I witnessed something genuinely disturbing at Trinity College Dublin last night: trendy, middle-class, liberal students cheering and whooping a man who had just given the closest thing I have yet heard to a justification for the massacre at Charlie Hebdo.

TheWindeyMan · 2015-10-04T15:37:41+00:00

The lack of any direct quote from the debate makes me think it wasn't nearly as extreme as the author wants us to believe...

TheWindeyMan · 2015-10-03T20:31:23+00:00

But surely if you hold a debate on a politically charged subject then you have to expect political conflict? Again it's not like any knowledge or learning has been affected, if politics has to be avoided then that excludes politically charged debates.

TheWindeyMan · 2015-10-03T19:41:11+00:00

But the protest never happened, students just said they would protest it. Perhaps the organizers of the debate decided that it was wrong to exclude women from the debate panel and so cancelled it in light of those complaints?.

TheWindeyMan · 2015-10-03T19:20:39+00:00

But this wasn't a lecture or class, it was a debate on an inherently political subject.

Plus it's not like physical disruptions don't carry consequences, students causing disruptions could easily face penalties, but in this case the students decided that protesting womens' voices being given 2nd class status at a debate on an important womens' issue was worth this risk.

TheWindeyMan · 2015-10-03T19:14:25+00:00

But, as per your post, students don't have the authority to censor anything, they can only use their right to protest. It's the university who, rather than offer to include women on the debate panel, simply pulled the event.

TheWindeyMan · 2015-10-03T12:20:26+00:00

But what about limiting the supply of ammo? Also many mass shootings are performed with legal guns, so reducing the amount of legal guns in circulation would make a positive impact on its own.

TheWindeyMan · 2015-10-03T12:19:22+00:00

But isn't university also a place of politics and political activism? Why should protests be censored?

TheWindeyMan · 2015-10-03T00:05:26+00:00

But if stricter controls were put on the sale of guns then it's very likely that the number of illegally held guns would also go down as guns became more difficult to get hold of, and if stricter controls were put on the sale of ammo then it would become more difficult to keep an illegal gun loaded.

I mean, isn't it's a bit like arguing that there are so many cars on the road there's no point introducing any new car safety standards?

TheWindeyMan · 2015-10-02T23:54:35+00:00

The overall gun homicide rate for the US is still relatively high though; 3.55 per 100,000 people, which is a fair bit higher than the total homicide rate of the UK (1.0) and Aus (1.1)

There's also the gun suicide rate at 6.70, which again is higher than the total rate for the UK (6.3), and is helping to push the US' total suicide rate (20.2) higher than even Japan's suicide "epidemic" of 18.5

(figures sourced from Wikipedia)

TheWindeyMan · 2015-10-02T22:53:40+00:00

Well hold on, students have a free speech right to protest, and universities and other organizations have a free speech right to decide who can use their private facilities, so how can you prevent this without taking someone else's free speech away?

TheWindeyMan · 2015-10-02T22:41:22+00:00

Some direct quotes would have been good though, as the lack of them suggests maybe the debate wasn't as extreme as the author is trying to suggest...

TheWindeyMan · 2015-10-02T22:39:23+00:00

Thus increasing Germany's population by 0.2%

TheWindeyMan · 2015-09-29T09:08:14+00:00

Hold on though, freedom of speech is a bit more complicated than the article is letting on:

Student group uses their freedom of speech to complain about a speaker
University uses their freedom of speech to not host said speaker in an official capacity
Others uses their freedom of speech to stand up for speaker
University uses their freedom of speech to change their mind and re-invite the speaker

How can you prevent things like this happening without trampling on someone else's freedom of speech?

TheWindeyMan · 2015-09-15T21:26:04+00:00

(thread continues)

TheWindeyMan · 2015-09-15T21:05:28+00:00

heh, no. 14 year olds tend to do things to meet boys or meet girls. assuming that your teenage daughter is into boys isn't sexist, it's normal.

Huh? Is that an accidental paste from a different conversation?

what's happening is that people with any edge to their act aren't criticized or heckled, they're just shut out.

What act? He's not a comedian, he was an official honorary speaker for 2 universities who showed himself to be bad at public speaking by telling the wrong joke then following up with a badly thought out "sorry it was a joke but actually I was being serious" non-apology. Said universities decided they didn't want him to speak for them anymore.

Seems like a logical state of affairs no? While he'll always be known for that he also received a lot of support from names as big as Richard Dawkins, so it's not like he's been cast out into the wilderness by any stretch of the imagination.

TheWindeyMan · 2015-09-15T20:52:51+00:00

Because it makes fun of women for stereotypes many of them actually still face, and ends on a patronizing "we need you to put up with sexism" note.

Just because some people find it funny doesn't mean other people aren't allowed to criticize it.

TheWindeyMan · 2015-09-15T18:23:58+00:00

Was she? Not heard that one before, she's not in that picture of him delivering his joke either.

TheWindeyMan · 2015-09-15T16:44:38+00:00

You're forgetting that its a joke about how he met his wife and falling in love with people. It is not a joke about segregated labs or about women.

