
An obsession with safe spaces is not just bad for education - kevindeasis
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21678223-obsession-safe-spaces-not-just-bad-education-it-also-diminishes-worthwhile-campus
======
_Marak_
I've been following a lot of this develop over Twitter and Youtube.

It's both sad and terrifying to see what is transpiring on these college
campuses. There was a video filmed ( now taken down from youtube ) where a
Yale Silliman College professor was trying to reason with some of these
students.

The professor vehemently defended the rights to free-speech, while the
students screamed at him that offensive speech should not be allowed on
campus.

When the professor asked, "Who should be responsible for determining what is
offensive speech?", a student replied with, "Anything that offends me!".

~~~
x0x0
Is this where we pretend that there's no history of racial grievances at Yale
(or Mizzou), and that history started afresh the minute before this
confrontation? An honest accounting of what happened starts with the fact that
there is a long history that had people simmering. Free speech is a wonderful
principle, but it conflicts with making students, particularly minority
students, not feel alienated.

This started when someone at Yale sent a relatively anodyne email suggesting
(but not ordering!) students be reasonably racially conscious in their costume
choices (ie no blackface) [0], and someone who is "charged with setting the
'intellectual, social, and ethical tone of the College'" [1] decided to salt
the wound and mocked the idea that students may be legitimately offended by
cultural appropriation [2].

As mostly male white people, it's easy to defend free speech when it isn't
your people or culture being treated as a costume.

If you're curious about Yale, imagine, for starters, how living in, say,
Calhoun hall would feel if you're black [3].

    
    
       Calhoun College, one of the 12 residential colleges at the heart of the 
       university’s undergraduate life. It is named for John C. Calhoun, a Yale 
       valedictorian-turned-politician from South Carolina and one of the 19th 
       century’s foremost white supremacists, who promoted slavery as "a positive 
       good."
    
    

[1] [http://pastebin.com/TLGSdaTg](http://pastebin.com/TLGSdaTg)

[1] [http://silliman.yalecollege.yale.edu/people/masters-
office](http://silliman.yalecollege.yale.edu/people/masters-office)

[2] [https://www.thefire.org/email-from-erika-christakis-
dressing...](https://www.thefire.org/email-from-erika-christakis-dressing-
yourselves-email-to-silliman-college-yale-students-on-halloween-costumes/)

[3] [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/nyregion/yale-in-debate-
ov...](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/nyregion/yale-in-debate-over-calhoun-
college-grapples-with-ties-to-slavery.html)

~~~
ericjang
I'm a student at Brown University, and these issues have been at the front of
campus-related tensions for the last 2 years (perhaps longer, but I wasn't
aware of them then). Your post reflects the most vocal attitude on campus at
the moment (the "free-speech" faction is shrewdly keeping silent). I'm up-
voting your post because you echo the perspective of many of my peers who I
respect, and I want to give others on HN the opportunity to respond to your
post without it being hidden.

I do not know of any black people at my school who openly criticize this
recent string of college protests (the debate seems to be predominantly
centered around blacks in these incidents). Surely, if this pain is something
only black people can understand and they are so united in this movement, then
it suggests that their grievances ARE legitimate.

... and yet, something feels wrong here. Something feels wrong when I see
hyperbolic signs like "our culture is not a costume" or retroactive
counterarguments like "it's not only about the Halloween Costumes". Something
feels wrong when I see people sharing FB statuses with #concernedstudent1950
when it implies they support the demands made by the student group [1].
Something feels wrong when my peers believe that whites cannot be the victims
of racism, due to their racial privilege. I don't have a good response to your
points, but I'm interested to see others' replies to your comment.

At any rate, all I'm sure of is that the political climate has dramatically
changed in the last 2 years.

[1]
[http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/columbiatribune....](http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/columbiatribune.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/3/45/345ad844-9f05-5479-9b64-e4b362b4e155/563fd24f5a949.pdf.pdf)

~~~
fweespeech
He is largely being down voted for simultaneously invoking history while
ignoring the right to protest exists only because of free speech and the right
to assemble.

The ability to have protests like we've seen on campuses and elsewhere are
defended entirely on 1st amendment grounds. Watering that down to push an
agenda, no matter how righteous, is the kind of idea only those truly ignorant
of history would propose.

[http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/civil-rights-first-
amend...](http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/civil-rights-first-amendment)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinker_v._Des_Moines_Independe...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinker_v._Des_Moines_Independent_Community_School_District)

etc.

