Org Mobile Site
Cal State-Northridge Halts Class Registration Until Students Complete Feminist Anti-Sexual Assault Video Game
Video
Then they must answer a quiz before they can enroll into any course.
So what's the problem? Well, according to one of the students; the questions are agree-disagree and if you dont select the answers the creator wants you must restart the entire game and do it again with the 'right' answers, if you dont you cant enroll:
Originally Posted by Pj Media:
All CSUN students registering for the 2015 Fall Semester are being forced to participate in an online, SIMS-style character game about sexual assault before being allowed to claim a seat for any course.
The game, titled “Agent of Change” and designed by feminist activists, does not allow students to complete the game until they have given enough “correct” answers as per the designers’ stated philosophical influences, such as “norms challenging,” “feminist theory,” and “social norms theory.” According to the Agent of Change website, the program helps users “see the connections between these power-based violations, how these problems affect their lives, and what they can do to challenge the cultural norms that help sexual violence flourish."
The students have to play this conversation tree game:All CSUN students registering for the 2015 Fall Semester are being forced to participate in an online, SIMS-style character game about sexual assault before being allowed to claim a seat for any course.
The game, titled “Agent of Change” and designed by feminist activists, does not allow students to complete the game until they have given enough “correct” answers as per the designers’ stated philosophical influences, such as “norms challenging,” “feminist theory,” and “social norms theory.” According to the Agent of Change website, the program helps users “see the connections between these power-based violations, how these problems affect their lives, and what they can do to challenge the cultural norms that help sexual violence flourish."
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Video
Then they must answer a quiz before they can enroll into any course.
So what's the problem? Well, according to one of the students; the questions are agree-disagree and if you dont select the answers the creator wants you must restart the entire game and do it again with the 'right' answers, if you dont you cant enroll:
Originally Posted by tree50:
So in order for me to enroll in the classes i already paid for this semester, my university is forcing me to take a 3.5 hour online course on feminism. The classes i need are almost filled up and the school locked/put a hold on my registration until i take this online class
[...]
2 minutes in to the "game" i realize its actually not a game and the computer forces u to pick the politically correct answers.. if you dont pick the right answer you have to replay the level until you pick the right one..
[...]
after nearly 3 hours of playing this retarded game you have to take a quiz and need 80% to pass.. here are some of the questions
My friend tried trolling(answered strongly agree on questions like #7) and was forced to restart the ENTIRE thing over from the beginning until he "gained a better understanding of violence" aka selected the politically correct answers.
So in order for me to enroll in the classes i already paid for this semester, my university is forcing me to take a 3.5 hour online course on feminism. The classes i need are almost filled up and the school locked/put a hold on my registration until i take this online class
[...]
2 minutes in to the "game" i realize its actually not a game and the computer forces u to pick the politically correct answers.. if you dont pick the right answer you have to replay the level until you pick the right one..
[...]
after nearly 3 hours of playing this retarded game you have to take a quiz and need 80% to pass.. here are some of the questions
My friend tried trolling(answered strongly agree on questions like #7) and was forced to restart the ENTIRE thing over from the beginning until he "gained a better understanding of violence" aka selected the politically correct answers.
It's hard to judge entire 3.5 hour quiz from a few screenshots.
It's often a problem of perspective. There are things you shouldn't do. If you go to a City vs. United game, and sit among die hard United fans in a City shirt, you're asking for trouble. That doesn't give them the right to beat you up, but you should have been smarter and not have done that.
Similar thing with rape and other violent crimes. Be smart not to put yourself in a situation where you could be raped/mugged/assaulted/hurt. That doesn't excuse the attacker, but it's not about him, it's about you.
The problem starts when someone who is employing common sense - you shouldn't have gone with a drunk guy you barely know to his flat on the other side of town - is accused of blaming the victim. It's not the victim's fault, it's the attackers fault, but if you were smarter, you could have avoided being the victim.
It's often a problem of perspective. There are things you shouldn't do. If you go to a City vs. United game, and sit among die hard United fans in a City shirt, you're asking for trouble. That doesn't give them the right to beat you up, but you should have been smarter and not have done that.
Similar thing with rape and other violent crimes. Be smart not to put yourself in a situation where you could be raped/mugged/assaulted/hurt. That doesn't excuse the attacker, but it's not about him, it's about you.
The problem starts when someone who is employing common sense - you shouldn't have gone with a drunk guy you barely know to his flat on the other side of town - is accused of blaming the victim. It's not the victim's fault, it's the attackers fault, but if you were smarter, you could have avoided being the victim.
