Safe Space Shut Down After Anti-White, Anti-Male Statements Leaked

Recently, the Independent obtained screenshots from the “5C Women of Color” Facebook group. According to its description, the group—accessible only to its 1,100 approved members—is “for 5C students and alumnae who identify as women of color to reach out and serve as resources/support for one another.” Many of the page’s most popular posts mock those who do not identify as women of color.

In response to her adoptive white father making jokes at her expense, Sarah Weiyun Otterstrom (SC ‘17) posted “I just need to get this out. I hate having white parents so much.” Another student responded by instructing Otterstrom to tell her father that “his pale ass is worthless and the sun doesn’t even like him. Talk about his receding hairline, the fact that he probably looks 20 years older than he actually is, and that he probably has a small penis.”

Untitled.jpg

Additionally, Namrata Mohan (SC ‘16) stated that her family “ha[s] THE ‘white person voice’ they use when they want to make fun of white Americans.” Later, she continues to justify this “white person voice” by stating that although “it’s soooo lowkey shady,” it’s acceptable to “make fun of white Americans” because “like white people created #colonialism so i’m not mad.”

Rachel Song (PO ‘18), who posted in the group for advice on classes, stated that she was concerned about taking “PSYC141: Leading Entrepreneurial Ventures” because she is “afraid [it] is going to be a class full of white, male business bros.” Lanna Sanchez (PO ‘19) noted that she is “kinda scared to take a politics course in general since this space is typically dominated by white men.” Sanchez added that a class taught by a “conservative POC [person of color] professor” also “raised a red flag.”

Catherine Chiang (SC ‘16)—who was elected by her peers to be the senior class speaker at Scripps College’s commencement ceremony this year and who is an acting intern at the Scripps Communities of Resources and Empowerment program—stated, “asian boys r a social issue,” to which other students responded “esp [especially] the nerdy ones who can just hide in their tech caves” and “they get all angry when it comes to how Asian men are asexualized/emasculated.” Kristine Lee (PO ‘17), a staff member of the Pomona College Asian American Resource Center who sits on the “Production” and “Mental Health” committees there added, “F*ck your masculinity whiny Asian cis bros this is why I only hang out with femmes.”

“As a feminine gay Asian woman,” Kristine Lee told the Independent, “I’m not interested in surrounding myself with the kind of possessive, toxic masculinity exhibited by the type of Asian American men we were discussing in the post.” In response to these discussions, Ji In “Kit” Lee (PO ‘17), another Pomona College Asian American Resource Center staff member, wrote “mehehehe I love this group.”

Untitled2

Not all students of color agree with the page’s sentiments. Carlos Perrett (PZ ’18), who spoke with the Independent, expressed his disapproval of the statements made on the 5C Women of Color page. “Facebook groups like the 5C Women of Color not only lack inclusion, but also fail to meet their purposes of creating a space of support. Instead these groups have become the perfect outlet for shaming, hostility, and discrimination.” Earlier this year, Claremont saw similar safe spaces intended to be “pro-POC, pro-black, and anti-white supremacist” established with clauses stating that “[w]hile you may want to invite a white friend or ally, to make this a safe and comfortable space for other POC, we ask that you do not.”

After the Independent reached out to members of the 5C Women of Color group for additional comment, the page was shut down. “We found out that screen shots of our interactions were taken by people who work for the Claremont Independent, and they’re geared to write an article,” wrote Kit Lee (PO ’17). “In order to preserve the confidentiality of past conversations and healthy discussions that have occurred in this group,” she continued, “we will shut down the group … to prevent whoever is the mole from leaking more screenshots to the CI.”

___________________________

Image Source: Facebook

96 thoughts on “Safe Space Shut Down After Anti-White, Anti-Male Statements Leaked”

  1. Regardless of how you feel about exclusive safe spaces it should be clear that students who share similar backgrounds organizing to support each other is not only ‘okay’ but important and commendable.
    The way that this article gleefully relishes the opportunity to undermine a support system for students that need it is disgusting. Those who would call themselves journalists while pitting prepared statements against Facebook posts, which were taken from a context in which no one with bad intentions would ever see them, should be ashamed. The editors who allow their writers to name students based on stolen images should be humiliated.
    I don’t agree with or support many of the statements cited in this article but if you cherry pick the worst parts of a group of teenagers talking about things that cause them pain, you’re bound to find some things that you don’t like. To write an article about those things and paint what is clearly a support group as a group founded on hate is pretty **** hateful.

