MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Columbia Students Interrupted a Sex and Gender Class to Protest a Professor They Disagree With (Updated)

"Professor Goldberg proudly refers to her experience as an LGBTQ rights lawyer while continuing to create a dangerous environment for students."

GoldbergScreenshot via VimeoThis post has been updated, see below.

Last week, activist students at Columbia University barged into a Sexuality and Gender Law class to protest the professor, a vice president and Title IX administrator who is insufficiently committed to the cause, according to the protesters.

The incident was captured on video. Led by junior Amelia Roskin-Frazee, who is suing Columbia for failing to properly investigate her sexual assault accusations under Title IX, the students entered Goldberg's small discussion class and began to talk over her.

"We are here today because despite the repeated efforts of student organizers, survivors at Columbia and Barnard are still endangered by administrators like Suzanne Goldberg," said Roskin-Frazee, reading from a prepared statement. "Professor Goldberg proudly refers to her experience as an LGBTQ rights lawyer while continuing to create a dangerous environment for students, including queer students, on this campus."

Goldberg repeatedly asked the students to leave, and accused them of violating university policy by disrupting her class. They eventually departed—on their own time, after the Roskin-Frazee was finished speaking.

Goldberg has become a frequent target of campus activism, according to Campus Reform's Toni Airaksinen:

Just last year, student members of Columbia Divest for Climate Justice were caught on video stalking her to her taxi, screaming at her that they wanted "divestment" as she fled.

Just a day earlier, students had followed her to a campus administrative building to call for divestment, as well.

Goldberg did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Roskin-Frazee declined to comment.

I don't want to see students punished for expressing their opinions, but a class meeting to which they were not invited is certainly the wrong time and place to do so. If students felt free to barge into classrooms and lecture halls and rant at professors they don't like, the most basic function of the university would be compromised.

Just as it was wrong to shut down an ACLU attorney attempting to advise students on their First Amendment rights, it is also wrong to disturb the operations of a random class. In fact, it's something of a new low for the campus anti-speech movement.

Updated at 1:00 p.m.: A university spokesperson sent me the following statement on behalf of Goldberg, to whom it is attributed: "There are many times in the day when I am glad to meet with students or hear students' views on university life issues, but interrupting a class is never acceptable."

Group of students protesting Suzanne Goldberg's class today from Bwog on Vimeo.

Photo Credit: Screenshot via Vimeo

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.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I don't want to see students punished for expressing their opinions, but a class meeting to which they were not invited is certainly the wrong time and place to do so.

    Trespassing, on the other hand...

    Professor Goldberg, behold the generation to which you will be passing your torch. Attention whores more than ideologues.

  • timbo||

    The only solace in witnessing the demise of capitalism and freedom is watching the Marxist imbeciles and the willing idiot sheep eat themselves.

    Zombies marching over a cliff is hilarious.

    All the better when they try to explain their lunacy. They sound like word of the day athletes and preachers.

  • Sanjuro Tsubaki||

    Their movement won't destroy itself if authorities continue to to prop them up.

  • BambiB||

    Actually, I'd like to see the students in the class stand up and beat the living shit out of these morons.

    Odds are, they are not even students - at least, not in the traditional sense. Many of today's college attendees are simply there to spend their student loan money. By lowering the academic requirements and funding any moron who wants to go to college, we wind up with dreck like this - and Berkeley - and Missouri.

  • pxm||

    Like Saturn, the Revolution devours its children.

  • Griffin3||

    Any student in a "Sexuality and Gender Law" class deserves what they get?

  • Chipper Morning, Mean Girl||

    When the Other becomes too otherly to properly other, a New Other is chosen from the brotherly or sisterly ranks of the faithful.

  • Principal Spittle||

    Not so. The existence of sexuality and gender based law requires gender and sexuality law classes. If you run afoul of these (horrible) laws you will be desperate for a lawer conversant in the twisted logic that will be used against you.

  • ||

    So it's a self fulfilling legal boondoggle you say?

  • Principal Spittle||

    Yes.
    When God confronted Adam concerning the first transgression of law, he mounted a gender based defense. "She made me do it!"
    It's noteworthy that he was unsuccessful in this bid and we have been left to wonder if it would have gone differently were the roles reversed.
    Men would suffer VERY greatly in childbirth?

  • Leo Kovalensky||

    Men would suffer VERY greatly in childbirth?

    With all the yelling and screaming, I could barely hear the ballgame.

