emory Wheel:

    Wow, I was just joking. Robby does spend the weekend reading the Campus circulars. Do those just show up in your email or what?

  4. Students certainly have the right to denounce racism in the classroom, but not all microaggressions equate to “racist actions.” Indeed, there’s no standard for what counts as a microaggression?they are, by their very nature, vague, subjective, and inconsequential.

    Well, you know why they call them microaggressions, right? Because it would take a million of them to add up to a single actual aggression.

    1. “Picoaggressions”

      1. State of The Art aggression tech can register attoaggressions.

        1. Yes, but that requires use of the Hadron supercollider.

          “Supercollider? I just met her. You’ve been a great audience.”

          1. You say that like Agression Hypersensitivity Syndrome isn’t a thing. Nice work, shitlord.

            1. Epi just can’t stop committing literal violence, right here in this comment section. I can’t even.

            2. My friend has SITS — Stress-Induced Tourette Syndrome.

            3. Drop the “Hyper” and you’ve got a winning acronym.

    2. Using ‘micro’ itself a cultural appropriation.

    3. You may laugh, but you’ve touched on what I think is part of their intent: the idea that “microaggressions” add up to become equivalent to actual aggressions, and can be responded to as such. Give someone enough dirty looks and eventually its the same as hitting them, entitling the microaggressee to hit you back.

    4. zero plus zero still equals zero. microaggressions are imaginary slights and thus are worth exactly zero actual aggressions regardless of how many there are.

  5. Why am I getting a Killing Fields vibe lately from all this campus bullshit? Oh, because they’re turning on their teachers, that’s why. As soon as they call for killing anyone with glasses because it microaggresses against the sight-enabled, we know they’ve arrived.

    1. Because it really is the same thing. You cosplayed as Maoists for the past 30 to 40 years? Reap the whirlwind….

    2. I think the vibe is closer to a Cultural Revolution vibe.

      What they are calling for is for their professors to be paraded about in dunce hats before their dismissal.

      If it were a Killing Fields vibe, all these coddled, middle-class and upper-class urban children would themselves be sent to the villages for their re-education by envious peasant farmers. It might actually be a good thing if the most outspoken of these students were forced to spend their summer under the supervision of heretofore migrant laborers on a truck farm. Of course, no libertarian could advocate the coercion required to accomplish that.

      1. No, but I feel they could be easily duped into volunteering. Just as all those kids in the sixties volunteered to go to Cuba to help with the sugar harvest.

      2. “If it were a Killing Fields vibe…”

        What do you think happens after the cultural revolution? Just as these profs have sown the seeds of their own destruction, the useful idiot students are sowing their own. They are next against the wall.

          1. OK but the answer we were looking for is how many bodies between the declaration of the cultural revolution and those reforms.

            Use exponents if you run out of space.

      3. It might actually be a good thing if the most outspoken of these students were forced to spend their summer under the supervision of heretofore migrant laborers on a truck farm.

        If a private school made it part of freshman orientation, no libertarian would object.

  6. Do it. Implement it and enforce it mercilessly. The only way out is through.

    1. I’m somewhat in agreement. I just think the key is to hand over the power to administer these rules to the douchiest, most petty socon you can round up.

      “Your reference to ‘rednecks’ is hate speech against our rural Southern population. You’re now expelled. Oh, and your comments about ‘Christags’ is hate speech against our evangelical students. You’re expelled, as well. Oh, did I just hear you make disparaging remarks about ‘frat bros’. Sorry, we don’t go for that kind of exclusionary talk around here. You’re out…”

      1. The people who live by the sword hardly ever stop to think that they might perish by the sword.

        1. The people who live by the sword hardly ever stop to think that they might perish by the sword.

          Because they never have. It’s not a possible eventuality in their minds because they have no frame of reference for that possibility. They’re not exactly what you would call abstract thinkers (which brings to mind the question of why the hell are they in college, but that’s another matter). That’s why something like what I’m talking about needs to happen. Somewhere. The social justice cadres need to get a sudden realization that these rules can be turned against them.

        2. Just another case for common sense sword regulations.

      2. I just think the key is to hand over the power to administer these rules to the douchiest, most petty socon you can round up.

        Why, I think I have just the person for the job.

        1. I don’t think I’m a socon….

          1. Not you! Think about it…

            1. the douchiest, most petty socon you can round up

              Santorum?

              The person, not the discharge.

