Emory students deeply traumatized by “support Trump” slogans chalked on campus

March 24, 2016 • 11:00 am

The Snowflake Students have now metastasized to Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, where a group of students has been deeply traumatized by seeing pro-Donald Trump slogans written in chalk in various places on campus. The multiple microaggressions occurred on Monday.

Here’s a screenshot of one taken from the New York Post:

Screen Shot 2016-03-24 at 8.01.46 PM

And another from The Washington Post:

Screen Shot 2016-03-24 at 8.06.23 PM
Photo courtesy of Amelia Sims

Well, all hell broke loose. As the Emory Wheel (the student newspaper reports):

Roughly 40 students gathered shortly after 4:30 p.m. in the outdoors space between the Administration Building and Goodrich C. White Hall; many students carried signs featuring slogans such as “Stop Trump” or “Stop Hate” and an antiphonal chant addressed to University administration, led by College sophomore Jonathan Peraza, resounded “You are not listening! Come speak to us, we are in pain!” throughout the Quad. Peraza opened the door to the Administration Building and students moved forward towards the door, shouting “It is our duty to fight for our freedom. It is our duty to win. We must love each other and support each other. We have nothing to lose but our chains.”

They’re in pain! In pain! OMG, somebody soothe them!

It goes on, of course:

After approximately ten minutes outside from the start of the demonstration, the gathered students were ushered into the Quad-facing entrance to the Administration Building and quickly filled a staircase to continue their demonstration. Pausing in the staircase, a few students shared their initial, personal reactions to the chalkings.

“I’m supposed to feel comfortable and safe [here],” one student said. “But this man is being supported by students on our campus and our administration shows that they, by their silence, support it as well … I don’t deserve to feel afraid at my school,” she added.

Let’s put it this way: if they’re going to feel afraid at seeing a simple political slogan—or even a name—no matter how heinous the candidate, scrawled on a sidewalk, then they don’t deserve to be in a decent college. And who ever told students that college is supposed to make you feel “comfortable and safe”? (“Unsafe,” of course, is the latest college euphemism for “hearing something I don’t like”).

The President of the University noted that the chalking was against university regulations (though similar chalkings for more liberal causes have not been punished), and that the perpetrators would be tracked down and fined. He also caved in to the students a bit:

Jim Wagner, the president of the university in Atlanta, met with the protesters and later sent an email to the campus community, explaining, in part, “During our conversation, they voiced their genuine concern and pain in the face of this perceived intimidation.

“After meeting with our students, I cannot dismiss their expression of feelings and concern as motivated only by political preference or over-sensitivity. Instead, the students with whom I spoke heard a message, not about political process or candidate choice, but instead about values regarding diversity and respect that clash with Emory’s own.”

This is a president who is a master of euphemisms but not of the truth. Of course the students are expressing political preference and oversensitivity! And by claiming that Trump’s values clash with those of Emory, he’s feeding directly into the students’ feelings of entitlement. He should have just shut up and said that if students defaced school property illegally, they’d be punished, as would students who wrote “Bernie Sanders 2016” on the same spots.

Of course the President Wagner’s make-nice message wasn’t good enough. The students need (and will probably soon demand) institutional change to prevent this kind of freedom of speech:

Other students asked for improving diversity in the “higher positions” of the University, including the Board of Trustees and the faculty in general who should not be simply “diversity sprinkles” to improve statistics, as one student described it.

Grievances were not restricted to shortcomings of the administration. “[Faculty] are supporting this rhetoric by not ending it,” said one student, who went on to say that “people of color are struggling academically because they are so focused on trying to have a safe community and focus on these issues [related to having safe spaces on campus].”

“Faculty are supporting this rhetoric by not ending it.” Think about that. If you don’t censor speech, you are tacitly supporting it.

I used to think these students are going to have a hard time when they collide with the real world after graduation. But now I’m starting to think that they’ll eventually constitute the real world, at least in the US and UK. And if they do, then it truly will be an unsafe space.

h/t: Kenneth

132 thoughts on “Emory students deeply traumatized by “support Trump” slogans chalked on campus

  1. People who say that authoritarian leftists have no influence and that they are not taken seriously by anyone are deluding themselves.

    1. Indeed. I find it disturbing that they essentially want to ban or censor the speech of anyone who doesn’t share their views. How the hell are we supposed to move forward if no one is allowed to argue? In my view, arguing openly is essential to democracy.

      1. As I say below, the story was NOT debunked: only one part of it that I didn’t report, a call for counseling by the students and an offer to provide it by the university.

