Define many.
(And yes, this is a serious request, not snark.)
Oh good grief, dstark. Stop playing games.
If we are discussing the War of 1812 in history class, or subatomic particles in physics class, and a student starts talking about his Disney vacation or his favorite vegetable or his favorite sexual position or whatever and won’t shut up when redirected, the prof has every right to shut him down for being disruptive and it has zero, zip, zilch to do with free speech.
It is intellectually sloppy on your part to think that free speech means a prof must allow any student to ramble on about anything even if not germane to the class. Why do you set up ridiculous straw men?
I am skeptical that anyone smart enough to be accepted into the University of Chicago Class of 2020 does not know the educational philosophy of this university. I see adults on this forum suggesting that the University of Chicago administration should have made this announcement sooner lest these little snowflakes become trapped at a school they might find themselves unhappy with. I know one student who would jump at the chance to take a place in the UC class of 2020.
My son (HS class of 2016) applied for admission to the University of Chicago for the class of 2020. He was waitlisted and ultimatey rejected for admission. This school was his top choice. Despite having a 35 ACT, straight As in HS, 11 AP classes (mostly 5s and a few 4s), and a few other stellar stats, he had to deal with the dissapointment of rejection. After he was notified of his waitlist status, he was moping around the house for a few days when I told him to get over it and move on to his next choice. Boo Hoo for him! Coddling young adults does not prepare them for life in the real world. I know. I know. I probably committed a micro agression or two.
Is arguing about whether FIRE is conservative or liberal relevant to safe places and triggers?
@Demosthenes49, I think comparing free speech in a classroom, to safe places and triggers is relevant to this thread.
You don’t have to answer the questions. Answering the questions weren’t mandatory. You are not going to get extra credit. Your grade is not going to be higher if you answer the questions. 
I think this might indeed be a change of policy for University of Chicago because they are now disavowing the safe spaces they have created and advocated for on their campus???
When I searched “safe space” on University Of Chicago’s own web site the NUMBER 1 results are for LGBT groups http://www.uchicago.edu/search/results/?GSAq=safe+space
http://lgbtq.uchicago.edu/page/safe-space
"The Office of LGBTQ Student Life Safe Space program fosters an inclusive environment that challenges oppression and provides support for LGBTQ students. Safe Space educates the University of Chicago community on the challenges that many LGBTQ students experience through trainings and supports LGBTQ students by developing an ally network and creating welcoming physical spaces for the UChicago LGBTQ community.
Surveys indicate that LGBTQ students who do not feel safe are likely to skip class, or even days of classes, out of fear for personal safety. Students who can identify a supportive community member are more likely to feel a sense of belonging at their school than those who cannot. The Safe Space program increases the visible presence of student and adult allies who can help to shape the University’s culture that is accepting of all people, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, or any other difference. This is particularly important for closeted students (those students who have not disclosed their sexual orientation or gender identity) as it gives them an opportunity to identify individuals they may safely reach out to in the coming out process, knowing that they will not be turned away or receive an negative reaction. "
SEARCHING further I found that it came to stand for places of refuge for marginalized students that the University itself wanted to make it known as a “safe space”
http://college.uchicago.edu/uniquely-chicago/story/introducing-center-identity-and-inclusion
"My hope for the Center for Identity and Inclusion is that people of all identities will be comfortable coming here,” said Vo. “[So] we can create a more powerful community that has a supportive environment. And through this we can make rest of campus a safe space for everybody regardless of how they identify.“Vo is excited about the new office. “[It] sends up a sign that you are welcome in this space,” he said. “You deserve to be here, no matter what anybody tells you. And that you are going to make it. We are here to support you through all four years.”
ALSO https://csl.uchicago.edu/profile/lupe-nieves here U Chi is trying to provide them with a safe space -
"Nieves also serves as a dean-on-call and sexual assault dean-on-call. She brings this perspective to her role in events services, which means she is always thinking about how best to support students during events that touch on controversial topics, how to provide them with a safe space, and how to ensure the events are successful. Nieves feels these services – and this perspective – are critical in providing comprehensive student support. "
EVEN when they hosted an economic round table for civil rights groups they designed the discussion to be a “safe place”
https://www.uchicago.edu/features/civil_rights_forum_convenes_academics_activists_and_advocates_to_deliberate/
“We designed the Urban America Forward roundtable series to be a safe place for people to have frank and provocative conversations about solving the civil rights challenges that persist in cities across the nation.”