  • Bearded Spock||

    Blue-on-Blue warfare is always fun to watch.

    The irony is that Professor Goldberg probably did the same thing back in her college days. She has suddenly woke up to discover that now she's the Establishment, not the Rebel.

  • Brandybuck||

    The left side of the left-vs-left autophagist equation is outright dumbfounded by this behavior. "We're not the establishment! Don't they know we aren't the establishment?!?!" What they fail to understand is that they weren't fighting the establishment back in the day either.

  • colorblindkid||

    "I don't want to see students punished for expressing their opinions, but..."
    Aaaaand there's the classic Robby disclaimer. Without fail.

    Good reporting all around, though.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    At this point, he does it on purpose.

  • Bearded Spock||

    It's actually a type of identity confirmation; a sign to us readers that it's the Real Robby, and not some unpaid intern or computer program that is writing the article.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    I don't know, I would think it would be fairly easy to create a computer program to write a Robby Soave article. It probably wouldn't be much more difficult than the Thomas Friedman Op/Ed Generator.

  • Bra Ket||

    I think he meant it more in terms of the slippery slope to expelling students with Trump hats and the like.

    But this would be a great opportunity to teach the students some real lessons about what freedom of speech is and is not. Not that they'd care. They fantasize that they're doing some kind of civil disobedience martyrdom by acting like assholes.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    The only reason they're doing this is because the chances of actually getting martyred are miniscule. The black civil rights protestors in the 50s showed far more sack than these twerps because they risked their lives for their cause.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    They're not wrong. What they did made headlines. If they did it out in front of the building nobody would have noticed. Some people think there's no such thing as bad publicity.

  • Eric Bana||

    I don't want to see students punished for expressing their opinions, but a class meeting to which they were not invited is certainly the wrong time and place to do so.

    Is there something that's clearly problematic with this statement? 'Cuz I don't see it.

  • colorblindkid||

    There isn't. Robby just always adds these unnecessary phrases in his articles so lefties don't think he's some evil rightie, and it's a running joke. I like Robby. It's just funny finding it in every single article.

  • BYODB||

    It's sort of like a Where's Waldo game at this point; can you find the hedging phrase?

  • Citizen X - #6||

    survivors at Columbia and Barnard are still endangered by administrators like Suzanne Goldberg

    I don't think this word means what they think it means.

  • SilentSkies||

    Inconceivable!

  • Agammamon||

    Anybody want a peanut?

  • ||

    the Roskin-Frazee

    Is that a polite way of saying the douchebag?

  • Zeb||

    It is now!

  • Rich||

    Nice band name.

  • Bretzky||

    The only way this nonsense will end is if university administrators start vigorously enforcing order on campus. If you can't or won't abide by the precepts required for a university to function, then you should not be allowed on campus.

  • Lily Bulero||

    Start making arrests. What has the university got t lose - they'll get called fascists anyway. Maybe the prospect of prison time will scare some students straight.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    Arrests for school disruptions? What do you think this is K-12?

  • Lily Bulero||

    I don't but apparently the students do.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Prison time. For protesting. Trespassing, at worst.

    I thought this was a libertarian site?

  • Azathoth!!||

    For trespassing.

    Libertarians are notorious for their support of private property rights.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    It's tenous to call this trespassing and to declare that this event is punishable by PRISON.

  • chemjeff||

    If administrators at Columbia University want to tolerate mischievous student behavior in the service of some higher principle such as freedom of expression, then they should be free to do so.

    If administrators at some other university have a no-tolerance policy for students who step even one millimeter over the line of unacceptable behavior and expel them, then they should be free to do so as well.

    Since, by and large, university administrators don't run their campuses like mini-bootcamps, it would appear that the administrators' desire for dialogue is greater than their desire for a perfectly ordered campus. Which, on the whole, should be celebrated as a good thing.

  • ||

    America needs more LAW and ORDER to defend it's white libertarian culture, chemjeff. Don't you know anything?

  • Migrant Log Chipper||

    A double dose of dimwitted digression.....brilliant.

  • Migrant Log Chipper||

    WAITER...there's a NAZI in my soup.

  • BYODB||

    It's interesting to note that the schools this type of idiocy seems to come out of are the institutions that have such an ingrained 'big name' that they seem immune to people not wanting to go there over this type of madness. Like, this is Columbia. That's a relatively good 'name' school to have on your resume from what I understand (depending on major) but this type of thing hardly jives with that reputation.