~~~
ericjang
Your username checks out, so take my upvote. That said, the debate has moved
past centering on First Amendment Rights as the point of contention; rather,
the issue is whether students _should_ dress in "offensive" Halloween Costumes
even if they are legally allowed to.

~~~
fweespeech
Hypothetical:

If the situation was the reverse of now and the majority was openly racist and
found anti-racism costumes offensive [say, Martin Luther King Jr costumes] ...
would you still favor banning "offensive" costumes?

I guess I just feel we don't have the luxury of determining what speech should
be allowed because sometimes the majority is in the wrong.

~~~
aidenn0
Actually, since I'm white, I think it would be considered racist were I to
dress as MLK Jr. ...

~~~
fweespeech
Do you genuinely not understand I'm talking about a member of a minority doing
that?

~~~
aidenn0
I actually did upon first reading, but it was very late.

~~~
fweespeech
Ah okay, sorry. Now I think its clear that I wasn't talking about white people
doing it, yeah?

------
eridius
I find it really hard to believe this article is presenting a fair argument
when it makes claims like:

> _People as different as Condoleezza Rice, a former secretary of state, and
> Bill Maher, a satirist, have been dissuaded from giving speeches on
> campuses, sometimes on grounds of safety._

There are some _really good reasons_ why students protested to prevent the
school from paying $35k for a 35-minute speech (Condoleezza's speaker fee for
the speech in question), such as the fact that many people consider her to be
a war criminal (which IIRC was in fact the basis for the protest, that and her
role in an administration that promoted torture, not some unsubstantiated
claim about feeling unsafe). I was unfamiliar with the Bill Maher speech issue
before, but a quick search shows that the protest there was about remarks Bill
made on his show that students felt were racist towards Muslims.

~~~
nickff
I can come up with moral and ethical objections for any given speaker; if one
does not want money going to morally debatable speakers, they should object to
all paid speakers.

I believe objecting to all paid speakers on campus to be a defensible
position, but paying for a variety of speakers also seems to be a strong
position.

~~~
thedz
Everyone has their own lines for when a speaker is too objectionable, I
honestly don't have a problem with someone protesting some speakers but not
others.

I mean, isn't that precisely what protesting something is?

(That said, there are definitely I think good and bad ways to protest, and
also reactionary protests that escalate way past what's acceptable)

~~~
MCRed
If the college republicans weren't able spend their portion of student fees to
bring some Republican I found repugnant to campus, how would I ever have the
opportunity to ask him very uncomfortable questions during the Q&A after his
speech?

Back when I was a college leftist we welcomed these opportunities. The idea
that they should be censored was abhorrent.

In fact, we joined forces with them when the college papers editor decided
that he could re-write and censor letters published by both groups (and in the
process inflaming hostility between us, until we discovered our words had been
changed as had theirs.)

I think liberalism has lost sight of the mission of defending ALL people's
rights, even ones you disagree with. "I will defend to the death your right to
say it" and all that.

\----

(so was I downvoted for challenging republicans or because we joined with the
college republican to challenge the censorship in the school paper? Oh, maybe
it was criticizing "liberalism"? I guess that's not PC.)

\----

PPS -- This was during the days of "political correctness" when any position
taken from the left was shot down with "that's just political correctness" and
it was an insult- like you could never think that you're just being PC. Which
of course as not in the least bit true. Back then.