        As for my failure to do my homework, look at the quotes I provided and then see which ones were “debunked” by Snopes. None of them. I have a piece going up this morning about the kerfuffle.

        In the meantime, thanks for the suggestion that I didn’t do my homework by relying on the Washington Post and the Emory student newspaper.

        That is a Roolz violation, is rude, and you can go away until you apologize.

    1. Excellent!

      I notice he’s seguing on from a rant about Health & Safety, which I consider one of the biggest threats to the quality of modern life. A conspiracy by the authoritarian, bureacratic, and cowardly to stop anyone doing anything remotely interesting or spontaneous. H&S/Political Correctness are two sides of the same coin, as far as I can see.


      1. The High School where I taught Math made all teachers and secretaries listen to a lonnnnng “workshop” on proper handling of chemicals and then pass a test on-line. Not much handling of H2SO4 in my classes, let alone on the secretaries’ desks.

        1. Ah, one of those ‘some smooth-talking salesman caught the ear of the CEO’ courses, no doubt. We periodically used to get exposed to that sort of thing. There was a notorious ‘win-win’ course that everyone in the organisation, without exception, had to attend. By careful manouvreing and ‘swapping’ my scheduled turn with others, I managed to be the only person in the organisation who never went on it.
          It made absolutely zero detectable difference to interpersonal relationships, the assholes kept right on being assholes, they just acquired some annoying buzzphrases.


    2. Love it!

      Though in a pernicious turn of language, “I’m offended” has morphed into “it’s offensive” as if offence can be an objective fact. That way it changes from a personal reaction to an actionable one – all with a simple change of pronoun.

      1. Some SJWs have cottoned onto the fact that ‘I am offended’ doesn’t always work, so they state that certain words cause demonstrable *harm*

        Some examples of *Harmful* words that cause the SJW to suffer emotionally:


        yeah so , bet you are scratching your head, wondering about some of these

        Well, crazy and batshit both contribute to the stigma against mental illness. If we stopped using these words, people would no longer stigmatize the mentally ill. The same goes for stupid, dumb, idiot and moron. Those words are ableist, and we would no longer think poorly of cognitive disabilities if people would only stop referring to Trump, for example, as an ‘idiot’

        Dick and b*tch are gendered slurs, which means that they are gender essentialist, or something, and we cannot disparage genitalia because it smears the entire group of people who have those genitals.

        Cult is objectively harmful because there are modern day members of the “Cult of Horus” or somesuch, and as the *proper* meaning of cult = worship of an ancient deity, it is wrong to use the term to refer to crazy people who get together and do crazy things in a modern setting.

        All of the above I have seen on various SJW blogs.

        1. It’s an attempt, at least, to try to connect the subjective to our actual moral language. Harm is bad, and if our language can cause harm, then that’s reason to think twice on it. This (at least it seems to me) is the rationale behind overt racial slurs. The mistake is taking that explicit case as justifying shifting the boundary to take in marginal or implicit cases, thus stifling speech.

          It gets really absurd when it comes to criticism of ideas, where the harm is far removed from criticisms. At that stage, it becomes about identity politics, and the restrictions on speech in that sense gravely stifle the political discourse.

          1. It gets really absurd when it comes to criticism of ideas, where the harm is far removed from criticisms. At that stage, it becomes about identity politics, and the restrictions on speech in that sense gravely stifle the political discourse.

            And it also leads to the euphemism treadmill. I was reading an SJW blog and the author explained that ‘idiot’, ‘crazy’ and so on were ableist and therefore hurtful, but that ‘bonkers’ was totes ok because the word is new and somewhat removed from the negative connotations associated with ‘idiot’ and ‘crazy’.

            So basically, they want to keep having the same negative thoughts about ‘the crazy’ and so on, but they just want to use ‘nice words’ to express those thoughts.

            1. ‘bonkers’ is new? Not in England, where it’s been in common colloquial usage for ever. (‘Ever’ meaning, at least back to my parents’ day).

              And it means exactly and precisely the same as ‘idiotic’ and ‘crazy’, negative connotations and all.

              (Not to be confused with ‘bonk’ or ‘bonking’, which is I think equally venerable but much more fun 😉

              Ah well.


            2. Anyone who wants to police language to that degree seems best dealt with by staying out of any conversation with them. Leave them to their puritan echo chamber.

  2. I wonder how the students would react to Trump being elected President. It’s almost worth voting him in** just to see the reaction!

    [**OK, perhaps not *that* worth it.]

    1. Yeah. I think Trump is a jerk. I don’t want him to be president. But some days I really want him to win. If he could win without being president I’d be for that.

