This article is a real gem: http://nypost.com/2016/04/02/nyu-stu...ety-on-campus/

Just backing up what we already knew, that Trump voters want to Make America Great Again with safe spaces on campus where nobody says mean things to them about how ****ty and dumb they must be for supporting him.

As has been obvious from the start, the whole trigger warnings/safe spaces thing(which doesn't really exist from the left except as isolated anecdotes) is projection from the right, who literally built an entire media/entertainment ecosystem to avoid being told news that upsets them.

I don't remember if someone posted it but Vox published a... letter? or something from a Trump supporting Ph.D. student all about the same ****, about how tough it is as a white dude to support an openly racist candidate.

This is absurdly stupid, even for you.

Do we really need to go over the number of safe spaces demanded by liberals on college campuses? Surely not right.

It will be a small number, ikes.

The key is that the right wing didn't brand their trigger warnings as that, they branded them as like, parent's rights.

So, for example, when you pull your kids out of school to stop them from learning about evolution or global warming or the homosexual agenda, that's not "safe space" stuff, that's just being conservative.

When Texas rewrites textbooks to glorify conservative politicians, downplay the horrors of slavery, and so forth, that's not a trigger warning over reality's well known liberal bias, that's just being conservative.

Really the fault here is that idiot liberal campus activists picked such poor easily-mocked branding, but yeah, ikes, remember where you pick this stuff up. It's not from reputable news sources, now, is it? It's from your stories. Which you read because you can't deal with reading mainstream newspapers, cause the mainstream press might publish a column about rape culture or whatever.

There's a massive difference between isolating yourself and forcing your isolation on others. I'm not sure what dailykos nonsense you're cribbing from here but it's ****ing terrible.

Agree with this. All my liberal news sources, like the New Yorker, New Republic, and New York Review of Books, decry this stuff as much as any right wing org. The only difference is they do so with intelligent and informed articles, because they can.

ya college kids wanting a clubhouse isn't forcing their isolation on others, as much as it rattles your boots to have to hear that a room on campus gets called a safe space

I don't necessarily agree with the whole trigger warning stuff. Like most people on the left, I think it's overkill and unhelpful.

That said, everytime I hear someone use it as a joke, I translate it to what they they really mean, and it becomes much less funny.

"Triggered? Lol! Hey guys. Remember those women that got raped or abused as children?

Remember? They complained that the fact that rape and forced kissing etc is everywhere in media caused them PTSD like symptoms where they were suddenly confronted with full recall of the attack?

I mean, I know right! How FUNNY is that? Triggered. Hahaha"

I'd like to see those numbers. I searched and there's no comprehensive list of campuses demanding safe spaces. Seems a little knockout-gamey at this point.

A lot of articles about why "Space spaces are just the worst" but not where they are.

Can we get a number on how many trump supporters are racist? Can't find any hard numbers on that either so that's also a little knockout game right?

Sure you can

You can add to the list as well.

University of Missouri
Yale said stop wearing black face on Halloween
Bowdoin
Breitbart is furious about something that happened at University of Edinberg.
Northwestern

Uh. That's all I can find.

This is only in reality, in reztes' safe space there are no such numbers.

Wait, what makes you say this?

The article quoted one of the Trumpistas as saying they were scared but did you notice how there wasn't a single example of anyone actually being physically intimidated?

You're suggesting the Republicans get extra credit in this comparison for being absolutely terrified for no reason? lololol

Well, I've been reading articles about behind the scenes state shenanigans. In many states there appears to be quite a bit of freedom for state delegates, even on first ballot. In those cases, it appears that organization and having solid party activists is the most important thing.

ND and CO don't really have primaries, so all the action is on delegate wrangling. There appear to be further shenanigans in states like SC, MO, and AZ. So it may be "problematic" but the whole primary process is pretty ad hoc and not really a creature of established, or at least consistent across states, law. It certainly isn't enshrined in the constitution.

Basically, as far as I can tell, it's hard to say someone "won" 1239, unless they actually have 1239 votes. I mean you could claim that they "should" have 1239 under mythical ideal conditions, but those aren't the conditions under which delegates are appointed.

Seriously, there's only like 3 campuses that have legit safe spaces. 2 are liberal arts colleges.

List of top twenty schools with safe spaces, surprisingly found very quickly by Googling "list of colleges with safe spaces."

Yeah, those aren't safe spaces. They're workshops and seminars to promote tolerance for LGBT. They don't restrict any 1st amendment rights and they're not physical spaces. You should read the article.

Here, again, is the difference between the safe-space branding and the conservative perception of it.

I read about the first 5 schools on here and it sounds like as a faculty member you can take a sensitivity course for a couple hours and get a little sticker to put on your office door to designate yourself as someone that's not a judgmental *******.

I actually read that piece of crap, onionesque article. Most of the "safe spaces" appears to mean one can get a list of LGBT "advisers" willing to talk to students coming out or what not. It's not like there are actual "safe spaces" on campus for the perennially butt-hurt. I actually support this, minus the toxic name, as a lot of young gays kill themselves when they realize they are gay and can't really deal with it.

Just to be clear, none of you actually think safe spaces are bad, I hope.

When my kids and I are looking to pick a university, even if they are straight, a safe space is a positive symptom of a wider tolerance and acceptance that should exist there.

Sure ideally in a couple decades they won't be needed, but let's be realistic.

My campus currently has an og "safe space" and then a new, more current "safe space" designed for those who felt offended by the original safe space.

Lol, Foldndark making fun of safe spaces, so good. No irony there! Remind me again, what brought you to the politics forum?

I think "safe spaces" are bad qua physical spaces. I think having colleges where insulting and beating up gays for sport is frowned upon is good, as is having lists of "non-judgemental" advisers. Many of the listed colleges are pretty conservative schools, drawing students from conservative areas, where "safe spaces" may be useful in light of prominent traditions of drunken (mostly)heterosexual frat boy rampages.