              1. The person, not the discharge.

                A distinction without a difference.

                1. But wait, he’s cool with Bruce being Caitlyn.

  7. The nice thing about being libertarian is believing that everyone is allowed to adhere to their own principles and values. People like this who are frightened of free speech are fair game to be punched in the face and told to STFU because, hey, free speech is a bad thing by their lights. I’m just doing them a favor by making sure they don’t accidentally run into any of it.

  8. So, the monster strangles his creator. Who could have seen this coming?

    I say do it. Do it in spades. Give these fuckers the power to revoke tenure and have those evil microaggressors fired. Academia has set in motion the means of its own demise. Let’s see how it plays out.

    1. How long do you think it would take for professors to stop being professors? I’d give it about five years, but I have a suspicion that there would always be some small number ready to martyr themselves for the holy cause.

      1. How long do you think it would take for professors to stop being professors?

        9 years, my kid will be 18 then.

      2. They’d be quickly replaced by those adjunct faculty members currently in non-tenure track positions, you know, the ‘studies majors. Then the academy will collapse. Shame about all those STEM resources that will be lost.

        1. Catapillar started its own university to properly train design engineers that conformed to their philosophy because there were no schools that were not bogged down in orthodoxy.

          Chemical companies, mining companies, fabricating companies, agriculture companies, etc will simply do the same. Universities will become private and outside the reach of politicians and SJWs. Academia as we know it will wither away.

          The STEM resources will not be lost. In fact, this may accelerate progress in those fields.

          *crosses fingers*

          1. Let’s be honest. Robby’s “microagression on campus” stories are in the same camp as “War on Christmas” stories are on Brietbart; both serving as clickbait for their targeted demographics. And both play up isolated incidences to make them seem more common than they are in order to induce that combination of hyperventilating paranoia mixed with smug superciliousness at a perceived culture enemy, which, in turn, leads to sweet sweet ad money.

            Public flagships and private research institutions aren’t going anywhere. Community colleges are pretty safe too. Your precious STEMz are safe, and perhaps one day, we can realize we’re too old for this Punch and Judy show.

            1. The difference is the war on Christmas people don’t seem to have any actual power to burn the heretics at the stake. The SJW’s in academia do and given the number and size of the universities in question I think “isolated” is wishful thinking.

              1. The SJW’s in academia do and given the number and size of the universities in question I think “isolated” is wishful thinking.

                They only have that power if you give it to them. Knowing this, if you choose to work at a place like Oberlin, you deserve what you get. The ones that don’t, you don’t hear about; you know, the silent majority.

                So relax, the kids are alright.

                1. “They only have that power if you give it to them.”

                  And right now they are being given power and the number and size of institutions suggests “isolated” is a bit off. What I assume is that eventually they will go supernova and blow themselves up after going too far but there are likely lots of victims between here and there. Is it every single campus? Doubtful but there are enough examples in enough unique universities both public and private to suggest that it is more serious than just a sideshow.

            2. ^ I agree with Heroic’s assessment.

            3. “….play up isolated incidences to make them seem more common than they are in order to induce that combination of hyperventilating paranoia mixed with smug superciliousness at a perceived culture enemy, which, in turn, leads to sweet sweet ad money.’

              If you want to be *even more cynical*, there’s a fair argument to be made that ALL media is this. And nothing but.

              The comparison between ‘War on Christmas’ and ‘University Free-Speech’-issues is superficially useful… but ultimately specious.

              There’s a reasonable distinction to be made between perceived threats to ‘cultural traditions’ like Holidays… and perceived threats to fundamental constitutional principles taking place in institutions of ‘higher learning’.

              The former is easily dismissed as being an exaggerated fear by a religious minority… the latter is something that represents a major shift in generational attitudes regarding what is or isn’t “free speech”, which ultimately affects everyone, everywhere.

              You can suggest there’s similar kinds of exaggeration occurring w/ the latter… and perhaps there is. But even if the threat is exaggerated, the problem being described is certainly real, and affects a large enough swath of the population to be worthy of note in ways that “Starbucks Eliding Christmas from Coffee Cups” is probably not.

              1. The comparison between ‘War on Christmas’ and ‘University Free-Speech’-issues is superficially useful… but ultimately specious.

