The past weeks have seen demonstrations of social unrest at two major academic institutions: Yale and the University of Missouri. For those who haven't heard, students at Yale are asking the Deans of the Silliman College to step down after they sent out an email to the campus concerning offensive Halloween costumes to which, in response, they were publicly screamed at by a group of students on the campus. They were defending--but not agreeing with the concept of the costumes themselves--the rights of people to wear whatever costume they want due to freedom of speech.
Meanwhile, at Missouri, president Tom Wolfe has just stepped down as a result of campus protests about his poor handling of ongoing racially-motivated events after the football team boycotted games in protest. While the racist acts were truly offensive and atrocious, the protesters came under fire when they forcefully blocked a reporter from documenting the protest, violating his rights as a reporter. But these aren't the only overreactions from college students enforcing the PC culture. Over the last few years, college campuses are becoming increasingly sensitive and decreasingly academic when it comes to taboo issues that might cause discomfort. It's gotten so bad that it's begun to seriously infringe upon the rights to freedom of speech and press for those with unpopular opinions.
As a college student, I find these videos and accounts incredibly alarming. If you watch the video of the Yale students yelling at the professor then you will hear a cringe-worthy statement from the berating female student: "It's not about creating an intellectual space, it's about creating a home here." Yale is a university. It's literally an institution built as an intellectual space. Of course students should have the right to feel safe on campus, but being uncomfortable in a discussion and feeling physically unsafe are two very different things.
Society should agree with me when I say that an individual wearing an Adolf Hitler costume for Halloween is being, to put it bluntly, an insensitive and tasteless jerk. However, it is his first amendment right to wear that costume and, as long as he doesn't directly, physically, or verbally attack anyone at the party, he is within his rights. What the students at Yale fail to understand is that while one may disagree with offensive acts such as this, one can uphold the fact that he does have the right to wear it and that cannot be taken away from him by anyone. Rather, they should simply ignore the costume or, better yet, engage with him as to why the costume is offensive and distasteful. Yelling and forcing him to take off the costume will only serve as a temporary solution if it works, but it will never convince him of the error of his ways and he will probably continue to do similar distasteful acts in the future. In any situation, just as you disagree with someone, they have the right to disagree with you and defend their own opinions, whatever they may be, even if they make you feel uncomfortable.
That was just a minor example of the issue at large. Speakers with unpopular views have been heckled, booed, and banned off campuses, protests have gotten out of control, and easily-offended students are grossly overstepping boundaries. Trigger warnings have become overdone, dished out simply when someone feels uncomfortable with a viewpoint, which is destroying academia. Rather than study what people are thinking and why, we are now hiding from it. This is absurd.
But, perhaps the worst crime against the rights of others is committed when one person dismisses another by saying that just because they are another gender/sexual orientation/color/ethnicity/etc., they are not allowed to have the opinion they have because they inherently don't understand. The minute that you stop uniting over ideas and start uniting over physical, sexual, or ethnic attributes is the minute that you, ironically, start dishing out the same type of bias that you are trying to cease.
It can also go the other way when someone outside of the minority begins speaking on behalf of what the entire minority finds offensive. The perfect example is the mass rush to defend Caitlin Jenner and, by association, transgender individuals against criticism and satire. It's a fact that people will oppose or criticize the decisions of others, but it should mainly be left up to those who the criticism or opposition is directed at to stand up for themselves. Don't rush to block discussion off before it reaches the minority, especially if you're not a part of it. It comes off as dehumanizing and, frankly, it's none of your business.
It's the same problem that's going on in the Middle East and other areas with issues in freedom of speech, but to a different degree. The message is the same: censor those who disagree and ban opinions that stray from the norm. But this norm is the socially progressive norm, so that makes it better, right? Absolutely not. Who gets to decide what's offensive or what shouldn't be said because it may offend someone? Limiting or banning dialogue only serves to sweep the issues under a big, metaphorical rug where they will sit and rot.
Speaking as a white male member of the socially progressive left who is sympathetic to any sort of civil rights movements, I'm appalled that people with the same base ideals as I can commit such blatantly restrictive acts, particularly on a college campus. There is a difference between proper and effective student activism and throwing a tantrum. When people through tantrums it overshadows all the good work that true activists are doing. All groups can only progress as fast as their slowest member, unfortunately.
I've made a lot of bold statements in this article and bold statements invite disagreement. To this disagreement, I invite discourse. I don't just invite, but demand a discussion with those who disagree with me here. I'll stand my ground and, perhaps, I'll convince you to join my way of thinking or, maybe, you'll persuade me to join yours. Take me out of my comfort zone, please. That's how a discussion is supposed to take place, not just in an intellectual space, but everywhere.
