Wow...

[Siggon Kristov]

What is the context of "debate" in the whole thing? I think you're narrowing it down to scheduled events. Does it refer to discussions/debates in the classroom? If so, I don't think it's fair to expect that someone should just choose to not turn up to class. The classroom needs to be a place where persons can feel comfortable. I don't mean they shouldn't have their ideas/beliefs/opinions challenged, but they shouldn't feel unsafe. I don't think persons should be expected to participate in a discussion that makes them uncomfortable.

To clarify this no-platform policy applies to invited speakers only, no hate or prejudice would be tolerated from a member of university staff.

That clears it up.

[Autokrator15]

What is the context of "debate" in the whole thing? I think you're narrowing it down to scheduled events. Does it refer to discussions/debates in the classroom? If so, I don't think it's fair to expect that someone should just choose to not turn up to class. The classroom needs to be a place where persons can feel comfortable. I don't mean they shouldn't have their ideas/beliefs/opinions challenged, but they shouldn't feel unsafe. I don't think persons should be expected to participate in a discussion that makes them uncomfortable.

There is no difference with what you wish to change and what I would want to change if I were there. But the way on how to change it is radicly different. You are making people look weak and the protections you wish to eract will only cause discrimination. You are making LGBT people as if they are different. Everyone needs to be able to practise his freedoms which are guerenteed by the constitution. The school should make sure that violance against others is banned, that security secures everyones person and that critizism of homosexuality of conservatism or whatever topic can be peacefully discussed. I have seen many progressives and gays use violance against christians or conservatives who are peacefully stating their opinions. Safe spaces are one sided and dangerous to freedom.

I have a lecturer who blamed "homosexuals" and "battymen" for the PNP's recent election loss. It was a pretty shitty claim. Many persons are talking about many different things that could have resulted in the JLP winning the election, however the election was so close that I don't think that anyone can prove their claims without doing research. Of course, someone couldn't argue against him, because merely defending LGBTQ+ people will get everyone to think that you're LGBTQ+, and then you have to start watching out for your own safety. I would have to watch out for my grade, because this specific class is one where 100% of the grade is from coursework, no exams. My name has to be on my papers.

This is no proof of the need of a safespace, this is proof that this idiot needs to be told to keep his trap shut, he is there to give unbiased and neutral lectures and should keep his views to himself. Also a teacher insulting a student or viceversa should be punished.

Marginalised students should not be expected to debate what are often uncomfortable and/or triggering
issues for the benefit of ‘free speech’.

This is sickening. You dont hear me chanting that I dont want to hear socialist ideas or progressive ideas because they trigger me? This whole trigger stuff is BS. We should stop it, realy. This whole safespace isnt about making sure that there is a safe enviroment in which we have the decendency to treat eachother with respect and being able to discuss everything, no this is to ban issues and arguments from one side of the isle in order to advance a cancerous progressive cultural marxist agenda.

Basically as I understand it a safe space policy is just guaranteeing that everyone will be treated with respect, nothing more than that really. If the progressive bias you talk about is denying people the right to openly discriminate against people in class then I'm glad it exists.

and, I probably talk for a lot of people here in saying that if you tried calling me doll then I'd break your nose...

I fear opression of the freedom of speech and warning people who call a lady friend a doll is just idiotic and stupid. I would have given that university a piece of my mind. On second topic, I dont want anyone to be discriminated in class, we should treat eachother with respect but this is so focused on specific groups that I dont see how you wish to create equality by creating special conditions for seemingly special people. I would argue that decency and respect rules should be enforced better. My question to you, why cant I be respectfull and differ on a subject such as LGBTQA+ issues? Decency thats where the key is.

[Siggon Kristov]

You are making LGBT people as if they are different. Everyone needs to be able to practise his freedoms which are guerenteed by the constitution.

We don't have a universal constitution. There is no single constitution which governs the USA, UK, and Jamaica We all have different laws - so when talking about "freedoms which are guaranteed by the constitution" - research whether such freedoms really exist. LGBTQ+ people do not have freedoms guaranteed by the constitution in Jamaica. If a police officer suspects that a man may engage in sexual relations with another man in the future, the police officer can detain him.

