At the same time, I have a bit of a personal story. When I was in 8th grade, I made a Facebook account, and uploaded a random picture with a random caption involving rape - at the time my friends and I used the word like when you beat someone at a video game... Yeah it was pretty bad. My mom found the picture and responded by screaming at me and basically taking my computer away for a while, and my Facebook deactivated for much longer. I didn't understand at the time why it was such a big deal (maybe more explaining could have happened) but that interaction both makes me cringe every time I think about it and might have been the best thing to happen to me. Maybe getting the acceptences revoked is just the kick in the ass that they need.
Universities used to use the term "in loco parentis": I can see a deferral of admission being a suitable equivalent of screaming and taking the computer away.
You can't tell me this is at all equivalent to calling someone "gay"
Maybe getting the acceptances revoked is just the kick in the ass that they need.
1) Get yelled at by an authority figure, or
2) Have your acceptance rescinded
I guarantee all of them will choose option 1. By the way, you're very lucky to have a parent who cares enough to teach you valuable lesson.
If we set out to send mixed signals about maturation to college students we couldn't have done a better job
> College is the time to not only learn new ideas, but also to un-learn things that you may have learned in a toxic environment.
Despite my counterpoint above, you are of course right. I knew of one very aggressive student at Harvard who went around putting posters up of dead fetuses to protest abortion and was against gay marriage - his family was extremely right wing, and that's what he was brought up to believe. Now he's out of the closet, living in SF, and is one of the most liberal people I know. That story may sound clichéd, but I promise you it's true.
But at the same time, there must be a line drawn somewhere, surely? If I write an extremely offensive admissions essay claiming immigrants are sub-human I shouldn't expect to be admitted.
But at the same time, there must be a line drawn somewhere, surely?
But posting offensive memes on the internet isn't illegal. Saying racist/sexist things isn't illegal. It's certainly something to have a conversation about, but not to totally alter their future.
If I write an extremely offensive admissions essay claiming immigrants are sub-human I shouldn't expect to be admitted.
You imply that media condoning racism, and sexual violence can be justified.
Perhaps "redeem" is a better word choice there.
You imply that sharing memes in a private group is equivalent to a KKK meeting or actual sexual assault.
Bear in mind that this argument is not intended as an argument for "thoughtcrimes" to be made illegal, it is made as an argument for creating and encouraging strict rules against this behaviour in privately-owned spaces. Facebook is not a 'public space', they just choose to give you those rights.
No, it doesn't, and you literally have no ground to make this argument. You're welcome to try linking "research" that supposedly suggests "this something or other" and then I'll be happy to point out how they don't actually make your case, if you wish.
> The only way we are going to remove sexual assault and racism from the world is for every one to understand that these things are never acceptable in any context.
And yet none of these students committed a hate crime or assaulted anyone. It's almost as if thought policing were useless and someone who's evil will do horrible things because they want to and not because "something something bad environment", just like a good person (the overwhelming majority, thankfully) won't do them, no matter the context.
And, guess what, your country has come a long way from the segregation of the 60s without needing to ban jokes. And nothing says this trend won't continue. Of course, the regressive left and the reactionary right are trying their damnedest to put setbacks or even make you walk back, but let's hope they're just noise that will die out eventually.
> Thus, while not equivalent, allowing it to be condoned in private groups is directly contrary to our goals as a society.
No, it isn't. Happiness isn't and shouldn't be mandatory. You're free to call someone out or leave if someone makes a joke you don't like, you don't get to tell them to not make it.
> Bear in mind that this argument is not intended as an argument for "thoughtcrimes" to be made illegal
Yes it is, but your rationalization isn't the worst I've read. Still incorrect, obviously.
If you are a private company, such as an american university, or facebook, you absolutely do get to decide to tell people not to make jokes, and you absolutely do get to make hiring decisions based on bad jokes.
> It's almost as if thought policing were useless
This is not thought policing, this is looking at someone's jokes and attitudes towards People of Colour and women and deciding as a private company if you want a toxic person, someone who thinks that it's alright to joke about sexual harassment, in your private space.
