First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
Post Reply Safe Spaces
Posted 12/24/15

HolyDrumstick wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:
Not to mention this little iota of mine. "REMEMBER, CHILDREN ARE ESPECIALLY VULNERABLE TO BULLYING." I cannot stress this enough. They aren't emotionally stable half of them and they vary greatly in stature. That's why I'm disturbed by your quote. Because we shouldn't expect children to deal with it. That's what parents are for, administrators, the works. We cannot expect all adults to be okay after bullying. When someone commits suicide over bullying, don't you want someone to be held accountable? What, blame the victim? Bollocks.

Now I'm not entirely sure what laws are in the books concerning bullying, but probably concerns things like continued bullying, Ala harassment. Which is illegal. I'm not advocating for laws concerning actually making these acts illegal, that's another debate, what I'm concerned about is making it against the rules in such a work place or school. I think they're fully justified for doing so in Schools, as stated above.


So, to sum it all up, I don't believe in your method of bite back control. I believe it is truly biting back when we go to our institution to end the bullying their and now. To make a safe space for those to afraid to directly confront their bullies. Now isn't that a dream?

Bullying is a harmful act that all blame should rest primarily on the one perpetuating it. Not the victim. It's views like these that mental help isn't seeked sooner. Because of the stigma that you're weak if you need such a thing. That too is bollocks.


Now back on topic, I do agree that dissenting opinions should be tolerated. Why? They're not inherently bullying, and I believe that is should be the gist of your argument.


Children are not pets, you are training them to be adults. The majority problem with overly sensitive adults is that they weren't taught how to stand up to bullies when they were kids.

Adults should NOT be protected from emotional and mental bullying. Sorry, that's fucking nonsense. No adult should be punished for calling another adult a stupid whiny little bitch, for being a stupid whiny little bitch, just because that person is stupid whiny little bitch who can't handle it emotionally. Sorry. (That's just one example that is popping into my mind, at the moment.)

No adult should be punished for saying or wearing something that someone finds offensive (Within reason. There are laws in place that are reasonable.)

Grow up.

If you REALLY want to fix the problem with suicides, you'd be better off encouraging healthy and educational, rather than crippling, upbringing. This includes teaching children how to deal with their feelings without thinking the world is caving in. Your "solution" will lead us deeper into a hole of dependence, and eventually no one will be here to tell you that you're just being stupid. BUT, guess what? Bullying will STILL exist. You can't outlaw it. People will always find a way to bully, even if more and more indirectly, and that's just how things are. Except, at that point, no one will have enough spine to deal with it.


So basically overly sensitive adults deserve to be bullied or don't deserve help or nothing can be done to help them? I disagree. We should help everyone regardless of mental capacity. I don't know what you're saying with that line, so I don't know if it is an accurate interpretation. Other than "Gung ho, independence! Every man for his himself!" which I highly disagree with.


Now here's where you misunderstood me I think I didn't make myself clear. My apologies. I think if someone does say an insult there should be repercussions as the company or school sees fit. If it is continued, then I see termination as a highly viable solution. It's within the school right to have such regulations in the first place. My solution to the problem is something along the lines "legal, but heavily discouraged." Even though continued harassment, and some form of bullying are illegal anyway. I believe creating an environment that tolerate dissenting opinions, while discouraging acts of bullying is very healthy. Bullying adds nothing of note to said environment besides pain and anguish.


And I Disagree with your dependence theory. Going and telling an adult or administrator is a perfectly valid way with dealing with workplace misconduct of any nature in my opinion. We do it a great deal for sexual harassment. Now I understand we DON'T want another donglegate, but I'm not advocating donglegate, I'm advocating an environment where people are encouraged to take their problems to the authorities, whether they be the police, the supervisor, or otherwise. Now do I think people take this too far? Donglegate did, but there are probably millions of sexual harassment cases to one or two overly sensitive charges. I think dealing with the problem yourself is an immature, outdated, way of dealing with ones problem that focuses too much on supposed independence. I don't think that's healthy. What I think is mature is finally having the nerve to tell the proper authorities about the problem and using legal avenue to ensure proper handling of the situation.