Alas, reality has become a parody of history.

~~~
eridius
There's various levels of offensiveness. And also bear in mind that both of
these cases were for a commencement speech. Commencement speeches are not the
places for divisive speakers. If the Young Republicans want to raise money to
pay for someone to come speak, that's very different than the school paying
the equivalent of free tuition for 3 students for a year for an extremely
controversial speaker to give a 35-minute commencement speech.

------
jagger27
The last I had heard of the term was in high school where a handful of
teachers and administrators had a small rainbow sticker on the windows of
their doors indicating that the room was a place where one would feel safe
from discrimination. It was an anti-bullying movement that not provided a
place to eat lunch, do work, etc. but more importantly gave victims a place to
seek help and privately report offences. Bear in mind the system came into
existence to fight homophobia.

The beast this movement has evolved into, if it has any relationship to the
system I knew, has come completely off the rails and seems to me to be turning
into the bully.

------
thedz
As with many articles on the subject, I think it's important to define what
precisely "safe spaces" mean.

The Economist attempts to define a "good" version:

> Like many bad ideas, the notion of safe spaces at universities has its roots
> in a good one. Gay people once used the term to refer to bars and clubs
> where they could gather without fear, at a time when many states still had
> laws against sodomy.

I've seen it written elsewhere that there are many existing safe space where
people can come together and talk: an Asian American gathering, or Black
Student Union meetings, or LGBT support groups, etc. I think these spaces are
critical for the comfortable discussion and sharing of some pretty private
details about a person's struggles and thoughts. These spaces aren't meant to
dissuade dissenting opinion so much as provide a place where people feel safe
to express their thoughts with others who understand, empathize, or have
undergone similar situations/thoughts.

But there's always going to be impletations taken to extremes, and the
Economist article appears to be targeting those. But I wonder: exactly how
prevalent are safe spaces that act as "justification for shutting out ideas"?

At least anecdotally, I haven't seen that many. This feels like taking what
seems to me a minority of safe spaces and painting the entire idea with broad
strokes.

I worry that people are strawmanning the idea of safe spaces by only using
egregious examples as examples of bad, while ignoring the (IMO) vast amounts
of good they have helped foster.

~~~
aetherson
My only real experience with "safe spaces" has been a continuing call for an
internet forum that I frequented to be a "safe space." In my experience with
that, 100% of the time "safe space" meant "throw out anyone who disagrees with
me even a little on this topic."

~~~
1123581321
MetaTalk, I'm guessing?

~~~
Ollinson
Might as well just say metafilter in general and be done with it.

~~~
aetherson
Neither. I'm not trying to import drama off-forum, so I'm not going to
specify.

------
seibelj
If you are so weak that words hurt you, that the mere speaking of words makes
you damaged, I am afraid that you need psychological help. I feel for men and
women who face real dangers. I don't feel for Yale students who must listen to
scary ideas.

~~~
colmvp
I can't recall the last compliment I received over the last month, but I can
tell you with vivid detail the racist words that have been thrown at me over
the last ten years for being non-white. One of my friends who is black can
recall the exact time years ago when he was sitting on a bus and a complete
stranger from across the street called him a nigger.

But hey, words don't hurt right?

~~~
eclipxe
No, words do not hurt. I don't let words hurt me. You control your feelings
and emotions. Its part of being a complete, mature adult. It is your
responsibility to not let someone else's words hurt you and define you. Its
called dealing with life and the fact that not everyone and everything in life
is rosy and a great experience.

Here's my tip - when someone does or says something that hurts you, examine
why you feel the way you feel and treat it with amusement. I'm a minority that
has dealt with racist comments. It is what it is. Do the words hurt me? No.
I'm amused at how ignorant some people can be, and I move on with my life and
write some code.

~~~
striking
I found this particularly enlightening, on this topic (no pun intended!)
[http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/11617](http://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/11617)

~~~
eclipxe
Good read - thanks for sharing. I quite liked this:

'Padmasambhava said that when a stick is thrown to a dog, the dog will chase
the stick. A dog’s gaze follows the object, the stick. The lion gazes steadily
at the source, the thrower. We need to look at our mind, the source of the
emotion. An emotion like anger is the stick. The source hurling that emotion
is our mind. It is the mind that projects. The source of our experience is our
own mind.

Dzogchen [Buddhism] turns our gaze inward toward the source of experience,
which is mind. Pristine mind is our lion's gaze.'

------
picklesman
I'm reminded of this piece from a year ago. Called "Everything is problematic"
it's written from the perspective of someone heavily involved with the radical
left/queer scene and how they increasingly noticed a certain brand of anti-
intellectualism that has taken hold. somewhat long, but well written
[http://www.mcgilldaily.com/2014/11/everything-
problematic/](http://www.mcgilldaily.com/2014/11/everything-problematic/)

------
hguant
This is the result of a privileged class (if you're going to college, any
college, in America, you're doing better than the vast majority of the world)
wanting to be part of what it perceives as the revolution of our time. Whether
or not this was based on legitimate claims or not, this has devolved into a
completely arbitrary "revolution for revolution's sake" morass of nonsense.
It's shameful thinking that this is how my generation is going to be perceived
in years to come.

~~~
bjkbjkvjkvkj
If you ask me, it's more of a diversionary revolution to distract from the
current corporate power grab and disappearing civil liberties. Controlled
opposition, if you will.