The school should make sure that violance against others is banned, that security secures everyones person and that critizism of homosexuality of conservatism or whatever topic can be peacefully discussed. I have seen many progressives and gays use violance against christians or conservatives who are peacefully stating their opinions. Safe spaces are one sided and dangerous to freedom.

Are you assuming that the school doesn't have rules that prohibit violence on campus? These rules are just on paper; they don't mean anything. If someone attacks you at night, and you can't identify the person, the school's rules can't help you. Even if there were police everywhere on campus 24/7, it wouldn't change anything for students who don't live on campus. When someone has to ride on the same bus, or walk on the same streets, with someone who he feels threatened by, the school can't really do much about it.

Also, this is not just about "criticism of homosexuality" - our existing laws against LGBTQ+ people are a form of violence/coercion. And you can go on about Christians or Conservatives "peacefully stating their opinions" but what exactly are these opinions? They are typically violent opinions, i.e. persons openly expressing that all LGBTQ+ people should be jailed or killed. When they kill LGBTQ+ people, they use religion to justify it.

I have a lecturer who blamed "homosexuals" and "battymen" for the PNP's recent election loss. It was a pretty shitty claim. Many persons are talking about many different things that could have resulted in the JLP winning the election, however the election was so close that I don't think that anyone can prove their claims without doing research. Of course, someone couldn't argue against him, because merely defending LGBTQ+ people will get everyone to think that you're LGBTQ+, and then you have to start watching out for your own safety. I would have to watch out for my grade, because this specific class is one where 100% of the grade is from coursework, no exams. My name has to be on my papers.

This is no proof of the need of a safespace, this is proof that this idiot needs to be told to keep his trap shut, he is there to give unbiased and neutral lectures and should keep his views to himself. Also a teacher insulting a student or viceversa should be punished.

You're confusing me. On one hand, you're saying there is no need for the classroom to be treated as a safe space for students, and on the other hand you're calling for sanctions against persons who do things that would not be allowed in a safe space. In general, you keep talking about how there should be decency. When someone else proposes a measure, you argue that it limits free speech, yet a Jamaican would consider you to be limiting free speech by enforcing "decency" measures.

Marginalised students should not be expected to debate what are often uncomfortable and/or triggering issues for the benefit of ‘free speech’.

This is sickening. You dont hear me chanting that I dont want to hear socialist ideas or progressive ideas because they trigger me? This whole trigger stuff is BS.

A rape victim suffering from PTSD is not BS. An LGBTQ+ person being bullied in school or being attacked, then being told in the future that LGBTQ+ persons deserve things like that, can cause discussion of certain issues to be triggering. Someone having mental health issues from bad memories/experiences, and having certain triggers, is not BS. I suggest you read up more on the severity of triggers; triggers aren't about disagreement. LGBTQ+ youth, and other marginalised groups, are more vulnerable to mental health issues.

[soysauce]

here is no difference with what you wish to change and what I would want to change if I were there. But the way on how to change it is radicly different. You are making people look weak and the protections you wish to eract will only cause discrimination. You are making LGBT people as if they are different. Everyone needs to be able to practise his freedoms which are guerenteed by the constitution. The school should make sure that violance against others is banned, that security secures everyones person and that critizism of homosexuality of conservatism or whatever topic can be peacefully discussed. I have seen many progressives and gays use violance against christians or conservatives who are peacefully stating their opinions. Safe spaces are one sided and dangerous to freedom.

Yeah, it applies to everyone,

Sexuality and gender identity are protected characteristics, people are born with them rather than changeable political opinions, it would be nonsense to suggest that criticism of different sexualities and genders is as acceptable as criticism of ideologies. Accepting them is a matter of decency...

[Autokrator15]

here is no difference with what you wish to change and what I would want to change if I were there. But the way on how to change it is radicly different. You are making people look weak and the protections you wish to eract will only cause discrimination. You are making LGBT people as if they are different. Everyone needs to be able to practise his freedoms which are guerenteed by the constitution. The school should make sure that violance against others is banned, that security secures everyones person and that critizism of homosexuality of conservatism or whatever topic can be peacefully discussed. I have seen many progressives and gays use violance against christians or conservatives who are peacefully stating their opinions. Safe spaces are one sided and dangerous to freedom.