Originally Posted by Sarmatian:
It's hard to judge entire 3.5 hour quiz from a few screenshots.
It's often a problem of perspective. There are things you shouldn't do. If you go to a City vs. United game, and sit among die hard United fans in a City shirt, you're asking for trouble. That doesn't give them the right to beat you up, but you should have been smarter and not have done that.
Similar thing with rape and other violent crimes. Be smart not to put yourself in a situation where you could be raped/mugged/assaulted/hurt. That doesn't excuse the attacker, but it's not about him, it's about you.
The problem starts when someone who is employing common sense - you shouldn't have gone with a drunk guy you barely know to his flat on the other side of town - is accused of blaming the victim. It's not the victim's fault, it's the attackers fault, but if you were smarter, you could have avoided being the victim.
The more ardent feminists feel that women should not be required by cultural conditions to take the practical steps you suggest, preferring an alteration of the culture that obviates the need for any such precautionary measures. Consider the following linked wiki entry.It's hard to judge entire 3.5 hour quiz from a few screenshots.
It's often a problem of perspective. There are things you shouldn't do. If you go to a City vs. United game, and sit among die hard United fans in a City shirt, you're asking for trouble. That doesn't give them the right to beat you up, but you should have been smarter and not have done that.
Similar thing with rape and other violent crimes. Be smart not to put yourself in a situation where you could be raped/mugged/assaulted/hurt. That doesn't excuse the attacker, but it's not about him, it's about you.
The problem starts when someone who is employing common sense - you shouldn't have gone with a drunk guy you barely know to his flat on the other side of town - is accused of blaming the victim. It's not the victim's fault, it's the attackers fault, but if you were smarter, you could have avoided being the victim.
Feminists argue that women should not have to adapt, but that the culture must be altered so as to render that adaptation moot.
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh:
The more ardent feminists feel that women should not be required by cultural conditions to take the practical steps you suggest, preferring an alteration of the culture that obviates the need for any such precautionary measures. Consider the following linked wiki entry.
Feminists argue that women should not have to adapt, but that the culture must be altered so as to render that adaptation moot.
I'm not really that concerned with what ardent feminists want in this particular issue. I agree with them, in fact - it would be nice if we lived in a perfect world like that, where there is 0% chance that a women may be sexually assaulted. In reality, unfortunately, we're not there yet, and may not get there ever. My problem is that if one holds such a view, he'd be accused of "blaming the victim" and probably a sexist. The more ardent feminists feel that women should not be required by cultural conditions to take the practical steps you suggest, preferring an alteration of the culture that obviates the need for any such precautionary measures. Consider the following linked wiki entry.
Feminists argue that women should not have to adapt, but that the culture must be altered so as to render that adaptation moot.
In the meantime while we're getting there, be smart and take precautionary measures. The society can catch the perpetrator, but it can't un-rape the victim.
California. 
Still a better game than Daikata though.
Still a better game than Daikata though.
Feminazism reached the US too?
This is how we have had it in Sweden since the very early 2000's...
Heck, our oldest and most renowned university have to GENUS-CERTIFY each and every class they hold... And yes, that goes for mathematics and stuff too - "But do you bring forward FEMALE mathematicians historically?"
This is how we have had it in Sweden since the very early 2000's...
Heck, our oldest and most renowned university have to GENUS-CERTIFY each and every class they hold... And yes, that goes for mathematics and stuff too - "But do you bring forward FEMALE mathematicians historically?"
Attached:
ec274d120b8473d2158abdd88e6ee9b51bdc03cb648d55b62e6ed340739d9c5f.jpg
(144.1 KB)
Originally Posted by Sarmatian:
There are things you shouldn't do. If you go to a City vs. United game, and sit among die hard United fans in a City shirt, you're asking for trouble. That doesn't give them the right to beat you up, but you should have been smarter and not have done that.
Similar thing with rape and other violent crimes. Be smart not to put yourself in a situation where you could be raped/mugged/assaulted/hurt. That doesn't excuse the attacker, but it's not about him, it's about you.
The problem starts when someone who is employing common sense - you shouldn't have gone with a drunk guy you barely know to his flat on the other side of town - is accused of blaming the victim. It's not the victim's fault, it's the attackers fault, but if you were smarter, you could have avoided being the victim.
This is about sums it up what I said concerning Charlie Hebdo.There are things you shouldn't do. If you go to a City vs. United game, and sit among die hard United fans in a City shirt, you're asking for trouble. That doesn't give them the right to beat you up, but you should have been smarter and not have done that.
