So, the grad student was completely within rights to stifle an off topic discussion, but you don't like what was said when (correctly) stifling said discussion? Compelling!

Those arguments weren't welcome and were offensive.

That doesn't mean that there is no time and place in a University that people should be free to make them. But in the context of that class, as given by the article, it would've been inappropriate then, for sure.

And still, it's not even clear that the undergrad student was right (we'd have to trust Holtz gave the right context). Let's say she was wrong and they should've been free to air them. So what?

Professor McAdams was clearly okay with allowing that sort of thing. Wait for his lessons. McAdams wasn't in any trouble for what he allowed to be discussed in his classes. What he got in trouble for was his clear professional misconduct in smearing an undergrad student by name in a blog post.

There's a time and a place for those arguments. Yes, it can be poorly timed and offensive to expect to be able to rant about them whenever you fancy.

And, of course, we can clearly see that there were other times and places (McAdams' lectures) where those things would've been allowed.

The only thing you're not allowed to do is start berating undergrads on your blog and posting their name alongside it.

Pretty much. If she had said something along the line of, "hey, you're allowed to make your religious arguments in class, but since they aren't relevant to Rawls, and I need to keep the class on track, maybe another time" that would have made sense, and we wouldn't be talking about it.

Instead, she said he wasn't allowed to make those arguments in her class because they might offend other students, and he was welcome to drop the class. Others in here agree citing hate speech, and that's the argument I'm attacking as pointless and off base. I'm reminded of some sage advise we both agree with:

I guess it's somewhat naive of me to be surprised a longtime professor would make such a short sighted, petty blunder. No one's infallible but why he thought publicly attempting to do Abbate a disservice was a wise move is beyond me. Old fart couldn't see two moves ahead.

Um, it was a class where it was inappropriate to have to listen to homophobic rants.

Again, you're trying to make some case that there should be a time and place for modest proposals of all varieties and that's fine. It still doesn't make this class one of those cases.

This is the most boring SMP refugee tone policing yet

It's not that she didn't want unrelated homophobic rants in class, it's the fact that she told him after the class that she didn't want homophobic rants in class.

Basically it seems like the issue here is that that TA wasn't providing a safe space for homophobes, right? That at the end of the day is FoldN's problem, that labeling a belief "hate speech" might trigger a conservative student and so it shouldn't be done.

Rememebr guys, this whole example came because I mentioned I put a positive space sticker on my office door. Fold immediately jumped in to tell me about the unintended consequences. So far we have one example where, giving absolutely all the credit to folds framing, we have a graduate student correctly shut down an off topic homophobic rant in class but didn't use quite the right tone while doing so. That's it. That's the big reveal. That is the big unintended consequence. Ghat it the thing that gets all the "banning speech" comments coming.

Oh yeah, this prof was a real piece of work. His dismissal letter is a fun read:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4jS...cTQ/view?pli=1

Excerpts:

Somehow FoldN came across this story and decided that the takeaway lesson was how SJWs are stifling free speech? That it was the the undergrad student who was treated unfairly? The grad student was the villain in this tale?

Though, to be fair, it's possible he just doesn't understand what happened --he keeps referring to the grad student as "the professor." I've tried to help him out, but he seems to have me on ignore.

Gold.

Holy ****, what an idiot. Also, who'd have thought the student was getting an F? Woulda swore such a class act would be pulling high 90's.

Honestly, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt here because it doesn't change the moral of the story at all. Part of the job of being a grad student is being thrown in front of a class with little training and being told to run the show. They're going to make mistakes, that's when the prof is supposed to do his job as an educator and set the TA back on the right course.

When an undergrad comes to your office with a complaint, the notion that you, the grown-ass tenured professor, should go online and harass the TA on your blog is just WTFBBQ bonkers. Dude was just completely out of control and the university is much better off without him.

But yeah, moral of this story is that liberals are def ruining campus with their safe spaces.

Yeah, I thought about bringing that up, but to be fair, it mostly isn't relevant.

Spot on about both what the prof did and the relevance of the student Trolley.

Mostly, just another stupid move by McAdams to not vet this kid, his character, and his story in any way. His source's horrid tale of liberals once again ruining what was once a good school was strong enough to go straight to print.

Fair point. Interesting that Abbate then took time out of the next class to talk about his objections at length though. Also interesting to me are the comments about tail docking, showing that the student in question is an obvious ****tard who has tried feeding his brand of bull**** to her before. And yet the big bad censorship crazy feminazi still gave up a bunch of her own time and the class' for him while he failed the course.

It's political correctness gone mad.

Another college without a sense of humor

http://www.splc.org/article/2015/11/...aper-the-koala

This paper sounds absolutely fantastic!

The offending article (Trigger warning: this really is offensive guys, not even kidding, better sit down.):
http://thekoala.org/2015/11/16/ucsd-...ace-on-campus/

Anyway, looks like the ACLU got it's back:
https://www.aclusandiego.org/ucsd-student-media/

More on The Koala:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Koala

And after foldns last example with thoroughly and laughably eviscerated we are off to the next stop in our round the country tour with this time with the great oppression of free speech by one group of students debatably acting poorly to another group who is overtly trying to troll them. How exciting! My goodness this particularly type of way students can be stupid is a very, very important issue to worry about, isn't it!

Here's one for you donkeys, albeit in grade school. Journalist was so clever about making America grate.

When there's absolutely no mention of the nature of the complaint or why the principal decided to uphold it, do you think "Wow, top level journalism" or do you think maybe something is missing from the story?

"Eviscerated" lol. I guess that's one way to look at it. Another way is that example after example of free speech getting trampled on are presented itt, and clowns like you constantly fall over each other to defend it while the rest of the world, columnists on the left and right, comedians, FIRE, the ACLU, and The President, slap down that BS and watch as the need for trigger warnings, microaggressions and campus wide safe spaces steadily gets laughed away... until the next fad takes it's place.

TIWFAB

Free speech being trampled on? That sounds horrible! Surely you must have a better example than...err....uh....a graduate student who debatably didn't have perfect framing as they correctly shut down a trolling agitator trying to hijack class with their homophobic anti gay marriage rant and then was subsequently abused by their supervisor and run out of the graduate school. But hey, name drop Obama one more time and it will be all okay, you totally won this one.

Meth: Not even once