Yeah, it applies to everyone,

Sexuality and gender identity are protected characteristics, people are born with them rather than changeable political opinions, it would be nonsense to suggest that criticism of different sexualities and genders is as acceptable as criticism of ideologies. Accepting them is a matter of decency...

No its not. I will never accept or acknowledge non-binary genders for example, they do not exist. And no one has the right to force me to do so. Its my freedom to believe what I believe and to say what I believe.

Now there is a difference between decency and forcing respect, what you want is forcing others to accept something they disagree with, thats not decency. I see decency to leave everyones dignity in tact and stating that the matter might be to sensitive and better not discussed at the moment, thats decency.

Also, this is not just about "criticism of homosexuality" - our existing laws against LGBTQ+ people are a form of violence/coercion. And you can go on about Christians or Conservatives "peacefully stating their opinions" but what exactly are these opinions? They are typically violent opinions, i.e. persons openly expressing that all LGBTQ+ people should be jailed or killed. When they kill LGBTQ+ people, they use religion to justify it.

Utter nonesense. I know alot of Christians and conservatives who see homosexuality as a non-issue, its who they are and its up to God to judge not mortals. Now there are also those who do judge and who do think homosexuals will for instance go to hell or that its not natural or some other bollocks. But you are now saying that ALL religious and ALL conservatives preach hate, this is so much nonesense that it actualy debunks the entire idea of a safespace. Also the avoidance of triggers are, following that wiki article on triggers, not a good way to get over PTSD. And applying censorship is not a good way to promote your over zealous progressive ideas.

Are you assuming that the school doesn't have rules that prohibit violence on campus? These rules are just on paper; they don't mean anything. If someone attacks you at night, and you can't identify the person, the school's rules can't help you. Even if there were police everywhere on campus 24/7, it wouldn't change anything for students who don't live on campus. When someone has to ride on the same bus, or walk on the same streets, with someone who he feels threatened by, the school can't really do much about it.

And a safespace is going to change that how? What you need is to campaign to make sure that existing rules and laws are enforced. Freedom of speech and expression should be honoured but violance or ousting threats is never okay and should be punished.

You're confusing me. On one hand, you're saying there is no need for the classroom to be treated as a safe space for students, and on the other hand you're calling for sanctions against persons who do things that would not be allowed in a safe space. In general, you keep talking about how there should be decency. When someone else proposes a measure, you argue that it limits free speech, yet a Jamaican would consider you to be limiting free speech by enforcing "decency" measures.

Hmm, I meant that I dont think a teacher should openly oust his opinions left and right, during the lessons he should be impartial and be teaching, outside class is another story though If I were him I would ask him to leave everyone in their dignity by not offending for instance homosexuals. The school has a choice on who they wish to hire and who not.

[soysauce]

No its not. I will never accept or acknowledge non-binary genders for example, they do not exist. And no one has the right to force me to do so. Its my freedom to believe what I believe and to say what I believe.

Now there is a difference between decency and forcing respect, what you want is forcing others to accept something they disagree with, thats not decency. I see decency to leave everyones dignity in tact and stating that the matter might be to sensitive and better not discussed at the moment, thats decency.

You're right, I can't force you to accept them, I can't force anyone to accept them just as I can't force them to recognise that racism is wrong and that women should have equal rights. The irony here is that you are looking for some protection from criticism for your - some would say backward - opinions that you have adopted of your own free will while simultaneously asking for every element of protection and recognition for an aspect of people's identity that they cannot change be removed. I mean I understand that being the only conservative on campus isn't fun, generally no-one likes the guy who refuses to recognise their friend's identity. But you can choose to stop being a conservative whenever you want, or just not talk about it, the LGBT community have no choice on that front.

I guess what I'm saying is that you have a freedom to believe whatever the hell you want, but you don't deserve any protection from society for your beliefs, and your opinions aren't an excuse to discriminate against others.

[Autokrator15]

You're right, I can't force you to accept them, I can't force anyone to accept them just as I can't force them to recognise that racism is wrong and that women should have equal rights. The irony here is that you are looking for some protection from criticism for your - some would say backward - opinions that you have adopted of your own free will while simultaneously asking for every element of protection and recognition for an aspect of people's identity that they cannot change be removed. I mean I understand that being the only conservative on campus isn't fun, generally no-one likes the guy who refuses to recognise their friend's identity. But you can choose to stop being a conservative whenever you want, or just not talk about it, the LGBT community have no choice on that front.