                Is it? We currently have the Republican front-runner telling folks in Iowa that he’ll make stores say “Merry Christmas”. Of course it’s just empty rhetoric, but so is the calls of a “diversity officer” telling us that she’ll make faculty and students say “ze/zir/zim”.

                the latter is something that represents a major shift in generational attitudes regarding what is or isn’t “free speech”, which ultimately affects everyone, everywhere.

                Fair enough, and I do suggest that its exaggerated. That is, exaggerated in the fact that the depressingly large proportion of “There oughta be a law…” folks hasn’t really changed all that much from generation to generation. But the authoritarian climate of fear described by Robby and riffed on by some commenters just doesn’t exist on most campuses. I’m not hiding Anne Frank above the titles of the suspended ceiling in my office, plan and simple.

                1. “We currently have the Republican front-runner telling folks in Iowa that he’ll make stores say “Merry Christmas”

                  Reductio ad Trump = nothing he does can be used as evidence of anything except Trumpness

                  ” Of course it’s just empty rhetoric, but so is the calls of a “diversity officer” telling us that she’ll make faculty and students say “ze/zir/zim”.”

                  The difference is that obviously no president is going to do fuck-all about “ending the War on Christmas”, and checks and balances in government present obvious obstacles to whatever populist bullshit that candidates might disingenuously promise.

                  Whereas in the latter cases… sure, diversity officers aren’t YET running the insane-asylum of universities….but when you see schools all across the country booting out presidents and these Demand-Waving groups spreading like a disease, the concern isn’t that the entire American population is going to be soon-facing its own similar speech-codes…. its that the very-idea of this kind of anti-free-speech attitude is becoming *socially normalized*

                  No one cares what these idiots want to do on college campuses; what’s of greater concern is that anyone in the larger world is being expected to treat them and their complaints as *legitimate* and treat them seriously.

                  1. Reductio ad Trump = nothing he does can be used as evidence of anything except Trumpness

                    How convenient!

                    schools all across the country booting out presidents

                    How many so far? 2? Indeed, college presidents are forced to resign for stupid shit all the time. Case in point, Dinesh D’Sousaphone. Like a public school district superintendents, it’s known that an expectation of the job is to fall on your sword.

                    its that the very-idea of this kind of anti-free-speech attitude is becoming *socially normalized*

                    It already has. The targets may be different depending on context, but the idea that unpopular opinions can be expressed in various public fora without risk of brow-beating by the majority has been long gone. That having been said, there is nothing wrong with criticizing the mini-Pol Pots on our campuses, castigat ridendo mores and all that; however, let’s not fall into the trap of sensationalizing it into Reason’s pet moral panic. That’s what Skezany and her “free-range parenting” is for.

                    1. “Let’s not fall into the trap of sensationalizing it into Reason’s pet moral panic”

                      Weird how you seem to blame the audience rather than the editors of the magazine which assigned a writer to cover the topic.

                      And i stick by the dismissal of all things Trump. He’s not evidence of any trend. This stuff is.

                      Yes, 2 have been booted, but how many scalps really need to be taken before the threats made by http://www.thedemands.org/ people are treated far more seriously? Not many.

            4. Hmmm. Heroic, you are probably correct. I may have fallen for the ‘this is the worst of it and so the tip of an iceberg ‘ assumption.

              1. With all due respect, I think you might have, Suthen.

                I’m not above poking fun at the mores of my fellow eggheads, but it’s gotta be something accurate. Especially, if we’re going into Two Cultures thing; it’s worth noting that some of the biggest SWJ douches come from the sciences, be they PZ Meyers, or cosmologist Sean Carroll; whereas, some of the most fierce defenders of classically Western values and civilization can be found in Classics, History, of Humanities departments, like E.D. Hirsch. Instead of alienating like-minded people on the “other side”, by claiming their disciplines are useless and parasitic, you should be encouraging them as they are at the front lines of the ideological battle. You can’t CADCAM freedom; there is no algorithm for liberty. However, philosophy, the investigation of the good life, can identify and argue for the values that sustain a free people; an accurate and unbiased investigation into history provides us with the information needed to prevent past mistakes; literature, poetry, and art can inspire a desire for freedom and liberty. An architect cannot draw up a blueprint to create more libertarians, but a novel about one has created a whole swath of them.

                Just my 0.02.

                1. That’s a good call, HM, and leans into why I’m starting to think that the emotion/reason dichotomy is pretty stupid. Sure there are people who want to base their decisions on how they feel, but the proper response should not be to respond with strict rationality. They are combined in the human experience and they should be combined in decision making and debate. Sometimes you’re going to lean more towards one side or the other, but you shouldn’t be aiming to eliminate one or the other.

