It was bad enough reading reports that College students across America felt the need of "safe spaces" so they didn't have to hear anything they don't agree with, or "trigger warnings" if they were to particpate in anything that they might not like, but to see College Universities across America create "response teams" to handle "bias" complaints by crybabies, whether by students or staff, is simply hitting the height of absudity, especially when some of the complaints are subjected to the light of day.
It isn't often we quote The Daily Beast, but in this instance they did a bang-up job of highlighting the ridiculous nature of what these teams are, what they are being used for, and how "their mission is usually the same: ostensibly, to make the university a safe place, where 'safe' is defined as 'silent'."
The wrong thing could be any remark, gesture, joke, or jape that offends anyone for virtually any reason. If the university’s spies are listening, you could be ratted out to a panel of administrators who keep files on alleged perpetrators, suggest ways for offenders to be more politically correct, and even submit their names to disciplinary committees.
At the University of Oregon and Colorado this team is called a Bias Response Team, at Vassar College they are called a Bias Incident Response Team, and the Ohio State University has a Bias Assessment and Response Team. According to the report they operate on more than a hundred campuses across America.
A look at some of the reports from the example linked, we see at the University of Oregon, complaints range from serious (which is supposedly what campus security should be dealing with) to the outright absurd.
For example, in their Annual Report for 2014-2015, starting on page #9, we see 85 compaints, listing a description of the basic complaint, what "bias type," they are complaining about, the "location" the offending action took place, and the esponse by the Bias Response Team (BRT). Note- 20 of the reports included "gender identity" as one of the bias types.
The very first report listed is described as a complaint over a poster which featured a "triggering image." Bias Type: Body Size. The response team offered support to the complainer.
Another one is where a student reported a culturally appropriative themed party. Bias Type: Ethnicity, Race. Response: A BRT Advocate reached out to the reporter. A BRT Case Manager met with the president of the student program to discuss the incident.
Then they had an anonymous student reported that an official online form asked for demographic information in a way that excluded certain identity groups at the Administrative Building. Bias Type: Gender Identity/Expression, Ethnicity, Race. Response: A BRT Case Manager met with administrators of the form to provide resources on inclusive surveying techniques. The administrators used these techniques on a survey they sent out the very next week.
Those examples are from just the first set of examples listed on Page 9.
“A student reported that a professor wrote an insulting comment on their online blog,” according to the case files of the BRT at the University of Oregon. “[We] met with the reporter, and a BRT Case Manager held a professional development conversation with the professor.”
In another case, “a student reported that a sign encouraging cleaning up after oneself was sexist. A BRT Manager followed up to ensure the sign was removed.”
A staff member who made a “culturally insensitive remark” was reported to the dean of students. And when an anonymous student filed a report complaining that the student newspaper didn’t feature enough transgender writers, the BRT met with its editors. The case files called this “an educational conversation.” A more objective chronicler might call it the university trying to intimidate a student-run press into making editorial changes.
It’s distressingly easy, after all, to accuse someone of bias. The University of Colorado-Boulder, for instance, asks people with information—they need not be students, or even affiliated with the university—to go to its website and make a report containing all relevant details on the perpetrators, including their dates of birth, phone numbers, and ID numbers. The BRT—which is typically composed of administrators, rather than students or faculty members—then intervenes.
Serious Question: What on earth are these children going to do when they are out of college and have to deal with the real world, where their is no "bias" reponse team to intervene when their little feelings are hurt, or when they *GASP* hear something they don't want to hear?
The title to this article partially came from an SQ note after one of my previous pieces, which so perfectly fits what we are witnessing in college campuses across America, I just had to use it.... his note was left after a link to an ANP article titled "Trump 2016' Yanks College Students Out Of Their 'Safe Space' With No TRIGGER WARNING!" - Steve wrote: "COLLEGIATE ATTIRE HAS NOW RETURNED TO MULTI COLORED DIAPERS-I SUGGEST THIS UNIVERSITY HAND OUT 'PROZAC DIPPED BINKIES' TO THE STUDENTS AND DIAPER CHANGE STATIONS!"
If it wasn't so sad and true, it would almost be funny.
The only change I would make is that those binkies and diaper stations should be at all public Universitites across the nation because they are creating a generation of children that will be incapable of functioning in the real world.
MILLENNIAL COLLEGE GRADUATES: YOUNG, EDUCATED, JOBLESS
In June 2015 Newsweek reported that "The millennial generation is still lagging in the workplace, just as it did last year. It makes up about 40 percent of the unemployed in the U.S. - They pointed out that as of May 2015, the data show 13.8 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds are out of work.
According to a study paper, titled The Class of 2015 there are a whole host of reasons that these Millenials are't employed, such as "because young workers always experience disproportionate increases in unemployment during periods of labor market weakness—and the Great Recession and its aftermath is the longest, most severe period of economic weakness in more than seven decades," or "it stems from weak demand for goods and services, which makes it unnecessary for employers to significantly ramp up hiring," and so on.
I call BS.
According to WSJ, in 2914, the median job tenure for workers aged 20 to 24 was shorter than 16 months. For those aged 25 to 34, it was three years, according to the BLS, still far short of the 5.5-year median tenure for all workers aged 25 and older.
The problem is these Millennials are unemployable for longterm, or incapable of functioning in normal society and unable to stick with a job, and this is the fault of not only parents, but once the children leave home, it is the responsibility of the schools and colleges to prepare them for the future and instead they are babying them, treating them like dayschoolers or kindergarteners, appeasing them every time they have a temper tantrum.
A perfect example of this was reported here at ANP on February 21, 2016, where a girl named Talia decided to move into an apartment that costs $1245, accepted a job to which she had to commute to which paid $733.24, bi-weekly," (Totalling 1,466.48 monthly), racked up credit card debt, then chose to publicly catigate her employer because she could not pay her bills.... then was surprised said employer terminated her.
With all that said.... there may be hope as the Millennial below proves as she takes a good, hard look at herself and other Millennials her age.... and isn't impressed with what she sees, and ends up concluding "Dear Elders, I'm sorry."