Similar thing with rape and other violent crimes. Be smart not to put yourself in a situation where you could be raped/mugged/assaulted/hurt. That doesn't excuse the attacker, but it's not about him, it's about you.
The problem starts when someone who is employing common sense - you shouldn't have gone with a drunk guy you barely know to his flat on the other side of town - is accused of blaming the victim. It's not the victim's fault, it's the attackers fault, but if you were smarter, you could have avoided being the victim.
I'd be interested in knowing what the course is that the guy is applying for. If it is something completely unrelated to gender issues then that would make it even harder to understand.
I can understand the motivation behind this game but it seems rather disproportionate and I doubt that it's very effective. People who are smart enough to take university classes will generally be able to spot which answer is the one you're expected to pick. If you're unlucky you might have to try twice, but either way it seems unlikely that this will have any impact on the students behaviour. Someone who is a pompous, sexist jerk is not likely to undergo a change of character simply by taking this test.
I can understand the motivation behind this game but it seems rather disproportionate and I doubt that it's very effective. People who are smart enough to take university classes will generally be able to spot which answer is the one you're expected to pick. If you're unlucky you might have to try twice, but either way it seems unlikely that this will have any impact on the students behaviour. Someone who is a pompous, sexist jerk is not likely to undergo a change of character simply by taking this test.
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
Feminazism reached the US too?
This is how we have had it in Sweden since the very early 2000's...
Heck, our oldest and most renowned university have to GENUS-CERTIFY each and every class they hold... And yes, that goes for mathematics and stuff too - "But do you bring forward FEMALE mathematicians historically?"
Meh that's easy. Astronomy, early computer programming and WWII code breaking. Basically works that were time consuming and boring, so you delegated them. Feminazism reached the US too?
This is how we have had it in Sweden since the very early 2000's...
Heck, our oldest and most renowned university have to GENUS-CERTIFY each and every class they hold... And yes, that goes for mathematics and stuff too - "But do you bring forward FEMALE mathematicians historically?"
On the original topic, I get the point.
It's to get out facts, dealing with false preconceptions and self denial. And you have to do a stronger test than something you can simply troll through without bothering to read. The method is very blunt though.
Originally Posted by Kralizec:
I can understand the motivation behind this game but it seems rather disproportionate and I doubt that it's very effective. People who are smart enough to take university classes will generally be able to spot which answer is the one you're expected to pick. If you're unlucky you might have to try twice, but either way it seems unlikely that this will have any impact on the students behaviour. Someone who is a pompous, sexist jerk is not likely to undergo a change of character simply by taking this test.
It's not aimed at mr pompous, sexist jerk. It's aimed at those who would change their behaviour if they start considering it from a female perspective. If you think that no means yes, you're probably not going to even notice that the girl you insisted to sleep with didn't take it well afterwards.I can understand the motivation behind this game but it seems rather disproportionate and I doubt that it's very effective. People who are smart enough to take university classes will generally be able to spot which answer is the one you're expected to pick. If you're unlucky you might have to try twice, but either way it seems unlikely that this will have any impact on the students behaviour. Someone who is a pompous, sexist jerk is not likely to undergo a change of character simply by taking this test.
The thingie at my university was quite mild. Just basically a tailored version of the drug abuse video tutorial we had to click through upon matriculation. Also, we were given a month to get through it (the sexual assault awareness material).
The OP program isn't exactly radically different - it's just more explicit about what the makers find unacceptable. (Though the design of this version does bring to mind certain United States HomeSec-type questions, like "Are you a terrorist" or "Have you ever been a member of a Communist party", making it somewhat sillier than usual.)
What people should be upset about is that universities are treating the whole endeavour as a joke. If you're going to do something, make up a serious program, maybe divide students into small groups according to age, interests, schedules, etc, and allow them to talk through their beliefs and feelings in a moderated context for an hour or two. Of course, one could argue this too would fall short from anyone's perspective, but an "oh yeah, here's some thing we put together, our job here is done" attitude on the schools' part does disservice to everyone. Better to just leave the issue alone entirely, in that case.
The OP program isn't exactly radically different - it's just more explicit about what the makers find unacceptable. (Though the design of this version does bring to mind certain United States HomeSec-type questions, like "Are you a terrorist" or "Have you ever been a member of a Communist party", making it somewhat sillier than usual.)
What people should be upset about is that universities are treating the whole endeavour as a joke. If you're going to do something, make up a serious program, maybe divide students into small groups according to age, interests, schedules, etc, and allow them to talk through their beliefs and feelings in a moderated context for an hour or two. Of course, one could argue this too would fall short from anyone's perspective, but an "oh yeah, here's some thing we put together, our job here is done" attitude on the schools' part does disservice to everyone. Better to just leave the issue alone entirely, in that case.
