As the letter to the Class of 2020 began to circulate on discussion forums and social media, some students and alumni praised the University’s message on its commitment to free expression.Other students criticized the letter, saying that the University disguises hate speech as “discourse.”
A content warning might be appropriate, but not an alternate text. If you aren't reading and discussing the same material as the rest of the class then you aren't really in the same class at all anymore. If you can't handle the material for any reason then you simply are not performing at the same caliber as your peers and should be graded accordingly. [Second paragraph reply is in response to a previous post on Charles Murray and his book The Bell Curve.] Murray has portrayed that way certainly, but he has evidence to back his claims and clarifies that it isn't certain how much of these measured differences stem from genetics and/or upbringing. A fact doesn't stop being a fact just because it's unpopular though. Further, one aim in bringing controversial speakers to the campus might be in fostering debate rather than expecting people to accept was is said at face value. But don't take my word for it, take Murray's. These imaginary sit-ins the author of that article is alluding to are in fact a real symptom of the SJW disease. Today's college kids are all too willing to throw a hissy fit and/or start a social media blitz at the first sign of anything that doesn't fit their preferred world narrative. It may still be relatively rare, just a few incidents of note per year, but the more media attention these actions generate over time the more likely this behavior is to continue.
University of Chicago has had enough