    1. Having a “support group” is one thing. But that doesn’t mean what happens in this group is automatically out of the public interest.

      When PoC groups have been calling for institutionally-financed safe spaces for some time now, and it’s in the public interest of Claremont students to know what happens in these spaces. When asking for an institution to instate a mild but insidious racial segregation, students and administrators have a clear interest in knowing what the effects of this policy will be. When similar “safe spaces” on campus have a track record of being platforms for some pretty bigoted rhetoric, should the tuition dollars of 5C students be funding a platform for exclusivity, hate and vitriol?

      These are stories that need to be heard and I’m glad they’re being reported. Ideas of this kind needs to be reported, examined, and questioned – no matter who says it.

      As for the value of “safe spaces” as places for support – what happened here is really unfortunately.

      As someone who’s been to quite a few support groups for a variety of things , an effective support group has a few main objectives: helping you deal with negative emotions in a healthy way, and better cope with and respond to serious problems faced in your daily life.

      Whether or not a having family with a “white person voice” counts as a major problem is up to you. But creating an echo chamber where much of the rhetoric is spiteful, belittling, and self-righteous doesn’t make people feel better, it doesn’t help them cope with problems, and it doesn’t create a positive path forward for dealing with problems. It makes people feel worse, not better.

    2. How is it hateful to point out hypocrisy? Familiarize yourself with the English language. Words mean something.

    3. Nice buzzwording and even calls for violence and intimidation. I think you hit them all, while missing the entire point. I hope you win SJW of the week.

      Life hack: reading comprehension is difficult when your face is pressed up against your playbook so closely. Try holding your agenda at arm’s length when taking in something new. Don’t worry, you can take a selfie with it when you’re done.

      By the way, you’re onto something when it comes to “cherry picking.” Apply the same reasoning to any of the articles that taught you the “right” way to read.

    4. true, i presume you also support private white nationalist groups where members can take out all their frustrations with ******* (no ill will, of course!)?

    5. But it has become socialy acceptable to say whatever about “whitey”..disagree with any non-white and be INSTANTLY BRANDED AS A RACIST…..what a great nation lib/dems,and the media have fostered…

    6. Are you completely insane? Here’s one of the quotes:

      “Kristine Lee (PO ‘17), a staff member of the Pomona College Asian American Resource Center who sits on the “Production” and “Mental Health” committees there added, “F*ck your masculinity whiny Asian cis bros this is why I only hang out with femmes.””

      This is from a staff member of an official college resource center. Please tell me in what context this acceptable or how it’s cherry picked given the poster’s position?

    7. I agree, Robin. The real problem isn’t the racism and sexism, it’s the people reporting it. Those monsters.

    8. Would you feel the same way if the support group were White and engaging in similar behavior?

    9. “…it should be clear that students who share similar backgrounds organizing to support each other is not only ‘okay’ but important and commendable.”

      Except when white males do it, then it’s a supremacy movement.

    10. The problem is they weren’t supporting each other. They were propagating bigoted hate speech. The fact that are defending this noxious bile says a lot about you as a person.
      There is a concept called “consciousness of guilt”. It’s when an individual or individuals exhibit behaviour indicating a guilty conscience. Taking down the Facebook page is exactly that. They know it is indefensible.
      I guarantee you would have no problem with names being published of people who disseminate speech you considered hateful.

    11. “a context in which no one with bad intentions” … except the people with bad intentions that posted them initially … “a group of teenagers talking” … except the ones who aren’t teenagers and the ones who are staff members.

    12. Facebook has a user agreement that prohibits hate speech. Many conservative sites have been taken down for far less cause. No one has a right to use Facebook to preach hate…. at least not yet.