The issue is that it's 3 hours long and if you give the "wrong" answers it makes you start over from the beginning. 6 hours or more of that and it becomes damn near brainwashing by sensorary deprivation.
I mean I can only imagine it like getting stuck in disney's: "its small world" ride for half the day, you dont come out of that the same man.
I mean I can only imagine it like getting stuck in disney's: "its small world" ride for half the day, you dont come out of that the same man.
Originally Posted by Ironside:
Meh that's easy. Astronomy, early computer programming and WWII code breaking. Basically works that were time consuming and boring, so you delegated them.
And why?Meh that's easy. Astronomy, early computer programming and WWII code breaking. Basically works that were time consuming and boring, so you delegated them.
Sorry to rock your boat, but let me rephrase my thinking... What mathematical EXCELLENT MINDS have women produced?
Don't get me wrong, there are some women comparable in some fields. But that's the exception, not the rule.
MY PROBLEM is when universities start to teach 50/50 on women/men gender based when they teach mathematical history, for political reasons, instead of teaching what great minds brought mathematics forwards and why - regardless of sex.
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
What people should be upset about is that universities are treating the whole endeavour as a joke. If you're going to do something, make up a serious program, maybe divide students into small groups according to age, interests, schedules, etc, and allow them to talk through their beliefs and feelings in a moderated context for an hour or two. Of course, one could argue this too would fall short from anyone's perspective, but an "oh yeah, here's some thing we put together, our job here is done" attitude on the schools' part does disservice to everyone. Better to just leave the issue alone entirely, in that case.
I am amazed no-one has mentioned this yet but they are treating it as a joke because they don't actually want to do it - for all Greys talk of the evil feminist rulers of Cal state they are complying with Federal laws requiring Collages to provide sexual violence prevention and awareness programs, and instead of oh I don't know actually educating the students have opted for a much lower cost alternative...What people should be upset about is that universities are treating the whole endeavour as a joke. If you're going to do something, make up a serious program, maybe divide students into small groups according to age, interests, schedules, etc, and allow them to talk through their beliefs and feelings in a moderated context for an hour or two. Of course, one could argue this too would fall short from anyone's perspective, but an "oh yeah, here's some thing we put together, our job here is done" attitude on the schools' part does disservice to everyone. Better to just leave the issue alone entirely, in that case.
That's right gentlemen - no feminists in the shadows here just the Federal Government and lazy, cost cutting bureaucrats...
Originally Posted by Sir Moody:
I am amazed no-one has mentioned this yet but they are treating it as a joke because they don't actually want to do it - for all Greys talk of the evil feminist rulers of Cal state they are complying with Federal laws requiring Collages to provide sexual violence prevention and awareness programs, and instead of oh I don't know actually educating the students have opted for a much lower cost alternative...
That's right gentlemen - no feminists in the shadows here just the Federal Government and lazy, cost cutting bureaucrats...
So if not for feminists, mind you tell us exactly what brought the Federal Government go that way?I am amazed no-one has mentioned this yet but they are treating it as a joke because they don't actually want to do it - for all Greys talk of the evil feminist rulers of Cal state they are complying with Federal laws requiring Collages to provide sexual violence prevention and awareness programs, and instead of oh I don't know actually educating the students have opted for a much lower cost alternative...
That's right gentlemen - no feminists in the shadows here just the Federal Government and lazy, cost cutting bureaucrats...
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
So if not for feminists, mind you tell us exactly what brought the Federal Government go that way?
Several high profile rape cases.So if not for feminists, mind you tell us exactly what brought the Federal Government go that way?
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
And why?
Sorry to rock your boat, but let me rephrase my thinking... What mathematical EXCELLENT MINDS have women produced?
Since they gave birth to them, one could say, all of them.And why?
Sorry to rock your boat, but let me rephrase my thinking... What mathematical EXCELLENT MINDS have women produced?
But, you've asked a loaded question. Very few women even got a chance to learn math before half a century, or a century ago, and one always has to account for cultural bias (girls don't need math!). But, as that is getting less prevalent, girls are getting better in maths.
In 2012 PISA tests, girls were really close to boys in maths, and even ahead in some countries.
Gentlemen are we really going to bury our heads every time feminists go too far by by pointing to our pet male chauvinist?