Major political donors will tend to lean toward candidates that support these
social justice policies rather than ones which might endanger their position
of power. When that happens, the ideology of an entire political platform, and
that of everyone associated with it, is up for grabs. It may not be
intentional, but these are the results that we're left with.

~~~
CM30
Thank you for posting this, because it's something I've personally suspected
for quite a while. If you want to destroy a counter movement or opposing
political side/class, the best thing to do is to turn them against each other.
Now notice how just before this whole privilege/safe spaces/other crap
started, things like Occupy were pointing out income inequality and perhaps
making a few people nervous...

I don't think it's a coincidence.

~~~
malandrew
That's basically what is happening with rent in SF. The landlords and other
owners have basically turned the middle and lower class against newcomers to
distract everyone from the real problem, which is a lack of supply.

------
hackuser
Before discussion takes off, maybe we can have a factual basis for talking
about this issue and learn something too:

Could anyone who knows describe specifically how 'safe spaces' are
implemented? Obviously we would need to talk about particular campuses because
each school operates independently and has its own rules. Perhaps a link to
the rule itself?

I humbly request that you don't respond with a general impression or with
memes or things you read or heard about. We're overwhelmed with unreliable
information already; more won't make the facts any more clear.

~~~
nickff
Every debate takes place under a constraint of limited information; if you do
not wish to base the argument on what may be anecdotal or flawed data, it
would be advisable to debate the principle of safe spaces. Which is to say,
that it may be more productive for you to ask or answer the questions 'are
safe spaces moral if we assume a perfect implementation (as described by the
proponent)?', and 'what conditions are required for a good safe space, or what
makes a safe space bad?'.

~~~
hackuser
> it would be advisable to debate the principle of safe spaces

I think that would be valuable to discuss but we need to know what that
principle is. I haven't seen anything that informs me about it. For example,
one person in this discussion said they are basing their conclusions on one
video they saw of one incident at one college.

My experience with similar issues in the past is that what most people
discuss, in any forum, doesn't turn out to be true - they are solving problems
that don't exist.

------
jasonszhao
The only way to resolve a conflict is to face it, not pretend it isn't there.
I think people these days are overly sensitive to sensitive topics. As a
(maybe isolated example), just today, I was called closed minded by a few
attendees for asking a question during a "open" Q&A session about Islam and
terrorism at school. Can't we just get over it and talk maturely?

------
MCRed
For the record, in the 1980s I started a campus liberal organization that
eventually went nation wide. The Progressive Student Network. Our positions
were totally in favor of free speech and totally defending "offensive speech"
in particular.

One thing todays liberals don't seem to get is that marginalized people are
the ones who get silenced when free speech isn't protected.

I never thought I would say this, but without Jesse Helms to kick around,
liberals seem to have forgotten what they stood for. (we stood for human
rights, unequivocally back then. But there was no right "not to be offended.")

------
hackuser
Let's remember that these are students in their world, college, and an
essential part of college and learning is to experiment with ideas and ways of
doing things. It has two implications:

1) This is their world, college, even if it's talked about on HN they should
not be conforming to our standards. Education, like software development, is
about experimenting and failing and learning from it all. College is the place
where they can do that. Step back and give them room to grow up.

2) They would be poor students if they weren't doing things that challenge
everyone else, especially the older generation. This is where innovation and
innovators will come from. I hope they don't give %!#@! what everyone is
saying about them; it would be tragic if we quashed their spirit.

~~~
justinsingh
The problem I identify is that such "safe places", from what I understand,
discourage experimentation and new ideas by shaming concepts that may offend
them.

I am interested in hearing your logic behind how this specific movement is
going to generate innovation & innovators, as I think you are claiming
(correct me if I'm wrong please). I think you may be mistaken if you believe
this is just a challenge against the older generation- it seems to be a
challenge against the ideas that do not conform to their criteria of having to
be inoffensive.

~~~
rtpg
>discourage experimentation and new ideas by shaming concepts that may offend
them.

Yeah, experimentation with new ideas like blackface and rape jokes.

I think the main issue with arguments against is that they rely on some black
and white vision of the world (also ignoring that you can have places that
aren't "safe spaces" to do your experimentation). Darwin would not have been
limited by safe spaces. But hey, maybe KKK recruitment would.

~~~
justinsingh
My knowledge on this topic is limited to only the video I saw of a group of
students arguing with a professor.

The students were arguing about the FUNDAMENTAL criteria of what should be
allowed to be expressed. If something offends people, that's not acceptable.
So, this criteria is not limited to only "new ideas like blackface and rape
jokes"\- it's anything that is considered offensive, and that's why it may
discourage experimentation.