      Besides, for my own interests, I want all haters flushed out. I want their words publicly attributed to them by name and in stone. Let no man run from the words he has spoken. Let him ask for and be forgiven, but never let it be hidden. I want truth and honesty. I want people to speak their mind in full view of the public.

    13. This is not “clearly a support group”. What was done is not cherry picking. There is no glee that people in alleged need don’t have a space for that.

      This is the overdue addressing of a culture of hate and violence that is on every campus on this continent, and counter the founding cultures and documents of the nations it’s comprised of.

      You seem to support segregation and racial discrimination, as well as racism itself (by the actual defintion: “promoting the race theory of biology which posits inherent, deeply distinguishing characteristics exist between ethnicities, demarcating separate races”). To quote: “clear that students who share similar backgrounds organizing to support each other is not only ‘okay’ but important and commendable.” Implying that the superficialities around which these types of groups are organized can be at all relied on to predict life experience (completely scientifically false, which is a major reason racism fell out of favour) . And implicitly supporting their inevitable policies of segregation, discrimination, etc.

      There’s no faux pas here by the journalists. Not their accessing public information. Not their publishing it. Not their holding accountable people who wrote their own names beside the hateful drivel this article calls out.

      This is a huge, long-standing, completely unacceptable culture of prejudice and malice that needs action like this article taken to counter-act it and reveal it for the racket it is. A bare-faced racket.

    14. WOW Robin Pollak you’re a racist sexist bigot. A “safe space” has NOTHING to do with advocating violence and hate speech – which you so clearly support.

      That page should have been taken down and all the posters should have to lose their jobs. That’s equality.

      Stupid Black Supremacist bigot.

    15. I guess we’d have to make it a white support group filled with anti-minority racism and homophobia for you to get over your bias and see this group for what it is; a hateful internet trolling collective that isn’t supportive at all.

    16. This person’s argument is just stupid. If it was posted on Facebook it is in the public sphere, and most college students are adults; yes they are technically teenage for maybe 2 years of college, but how do we know for sure how old they are!? Another question, is it ok for students to set up safe spaces that advocate racism, discrimination, and bigotry?

    17. “Regardless of how you feel about exclusive safe spaces…”

      I feel they, at best, are places where cowards retreat to avoid being called out on their own ridiculousness. At worst, they are places that openly allow and promote racism, with some “safe space” groups actually pushing to disallow people born with the wrong colour of skin (i.e. white). If the point is to safely incubate hate, then I suppose they are “safe” spaces. Otherwise, they should be done away with, especially at universities, where students are supposed to be learning to defend their positions intellectually.

      “you cherry pick the worst parts of a group of teenagers talking about things that cause them pain”

      The way that you gleefully relish the opportunity to be an apologist for racism just because you feel it is acceptable because the women feel “pain” about anything is disgusting.

    18. You are truly lost. No happiness can be had when you cannot answer the most important question, who am i.until you know the answer to that you are lost.

  2. So it’s ok for those persons identifying with similar backgrounds can

    That’s it. White folks will close off politics, private schools and private clubs ( like the Masters) and exclude anyone who tries to invade our safe space.

    Separate but equal. **** that. How about just separate. We’re going to undo the last 50 years of civil rights laws since all this equality causes you guys to have to create safe spaces. It’s just not fair.

  3. I have to agree with the first comment. I don’t agree with the statements made in these quotes but it’s clear these are students venting personal issues and supporting each other in times of emotional turmoil rather than people with a political agenda to spread a message. The fact that this comes from a private group but was somehow secretly obtained and made public is distasteful to say the least, especially with the names attached. While we all condemn acts of harassment, it wouldn’t be surprising to me if these students received some after this article. This article represents the opposite of what one would call quality journalism.

    Moreover, if it’s a private student Facebook group, who shut it down? Only the students running the group could shut it down. I wouldn’t be surprised if they shut it down after their personal lives have been so carelessly put on display here.