I think our definitions of bullying are a bit different, (Although they would include your example, quite honestly, if it happens consistently.) I'm not advocating for termination due to an outburst or two, I'm advocating against continued bullying, because bullying in some definition is consistent and continued.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/24/15 , edited 12/24/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


So basically overly sensitive adults deserve to be bullied or don't deserve help or nothing can be done to help them? I disagree. We should help everyone regardless of mental capacity. I don't know what you're saying with that line, so I don't know if it is an accurate interpretation. Other than "Gung ho, independence! Every man for his himself!" which I highly disagree with.


Now here's where you misunderstood me I think I didn't make myself clear. My apologies. I think if someone does say an insult there should be repercussions as the company or school sees fit. If it is continued, then I see termination as a highly viable solution. It's within the school right to have such regulations in the first place. My solution to the problem is something along the lines "legal, but heavily discouraged." Even though continued harassment, and some form of bullying are illegal anyway. I believe creating an environment that tolerate dissenting opinions, while discouraging acts of bullying is very healthy. Bullying adds nothing of note to said environment besides pain and anguish. It has its purposes. Generally, this is true, but exposure to bullying is beneficial to learn to deal with bullying. I will agree that it sometimes goes too far. I simply think that we already have laws in place for those situations.

And I Disagree with your dependence theory. Going and telling an adult or administrator is a perfectly valid way with dealing with workplace misconduct of any nature in my opinion. We do it a great deal for sexual harassment. Now I understand we DON'T want another donglegate, but I'm not advocating donglegate, I'm advocating an environment where people are encouraged to take their problems to the authorities, whether they be the police, the supervisor, or otherwise. Now do I think people take this too far? Donglegate did, but there are probably millions of sexual harassment cases to one or two overly sensitive charges. I think dealing with the problem yourself is an immature, outdated, way of dealing with ones problem that focuses too much on supposed independence. I don't think that's healthy. I disagree. I don't think you can function well in a society without a certain amount of means to function independently. I think a certain amount of independence is VERY healthy, and I think too much dependence is extremely unhealthy. I also think too much independence is unhealthy, but that isn't the issue here. I advocate a healthy balance. I don't, however, think that the government should take responsibility for handling adults' feelings. What I think is mature is finally having the nerve to tell the proper authorities about the problem and using legal avenue to ensure proper handling of the situation. Sure... but only if you can't handle it yourself.

I think our definitions of bullying are a bit different, (Although they would include your example, quite honestly, if it happens consistently.) I'm not advocating for termination due to an outburst or two, I'm advocating against continued bullying, because bullying in some definition is consistent and continued.


Our definitions aren't different. Standing up to bullies on your own is what is healthy, in most cases. This is for bullies and the bullied, alike.
Often, bullies don't learn how to deal with things, and not be a bully, when they are taddled on. They simply learn to be more careful and clever with their bullying. Being stood up to teaches them that the bullied will not always be bullied.
The bullied learn what to accept emotionally and what to put their foot down about. However, they don't learn about "Safe Spaces." In the REAL world, safe spaces do not exist. They also learn that words are just words, and have tougher skin.

I also went through highlighting what I disagree with, and why.

I really don't think I'm going to see eye to eye with you on this, so goodbye. I do hope you don't raise children, though. I'm worried they'll be emotionally and mentally crippled.
Posted 12/24/15

HolyDrumstick wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


So basically overly sensitive adults deserve to be bullied or don't deserve help or nothing can be done to help them? I disagree. We should help everyone regardless of mental capacity. I don't know what you're saying with that line, so I don't know if it is an accurate interpretation. Other than "Gung ho, independence! Every man for his himself!" which I highly disagree with.


