Students who avoid making eye contact could be guilty of racism, oxford unibersidad says

Students who avoid making eye contact could be guilty of racism, oxford unibersidad says | Telegraph

Students who avoid making eye contact with their peers could be guilty of racism, according to oxford University’s latest guidance. artikulo sa pamamagitan ng Camilla Turner for Telgraph.co.uk, 22 April 2017.
keywords: pc, politically correct, trigger warning, gender neutral, racism, equality, diversity, snowflake, pandering, oxford unibersidad, england, artikulo, telegraph, april 2017

	naisumite sa pamamagitan ng DarkSarcasm sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas

1 fan

5 comments

I remember visiting this website once...

Here's some stuff I remembered seeing:

Students who avoid making eye contact with their peers could be guilty of racism, according to Oxford University’s latest guidance.

The university’s Equality and Diversity Unit has advised students that “not speaking directly to people” could be deemed a “racial microaggression” which can lead to “mental ill-health”.

Other examples of “everyday racism” include asking someone where they are “originally” from, students were told.

Oxford University\'s Equality and Diversity Unit explains in its Trinity term newsletter that "some people who do these things may be entirely well-meaning, and would be mortified to realise that they had caused offence.

“But this is of little consequence if a possible effect of their words or actions is to suggest to people that they may fulfil a negative stereotype, or do not belong”.

Last year Oxford law students were told they could skip lectures covering violent cases if they feared the content would be too “distressing”

Universities have been accused of pandering to the “snowflake generation” of students, who are seen as over-sensitive and quick to take offence.

Dr Joanna Williams, a lecturer in higher education the University of Kent, said the guidance was “completely ridiculous” and will make students “hyper-sensitive” about how they interact with one another.

“Essentially people are being accused of a thought crime,” Dr Williams told The Telegraph. “They are being accused of thinking incorrect thoughts based on an assumption of where they may or may not be looking.”

Dr Williams, who is author of Academic Freedom in an Age of Conformity, said that Oxford University’s guidance was “overstepping the mark” by telling students “how they should feel and think”.

She said: “Instead of people seeing each other as potential friends, equals, these re-racialise academia, they force people to see each other as a person of colour, they force people to be put into boxes about identity.

“It is really problematic - it means people can’t relate to each other naturally, they have rules in the back of their mind and they can’t be spontaneous as their interactions are all overlaid with the desire to follow all these rules.”

Last year Oxford law students were told they could skip lectures covering violent cases if they feared the content would be too “distressing”.

Earlier this year it emerged that Cardiff Metropolitan University banned phrases such as “right-hand man” and “gentleman’s agreement” under its code of practice on inclusive language.

The university guidance dictates that “gender-neutral” terms should be used where possible, adding that students should not allow their “cultural background” to affect their choice of words.

The University of Glasgow has started issuing “trigger warnings” for theology students studying the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, whereby students are told they may see distressing images and are given the opportunity to leave.

The term "snowflake generation" was one of Collins Dictionary\'s 2016 words of the year. Collins defines the term as "the young adults of the 2010s, viewed as being less resilient and more prone to taking offence than previous generations".

An Oxford University spokesman said: “The Equality and Diversity Unit works with University bodies to ensure that the University\'s pursuit of excellence goes hand in hand with freedom from discrimination and equality of opportunity. The newsletter is one way of advising and supporting staff towards achieving these aims.”

Pupils from ten private and grammar schools dominate applications for top graduate schemes

Comment: General Election series: What the Conservative manifesto should pledge on...Education

New rule change allows schools to remove school governors for first time

The 11-plus can 'never be tutor-proof', major grammar school exam board admits

Invisible ink revealed as the latest university exam scam

Comment: Young people will continue to get a raw deal in Westminster unless they vote

With private school fees up 70pc since 2004, how are families paying?