    I suspect your average State U can't get away with allowing this type of thing because it might actually hurt them. Schools like Yale or Harvard will continue receiving students regardless, I think.

    Although it does seem like it comes out of all schools, it seems like it's far more prevalent at the 'big name' schools. Maybe it has something to do with what they're 'teaching' students? Or maybe the bigger schools have more room for idiot programs for these types of future professional rabble-rousers and these are their final projects?

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Interesting. I had the exact opposite perspective. Most of the universities that Reason highlights for this sort of thing are small liberal arts schools with no reputation. Berkeley is usually the exception, not the rule.

  • RT||

    I agree with your point that administrators should be free to do as they will, but I don't think "dialogue" is happening here and I seriously don't think the administrators are approaching this in that way, either. It's either fear of ticking off the wrong people or agreeing with the protestors in principle.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    ...or, there's a law suit pending and it's a bad idea to piss off the plaintiff, especially when you may be able to use her unusual behaviors to support your own side.

  • AndyWingall||

    I think by referring to these radical Leftists as "snowflakes" we encourage people to treat them with kid's gloves. It would serve everyone better if we refer to them what the really are--mean oppressive bullies.

  • timbo||

    And by "mean oppressive bullies" you mean - complete pansies who hide behind the herd of ignorant douchebags that own the narrative.

    This is the "Scause for a Clause" southpark episode every day now. Do nothing of substance, just protest like cowardly assholes. I would like to see antifa really go nuts somewhere other than my town just once. Do some real crime and stand trial for it like a real revolutionary.

    These pussies think they are in Tiananmen Square when they are really just crying in the student lounge with AC, Ping-Pong, and a smorgasbord of food choices.

  • Bra Ket||

    And by "mean oppressive bullies" you mean - complete pansies who hide behind the herd of ignorant douchebags that own the narrative.

    As opposed to bullies that only take on their equals in fair fights with even odds?

  • timbo||

    They are not even bullies. They are complainers.

    As usual in American vernacular, we have taken the word bully to apply to every form of language we do not like.

    A bully is a school kid that pushes people around until they are challenged. anything beyond school age is a called a jerk and should be dealt with or run from like in life.

    Americans are now the biggest pussies on earth.

  • Bra Ket||

    I think it's a decent metaphor. The students aren't simply making noise and getting in people faces rudely without consequence. An example of that would be the neo-nazi protestors who (despite everyone obsessing over the new genocidal regime they are expected to start any second now) have almost no chance of getting any of their demands. The students on the other hand are getting people fired. Even if they don't manage to destroy your career, who wants the students at the place he or she teaches every day to be screaming and chanting for his head on a platter?

  • BYODB||

    Hey now! We'll always have the French to look down upon!

  • Paloma||

    At least Mafioso bullies don't expect people to feel sorry for them. These twits think of themselves as victims, with a twist. "I'm not a victim, I'm a survivor". The twit actually referred to herself as a survivor. At least the Weathermen never stopped that low.

  • Domina Elle||

    Hilarious

  • Cynical Asshole||

    It would serve everyone better if we refer to them what the really are--mean oppressive bullies.

    I prefer the term "cry-bullies" personally. They're bullies and cry-babies at the same time. If they thought for one second that they might actually have to face some kind of repercussions for their actions they'd cut this shit out. But they know they'll be held accountable for their actions.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    Dammit

    *But they know they won't be held accountable for their actions.*

  • Liberty =><= Equality||

    They will be when they try to enter the workforce.

  • timbo||

    They are already being held accountable in the workforce.

    The robots are making them obsolete. They may make me obsolete as well but watching this idiots crying in the face of reality will be comedic theater. Then the riots will start.

  • Cy||

    We don't riot when we're armed, we revolt.

  • Ride 'Em||

    They won't enter the work force. They will become professors or community organizers or political operatives or writers Vox. Something that doesn't improve life on earth.

  • Liberty =><= Equality||

    The term is supposed to be ironic, though the irony may be lost on some people.

  • Rhywun||

    Just last year, student members of Columbia Divest for Climate Justice were caught on video stalking her to her taxi, screaming at her that they wanted "divestment" as she fled.

    Because of course the Sexuality and Gender Law professor holds the university's purse strings.

  • Spartacus||

    That was pretty much my first thought.
    Actually, it was my second thought. My first was "all these students are on video committing a serious breach of the student conduct policy (disrupting a class). I wonder if any of them will face any consequences?" After I finished laughing, I went on to my second thought.