Now here's where you misunderstood me I think I didn't make myself clear. My apologies. I think if someone does say an insult there should be repercussions as the company or school sees fit. If it is continued, then I see termination as a highly viable solution. It's within the school right to have such regulations in the first place. My solution to the problem is something along the lines "legal, but heavily discouraged." Even though continued harassment, and some form of bullying are illegal anyway. I believe creating an environment that tolerate dissenting opinions, while discouraging acts of bullying is very healthy. Bullying adds nothing of note to said environment besides pain and anguish. It has its purposes. Generally, this is true, but exposure to bullying is beneficial to learn to deal with bullying. I will agree that it sometimes goes too far. I simply think that we already have laws in place for those situations.

And I Disagree with your dependence theory. Going and telling an adult or administrator is a perfectly valid way with dealing with workplace misconduct of any nature in my opinion. We do it a great deal for sexual harassment. Now I understand we DON'T want another donglegate, but I'm not advocating donglegate, I'm advocating an environment where people are encouraged to take their problems to the authorities, whether they be the police, the supervisor, or otherwise. Now do I think people take this too far? Donglegate did, but there are probably millions of sexual harassment cases to one or two overly sensitive charges. I think dealing with the problem yourself is an immature, outdated, way of dealing with ones problem that focuses too much on supposed independence. I don't think that's healthy. I disagree. I don't think you can function well in a society without a certain amount of means to function independently. I think a certain amount of independence is VERY healthy, and I think too much dependence is extremely unhealthy. I also think too much independence is unhealthy, but that isn't the issue here. I advocate a healthy balance. I don't, however, think that the government should take responsibility for handling adults' feelings. What I think is mature is finally having the nerve to tell the proper authorities about the problem and using legal avenue to ensure proper handling of the situation. Sure... but only if you can't handle it yourself.

I think our definitions of bullying are a bit different, (Although they would include your example, quite honestly, if it happens consistently.) I'm not advocating for termination due to an outburst or two, I'm advocating against continued bullying, because bullying in some definition is consistent and continued.


Our definitions aren't different. Standing up to bullies on your own is what is healthy, in most cases. This is for bullies and the bullied, alike.
Often, bullies don't learn how to deal with things, and not be a bully, when they are taddled on. They simply learn to be more careful and clever with their bullying. Being stood up to teaches them that the bullied will not always be bullied.
The bullied learn what to accept emotionally and what to put their foot down about. However, they don't learn about "Safe Spaces." In the REAL world, safe spaces do not exist. They also learn that words are just words, and have tougher skin.

I also went through highlighting what I disagree with, and why.

I really don't think I'm going to see eye to eye with you on this, so goodbye. I do hope you don't raise children, though. I'm worried they'll be emotionally and mentally crippled.

Oh, okay, I was mainly arguing so senpai will noticed me, but he/she are not here.
16847 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 12/24/15
The purpose of learning and education is to be exposed to dangerous, controversial, and different ideas to expand your mind. Safe spaces are no different than what the catholic church, communists, or fascists did to their educational system.
27705 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / TX
Offline
Posted 12/24/15



PeripheralVisionary wrote:

Depends. In order to promote tolerance you have to promote intolerance of intolerance. You can tolerate such factors, but you can ban a wide array of speeches that are related to a topic. Let's be honest, no one should accept intolerance as a part of life. It must be vigorously opposed while at the same time tolerated in peaceful conditions. College isn't the place for hate speech in my opinion. They can tolerate any club, meeting or association they want or not that is conducive to the learning environment.


Who decides what intolerance is. Lets for the sake of discussion you ask a religious person do you support gay marriage and if they answer no then they are simply homophobic not allowed to go to campus? What if we turn this around and if you speak out against the bible than your kick out of school would you support that? The idea of making an entire campus a safe zone is essentially making teens and young adults surround themselves with yes men. If they are exposed to different people and different beliefs than there going to be better equipped to handle different situations than simply backing down.



Here's what I think the main idea is. We won't tolerate bigotry. And I think that is ultimately a good thing. We don't tolerate sexism, we don't tolerate racism, so why on earth should we tolerate bigotry against LGBT people?