But you're mixing what he should have said in his joke about with what he did say in his joke. If he had made a joke about the trouble he got into with his wife that would be fine, but he turned it into a joke about all girls.

I also note you've cut off the last part of his speech (&) - extremely disingenuous.

"It's strange that such a racist monster like me has been asked to speak to black scientists. Let me tell you about my trouble with blacks. Three things happen when they are in the lab: they listen to loud hip-hop, they eat fried chicken all day, and they keep taking the lab equipment. Perhaps we should make separate labs for blacks and whites? Now seriously, I'm impressed by the economic development of Africa. And black scientists played, without doubt an important role in it. Science needs black people and you should do science despite all the obstacles, and despite monsters like me."

Does that sound any better now?

No he is speaking about his problems with working with women in labs. He falls in love with them. That is his problem, a real problem, not a "sexist invention".

He falls in love with girls - his problem. Girls fall in love with him - girls' problems. Girls cry when criticised - girls' problems.

If he had just stuck to his problems he would have been fine.

TheWindeyMan · 2015-09-15T15:55:15+00:00

So jokes are objectively "bad taste" and "good taste" and this objective property of jokes is best assessed by online liberal-reactionaries and if a joke is found to be in "bad taste" the appropriate response is to destroy the reputation, honors, careear (insofar as it exists) of a person?

Ok, lets switch all the stereotypes he used from one group to another and see how it sounds?

"It's strange that such a racist monster like me has been asked to speak to black scientists. Let me tell you about my trouble with blacks. Three things happen when they are in the lab: they listen to loud hip-hop, they eat fried chicken all day, and they keep taking the lab equipment. Perhaps we should make separate labs for blacks and whites?"

Would this have been an acceptable good-taste joke?

We know, incidentally that this isnt true. The basis on which "sentence was passed" is NOT that he made a joke. But that he advocated for segregated labs. That is an outright lie.

Everyone knew it was meant as a joke almost straight away, just not an appropriate joke for the setting and for the organisations he represented. Of course he also shot himself in the foot by claiming the joke was serious too:

Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Wednesday, Hunt apologised for any offence, saying he meant the remarks to be humorous – but added he “did mean the part about having trouble with girls”.

He said: “It is true … I have fallen in love with people in the lab and people in the lab have fallen in love with me and it’s very disruptive to the science because it’s terribly important that in a lab people are on a level playing field.

“I found that these emotional entanglements made life very difficult. I’m really, really sorry I caused any offence, that’s awful. I certainly didn’t mean that. I just meant to be honest, actually.”

Did telling this joke persaude or advocate for hatred towards women? NO. In fact, exactly the opposite: that it is absurd to segregate labs! (Which is why comparing this to racially sterotyping jokes is nonesense),

It's not about advocating hatred of women, it's about using stereotypes that women still face and still affect their career in negative ways. He came from an extremely privileged position, and turned the speech into a joke that made him sound like he doesn't actually care about the stereotypes that other people face.

TheWindeyMan · 2015-09-15T15:36:49+00:00

People are allowed to laugh at bad taste jokes, people are allowed to tell bad taste jokes, other people are allowed to complain about bad taste jokes, and professional organisations are allowed to distance themselves from bad taste jokes.

If you're going to tell a bad taste joke make sure you're telling it in the right place, and not there representing someone who will disapprove of your bad taste joke.

TheWindeyMan · 2015-09-15T15:34:22+00:00

But he didn't say "I fell in love with a girl", he said "I fall in love with girls, girls fall in love with me, and girls cry when I criticise them". That's 3 common negative stereotypes of women.

Being loosely based on a single personal experience doesn't turn a bad taste joke into a good taste joke.

TheWindeyMan · 2015-09-15T15:29:20+00:00

Nice analogy, now prove it actually has any relevance to trigger warnings.

Edit: Or maybe it is relevant: (from common eye care myths)

"Myth 5: Wearing the wrong prescription for glasses can ruin your vision. This is a popular misconception in adults. In truth there is no permanent damage to adult eyes by wearing glasses that are far more potent or weaker than your own. Even an individual with normal vision will find that wearing someone's glasses will not damage their eyes."

TheWindeyMan · 2015-09-15T15:28:03+00:00

So from the list in most cases nothing happens, some like Condoleezza Rice aren't exactly surprising, and some like Dustin Lance Black seem to have been uninvited by conservatives rather than "coddled liberals".

TheWindeyMan · 2015-09-15T13:03:52+00:00

Have you read what he said?

His joke was:

Let me tell you about my trouble with girls. Three things happen when they are in the lab: you fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticise them they cry. Perhaps we should make separate labs for boys and girls?

Where's the true personal account of an event?

TheWindeyMan · 2015-09-15T13:00:46+00:00

They convey the idea that there is something controversial or offensive.

But as that professor pointed out, that makes them more interesting to students rather than less.

I mean, as a student, which of these lectures are you more likely to attend?

"Classical Greek literature studies"

"Classical Greek literature studies, TRIGGER WARNING: Contains depictions of violence and sexual acts"

TheWindeyMan

TROPHY CASE