    Really, what should happen is that all those enrolled students paying five figures for their classes ought to sue the activists for the missed class time. *That* would be entertaining.

  • Texasmotiv||

    I had to look up 'Divest for Climate Justice' because it sounded like a fake name that someone made up as a satire of SJWs. Nope, it's a thing, it's just - really - buzzword heavy.

  • Old Mexican's Speedos||

    Last week, activist students at Columbia University barged into a Sexuality and Gender Law class to protest the professor, a Title IX administrator who is insufficiently committed to the cause, according to the protesters.


    Welcome to the Maoist world you ushered in, professor. You reap what you sow. You wanted to instill bad ideas in your students, you get people shouting at you for not being 'pure enough'.

    This Cultural Revolution is only different in one aspect: these students are not yet perpetrating serious acts of aggression against teachers and intellectuals yet. But congratulations on your new baby, professor: it's a monster!

  • Trainer||

    This certainly was an act of aggression, passive-aggression but still 100% aggression. And the one thing we know about passiveaggressives is that they only stay passive as long as they feel it's working. Once the police show up or someone stands up to their nonsense, the aggression becomes much more active.

  • mjerryfuerst||

    What does this have to do with "Maoist"? What do you mean by Maoist?

  • Microaggressor||

  • Liberty =><= Equality||

    What about the professor at Evergreen State who was advised by police to stay away from campus because he had said something the little darlings found upsetting?

  • Domina Elle||

    You took the words right out of my brain

  • Rebel Scum||

    Proggies eat their own.

  • Tony||

    They're not the only ones. Sen. Corker isn't even an 18 year-old.

  • DesigNate||

    Most of the republican establishment are progressives, Tony.

  • Old Mexican's Speedos||

    If students felt free to barge into classrooms and lecture halls and rant at professors they don't like, the most basic function of the university would be compromised.


    "Here's a check with the tuition money we're returning to you. Now, get the hell out of here!"

    That should be the right response to such acts of intimidation by these inconsiderate brats.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Agreed, except all that wokeness tuition money should probably go to the actual students whose classes and events got disrupted. "Here you go. Sorry we let in a bunch of assholes who tried to screw up your pursuit of knowledge."

  • Brandybuck||

    None of the actual students were attending her class anyway.

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting in to.

    I say, let 'em crash!

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    ""They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting in to.

    I say, let 'em crash!""

    Surely, you can't be serious.

  • AndyWingall||

    Cut me some slack, Jack! Chump don' want no help, chump don't get no help!

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    Golly

  • Paloma||

    Especially if the check bounced.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    """Here's a check with the tuition money we're returning to you. Now, get the hell out of here!""'

    It should be free tuition for them. So they think.

    I saw a video where some students were doing a SWJ protest in class on the day mid-terms where scheduled. They were trying to get the class to walk out so no one would have to take the test. And to think, these are the very same people that want the tax payer to pay for their school. One of my thoughts on that is that if you don't think you're worthy of self investment, you're probably right and I don't think the taxpayer should have to invest in you.

  • John C. Randolph||

    I wouldn't give them a refund. If they think they're entitled to it, they can litigate and let a jury tell them to fuck off.

    -jcr

  • Cynical Asshole||

    Last week, activist students at Columbia University barged into a Sexuality and Gender Law class to protest the professor, a Title IX administrator who is insufficiently committed to the cause, according to the protesters.

    Hey, dipshits! You're supposed to eat your own AFTER you've seized power, not before. Morons. Thanks God our wannabe "revolutionaries" are so much more stupid than previous generations. Lenin wouldn't even consider these fuckwits to be "useful idiots." He'd probably think of them as just plain idiots and put them up against a wall the first chance he got.

  • Liberty =><= Equality||

    On college campuses, gender marxists are the ones in power.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Just last year, student members of Columbia Divest for Climate Justice were caught on video stalking her to her taxi, screaming at her that they wanted "divestment" as she fled.

    Just a day earlier, students had followed her to a campus administrative building to call for divestment, as well.

