College Students Demand Protection From Words and Ideas

Thomas Jefferson once said:

It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god.  It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.  - Notes on the State of Virginia

Freedom of Religion was an uncomplicated matter. For Jefferson, tolerance of other worldviews would be wide ranging unless it damaged him financially or harmed him physically.

Andrew B. Myers / The Atlantic

The times have changed. In today’s world the psychologized self reigns supreme such that if what you do or say hurts another person’s feelings then you have harmed them. This amounts to a form of oppression. The offender must therefore be silenced. No pockets need be picked. Nor legs broken.

Words and Ideas are enough to cause harm. Identities are thereby marginalized. And legitimacy denied.

Tolerance is passé. Affirmation or silence is required.

Obviously, in such a fragile world, freedom of religion and freedom of speech will be under threat.


Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt were featured in a previous post.

Their very fine book, The Coddling of the American Mind offers insight into today’s fragile student psyche. And how we got to this point in our culture.

They wrote a series of articles in The Atlantic which they eventually turned into that book.

Here are some quotes:

In the name of emotional well-being, college students are increasingly demanding protection from words and ideas they don’t like. Here’s why that’s disastrous for education—and mental health.

Something strange is happening at America’s colleges and universities. A movement is arising, undirected and driven largely by students, to scrub campuses clean of words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense. Last December, Jeannie Suk wrote in an online article for The New Yorker about law students asking her fellow professors at Harvard not to teach rape law—or, in one case, even use the word violate (as in “that violates the law”) lest it cause students distress. In February, Laura Kipnis, a professor at Northwestern University, wrote an essay in The Chronicle of Higher Education describing a new campus politics of sexual paranoia—and was then subjected to a long investigation after students who were offended by the article and by a tweet she’d sent filed Title IX complaints against her. In June, a professor protecting himself with a pseudonym wrote an essay for Vox describing how gingerly he now has to teach. “I’m a Liberal Professor, and My Liberal Students Terrify Me,” the headline said.

Two terms have risen quickly from obscurity into common campus parlance. Microaggressions are small actions or word choices that seem on their face to have no malicious intent but that are thought of as a kind of violence nonetheless. For example, by some campus guidelines, it is a microaggression to ask an Asian American or Latino American “Where were you born?,” because this implies that he or she is not a real American. Trigger warnings are alerts that professors are expected to issue if something in a course might cause a strong emotional response. For example, some students have called for warnings that Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart describes racial violence and that F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby portrays misogyny and physical abuse, so that students who have been previously victimized by racism or domestic violence can choose to avoid these works, which they believe might “trigger” a recurrence of past trauma.  

Source: The Atlantic

According to the most-basic tenets of psychology, helping people with anxiety disorders avoid the things they fear is misguided.

Lukianoff & Haidt

Read the whole thing.

+++

As a Christian I certainly advocate avoiding offensive speech, if at all possible, without denying my worldview.

As a grandparent I bemoan the overall lack of resilience and grit in today’s younger generation.


What are we doing to our students if we encourage them to develop extra-thin skin just before they leave the cocoon of adult protection?

Lukianoff & Haidt

We’ve coddled too far. The weakest person in the room now dictates the discussion. And remains woefully unprepared for life in this world.

+++

“Anti-Conversion Therapy” Laws

From the site SexMatters this letter writing campaign to UK members of government.

U.S. citizens should express concerns to their representatives too.

These so-called “anti-conversion therapy” laws massively overreach and disregard both free speech and religious liberties.

Here’s the letter they recommend UK citizen’s send to their representatives.

I was disappointed to see the photograph of you holding a placard that says “I support a trans-inclusive ban”.

This sounds like a clear slogan to get behind – but this is not a straightforward issue. I urge you to think again.

Affirming that a child is “trans” is not similar to sexual orientation. Childhood gender distress often resolves, and extreme treatments that involve social transition, cross-sex hormones and a pathway to surgery and sterilisation should never be routine.

I am sending you two reports that I hope you will read. One is by Dr Hilary Cass, former President of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, on NHS gender identity services for children. The other is by Sex Matters, based on its research on the campaign to ban conversion therapy.

Dr Cass’s interim report sets out serious concerns about how children are being treated – not using normal clinical standards for exploring the causes of gender distress, but being declared as “trans” by their school and doctors after self-diagnosing. Her report highlights that a high proportion of those presenting at gender clinics are children and young people in care, with autism or experience of abuse, and those who would likely grow up to be lesbian or gay.

Threatening teachers, parents, foster carers, clinicians and youth workers with prison, fines and a criminal record if they disagree with a child’s self-diagnosis is not the way to get these children the support they need.

The call to “include trans in the ban” is presented as a simple moral test, but it obscures the complexity and uncertainty about the cause of so many children declaring themselves trans. Inclusion in a new criminal law will make it harder for children experiencing gender distress to get careful therapy, or to get support in school and in the community that does not simply “affirm” them as being “born in the wrong body” and needing a lifetime of hormone treatment and surgery.

I would like to meet to discuss this.


The Cass Review – an interim report to the National Health Service England.

Although not mentioned, Christian Pastoral Counseling will be effected by these proposed UK laws as well.

See this relevant post: Christian “Hate Crimes?

And this one: Who Is The Conversion Therapist?

+++

As a Classic Christian I encourage everyone to “Embrace, Don’t Affirm.”

Individuals with a Gender Identity Disorder (Gender-Dysphoria) need Truth-filled Love. Please read this post for more details.

Love Refuses to Affirm Confusion

Christian “Hate Crimes?”

Upcoming posts will discuss the current move in Europe and beyond to criminalize a form of Christian Therapy that Evangelical Christians have employed.

But first this unseemly development on the Religious Freedom front.

A Finnish prosecutor has charged two Christians with hate crimes for publicly expressing their Christian beliefs about sex and marriage. One member of parliament and a bishop of the Lutheran church found themselves in a Finnish hate crime crosshair. A government minister (MP) recently raised hate crime suspicions by tweeting a negative opinion of her Church’s leadership because of their intent to sponsor a Pride Parade.

For that expression of her deeply held beliefs (that many Christians may oppose) and some previous statements by her from years ago, she has been charged with a hate crime.

Hard to believe. But here are the details. By the way, the interviewer in the video below says he is baffled by this even though he is a gay Catholic. You should be too.

+++

Again, many Christians may disagree with the MP and the Lutheran Bishop but surely we can agree that this shouldn’t be a prosecutable offense.

Is this the world we want to live in?

You can find more information about this story here. (The usual link disclaimer applies. 1Links from this blog to online resources don’t necessarily mean I support everything found on these sites. But as adults we should embrace viewpoint diversity. And make alliances where we can.)