                  As you say (to paraphrase what I believe part of your closing to be), sometimes it’s easier to be led to freedom by your heart than your head. A civilization designed to be free usually ends up anything but.

                  1. They are combined in the human experience and they should be combined in decision making and debate. Sometimes you’re going to lean more towards one side or the other, but you shouldn’t be aiming to eliminate one or the other.

                    Indeed, an Aristotle said it better than both of us more than 2000 years ago.

                    sometimes it’s easier to be led to freedom by your heart than your head

                    Logic is part of the trivium; that is, the set of three disciplines (grammar, rhetoric, logic) in the liberal arts to be studied before moving on to the quadrivium (music, arithmetic, astronomy, and geometry). Founders of the Republic (American and Roman) believed that all free men should master these disciplines, as they are what was deemed to be necessary to meaningfully participate in civic life in a representative republic.

                    1. Since I believe this is somewhere in your field of expertise, have you read/studied anything by Korzybski? I’m thinking of picking up Science and Sanity in the near future, I’m curious if you have any experience with the general semantics course it lays out.

          2. I’ve always argued the market will be the solution. New learning centers that promise open and free expression competing with the outmoded and outdated universities.

        2. All of the STEM disciplines can be studied in small co-ops with crowd funded equipment. I mean unless you need a 10 billion dollar particle collider or a massive telescope in space, you’re probably going to be able to get everything you need.

        3. I don’t know if my school is different from the norm, but there were a lot of adjunct faculty in areas besides the social sciences. For my own major (business) the adjunct faculty were generally people who had lots of work experience outside of academia, and worked as a professor part-time. They were generally some of the best and favorite teachers I had.

          1. I’ve only taken night classes at a community college, but the English and Philosophy professors I had were the only two who weren’t adjunct faculty who actually worked in the field they taught at night.

            We’ll see how that goes once it becomes free for everyone.

    2. This has actually happened in at least one case that I know of personally (the victim occasionally reads these pages, incidentally). It has ruined real lives. I’m glad I’m not teaching (have a new job at my university) and am near retirement.

  9. [sample of question on an Occidental science test]
    Place in order of magnitude:
    1 Picoaggression
    2 Yoctaggression
    3 Nanoaggression
    4 Attoaggression
    5 Microaggression
    6 Femtoaggression
    7 Milliaggression
    8 Zeptoaggression

    1. You are a funny guy.

      *looks at name*

      Oh.

    2. I’m working on an application for this, complete with graphs that show where in the aggresionsphere a current faculty member stands. They’ll be levesl for students to view on their smartphone that will prepare them for class with said faculty member:

      Level 1: Ok, go to class.

      Level 2. Ok, go to class, but take mattress.

      Level 3: No go.

      I’m going to have to divide my time between that and my mobile safe spaces project.

      1. Level 3 really should be Problematic.

  10. These people must get their sandy vaginas from sitting on the Emory Board.

    1. File that under *Atrocious pun*.

      1. I prefer filed under *narrows gaze*

        1. Thank you, thank you! First a mention in the From the comments from Lenore’s contest last week and now a narrowed gaze! I’m a somebody now.

  11. Demand #11 =

    (i think as a rule, one should always read “Lists of Demands” backwards, from the bottom to the top, because then you are most likely to see The Demanders in their truest light – by making their most-retarded demands more-prominent, rather than coming after you’ve exhausted your appetite for self-righteousness)

    “11. Acknowledging foremost that all kinds of speech are not protected by the First Amendment. …. we demand that Emory University Information Technology Services formally request that Yik Yak, Inc. install a geofence covering the zip code 30322 in order to protect our students from subjection to intolerable and psychologically detrimental material.”

    *Noted = there is a mountain of unrelated, meaningless bullshit between that first and last quoted sentence there, mostly attempting a poor equivocation of ‘insulting remarks’ with ‘calls for violence’.

    1. These poor, fragile souls probably shouldn’t have been let out of the playpen.

      1. Never mind that there’s already a 100% functional protection system in place to prevent being offended by YikYak

        aka = DONT USE YIKYAK

        1. But itz my write to use all products, without having to deal with consequences! Capitalism does not mean freedom!

    2. What’s a geofence?

      1. Google is your friend =

        “A geofence is a virtual barrier. Programs that incorporate geo-fencing allow an administrator to set up triggers so when a device enters (or exits) the boundaries defined by the administrator, a text message or email alert is sent.