> someone who's evil will do horrible things because they want to and not because "something something bad environment"
There are no evil people, there are only people who have been brought up in an environment where the actions they have taken are acceptable. What, you think people who do evil things are genetically predetermined to do them? It's rubbish. Hundreds of psychopaths have been born and never hurt a fly, it's about upbringing and social rules, rather than some "innate need to do 'bad'".
> And, guess what, your country has come a long way from the segregation of the 60s without needing to ban jokes.
Actually, the country I live in, like most European countries, has hate speech laws. We no longer have quite as bad a problem with racism as the US does.
> And nothing says this trend won't continue.
The 915 surviving and growing white supremacy hate groups, along with the 'alt-right' (The leader of the alt-right has openly written that he wants to exterminate black people), says otherwise. That young people feel that they can support such openly racist and anti-PoC movements, says a lot about the atmosphere today.
> but let's hope they're just noise that will die out eventually.
I'm pretty sure they said the same thing about the National Socialist Party...
> No, it isn't. Happiness isn't and shouldn't be mandatory.
We're not making happiness mandatory, we're making blatantly abusive speech against the law. I mean, it should be covered under the various "harassment" legislation, but shrug apparently not.
Funny, serial killers still exist and will continue existing, even though society has condemned that for a long, long time.
Yes, some people are born with their wires misshapen, just like there're people born deaf. What? Did you think that the brain was, somehow, our only organ that couldn't get messed up since birth?
> What, you think people who do evil things are genetically predetermined to do them? [...] Hundreds of psychopaths have been born
So, are they or are they not born? You're contradicting yourself.
> Actually, the country I live in, like most European countries, has hate speech laws. We no longer have quite as bad a problem with racism as the US does.
Yeah, you keep telling yourself that. A friend of mine (hailing from my latin american country) and the refugee crisis tell me otherwise. If so-called "hate speech" is banned openly, it just happens behind doors, using so-called "coded language".
> The 915 surviving and growing white supremacy hate groups, along with the 'alt-right'.
So do TERFs, the militant branch of BLM, AntiFa, etc. If we're going to judge by fringe groups, they just happen to be more visible every day on both sides. And they don't represent the majority, it's as if they were called "fringe" for a reason.
> I'm pretty sure they said the same thing about the National Socialist Party...
And it did die out. Some people might be itching to call anyone they disagree with "nazis", but they aren't.
> We're not making happiness mandatory, we're making blatantly abusive speech against the law
Funny how you earlier in this very same comment said that you weren't arguing for thought policing. Glad you decided to become honest at the end.
> I mean, it should be covered under the various "harassment" legislation, but shrug apparently not.
Harassment requires a victim. Yanow, someone being harassed.
---
Anyways, you contradicted yourself twice, and one of those times was the very same thing you pretended you weren't arguing for. That's just dishonest argumentation, meaning this discussion is pointless, so I won't engage you further.
Cheers.
As a gay person who has suffered quite a bit of discrimination and bullying from other people and who hails from a different Latin American country I advise you to stop being offended on behalf of other people. Nobody needs this patronizing attitude. It literally helps nobody.
> Comparing this to fascism is a little heavy, but not out of line.
Are these students already not submitting themselves to be judged by Harvard's exceptionally high standards? This isn't some good state school and these aren't students who have earned their place by paying taxes and getting good grades. If Harvard sees this kind of behavior, decides that they made a mistake when choosing these students (they want students who will represent them well for the rest of their life, and character is very much in play during college admissions)... I think it's more than fair to say that these students should lose their place to someone who hasn't so easily proven themselves as a risk to Harvard's brand.
Learning that your actions have consequences and that no one is responsible for facing those consequences but you is more valuable than any other single lesson they'd have learned in college. And they didn't even have to pay tuition to find that one out.
Revoking one's admission to Harvard is a really rough way to teach the lesson of what you're supposed to and not supposed to say. College is the time to not only learn new ideas, but also to un-learn things that you may have learned in a toxic environment. I can say that I certainly did, and it's only fair that we allow others to fail in a similar way.
I believe that actions like this only further foster the alt-right and do a great disservice to our current political atmosphere. These kids have no positive way to understand their punishment - they have been reprimanded by a power that controls their fate, without warning. The odds that they'll "learn" from their "mistake" is highly unlikely.
Comparing this to fascism is a little heavy, but not out of line.