
The Rise of the College Crybullies - larrys
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-rise-of-the-college-crybullies-1447458587
======
malandrew
Honestly, the college admissions application should come with a single trigger
warning that covers all possible inconvenient ideas you might encounter in a
university setting. Uncomfortable with that? Then don't attend. Were I
entering college today, I would consider all this a reduction of what I would
be exposed to in a university setting. If I'm paying for an education, I want
a full education, not just the parts no one is protesting.

~~~
gozo
So you have no problem trying to exclude people based on their opinion as long
as it is one you don't agree with? That seem quite hypocritical. Similar to
how those who supposedly value diversity of opinion have no problem trying to
dismiss other peoples opinions by calling them "crybullies".

~~~
otterley
Voicing a different opinion is different than demanding someone be punished
because they have a different opinion.

Maintaining diversity of opinion is a two-way street that requires tolerance
from everyone. Refusing to invite intolerant people is not hypocritical; it
ensures the culture of spirited debate is preserved for all comers.

~~~
gozo
That is the exact same argument that the people you are opposing are making,
just that you differ in opinion what is considered intolerant.

And saying that you should try to exclude people who don't agree with you
seems very much like "demanding someone be punished because they have a
different opinion".

~~~
otterley
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not being
intentionally obtuse.

How would you design a system that is supposed to foster debate and differing
opinions such that people don't shut it down because they cannot tolerate
those differing opinions?

~~~
gozo
You're the one not responding to my arguments, how am I the one being obtuse?

How is excluding people you think are intolerant any better then they
excluding you for thinking you are intolerant? How is calling people
"crybullies" and implicitly "indoctrinated" instead of reviewing and arguing
against their arguments being tolerant? How is it not you that don't tolerate
people when you think it's a good idea to try to exclude others from college
based on their opinion?

I think everyone has the right to campaign for their cause regardless if that
cause is to stop someone else from doing something. I think it's up to the
other party to argue their case as best as they can on their own merits
instead of trying to shame the other group that are expressing their opinions.
People who support free speech should celebrate the outpouring of free speech
happening on campuses right now and they should form their own groups arguing
for their causes rather than thinking they are morally superior even though
they really just disagree since they want the same thing they are accusing
their opponents for.

~~~
otterley
> How is calling people "crybullies" and implicitly "indoctrinated" instead of
> reviewing and arguing against their arguments being tolerant?

By "intolerance" I mean "having consequences beyond having people disagree
with you," for example, making you lose your job.

> I think everyone has the right to campaign for their cause regardless if
> that cause is to stop someone else from doing something. I think it's up to
> the other party to argue their case as best as they can on their own merits
> instead of trying to shame the other group that are expressing their
> opinions. People who support free speech should celebrate the outpouring of
> free speech happening on campuses right now and they should form their own
> groups arguing for their causes rather than thinking they are morally
> superior even though they really just disagree since they want the same
> thing they are accusing their opponents for.

That's not the issue here. If this were all that were happening, we wouldn't
be having this discussion.

The issue is that speech is now being suppressed in higher education settings
-- a place where (otherwise lawful) offense is expected to be tolerated -- by
students who don't respond to offense with the sort of counterargument you're
proposing. Instead, they are making demands for resignation or other forms of
retribution, and these are starting to bear fruit.

~~~
gozo
> The issue is that speech is now being suppressed in higher education
> settings -- a place where (otherwise lawful) offense is expected to be
> tolerated -- by students who don't respond to offense with the sort of
> counterargument you're proposing. Instead, they are making demands for
> resignation or other forms of retribution, and these are starting to bear
> fruit.

Yeah, there's not much point in continuing this discussion. I don't see how
you can in one sentence claim that "(otherwise lawful) offense" should be
tolerated, but in the next say that calls for resignations or retribution
(like boycotts) shouldn't be? Those aren't normally unlawful. Isn't that
literally "lawful offence except those I disagree with like calls for
resignation"?

~~~
otterley
It's not about disagreement. It's about the institution. If you don't agree
with one of the main purposes of the institution -- to inculcate tolerance of
differing views -- don't go there.

Meanwhile, the rest of us think this institution as it stands today still
provides an incredibly valuable function in society. We make better decisions
as a result because we're able to digest more opinions without vomiting all
over ourselves.

------
larrys
To get past the paywall:

[https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB4QqQIwAGoVChMIuvHrzNKQyQIVgzEmCh2XTg3A&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%2Fthe-
rise-of-the-college-
crybullies-1447458587&usg=AFQjCNF3OKC3CwhbQQsPh9e9OOiJInjmlQ)

------
orionblastar
Just the same social justice warriors who attack tech companies and want more
females and minorities in STEM, but they don't take STEM classes they take
classes in the liberal arts instead.

I encourage females and minorities to take STEM classes for STEM jobs and
challenge themselves.

Calling racism or sexism esp when almost none exists, there has been no
evidence of racism on MU campus for six months.
[http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/11/confirmed-there-
is-a...](http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/11/confirmed-there-is-
absolutely-zero-evidence-of-any-racist-incident-on-mizzou-campus-in-
last-6-months/)

So what is the deal? If there was racism there'd be some evidence of it.

~~~
malandrew
I like the litmus test that only someone with a github profile with projects
of their own and commits to any projects in broad use are privvy to an opinion
about tech culture.

When I see an SJC opinion on identity politics and tech, my first instinct is
to check github to see if the author has ever contributed to open source or
has any sizable projects of their own published. I'd guess that 99 times out
of 100 they don't.

There are a lot of loudmouthed people with lots of opinions and no street
cred.

Pretty much every scandal over the past few years have involved someone with
little to no content in their github profile. I encourage anyone with a
particular scandal in mind to go find the github profile of the person at the
center of the scandal and see if they've accomplished much if anything as
software engineer.

~~~
rescripting
This is a bit divergent but GitHub alone is a bad litmus test to determine if
someone as accomplished anything as a software engineer.

Many talented engineers are precluded by their contracts from contributing,
use other channels to do so, or simply don't work on open source projects.
Dismissing someone because of an empty github profile seems like a bit of a
hair trigger reaction.

~~~
orionblastar
Agreed but the SJWs will always make an issue with a project on a political
thing and ask for a code of conduct. It seems to be an annoying pattern of
behavior.

You have to remember that SJWs have declared a war on hackers and people in
STEM. Trying to find something wrong with them to make them lose their jobs or
be kicked out of open source projects.

[http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6918](http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6918)

ESR has an opinion on it that SJWs need to be kicked out of open source
projects. Most of them can't even code properly and submit buggy code that
gets rejected, and then they claim discrimination.

~~~
adiabatty
Nowhere in that post did I see the opinion that good patches be rejected on
the grounds that the author is an SJW — ESR appears to say he's quite happy to
accept good contributions from anyone. What am I missing?

~~~
orionblastar
Good patches should not be rejected by the ground that anyone is anything.
What matters is code quality.

ESR was talking about the issues the SJWs make wanting a code of conduct and
other political things. That they should be kicked out of projects when they
do that sort of thing.

If they submit good patches, it should be accepted. If they cause a political
issue instead of a coding or debugging one then they are just stirring up
trouble.

In the example the POC (People of Color) submitted several patches but only
one or two got accepted because they were good enough. The SJW got upset over
the fact that not all of them got accepted. Called the project leader a white
straight male, and project leader replied back he was a Latino and accepted a
few patches from POC and goes by quality not race to accept or reject a patch.

Really hard to tell a SJW from a troll pretending to be a SJW, Poe's law and
all of that.