        Geofencing – Whatis.com – TechTarget
        whatis.techtarget.com/definition/geofencing’

        Whether such an idea is legally feasible, practical, desirable, constitutional, etc. is completely separate. I’m sure there are plenty of people in the same Geo that have zero interest in the Black Student Group demands.

        1. So Emory students favor segregation.

        2. From what I’ve heard, Yik Yak has already done this in many other locations. I’m guessing that they’re fairly open to the idea of shutting out specific locations.

        3. So, they want a Pack ‘n Play for their internet.

    3. Let me guess,

      Demand #12: We demand a pony. You told us if we were good we’d get a pony! We were good and we want a pony!!!elevnty!!

  12. Acknowledging foremost that all kinds of speech are not protected by the First Amendment

    Um…

    Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech…

    Yes. They. Are.

    1. Reason number one why their protestations that “hate speech is not free speech!!!1!11!!1!!” is such a vapid, content-free argument. There is no such thing as “free speech”; there’s speech, and there’s the legal limitations on prior restraint and censorship. They aren’t advocating against “hate speech” so much as arguing for suppression. Which, because they’re progressives and desire power above principle, is not in the least surprising.

      1. Truth. I’m fond of citing the Constitution of the federal gov’t and of my state when discussing these things with people. I explain that just because the gov’t does something does not mean it is a constitutional action.

  13. Demand #8 =

    “Black administrators are told to stand by racist and problematic faculty in order to preserve the positive image of the University to media and investors. However, the fact that these threats are made point to the job insecurity that Black faculty and administrators face at Emory University. We demand job security for Black faculty and administrators when they are earnestly working on behalf of Black students.”

    *Noted = Bad writers seem to love to use the phrase, “THE FACT THAT _____” as a replacement for actually citing any facts. Who is doing the “telling”? And in whatever theoretical instance they have in mind…how do they know any hypothetical ‘Black Administrator’ isn’t *genuinely* more concerned about their peer-faculty than the bleatings of aggrieved students? Administrators get their jobs by being good ‘team players’, not by playing Komissar for the student committee.

    speaking of “Job Security”…btw…. i’m not so sure that’s something these activists are developing a reputation for ‘helping’ much with. Their addition of “…earnestly working on behalf“… suggests they retain the right to demand Black staff be fired as well, insofar that they’re “not towing the lion”

    Basically, their demand boils down to, “Black staff need job security. Everyone else shold be fired whenever we want. Black staff also needs to be fired whenever we want

    Sounds legit.

    1. We’ve come a long way since the original Port Huron statement.

    2. Fact: Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica.

      1. Ergo: arbitary conclusion.

        1. *arbitrary*…

  14. Demand # 7 = “Black staff, faculty, and administrators who advise Black organizations should receive an increase in their financial compensation or salaries. Students should be forced to pay more to attend Emory”

    no further comment needed

  15. This is not a wise path for any institution that actually values free expression.

    So…most American universities can keep going then, right?

  16. “Where are you from”.

    Yeah, no one ever asks that at college except to root out what kind of dirty foreigner you really are.

    1. I’m not going to ask the twerp from Des Moines with rosacea where he’s from. You’re damn right I want to know what part of the world your shade of mocha-cappuccino signifies.

      1. OK, well there’s one data point against what I was trying to say. But I think most people are interested in where there fellow students are from, even if they are obviously American (or at least ask because it’s a way to make conversation).

        I’m still confused about this cappuccino skin thing. Isn’t cappuccino just white and frothy at the surface?

        1. Isn’t cappuccino just white and frothy at the surface?

          Don’t make fun of my dandruff.

        1. In truth I wouldn’t be especially motivated in either case. I just hate that “color blindness” as a personal ethos has been construed to mean actual myopia with regard to the heritage of other people.

          1. And maybe there’s some psycho-sexual thing going on, having grown up with a white sister but spending much of my formative years among Hispanic and middle eastern women, whom to this day I find arresting. Apparently that’s exoticizing and I’m meant to feel ashamed for it.

          2. Frankly, I could give a shit about who is Chinese and who is not.

        2. Dey might be one o’ dem Mooslums.

      2. Pinkley: [impersonating a General] Where are you from, son?
        Soldier: Madison City, Missouri, sir!
        Pinkley: Never heard of it.