So in your mind its either you say yes to everything I believe or you don't get to go to college. Getting a little to close to fascism which even if you disagree with another person views they are allowed to say them. Best way to handle them is with debates and actively meet with people with different views. Get to know them and find some common ground. One of my best friends that I keep in touch with since high school is atheist and I was in the priesthood. Of course when we first meet there were hostility between us but we forced ourselves to meet once a week and eventually we found common ground "ozzy music, fishing, golfing you get the picture" and we became friends. If someone asked me for advice for lack of a better word I gave them bible based advice and he kept his mouth shut and if someone asked him I keep mine shut. That is called having mutual respect for one another and with safe zones I don't see things like that happening.
The whole point of college is to study your desired field and expand your horizons but you really can't if the college controls who allowed to speak and for what subjects there allowed to speak on.



OP, like all people, have shown a consistent bias that sadly I noticed for logging on one too many times. If someone liked Biscutnote or Michael z007 posted, would you not be skeptical about the scenario presented before you? However, it appears to be a case of someone doing something about said speaker.


So just because these other users don't agree with you there worth ignoring? If you going that route than please admit to your own bias. You do realize that the cr users are from every walk of life and just because you may not agree with their views they are worth hearing out.




Oh, okay, I was mainly arguing so senpai will noticed me, but he/she are not here.


It's ok father JPOP noticed you ^_^ Notice the m next to my pic its 4 male. If you have any concerns than please feel free to pm me. I'm always up for a chat as time allows.
27705 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / TX
Offline
Posted 12/24/15

KnightOfZero1991 wrote:


J-POP187 wrote:

This is a new word I keep hearing about. Especially with South Park this season. What ever happened to colleges being about discussions of varying opinions and accepting all views. Personally any colleges that make it a point to promote space spaces I would turn my kids away from if I had kids. Being able to accept and work with people who you don't like is part of reality. By creating these types of places I believe it is doing a disservice to those who attend colleges. Are we at the point where people would rather hide under blankets and pillows instead of having discussions. I weep for the future of this country.

From what I could find

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=safe+space



A place where college students can go if they have been subjected to ideas that differ from the progressive narrative. These safe spaces have pillows, soothing music and an understanding, sympathetic staff. Presumably, this allows them to recover from the trauma; free from any lasting damage resulting from exposure to ideas that conflict with their leftist professors.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe-space


In educational institutions, safe-space (or safe space), safer-space, and positive space are terms used to indicate that a teacher, educational institution or student body do not tolerate perceived anti-LGBT violence, harassment, hate speech or disagreement, but rather are open and accepting to opinions aligned to their own, thereby creating a safe place for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and all students.


So what do you think good idea to promote safe space?


Alternative: university funded host/hostess clubs like Ouran High School Host Club

People are sad, and here are some beautiful women/charming men to talk with to make you feel better.


I could get behind that as long as they have a variety to choose from. I want my neko glasses wearing maid.
80213 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Seattle
Offline
Posted 12/24/15
These are pointless, however, I do like being a spoiler of fun and tell people that their oppression of free speech makes is not allowed in my safe space.
Posted 12/24/15 , edited 12/24/15

J-POP187 wrote:




PeripheralVisionary wrote:

Depends. In order to promote tolerance you have to promote intolerance of intolerance. You can tolerate such factors, but you can ban a wide array of speeches that are related to a topic. Let's be honest, no one should accept intolerance as a part of life. It must be vigorously opposed while at the same time tolerated in peaceful conditions. College isn't the place for hate speech in my opinion. They can tolerate any club, meeting or association they want or not that is conducive to the learning environment.


Who decides what intolerance is. Lets for the sake of discussion you ask a religious person do you support gay marriage and if they answer no then they are simply homophobic not allowed to go to campus? What if we turn this around and if you speak out against the bible than your kick out of school would you support that? The idea of making an entire campus a safe zone is essentially making teens and young adults surround themselves with yes men. If they are exposed to different people and different beliefs than there going to be better equipped to handle different situations than simply backing down.