~~~
hackuser
> My knowledge on this topic is limited to only the video I saw of a group of
> students arguing with a professor.

I don't think one video is any more than an anecdote, not representative of
all these people doing all these things at all these colleges nationwide.

~~~
justinsingh
Yup! You're right, and I wasn't referring to all colleges nationwide. Just the
points backed in the video I saw.

Can you give me sources that exemplify supporters of safe spaces who aren't
fundamentally against shaming any idea that may offend people?

------
KayEss
This sort of attitude is a really scary thing -- the west seems on the brink
of losing all of its values. How on earth am I going to make sure that my 5
year old doesn't end up this way?

~~~
newjersey
Probably the most important thing you can do is you can try to NOT be a
helicopter parent.

~~~
hanniabu
I've never heard that term before...is that an over protective parent?

~~~
Abraln
Kind of, but also "hovering" nearby to prevent every scraped knee and to step
in whenever the child faces any difficulty.

------
Pxtl
Is it really infantilizing people to ask them not to wear offensive costumes?
Is a polite request so absurd between adults?

~~~
lingben
So who decides what is or is not offensive? Can anyone?

How is one to predict what may or may not offend someone?

What if I find your comment and tone offensive? does that mean that you have
to now remove it? or that you'll censor youself in the future, lest you
continue to offend me?

And if you attempt to question the genuineness of my offense, then I take
further offense at you attempting to de-legitimizing my original offense
taken.

To ground my point by way of example, consider this lunacy about the cry of
"Japanese cultural appropriation" and how that is 'offensive':

[http://cheshireinthemiddle.tumblr.com/post/131407267302/ginz...](http://cheshireinthemiddle.tumblr.com/post/131407267302/ginzers-
spoopy-roxxi-ginzers)

Happily it was put to rest (by an ethnically Japanese person) but this is
typical of the insanity that has taken over most campuses in the US right now

Yes, it is infantalization to request that others self-censor just in case
they may cause offense to you.

there is no 'right to not be offended':

[https://youtu.be/fHMoDt3nSHs?t=201](https://youtu.be/fHMoDt3nSHs?t=201)

~~~
Pxtl
Hypothetically, if somebody went out to halloween as Foetus-Eating Penis
Hitler, I'd think we'd agree it's tasteless and inappropriate.

At that point, everything is a spectrum between the banal and the monstrous.
You just draw the line in different spots from others.

~~~
lingben
Actually, I'm not sure we'd agree. Personally I'd probably find that costume
hilarious (depending on how well it was executed) but then I have a dark sense
of humor. For example, I find this anecdote from John Cleese about his mother
hilarious:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f74L2hRZE1Y](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f74L2hRZE1Y)

But let's assume that I found that costume 'offensive'. What would I be
entitled to do? that is, what should I be able to do? Nothing.

That is, other than get offended, I don't have a right to do anything other
than that. I certainly don't have a right to _not_ be offended.

Taking offense is so subjective that it is meaningless. Think of it this way,
you may not like mayo on your french fries but a lot of people do.

Does that mean that you have to force others to not enjoy their french fries
with mayo?

No.

It just means that you eat what you like and leave others to enjoy the foods
they enjoy.

Gosh... now that I've typed that out I hardly can believe that it has become
so irrational that we have to actually spell out such things to one another as
adults in the year 2015.

sigh

------
malandrew
What I find most strange in this is that safe spaces used to be places where
individuals voluntarily gathered to be insulated from something and to feel
comfortable opening up to their peers. The classic examples are supports
groups.

The problem as I see is it that people who appreciate having a safe space are
now trying to change the venue to one where participation is no longer
consensual.

Take three locations, A, B and C. A and B are empty and C is a large room with
all of society. Now take two groups, a majority and a minority group.

Members of the minority group wants a space where they can relate to other
members of their group and avoid those who aren't members and can't relate.
This is space A and what most people are calling a "safe space". Members of
the majority group do the same. This is space B. Members of the majority group
call this a "club/clubhouse". There really isn't much difference between a
safe space and a clubhouse. Both are places where likeminded people can
gather, relate to one another and conveniently ignore everything around them
that they don't have to interact with.

The tragedy now is that space C, the public space is crumbling because it
contains people from both groups trying to "improver the public clubhouse"
from their perspective, ignoring the perspectives of the others.

You simply can't take a public space and make it a more comfortable/safe place
for one group without likely alienating some of the people already occupying
that same public space.

A lecture hall on campus can be a safe space, but designating an entire campus
as a safe space without enthusiastic consent from everyone already occupying
that public space is oppressive to anyone that disagrees.

------
setra
Looks to me like academia his now facing the consequences of the ideology many
individuals in it push.