To get into a university course you have to partake in this preachy and rather patronising multiple choice game where every time you do not respond the way the maker wants you are made to rewatch the previous scene, then at the end you have to do an opinion quiz where if your opinion does not match up to the maker's you are made to restart the entire tedious process over.
Whether you agree with it or not it is rather blatant that it's methodology is that "you WILL learn to side with my opinion, or you will repeat the lesson, until you comply you will not progress ." It doesnt matter if you think the opinion is right if the method of it's propagation is blatant coercion.
If you still dont have a problem with this, replace the maker's opinion with kadagar's.
To get into a university course you have to partake in this preachy and rather patronising multiple choice game where every time you do not respond the way the maker wants you are made to rewatch the previous scene, then at the end you have to do an opinion quiz where if your opinion does not match up to the maker's you are made to restart the entire tedious process over.
Whether you agree with it or not it is rather blatant that it's methodology is that "you WILL learn to side with my opinion, or you will repeat the lesson, until you comply you will not progress ." It doesnt matter if you think the opinion is right if the method of it's propagation is blatant coercion.
If you still dont have a problem with this, replace the maker's opinion with kadagar's.
If it happens in an anglo country it does not worry me, anglo countries take everything to the extreme.
One used to have an extreme empire.
One has an extreme army.
One has extreme numbers of poisonous animals.
One has extreme public surveillance.
One or more have extreme zero tolerance policies at schools.
In all anglo countries everyone is extremely concerned about being so extreme.
And so on (this is really just a small selection of my "prejudices" but I love you anyway).
English is a wonderful language but I wouldn't want my kids to grow up with it as their mother tongue, it might make them extreme.
And if the game isn't dynamic, people will probably spread the right answers somewhere on the innernets, like in a fraternity Facebook group where they usually share pictures of women on toilets that they took on campus or something like that. You might call it a waste of time and so might I but there are quite a few of those around nowadays. Imagine you spend 3 hours writing a job application and then don't get the job and are still thankful to the job creators and write 99 more. You also have to agree with the government not to murder people or you WILL be thrown into a jail.
So what exactly is the argument? That students should have the right to think that rape is fine and still get to reap the same benefits as the rest of society? What are the specific questions that are overly patronising and which are the answers noone should be forced to give?
The screenshot of Q2-Q7 only has statements where you should probably just answer strongly disagree and get on with life unless they are trick questions from male advocats. (Warning: half a joke in there!!!)
One used to have an extreme empire.
One has an extreme army.
One has extreme numbers of poisonous animals.
One has extreme public surveillance.
One or more have extreme zero tolerance policies at schools.
In all anglo countries everyone is extremely concerned about being so extreme.
And so on (this is really just a small selection of my "prejudices" but I love you anyway).
English is a wonderful language but I wouldn't want my kids to grow up with it as their mother tongue, it might make them extreme.
And if the game isn't dynamic, people will probably spread the right answers somewhere on the innernets, like in a fraternity Facebook group where they usually share pictures of women on toilets that they took on campus or something like that. You might call it a waste of time and so might I but there are quite a few of those around nowadays. Imagine you spend 3 hours writing a job application and then don't get the job and are still thankful to the job creators and write 99 more. You also have to agree with the government not to murder people or you WILL be thrown into a jail.
So what exactly is the argument? That students should have the right to think that rape is fine and still get to reap the same benefits as the rest of society? What are the specific questions that are overly patronising and which are the answers noone should be forced to give?
The screenshot of Q2-Q7 only has statements where you should probably just answer strongly disagree and get on with life unless they are trick questions from male advocats. (Warning: half a joke in there!!!)
Originally Posted by :
If it happens in an anglo country it does not worry me, anglo countries take everything to the extreme.
One used to have an extreme empire.
One has an extreme army.
One has extreme numbers of poisonous animals.
One has extreme public surveillance.
One or more have extreme zero tolerance policies at schools.
In all anglo countries everyone is extremely concerned about being so extreme.
And so on (this is really just a small selection of my "prejudices" but I love you anyway).
English is a wonderful language but I wouldn't want my kids to grow up with it as their mother tongue, it might make them extreme.
Said by the nationality that in the span of thirty years gave us exhibit A of the results of both extremes of the nationalism scale. Or perhaps do you like me occasionally object to what our nations do?If it happens in an anglo country it does not worry me, anglo countries take everything to the extreme.
One used to have an extreme empire.
One has an extreme army.
One has extreme numbers of poisonous animals.
One has extreme public surveillance.
One or more have extreme zero tolerance policies at schools.
In all anglo countries everyone is extremely concerned about being so extreme.