Here's what I think the main idea is. We won't tolerate bigotry. And I think that is ultimately a good thing. We don't tolerate sexism, we don't tolerate racism, so why on earth should we tolerate bigotry against LGBT people?


So in your mind its either you say yes to everything I believe or you don't get to go to college. Getting a little to close to fascism which even if you disagree with another person views they are allowed to say them. Best way to handle them is with debates and actively meet with people with different views. Get to know them and find some common ground. One of my best friends that I keep in touch with since high school is atheist and I was in the priesthood. Of course when we first meet there were hostility between us but we forced ourselves to meet once a week and eventually we found common ground "ozzy music, fishing, golfing you get the picture" and we became friends. If someone asked me for advice for lack of a better word I gave them bible based advice and he kept his mouth shut and if someone asked him I keep mine shut. That is called having mutual respect for one another and with safe zones I don't see things like that happening.
The whole point of college is to study your desired field and expand your horizons but you really can't if the college controls who allowed to speak and for what subjects there allowed to speak on.



OP, like all people, have shown a consistent bias that sadly I noticed for logging on one too many times. If someone liked Biscutnote or Michael z007 posted, would you not be skeptical about the scenario presented before you? However, it appears to be a case of someone doing something about said speaker.


So just because these other users don't agree with you there worth ignoring? If you going that route than please admit to your own bias. You do realize that the cr users are from every walk of life and just because you may not agree with their views they are worth hearing out.




Oh, okay, I was mainly arguing so senpai will noticed me, but he/she are not here.


It's ok father JPOP noticed you ^_^ Notice the m next to my pic its 4 male. If you have any concerns than please feel free to pm me. I'm always up for a chat as time allows.

I am biased, but I'm not the one posting the thread. One must be skeptical of all thread postings, but certain people use questionable sources and a variety of tricks regarding such a thing. As someone who depends on forumers for a great deal of information, it is troubling. Hence my continued approach to ask questions. And thanks for noticing me. Can't say I agree with any of your posts, but I appreciate the thought. Merry Christmas. I only ask that if you wish to present your opinion as right, you get your information right. Much like news sources, thread posting can be misleading, and they shouldn't.


I do believe in discussions, but I believe the posts made clear that yes, I tolerate only to an extent, and certain positions may be more inherently tolerable than others, yet there's line most positions can't cross. For example, a BLM protestor can't use intimidation (Which a great deal use anyway) on certain grounds, much like LGBT people. But remember, LGBT stances focus on your view of a group of people, and certain viewpoints are more intolerable than others. There's a huge gulf between abortion and LGBT, and the gulf is the people you could directly affect, and presumably make suffer with your opinions. Because there are LGBT people on campus.


As for the second post, I think not tolerating bigotry is a good thing to an extent, but remember, who decides when something is hate speech? The company or school, of course. Usually hate speech borders on intimidation and something, and I'm not really sure what guidelines each school use. I do think such school are however justified in terminating the employment of people based on certain offenses. Let's be honest, I think it's more to preserve the reputation of the school to appeal to the left, and been a bit overzealous in these years. I'm blinded by my own ambition to rid the world of tolerance, but look and behold! You can't say anything without being caught in trouble. Of course, I'm only referring to outright displays of racism and homophobia, and not anything like say certain statistics.


Here's how I promote intolerance of intolerance. Say it is wrong. I'm not sure where to go from here, but I believe any demagogue promoting falsehoods about LGBT people needs to be silenced.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/24/15 , edited 12/24/15

Rujikin wrote:

The purpose of learning and education is to be exposed to dangerous, controversial, and different ideas to expand your mind. Safe spaces are no different than what the catholic church, communists, or fascists did to their educational system.


Oh snap... he broke out the truth.
Posted 12/24/15

HolyDrumstick wrote:


Rujikin wrote:

The purpose of learning and education is to be exposed to dangerous, controversial, and different ideas to expand your mind. Safe spaces are no different than what the catholic church, communists, or fascists did to their educational system.


Oh snap... he broke out the truth.


I agree, but I don't think bullying is the best method to support such theories. Whether or not we're bullying those with dissenting opinion remains to be seen. I think some parts are overzealous, but I do believe that being against LGBT bullying is a good thing.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/24/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


HolyDrumstick wrote:


Rujikin wrote:

The purpose of learning and education is to be exposed to dangerous, controversial, and different ideas to expand your mind. Safe spaces are no different than what the catholic church, communists, or fascists did to their educational system.


Oh snap... he broke out the truth.


I agree, but I don't think bullying is the best method to support such theories. Whether or not we're bullying those with dissenting opinion remains to be seen. I think some parts are overzealous, but I do believe that being against LGBT bullying is a good thing.


No, you guys are totally bullying us. Most of us are standing up to you, though, because we're well adjusted.
Posted 12/24/15

HolyDrumstick wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:


HolyDrumstick wrote:


Rujikin wrote:

The purpose of learning and education is to be exposed to dangerous, controversial, and different ideas to expand your mind. Safe spaces are no different than what the catholic church, communists, or fascists did to their educational system.


Oh snap... he broke out the truth.


I agree, but I don't think bullying is the best method to support such theories. Whether or not we're bullying those with dissenting opinion remains to be seen. I think some parts are overzealous, but I do believe that being against LGBT bullying is a good thing.


No, you guys are totally bullying us. Most of us are standing up to you, though, because we're well adjusted.


I'm sorry, on behalf of the left. We just like bullying people. If you've ever seen the South park episode Butterballs, it sums up our efforts pretty well on that front.
27705 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / TX
Offline
Posted 12/24/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

I am biased, but I'm not the one posting the thread. One must be skeptical of all thread postings, but certain people use questionable sources and a variety of tricks regarding such a thing. As someone who depends on forumers for a great deal of information, it is troubling. Hence my continued approach to ask questions. And thanks for noticing me. Can't say I agree with any of your posts, but I appreciate the thought. Merry Christmas. I only ask that if you wish to present your opinion as right, you get your information right. Much like news sources, thread posting can be misleading, and they shouldn't.


I do believe in discussions, but I believe the posts made clear that yes, I tolerate only to an extent, and certain positions may be more inherently tolerable than others, yet there's line most positions can't cross. For example, a BLM protestor can't use intimidation (Which a great deal use anyway) on certain grounds, much like LGBT people. But remember, LGBT stances focus on your view of a group of people, and certain viewpoints are more intolerable than others. There's a huge gulf between abortion and LGBT, and the gulf is the people you could directly affect, and presumably make suffer with your opinions. Because there are LGBT people on campus.


As for the second post, I think not tolerating bigotry is a good thing to an extent, but remember, who decides when something is hate speech? The company or school, of course. Usually hate speech borders on intimidation and something, and I'm not really sure what guidelines each school use. I do think such school are however justified in terminating the employment of people based on certain offenses. Let's be honest, I think it's more to preserve the reputation of the school to appeal to the left, and been a bit overzealous in these years. I'm blinded by my own ambition to rid the world of tolerance, but look and behold! You can't say anything without being caught in trouble. Of course, I'm only referring to outright displays of racism and homophobia, and not anything like say certain statistics.


Here's how I promote intolerance of intolerance. Say it is wrong. I'm not sure where to go from here, but I believe any demagogue promoting falsehoods about LGBT people needs to be silenced.


For the bold ever seen this show?


If you didn't like my sources than feel free to post counter sites. This is what I went by and I be with you honest I decided not to use the geek feminism link since I know people would get off topic on the name alone and I make it a personal rule never to click on tumblir. As for the lgbt movement sure they're the ones that come up the most when you look at safe spaces. However I been seeing other groups use the word to do things such as people demanding a guy be fired from their jobs if heaven forbids they say they don't like a certain type of food. Look it up white guys says he doesn't like mexican food and people are signing a petition to have him fired and from what I know that was the only thing racial he ever said. All it takes is one person from the pc movement to screw somebody over and that is what I will not tolerate. If you want a safe space then form a club but to demand the entire college declares themselves a safe space for you is just selfish and is killing the very ideas that colleges like to spout. Expanding horizons only if you agree with us.

My results looking up safe spaces

Posted 12/24/15

J-POP187 wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

I am biased, but I'm not the one posting the thread. One must be skeptical of all thread postings, but certain people use questionable sources and a variety of tricks regarding such a thing. As someone who depends on forumers for a great deal of information, it is troubling. Hence my continued approach to ask questions. And thanks for noticing me. Can't say I agree with any of your posts, but I appreciate the thought. Merry Christmas. I only ask that if you wish to present your opinion as right, you get your information right. Much like news sources, thread posting can be misleading, and they shouldn't.


I do believe in discussions, but I believe the posts made clear that yes, I tolerate only to an extent, and certain positions may be more inherently tolerable than others, yet there's line most positions can't cross. For example, a BLM protestor can't use intimidation (Which a great deal use anyway) on certain grounds, much like LGBT people. But remember, LGBT stances focus on your view of a group of people, and certain viewpoints are more intolerable than others. There's a huge gulf between abortion and LGBT, and the gulf is the people you could directly affect, and presumably make suffer with your opinions. Because there are LGBT people on campus.


As for the second post, I think not tolerating bigotry is a good thing to an extent, but remember, who decides when something is hate speech? The company or school, of course. Usually hate speech borders on intimidation and something, and I'm not really sure what guidelines each school use. I do think such school are however justified in terminating the employment of people based on certain offenses. Let's be honest, I think it's more to preserve the reputation of the school to appeal to the left, and been a bit overzealous in these years. I'm blinded by my own ambition to rid the world of tolerance, but look and behold! You can't say anything without being caught in trouble. Of course, I'm only referring to outright displays of racism and homophobia, and not anything like say certain statistics.


Here's how I promote intolerance of intolerance. Say it is wrong. I'm not sure where to go from here, but I believe any demagogue promoting falsehoods about LGBT people needs to be silenced.


For the bold ever seen this show?


If you didn't like my sources than feel free to post counter sites. This is what I went by and I be with you honest I decided not to use the geek feminism link since I know people would get off topic on the name alone and I make it a personal rule never to click on tumblir. As for the lgbt movement sure they're the ones that come up the most when you look at safe spaces. However I been seeing other groups use the word to do things such as people demanding a guy be fired from their jobs if heaven forbids they say they don't like a certain type of food. Look it up white guys says he doesn't like mexican food and people are signing a petition to have him fired and from what I know that was the only thing racial he ever said. All it takes is one person from the pc movement to screw somebody over and that is what I will not tolerate. If you want a safe space then form a club but to demand the entire college declares themselves a safe space for you is just selfish and is killing the very ideas that colleges like to spout. Expanding horizons only if you agree with us.

My results looking up safe spaces


With discussion there is bigotry. You know, maybe I should rethink my thoughts. Instead of being against bigoted thoughts, we should be against bigoted bullying, no matter the case. I assumed safe spaces were saying "okay, we're against bullies, get out." but along the lnie I got confused with "we don't tolerate any lgbt anti aspects, get out". Would have to review my stance. I think I argued with drumstick regarding bullying of all natures, but I have to check.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/24/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

With discussion there is bigotry. You know, maybe I should rethink my thoughts. Instead of being against bigoted thoughts, we should be against bigoted bullying, no matter the case. I assumed safe spaces were saying "okay, we're against bullies, get out." but along the lnie I got confused with "we don't tolerate any lgbt anti aspects, get out". Would have to review my stance. I think I argued with drumstick regarding bullying of all natures, but I have to check.


You did. And to a point, I agree.

I just don't think people should be punished by law for saying harsh words, regardless of how often or how offensive.

Here's a summary of our argument:

Young people: We want to get rid of anything that's bad!

Old people: That's cute, but unrealistic. How about you learn to deal with the things that aren't really fixable, first?
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.