    1. Freedom of speech isn’t freedom from consequences. Anyone who makes blatantly racist comments like these women did shouldn’t be paid (or have their racist clubs financed) by the college.

    2. “it’s clear these are students venting personal issues and supporting each other ” … except for the ones who are staff members right?

  4. For a group [The Claremont Independent] that prides themselves on liberty, privacy, and the protection of fundamental human rights, this article is downright hypocritical… to say the very least. While a lecture on the pseudo-libertarian stances that you guys purport will likely be lost, it is important to recognize that your overall mission should apply equally to all peoples. If you want to protect liberty, if you want to preserve freedom of speech, **** if you want to really make an impact with your publication ethos and the work that you guys do, then INCLUSIVELY apply all your values and rhetoric for the defense of those principles…not only when they serve and justify your purpose. If another publication had infiltrated and deliberately attacked your repose, your safe-space, your liberty, then surely you wouldn’t be pleased. The issue at hand is one of respect for all people and their sacred right to freely congregate for WHATEVER THE **** THEY WANT insofar as it does not translate to harm for others. People need places to vent and surely you’d agree that collective governance, rather than imposed, coercive bureaucracy would be ideal… so don’t take it upon yourselves to be regulators of the internet, don’t take it upon yourselves to violate the rights that are integral to the success of prosocial interaction, don’t take it upon yourself to actively seek offense for the purpose of sabotaging the liberty of others. In fact, simply, don’t take it upon yourselves to **** on everything that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness stand for. Your actions are a microcosm of the blatant disregard that the American Civil Government has shown when it comes to the all-encompassing liberty and equality that is enshrined in the United States’ Constitution…the very disregard that, through a long chain of horrible and unfortunate practices, lead to the necessity of things like safe-spaces. To pull out an oldie but goodie: “actions speak louder than words”. Your rhetoric may be idealist in nature, it may speak to the preservation of everything that is sacred to the United States… but your actions, like that of the American Government, have been one of deliberately sabotaging its principles. So do yourself a favor and take a step back to evaluate how exactly you can reconcile your libertarian principles with your fascist actions…and if that fails, perhaps you can take solace in the fact that Martin Bormann is smiling up at you guys from 6-feet under.

    1. No on attacked this group’s liberty. They were free to write, the Independent was free to uncover it. Investigation doesn’t involve showing up at someone’s door and saying, “Hi, I’d like to look into those dirty secrects you’d like to keep hidden.” Investigative journalism involves – – wait for it – – investigation! Next time, instead of using a lot of words, try using a little logic. It works so much better.

    2. Criticism isn’t censorship you towering moron.

      Freedom of speech means freedom from government coercion, not freedom from consequence you jackass

    3. You are right – people can congregate or form clubs with anyone they like and say whatever they like – if they’ve paid for their clubs house or website or whatever else out with their own f…..g money.
      But once you start using funds that are provided by others, like taxpayers, then you have lost your right to avoid criticism or critique for your actions and words.

    4. As an African American and someone who leans libertarian, I have this to say to the writer on this subject.

      If you take school funds and use school property to meet, the school public or private has a right to deny you access to that space if it is uncovered that what are you engaging in amounts to racism and bigotry.

      If one wants to vent about race relations, then you do that away from social media or the web where it is likely that you will get caught by someone. Or if you anger a member of the group they will expose you to the public. Or someone infiltrates the group to see if the group is bigoted and racist or not. Commonsense tells you that.

      What is more interesting is that some of the same people have no problem when it comes to exposing white racism and white bigotry. You don’t want their names redacted. You want to expose the evil.

      Now as an African American, I know people of color who say very racist and bigoted things about each other and white people. I generally don’t hang around those people or try and make friends with them. But it is interesting to see what people think is acceptable under the guise viewing ones self as marginalized.

      Bigotry is bigotry. Racism is racism. You get caught and you lose your space on campus. You don’t get a pass. It’s called equal opportunity. So, deal with it. Don’t be a hypocrite. Don’t try an defend the indefensible.

    5. “If another publication had infiltrated and deliberately attacked your repose, your safe-space, your liberty, then surely you wouldn’t be pleased.”