And so on (this is really just a small selection of my "prejudices" but I love you anyway).
English is a wonderful language but I wouldn't want my kids to grow up with it as their mother tongue, it might make them extreme.
Originally Posted by :
And if the game isn't dynamic, people will probably spread the right answers somewhere on the innernets, like in a fraternity Facebook group where they usually share pictures of women on toilets that they took on campus or something like that. You might call it a waste of time and so might I but there are quite a few of those around nowadays. Imagine you spend 3 hours writing a job application and then don't get the job and are still thankful to the job creators and write 99 more. You also have to agree with the government not to murder people or you WILL be thrown into a jail.
So what exactly is the argument? That students should have the right to think that rape is fine and still get to reap the same benefits as the rest of society? What are the specific questions that are overly patronising and which are the answers noone should be forced to give?
The screenshot of Q2-Q7 only has statements where you should probably just answer strongly disagree and get on with life unless they are trick questions from male advocats. (Warning: half a joke in there!!!)
Ignoring the ever so prevalent sexist assumption of "most men need to be told not to be rapists":And if the game isn't dynamic, people will probably spread the right answers somewhere on the innernets, like in a fraternity Facebook group where they usually share pictures of women on toilets that they took on campus or something like that. You might call it a waste of time and so might I but there are quite a few of those around nowadays. Imagine you spend 3 hours writing a job application and then don't get the job and are still thankful to the job creators and write 99 more. You also have to agree with the government not to murder people or you WILL be thrown into a jail.
So what exactly is the argument? That students should have the right to think that rape is fine and still get to reap the same benefits as the rest of society? What are the specific questions that are overly patronising and which are the answers noone should be forced to give?
The screenshot of Q2-Q7 only has statements where you should probably just answer strongly disagree and get on with life unless they are trick questions from male advocats. (Warning: half a joke in there!!!)
The argument is that if the message is so obvious why is agreeing to it being imposed as a pre-requisite for higher education instead of being allowed to stand on it's own merit? Forcing it on students gives the impression the people setting it arent secure in thier beliefs to allow criticism. That you must state you disgree with these things or have to go through teh song and dance again and again until you get it right, well, it seems less "this is a good idea" and more "Dont question doctrin"
Originally Posted by Greyblades:
Said by the nationality that gave us exhibit A of the results of both extremes of the nationalism scale. Or perhaps do you like me occasionally dislike what our nations are doing?
That's why we are so moderate now, it only took us two World Wars and a Cold War to find our middle. We kept some of the extremes of course, but the mainstream here is rather centrist as you can see by the "we have to find a common solution"-chancellor from a relatively centrist part in a coalition with the most centrist party from the other side that we keep reelecting.Said by the nationality that gave us exhibit A of the results of both extremes of the nationalism scale. Or perhaps do you like me occasionally dislike what our nations are doing?
Originally Posted by Greyblades:
Ignoring the ever so prevalent strawman of "most men need to be told not to be rapists":
It's easy to ignore things that are not even there. Ignoring the ever so prevalent strawman of "most men need to be told not to be rapists":
Originally Posted by Greyblades:
The argument is that if the message is so obvious why is agreeing to it being imposed as a pre-requisite for higher education instead of being allowed to stand on it's own merit? Forcing it on students gives the impression they arent secure in thier beliefs to allow criticism. That you must state you disgree with these things or have to go through teh song and dance again and again until you get it right, well, it seems less "this is a good idea" and more "Dont question doctrin"
Well, I wouldn't know, just like I don't understand how you can litter a country with CCTV, check all communication of your citizens and claim to defend freedom. Where I come from the constitution says that all tele communication, via letter or otherwise, has to remain secret.The argument is that if the message is so obvious why is agreeing to it being imposed as a pre-requisite for higher education instead of being allowed to stand on it's own merit? Forcing it on students gives the impression they arent secure in thier beliefs to allow criticism. That you must state you disgree with these things or have to go through teh song and dance again and again until you get it right, well, it seems less "this is a good idea" and more "Dont question doctrin"
Maybe it's just what others have said, that they are trying to cover their asses because in that respective country there is also an extreme culture of suing for the craziest things. Not that we don't have silly lawsuits here, it just seems a little more, how to say that..."extreme" over there.
Also keep in mind that in some cases, perhaps also this game, the training is made a bit extreme on purpose because people do not act as extreme in everyday life anyway. Like when you learn dancing you practice the moves in a more extreme way but are not supposed to dance like that when you're out on a party. What's wrong with the game is that it only covers sexism and not e.g. insults based on disabilities or being poor as well. They should probably add another 3 hours, people have a month to do it anyway.
