Do you have a picture of this sign?The sign that says whites not allowed at a public school is not enough for you?
I agree that it's a bad idea. People should try to get along without letting some irrelevant factor like the amount of skin pigment get in the way. But apparently it does.I just think it's a bad idea. I can't speak for anyone else. I'd argue that most of their other demands would address the issue with varying degrees of success, and as far as their desire for affordable housing, that I agree with as well. I just can't get behind designated areas based on race or any other attribute students can't control.
Just a heads up the washingtontimes is moonie propaganda and as such is prone to using terminology which is purposely misleading. You can tell because they straight up try to use a name that misleads people into thinking they're a legit news source.
Of the many many things that I have a problem with, this falls way way down near the bottom of the list.People are being denied the ability to live in certain campus dorms due solely to race and you see no problem with that? The particular race shouldn't really be relevant to your opinion.
Of the many many things that I have a problem with, this falls way way down near the bottom of the list.
People nowadays seem to have difficulty with priorities. All the outrage is about things that little to no impact on their own lives.
But.. if you're really concerned about this, by all means, please write your congressperson or CSU directly. That would be much more effective than posting about it here. Someone might even believe that you actually care.
Do you have a picture of this sign?
Uh, no. "I don't want you at my golf course."I get that if you feel you're being attacked that you'd want somewhere safe to go, but that's what private property is for. This separate housing thing just seems like the wrong direction.
I'm here because I have a strong dislike to the style of yellow journalism used by certain outlets like the Washington Times, where they take a relatively minor issue, usually something with only a localized impact and involving consenting parties, and sensationalize it purely to generate outrage.Actually my purpose of posting here is to have an intelligent debate and maybe learn something new or possibly learn some perspective. Considering your post I'm not sure what you are doing here other than wasting your time by adding nothing of value to the debate and having no impact on the issue either.
And just because something doesn't impact me personally doesn't mean that I can't have an opinion on the subject. The vast majority of intelligent people have opinions on countless things that don't necessarily "impact" them personally. I will ask the obvious though, since this doesn't impact you and thus you should have no opinion whatsoever why exactly are you bothering posting in the thread?
I'm here because I have a strong dislike to the style of yellow journalism used by certain outlets like the Washington Times, where they take a relatively minor issue, usually something with only a localized impact and involving consenting parties, and sensationalize it purely to generate outrage.
I get it that there's no story in reporting that CSU and this student union came to a mutual agreement, but this rhetoric that all Democrats/libuhruls are trying to bring back segregation, but this time with whites as the oppressed class, is just paranoid propaganda.
Is this issue minor only because it's localized? Would you care only if all schools introduced segregated dorms? Do any issues matter until they threaten to become widespread? Did tax payers and students not part of this student union of CSULA "consent" to this?
I would be more concerned if anyone was actually being harmed.
As a private institution, these colleges and universities have a right to create safe spaces as they don't explicitely exclude anyone. The students using these facilities will be poorly equipped to enter the real world.
In their official statement, the university states these spaces are open to all students. The spaces are not excluding anyone, so there probably isn't a legal implication. However it is fair game to mock the entire notion of creating a space free of micro aggressions, a concept only academia could invent and championAgain, I am no lawyer and am not familiar with the law but I am pretty damn sure that a restaurant can't post a white only sign outside and deny anyone that isn't white to enter their establishment. I'm pretty damn sure that you couldn't even do that if you were renting an apartment but a state institution can do it with publicly funded housing???
Explain that to the non-black students on campus who wouldn't be allowed to live in the "secluded" dorm.it's not segregation, that's forced.
it's seclusion, that's a choice.
PC up that bitch a bit.
Explain that to the non-black students on campus who wouldn't be allowed to live in the "secluded" dorm.
Edit: Will have to read up on what the university is actually proposing though. The Moonie paper has a history of lying.
Of the many many things that I have a problem with, this falls way way down near the bottom of the list.
People nowadays seem to have difficulty with priorities. All the outrage is about things that little to no impact on their own lives.
But.. if you're really concerned about this, by all means, please write your congressperson or CSU directly. That would be much more effective than posting about it here. Someone might even believe that you actually care.
If you were too scared to substantively respond to the article, you could've just said so
In their official statement, the university states these spaces are open to all students. The spaces are not excluding anyone, so there probably isn't a legal implication. However it is fair game to mock the entire notion of creating a space free of micro aggressions, a concept only academia could invent and champion
the university offers four “themed living communities,” including first-year, honors and gender-neutral housing.
UC Berkeley has seven communities that each offer housing themed around a specific community, including Native Americans, Asian Pacific Americans and African Americans
Stanford offers four “ethnic theme dorms” that each focus on Latino, Native American, Asian American and black culture. These are among nearly 20 “theme houses” at the Palo Alto campus.
Reed College in Portland, Ore., offers an "intentional living community" for "students of color to heal together from systemic white supremacy," and the themed housing focuses on black and indigenous voices, according to the college's website.
As a private institution, these colleges and universities have a right to create safe spaces as they don't explicitely exclude anyone. The students using these facilities will be poorly equipped to enter the real world.
That persons making a request to an institution, and that institution choosing to grant said request, is simply not comparable to segregation. You guys sound like reactionary idiots.
Are you somehow being personally repressed by this? Is it a slippery slope where the next step is all whites will be sold into slavery to black masters?