“The university’s letter is dishonest a significant misunderstanding of what the terms “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces” mean, and came across as an awkward attempt to deflect attention from genuine issues on campus.” So Downes is saying that the letter is a poor attempt to avert attention away from real issues that are happening around campus. “The University’s dean’s letter has a fundamental misunderstanding what the terms “trigger warnings”, and “safe spaces” mean.” So “Trigger warnings” are alerting a reader or viewer to the fact that it contains potentially distressing material that is personal to them. “Safe spaces” are a
This subject is tackled in John Stossel's "Censored in America" Fox News hour. Freedom of speech should not be limited, for it is a big part of having a "free society". Freedom of speech is being limited and restricted, and this needs to change. The one place that seems to be limited the most in the aspect of free speech is on colleges and universities. It seems that college students push away ideas and opinions of others they find to be disturbing or conflicting with their own views.
The above incidents indicate that hate speech on the college campus is very common and serious. Some people argue that we must impose some sort of punishment for perpetrators of offensive speech on campus, whereas some oppose regulation on offensive speech. Mari J. Matsuda, the author of the article, “Assultive speech and academic freedom,” is a supporter of hate speech regulation on campus. First, she argues that hate speech on campus violates American democracy since it infringes on the rights of minority students to have equal access and equal participation in the college (Matsuda, p.150). She mentions that it is unlikely for most university students of color to experience campus life without coming across offensive speech or harassment (151).
The goal of the usage of this fact is to show readers this common term does not reflect real traits of smart people and can be treated as an insult because of that. It is one of the few examples of Fridman’s appeals to readers’ logic. The essay is based on general data; the author mentioned schools and universities promote negative attitude to smart students: “Nerds are ostracized while athletes are idolized” (Fridman). But he did not use any statistical or science data to support his position. For example, Fridman could provide data about scholarships and other types of funding for sports and other activities.
Banning books is not acceptable because it’s not allowing the reader the choice of what they want to read and that is going against their civil rights. It also keep them from broadening their horizons because they do not have the ability to step into another person’s shoes and learn from their mistakes. Keeping controversial topics out of the spotlight causes people to be uneducated about specific topics, which also leads to judgement and stereotyping of certain groups or people. How does banning books cause more harm than good? Well, banning books destructs the general well being of people;from someone not being able to have control over what they want to read, to keeping people from the best overall learning experience, and to not discussing real topics that need to be talked about.
Public speech is an intrinsic characteristic of most institutions that allows speakers to expound upon topics relating to current political, social, or other miscellaneous issues. Recently, disapproving students at various colleges such as Berkeley and Middlebury have challenged public orators given permission to speak at their respective campuses. Although most of these protests had peaceful inceptions, they promptly intensified until the calm civil disobedience became an escalating riot. Such protests in academic as well as non academic realms have raised the question of how institutions should decide to whom they provide a public stage to without provoking severe objections by its members. To provide fair and constitutionally aligned opportunities
For the fact students are unaware of the consequences they can and will face when using the drugs.They have no idea of the short or long term consequences they face of hair growth, aggression, which can lead into dessionist thoughts. Many of the influences can come from professional athletes who have also used or still continue to use drugs. But also those peers who surround the student in their sports atmosphere can greatly pressure them to using. By educating the the students and the peers of those students about what the drugs do to affect their body can help influence them to not use drugs but to exercise naturally. Zero supplements, or drugs to have excessive muscle and endurance gain.
Football players should not be punished for their opinion and issue in which they protest in the United States because it brings awareness to society issues, use social status, and even though people disagree that the protest should not happen during the National Anthem. However, it the best time to show the fans what issues they are protesting. This act of protest is nothing new to America, but it has only just become an outrage due, to the involvement of the president and many other average citizens that claim it to be an unfit way to protest. The first instance of this act dates all the way back to World War II, when the Supreme Court voted down a demand that the flag should be saluted during the Pledge of Allegiance (Sachs 1). Then time goes by until 1996 when basketball star Abdul-Rauf was suspended for the length of one game, due to him refusing to stand for the national anthem for a religious purpose.
With recent attacks on college campuses and the Charlottesville riot, many question if hate speech should be restarted for a sense of security in the nations community. hate speech should have a protection policy because it will provide a bigotry free zone for students and from psychological studies hate speech triggers violence. Sense of security, emotional distractions and an increase of absences are main factors on why college campuses should pass a restriction on hate speech. First, a restriction on hate speech allows a sense of security on the campus. College campuses like Berkley have reached out to try and propose an amendment that would ban hate speech and remove speakers like Ben Shapiro from giving a speech on their campus.
Anne Neal, the president and co-founder of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, brought up many great points in her speech on academic freedom. If we do not begin to allow the proper learning and teaching techniques, our society will begin to suffer. Academic freedom is in the decline in today’s society and Anne Neal wants to make a difference. Recently speakers have been backing out of their speeches because of student protests. Campuses are giving speakers speech codes with extremely broad rules.
This argument is dubious at best. But this much is clear: guns do nothing to help universities attain the kind of safety they desire and need -- the safety that enables intellectual and political exploration. Guns by their very nature dampen speech -- they chasten it. Colleges simply cannot tolerate
This case gained negative notoriety because of the light sentence Turner was given. New ideas have to be constructed so that violations like that of Brock Turner will not occur repeatedly in collegiate settings. Colleges need to implement “zero tolerance” policies when disciplining sexual predators. If someone is tried and convicted of a sexual crime on campus, they should be permanently expelled instead of being allowed to return when their sentence is up, like Brock Turner’s case
The Constitution prohibits “unreasonable” searches, so if staff and coaches do not believe for sure that a student athlete is using drugs, they should not be able to test them. Also if a person is seen to be positive in a test, they will need to explain and it can be embarrassing and can be judged by other classmates, even if you have an actual medical condition that requires it. Many people say that drug testing invades your privacy and your rights as a United States citizen, but now there are new testing that involves using student 's
An argument many people make against banning alcohol is that if alcohol isn’t legal on campus, then students will go off campus. By going off campus they can drink to their hearts desire and they won’t be under supervision. They say that this also creates problems because now students aren’t under adult supervision and can, quite frankly, do what they please. Also people make the argument that colleges should spend more time on alcohol safety and proper use. Although colleges should provide these seminars for students on alcohol, they should also crack down on its usage.