This is stupid and people should start taking responsibility for themselves.
If you leave your doors and windows open when you go to sleep at night and get burgled, yes you bear some sort of responsibility for what happened. The police will probably recommend you don't do it in future without worrying about cries of "victim blaming".
Same goes for leaving your car door open with the keys in the keyhole while you nip into the shops.
Or a well-dressed businessman deciding to take a stroll round a ghetto.
The job of the police is to deal with criminals and try to make the world a bit safer, not to absolve us all from our individual responsibilities, or to create some sort of utopia where we can take any sort of irresponsible action free from consequences.
If you leave your doors and windows open when you go to sleep at night and get burgled, yes you bear some sort of responsibility for what happened. The police will probably recommend you don't do it in future without worrying about cries of "victim blaming".
Same goes for leaving your car door open with the keys in the keyhole while you nip into the shops.
Or a well-dressed businessman deciding to take a stroll round a ghetto.
The job of the police is to deal with criminals and try to make the world a bit safer, not to absolve us all from our individual responsibilities, or to create some sort of utopia where we can take any sort of irresponsible action free from consequences.
Originally Posted by Husar:
That's why we are so moderate now, it only took us two World Wars and a Cold War to find our middle. We kept some of the extremes of course, but the mainstream here is rather centrist as you can see by the "we have to find a common solution"-chancellor from a relatively centrist part in a coalition with the most centrist party from the other side that we keep reelecting.
Good for you, please begin to notice that your european satelites are beginning to feel the same as you did after versailles. You might want to tell brussels to stop giving the people who say "the ones running the EU think the only entity that matters is itself and not it's members" more ammunition.That's why we are so moderate now, it only took us two World Wars and a Cold War to find our middle. We kept some of the extremes of course, but the mainstream here is rather centrist as you can see by the "we have to find a common solution"-chancellor from a relatively centrist part in a coalition with the most centrist party from the other side that we keep reelecting.
Originally Posted by :
It's easy to ignore things that are not even there.
Hmm. Point. Lets go with "ignoring the condescending assumption that most young people need to be told rape is serious." It's easy to ignore things that are not even there.
Sorry.
Originally Posted by :
Well, I wouldn't know, just like I don't understand how you can litter a country with CCTV, check all communication of your citizens and claim to defend freedom. Where I come from the constitution says that all tele communication, via letter or otherwise, has to remain secret.
Maybe it's just what others have said, that they are trying to cover their asses because in that respective country there is also an extreme culture of suing for the craziest things. Not that we don't have silly lawsuits here, it just seems a little more, how to say that..."extreme" over there.
As I said, I occasionally object to what my nation does. Now more than before.Well, I wouldn't know, just like I don't understand how you can litter a country with CCTV, check all communication of your citizens and claim to defend freedom. Where I come from the constitution says that all tele communication, via letter or otherwise, has to remain secret.
Maybe it's just what others have said, that they are trying to cover their asses because in that respective country there is also an extreme culture of suing for the craziest things. Not that we don't have silly lawsuits here, it just seems a little more, how to say that..."extreme" over there.
Originally Posted by :
Also keep in mind that in some cases, perhaps also this game, the training is made a bit extreme on purpose because people do not act as extreme in everyday life anyway. Like when you learn dancing you practice the moves in a more extreme way but are not supposed to dance like that when you're out on a party. What's wrong with the game is that it only covers sexism and not e.g. insults based on disabilities or being poor as well. They should probably add another 3 hours, people have a month to do it anyway.
The assumption that it is needed is itself highly insulting, that it is mandatory and highly obtrusive amplifies it. With such emphasis on avoiding hurting anyone's feelings it is strange that this insult is being defended.Also keep in mind that in some cases, perhaps also this game, the training is made a bit extreme on purpose because people do not act as extreme in everyday life anyway. Like when you learn dancing you practice the moves in a more extreme way but are not supposed to dance like that when you're out on a party. What's wrong with the game is that it only covers sexism and not e.g. insults based on disabilities or being poor as well. They should probably add another 3 hours, people have a month to do it anyway.
Originally Posted by Greyblades:
Hmm. Point. Lets go with "ignoring the condescending assumption that most young people need to be told rape is serious."
Again, not there.Hmm. Point. Lets go with "ignoring the condescending assumption that most young people need to be told rape is serious."
Originally Posted by Greyblades:
The assumption that it is needed is itself highly insulting, that it is mandatory and highly obtrusive amplifies it.