    2. When I first heard this, it was in the context of someone asking a non-white person where they were from, and then when they answer with an American location, are asked “No, where are you really from?” I can see why that’d be annoying, although it’s obviously not the end of the world. But now apparently it’s offensive to even ask where they’re from in the first place.

      1. Asking any, for example East Asian person, where they are “really” from when you have no reason besides their appearance to believe they are of foreign origin is pretty obnoxious. Asking someone who has an obviously foreign accent seems like a reasonable thing to do. As does asking where someone’s ancestors are from. It’s not as if no one ever asks American white people where their ancestors were from.

        1. As a side note, from what I’ve heard, this isn’t even remotely a specifically-American thing. I have multiple friends (mostly Latino) who have said that while traveling or studying abroad in Europe, they frequently encountered that (people asking “Where are you really from?” after they were told the person was from the USA) on an ongoing basis.

  17. Demand # 3

    (I am learning that my chosen M.O. may be utterly confounded by the Black Students of Emory University…who have deviously placed some of the Most Retarded Demands *way up at the top*!!)

    “Due to the systematic oppression faced by Black students throughout the world via colorism, racism, classism, mass incarceration, police brutality and all other injustices we need psychological services that cater to our unique psychological needs.”

    This is otherwise known as the “Englebert Humperdink Clause

    And how does one cater to the unique psychological needs…?

    “our psychic health is compromised due to systemic oppression (social, racial, economic, gender, etc). These alternative counseling methods include: Black spirituality methods, Black counselors, and counselors of color.”

    Ah. So the “methods” are actually “people”.

    No one ever told me that you could successfully counter the effects of economic and gender ‘oppression’ merely by engaging in Black Spirituality. This seems like it should be obvious, but somehow it escaped me.

    1. Those poor, oppressed students at a private university! Won’t somebody think of the poor private university students?!?!?!?

    2. “Colorism”?? That’s a new one for me. I’ve been paying pretty close attention to this nonsense lately, but I had not yet heard this dumb-shit term.

      1. I wonder if “colorism” is where lighter skinned black people get different treatment than darker people in majority black countries.

        1. Generally, yes, but it’s not limited to black countries.

    3. No one ever told me that you could successfully counter the effects of economic and gender ‘oppression’ merely by engaging in Black Spirituality.

      Out of everyone here, I would have thought you would have been familiar with King Sun.

      1. I always thought he was a poor-man’s Rakim.

        Head-Wraps and Goat Curry are not yet approved by the American Psychological Association, last i checked.

        1. King Sun is dope. At least back in the day; he didn’t represent himself well as he should of in this impromptu battle against Iron Solomon, imo. King Sun was around before the time when rappers hyper-specialized themselves into “lyrical” or “battle”.

          Anyway, fuck the APA. Goat curry at least once a month. It counters the effects of economic opression for Taj India, and it makes me…happppyyyyy.

          1. rap-battles are less lame than spoken-word poetry for about the first 30 seconds, then they’re worse.

            1. Nowadays, I can’t tell the difference. Fuck that corny-ass motherfucker Daylyt.

    4. we need psychological services that cater to our unique psychological needs.

      So black people are all unique in exactly the same way?

      Man, writing standards are pretty low these days.

      1. Well, yes, but that was obvious the moment that they started a movement about racial equality for exactly one race.

      2. “we need psychological services that cater to our unique psychological needs.”

        Like, they’re ultra-crazy?

    5. I assume that a white student will face no approbation when he or she demands a white psychologist.

      1. WHYCOME THEY AINT GOT NO CRACKER HEADSHRINKERS UP IN HEARE

        1. Y’ALLS GOT ANY OF THEM SEX THERAPISTS WITH BIG BOOBS?

    6. Their demands always seem to boil down to “You should create jobs for us after we graduate”.

      Which, if you think about it, is actually quite clever. “Studies” majors are unemployable in any other professional setting. For once, they are actually planning ahead and acting rationally.

    7. “our psychic health is compromised due to systemic oppression”

      So they admit they’re nuts and are looking for something to blame?

  18. the result will be a meaningful reduction in the practical amount of academic freedom on campus. This is not a wise path for any institution that actually values free expression.

    You’d think by now Robby would have figured out that was never an actual priority?

    1. A priority of whose? I think that for a lot of students, professors and administrators it still is and certainly was.

      1. They don’t seem to be calling the shots.

        1. Keep in mind that this is a demand from a small minority of students, not an actual policy of the University at this point.

          1. God, Zeb! How can we have a proper Two Minutes Hate if you keep this shit up?

            1. “Hate” is too strong, and “Two Minutes” too short.

              I think these articles are excellent material for providing “30-Minute Mocks”

              1. Seven Minute Snarks do the job for me.

    2. It’s kind of cute, really.

  19. something nuke something orbit

  20. So, how many microaggressions = a throat punch?

    Trying to establish a real world relatable scale here.

    1. Assuming that a throat punch is about one aggression, you should be looking at about 1,000,000 microaggressions per throat punch.

      Totally necessary source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_prefix

  21. Perhaps colleges should stop holding classes altogether since they are so frightening and traumatizing to students. Instead they could just pass out bowls of pabulum.

  22. Earlier in the thread Heroic said my fears may be overblown and after some thinking about it I agreed. He works in academia so I tend to defer to his judgement. Still, maybe my fears are not as overblown as he thinks.

    No one has mentioned that this movement can be traced directly to the white house and their actions on Title IX. The grievance mongers and anti-1A crowd has all snowballed and gained impetus from official channels. Maybe these are relatively isolated incidents and this is just a vocal minority but they do have the sympathy and support of some very powerful political figures.

    If we don’t put a stop to this horseshit it will soon look like I am downplaying the problem.

    1. they do have the sympathy and support of some very powerful political figures.

      That is 100 percent true.

    2. I think there is a distinction to be made from the so-called “Culture War” hemming and hawing…. and the fact that these ginned-up-campus ‘crises’ are being used to justify far more Federal intervention into Education, imposing all sorts of control-systems via Title IX and other OCR-inspired angles.

      I think regardless of how one feels about the blacklivesmattering folks, or Tranny-toilet-rights or Proper Pronouns, there are legitimate libertarian issues here both from the angle of basic Free-Speech principles going the way of the dodo in higher-ed, as well as the above-mentioned concern with increased Federal oversight…which inevitably seems to be used for political ends.

  23. A perfect tool for any student who didn’t do well or doesn’t like the teacher. Course evaluations are harsh enough, but now you can report your prof for a CRIME and he won’t even be able to defend himself. Perfect!!! And since some idiots don’t even want the prof to talk about old dead guys, good luck teaching at all.

  24. So…make student evaluations even sillier than they are now?

  25. So…make student evaluations even sillier than they are now?

  26. So…make student evaluations even sillier than they are now?

    1. What the…

  27. “Microaggression” is when one of these activists tries to rape someone.

  28. Why stop at microagressions. Why not just literally grab the stupid little biatches and throw them out of the classroom, and then laugh hysterically as they rant about it on Tumblr. #IDrinkSJWTears

  29. How Robespierre-ish of them .

  30. When the PC revolution has eliminated all perceived transgression will everyone communicate in mime?

    1. Too dangerous.

      1. isn’t pointing an aggression, miming is full of aggressive pointing

    2. White face? Are you crazy?

  31. The students must be angry that their degrees do not add up to much in the end. Not too many jobs available for mid-20’s women’s studies, gray history or LGTB chakra science graduates. So much money being spent and nothing to show for it but a job a Starbucks and a bedroom in the basement of Mom & Dad’s house where they are constantly being microaggressed to get off their lazy ass and get a job.

    1. It’s all part of the Melissa Harris-Perry continuum plan.

  32. Here’s a micro aggression for them, one to the heart and one to the head. Double tap those whiny assed punks.

  33. I don’t mind reading about colleges like these – it’s institutional suicide. I’ve never donated to my alma-mater because it was a science school when I attended. Now all it talks about is the next racially sensitive safe zone buildings that it erecting.

  34. great. conservative and Christian students should fully take advantage. Every time someone mentions black lives matter or “whiteness” or the “patriarchy” or some other PC bullshit, just add to the tally. make complaints, too. the process is the penalty. these people will learn if you punish them enough.

  35. the idea that micro aggression exist is aggressive in itself, may they all self immolate for their transgressions.

  36. Microaggressions (such as they exist, if at all) should only, at worst, provoke micro-reactions.

  37. Whoever made this bed now gets to lay in it. Unfortunately, though, everyone has to lay in this heaping pile of intellectually dishonest dog shit.

  38. When buffoons complain about micro-aggressions I imagine their whines to the tune of micro-violins playing in the background.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.