    What does that even mean?
  • Cynical Asshole||

    I'm not sure either. I thought the "divestment" crap was when students cry-bully activists try to force the university or corporations from investing in anything that will go towards Israel. IOW, no investing in any company that trades with Israel (but don't you dare suggest that these fuck-wads are anti-semites). And I thought "climate justice" was their catchy euphemism for transferring wealth from "rich countries" to "poor countries" because, you see, the "rich countries" only got rich by stealing from the "poor countries" and killing Gaia or some such horseshit, so we "owe" the "poor countries" reparations for our sins. It's the usual faulty zero sum economic thinking wrapped up in environmentalist garbage and used as an excuse to redistribute wealth on a global scale

    But what one has to do with the other, I have no idea. It doesn't make any sense at all. I think it's just a bunch on nonsensical word salad that basically translates to "WE'RE TOTES WOKE 'N' YER NOT UNLESS YOU DO WAT WE WANTZ!!11!!11!!!!1!!!!!! WHAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!11!!!!!!!!!!!"

  • Rhywun||

    Divesting pensions from dirty energy (and other yokel interests like guns) is big in California and elsewhere lately.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    Ah, I see. Instead of investing in anything that might actually produce a decent ROI, you only invest in things that are sufficiently woke like solar panels, unicorn farts, and pixie dust. AKA "woke investing." You won't make enough money to retire on, ever, but you'll have the smug self satisfaction that at least you didn't contribute to the further raping of Mother Gaia.

  • Cyto||

    As far as I recall, divestment on college campuses started with the Anti-apartheid movement.

    But then again, boomers who were around for the anti-war protests of the Viet-Nam era might think that divestment started with the military industrial complex in the early 70's.

    I dunno. Somebody was probably calling for divestment from colonial investments back in the 1600's.

  • Jerryskids||

    I blame the parents. When your three-year old throws a temper tantrum, giving him what he wants teaches him that throwing a temper tantrum works. You should have put a stop to that shit when he was little - when your three-year old throws a fit you immediately snatch him up, take him home, gather up a few of his favorite toys and smash them. You don't argue with him, bargain with him, try reasoning with him, giving him a lecture, you just punish him. No means no, period.

    Given that the college admins are supposed to be acting in loco parentis, somebody needs to smack the shit out of them and tell them the key word there is "parentis", not "loco" you deranged assholes.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    "I blame the parents."

    I blame the people who did it.

  • Braunasaurus||

    Holy crap since when is there a Q added to the end.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    Actually if they only added a Q to the end and didn't also add the I and the + (LGBTQI+) and a bunch of other letters then they weren't sufficiently "woke" either and should be sent to re-education post haste. And for even asking about the Q, you should just be put straight up against a wall and shot because you're clearly not even worth trying to re-educate, you cis-hetero shitlord! /sarc

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    It's the exclusion inclusion. The Q wants to be excluded from the LGBT, but also wants to be included in the LGBT phrase.

  • Rhywun||

    The "Q" and pretty much any letters thereafter signal that the user is a left-wing agitator. "LGBT" isn't sufficiently political.

  • Chipper Morning, Mean Girl||

    Don't mess with the Q Continuum.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    Funny,

    In an episode of Voyager, Q tries to dump his rude, overly entitled son on Capt. Janeway.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Kirk > Janeway > > Archer > Sisko > Picard > Chris Pine.

  • Azathoth!!||

    Kirk > Janeway > > Archer > Sisko > Picard > Chris Pine>.

    Where does Captain Malfoy fit in?

  • Liberty =><= Equality||

    Look upon my acronyms and despair

    Over time, a number of other additions have been suggested to the LGBT acronym. The most common is Q, signifying "questioning" to recognize that many people are uncertain about their sexual orientation or gender identity (or both). Some also use the Q for queer. At full throttle, the letters wind up something like LGBTQQIP2SAA – Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender,

    Two Q's to cover both bases (queer and questioning);
    I for Intersex, people with two sets of genitalia or various chromosomal differences;
    P for Pansexual, people who refuse to be pinned down on the Kinsey scale;
    2S for Two-Spirit, a tradition in many First Nations that considers sexual minorities to have both male and female spirits;
    A for Asexual, people who do not identify with any orientation; and
    A for Allies, recognizing that the community thrives best with loving supporters, although they are not really part of the community itself.
  • Chipper Morning, Mean Girl||

    It says most people default to LGBT or GLBT. Wait a second, who says GLBT? The GLiBerTarians?

  • timbo||

    Like Chapelle said, I think the Q is for the fags that are not sure if they want to be fags or not sure if they have a choice. You know, fence riding fags. like prison fags.

    hilarious.

    Outrage ensues.

  • GeneralWeygand||

    Thank you for your scholar.

    "Allies"? Like they storm Miami beach with them?