I guess what I'm saying is that you have a freedom to believe whatever the hell you want, but you don't deserve any protection from society for your beliefs, and your opinions aren't an excuse to discriminate against others.

I'm far from the only one and I'm classical-liberal not conservative. Also these issues arent an issue in the Netherlands at all at the moment and I would love to keep it that way. But even liberal ideas have its limits. I will never accept things that simply dont exist but I will never harm someones dignity. But the person must not expect me to use nouns that dont exist. If he or she doesnt wish to work with me or talk to me thats entirely fine by me and I wont harbour any animosity towards the person, but mostly the same cant be said about what they would probably do to me, which says more about them then about me.

And I seek no protection here for what I find, what I want is that everyone can speak his mind freely and my freedom or that of someone else must never be limited because of someone's feelings.

On top of that I desire nothing but critizism aslong as I too am treated as I treat other, with decency. I have been insulted here more times than I can count for opening a discussion and show casing a different point of view which is also based on statistics and research. Critizism in general is never wrong. Where I drew the line was being compared to Hitler, which could cause character murder which is a low move. Also I find it funny that none would jump the other and correct the person for his respectless behaviour whilest I would do so If it were done to another.

Now that I have a choice to be silent or change my views can also be said for those who claim to be non-binary because in my view they are not born with it they choose or think they have a non-existing gender. But even if we disregard this I hold strong opinions on expression and freedom of speech, I believe that the exchange of ideas is good of society and shutting up only for people to like me goes against who I am and apperently that would - according to you - be very different than someone who cant express their sexuality or gender? I think not. Why must I appear progressive to just fit in and to not be hated? Why is someone hated for their views or opinions?

Also the notion that someone can or should not speak of his convictions or analytical ideas concerning the development or maintaince of society is dangerous. If I have societies best interest at heart and I believe this to be the best way then why shouldnt I express them?

[soysauce]

I will never accept things that simply dont exist but I will never harm someones dignity. But the person must not expect me to use nouns that dont exist.

Well, I know a few people who'd identify as non-binary, so from my perspective it does exist, Why do you say it doesn't?

As for pronouns - I've only ever met people who use "they/them" which does exist, there are others but I don't really think it's much of an issue.

[Autokrator15]

I will never accept things that simply dont exist but I will never harm someones dignity. But the person must not expect me to use nouns that dont exist.

Well, I know a few people who'd identify as non-binary, so from my perspective it does exist, Why do you say it doesn't?

As for pronouns - I've only ever met people who use "they/them" which does exist, there are others but I don't really think it's much of an issue.

They / them, ableit weird I would not have a problem with. The only thing is that you cant see it from the outside and thats the whole deal with nouns, they dont target gender but sex.

Why I say it doesnt is because I believe it doesnt exist so Im not going to imply the possibility that I am wrong or else I wouldnt believe in it now would I?

[soysauce]

Now that I have a choice to be silent or change my views can also be said for those who claim to be non-binary because in my view they are not born with it they choose or think they have a non-existing gender. But even if we disregard this I hold strong opinions on expression and freedom of speech, I believe that the exchange of ideas is good of society and shutting up only for people to like me goes against who I am and apperently that would - according to you - be very different than someone who cant express their sexuality or gender? I think not. Why must I appear progressive to just fit in and to not be hated? Why is someone hated for their views or opinions?

Also the notion that someone can or should not speak of his convictions or analytical ideas concerning the development or maintaince of society is dangerous. If I have societies best interest at heart and I believe this to be the best way then why shouldn't I express them?

Generally the reason I dislike people over their opinions is that their opinions are their own choice and say a lot about them, if someone chooses to be an MRA for example I won't go anywhere near them because a lot of MRA's are dangerous and unpleasant people to be around. But I digress,

I've got a fairly broad knowledge of LGBT issues and I'm generally not that interested in entertaining the notion that gender fluidity isn't real, to argue that point is superfluous. That argument has been done to death before, there's solid research backing it up too, it can be safely said that it is fact. To argue against fact is prejudice, and I really don't have much time for that.

Also the idea that being disliked for your political opinions is comparable to being born with a sexuality or gender identity other than "normal" just demonstrates a lack of understanding