"She is telling him about her hurt, and she is exploited. She is made the poster child for rude, entitled brats. "
This sounds like the meme that it was Khazir Khan’s fault for provoking DJT into saying not-nice things to a Gold Star family. No. The fault lies with the person who acted badly; you don’t get to blame a provocateur.
And she was not “telling him about her hurt.” She was screaming shut up and be quiet and if I recall correctly using foul language. You would have a point if she had said, “I’m hurt by your wife’s email; it makes me feel unsafe and I’d like to discuss it with you further so we can get to a mutual understanding, as I want to feel safe here.” But she did nothing of the sort. She sought to threaten, not to engage in dialogue. This is obvious.
I admit I haven’t read much of this thread, but I need to point out that trigger warnings are not cries against controversial topics. They’re warnings in lectures or readings of potential post-traumatic stress. ** A rape survivor has the right to know if a lecture will discuss rape; a survivor of domestic abuse has the right to know when that might come up in class.**
“I think this might indeed be a change of policy for University of Chicago because they are now disavowing the safe spaces they have created and advocated for on their campus???”
Heavy sigh. What do you think? Do you really, honestly think that U of Chicago is immediately dismantling all LGBT groups on campus and demanding they go away? Do you think they are saying “it’s open season on LGBT students - if you see one, it’s perfectly acceptable to harass them, pull their hair, call them vile names and the u fully supports you”?
If you honestly think this is U of Chicago’s new policy, then you have a level of paranoia I can’t really address.
However, it may be that at U of Chicago you may come across a conservative student who, for example, believes gay behavior to be sinful or argues that gay marriage shouldn’t be legal. And given that it’s a free country, they are entitled to hold that opinion. (To be clear - I don’t hold those opinions and find them to be ridiculous, but people do get to have opinions about things even when I don’t like their opinions.)
@runswimyoga - I do appreciate your concern about this topic on behalf of your child. I read Dean's letter carefully, as well as several other related UChicago materials. I do not think the "safe spaces" that you are referencing are what Dean Ellison is referring to in his letter. No one is going to shut the LGBTQ safe space program down (for example).
By the way - this letter was meant for UChicago freshmen. I can’t believe that someone was so inappropriate as to take a picture of it and put it in the newspaper for the whole world to see. They are clearly provocateurs who are just exploiting this poor Dean in order to generate publicity for their own sick, twisted agenda.
Avert thine eyes lest you participate in this sin !![/sarc]
“And if thy eye causeth thee to sin, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell-fire.”
The university issued the Final Report of the Committee on Free Expression last fall - close to a year ago - and, having read that report, I didn’t find the principles expressed in this letter surprising at all. Maybe my experience is atypical, but Chicago’s views on free speech have been clear for a long time and were stated again last fall - when many were applying/thinking about it - for the benefit of anyone who wasn’t aware of these views then.
So many different tangents. Here are my thoughts FWIW.
First, I would be angry if my friend filmed my students and posted the video on his website for all the world to see. Having said that, it would never have occurred to me to stop him or anyone else from filming as life today is perpetually being captured in images and multiple people had their phones out during Shrieking Girl’s outburst. We also don’t know if the master even noticed that his friend was filming.
Second, it is hard for me to believe that the costume e-mail really made Shrieking Girl feel unsafe in her residential college. Most of us have been exposed to lots of rude and offensive Halloween costumes in our lifetime. In this case, she wasn’t even experiencing the actual costume, but the thought of others being encouraged to make their own decisions as to what might be appropriate. To me, it seems unlikely that her visceral reaction was truly angst or upset at having to see such a costume, but rather anger that the master’s wife didn’t share her political view that people should be told how to behave to avoid discomfort to others. To characterize that as feeling “unsafe” in her home, is far-fetched.
Third, these other stories of law school classes being stripped of content, etc., are very disturbing. Don’t go to medical school if you can’t stand the sight of blood. Don’t go to law school if you can’t learn about all facets of the law. We have to draw some lines.
Finally, I truly don’t believe it is in anyone’s interest for this overly PC world view to overtake academia. I think it engenders a backlash against the very legitimate concerns that minorities face. For example, the PC experience my son has endured in high school has made him more antagonistic towards women’s issues, an outcome I consistently have to fight against and one which I find very disturbing.