      Obama put it well. The presidency is not a talk show. We should elect Trump the national talk-show host. I’d like that. All the right people pissed off.

  3. Hell, I’m MACROagressed every time I see or hear tell of The Donald, but I content myself with muttering under my breath.

  4. “… an antiphonal chant …”

    You’d think anyone going to school in the same city as Ebenezer Baptist would recognize that as “call-and-response.”

  5. “But now I’m starting to think that they’ll eventually constitute the real world”

    Yep. Scary times a comin. Y’all thought religion was bad; this is the new religion. Passion without direction.

    1. Well, if these snowflakes are the future of the US and the UK then I doubt these attitudes will last more than a generation – after that, our economies will have collapsed and they will really have cause to feel unsafe.

      How will these little dears cope with working in the real world, for companies that have *competitors*, where if the company fails they could actually LOSE THEIR JOBS?!

      (Disclaimer: I got made redundant from three out of four companies in succession. Did I whine about feeling unsafe? No.)

  6. Wasn’t “We have nothing to lose but our chains” a civil rights reference to the fact that the protesters had everything to gain and nothing to lose? To warn their opponents that they were facing a people who were too deseperate to just give up? That if they fought it would be the cornered rat scenario?

    If you are going to a college (an estimate $63k a year at Emory), then you have A LOT to lose. The whole ‘our chains’ line is a reference to slavery. Do not compare your struggle to that of slaves.

    You have an awful lot to lose, if you can afford such expensive education. And all you stand to gain is not having to listen to political opinions you disagree with.

    Not that they’re risking much, of course. Colleges seem to be too worried about their customers to tell these students to grow up.

    In a way, I’m glad we have Trump around. As long as someone like him, who is so anathema to these people, having the kind of influence they do, then these people cannot truly win. It may be possible that Trump is galvanizing these people, which would be a problem, but honestly, if I had to choose between Trump and people who feel the need to protest their fellow students being able to disagree with them? I’ll take the loudmouthed asshole any day.

    For all that can be said against him, I haven’t seen anything suggesting Trump is opposed to free speech. He fights fire with insulting fire.

    1. If you think the “loudmouthed asshole” is somehow less a threat than a group of college students then you truly have no idea of what is going on in this country.

      These college students may indeed be authoritarians, but in the broader scheme of things they are nothing more than a pimple on the ass of the body politic. The true and much greater threat to liberal values is the authoritarian right that supports Trump and Cruz. VOX has published an in-depth article on how the authoritarian right has taken over the Republican Party. I recommend it.


      If Trump should become president, all those people who are so afraid of immature college students will really have something to be afraid of. People who seem to think that the authoritarian left is somehow as much a danger as the authoritarian right have absolutely no sense of proportion and they are the deluded ones.

      1. I think your predictions for Trump’s presidency are too grim. But let’s say you are right. Then, I think it is the civic duty of these anti-Trump students not only to clear the writings on the wall but to use their free time to travel around, talk to voters, help them register, in a word, campaign. Because, if Trump should become president, this would be because US voters would elect him. The behavior of these students makes me only despise them as infantile, whiny Mama’s boys and girls. And I suspect the same goes not only for Trump’s supporters but also for those who are hesitating and who will determine the outcome. If I were a candidate, I could only wish the camp of my opponents to look like this.

      2. “Do we love the authoritarians? Yes, we love the authoritarians, and the poorly educated, too. We’re doing great at the polls with the authoritarians and the poorly educated. Nobody beats us with them.”

      3. Good article, heck, excellent article, a bit long winded though, except for, perhaps, Politic Scientists and students there of. As for me, I’m a senile old man and prefer quick quips and one liners as forms of personal expression. They fit better with my deteriorating mind/brain.

  7. It’s not so simple.

    What if there had been Nazi swastikas and “Heil Hitler” chalked on campus? or a noose and “support the KKK”?

    What if the motives of those who chalked Trump2016 are identical to those who might have chalked Nazi swastikas?

    1. Then I would hope the police would investigate the potential of racially-motivated crimes being plotted.

    2. No speech in a public setting can be censored just because we don’t like it. Remember the Illinois Nazis? If it is part of a pattern of harassment that is different, but the harassment is the crime, not the speech. That’s why the “offenders” here would have to pay a clean up fee, rather than face disciplinary charges.

    3. What if someone wrote in chalk
      “It’s not so simple. What if there had been Nazi swastikas and “Heil Hitler” chalked on campus? or a noose and “support the KKK”? What if the motives of those who chalked Trump2016 are identical to those who might have chalked Nazi swastikas?”?

