Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday October 29 2016, @02:53PM   Printer-friendly
from the whatever-happened-to-DEsegregation? dept.

The Washington Times reports a story about protesters on the UC Berkeley campus physically blocking white students from accessing a bridge while police stand by and watch:

Students at the University of California, Berkeley held a day of protest on Friday to demand the creation of additional “safe spaces” for transgender and nonwhite students, during which a human chain was formed on a main campus artery to prevent white students from getting to class.

The demonstrators were caught on video blocking Berkeley’s Sather Gate, holding large banners advocating the creation of physical spaces segregated by race and gender identity, including one that read “Fight 4 Spaces of Color.”

Protesters can be heard shouting “Go around!” to white students who attempt to go through the blockade, while students of color are greeted with calls of “Let him through!”

Students turned away by the mob are later shown filing through trees and ducking under branches in order to cross Strawberry Creek, which runs underneath the bridge.

The protests were a response to a Safe Space being moved from the fifth floor of a building down to the basement.


[Original version of this story had "UCLA"; corrected to: "UC Berkeley" -Ed.]

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by BK on Saturday October 29 2016, @06:43PM

    by BK (4868) on Saturday October 29 2016, @06:43PM (#420205)

    Zz9zZ said:

    What they want is perfectly reasonable, "safe spaces" are really just club houses.

    I want a safe space for white people. Maybe one for white and male people... Maybe a golf course? Do I really want that?

    It is pretty difficult now in the USA to have a private club wiht exclusivity along racial lines. Oh they exist, but they are rarer by the month. Usually, we count this decline as a good thing. we say that these things are racist or sexist or [foo]ist and have no place in an inclusive (at least officially) society.

    These folks at UCLA (or UCB?) want something that is actually illegal though (imo - ianal) - racial [or foo] exclusivity in public accommodation. Segregation based on appearance. That's like having racially exclusive seating or drinking fountains or lunch counters [si.edu]. Actually, it's worse than that - they want segregation in publicly funded public accommodation.

    This is not a trivial thing. This is not kids being kids [freep.com]. Or if it is, it deserves to not be treated as such. People have lost [thefire.org] their jobs [nytimes.com] over this sort of thing - and recently. If there was a counter-protest would it be a problem? What if "klansmen" - real or fake - took part? Maybe kids can't just be kids anymore. Maybe we can't handle it.

    We have pictures - the days of ubiquitous cameras are on us. Pictures can show bad cops. Pictures can show bad students. The students taking part should be kicked out of UCLA or whatever school they are in. We should use the photos to find them all. They should fail their classes for the term. ...and be allowed to seek readmission in the spring or maybe next fall if they can demonstrate learning. Anything short of this demonstrates public(ly funded) tolerance of intolerance. Which is intolerable.

    --
    ...but you HAVE heard of me.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 29 2016, @07:04PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 29 2016, @07:04PM (#420212)

    These folks at UCLA (or UCB?) want something that is actually illegal though (imo - ianal) - racial [or foo] exclusivity in public accommodation. Segregation based on appearance

    You are a sucker, aren't you?
    Who told you that? Why did you believe them? Eh? Because it is what you wanted to believe. So you didn't bother to question, to doubt. It gave you the good feels, didn't it? You gotta watch out for that shit. When people tell you things that give you the good feels, they are coning you.

    This living-learning community focuses on academic excellence and learning experiences that are inclusive and non-discriminatory. This community is open to all students. [snopes.com]

    Sucker!

    • (Score: 4, Informative) by BK on Saturday October 29 2016, @07:52PM

      by BK (4868) on Saturday October 29 2016, @07:52PM (#420229)

      Just doublespeak [propublica.org] friend.

      --
      ...but you HAVE heard of me.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 29 2016, @08:20PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 29 2016, @08:20PM (#420235)

        WTF does facebook have to do with lies about housing discrimination?

        You aren't my friend. You are just a bigot who indulges in random red herrings because he can't make principled case for his bigotry.

        • (Score: 2) by BK on Saturday October 29 2016, @09:56PM

          by BK (4868) on Saturday October 29 2016, @09:56PM (#420276)

          You are just a bigot

          You're just an ignoramus who doesn't know how to use contractions.

          Public accommodation is not just housing. A public accommodation [wikipedia.org] is just about any facility used by the public. Stores. Universities (and their facilities). And in today's case, a bridge.

          My link about Facebook's doublespeak should sound eerily familiar to the explanations offered by UCLA in your link. They're both trying to hide behind the same fig leaf.

          --
          ...but you HAVE heard of me.
          • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 29 2016, @10:11PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 29 2016, @10:11PM (#420283)

            > My link about Facebook's doublespeak should sound eerily familiar to the explanations offered by UCLA in your link.

            Only to someone who wants to hear similarities.
            On one hand you have UCLA saying, "Anybody who likes this culture is welcome" and on the other hand you have facebook saying, "you can discriminate based on race."

            And to you, those are the same thing because in the mind of the bigot anyone talking about bigotry is automatically the bigot.