Oh, and the student who can’t stop talking about sexual assault even when it is totally irrelevant, should be referred to counseling and I wouldn’t be surprised if he himself was the victim of childhood sexual trauma.
“By the way - this letter was meant for UChicago freshmen. I can’t believe that someone was so bold as to take a picture of it and put it in the newspaper for the whole world to see. [/sarc]”
Great point!
@al2simon But if U Chicago is known for always being a place for freedom of speech and intellectual discussion
WHY would the Dean co-opt a term that has a different meaning and purpose (on its own website!) … and turn it into a negative… WHY Use those words SAFE SPACE that have come to signal so much more for marginalized groups?
It seems so unprofessional when your university has spent so much funding on helping marginalized groups …
@Pizzagirl I don’t know what I think about the letter other than the affront using the words trigger warnings and safe space were not in good faith as to what they really are and that could create a dangerous environment for already marginalized minorities.
The newspaper is that is linked for this thread is Chicagomaroon, It says the following:
I applaud Chicago’s stance on promoting the sharing of ideas and not uninviting potentially controversial speakers. But I have some thoughts on “safe spaces.”
Maybe colleges should consider giving all students single dorm rooms. These could be the safe spaces on campus. This is a simplistic and potentially expensive (possibly impractical) idea, but I know that I have always craved a little alone time each day to reflect on my concerns. Maybe a safe, comfortable place to decompress and contemplate alone might help to reduce the angst that some of these students feel.
Taking a different aproach from many of you…If I were a conservative student on campus these days, I might feel the need for a safe space every now and then! I literally felt like my stomach was punched at my freshman son’s college convocation ceremony last week, when the university president started his speech with a feeble/negative joke about red hats and Trump. While much of the audience cheered, I did not find it at all funny and was disappointed that he used that forum to demonstrate his political stance. While I know that all the Ivies lean left, I found myself wishing that my son could have found a school that was more politically neutral.
But, then I reflected on the incident in my hotel room “safe space” overnight and decided that it is actually really good for my children to be exposed to all points of view…even when offered at inappropriate times. I want them to be happy, but also challenged and not overly sheltered.
So - Hopefully Chicago will introduce kids to many trains of thought. And hopefully my son’s school will make an honest effort to do the same. And hopefully all students of all genders, races, political persuasions, sexual orientations, etc can learn to be polite and listen to the professors, outside speakers, and each other.
Because they figured people would have the brains to understand that U of Chicago is not saying “let’s tear down every support for LGBT or other minority groups on campus, and it’s open season on anyone who isn’t a white heterosexual WASP.”
Honestly, it’s as nonsensical as thinking they are announcing that they are going to tear down Hillel or abolish the Chinese Students Association. They expected you to understand the difference.
@dstark: Your classroom example wasn’t relevant because it was within the specific context of disrupting a classroom. “Safe spaces” and trigger warnings involve other issues entirely. That is why I wanted to know the relevance (in case I’d missed something), but your refusal to explain the reasoning suggests I was right the first time.
@stargirl3: Trigger warnings are most certainly about controversial topics. For example, trigger warnings have been demanded for [Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe, The Great Gatsby by F Scott Fitzgerald, Mrs Dalloway by Virginia Woolf, and The Merchant of Venice](US students request 'trigger warnings' on literature | Books | The Guardian). Also included, [greek mythology](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/05/14/columbia-students-claim-greek-mythology-needs-a-trigger-warning/).
Despite your putting it in bold, it turns out that neither victims of rape nor domestic violence (or any other crime, though of course those are the special crimes these days) has any right to know what will come up. Students with documented disabilities, such as PTSD, may have such a right under the ADA
Here is the quote from the Dean’s letter -
You’d have to ask the Dean why he phrased things this particular way. But as we discussed upthread, a lot of these terms have been co-opted to serve other agendas. I have definitely seen the term “safe space” used far beyond its original meaning, even by–and often especially by–these “marginalized groups” that you are referring to.
The Dean specifically qualified the term safe space with scare quotes and with the adjective intellectual. He probably thought that was enough to distinguish the concepts in the minds of his intended audience of UChicago freshmen.
@Demosthenes49, Ok. That’s a good decision not to comment on the story. I reread the story. The story is slightly different than I posted. Maybe. I am not sure.
@al2simon, so is the dean including living areas when he says intellectual safe places?