I think that it is important that we stand up for our first amendment right, even when others are trying to silence speech they dislike with aggression and violence.
I think the purpose of the list is to try and get folks to walk in the shoes of someone else. I think that is a good thing. It isn’t calling out an individual for specific behavior.
It looks to me like a list of pretty rude remarks, though sometimes folks honestly don’t recognize the rudeness. Rudeness is a free speech right. It is also a free speech right to object to rudeness. So - pretty much a stalemate as far as I can tell.
I generally prefer not to exercise my free speech right to rudeness.
People have a First Amendment right to say any of those things, but it’s worth letting them know that they may be hurting or upsetting others unintentionally if they do. And if they want to hurt or upset others on purpose, it’s OK to exclude them from being student leaders of freshman orientation, even at a public university.
I think the OP is off base on several counts. There is absolutely no indication that the university is saying “If you hear this come out of someone’s mouth, you should yell at them rudely and even beat them up”, so I don’t see aggression and violence. That may indeed happen in other circumstances, but the topic is a university list. I would have an issue with the university if they threatened punishment for most of these things. I agree they tend to be thoughtless, and slightly rude in some cases, etc. but they hardly constitute hate speech. But I don’t think the school is saying they are hate speech and they are not threatening suspension or the like. If they are, then I have an issue with them.
They seem to simply be trying to illuminate where there might be ignorance. There used to be, and may still be, a vast number of people that had no idea how offensive the phrases “Jew someone down” and saying they got “gypped” were. I think a couple of the ones they mention on the list are being a little over sensitive, but so what? They are still easily avoided. Now there is a line somewhere, and society over time will figure out where it is. I personally hope that phrases like “America is a melting pot” don’t survive being on a list such as this, but indeed it has been on others. Same with “ghetto”. People imagine offenses where there are none, or if there are it isn’t because of the word. But most of the phrases on the list above strike me as serving no purpose except to bring some superficial difference to light that isn’t really even conversational, or at least shouldn’t be in polite conversation.
The aggression and violence has been aimed at people who have been expressing their unpopular opinions via signs, hats, tshirts, and their voices all over the country.
My intention here was to discuss how speech restrictions can get out of control and how the latest attacks on people expressing their “unapproved” opinions is an ominous example of that.
I think the list makes sense. They should have someone students can go to for discussion if they don’t understand why any of those statements are offensive and/or rude.
Clearly, the kids at the homecoming dance in AL would agree that these expressions crossed of line common courtesy and rightly earned the kid who dared to utter one of them a vicious beating.
OP seems to be trying to start something. The list is basic, boring, friendly advice: “if you say this kind of stuff, it often doesn’t go down well, so think twice before you do.” The end.
At least until the anti-PC crowd wants to gin up some outrage.
And these were suggestions for orientation leaders, kids representing the university to new students. Don’t you think some suggestions about how not to be misinterpreted are a good idea for them?
You appear to be trying to compare what is happening in some political rallies and other situations outside of campus life with an attempt by a university to enlighten students as to common but thoughtless words and phrases, comparable to some older ones I already pointed out. People have gotten violent over politics since time began. I don’t see how the two completely different situations relate at all, other than if we can teach people while they are in grade school and up why some things are actually rude and annoying to others, it might help (but doubtful) eliminate the kinds of scenes you refer to. But that is a stretch for now. It is fine and dandy to say “I can say anything I want and you have to take it”, but why would you want to have that attitude towards speech that is clearly, I will say it again, thoughtless and mildly offensive. Sure it is less than using the “n” word and other examples. Vocabulary is like that. Words have meaning. If I say I something is warm, you don’t assume I mean it is hot, do you? Similarly, if I use a word or phrase that is clearly just thoughtless and mildly off-putting instead of one that is clearly hateful, the reactions should be different.
Yes, outside of politics I agree that there can come a point where some people express outrage over words and phrases that don’t deserve such a response. That is more anecdotal, and if there is no merit then that reaction will probably not survive as an acceptable one. Within politics, it is more about political beliefs than any given word or phrase. A word or phrase on a hat isn’t really about that word or phrase, it is about all the went behind it. The JMU thing is a very far cry from that situation. Having history behind something and having politics behind something is not the same.
I don’t know what you are driving at, in the case of the JMU list unless you are saying they are treating that like hate speech and that students are getting violent over it. Short of that, I see zero ties to the political aspects you tried to stir up, which are a violation of the Terms of Service. I say that as a member, not as a moderator. It is plain for all to see.
I was making a wider point about the role of PC policing in this society, but I guess the examples I used are prohibited on this site. I find it sad that I am assumed to have some nefarious agenda for doing so. My only agenda is protecting the first amendment.
People who lead groups and events are frequently given guidelines about what to say and not say. If you are leading orientation you are representing the school and of course they don’t want you saying offensive and/or rude things in that role.
Not even remotely a free speech issue. If calling people retarded is terribly important to you, then don’t sign up to be an orientation leader.
No wonder kids spend so much time alone on their cell phones and laptops in HS and college. It’s too scary to talk to anyone these days for fear of saying the wrong thing. Am so glad I am an adult out of school so no one can tell me what I can and cannot say. I read this CC website and get more than enough PC advice.
Nah, my kids are perfectly fine talking to their peers and others on campus. No need to hide behind their cell phones and they rarely use them. Why? Because they care about and speak with sensitivity to other people and they aren’t bigoted. Same holds true for those they befriend.
Since all of recorded time people in their sixties and older (OK, en masse longevity is fairly recent, but people did still live to be old before modern medicine) have shaken their heads at some of the values of teenagers and young adults. @1or2Musicians and @doschicos are right. This isn’t an assault on the First Amendment in any way, shape or form. It is simply an evolving sense of enlightenment and of what is right and wrong regarding behavior towards others. In 1900, perfectly civilized people that were not at all prejudiced thought nothing of calling their African-American maid’s son “boy”, or any other African-American male, for that matter. Or calling a 25 year old secretary a “girl” as recently as the 1970’s with almost no one raising an eyebrow. It still happens of course, but few still think it is the correct thing to say. Just like they also thought nothing of using the phrases “Jew me down” or getting “gypped”. But for those growing up in the 1960’s and later, most would never use those terms out of a new-found set of sensibilities.
No one is telling you that you cannot say any of the things I mentioned above, @MOMANDBOYSTWO, only that you should not. But heck, you can even use the “n” word if you want, and no one can lock you up unless you are doing it to incite a riot or something similar. But just because you can, would you? You certainly might be ostracized if you do, depending on where you live and who you associate with.
Do you stop learning just because you pass the age of 22 or whatever? Don’t you agree there might be good reasons for some of those strictures? If not, then ignore them. Like I said earlier, I still see nothing wrong with “melting pot” and “ghetto”, and will continue to use them unless someone convinces me my reasoning is off and there are good reasons people should be offended by those words, other than they just decided to be offended.
OP has woefully mischaracterized the handout described in the linked article. I read the article instead of just the OP and believe even more that it was a good thing. This was part of a larger handout for orientation leaders that explained why it would be good to avoid these phrases. It was intended to be something for leaders to reflect on before they met with their first year students.
If I had someone in leadership that I was supposed to connect with and I heard them use many (maybe any) of these phrases, I would avoid them entirely. If these leaders actually care about their positions and want to do them well, they will pay attention to the suggestions.