  • Radioactive||

    Sounds like someone need a hard knee to their crotch...the rosin cookizzze?

  • Crusty Juggler||

    I'm really scared you guys.

  • Chipper Morning, Mean Girl||

    Yes you did.

  • Microaggressor||

    Literally shaking in my gender non-conforming boots.

  • mjerryfuerst||

    yawn.....

  • Unlabelable MJGreen||

    I'm glad I get to hear about every single one of these incidents.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    Where's the like button? Reason has an extremely odd obsession with something unimportant.

  • ||

    Those crazy and wacky conservatives!

  • Tony||

    That seemed effective.

  • Liberty =><= Equality||

    Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition Cultural Revolution.

    A striking similarity is the phenomenon of students eventually turning on the teachers who indoctrinated them, for not being revolutionary enough.

  • DajjaI||

    While this behavior is reprehensible, I nevertheless think it should be legal. Why? Because if the other students can condemn and ridicule it then it will peter out on its own. Whereas if you prohibit it, then the students will become radicalized - "Professor Goldberg is indoctrinating her students are we are not allowed to voice our opinions." And they will take more extreme measures.

    In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Goldberg is complicit in this scheme. It's basically a ploy by mid level administrators to lobby for greater involvement of police and administrative staff.

  • John C. Randolph||

    I nevertheless think it should be legal.

    Legal? Sure. Free from consequences? Fuck no. This fracas is an infringement on the rights of the lecturer and the students who aren't participating in the screeching.

    -jcr

  • DajjaI||

    I agree but it happens so rarely that it's better to just let it go. Believe me these students are embarrassed by their behavior and won't do it again. Like I said, I think Goldberg is complicit and wants to ramp up the level of policing and admin oversight over everything. We shouldn't indulge her.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    ""Believe me these students are embarrassed by their behavior and won't do it again.""

    I seriously doubt that. They think they are doing the right thing.

  • BYODB||


    Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

    C.S. Lewis

  • John C. Randolph||

    This kind of shit will continue until the snotty little brats start getting expelled without refunds.

    -jcr

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    Do you get a refund when you are expelled?

    I doubt they have plans to pay for their student loan anyway. They are entitled to get their lack of education for free. ;-)

  • ||

    Let's have a debate.

    Who is more powerful and terrifying?
    A) Campus identity politics dipshits
    B) White nationalist tiki-torch dipshits

    Discuss.

  • timbo||

    A. Because they have the majority on their side.

  • ||

    Cannot tell if serious. I mean that as a compliment.

  • Microaggressor||

    Neither is terrifying. The main difference is:

    A) Gender communism trickles into the media, entertainment, and education, which results in creeping socialism via the democratic process. The prospect of standing in breadlines is slightly terrifying.
    B) Tiki-Nazis get laughed at, and Trump says mean things and tries to fuck over immigrants. I'm sure this is terrifying for some people, but not me.

    Pick your poison.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    A) Gender communism trickles into the media, entertainment, and education, which results in creeping socialism via the democratic process. The prospect of standing in breadlines is slightly terrifying.

    Pro-tip, standing in breadlines is the least terrifying part of communism.

  • ||

    If your future depended on your legal status in America, you would find Trump's rhetoric a lot more terrifying.

    How much influence the tiki-torch guys have over that is more questionable. But I'll posit they have at least as much influence over immigration policy as campus activists have to effect creeping socialism in federal policy.

  • cc2||

    Please tell me one country where being there illegally is without consequences? Most countries are very strict about it.

  • DevilDog943||

    The USA is ALMOST consequence free for illegal aliens. Some states (California, for one) have almost completely formalized the de facto legalization of illegal aliens.

    However, if Trump manages to push his anti-illegal policies into effect, despite the strong resistance of the courts, the federal attitude toward illegal aliens may get a good deal closer to that of (for example) Mexico.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    ""Please tell me one country where being there illegally is without consequences? Most countries are very strict about it.""

    This. We have some of the most relaxed immigration laws in the world. Yet some how we are the racist ones.

  • Crusty Juggler||

    THE END IS NEAR!

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    More powerful:

    A) Campus identity politics dipshipts

    They have the media and political support.

    More terrifying:

    B)White nationalist tiki-torch dipshits.

    As Brendan O'neill said, when the ACLU defended the Illinois Nazi's right to march in Skokie, the ACLU didn't become NAZI's.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Although, to be fair, I'm not sure why people carrying tiki torches and swastikas are more terrifying than people marching in a BLM demonstration with a hammer and sickle. Either one taken to its conclusions results in millions being killed, but the hammer and sickle always gets a pass-- for some strange reason.