      You are woefully ignorant of the most basic tenets of liberty. You are labouring under the impression that it is freedom from responsibility or consequences.

  5. I see no issue here (beyond the implied hypocrisy of the group). Any group should be allowed to discuss pretty whatever they want assuming there are direct threats. It goes both ways though — if a bunch of white dudes want to do the same, no one should try to police them.

  6. Safe to hate spaces should never be paid for by public dollars. And white male only spaces will be next as we regress fully to a pre-civil rights era. Thanks, SJWs.

  7. I am very happy that my 3 kids began university after age 22. As adults.
    The two older will begin their doctorates as parents themselves. But at least it means that they don’t get nursery school and higher education confused.

  8. To the student who hates her white parents, I hope they are made aware of this post and stop paying for her education. We’ll see how much she hates them then.

    1. I like the Independent generally but I find it in poor taste to mine facebook groups for a few distasteful comments made in private. I see the value of pointing out their hypocrisy, and can easily imagine the exaggerated reaction if it were a white male group doing something similar (probably extra therapists would be hired to help the students “process” it), but part of me still feels like it is petty and stooping to their level.

      1. There is a real world example from Canada.
        A group of male dentistry students had a private Facebook page where they made some crude remarks about fellow female students. Someone took screencaps and it was a national scandal with people calling for heads to roll.
        They never published the names of the men in spite of relentless pressure to do so but they were all booted out of dental school.

    2. They do. They’ll also get called out on it when they get caught out. Especially if they are dense enough to use their real names like this group of morons.

  9. Does nobody else question why the site would be shut down? If those who created it, participated in it, and admired it felt there was no wrong doing- why did they so quickly shut it down when it was identified as an issue? Generally most people, no matter the color or gender, react that quickly only when they too believe it to be bad. They could claim protection of those who use it- but as an admin of a group, it is your responsibility to maintain a level of decency that fits the purpose of the group. That level of expectations would prevent anyone from having to shut it down due to indecency or racism. That’s leadership 101. I feel for these girls, I do….but act like grown women and confront the issue with respect and real life responsibility. Spreading hatred solves nothing once you leave college and you will have missed the most important lesson of being fortunate enough to get to college…inclusion and learning to work with all types of people. There is no work place that will accept the types of recommendations that this site has offered as an acceptable way to act.

  10. People say all sorts of things among friends. However certain groups paint themselves as victims of various “isms” shouldn’t be so blatantly hypocritical in writing.

    This Facebook group demonstrates that people rarely walk the talk.

    I personally have not forgotten the video of Black women trying to shut an Asian woman up when she shared her own experiences of racist slurs hurled at her by black people. She dared to point out that intolerance exists everywhere.

    This 5C Women of Color group proved her point yet again.

    1. Don’t need to. They used them in a public space. Facebook is a quasi public place. There is zero expectation of privacy. I don’t have any expectation of privacy on any part of FB.

      It is naive to think so as well.

      1. If you had published the same article with the names removed, independents like me would have been on your side, and firmly against the racist language used.

        But you decided to take the low road. The names of the students involved are completely irrelevant to the substance of the piece.

        I was part of the CI during my time at CMC, and if this had happened while I was involved, I would have quit. I am embarrassed to have ever been part of the CI.

        1. If the names of students had not been published – the CI would have been accused of fabricating evidence or simply making up the story.

          As long as the CI gave these students the chance to respond to this story prior to publishing and/or gives them the opportunity to respond – I don’t see there being a substantial problem. The CI has been playing fast and loose with a few rules in a handful of recent stories – but it’s undeniable that what’s being reported is true. The fact that campus activists have been repeatedly using “ethics” as a red herring when confronted with their own unethical behavior is pretty telling.

          If professors, school administrators, politicians, or other students leaders said these kinds of things in a similar venue – I’d wager that not a single major national media organization would have given them a shroud of anonymity. So why should the “leaders” of social justice movements on campus be held to a lower standard of accountability?

          Heck, the inciting incident of all the recent events on campus were private images posted on Facebook. Activists on campus had no problem with making the identities of everyone there very public. If it’s acceptable to do that – what the CI did here is also acceptable. You can’t have it both ways.

        2. Surprisingly, after this article came out, I cut off all my involvement with the CI. I had been planning on leaving at the end of the year, but this was just too much.

          1. I don’t think one has an expectation of privacy when speaking to 1,100 people, regardless of funding.

            But why would a Facebook group need any funding? Aren’t such groups free? How much money was the group getting, and for what?

    2. Hi Lauren! Did the New York Times get permission to print the Pentagon Papers? Journalism isn’t predicated on getting permission, otherwise nothing would get published.

  11. If you had published the same article with the names removed, independents like me would have been on your side, and firmly against the racist language used.

    But you decided to take the low road. The names of the students involved are completely irrelevant to the substance of the piece.

    I was part of the CI during my time at CMC, and if this had happened while I was involved, I would have quit. I am embarrassed to have ever been part of the CI.

    1. The names were important, because many of them were leaders and staff members at local college resource centers, and safe spaces. It’s a glimpse into what we should expect to see at those places, especially those that are segregated.

  12. For those who are upset that at the exposure of members of the group as having racist opinions, making some privacy argument and the like, this is news. It was news when the FBI infiltrated the Klu Klux Klan. It’s been news every time a reporter infiltrates a neo-**** group. It’s news whenever an insider exposes a political candidate’s real attitudes about gender, race and ethnicity. It’s news whenever a politician is caught being nasty or hateful on a hot mic.
    Yes, any group of humans is going to have prejudices, there will be gender bias, racism, bigotry, sexism, all of it. Society has come to expect it from the constant bad actors, but those groups; whites, white males, conservatives, libertarians, middle class, parents, grandparents, Republicans, senior citizens, they’re all being vilified, butchered, drawn and quartered today on the college campus. And by egotistical groups of immature, know it all youngsters whose self-righteousness is supposedly anchored on moral high ground, unquestionable and irreproachable.
    But now it comes to light that they are not so holy, so pure, so spiritually clean as they present themselves to be. They are every bit as hateful, mean spirited, nasty and bigoted as any of the groups they preach against. Amazing, isn’t it, what a little light will expose. You hear it everywhere but you don’t listen.
    Welcome to the real world. Come out here to the world of 8-16 hour days, in hourly labor jobs to try and support someone besides yourself. If you can care about someone other than yourself. Having to swallow your pride and hold your tongue, just to hold on to that hourly wage job that pays the bills and puts food on the table. Welcome to the real world. Your home in the academic matrix is temporary. Unless you plan on dying before you’re sixty, you all have a long stretch of really bad days ahead of you in the real world. If there is any poetic justice in all this, it’ll be that college aged brats in your older days will be even more insensitive, intolerable and will hate you even more than you hate every else now.

    1. How do you compare people venting about things in their personal lives to scandals like Watergate, the KKK, and neo-**** groups? Has anybody bothered to ask exactly what the jokes made at the adopted student’s expense were? Were they racial in nature? Why was that comment made? Regardless of beliefs, good journalism would seek out the answer to those questions. The students comments are clearly in reaction to something.

      And if you think a student saying they hate having white parents in reaction to jokes made at their expense is comparable to organizations which without provocation routinely promoted hate in a public area and incited violence and murder against various minority groups (of which the student is a member), then you have no leg to stand on. Is this the best equivalence you can come up with? Are people not allowed to be angry about being treated poorly (presumably on the basis of race)? Is expressing your frustration with racism at the hands of a particular racial group the same thing as hating that racial group?

      And another question. Is hate the same thing as oppression? Look, I’m a woman. And I don’t care if men hate women, or if women hate men. What I care about is if one group goes about oppressing the other. And somehow I don’t think a bunch of college students venting about their personal lives are looking to set up a system of oppression for white people. In contrast to what KKK and neo-**** groups were aiming to do.

      1. Random reader, My answer to you is very simple. Imagine if these posts, instead of targeting white people, we’re written by white people and targeted blacks or Asians or some other group. Would they still be just “venting” in your opinion? Racism is racism, and pointing it out is a service to everyone.