      I’d find that much worse and more worrying than “Support Trump”.

    4. Free speech has a major benefit of advertising. I do not want people who paint swastikas to hide. I want them to post images of them chalking their designs, I want them to stand by their message. Then I and everyone else will know who they are.

      You can then talk to these people and ask them why they hold their beliefs and find out what caused their ignorance and prejudice. If they are reasonable they will likely stop.

      Likewise, society has the opportunity to shun such ideas and make people who hold them feel ostracized. Although I do not know if this is a benefit, it might have the same effect of causing them to stop.

      The alternative is pent up anger without outlets that can lead to real harm…sticks and stones vs. words. I prefer the later.

    5. If there had been swastikas etc, my first assumption would have been it was a hoax.

      As for the possible motives of the Trump2016, given the student response, my guess would be the writer felt too ‘unsafe’ and intimidated by the anti-Trumpists to openly challenge what appears to be the prevailing orthodoxy at the college.

      And if their motives were the same as Nazis’, which I don’t know at all – let’s try not to go Godwin, well, shame on them but they have as much right to hold and express their unrighteous views as I do mine. The only action college authorities should take against them is whatever action they would take against any other graffiti artists.

      1. +1

        Of course, ‘their’ motives may just have been “Let’s piss off all these precious twats” – in which case ‘they’ have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. And they didn’t even have to chalk a slogan that any court, anywhere, would hold to be even mildly offensive or threatening. Brilliant!


    6. Crap’s sake. You hose (or bucket) the stuff off and get on with life.

      On the other hand, if the chalkings had exalted Cthulhu, you would hire someone to hose them off.

      1. Agree. The best way to treat those who are purposefully trying to provoke you is to completely ignore them.

  8. So it’s finally reached the point of censoring political speech, which even those with the narrowest interpretation of the First Amendment (e.g., Bork) agree is protected. Wow.

    1. Yeah that was my thought too: wow. Demanding your political opponents not be allowed to voice their support for election candidates is about as direct an attack on free speech as you can get. Historically, this was the first and foremost point of it.

  9. Calls for saturation policing in Muslim neighborhoods, threats to set the Syrian desert aglow with A-bombs, dueling photographs of the candidates’ wives on Twitter — can’t the Republicans just phone in a forfeit for the general election already? (“We regret to inform you that the Republican team is unable to field a competent presidential candidate this Fall. We hope to be back in action in 2020.”)

  10. Lawyers are probably already looking to legally enforce these ‘safe spaces’. Probably by arguing (sadly, possibly successfully) that this is analogous to employment. If they succeed there, then big lawsuits against colleges by disaffected students will be the next move.

    What a wonderful world!

    1. You beat me to it:

      “The answer is to take a goddamn piece of chalk and draw a goddamn arrow pointing to ‘Trump’ and write ‘ASSHOLE.’ How hard is that to figure out?”

  11. Trump is a dangerous Fascist who must be stopped, so are the whining, sniveling, anti-free speech regressive’s.

    1. I hate trump but he’s nowhere near being a fascist. If you want to win the argument, call him what he is: a racist, an ignoramus, a loudmouth, a demagogue. Calling him a fascist demeans the memory of those who suffered under Mussolini.

      1. The term “fascist” can be defined and explained in may different ways. Moreover, any analogy between Trump and the fascist dictators of the 1930s is imprecise at best. This is why I refer to Trump as a proto-fascist. That is, if elected president he would enunciate values and institute programs (unless stopped by Congress) that resemble those of the fascists of the past. Here is an article by an historian that explores the fascist tendencies in Trump’s statements.


        The important thing is the danger Trump represents to the country on almost every level: social issues, tax issues, economic issues and foreign policy. To label him is not particularly important.

          1. The author of the article you cited also says this:

            “Trump’s xenophobic rhetoric, his demagoguery, and his populist appeals to citizens’ economic anxieties certainly borrow from the fascist playbook.”

            The fact is that scholars of fascism have debated to what extent Trump can be legitimately called a fascist. As is the case in many academic debates, there is no resolution to this issue. Part of the reason for this is that “fascism” can be defined in many different ways. So, if Trump should become president I do not anticipate storm troopers goose stepping down Pennsylvania Avenue. But, his authoritarian mindset does resemble fascists of the past.

            Again, it is really not important if Trump fits your definition of a fascist. The most important thing to understand is that a Trump presidency will be ruinous for the country as would a Ted Cruz presidency.

            1. No less ruinous than Obama, who is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Obama, who supports widespread government surveillance, the hacking of mobile phones, and the disastrous TPP, which will only lead to more inequality.

              And Trump is a performer, not much more. His rhetoric is empty. The bullshit he spews would never even get passed as law in the first place. Also, if you look closely at what he says, he really is way way more liberal than most folks realise. He is playing the ignorant rednecks, and appealing to the fed-up voters, who want someone authentic. As Trump is trolling, he doesn’t care what comes out of his mouth.

              He invited the Clinton’s to his wedding, btw. I think that this whole thing started off a one giant troll, and then surprised the hell out of him when people actually took it seriously.

              Trump is a performance artist, at best.

        1. I’m thinking Trump is even more Francisco Franco than Mussolini. And this election is our Spanish Civil War. Now is the time for all good men and women to join the Abraham Lincoln Brigade.

      2. In one sense at least, it also demeans the memory of Mussolini. As bad as he was (and he was certainly very bad), Mussolini never painted himself orange or slapped a mound of pee-colored fiberglass insulation on top his head.

        It’s only a matter of time, I suppose, until Trump starts bragging about how he’ll be the best, phenomenal, the greatest ever at making Amtrak run on time.

        1. The workings of the conspiracy to elect Donald J Trump are insidious. Usually they take the form of foolish and hysterical claims, like “Trump is worse than Mussolini” or attacks on his appearance. Such absurd comments distract from legitimate and serious complaints and help Trump.

          1. And yet they hold him up to precisely the derision Trump deserves.

            It will take Republicans at least a generation to live down their moral cowardice for failing to do so themselves, to live down their abdication of the duty to snuff his profoundly unserious candidacy in its infancy by ridiculing him mercilessly. They have brought shame upon their party and to the republic upon which it squats.

            1. Anyway, it’s impossible to criticize Trump’s substantive policy positions, for he hasn’t any. In their stead, he makes empty, silly promises — ones with zero chance of success — which he guarantees “absolutely, 100%” to fulfill. In so doing, Trump panders shamelessly to the worst, fallen angels of his fellow citizens’ nature.

      3. Don’t get all Regressive on me, and try to deny me my free speech. Expressing my opinion that Trump sounds Fascist (to me) is not demeaning to anyone. And I don’t mind your adding racist, ignoramus, loudmouth, and demagogue at all, I complete agree. Further more, I’m not trying to “Win” anything, nor do I care about “winning the argument” since I’m not arguing, simply expressing my “Opinion”.
        I only wish you loved free speech as much as you dislike Trump.

  12. “We have nothing to lose but our chains.”

    OMG, they are taking phrases from the Communist Manifesto now?!?

    1. When Biden made his “chains” comment he was widely criticized by all for comparing anything going on today to the suffering of slavery. I wonder if the same people will speak up this time?

      I can understand these kids being upset by what Trump represents – all decent people are, or should be.

      However, whining to the president just shows these kids haven’t grown up yet and haven’t learned to stand on their own feet. It’s the equivalent of running to mummy or daddy when your sibling won’t let you play with their toys.

      The writings are in chalk. They’ll wash off with water. Either go around washing them off, or add your own message about Trump or another candidate next to them.

      And stop running to others to sort out your squabbles.

      Of course, the litigious nature of US society doesn’t help either, nor the seeming desire for revenge rather than justice.

    2. The Communist Manifesto? Is that where it came from? Speaking as a long-time leftist, I object to the cultural appropriation in stealing ‘our’ slogans. I demand an apology for this microaggression!


  13. “I used to think these students are going to have a hard time when they collide with the real world after graduation.”

    They will, at least if they expect to compete in the largely capitalist West. This special snowflake garbage will not last very long when there are deadlines to meet, targets to achieve, and jobs on the line.

    This is one of the reasons that I don’t think this is much of a “thing” to worry about. I work in an intense environment for a profit-seeking entity, and 80% of our employees are millennials. I don’t see a lot of evidence of entitled behavior from them – there is simply too much to do to concern oneself with microaggressions and what to be offended by next.

    1. I tend to think they’ll just grow out of it regardless of whether some tough job forces them to or not. They’re young adults; this is their first foray into political activism, and because they’re inexperienced at it they don’t do it well. After a few years of experience they’ll probably do it better.

      I also wonder if they’re just doing a bit of context-based reasoning. “In college, this is how its socially acceptable to act, so I act this way in college. But I know from my summer jobs and internships that people don’t act this way in the real world, so I when I leave college, I won’t act this way…”

      1. I sure hope they grow out of it or I’m going to be escalated on a lot when they enter the workforce.

  14. Three points:
    1. Emory University is in the heart of Trump Country, and Trump followers can be scary,
    2. 40 students is 1/2 of 1% of the undergraduate enrollment at Emory,
    3. Emory`s president should give a long, hard look at the function of his university.
    I am an Emory graduate, from a past era when tuition was affordable.

  15. “Extremes in thinking and a vacuum in the middle where fact and reason used to dwell lately characterize the national state of mind.”

    —James Howard Kunstler, Too Much Magic:
    Wishful Thinking, Technology, and the Fate of the Nation
    (Grove Press, 2012).

    1. A quibble: why is the “extreme” always wrong? Somebody smart said something once about the truth not always being about splitting the difference between the two extremes.

  16. The thing that makes me most angry about the screaming, disruptive anti-trump protests is that they force me to defend Trump’s right to say dumb shit. Ewww.

  17. How did these students ever get into college? I do not like Trump but that does not mean that I want to see every sign/opinion/etc supporting him removed. These students need to grow up before they get really traumatized by the real world.

  18. Many excellent comments so far, some less excellent but still entertaining, a few somewhat boring, mine might be among the latter, oh well. Keep em coming follow commenters.

    1. Meant “fellow” not “follow” in my comment, I sure wish “they” would include an edit button. It would make posting so much easier for semi-illiterates such as myself.

      1. The lack of an ‘edit’ function is a long-standing microaggression by WordPress. Everybody’s whined about it at some time or other, including me. Usually just after we’ve hit ‘post’ by accident. Either ‘they’ don’t care or it’s in the ‘too hard’ basket, seemingly.


        1. Or they might have realized how out of control self-editing can get. Much as I hate having my typos & worse out there for all the world to see, I can put up with that as long as it prevents people from editing their posts to “redefine” their arguments.

  19. I’ve mentioned this before. A recent poll showed that something like 60% of democrats, and 85% of republicans consider political correctness a serious problem.
    Many people who haven’t necessarily been political in the past respect trump for what they perceive as his honestly because he’s willing to say offensive things, and give a big FU to political correctness. Students reacting like this just feeds that attitude, and benefits Trump.

    1. And I am fing sick of the SJWs who claim that anyone who complains about ‘too much PC ‘is just looking for an excuse to be a bigot.

      Nice strawman, guys. No, we oppose excessive PC because even innocuous actions or words are deemed to be ‘white supremacist’ or ‘transphobic’ or ‘misogynist’

      Heck, liking a photo of a Sports Illustrated model is probably considered to be misogynist by some people.

      hehe. Amanda Marcotte once argued that not liking kittehs is proof of misogyny because kittehs are associated with women ergo if you don’t like kittehs you hate wimmens.

  20. Let’s put it this way if they’re going to feel afraid at seeing a simple political slogan—or even a name—no matter how heinous the candidate, scrawled on a sidewalk, then they don’t deserve to be in a decent college.

    The place they belong to is a padded room.

    I may even suggest a voluntary injection with a large dose of thiopental.

    Because if they’re really deeply offended by that, life is apparently way too hard for them and they better just give up.

    1. Because if they’re really deeply offended by that, life is apparently way too hard for them and they better just give up.

      I am a tad skeptical. I visit more than a few forums where SJWs are active, and it is very interesting to note how they change their tune depending on where they are. I know one SJW who claims that prostates are a ‘female health concern’ on one forum, and that they are a male health concern on another!

      As I wrote in another comment on another blog:

      “” In victimhood culture, “oppression” is a form of currency.

      The oppressed status of the messenger matters, not the message. This is why SJWs announce their disabilities at the forefront. If they are more oppresed than you, they act as if this gives them the right to accuse you of hate speech over minor disagreement. The point is to terminate thought and to silence dissenters. To get hugs and sympathy for the brave stand they are taking against you and your “gross” and “hateful” facts.

      This behaviour is very authoritsrian. Claim victimhood, signal your virtue, profit, as others grovel at your feet and apologize for being born white , cis het or male.

      Shame people into “believing” that you are right, even if your stance is factually wrong.

      Sjws behave just like fundie Christians, who constantly claim that they are victims of persecution. They state that they have the moral right to discriminate and that if they are denied this, it is persecution. Now substitute fundie Xtians for fundie Islamist. Fundie Islamists use the same reasoning to excuse their hatred for gay folks and women.

      And SJWs are no different. It is a religion. A cult. And it’s proponents are mostly interested in self-aggrandizement.

      They signal their virtue by attacking Dawkins. By coming here and accusing Michael Nugent of hate speech for merely breathing. They are such good liberals! Hey, look at me, I am acting all offended on the internet! And they get hugs and support and they feel good about themselves.””


      I prefer that my arguments be based on their merit, not my status as an oppressed person. I find it incredibly sad that, to be taken seriously on an SJW forum, that I must first list all of the ways in which I am oppressed, in order to not be accused of misogyny/white supremacy/Islamophobia/ableism/transphobia, and so on.

      And sometimes even that isn’t enough – Maajid Nawaz and AHA are but just two examples of oppressed persons who are accused of white supremacy for not behaving the way SJWS think brown people should behave.

      1. I was being sarcastic — of course, as with most other aspects of human behavior, this is all done with inclusive fitness maximization in mind, as it succeeds brilliantly in attracting attention to and concentrating power in the hands of the people doing it.

  21. The important case being made here is not to argue about Trump or the snowflakes, but to see what a poor job the school is doing with this.

    No wonder we have all these offended kiddies running around campus if this is the lesson they get at the school. It is really pathetic and a complete failure of who the authority should be. If you have ever seen management at it’s worst this Wagner fits the bill.

  22. I’m an overage delinquent and just for these children:


    not scary enough?


    What happened to the good ol days,
    I’m a lumberjack and I’m Ok
    I sleep all night and work all day,
    He’s a lumberjack, and he’s okay.
    He sleeps all night and he works all day.

    Monty Python

    Light relief is required.

  23. By saying that by being silent you are supporting the opposition = ‘if you are not with us you are against us’.

    Regressive lefties are becoming far righties.

  24. Poor bunnies.
    Does anyone have any good recipes for coney? It’s hard to get these days, but there is still good eating on a bunny.

  25. I continue to be baffled by this phenomenon of thin-skinnedness, and now I’m wondering if it’s not a problem of entitlement but of protracted childhood innocence or naivete. It seems that many are simply not quite ready for the rigours (adventures) of university life.

    1. I think that plus finding finding humanism, but then letting it get out of hand in a social orgy of virtue signaling and one-uppery. I doubt they would be throwing much of a tantrum here if they were on their own, and not competing for being the most offended.

      1. Good point. You may be right. I wonder too if the ease and rapidity of ‘messaging’ stuff on social media have exacerbated/magnified this problem. Social media happily feeds the horde mentality and emboldens many a crackpot (see Trump).

  26. It’s *graffiti*, you twats. Get a life!

    And for the pain, I prescribe paracetamol. Or valium. Whatever….


  27. I’m watching “The Nightly Show With Larry Wilmore” right now and they gave it a good mocking. Larry “interviewed” a couple of “students” (really a couple of comedians) who said stuff like “I didn’t come here to get exposed to different opinions!” and “We have to go to another protest now, someone found the word ‘slave’ in a history book.”

    The panel discussing it thought it was pretty silly too, and one of them said “this is what happens in a society that gives kids participation trophies.”

    I think I’m going to watch this show more often.

  28. Let’s hope this wallowing in victimhood and vulnerability is a passing fad and that like the rest of us who went to university to extend our adolescence, they’ll look back at some of the stuff they did and said and wince. These kiddie-winks bleating of their pain and chains are some of the safest and most privileged people in the history of the planet, and it’s about time they recognised the fact.

    1. I can’t count how many times I’ve been grateful that all my youthful idiocy was never videoed and shared online! (Because there was no online then.)

  29. When I read this I laughed and laughed. As a military veteran and self-employed person, all I can say is we’ve raised a generation of intolerant little babies… and they’re in college no less.

    When I was 18 years old I was in boot camp. After my honorable discharge, I entered college and excelled earning a Bachelors of Science then two masters degrees (in subjects that matter like technology and business).

    We need to make these intolerant little entitled babies with their “safe spaces” grow up and discipline them when they refuse to.

    The public education system and America’s institutions need sweeping reform and those which are too far gone need to be shut down and replaced.

    It’s time to make the children grow up and make America great again. Playtime is over.

    1. I had the same reaction with my cousins (12 years younger than me) who at the age I had worked my ass off, had 2 degrees and for realz job, they were living at home, sleeping in and calling in sick to their work because they’d gone out partying the night before. They dropped out of school and then were pampered at home.

  30. I’m an old man, a life long, bona fide liberal and atheist. It really saddens me that today’s young people seem to have been indoctrinated with the concept that anything intruding into their comfort zones must be censored to protect their tiny egos. That position can only lead to a false sense of security. It is much better to know where the enemy lays in ambush than it is to silence their lot and drive them underground. As it is, these young people are providing ammunition to bullies like Trump (and the modern GOP). They will certainly use it against those of us who would rather try to have an adult debate with schoolyard bullies like Trump. This is an idea that all college students should be taught. If the history of the past century has taught us anything it should be that fascism isn’t about left or right, it’s danger is in silencing all dissent.

    1. Indeed.
      “The Emory University media brouhaha was one of several distorted claims of rampant political correctness on college campuses and elsewhere, with several (embellished) details repeated by major outlets such as the Daily Mail, Mediaite, and the Washington Post. …

      “In nearly all such claims, details of the actual controversy were obfuscated by embellished elements framing students or schools as overly sensitive. While it was true some students of color expressed that the large number of Trump chalkings made them uneasy, most simply gathered to express their political distaste for the presidential candidate and his platforms on issues of race and religion.”


    2. The “debunking” by Snopes dealt almost entirely with one thing that I did not report: the supposed call of students for counseling and the offer of such counseling by Emory. All the quotes by the participants, and provided by the Washington Post and the Emory newspaper, were NOT debunked.

      I suggest that before you say the story was “debunked,” you read the Snopes article carefully and compare it to the Post and Emory Wheel pieces. The debunking was FAR from “thorough”. Have a look at Snopes piece and then Post and Emory Wheel piece, and judge for yourself how thorough the “debunking” was. In the meantime, I have a post going up this morning with more details about the “correction.”

    3. I won’t hold my breath waiting for the retractions from the self-congratulatory posters on this site who reflexively condemn the “regressive left”.

      1. Well aren’t you the superior one? I have published an update and analysis of the Snopes piece (later today), which by no means shows that the Emory students were simply making a political protest free from the “I’m offended” trope. Why don’t you read the original reporting by Emory and the Washington Post, then the Snopes piece, and see how far the “retractions” go?

        As for your snipe at the “self-congratulatory posters,” that’s just bloody rude. Your comment adds nothing to the discussion except to reveal that you don’t read very carefully and yet are quite pleased with yourself for no reason. Not to mention that you ignore the many, many incidents of ludicrous student actions and demands that I’ve reported over the past several months—actions and demands that have NOT been refuted. What about those? The rest is silence.

  31. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry about this. It sounds so ridiculous to most people, but this kind of attention-seeking rubbish from students is really becoming the norm at a lot of institutions. I work for a college and we are currently avoiding using any words that sound “too academic” in our marketing materials because we don’t want students to think we are promoting white culture and privilege… I wish I were joking. (Note that I work at a private college where tuition is over $50,000/year…sorry, but all of our snowflake victims who attend are “privileged”) I personally find this dumbing down of language offensive. I am so fucking grateful to have graduated from college 10 years ago. I wouldn’t be able to stand being a student today. Exposing students to multiple perspectives and teaching them how to think critically is becoming a thing of the past. What a total waste. The environment on college campuses right now is completely suffocating.

    1. Oh dear. That must be very frustrating for you. I would never keep in my disdain as I find that kind of censorship of common vocabulary for no reason maddening. I would enjoy the irony though (and feel compelled to constantly point it out). I work at a university too in IT and we are in a science building so when someone suggests something unreasonable or non evidence based, I say things like, “are we really going to suggest that, here, at the university, in the science building?!” Often a sentence like that is in response to someone not wanting people to speak freely and point out errors. Good luck with your annoying situations maybe this site will allow you to express the frustration you probably can’t express at work as freely.

      1. Thanks! It is frustrating. I have so many weird stories from my little liberal arts college…If you have a different opinion, no one is interested in listening to you because you’re apparently a bigot if you disagree. Social justice is not what it was when I was in college. It’s turned into an ideology. Blog posts like these are always a breath of fresh air to me! I’m happy word is starting to get out so I can begin to get this weight off my shoulders. Ahhhhh! 🙂

  32. A curious circumstance has occurred. For the second time in a couple of weeks, an inflammatory comment by some person calling himself ‘Pray Hard’ has appeared in my inbox feed from WEIT, but hasn’t appeared on this page. (Probably just as well, given my likely reply…)

    Is he blocked but the blocking is only partially effective?


      1. Possibly Grania can enlighten us. The same seems to have happened to a commenter called ‘William’ on the ‘Ignoramuss view of evolution’ thread, to which Ant wrote a lengthy reply – Ant’s reply is there, but no sign of William.

        No big deal, it just tweaks my curiosity.


        1. This happens when an offending post is seen and then deleted by a mod, after it’s already been sent to our inboxes. There’s no way to call back those. 🙂

Leave a Reply