  • ||

    Naziism is more explicitly evil, while communism is more insidious. That makes it really, really, hard to imagine that the guy with the swastika armband is a nice guy with some misguided beliefs, while it's at least semi plausible that the hammer and sickle guy might just be a well intentioned if misguided youth.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    I can agree with that, but isn't it nicer to have a guy walk up to you and say, "I'm evil incarnate, glad to meet you!" than someone who lies or is confused about it?

    I'm not saying that makes the Marxists worse, but don't feel I have to keep tabs on a guy walking around with a tiki torch and an armband, loudly proclaiming his intentions.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Especially because the guy with the Swastika doesn't have the support from 7 out of 10 academics in leading universities...

  • Azathoth!!||

    it's at least semi plausible that the hammer and sickle guy might just be a well intentioned if misguided youth.

    No. It's not.

    The reason you think that is due to the pass that communisms absolute murderousness always gets--it is just as evil as Nazism, just as horrific it it's openness about killing all those who get in the way of the revolution--and, unlike Nazism, it keeps getting tried to the detriment of it's victims and the accolades of the intelligentsia.

    He's not 'well-intentioned' at all.

    We need to stop forgetting that.

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Here's an excellent breakdown from Brendan O'neill on the alt-right.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-VwHGWL1HU&t=622s

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    It's a new level of the me generation, and has gone full retard.

  • chemjeff||

    I applaud the students for being willing to challenge their professors and their administrators. Professors are not gods. They are sometimes wrong and ought to be challenged when they are wrong. The product of a university education should not be a passive student just repeating what professors say.

    I criticize however their methods. They shouldn't disrupt the educational opportunities of other students. That is absolutely wrong. Plus, they should use fact-based arguments not emotional appeals. If the students genuinely believe that the professor is "creating a dangerous environment for queer students" then they should put forth logical arguments and be willing to have those arguments appropriately criticized.

    But I think we would all appreciate students, and all individuals really, willing to be active and protest injustices that they see. Imagine if these were male students protesting the university's Title IX administrator with protests like "you are creating a dangerous environment for male students". That can be a valid complaint and I would expect the protestors to have facts and data to back up their assertions. But I don't think anyone here would be complaining that they are "triggered snowflakes". We would applaud them for their willingness to stand up to what they perceived to be a powerful institution trying to oppress them.

  • cc2||

    Yeah, it would be great if they could show how gay students or minorities are "endangered" on college campuses. Like with data instead of assertions. Most of their "fear" is the fear that someone doesn't agree with them.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    ""They shouldn't disrupt the educational opportunities of other students. ""

    They have zero respect for other people. You either agree with them or you are part of the problem.

  • DRM||

    When a school tolerates disruption of a class, it's admitting that nothing actually important to its actual mission and goals is happening in the class so disrupted.

  • Illocust||

    Fine them, they are all students sneaking into a class they haven't paid for. Fine them for the students time, the professors time, and the cost of making up for the time lost. Make these students take out new loans to pay for their interruption of class time. It's a good first punishment to show the school is serious.

  • Brendan||

    This is actually good. Not for the university or class or anything, but for the rest of us. We get to see the up and coming generation of lefties for what they are, and we get solid evidence of what happens after 12+ years of left wing dominated education.

  • Microaggressor||

    It's just nice that we have visibility of it thanks to modern technology. 1960s China didn't have the luxury.

  • Half-Virtue, Half-Vice||

    LOL

  • Diane Reynolds (Paul.)||

    Define "dangerous environment".

  • Texasmotiv||

    "An environment where people can barge into your class and shout down the professors that were trying to teach you! That's what we are protesting against!"

  • Citizen X - #6||

    "There are many times in the day when I am glad to meet with students or hear students' views on university life issues, but interrupting a class is never acceptable."

    Wicked sack, Goldberg.

  • Ska||

    I want to see a counter protest where the students are holding signs depicting Fredo Corleone "I can handle things, I'm smaaahhht!"

  • Fooseven||

    This really needed that Simpsons bit with the duff commercial showering the protestors with beer, transforming them into attractive party girls

  • Sigivald||

    What I'd love to see is a student in the class saying roughly this:

    "I'm paying to f*cking learn something here. Go away."

  • Gina_B||

    The answer here is very simple. The students should face disciplinary action, up to and including suspension/expulsion. It is not all right to hijack a class that other students are paying for.

  • Empress Trudy||

    They should have stabbed her to death and then burned the building down

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    That's the spirit

  • GILMORE™||

    Led by junior Amelia Roskin-Frazee, who is suing Columbia for failing to properly investigate her sexual assault accusations

    i recognized the name. this isn't the first time she's appeared in links here. she started her career as an activist-shit-starter a long time ago

    http://www.curvemag.com/Curve-.....in-Frazee/

    i found only 1 mention of her name in a search of Reason, but i'm pretty sure she's popped up in the comments in the past via links to similar stunts.

  • AndyWingall||

    Does anyone find it odd that black militants who scream about black oppression and black power follow white european jewish ideology? Who's the Uncle Toms?

  • Praveen R.||

    If this story is true, then there might a reason for this female rape victim(allegedly) to adopt the rude route

    goo.gl/UvSQfU

    However, questions I have
    1) did they find any real DNA once they did the rape test or just vaginal tearing?
    2) She did not report the first rape. But how would the university not check the scan logs and security cameras right away when she reported the second rape.

    Not sure if she is a fake or if the university did drop the ball in investigating the case properly. And since this is not a date rape situation, why isnt the city involved in the investigation

  • Praveen R.||

    I cant be sure she was raped. But I gotta blame Columbia for being so blase about record9ing over the video footage in her dorm even though she told an admiinstrator she was raped but didnt want an official report because she had no conf9idence in their sincerity. I dont care what she said, but the university should have at least checked the damn tape and checked the swiping log of all students who entered just to be on the safe side. It;s not like it ta9kes a lot of resources.

    I am not a fan of how some on the left treat the accused in rape cases on campusesm but this is a case of a bungled criminal investigation by a university. At the very least, they could have at least have determined if she is a liar

  • Texasmotiv||

    I'm starting to think college administrators shouldn't be investigating felony rape cases.

  • Praveen R.||

    Agreed. It is stupid that colleges get into the field of investigating criminal cases.

  • Praveen R.||

    Just reading more about this case, I am beginning to raise the chances of this rape being a hoax. Pretty convenient there was no intercourse in the second encounter which she reported faster. Just objects inserted. Which she could have done herself.

  • Enemy of the State||

    Students'parents presumably paid good money for their darlings to hear their professor's Marxist pseudo-sex classist crappola, not some fucking co-ed's paranoia driven snowflakism...

  • TxJack 112||

    Unruly children learn proper behavior by being punished for making bad decisions. What about the people in the class who paid to be there? What about their rights? We always hear about the rights of protesters but never the rights of the people whose lives they disrupt. Sorry, but if I was a student in that class, I would be filing a grievance demanding the protesters be disciplined and forced to reimburse me for the amount of time lost during their arrogant and childish protest. As long as we, as a society, let this adult sized toddlers continue to act as they are this garbage will never stop In addition, allowing this type of behavior is no serving them or helping prepare them for the real world. Unless they intend to remain in academia, this type of behavior will get them fired. I would love to see group of protesters march into the board meeting of a major Fortune 500 company and then count the minutes until security is monitoring as they clean out their desks on the way out the door.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    This wasn't a board meeting at a Fortune 500 company. It was a stupid class. That's important context. All you people screaming for stiff penalties (or even jail time!!) are failing to grasp the context and are instead fantasizing that what they did was more disruptive than it was.

    They wasted literally under two minutes to express their views in a peaceful manner. Disruptive? Yes (but that's the point). Inappropriate? I'd say so. Worthy of significant punishment? You've got to be kidding me.

  • JunkScienceIsJunk||

    I think it's worth pointing out here (since Reason is so steadfast in its criticism of academia) that the professor did exactly the right thing. Yeah, I know, you conservatives were hoping that she would have backhanded the student, knocked her to the ground, took a piss on her, called the police, jailed them for a few years, and then sent them to mandatory boot camp before sending them to some good ol' fashioned blue-collar manufacturing jobs.

    But I think it was noteworthy that she was very firm that it was disruptive and violated student conduct policy, succinctly explained what the purpose of the classroom is, offered to listen to their complaints in a more appropriate venue, and then urged the students who were in the class to ignore the protesters and move on with what they were working on. But I'm sure this event will continue to be painted as the norm in academia and that the victim here will somehow be blamed for siding with the protesters.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    SJWs eat their young. And their elders.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online