Campus Free Speech

This Claremont Safe Space for Women of Color Is Actually Pretty Hateful and Racist

Students form identity-based group in order to bash people they don't like.

|

Claremont College
Craig Stanfill / Flickr

Are non-inclusive safe spaces—ones designed for members of a specific minority—bastions of toleration? Not at the Claremont Colleges. 

One of the more curious demands made by activists students in the past few months has been the repeated call for segregated safe spaces: places where black students, Latino students, female students, etc., could go to feel comfortable and protected. Such spaces are often closed to people who don't belong to the group, even if those people are supportive. At the University of Missouri, for instance, students of color formed a blacks-only healing space, and asked white allies to leave. If the space were to be invaded by members of an out-group, it would become unsafe—that's the thinking. 

The Claremont Independent, a conservative student newspaper of the Claremont Colleges, recently obtained screenshots from a virtual safe space: 5C Women of Color, a Facebook group for black female students at the colleges. The group was private. It no longer exists—the women shut it down after they discovered that the Independent was planning to run an article about it. 

I don't really want to shame these young women, who probably never expected that their conversations would become fully public. And I'm sure context would mitigate the offensiveness of some of their remarks. 

But the reality is undeniable: this so-called safe space is just really racist. One woman, an Asian student, referred to Asian men as "nerdy ones who can just hide in their tech caves" and "they get all angry when it comes to how Asian men are asexualized/emasculated." Another female student, who works for the Asian American Resource Center and sits on the mental health committee, commented, "F*ck your masculinity whiny Asian cis bros this is why I only hang out with femmes." 

This person agreed to an interview with the Independent, so I will quote her by name: 

"As a feminine gay Asian woman," Kristine Lee told the Independent, "I'm not interested in surrounding myself with the kind of possessive, toxic masculinity exhibited by the type of Asian American men we were discussing in the post." 

Other students talked about their unwillingness to enroll in classes that would be "dominated by white men." Another student didn't want to take a class that was taught by a conservative professor of color. 

One student, who had been adopted, complained about her white parents. Another responded by making fun of white people's paleness and receding hairlines. 

It was okay to make fun of white people because they were responsible for colonialism, said another. 

Again, these students are entitled to their feelings. They may have had really bad experiences with white and Asian men—and conservative black professors—that validate their feelings. But they are clearly demeaning entire categories of people based on specific negative interactions. Is this not a kind of racism? 

One of the purposes of a college education is to undermine racist and collectivist thinking by exposing students to the uniqueness and intrinsic worth of all people, regardless of skin color, gender, sexuality, ability status, etc. Imagine a student from a socially conservative background meeting an out-gay person for the first time and developing a new attitude about gay rights, or a militant atheist learning to empathize with devout followers of Christianity or Islam, or a Midwesterner developing an appreciation for Chinese culture after taking a class about it. This is the public good that college is supposed to facilitate. 

But if students break off into groups based on immutable identity—and constantly reaffirm their prejudices about members of other identity-based groups—they aren't just missing the point of college: they are actively working against it. 

Students, of course, have free speech and assembly rights, and should be allowed to sort themselves into whatever groups they want (even at Harvard). It should go without saying, but I don't think Claremont should take any action against these students or discourage their activities. But the next time students demand a formal race-based safe space—they have already done so at Western Washington University, the University of Arizona, and other places—the public should keep in mind that there are good reasons to rebuff them.

Advertisement

NEXT: Assimilation, 2016-Style: Come to America, Learn Vietnamese

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. One of the purposes of a college education is to undermine racist and collectivist thinking by exposing students to the uniqueness and intrinsic worth of all people, regardless of skin color, gender, sexuality, ability status, etc

    That is precisely the thought process behind the entire “diversity” push.

    Oops.

    1. Except that it actually does work like that. College exposed me to a lot of different cultures and ideas and individuals and changed my understanding not only of them, but also of myself.

      1. It did expose me to their uniqueness, but their intrinsic worth?

        1. Well I mean nothing has intrinsic worth. Things are only valuable insofar as they are valuable to the individual in question.

          1. Thank you, Hugh. There is no phrase more meaningless than “intrinsic worth,” whether uttered by a socon talking about another culture, or by a goldbug, talking about gold.

            1. There is the “spiritual” (or whatever you want to call it) intrinsic worth of people (I don’t buy it, but a lot of people do). There wouldn’t be a pro-life movement if lots of people didn’t believe in the intrinsic worth of every human organism, even if it doesn’t have a functioning brain.

              1. That’s not intrinsic worth. That’s worth in their eyes. That’s the whole point.

                1. Well, no. Their view of the world is that people all have intrinsic worth because God says so (or God loves them or created them or whatever it is). When there is an all powerful God, things can have intrinsic worth because whatever God says is true (sorry, religious people, I know I’m being lazy describing this).

                  1. You are actually doing a pretty good job. Yes, people have intrinsic worth. Other things do also. Values and traits that are focused on bettering the human condition or relieving suffering for one’s fellow human have intrinsic worth, things such as generosity, unselfishness, empathy–things that non-religious people possess and exhibit as well.

              2. I do not see how someone can think they have enforceable rights without believing that people have a intrinsic worth.

                1. What is an enforceable right, and why is it not enforceable without intrinsic worth? If enough like-minded individuals who believe that people have value get together and decide that rights are worth protecting, I don’t see why that requires believing in intrinsic worth.

                2. Spot on with caveat. Intrinsic worth is still subject to fungibility and may not be perceived to be equal in any case.

          2. A sentient being can value itself. Ask my cats. This gives them intrinsic (internally-generated) worth.

      2. Living in the real world College exposed me to a lot of different cultures and ideas and individuals and changed my understanding not only of them, but also of myself.

        1. ^This. There is nothing special about college that people can’t learn the same stuff in their earlier years of schooling or in later years out in the real world.

      3. It might “work” like that, but is it the “purpose”?

      4. It actually used to work like that. Now some groups are so microagressive because of their sex or skin color that it’s not allowed to be that way anymore.

    2. No, that is what the race-baiters CLAIM is the thought process behind their diversity push.

      But they don’t really embrace diversity and are fighting for their own in-group’s dominance.

  2. It was okay to make fun of white people because they were responsible for colonialism, said another.

    The breathtaking stupidity of this comment and others like it really has me worried about our future. This is the mindset of tomorrow’s “leaders” – the same tribalist bullshit that leads to some rather unpleasant places.

    1. Look, Rhywun, no one is talking about purges or ovens, OK? And people always start off talking about that stuff before they do it. So stop overreacting. Thank you.

    2. Just as well no Asian kingdoms (say Khmer, Thai, Japanese, Chinese) attempted to create colonial empires.

      1. +1 Co-Prosperity Sphere

      2. Fucking Ghengis Khan, how does he work?

        1. He was played by John Wayne in a movie, so obviously he was a white guy.

          1. I thought that was Tom Cruise…?

          2. “Death comes not easy to Temujin, pilgrim.”

          3. that’s her point, they were all white guys, or least played by them

        2. Well, he was kind of a promoter of rape culture.

        3. And didn’t Chinese emperors claim jurisdiction over the whole world?

          1. Just like American Presidents!

        4. “If Genghis Kahn started an empire, then he was obviously white on the inside. It’s like the Aztecs, who were obviously not real Native Americans.”
          [/prog]

    3. I’m not convinced people in college are more stupider than when I went to college.

      I think the problem is that somehow they think they’re opinions are more likely to be correct — or at least to be heard.

      Too much social media on my lawn?

      1. …they’re full of opinions that are…

      2. I’m not convinced people in college are more stupider than when I went to college.

        No, but their stupidity is going in more sinister directions.

    4. There is no doubt in my mind that the liberals have become more hateful and intolerant than the conservatives. It is known.

    5. You know who else thought it was okay to shit on an ethnicity because of their perceived institutional power?

      1. Hutus?

      2. Irish?

      3. Morlock’s?

      4. … everyone, ever?

      5. R. Kelly?

        1. No, he just peed on other ethnicities. TOTES different.

    6. Yeah, I’m pretty sure I never was responsible for colonialism.

      If holding people responsible not just for what their ancestors did, but what anyone of the same race ever did, isn’t racist, I don’t know what is.

      I really think that the root of most of the world’s biggest problems is people thinking that who we are descended from matters at all to how people should interact.

      1. I think racism gives mankind an evolutionary advantage and thus will never go away and should not go away.

        Think of it like this: from an evolutionary standpoint, race is like a soccer uniform–it helps people on the same team quickly determine who is supposedly on the same side as them when in group-on-group competition.

        Tribalism works. It is the basis for much of mankind’s survival through thousands of years. And it probably will be that way for quite a while longer.

    7. I’d be worry because if they get their hands on power. Watch out.

      1. I’d worry.

    8. No, most people, including my fello millennials, do not think like this.

  3. Are non-inclusive safe spaces?”ones designed for members of a specific minority?”bastions of toleration?

    Isn’t a non-inclusive safe space pretty much by definition intolerant?

    1. Up is down, left is right

      1. For Australians it is.

    2. That’s what Martha Burk said.

    3. Just like there’s rape and there’s rape-rape, there’s tolerant-intolerence, and there’s intolerant-intolerence.

    4. Nobody wants to hear your logic, you cis-normative, melanin-challenged, racist shitlord!

      1. He is using cis-logic, which is inferior to trans-logic.

        1. Trans-logic stands cis-logic on its head.

          1. Is that sexy?

  4. Imagine a student from a socially conservative background meeting an out-gay person for the first time and developing a new attitude about gay rights, or a militant atheist learning to empathize with devout followers of Christianity or Islam, or a Midwesterner developing an appreciation for Chinese culture after taking a class about it. This is the public good that college is supposed to facilitate.

    Uh-uh. That would be “cultural appropriation”. Which is evil!

    1. Racial segregation is good now. Try to keep up, shitlords!

      1. The darker the racial segregation, the better.

        *Seems to be the rule*

  5. It was okay to make fun of white people because they were responsible for colonialism, said another

    I had nothing to do with colonialism, thank you very much.

  6. I still can’t believe the woman who complained about her white parents. It’s one thing to vent in person occasionally with friends, but to do so in writing to a large group of people. Insane. That said, she’s the one that will have the most consequences for her actions since her parents will see that post and she’ll have to deal with them. The sadistic part of me would love to be in that room when that conversation happens.

    1. Meh, her parents are responsible for raising the little shit that way in the first place.

      1. They probably just took her in for the money.

        1. If that were true she’d be working in their monocle-polishing factory.

        2. Unless she was a foster child, they probably dropped quite a bit of money to adopt her.

          1. Even then, the stipend to foster parents rarely means a net gain for the parents. As much as I think some people shouldn’t be allowed to foster/adopt, most still have their heart in the right place, even if their heart is a bit more twisted then I would prefer.

      2. There is only so much that parenting can do. Some people have a strong inborn trait of being cunts.

      3. It’s just as likely that she learned to hate her parents in college, after a few “critical thinking” courses.

        1. Good point.

        2. My guess is (assuming her parents are assholes which is a possibility) that she adopted the parent hatred for the coolness factor. She’s a victim, she’s been microaggressed more than thou and therefore more hep than you.

          1. *aren’t*

          2. Plus, they’re white, so is there anything they haven’t done to her?
            Man, isn’t collectivist guilt fun?

        3. I wonder if its possible to reverse an adoption after the kid is an adult?

          “Oh, you wish you parents weren’t white? Lemme help you with that.”

        4. … have you *met* a teenager? Hating your parents is a very common trait. I expect most people don’t fully get over their parental resentment until a few years outside of the home.

          1. IMHO many children come to fully appreciate their parents about the time their own kids start walking.

            “Mirror, mirror on the wall,
            I became my mother after all!”

    2. I wonder who’s footing the college bills.

      1. I wonder if the gravy train is over.

    3. Hopefully, Sarah Weiyun Otterstrom ‘s parents will have a talk with her about it.

    4. The Independent doesn’t really give us enough detail to judge, IMHO. According to the article, the student complained that her parents joked at her expense, and some of the other kids on the group told her to make fun of her parents in response.

      Without knowing what the original jokes were, there’s no way to tell whether a very sensitive college frosh, outrageously jerky parents, or something in between. I pretty much expect 19 year olds to spend some time on private(ish) forum complaining that their parents are awful.

  7. Such spaces are often closed to people who don’t belong to the group, even if those people are supportive.

    I thought progs were all about accepting people based on however they self-identify.

    Or is it just when they think they can score cheap political points against SoCons who know the difference in sex and gender?

    1. Exercising freedom of association by excluding the more privileged classes is okay, because we’ve conveniently redefined racism so that punching up isn’t racism. When bakers refuse to bake a gay cake, that’s punching down and literally Hitler.

      All it takes to resolve the cognitive dissonance is redefinition of words and stubborn denial of several realities.

    2. Dunno but it has a SS versus SD feel to me, supportive but ain’t us…

  8. Another female student, who works for the Asian American Resource Center and sits on the mental health committee, commented, “F*ck your masculinity whiny Asian cis bros this is why I only hang out with femmes.”

    Heh, it sounds like she’s doing the Asian men a favor. She doesn’t sound like somebody I’d want to waste my precious time on.

    I wonder if these mental giants realize that by segregating themselves off they’re making every other place a safe space for us white male cis-hetero shitlords.

    1. Doesn’t matter. Some giant, mutant plant is gonna have its way with her eventually.

      At least that’s what I have gleaned from my exposure to Japanese literature.

      1. Huh, based on my experience I would assume some huge multi-tentacled cephalopod.

        1. Little of column A.
          Little of column B.

    2. Good thing she’s on the mental heatlh cmmttee for all her asian emasculateds that go to the resource center. Nothing like getting professional help

  9. One of the purposes of a college education is to undermine racist and collectivist thinking by exposing students to the uniqueness and intrinsic worth of all people, regardless of skin color, gender, sexuality, ability status, etc. Imagine a student from a socially conservative background meeting an out-gay person for the first time and developing a new attitude about gay rights, or a militant atheist learning to empathize with devout followers of Christianity or Islam, or a Midwesterner developing an appreciation for Chinese culture after taking a class about it. This is the public good that college is supposed to facilitate.

    WTF?!?!?

    That’s not the fucking purpose of college!!!!!! That passage is so stupid, I think it gave my computer cancer!

    1. This is why there are more thirty year olds still living at home with mommy now since the days when we were still a agrarian society.

    2. To be fair, he said one of the purposes. Not the purpose.

    3. It’s one of the stated purposes of public education — to expose students to diverse cultures and different ways of thinking. I am sure it would have been plainly stated in legislative records when public universities were established.

      1. Yes, it’s the stated purpose. Of course it’s not really the actual purpose.

        1. No, indoctrination in State values and expansion of the State bureaucracy was the purpose.

          Unfortunately for legislatures, the inmates co-opted the plan and ran wild with it.

          1. No, indoctrination in State values and expansion of the State bureaucracy was the purpose.

            That’s now completed in the K-12 system.

    4. Who gets to define the purpose of college?

      1. The college. Most have some sort of charter, statement of values, and so-on.

    5. My favorite part is how the original statement assumes there are no Midwesterners with Chinese ancestry. Or that individuals from Asia have avoided the Midwest completely. It’s like the typically progressive mentality that fly-over states are all populated by fluffy Bull Connor knock-offs has been absorbed whole by Soave.

  10. iow No Irish

    1. Irish approves of the segregation aspect, though.

      1. He’s busy establishing his own safe-space right now.

      2. False. Segregation prevents me from having the opportunity to openly signal my racial superiority by publicly discriminating against my inferiors

        1. Get off the high road, Irish. We all got pink eye because you won’t stop texting on the toilet.

          1. That is his safe-space.

          2. Get off the high road, Irish. We all got pink eye because you won’t stop texting on the toilet.

            +6 real family members

  11. Terrific way for anyone to feel absolutely safe from any possible nano-aggressions: retreat into your own head.

    Well, maybe not. Some of us have little voices inside our heads that nudge us out of our comfort zones. What can ya do?

  12. I feel like I woke up in 1991.

    1. Gulf War Syndrome, brah?

      1. The good news is his Big Johnson shirt and BKs still fit perfectly.

        1. Yeah, but does his hypercolor shirt still work?

          1. Which? Because if you have a functioning hypercolor shirt, I’ll mail you $17 and a bottle of plastic jug whiskey for it.

        2. What about his Skidz? Did he drink a few too many Crystal Pepsis to fit into them?

  13. Another responded by making fun of white people’s paleness and receding hairlines.

    South Park did it.

  14. It says something about the Social Justice Warrior discourse that I read lines in the article like:

    Rachel Song (PO ’18), who posted in the group for advice on classes, stated that she was concerned about taking “PSYC141: Leading Entrepreneurial Ventures” because she is “afraid [it] is going to be a class full of white, male business bros.” Lanna Sanchez (PO ’19) noted that she is “kinda scared to take a politics course in general since this space is typically dominated by white men.” Sanchez added that a class taught by a “conservative POC [person of color] professor” also “raised a red flag.”

    and think, “Oh, that’s all? I mean, guys, that’s pretty par for the course. We’re supposed to be freaking out over this?”

    God, there will come a reckoning one day, I swear. It will not be pretty.

  15. Who can I talk to about returning this culture? It’s broken.

  16. “Is this not a kind of racism?”

    Clearly Robby has never had reality explained to him. Only white people can be racist. Because being racist requires that you hold power to exert over the oppressed minority. Sure, you probably think that these student groups cordoning off an area for themselves and kicking out “others” while spouting hate is an example of actually holding the kind of power that defines modern racism. But that’s just because you are the kind of colonial, white, cis-hetero oppressor who can never see how hurtful and racist your question really is.

    1. that is the part they have not yet come to understand… there are two parts of racism… and they are now on the wrong side of the moral argument

      first, the personal side– that is to say your personal prejudices towards other groups. every person has said prejudices…. not just whites. this is not possible to eradicate, and it is not even, necessarily, bad or malicious. they are personal perceptions, that are really none of other people’s business.

      second, is the public kind of racism. this is where you actively discriminate. you deny people jobs, access to public accommodations, you shut down their free speech, you harass them. this… is exactly the kind of racism that the civil right movement rose up to fight. this is the kind of racism that should be completely discouraged in a free society. this is the kind of racism that happens when one group uses its power to supplant another group. this is the kind of racism that is demonstrated by calls for officially segregated areas.

      1. “Hey, Shaniqua, can I use your SafeSpace(TM) water fountain?”

    2. Spouting hate requires no power; only enslavement or running an apartheid regime does. I agree “racism” is probably not the best term to describe the brand of insularity the safe space clients exhibit, as they hate on whites less for physiognomy than for success. Envy, in other words. Identities based entirely on historical resentment and self-pity are new on the global scene, and possible only in democracies where the hoi polloi can vote themselves shares of the public purse. The minorities of previous eras never expected quota compensation for wrongs done them as they knew it wasn’t coming.

  17. This Claremont Safe Space for Women of Color Is Actually Pretty Hateful and Racist

    One of the purposes of a college education is to undermine racist and collectivist thinking by exposing students to the uniqueness and intrinsic worth of all people, regardless of skin color, gender, sexuality, ability status, etc.

    literally can’t even

  18. Black people can’t be racist, you stupid bigot

    1. Alt-right Robby is at it again.

    2. I told you, I felt like I woke up in 1991.

    3. But I thought you were one of them black Irish.

    4. Arsenio? Is that you?

  19. “One of the purposes of a college education is to undermine racist and collectivist thinking by exposing students to the uniqueness and intrinsic worth of all people, regardless of skin color, gender, sexuality, *ability status*, etc.”

    Uh…Robby. Ability status does not fall in the same category as skin color, gender, and sexuality. One of these things has to do with your actual ability to accomplish a task, which is pretty relevant.

    There are collectivist statements I could make about people with no legs that are probably accurate. Such as “he would make a poor NBA player.”

    1. Don’t you mean “They would make poor NBA players”?

      You people don’t even know how to do collectivism right.

    2. Yeah. The government is able to pay sub-minimum wage for non-ableist peoples.

      1. Is “non-ableist” the latest euphemism for “handicapped”?

        1. I love the term “ableist”. As if having arms that work is something I came to practice after years of soul-searching and thoughtful consideration.

          1. “Ableist” means you discriminate against cripples.

            1. So, does non-discrimination mean I should treat them exactly the same as the non-cripples, with no special accommodations? I somehow bet it doesn’t.

              1. No, you have to accommodate them exactly as they want to be accommodated by anticipated all the ways they might wish to be accommodated and yet still be ready to admit blame for anything you did wrong.

            2. Damn cripples, always messing up my yard with their crutches and wheelchairs.

    3. It’s “xe would make a poor NBA player” Cis-normative shitlord.

    4. You could also say that about the Pygmies

  20. Us versus Them.

    Since the beginning of time.

    Until the end of time.

    1. Gooble-gobble. Gooble-gobble.

    2. Say…you sound like on of those “them.”

      1. I am an engineer, so yes, I have always been one of them.

      2. Nah…I did use to be one of Them, though.

    3. “Derp endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. Derp was always here. Before Man was, Derp waited for him, the ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner. That is the way it always was and will be. That way, and not some other way.”
      -Judge Derpden, Derp Meridian

  21. On the plus side, this is another college that I can strike off my kids’ list of potential landing spots. By the time he’s ready to apply there may only be 6-8 places left worth going to.

    1. The list is probably pretty small at this point.

    2. Or just make sure the kid goes into a STEM field.

      1. Don’t kid yourself, real soon now all STEM classes will be required to spend the first 4 or 5 classes on social justice.

        Eventually grades will need to take into consideration adjustments for the microaggressions endured by the minority students.

        Its coming.

      2. Because ceding the humanities to these retards has worked so well.

        1. Blame the free market.

          Conservatives/libertarians largely aren’t interested in teaching the humanities (outside of economics), and so don’t.

  22. And I’m sure context would mitigate the offensiveness of some of their remarks.

    DONALD TRUMP NEVER GETS THIS TREATMENT!

    1. That’s Mr. Donald J Trump to you.

    2. Well he has not demonstrated himself to be the racist gasbag that the subjects of this article have.

    3. White cis-hetero shitlords are not entitled to context-mitigation.

    4. WHYCOME TURMP DONT GET SAFE SPACE?

  23. But if students break off into groups based on immutable identity?”and constantly reaffirm their prejudices about members of other identity-based groups?”they aren’t just missing the point of college: they are actively working against it.

    Um, pardon me but this is unmitigated bullshit. The point of college is to receive an education. And People breaking off into groups based on immutable identities is normal. And it can often lend a bit of comfort to people away from home for an extended period of time for the first time in their life. It can ease the transition to a larger cultural world and people have been doing it since kids started going away to college.

    Do you not think black groups on campuses that had previously been segregated in racist parts of the south “worked against the point of college” or do you think it helped people from minority groups have a support network to get through what would arguably have been much tougher had they gone it alone?

    1. And furthermore, do you think it would have been “working against the point of college” for a group of young female cadets to form a social group when the Citadel or VMI started allowing them in? That’s dumb as fuck.

      Oftentimes those types of groups helped their members overcome adversity so they could better pursue “the point of college”, which is supposed to be to get a fucking education as opposed to enter some multi-culti social experiment to the tune of $50k a year.

      Jesus Christ. When did “the point of college” depart from an academic mission?

      1. Jesus Christ. When did “the point of college” depart from an academic mission?

        Probably around the time that grievance “Studies” became a thing.

        1. I swear, I weep for our future as a species. Because the generation after mine is totally fucking retarded.

          1. These are all symptoms of a society that is too affluent and too comfortable. After these idiots cause it all to collapse, things will be sorted out as people will no longer have time and resources to indulge this bullshit. I feel bad for the young kids who are going to get stuck with the aftermath and trying to rebuild it all, though.

            1. And by young kids, I mean those who are currently small children.

              1. I’ve come to the sad realization that my three youngest are either going to have to overcome Sharia law or they’re going to have to reinvent the internal combustion engine. Because western society is collapsing because retards out there think education is overrated and somehow racist/sexist/homophobic/ableist or some other fucking slur not founded in reality. I just wonder whether it will be swallowed up its own asshole or it will self-emasculate to the point the rabid psychopaths bent on our demise will just roll over us.

                1. Meanwhile, Art Briles needs a job.

                  1. And unfortunately for him, Louisville and Miami (FL) already filled their vacancies.

          2. Let’s not excuse ourselves – at least those of us who view racism as more vile than violating the NAP.

            There are too many Reason scribes and commenters here who think that would rather violate the NAP than be accused of raycyzzzzzzzzzzm.

            1. I’m sorry, but it looks like those two sentences contradict each other. Can you rephrase that please?

              /no snark

              1. I think he’s saying there are a number of ‘libertarians’ who are fine with violating the NAP if it’s for a cause they approve of, like enforcing public accommodation laws. Or forcing people to bake gay wedding cakes, or transgender bathroom accommodations, etc.

                1. You thought right. Brownie points for wrapping the quotes around libertarian.

                  1. Thanks to both of you for clearing it up. I thought so didn’t want to misread the “those of us” part of your first sentence. I didn’t think you were referring to yourself but wanted to be positive. I’m learning that a lot of people here who I thought were proponents of the NAP really aren’t when put on the spot.

              2. You expressed concern for the future of our species because the generation after you is totally fucking retarded.

                In my view, some of the fault lies with the people who contend that racism is the worst, most vile, reprehensible phenomenon in the world. Naturally, those who so argue would view racism as far worse than violating the non-aggression principle.

                The universe of people who think that racism is the most wicked of sins includes some Reason writers and a fair percentage of the commentariat. It logically follows that many “libertarians” think that racism is worse than violating the non-aggression principle.

                If A does not want to associate with B because of the latter’s skin color, who are we to support the use of violence to forcibly associate them?

        2. I think it started going downhill sometime in the 80’s. Was that second or third wave feminism?

          There were distinct tinges of this BS in the late 80’s/early 90’s but it was on the edges and not nearly as common nor institutionalized.

          1. That’s when I grew up. Movies with Kristy Swanson aside, I don’t remember there being much said about institutionalized rape culture or this overt bitching about supposed slights. I remember women forming groups on campus…so they could have organized parties and partner with fraternities. I don’t remember them organizing lynch mobs to silence “bros” or to intimidate people who don’t share their beliefs that every other man on campus is a rapist in waiting.

            1. I’m referring to the educational/philosophical trend that led us to where we are. I believe intersectionality dates to the 80’s as does a lot of the Stanley Fish deconstructionist stuff.

              1. I don’t really remember speech codes existing then, though. And wasn’t that a big thing for him? I think that took off in earnest in the early aughts. But I could be glossing over the sins of my generation a little.

                1. It certainly didn’t have the extremist attitudes that exist now, but the philosophical underpinnings were there. The only book by D’Souza that’s worth a damn is Illiberal Education, which covers that era and how reason was beginning to be supplanted by emotion.

      2. From college, I recall the KSA which hated the JSA which hated the CSA which hated the TSA.

        And then there was the BSU, which pretty much resented everybody.

        Now they all just hate whitey. Progress!

      3. I think that the “point of college” has always been explicitly more than just the academic mission. Most older colleges were founded with a specifically religious mission. And as far as I know, they have pretty much always claimed to be the place to shape young people into good, moral people, or good productive citizens, or good Christians or whatever the mission of the particular school was. Yes, academics have been and should be the primary activity, but it was never really the entire “point” or mission of most institutions.

        1. So if moral shaping is the second pillar of an education, then why do moral relativists run the show? University is an academic institution, full stop. Whatever corollaries accompany that is up to each individual institution, but saying that university life is categorically predicated on multicultural indoctrination is a destructive delusion that you’re seeing play out before your eyes.

          1. I’m just talking about what they have done and claimed to do historically. Not approving of anything going on today, necessarily. Some seem to be insisting that the only point is academics, which is something that just about every university would argue with.

            Exposure to people from different cultures at a University with students from different countries and backgrounds is also a rather different thing from the perverse multiculturalism that infects Europe and is making inroads here. The way it should work is that everyone learns from each other and benefits from exposure to different people, not that white people should shut up and learn how evil they are. Of course, now American universities are pushing that same kind of shit, and that is a bad thing which does seem to be undermining the educational mission, which I agree should be the main thing.

            1. Some seem to be insisting that the only point is academics, which is something that just about every university would argue with.

              I don’t think it’s unfair to claim that just about every university has deviated from it’s academic purpose, so the fact that they’d argue with that notion isn’t a game changer.

              Exposure to people from different cultures at a University with students from different countries and backgrounds is also a rather different thing from the perverse multiculturalism that infects Europe and is making inroads here.

              You’re right it’s not the same. I’m not claiming that there are campus ghettos and no-go zones (though now with safe spacism maybe that’s changing). I’m saying that a university education doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with “diversity”, that’s a side dish independent of the main course that can and historically has existed in the absence of the side dish altogether.

              Large cities tend to be places where “people from different cultures, backgrounds and countries” live together, but that’s not the definition of a city and not a necessary component of a city by any means.

            2. If diversity is in fact not an old old wooden ship from the Civil War era, it’s a euphemism for celebrating the innocence and superiority of virtually any non-white culture or ethnic group at the expense of the guilty and inferior white European cultures and ethnic groups. I’m just sick of being beaten over the head with euphemisms meant to destroy western civilization and knock my children down a peg and then being expected to pretend that’s not what is happening.

              1. Or “diversity” could just be a word that means what it says in the dictionary.

                I’m as annoyed as anyone that it has come largely to mean little more than various different kinds of non-white people. But actual diversity (that is, not just of race and ethnicity, but also of thought, beliefs, experiences, etc.) is a good thing.

                Anyway, I’ve sort of wandered off the topic here. I’m not even arguing that diversity is an essential element of college. I’m arguing that colleges and universities have historically often had missions that go beyond just academics and it’s not some new, emerging perversion of their missions or purpose. The diversity thing is largely bullshit because it’s really very superficial and quite often just the kind of euphemism you describe.

                1. Or “diversity” could just be a word that means what it says in the dictionary.

                  Clearly it doesn’t because they don’t want diversity as defined in the dictionary. They especially loathe diversity of thought. They don’t want free market advocates, they don’t want conservatives or libertarians. Diversity of that sort would mean that core assumptions would be challenged regularly and they lose their minds when that happens.

                  I’m arguing that colleges and universities have historically often had missions that go beyond just academics and it’s not some new, emerging perversion of their missions or purpose.

                  I know you’re not arguing in favor of the euphemistic notion of diversity. What I’m arguing, is that these corollary purposes are just that, corollaries, not a single one of those corollary missions is rooted in the definition or in the overall purpose of a university.

                  That would be like saying the whole purpose of a primary school education is to provide a public good at tax payer expense. That claim assumes that taxes are a foundational and an inseparable part of the experience when it’s really not. It’s a present circumstance, an unfortunate one at that.

      4. One of the early reasons to deny women access to universities (and why women-only colleges sprouted up) was the idea that they would only stick around long enough to get their Mrs. and then would drop out. When I went to school (starting in 2003) there were still some women doing this.

        That said, four-year colleges and universities have always included producing well-rounded individuals, rather then just educated-workers, as part of their mission. It’s why four-year colleges have “general degree requirements”.

        You can argue that I needed some of my English courses (up to my technical writing class, at least) for my Bachelor’s of Science, but why did I need another 8 hours of addition humanities and 8 hours of social studies? Did learning a crap-ton about psychology and philosophy better prepare me to be an engineer? Nope. I’d argue they make me a better person, but strictly speaking most of my humanities knowledge is entirely irrelevant to my career.

        So while I get your point, I think it’s important to remember that universities and colleges have, for a very long time now (and I do mean at least the past century, I’m fuzzier on history of academia before then), taken a fairly holistic approach to what the college experience means.

    2. Why can’t each student determine what the point of college is for themselves?

      1. I guess you’re right. College is different things to different people. I just always assumed people with an ounce of brains in their head thought the main purpose was to get an education.

        1. And I agree with that. And think it’s stupid for schools to accommodate people who think they should do pointless activism instead of class work.
          But as I mention above, I think colleges and universities have always had explicit missions beyond just academics.

          1. But as I mention above, I think colleges and universities have always had explicit missions beyond just academics.

            Categorically, university is about education. Everything else just swims in that wake. And clearly any old corollary missions won’t do, they need to not actively work against the pedagogical purpose without which a university would be entirely worthless.

      2. Because the colleges pre-date the student, set the curruculum, and have a campus culture already.

        It behooves the student to choose a college that matches their goals, not for the university to compromise itself to suit every student.

        That said, the point when many straight-out-of-highschool students are choosing their school, when they’re 16/17 and have no idea what they really want to do, is not a time you can really expect them to make terribly informed choices or answer philosophical questions. So we’re stuck with the system we have, where most end up gong to a school that has the right degree program (for what they think they want to spend the next fourty years doing) and the right price.

        Those that are able to choose any school and accurately know what they want to do prior to making a school choice are not the typical student, I think.

        Then again, maybe that’s projection.

      3. That would require individualism and that is completely, totally, not allowed!! Stay in your assigned group!!

  24. Sounds less like bigotry and more pig-ignorance and bitchy whining.

  25. I don’t really want to shame these young women, who probably never expected that their conversations would become fully public. And I’m sure context would mitigate the offensiveness of some of their remarks.

    What? Seriously?

    1. Seriously. Bear in mind Robby still claims that the question of whether Nunguesser raped Emma Sulkowicz is not answerable despite there being 0 evidence that a rape occurred and a great deal of evidence that it didn’t. It would not suprirse me at all if he claimed that World Trade Center 7 was secretively demolished by the government.

      1. I mean…what context, exactly? That they hate white and Asian men? I’m confused as to what kind of context would “mitigate” any of this.

        1. Being on stage at the Improv as a stand-up comic?

          1. Which Improv? IMPORTANT QUESTION

              1. Irvine?

                *has flashbacks of undergrad, retches violently, collapses in a stupor*

        2. Online format with presumed privacy, largely anonymous, with the expectation of a sympathetic audience.

          Same reason why racist grandma really lets loose when she’s at dinner at home, but plays nice and holds her tongue when you’re eating out. Why the tone of idle conversation in the office always changes when a woman walks in the room. Why I used to hear a lot of co-workers make gay jokes until I put a picture of my wedding day on my desk. Why anytime you get with a largely inclusive group and go drinking, you’ll here some really off-color remarks that they would never say in public while sober. Heck, why people in these comment sections feel comfortable joking about killing people based on their ideology (“woodchippers” anyone?).

          It’s not hard to create an environment where people will share opinions that normally they’d be far too polite to say out loud.

          Honestly, I’m really not sure why people are surprised that women of color can behave as bad as everyone else.

    2. I think he’s just trolling us at this point.

      1. Damn well seems like it

      1. I only fart in glass elevators.

  26. “Safe spaces! Damn, why didn’t I think of that? I should have simply said that the colored schools were safe spaces, and going to white schools would trigger them.”

    /George Wallace

    1. Safe spaces today!

      Safe spaces tomorrow!

      Safe spaces forever!

    2. “They moah comf’table among they own kind.”

      1. The current SJW idiots are working hard to try to prove that correct.

        1. Yup. That’s the sad part of the SJW racial agitation; making George Wallace and the like look like prophets.

          1. Could you imagine their reaction if someone today said “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”?

            They’d crawl into their safe space and shit in their pants.

            1. There have actually been, no-shit, protests that white people quoting that line by MLK is racist.

          2. Safe-space Advocate: White cis-gendered racist men despise others because of their color, culture, sexuality, or gender. A safe-space advocate conscientiously believes that it is in the best interest of oppressed groups to have a separate social order.

            Compare the original George Wallace: “A racist is one who despises someone because of his color, and an Alabama segregationist is one who conscientiously believes that it is in the best interest of Negro and white to have a separate education and social order.”

            NB, younger readers: “Negro” was the preferred nomenclature when Wallace made this speech.

            1. Heh…SJW = Social Justice Wallace.

        2. Considering SJW’s are just new age progressives, it’s not shocking at all that they are all racist as fuck.

    3. To be fair, “safe spaces” are social things, not classroom things.

      So in the case of school segregation, “safe spaces” wouldn’t be having segregated schools, it would be intergrated schools with social clubs (but not academic or sports clubs) that were segregated.

  27. And yet, people somehow applaud with short, fat, white nerds self-segregate in their parents basements to play nerd-games.

    1. If by “applaud” you mean “mock”, then sure.

    2. Hey, Johnny Longtorso’s gotta spend his day SOMEWHERE.

    3. It’s the best birth-control we have.

  28. I do find it weird to see university sponsored racism and sexism so openly embraced. But Obama said there is no such thing as “so-called reverse racism” so I guess it’s okay. But this divisiveness is how we end up with Trump. So maybe it’s not okay.

    1. Does Trump openly advocate and practice the overt group think racism that these racist gasbags do?

      1. No, but he’s much worse, because TRUMP!

        1. One would expect Reason scribes to be better able to ratiocinate.

  29. Totally on topic:

    A group of students has been occupying the office of Jodi Kelly, dean of Seattle University’s Matteo Ricci College, who was placed on administrative leave on the sit-in’s 22nd day.

    Seattle University’s interim provost has placed Jodi Kelly, dean of the school’s Matteo Ricci College, on administrative leave amid a student protest over the college’s culture and curriculum.

    Students last month began occupying a part of Kelly’s office, calling for her resignation and changes to the college’s curriculum, which they say focuses too narrowly on Western ideas and history.

    The article doesn’t even really detail why Kelly was placed on leave.

    http://www.seattletimes.com/se…..-protests/

    1. She was placed on leave because FEELZ. Have to placate the little snowflakes, no matter how unreasonable and idiotic they are.

    2. I guess they’ll have to change the name of the school while they’re at it.

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

      I swear, if my kid ever pulls a stunt like occupying someone’s office…

  30. One of the more curious demands made by activists students in the past few months has been the repeated call for segregated safe spaces: places where black students, Latino students, female students, etc.,

    I’m not sure that a person *should* feel any more ‘comfortable and protected’ simply because they’re surrounded by people with similar demographic characteristics.

    I mean, take the Prison Population, for instance.

    1. I don’t know how or why, but saying that is gonna get a RAAAAAAACIST! flag thrown on you.

      1. +1 Red Card (or is that racist?)

    2. students of color formed a blacks-only healing space, and asked white allies to leave. If the space were to be invaded by members of an out-group, it would become unsafe

      I understand how “that’s the thinking”… but is it necessary to actually treat their insane conception of “Safety” as legitimate in order to talk about this stuff?

      I don’t really want to shame these young women, who probably never expected that their conversations would become fully public. And I’m sure context would mitigate the offensiveness of some of their remarks.

      tell that to Donald Sterling. And add “shame” to the same above point re: “treating insane, irrational conceptions as legitimate”

      But the reality is undeniable: this so-called safe space is just really racist.

      ‘racist’ as in VDare-‘Racist’?, or just “people making unflattering observations”? Because who gives a shit if a little clucking-hen circle talks shit about boys? More power to them. Bitching about people is *normal* and doesn’t require tut-tutting.

      Is this not a kind of racism?

      Not really. Until they act on it in with the intent to insult/degrade/hurt others, its just so much stupid yapping.

      It seems to me that this is all just bunch of “Whataboutism” which tries to use SJW-logic against them. Fuck SJW-logic.

      1. It may not be racism without harmful action, if that’s how you want to define it, but it is definitely bigotry.

        1. Bigotry is intolerance of views different from one’s own.

          Intolerance means it must be expressed in the face of these alternate views.

          Insofar as they’re expressing their opinions about these ‘disfavored groups’ to *one another*, and not to the people they’re “bigoted” against…. then its just talk. and it means fucking nothing. No, its not bigotry.

          As per my below example = i knew a lot of very-religious jews growing up who (from their own experience of bigotry growing up) would never allow their children to be friends w/ or date non-jews.

          (for the record, I also knew some Christians who felt the same way in reverse. its not a point about any one group but rather the issue of ‘opinions’ vs. ‘behaviors’)

          I also knew a lot of people *who held uncharitable opinions* about X/Y/Z groups, but still nevertheless socialized with them, let their kids play with them, and never said ‘boo’ in public about their distaste.

          The only parts that are really “bigotry” are the actions taken to express intolerance. Merely having uncharitable opinions about different groups of people is NOT bigotry. Taking action on those opinions and discriminating against them based on their identity or their views, IS bigotry.

          1. Bigotry:

            noun, plural bigotries.
            1.
            stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one’s own.
            2.
            the actions, beliefs, prejudices, etc., of a bigot.

            It does not require action, or the expression of their views to anyone. So, their recorded and documented intolerance of that which differs from their own is sufficient for it to be bigotry.

            1. It does not require action, or the expression of their views to anyone

              Maybe you need to look up “Intolerance” then

            2. What you seem to miss is that “merely having unkind views” of a certain group does not rise to the level of Bigotry unless those views are acted upon in the face of this ‘other group’.

              Merely discussing these views with your in-group is not “bigotry”. If your bigotry doesn’t make itself manifest in any actual behavior, its just a freaking opinion. And anyone is free to have any opinions they want.

          2. It’s also Racism:
            noun
            1.
            a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.
            2.
            a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
            3.
            hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

            It does not actually require action to meet the definition.

  31. Is this not a kind of racism?

    There’s only one kind of racism, and yes, it is.

  32. Colonialism was the best thing to ever happen in a lot of the backwater shitholes littering the globe. Jesus.

  33. As a feminine gay Asian woman…

    Finally, something that can hold my interest here.

    1. Woman, or “woman”?

  34. Also, I love the justification that we shouldn’t judge because this is a “support group” and the kids are helping each other deal with issues.

    I have done A LOT of therapy, including group therapy. Insulting and belittling your adopted father because he hurt your feelings is not a psychologically healthy response, and a person advising you to do that isn’t being a very good support. Better advice may be to, I don’t know, honestly talk to your day and let him know that he hurt your feelings and that you’re not okay with it in a calm, fairly controlled manner. If that doesn’t work, you can escalate then. But there is an adult way to do this.

    In general, it isn’t generally advised to blame all your problems on other people/actively score settle in the modern day. Yes, a lot of psychological problems are the result of a response to your environment- if you were abused as a kid, that teaches you things about your own value and how the world works and so on. But in the present moment, you are responsible for your action, and any good therapist would agree. You don’t have to act one way on your feelings- anger doesn’t have to result in a fight. You can go for a walk instead.

    Sorry for the mini-rant, but it just pisses me off how these groups justify themselves with psychobabble totally divorced from actually healthy psychological support. I worry that it will mean people who really do need help won’t get it, or will get it from the wrong people like these assholes.

    1. Also, it is simply not plausible that hordes of these kids are all-of-a-sudden being so oppressed. They’re learning this crap somewhere.

      1. Claremont’s tuition is $47,150/yr plus another $15,000/yr for room & board.

        These children either come from very affluent families or are recipients of generous scholarships. Either way, they are not oppressed.

  35. “People of color” can’t be racist, Robby. It’s physically impossible for these people to be racist. That is what they are taught in their college courses.

  36. One of the purposes of a college education is to undermine racist and collectivist thinking

    Really? Jeez, I was pretty sure “Racist Collectivism” is actually some people’s *major* now.

    1. That is pretty much the curriculum for the various “Studies” majors.

  37. Why don’t you “want to shame these young women”? They should be called out as racist. And, while I agree that “these students are entitled to their feelings”, are the entitled to impose those feeling on others by excluding them from their “safe place”? Poor babies.

  38. So, what the hell does “bro” mean now anyway? Is it just any straight male?

    I thought it had some kind of stereotypical “fratboy” connotations, but the way these people are using it it seems like it’s just any man they don’t like.

    Get off my lawn, you stupid kids.

    1. It’s bruh now, I think.

    2. Judging from the “Bro-rito” food truck out in front of my office building today, sometimes “bro” still means “black”.

  39. To reiterate some of the above =

    – I don’t care if they want to have little racist exclusive clubs. freedom of association FTW.

    – no, talking shit about people isn’t “Racist”, or if it is it doesn’t rise to the level of something requiring censure and condemnation and outrage. They can believe whatever dumb shit they want. Until they start demanding policy be based on racial criteria and/or start acting abusively towards other groups, they are free to have their dumb collectivist opinions.

    – They don’t need to have had “bad experiences” to ‘validate’ feelings. Feelings are by definition equally worthless in the context of a reasoned argument and no one should be required to take their feelings seriously one way or the other.

    “This [promotion of reconciliation with “others”] is the public good that college is supposed to facilitate.””;

    seems to me that is something just made up out of thin air. “Dealing with Pluralism” is not something a university is required to promote; people will eventually learn (or not) on their own sooner or later… whether they go to college or not. Some will, some won’t. I’ve known some very-religious people who lived their entire lives believing they were members of the Chosen-elect & everyone else was going to hell. I was told i couldn’t date certain girls because their parents wouldn’t accept [insert arbitrary religion] in their house. They all went to college AFAIK and it didn’t change their view.

    1. Yeah, but these people absolutely don’t think freedom of association is a two-way street. It’s what makes further analysis of their standpoint frustrating. They just don’t start their arguments from the same place a libertarian does.

      1. these people absolutely don’t think freedom of association is a two-way street.

        Then wait until they act in a hypocritical way and call them on it. However, this piece is tut-tutting them merely for *existing* in their little private Facebook sphere.

        People can and have (HELLO MARY) in the past taken random H&R comments out of context to try and claim that this is a particularly mean-spirited and hateful group of crazy vile awfulness.

        Of course they’re absolutely *right* 😉 … but the point is = So what? Merely being a bitch-circle is neither a crime nor something to apologize for.

        So what if the “Females of Color of California-Communist-College” have a facebook group? More power to them.

        When they start demanding males be silenced from speaking in classrooms, etc? (*and i know they have, and i expect they will) THEN fight them with the fury of 10,000 suns. But as far as their discussion groups go? i’m unconcerned.

        1. Dammit, I was working on a good, ol’ fashion shit fit for these harpies, and Gilmore has to come along with with his principled point of view and TOTALLY RUIN IT!!

          /FUCK!!!

    2. Until they start demanding policy be based on racial criteria…

      But generally speaking, they do demand that.

      Outside of that criticism, you’re correct, this is really just another example of how people are wasting their money and time at college.

    3. people will eventually learn (or not) on their own sooner or later… whether they go to college or not

      Yeah, the notion that you need college for this is kind of insulting and/or arrogant.

      1. To be fair …college *really might be the first time* people really do engage with a variety of other types of people.

        growing up in NY this was never my problem. But i get it. That still doesn’t mean its the *college’s* job to facilitate it.

        Amusing anecdote I’ve told here before = My very first night in my college dorm

        I got dropped off a few days before campus opened. there was no one in the building except a brazilian kid (who later became a close friend) and a dude from Alabama. We broke out a socializing-implement, some pizza, and got chatty.

        so, Mr Alabama finally chimes in =

        “This is just amazing. College is just so *diverse*.”
        I looked at Brazil. He shrugged.
        “Diverse How?” says I.
        “Well, i mean, just look at us here. We got a yankee from NY, a brazilianish person, and i even saw my first jew today”.
        Pause
        “Where was this?” Up the campus a ways.
        “what was their name?”
        “Oh I didn’t talk to nobody”.
        “were they wearing a star of david?”
        “what now?”
        “A yarmulke?”
        “Huh?”
        “welll…how did you *know* they were jewish if you didn’t talk, and they weren’t wearing anything…”

        Alabama looks at us like we’re nuts.

        “Dont you know what they *look like*?”
        I figured it was a waste to explain how many bar-mitzvahs i’d attended

        “ok, what do they look like”

        He gets into scientific-explanation mode =
        “Well, they all look a bit like Leonard Nimoy…..”

        He basically began to describe an arab-newspaper cartoon

        1. That’s some funny shit.

          Everything you’ve said in this thread is spot-on, btw.

        2. and no, i’m not trying to make some point about Southerners. My family is mostly from North Carolina and i have heaps of cracker-ass tobacco farmers in my blood. I was just saying *this one dude* was hick as fuck

          1. You don’t have to tell me. I went to school in NH. I was that “holy shit, look at that guy!” guy for a lot of people from Coos County.

            1. I wasn’t replying to you, i threw the above in there as a post-script in the event some of our southern colleagues might take umbrage at the suggestion they were less-than-worldly.

              but thanks for your comment. btw, – that thing the other day about education reform – did i get something wildly wrong re: referencing the “prussian model”, or were you genuinely concurring? i sometimes can’t tell.

              1. If I remember correctly, I approved of your message.

            2. Co?s? GTFO. Really?

              1. Yeah, there’s nothing fucking metal about the place at all.

                Well, except for the rock quarries.

        3. growing up in NY this was never my problem. But i get it.

          I grew up in a diversity bureaucrat’s wet dream but even still I remember all the indoctrination against “prejudice” starting in elementary school – in the late seventies. It’s hard to believe that kids aren’t getting diversity seminars from kindergarten on. Granted most of that is bullshit but still.

          1. l I remember all the indoctrination against “prejudice” starting in elementary school – in the late seventies.

            I never got any indoc from what i can recall.

            My neighbors were every flavor of the rainbow and there were at least a dozen religions on my block. I’ve always had a thing for “freedom OF religion” (as opposed to the atheist ‘freedom FROM’ thing) because of my childish assumption that it was NORMAL for there to be like 30 different gods to choose from and that life would be boring if there weren’t lots of different churches and that everyone had their own magic and robes and incense and bizarre rituals etc.

            It just made sense to me that pluralism was very normal, and it seemed weird to me whenever we went somewhere there was only 1 type of person. And it never occurred to me to wonder if the chinese or japanese or vietnamese or indian or black or arab kids were “any less american” than me, because i was informed my fathers parents had come off a boat not so long ago themselves.

            i find the whole M.O. of “Teaching Diversity” to be inherently contradictory; to me there was nothing to ‘teach’. it was just self-evident fact. By trying to lecture Group A about how they need to be “Tolerant” of Group B is a process of saying “Groups Matter” by *definition*. Insisting everyone ‘give a fuck’ about minor racial differences is simply (in my view) creating a problem to solve.

  40. “One of the purposes of a college education is to undermine racist and collectivist thinking by exposing students to the uniqueness and intrinsic worth of all people, regardless of skin color, gender, sexuality, ability status, etc.”

    WTF!!!!

    No, that is categorically not one of the purposes of a college education

  41. ‘Safe Spaces’ are inherently hateful and racist. They can be no other.

  42. professor of color

    Sometimes I think Robby has a team of SJW intern ghostwriters trying to write as though they were the allegedly anti-PC Robby Suave.

    One of the purposes of a college education is to undermine racist and collectivist thinking by exposing students to the uniqueness and intrinsic worth of all people, regardless of skin color, gender, sexuality, ability status, etc.[…]This is the public good that college is supposed to facilitate.

    Or maybe the present state of university discourse should be taken as evidence that the theory that a university education eiether is or should be a multicultural concentration camp, has fallen flat on it’s face.

    But if students break off into groups based on immutable identity?”and constantly reaffirm their prejudices about members of other identity-based groups?”they aren’t just missing the point of college: they are actively working against it.

    Because it’s not the fucking point of college. College is a place to be educated, particularly where it concerns ones professional career choices. It’s not a diversity training seminar and it’s not a campfire singalong.

    Planned and policy driven multiculturalism doesn’t work in society at large and it doesn’t work when you centrally plan diversity in a small area like a campus either.

    1. People keep confusing a ‘liberal arts education’ (which is all about ‘broadening your horizons’) with ‘university – which is all about post-high school education in general and career training in specific. The whole ‘exposure to new ideas’ is a neat side-benefit of going to college but its not guaranteed to be there nor is it of primary importance when it is.

      1. Nor does the “broadening of horizons” justify racial quotas and degrading academic standards to accommodate those who don’t belong there while turning away hard working candidates that ought to be in their place.

  43. “…One student, who had been adopted, complained about her white parents.”

    Those poor parents. Awful.

    1. I saw that. And the saddest thing is that it has to make white people have second thoughts about adopting black children. Adopting a black child would be great right up until the race haters got a hold of them. And how, short of moving to a compound in the mountains, could you keep that from happening?

      1. My parents have close friends who adopted a black girl. Imagine. A couple from old world Italy in the 1970s adopting a black girl. The old man died recently unfortunately. I really, really, really nice man. When I went to pay my respects her grief made clear that was her father.

        1. A really. Ugh.

          /ruffles Robby’s hair.

          “One of the purposes of a college education is to undermine racist and collectivist thinking by exposing students to the uniqueness and intrinsic worth of all people, regardless of skin color, gender, sexuality, ability status, etc.”

          Aside from the fact I don’t think this is so, I managed to go through four years of university and never once heard anything remotely like this from professors or students. Ever.

          1. If racist and collectivist thinking is truly inferior, and to a large extent it is, then those ideas should naturally lose in the marketplace of ideas. To suppose that university is all about promoting one particular set of ideas beyond the one single claim that ‘academic pursuits=good’, is to utterly disavow the notion of a marketplace of ideas. Robby seems to have knack for being just barely wrong most of the time. Probably because he accepts so many vaguely leftist assumptions at face value.

            1. mercantilism can be manipulated and dictated to by power and to your point that I think is what is occurring. Just as their ‘crat minnions regulate markets to twist them to their whims to gain more power, so to the market of ideas. While Mao was right, he was a fast tracker. In a democracy (sic) that has guns, ya gotta take the masses along a little slower.

          2. Ugh is right Rufus.

  44. OT =

    Robby, saw that speaking-event video posted on Youtube (“How the Federal Government Is Killing Free Speech on Campus” – which i think is still only on the home page here, but was never linked in H&R or reason.tv)

    Great job. Its always nice to hear people talk extemporaneously about their work outside of formal writing. you made a number of interesting points which i think added useful color to the way you choose to cover things. I think if anyone else hasn’t seen it yet its worth checking out.

  45. If you’re heading off to college, learn and use this phrase: “Fuck off with your guilt-peddling, you commie prick!”. Use it often.

    -jcr

  46. Sounds like a plan dude.

    http://www.Goin-Anon.tk

  47. How many more Reason articles are going to be written in this manner where there’s a CONSTANT underlying theme of ‘let’s be gentle ‘ a reticence about calling out absurd, RACIST, SUPREMACIST SJW’s?

    The other day it was Shackford (sp?) and his ‘cautious’ gentle treatment of these fucking loons?

    For fucks sake, the other day Milo Yiannopolous (sp?) was physically assaulted when ‘protesters’ took over the stage, grabbed microphones and yet again – blatantly interfered with free speech while campus admins ORDERED security not to intervene/arrest and did the same when Chicago Police arrived

    Why is Reason apologizing for these fucktards?

    Is it the soft bigotry of low expectations?

    If this was a student KKK group would they be so polite ?

    Stop being such fucking pussies (oh, is that sexist Hate speech?) and stand up for free speech and free association and call these fucking racist supremacist authoritarian loons what they are!!!

  48. Mr. Soave, I think you are being too kind in regard to these racist misandrists. You say that of course they have the right to free speech, and, yes, they do. But if they use that right to try to deny it to others, to drown out the voices of any whose opinions differ, to refuse equal space and time to groups or speakers that “offend” them, are they not giving up their right to exercise that right?

    1. Nobody ‘gives up’ rights – but what they are doing is (usually) NOT exercising their rights

      Like here…

      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W8uMFIdTxCk

  49. A college education that exposes students to racial, sexual orientation etc diversity WHILE INSULATING THEM from the diversity of IDEAS is not a real education

    These ‘safe spaces’ etc protect them from the very IDEAS they should be confronting

    College is supposed to be an uncomfortable process of stepping outside what is often a comfortable room and being exposed to things that make you think make you feel uncomfortable and even yes scar College is supposed to be an uncomfortable process of stepping outside what is often a comfortable room and being exposed to things that make you think make you feel uncomfortable and even yes … SCARED!!!

    They want to remove the Giants of English literature FROM English lit because of skin color and (presumed) orientation?

    These people are the biggest threats to liberty in America and Reason is constantly bending over backwards to ‘yea but’ their authoritarian racist anti-free thought excesses

    It’s fucking amazing

    That’s how people grow

    That is the diversity the regressive left fights against tooth and nail

    For fucks sake they want to remove

    1. yeah and when their lives are a miserable fucking failure, they will turn to daddy government to help and blame successful people for keeping them down.

  50. Reason should be covering THIS story

    THIS is SJW violent racist authoritarians in action

    BLM thugs interfering yet again with free speech

    And TRULY interfering with “ACCESS”
    To speech, Reason

    When you trespass on stage at an event with hired speakers, grab mics, set up a phalanx of thugs in front of the stage and are abetted by a campus admin that orders security (paid for by those who put on this event … Several hundred extra dollars) to NOT Protect the rights of the speakers- well this is the thuggery of the regressive left

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W8uMFIdTxCk

  51. the article: “One of the purposes of a college education is to undermine racist and collectivist thinking by exposing students to the uniqueness and intrinsic worth of all people, regardless of skin color, gender, sexuality, ability status, etc. ” Uh, no. When did that become a purpose? The purpose of college is to learn stuff. Secondarily it is about individual maturation. Third about having fun.

  52. I have had two great shocks in my life. The first shock was leaving home for the first time to go to college. The second great shock was leaving college and entering the real world. The first shock I blame on the parochialism of rural America, the second on the ideological echo chamber of modern academia.

  53. I guess I’m just not seeing the big deal here. Private opinions told in confidence are unflattering! So shocking!

    I mean really, you don’t think those all-boys clubs at Harvard have been host to all sorts of similar conversations about women over the years?

    Are the girls showing some racist opinions? Sure. But you’ll have to do more then publicly show their private conversations before I’ll care. Maybe if they were going for some elected office it might be relevant, but so long as they’re students being students, this seems like a gross overreaction.

  54. Great article Milo Robbo.

  55. One true story about students’ snippy comments, though. My church college had “unity week,” “brotherhood month,” and similar snorefests, where people stood up and emoted about such tragedies as the fact that most tables in the school cafeteria were either “Black” or “White” (less attention to the fact that some were also “foreign”). Some White (or legally White) friends and I used to make fun of those little chapel talks, during my first two years. If people wanted to see mixed-race tables, why didn’t *they* sit at them? All those people were doing was reinforcing prejudice. Sneer, sneer, sneer.

    My third (and last) year, a lot of friends in different little cliques left, leaving a lot of congenial acquaintances who weren’t yet friends. We drew together, and what d’you know, we had one (sometimes spilling over into two) of those mixed-race *and bilingual* tables.

    1. My church college…

      What’s a church college and where can I get one?

      Want blacks and whites to sit together? What incentives are you prepared to offer?

      1. 1. Short phrase for “the church-sponsored college I attended.” You can get one by convincing any church-sponsored college that you’re a good little member of the church who wants to study in an atmosphere of denominational bias, with mandatory chapel sessions, single-sex dormitories, and 10 p.m. or earlier curfews for freshmen. ;-D

        2. You’re right, though. Earnest nerdly version, which this site probably doesn’t need, but anyway: People sooo need to move beyond “wanting Blacks and Whites to sit together” and just quietly accepting that, if and when the little prep school cliques break up, then Lee (who is Black) and Tracy (who is White) and also Wing (which sounds either Red or Yellow, but what’s it to me?) might happen to want to sit together. Or not. That’s the point of progress beyond segregation, through bean-counting, to actually recognizing people different from self as fellow members of the human race.

  56. “Imagine a student from a socially conservative background meeting an out-gay person for the first time…”

    We don’t really have to imagine this. It certainly happens all the time. Imagine, though, if Bobby Soave were to write about it!

  57. Forming your own closed-off, race/gender based hate groups is the opposite of “collectivism”. It’s tribalism.

  58. Ku Klux Klan members are a minority, too, subject to all kinds of micro- and macro-aggressions. I wonder how college administrators would react to the idea of a safe space for Klan members, so they could discuss white supremacy without threat of interference from people who disagree with them.

    Of course the response is that historically oppressed groups are privileged groups: they need special treatment to counteract past oppression. Soave is correct to point out that creating safe spaces for privileged groups does not include making them aggressive purveyors of new oppressions, or promoters of the same kind of prejudicial thinking that led them to feel unsafe in the first place.

    If you want to feel safe, embrace difference. As soon as you mark other groups out as antagonistic, unfriendly or suspicious, you will never feel safe again.

    1. Seeing as this was a private Facebook group, there’s absolutely no reason to believe there *isn’t* a similar KKK “safe space”. They might have to use a different name (“Geography Club”, maybe) but they can certainly get the same safe space these girls had.

  59. More proof Democrats never really left their Dixiecrat heritage behind.

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

    ????? http://www.Reportmax90.com

  61. I am making $95/hour working from home. I never thought that it was legitimate but my best friend is earning $12 thousand a month by working online, that was really surprising for me, she recommended me to try it. just try it out on the following website…

    —————————————>>>> http://www.earnmore9.com

  62. “I don’t really want to shame these young women”

    sigh….and why not? They are simple-minded, racist, hateful little twats. If they were white men no one would hesitate to heap the shame on them.

  63. Hey! I have recently started following you and every post of yours inspires me to make stuff on my own. Thanks a lot! It’s a great post.
    slitherio supersnakeio

  64. Great info! I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don’t know what to say except that I have.
    |happy wheels game |five nights at freddy’s

  65. I’m not sure that “racist” is the best terminology for Claremont’s feminine Asian girls’ group; “self-piteous insularity” might fit better. The ideology is unhealthy not for racism, but simply for militating against success?note how the tech-savvy Asians become “honorary whites,” thus joining the oppressors of multiculturalism’s celebrated “people of color.” Soave needed make far fewer concessions to the safe space boosters on campus than he did, when student activity fees often running $500 a semester are tapped to fund them.

  66. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser?

    ???? http://www.selfCash10.com

  67. Why don’t you out them?
    Theyd’ get a quick taste of the real world.

  68. I went to the Independent article, and frankly, it was pretty mild stuff. The saddest part was that some of the writers are so scared of interacting with white males. I don’t doubt that there are jerks on campus, but I suspect these students could handle attending class with them.

  69. 2″My friend just told me about this easiest method of freelancing. I’ve just tried it and now II am getting paid 15000usd monthly without spending too much time.You can also do this.

    >>>>> https://www.Cashpay60.tk

  70. I agree with your point. Should not discriminate between white, black or yellow. All of them can play free Slither.io

  71. I would like to say that this blog really convinced me to do it! Thanks, very good post. word cookies game | hotmail email login

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.