Boarding schools should be forced to report child abuse following John Smyth scandal

SATs risk giving children mental health issues, education select committee warns

Outstanding school put into special measures 'because it did not have a fence': Headteachers attack Ofsted over 'whimsical' inspections

Headteachers raise prospect of strike for first time in six years over education cuts

Jeremy Corbyn promises to find £3bn to plug hole in school budgets

Boarding schools no longer need 'Harry Potter effect' to inspire children, leading headmaster says

Lack of free speech at universities is a 'great blight of our age', Lord Lawson says

Private schools now educate more international students abroad than in Britain

Oxford University apologises for 'everyday racism' advice which offended autistic people

'My daughter is DONE with homework' - mother's anti-homework stance wins praise

Britain faces headteacher crisis as new research reveals school leaders are leaving profession in droves

Whooping should be banned beause it excludes deaf people, Nation Union of Students say

Charity Commission probes student unions over calls to boycott Israel

5 comments

	jlhfan624 said: link is what these kids are going to be like when they try to find a job after college. posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas.

	jlhfan624 said: Actually I saw this on Twitter awhile back and to quote the greatest American of our time, this is how it made me feel: "I've finally stopped crying but that's only because I started vomiting." - Dale Gribble/Rusty Shackleford posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas.

	legend_of_roxas said: My generation needs to toughen up. There's no reason to get mad over these dumb "microaggressions" like someone avoiding eye contact with someone else. Sometimes I don't make eye contact with people while I'm passing through the halls of my college or whatever because I don't want them to think I'm staring at them or something. You just can win with these overly sensitive people I swear. And if you're going into law, you shouldn't be skipping violent cases because they're too "distressing". That's going to be part of your job one day. If you don't want to deal with stuff like that, find another career path. Colleges shouldn't be babying these students because college is one step away from entering the real world. If they come out of college being too scared to brush up against a leaf then they're going to have a real hard time dealing with what's out there. posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas.

	misanthrope86 said: Let's be real though: the psychological research that this is based off is being prioritized in our current neoliberal research institutions. That is where research money is going because reductionist, experimental research can mass-produce data that reduces highly complex psychological phenomena down to something like this gestures to the article, devoid of context, but easy for policy makers (in universities, in government, in business etc) to base their decisions on. This is the kind of research universities, governments and big businesses pay mega-bucks for. It seems odd to blame students for something that universities/governments/businesses actively and systemically produce. I had a rant about trigger warnings but nobody cares anyway, so whatever. But maybe if trigger warnings irritate you (maybe they... trigger you...?), then they aren't there for you. posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas.

	ThePrincesTale said: Part of this article seems to just be anger that mental health is gaining acknowledgement... I don't understand the backlash. Yes, we do cover cases of sexual abuse in law, and in more graphic detail than you'd get on the news. You won't have to encounter them again unless you go into criminal law. Some people have experiences that make it a distressing topic. They would very much prefer to watch the lecture at home or receive a friend's notes. They are not "snowflakes" and the solution isn't to simply "toughen up"... the impacts of sexual abuse actually exist. People are getting more offended over this sort of thing than the "offended generation" that they're complaining about. Making something a "thought crime"... Seriously? Who enforces these standards of "political correctness"? Who actually condemns you for not making eye contact? Who is actually policing the words you use and silencing you? Can we not neglect the context that this probably one thing in a long list of suggestions in a page of a newsletter... and that it's intended merely to make people think and reflect, not to constitute a rule of some sort? The underlying idea of the whole thing is just "be tactful and don't needlessly offend people". I don't understand how that can provoke such outrage or why it's even news. It's also worth noting that people have always been getting offended (though I think the only people "offended" in this story are the readership... just as the media outlet no doubt intended). In the past it was just about different things. I mean, people call for more representation now, but imagine the outrage it would cause a few decades ago if you put an LGBT person in a children's novel. posted sa loob ng isang taon na ang nakalipas.

idagdag ang iyong komento

pagtatalo