No, the problem seems to be that there are actually problems with rape on campuses and so some people do indeed have to be made aware of the issue. Making everyone aware might serve two purposes:The assumption that it is needed is itself highly insulting, that it is mandatory and highly obtrusive amplifies it.
1) If bystanders see something, they might be more aware of what is going on and less likely to excuse and watch it without helping.
2) The people who think it's fine are among the ones trained, the only way to train them would be by using profiling and then branding them as potential offenders and sending them to classes. Would you prefer that over just educating everyone or would you rather tell the rape victims that they should have watched their backs better and that you won't do anything about the ongoing rape cases?
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
Of course, one could argue this too would fall short from anyone's perspective, but an "oh yeah, here's some thing we put together, our job here is done" attitude on the schools' part does disservice to everyone.
Having worked quite a time at a University I would venture to make a claim that many things done there follow the pattern you mention. It can be partly explained by the stupidity of the orders loaded down from on high. Of course, one could argue this too would fall short from anyone's perspective, but an "oh yeah, here's some thing we put together, our job here is done" attitude on the schools' part does disservice to everyone.
For example, fifth year students here have a choice whether to write a diploma paper or to have a final exam (aka state exam). Once they choose it can't be revoked, i.e. they can't be pretending to be writing something for close on a year and then in May (when they see they can't make it by the deadline) announce they opt for the final. Normally, they are ready to make a choice as late as October.
However, the workload of each professor (on which the yearly salary depends) has to be determined in late August when no one knows how many students will want to write the paper (perhaps, no one will).
Seeing such (and many other) discrepancies makes the teaching stuff practise formal approaches where they think the University powers-that-be are out of touch with reality.
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
Sorry to rock your boat, but let me rephrase my thinking... What mathematical EXCELLENT MINDS have women produced?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sofia_KovalevskayaSorry to rock your boat, but let me rephrase my thinking... What mathematical EXCELLENT MINDS have women produced?
Never heard of her?
Originally Posted by Husar:
That's why we are so moderate now, it only took us two World Wars and a Cold War to find our middle. We kept some of the extremes of course, but the mainstream here is rather centrist as you can see by the "we have to find a common solution"-chancellor from a relatively centrist part in a coalition with the most centrist party from the other side that we keep reelecting.
Conclusion: Anlgoguys, you should start a war or two to get the meaning of things and learn moderation. The Ukraine crisis seems a good chance to start at least one.That's why we are so moderate now, it only took us two World Wars and a Cold War to find our middle. We kept some of the extremes of course, but the mainstream here is rather centrist as you can see by the "we have to find a common solution"-chancellor from a relatively centrist part in a coalition with the most centrist party from the other side that we keep reelecting.
Originally Posted by :
Would you prefer that over just educating everyone or would you rather tell the rape victims that they should have watched their backs better and that you won't do anything about the ongoing rape cases?
I would prefer that the moral guardians would get thier message across without subjecting the majority of the students who are already not going to comit or abet rape to something that boarders on indoctrination. I also wish that the very people who scream bloody murder when they are unintentionally insulted wouldn't impose this level of insulting condescention upon others.Would you prefer that over just educating everyone or would you rather tell the rape victims that they should have watched their backs better and that you won't do anything about the ongoing rape cases?
Originally Posted by Greyblades:
I would prefer that the moral guardians would get thier message across without subjecting the majority of the students who are already not going to comit or abet rape to something that boarders on indoctrination. I also wish that the very people who scream bloody murder when they are unintentionally insulted wouldn't impose this level of insulting condescention upon others.
I was trying to get some constructive criticism out of you, but all you give me are complaints without solutions.I would prefer that the moral guardians would get thier message across without subjecting the majority of the students who are already not going to comit or abet rape to something that boarders on indoctrination. I also wish that the very people who scream bloody murder when they are unintentionally insulted wouldn't impose this level of insulting condescention upon others.
How would you go about preventing rape on campus?
Originally Posted by Husar:
How would you go about preventing rape on campus?
Separate campuses for males and females and no admission of the opposite sex.How would you go about preventing rape on campus?
Originally Posted by :
How would you go about preventing rape on campus?
By realizing that in the field of crime aside from legalization there is no final solution, only management. How would you go about preventing rape on campus?
Let the people who are experts on the subject do thier work, put oversight on them if you must but make sure they are staffed by experts as well, and dont turn to people with agendas every time the police fail to give you a 0% occurance rating.
Originally Posted by :
Separate campuses for males and females and no admission of the opposite sex.
Youtube Video
Separate campuses for males and females and no admission of the opposite sex.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO