Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The importance of free speech in universities
Freedom of speech on campus
Freedom of speech on campus
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The importance of free speech in universities
Universities throughout America are debating implementing safe zones for students. These safe zones are areas where college students can go in order to essentially be shielded away from different opinions that counteract with their own which they may find to be off-putting or offensive. These safe zones are meant to “protect” students, but in reality, it is simply delaying their growth as well as defeating the whole reason as to why many people even attend college. Most students attend college pursuing higher education and seeking self-growth. The idea of safe spaces would take away from this goal that students have when they are attending universities. Safe zones disable students from having the opportunities to learn from peers who have a different outlook than their own. College is a time for students to mentally develop and challenge what they believe in safe zones do not prepare students for the real world as college should be doing, but simply discourage students from expanding their views and seeing the world from
People may advocate that if there were no safe zones, students would not have a place to go where they could be protected from exposure to a hate crime. Contrary to this statement, any adept college campus should be able to effectively distinguish between students who are expressing their personal opinions and students who having a goal of undermining others. If universities are able to appropriately draw the line between discriminating and expression of opinion, then safe zones become unnecessary. Because the scale of what would be considered discriminating can be questionable and line is hard to draw, people have to take it into their own hands to be considerate of their peers. With respect and the mutual goal of personal growth, it would be possible to eliminate the idea of safe
Throughout America, people place a high value in their freedom of speech. This right is protected by the first Amendment and practiced in communities throughout the country. However, a movement has recently gained momentum on college campuses calling for protection from words and ideas that may cause emotional discomfort. This movement is driven mainly by students who demand that speech be strictly monitored and punishments inflicted on individuals who cause even accidental offense. Greg Lukianoff and Johnathan Haidt discuss how this new trend affects the students mentally and socially in their article The Coddling of the American Mind published in The Atlantic Monthly. Lukianoff and Haidt mostly use logical reasoning and references to
College is full of new experiences, new people, and new communities, and many universities encourage the exchange of new ideas and diversity among students. This year, the University of Chicago sent out a letter to all of its incoming freshmen informing them that in keeping with their beliefs of freedom of expression and healthy discussion and debate, the school would not provide “safe spaces” or “trigger warnings”. Senior Sophie Downes found this letter to be misleading in many ways, including in the definitions of safe spaces and trigger warnings, as well as the issues it was addressing. Downes claims that the letter was misrepresenting the school, but also was using the letter as a sort
Charles R. Lawrence intended audience in his article “On Racist Speech” is college students and universities. His sense of tone is forthcoming. Lawerence word choice sets the tone by using the words conspicuous,dissenter, and bigot. The article gives examples of how universities do not protect minority college students. Lawrence states that universities should protect their students He also gives an example of how universities have tried to have rules to ban racist speech yet they have proven ineffective in stopping racial slurs. The regulations have not stopped the verbal brutality yet it has stopped the occurrences of physical fights. He mentions how students do not have any need to be hurt verbally.
According to The Coddling of the American Mind, trigger warnings and microaggressions confine professors’ and well-educated adults’ unalienable right of speech; furthermore, they can impact one’s health. Protecting rights have a unison consensus; the authors unite them and the audience together to persuade the well-educated adults to protest the use of trigger warnings and microaggressions. While concluding that vindictive protectiveness is the reason for trigger warnings and microaggressions Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt state, “A campus culture devoted to policing speech and punishing speakers is likely to engender patterns of thought that are surprisingly similar to those long identified by cognitive behavioral therapists as causes of depression and anxiety.” (45) The word “policing” holds a negative connotation implying regulation, and no one wants their first amendment right of free speech stolen from them. Also the idea that trigger warnings and microaggressions may lead to depression and anxiety gives more logical reasoning to end trigger warnings and microaggressions in higher level education. When the authors specify the change that colleges should make, Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt write their idea of the purpose of college, “Rather than
Students for Concealed Carry, an organization for concealed gun carry on campus, say, “The crux of the SGFS essay is the undeniable fact that college campuses typically have lower crime rates than the cities in which they reside” (642). In “Why Our Campuses Are Safer Without Concealed Handguns”, an article against concealed handgun carry, states that, “Our colleges and universities are safe sanctuaries for learning…” (633). They both have the same point of
What originally set out to be a policy deemed to create a safer environment in our schools has communities now taking part in what many ...
Answer: Certainly, safety is a major concern when it comes to every student. However, there comes a time when we are put in situations that are unavoidable due to extreme behavior. Cases like this one have allowed us to document, and therefore show proof, that inclusion is not in the best interest of a student, for their safety, and the safety of those they are in class with. When dealing with parents who want full inclusion and do not want to hear reasons why inclusion may not work, cases like Light v. Parkway have given the district the ability to “overrule” those
College is often said to be the time to be whoever you want to be. However, when a student feels they need to make the choice to cover, they lose the opportunity to be themselves and learn more about their community. Covering is a person or group’s acts of censoring portions of their identity viewed as disadvantageous in an attempt to assimilate. Judicial and societal unwillingness to provide protection for marginalized communities furthers encouragement for individuals to cover. While some civil rights activists intertwine protective legislation with equality, requirements for covering in college settings shows a lack of equality and the need for creating a model of acceptance, an opportunity to further equality throughout the world.
Increase security on campuses: Security is a way for people to feel more comfortable walking around their campuses. Not only that, but increasing security provides more support for people in these situations. By increasing security, we decrease the risk for sexual assault.
Traditionally, there have been four primary factors that students and parents consider when selecting a college or university, such as, academics, location, cost, and culture. But recently, a new factor safety influences their decision (Johnson & Levering, 2009).Throughout the country and through many years, an increase in the number of crises occurs almost daily throughout the country on college or university campuses. What is campus crisis? Goshen College explained (2016): the crisis is an event, condition or situation that has the potential to cause harm or injury to institution’s financial standing or its ability to fulfill the institution’s mission beyond the immediacy of an emergency. An emergency must be addressed instantaneously,
” The world doesn’t care about your feelings or beliefs, people think they are right no matter what and students will have to face hateful, discriminating, sexual words no matter where they go. So, college is there to prepare them, by helping them develop their beliefs and opinions on topics, not censoring them. Trigger warnings cause the student’s to have thin skin and “could theoretically lead to discrimination in the job market, with young people passed over in favor of (perceived tougher older people). (Whitley 2)” Isn’t discrimination what society is trying to prevent. If trigger warnings become implemented at a young age, they will grow up to think with their emotions causing them to have thin skin and not be able to handle certain situations that could arise in the workforce. Which could cause some to be unemployed and to still have a huge load of college debt.
A gray area in the free speech of hate groups would be implying physical harm on a group of people without a direct threat. Everyone has the right to hold an opinion and say what they want about each other and feel a certain way about specific groups, but when violence is incited is where the line is drawn. The gray area would be people who praise violence by others but themselves do not incite any violence. This gray area is a concern when it comes to free speech because although a person may not try to hurt anyone the enjoyment they find in violence concerns other citizens (Sorial, Mackenzie, 2).
Overall, I think Ben-Porath made some valid points, but I don’t think Ben-Porath thoroughly presented her ideas in the 1.5 hours. She briefly discusses the difference between “dignitary harm” and “intellectual challenges”, and “feeling comfortable”. She also showed us her student response to the people with signs of hate: with another sign, with humor. But what happens when the students feel deeply uncomfortable and insecure when controversial speakers are on campus? Is “absence” enough to make it a “safespace”? I think I might need to read more of her book to understand better about the boundaries between free speech and “dignitary
Public safety covers a wide variety of people and organizations, but carries one common theme and that is, the public’s safety. This course has broadened my knowledge on the many roles that make the public safety sector go around and the role the public plays in it as well. My thoughts before the course were close minded and to the point. I quickly realized that policing is not as cut and dry as I once portrayed it to be. Society is always changing and adapting, and it is the job of the those in public safety to adapt and change with it. The mindset that I grew up with, in rural Saskatchewan, was the police are good people and you will only need to deal with them if you break the law or see someone break the law. My answers in the module 1 survey reflected my upbringing. My first thought for
It’s true what everyone talks about safety – you are the key to your safety, when you do it safely you do it the right way and the best gift you can give to your family is to always stay safe. We have been taught by our parents and teachers to be cautious while doing a number of things. That’s very essential in our daily lives, because one needs to be extra cautious to prevent unavoidable accidents. However, mishaps do happen everywhere in the safest of places, no matter how careful we are in our actions. It is highly unpredictable, what’s going to happen the very next instant. There are numerous incidences we come across like simple trips, falls, cuts due to sharp objects, burns or sudden worsening of a person’s health condition, causing