~~~
lexcorvus
Indeed, there's a lot of _Schadenfreude_ going on here. The chickens are
coming home to roost.

------
JumpCrisscross
Is there a link between the changing socio-economic makeup of our nation's
elite college student bodies and these phenomena?

------
venomsnake
Question - doesn't that give wonderful options for further discrimination?
While excluding someone for his race is a non starter, not hiring him because
of activities he was involved, especially causing unrest in college could fly.

------
lexcorvus
I believe that many people genuinely feel unsafe when in the presence of
someone whose political beliefs offend them. The problem arises when that
person, or those beliefs, do not in fact represent a threat. In such a case,
feeling unsafe is delusional. Indulging this delusion just invites more
delusion, which predictably spirals out of control.

The solution is to explain that feeling unsafe is unjustified when there is no
credible threat. This strategy is not presently a reliable route to political
power, which is why it's not being pursued. On the contrary, every concession
to the delusion—e.g., the creation of "safe spaces" to protect people from
largely imaginary threats—is testament to the present power of complaint. As
long as there are special "protected" classes under the law (in the name, of
course, of equality), we can expect more of the same.

------
learc83
I think it's becoming evident that 18 is no longer an appropriate age to
consider someone an adult. This isn't really even unprecedented, the age at
which children were considered adults has shifted throughout history, and to
me, it looks like it's shifting again.

These problems seem to arise because children are demanding to be treated like
children, but we're making the mistake of thinking of them as adults.

~~~
striking
As someone who recently turned 18, I disagree. From my perspective, these
children are coddled to hell and back.

They're expecting colleges to parent rather than to teach. That's just how
they grew up, that's just how they'll try to shape the environment. They don't
want to fit the environment, they want the environment to fit them.

I've been a competent programmer since I was 16 and not having a degree means
no one cares. What does it even mean to be an adult?

~~~
sosuke
> What does it even mean to be an adult?

I've thought of that often. The more time went by the more I found the adults
around me were ultimately fallible. The older I've gotten I've questioned my
capacity as well. Am I being a good adult? What qualities to I aspire to have?

The people I see make it the farthest have the toughest hides. Life doesn't
just throw shit at you from time to time it is a waterfall of crap. There is
never a right time and waiting for it doesn't help. The adults I like the most
set boundaries on life and work. They generally complain a great deal less.
They have just as much to complain about, but choose not to waste time on
trying to change the things they can't.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_Prayer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_Prayer)

O God, give us the serenity to accept what cannot be changed, The courage to
change what can be changed, and the wisdom to know the one from the other

I've fallen back to that recently. I've focused my energy on things that I can
do to make a difference. For me, for my family and friends.

I haven't figured it out. You've no doubt heard of the programmer's imposter
syndrome? Well I'm starting to believe that some of the best adults feel like
adult imposters.

I could ramble for a while on this I guess.

~~~
striking
Thank you for your post. I'm definitely going to keep the Serenity Prayer in
mind, that's really powerful.

------
thex10
Ugh! I'm so sick of seeing the media flip out over.. all of this.

Did I miss something, or is this piece not attributed? If the author is not an
educator than I'm not gonna trust their opinion on what's good for education.
If they're not a minority I'm not gonna trust their opinion on safe spaces.
Just a matter of having the right qualifications.

The title statement claims to have some insider knowledge as to what's a
"worthwhile" protest, while at the same time dismissing concerns for space
space as worthless. What in the ever living hell.

> The University of Missouri episode shows how damaging this confusion can be:
> some activists tried to prevent the college’s own newspaper from covering
> their demonstration, claiming that to do so would have endangered their safe
> space, thereby rendering a reasonable protest absurd.

That's "damaging" only to the media wanting to tear into the story so quickly.
CRY ME A RIVER.

~~~
seibelj
The Economist has its quirks, one of which is to never assign attribution. The
newspaper itself stands behind everything printed. If you disagree with the
article, you disagree with the institution's opinion.

~~~
thex10
Thanks for that clarification. That is perfectly ok with me.

