As an alternative, read this:
https://www.vox.com/first-person/201...igger-warnings

I don‘t agree that it is degrading free speech.

You can respect free speech without creating a threatening environment.

By the way, I’m a big fan of political correctness or, as I like to call it, consideration.

Thanks for posting the WSJ article, but it was largely uninformative.

So let's agree to disagree . I don't think "safe spaces" help and as you know, I have a family member who can be more than triggered. I believe that one has to move forward and get the help they need to move forward and not blame society for being "static" for lack of a better term.

I believe one has to take responsibility for their life and their "triggers" and not make society adjust/conform to their triggers just because they feel aggrieved. After all, do employers really care if one is transgender, has PTSD etc?

I do not want my relative to succumb to victimhood mentality. They are the architect of their destiny/life but in the US at present, they are given a million reasons to claim powerlessness/victimhood. What a shame on all levels!

Who‘s talking about blaming society. I‘m sorry, but you completely misinterpret my meaning. I don‘t think people are succumbing to victim mentality. And hell yes, employers, direct supervisors do have to be cognizant of employee needs. Employees are people, not robots. I directed a hospital department for 11 years. My job was to make sure the people I supervised had what they needed to do their job. And some people needed extra flexibility. And they did a great job, especially given that it was a crushingly dull data intensive task.

That was not creating victims, rather it was holding people responsible for the task at hand, while creating an environment that fosters completion of work.

The best supervisor I had gave me flexibility to work at my parents‘ when my mother was dying. And I did a great job too, albeit from a distance and at weird hours.

It‘s not a shame to respect individual needs. Never, ever


So we absolutely disagree, respectfully. Not much more for me to say.

Nor I...I was referring to victimhood on college campuses and how that reverberates later in their professional life.

Judging from the article I shared, I don‘t see much of that either. Or rather, I don‘t see an epidemic of victimhood.

You need to reference more articles on safe spaces on US campuses. As the WSJ author referenced, there are roughly 200 universities/colleges which have "speech police"! Really?? Again... aren't universities back in the day about discussion, discourse and debate? Not so anymore in the US as too many are "triggered"! PC run amok in my view...

Well that‘s your view. I can‘t agree. Good night.

Does Spanky really believe those GOPs really made full transcripts!
Anyway, the protocol is the interviewee checks the official transcript before it is released.

GOP releasing unchecked transcripts would be a farce.

Reading around, it seems this concept of "safe spaces" has been intentionally overblown to suit the agenda of the right-wing media in its relentless attempts to discredit students and universities (they're all leftie libtards, right? )

There's quite a good down-to-earth article about it all here which kind of adds a little perspective.

It seems they are not completely unheard of, along with requests for content warnings but, then again, if you are the victim of abuse and someone suddenly presents your class with a case study on a closely related theme, it would take someone with either a very strong stomach or someone in denial not to be affected in some way.

The word "shifty" is also a slight antisemitism (IMO).
No respected public official would dare to use it in Germany in describing a politician - even more so if he's Jewish.



Which is really weird if you think that Trump is probably the most loyal supporter of Israel of all.
But not so weird if you realize that Trump likes to play both sides a lot of the time, so he doesn't end up on the wrong side ;-)

That‘s the same article I cited above. I think it’s a very informative piece. There‘s also this account of a guy who complained a lot about safe spaces and when the tables turned, he was crying for a safe space himself.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...g-debate.shtml

My husband is a professor here. He‘s been an academic for nearly 30 years. In the US, he did a fair amount of academic counseling in addition to his normal stuff. He thinks there is a definite need for safe spaces, in cases of abuse, when people are coming out, etc. His perspective is that it‘s something that‘s been blown out of proportion by right wing advocates to create controversy and news, and many of the denigrators really want their own spaces. At the university of North Carolina, conservative students took his classes and gave him high marks for fairness, despite his left leanings. I‘m obviously biased, and providing an anecdote - but we all do.

Could you please give me an example of offensive literature? I have no idea what safe space really means tbh, not accustomed with these concepts.

I personally decided to gently guide my kids towards maths and natural sciences as I am aware that lots of academic subjects are rather shifty and politicised for quite some time already. For better or for worse. Artistic creativity is a bonus, but only to be pursued as a hobby.

I‘m sorry you feel that way. I wouldn‘t call all non science/math areas shifty and politicized, and neither would I say that science and math are immune to shiftiness and politicization. But as long as your kids learn to think, are curious and can communicate - it doesn‘t much matter what they do.

One of the schools I went to, Carnegie Mellon in the US has placed their quite rigorous statistics department in the school lhumanities and social science.

But anyway, safe spaces....here‘s a definition...

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

And no doubt you can find many memes providing an alternative view.

Americans have been banning books forever. The specific texts mentioned here are Vonnegut‘s Slauterhouse Five, Twain’s Huckleberry Finn or Tom Sawyer, Nabokov‘s Lolita, Lee’s To kill a mockingbird. Reasons are violence, sexual imagery and content and use of racist, albeit colloquial language.

It‘s easier to ban a book completely than require an intelligent discussion about uncomfortable topics. Of course places also like to ban discussions of evolution or offer alternative views like creationism.

It‘s all chicken shit - kids are going to read banned books, ask questions....curiosity is a great thing.

Net tightening
Source

The article does not mention that this was an extremely fast decision.
Barring Supreme Court obstruction then finally his tax returns will be handed over.

Muddy waters getting muddier!
Source

Meanwhile, the Dems have released the first two transcripts from the Congressional hearings, some tidbits;

Yovanovitch's testimony

• She said a Ukrainian official warned her to "watch my back" as Trump associates worked to undermine her and have her removed.
• Yovanovitch said Giuliani’s shadow diplomacy “cut the ground out from underneath us” at the US embassy and hampered her efforts to represent the US as the senior-most diplomat in Ukraine.
• She said it was “not good policy” and not in the interests of the United States to get the State Departments involved in Trump and Giuliani’s efforts to solicit political help from the Ukrainian government.

McKinley's testimony

• McKinley told lawmakers that he spoke with a fellow ambassador about what McKinley believed sounded like “bullying tactics” within the State Department toward officials who might comply with the impeachment investigation.
• He testified that he chose to resign because in part because of what he saw as the use of ambassadors “to advance domestic political objectives.”
• McKinley said he “was ‘disturbed’ by the implication that foreign governments were being approached to procure negative information on political opponents."

I guess different people name some things in different ways. What I have read about "safe space" to me it looks more like a set of principles to which any university should adhere if they're not already doing it, have it written in their charter and actively promote it through different means - student organisations, clubs, workshops, conferences etc.

I don't agree with book banning/burning/censoring. (and not following rigorous research/study methods, of course) I know quite a lot about book burning and official censorship so I'm interested in anything that resembles that and of course, probably have a different view than many people here. You can create a "safe space" for everyone and still have an academically rigorous learning environment. I feel like book censorship and rewriting history doesn't really help.

But it may be just me, of course and I don't intend to debate it any further as it is off topic anyway. Thank you for your answer, I was really curious to find out more, and more from an American point of view. Because to me it seems that some Americans on EF have deep resentments in regards with the so called "political correctness" and I always wondered why so much....I don't know how to call it, maybe anger.

Not anger... But open debate. I completely agree with your and edot's comments regarding book banning and censorship. That said, the sensitivities of those who feel afflicted do stifle debate and discourse. The fact that some US universities have prohibited outside speakers for fear of causing angst among students and their triggers makes me feel disheartened.

30 years ago when I attended a fairly conservative, public university, contentious speakers and debates were welcomed because of the discourse and discussion which ensued. The past few years, at US universities and colleges, any speaker can be "disinvited" if some group feels his/her viewpoint is not analogous with their own and are triggered. This applies to both extreme right and extreme left btw.

Interesting article from the Telegraph here (I gather this issue is also affecting UK universities):

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/educatio...shock-disturb/

Here is another article from FIRE which has a historical list of those speakers with whom students in the US objected (Note the rise since 2015!):

https://www.thefire.org/research/dis...tion-database/

@Terrifisch, my apologises if I seemed like pointing in your direction. I didn't think of you when I made those observations (maybe I shouldn't have mentioned them at all) We had/have other contributors who made me think of all of these.
I enjoy reading your posts, even when we don't agree.

No worries Greenmount! As the youngest of 9, I have quite a thick skin . Which may explain why I still visit this forum

I think disinvites happen as often for security concerns as they do for triggers.

But the FIRE list was interesting —- students thought Mr Rogers (Fred Roger). wasn‘t mature enough for them. Right.