There's a strange world that exists on many college campuses these days. No one is allowed to do or say anything that might make the students (or at least certain students) feel uncomfortable, threatened or uneasy. You know, it's just like everyday life, right? This idea that college students cannot handle opposing ideas, debate, or anything that might make them think and then stand up for their convictions is the essence of liberal orthodoxy These students have to be "protected" from anything that could possible upset any of them.
Think about how this manifests itself. On one campus, the administration had to grovel and apologize because a group held an event about visitors from other planets and part of the food served was Mexican. Get it? That's right, the poor students were attending an event where aliens and Mexican food were combined. My guess is that the Hispanic students at the event must have been so overcome by this terrible and overwhelming trauma that they could hardly stand. Then there's the campuses where screening of the film "American Sniper" has been stopped because some Moslem student organizations felt the film was Islamophobic. That's right, these students were offended because the soldiers who were fighting the Islamic terrorists were actually shooting those terrorists. Even worse, the soldiers did not appear to like the Islamic terrorists who were attacking them. No wonder the film was banned. We cannot have these poor Moslem students suffer through an accurate portrayal of history.
This phenomenon of preventing upset for certain college students is bizarre, but what is even more bizarre is that the college administrations all seem to buy into the nonsense. Fifty years ago, colleges around the nation were said to act in loco parentis. This meant that the college had to stand in for the students' parents. That is why the colleges had curfews, regulations about who could visit dorms, and all manner of other behavior regulation. The students of that day rebelled. They pointed out that they could vote, join the military, and do everything that any other adult could. They argued that the college administrations had no right to limit their activities or otherwise regulate their behavior. Now, however, that has all flipped. College administrations are supposed to protect the delicate flowers among some of the students from having to deal with the real world.
Anyone who lives in America has no doubt encountered a situation which made him or her uncomfortable. There is no protection available for such situations. There ought not be such protection on college campuses either.
The issue, however, is not just the need for students to be ready for real life. It is substantially more. In many instances, the "protection" of the feelings of certain students is just a means to censor thought and expression of viewpoints on campus. Compare two situations to see this: imagine that an unnamed female student tells a false story to a reporter that she was gang raped at a fraternity party on campus. Then imagine that the members of the fraternity were to march through the campus denouncing the lies told by feminists who want to undermine the Greek system. We have already seen the reaction by the university administrators to the phony rape charges: at Duke, there was almost a lynching of the accused men. At the University of Virginia, the administration suspended all fraternities and closed the one at which the supposed rape took place. In both places, none of those who were falsely accused received so much as an apology from the administration. Now imagine what the U VA administration would do if the fraternity boys marched through campus denouncing the liar who falsely accused them of rape. We can't have that! It might make some women uncomfortable.
The truth is that the essence of college used to be to train students to think critically. Today, that essence has changed. Critical thinking is no longer encouraged. It is not even allowed in many places. The goal is conformity to a liberal victimist orthodoxy.
Think about how this manifests itself. On one campus, the administration had to grovel and apologize because a group held an event about visitors from other planets and part of the food served was Mexican. Get it? That's right, the poor students were attending an event where aliens and Mexican food were combined. My guess is that the Hispanic students at the event must have been so overcome by this terrible and overwhelming trauma that they could hardly stand. Then there's the campuses where screening of the film "American Sniper" has been stopped because some Moslem student organizations felt the film was Islamophobic. That's right, these students were offended because the soldiers who were fighting the Islamic terrorists were actually shooting those terrorists. Even worse, the soldiers did not appear to like the Islamic terrorists who were attacking them. No wonder the film was banned. We cannot have these poor Moslem students suffer through an accurate portrayal of history.
This phenomenon of preventing upset for certain college students is bizarre, but what is even more bizarre is that the college administrations all seem to buy into the nonsense. Fifty years ago, colleges around the nation were said to act in loco parentis. This meant that the college had to stand in for the students' parents. That is why the colleges had curfews, regulations about who could visit dorms, and all manner of other behavior regulation. The students of that day rebelled. They pointed out that they could vote, join the military, and do everything that any other adult could. They argued that the college administrations had no right to limit their activities or otherwise regulate their behavior. Now, however, that has all flipped. College administrations are supposed to protect the delicate flowers among some of the students from having to deal with the real world.
Anyone who lives in America has no doubt encountered a situation which made him or her uncomfortable. There is no protection available for such situations. There ought not be such protection on college campuses either.
The issue, however, is not just the need for students to be ready for real life. It is substantially more. In many instances, the "protection" of the feelings of certain students is just a means to censor thought and expression of viewpoints on campus. Compare two situations to see this: imagine that an unnamed female student tells a false story to a reporter that she was gang raped at a fraternity party on campus. Then imagine that the members of the fraternity were to march through the campus denouncing the lies told by feminists who want to undermine the Greek system. We have already seen the reaction by the university administrators to the phony rape charges: at Duke, there was almost a lynching of the accused men. At the University of Virginia, the administration suspended all fraternities and closed the one at which the supposed rape took place. In both places, none of those who were falsely accused received so much as an apology from the administration. Now imagine what the U VA administration would do if the fraternity boys marched through campus denouncing the liar who falsely accused them of rape. We can't have that! It might make some women uncomfortable.
The truth is that the essence of college used to be to train students to think critically. Today, that essence has changed. Critical thinking is no longer encouraged. It is not even allowed in many places. The goal is conformity to a liberal victimist orthodoxy.
No comments:
Post a Comment