      2. yeah i’m sure the white family who adopted an asian daughter is a bunch of racists that told her “finish your dinner or i’ll call FDR!”

      3. Some of the people quoted are staff members. Racist staff members running campus organizations seems pretty scandalous and relevant.

  13. Black women actively contributing to the systemic racism and violence rampant on campus. Oh the hypocrisy! Lol

  14. seriously disgusted at this article and the CI’s lack of ethical journalism. You’re not exposing a politician here, nor a scandal. you’re exposing people’s vulnerabilities. Many of whom expressed dealing with mental health struggles or simply expressing themselves in what they perceived to be a PRIVATE space.

    You weren’t expressing opinions here or proposing an alternative. You simply wanted to shame women of color. You guys should really be ashamed of yourselves.

    1. Vee,
      So if this was a bunch of white students railing against minorities, you’d still think this topic was off-limits?

    2. Some of those posting comments are staffers with an official college resource center evidencing clear and obvious racism and sexism, so yes it’s perfectly acceptable to expose their vileness just at it would be for any public employee.

    3. Facebook is public. Period. Anyone who expects privacy there is ignorant. That’s not an excuse. When you publicly air such vile hate expect it to come back and bite you in the *** simple.

      You are definitely right on one thing. Many of them are certainly mentally ill. It’s almost a necessity to belong to such a group.

    4. “You’re not exposing a politician here” … no they aren’t, but they are exposing racist staff members, which seems like it would be pretty damned relevant to the student body.

  15. And I’d also like to point out that the first people to colonize land that already ‘belonged’ to someone else were from Africa.

    Africans wiped out whole branches of the human family as they colonized the world.

    Funny how stuff like that always gets left out of ‘African Studies’ curriculums.

  16. In my lifetime I have been been privy to the massive hypocrisy
    of ****-ism, marxism, communism, maoism and of course the basis of all these, socialism. In 1962 I had the opportunity to ask a young German pilot ” what is the feeling in Germany now about Adolph Hitler?” The 23 year-old told of the very heated discussions he had had with his father re. Hitler. Finally the father spurted out”He gave us free lunches!” As a youngster I was aghast at the casual and minor justification to support such a obvious, admitted, published and apparent evil dictator. Unfortunately the youngsters of today have a very large gap in their understanding of the consequence and significance of WW2 thanks to the academic liberalism agenda. Imagine, at the end of WW2 had our leaders advocated “safe space” for those **** advocates desiring their free speech rights or regaining their”politically correct” gains of the 30’s and 40’s. We did learn that people can be conned, deceived and manipulated as long as the promises are grandiose enough and the true lessons of history are ignored (or omitted) . In case some of you have not noticed “safe space” has existed here ever since that famous massive compromise called the US constitution was hammered out 200+ years ago by people inspired by events even worse than those we ***** about today. Perhaps a moral guideline might be in order instead of the common admonition “that which furthers our cause is good, all else is bad”

  17. The user later added a caveat to her post by saying it’s OK to “make fun of white Americans” because “white people created #colonialism so i’m not mad.”

    Someone tell this simple ***** that colonialism is the reason she isn’t squatting in the African underbrush with a bone through her nose today, hiding out from feral, machete wielding jungle thugs who want to rape her and then pull out her entrails and strangle her with them. Instead, she’s here in whitey’s world, ******** about her lot in life on whitey’s social media platform, using whitey’s hand-held communications technology. Yeah, she got such a raw deal. Maybe she should be accommodated with a one-way plane ticket to Rapeandmurderville, Uganda.

  18. The truth is that every race and culture are more blatantly xenophobic than white people these days. Identity politics consist of nothing more than a particular group wanting to be recognized by powers that be in their life, or wanting to suppress influence from foreign cultures/races (except white people do less of the latter). If it wasn’t for that, groups would basically avoid each other. Since white people constructed much of western society, it’s institutions, etc. then they are usually being attacked for not hiring or including.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *