How "liberal" became a dirty word

[TitanTiger 20,542]

Campus ‘activism’ redefined

By Michael Graham | Thursday, April 3, 2008 | http://www.bostonherald.com | Op-Ed

Oh, to be a campus activist now that spring is here.

“Campus activist” is what the Boston Globe-Democrat calls the students pushing for coed dorm rooms at colleges across the country. Not just coed dorms, floors or even suites. One room, two beds, a boy and a girl.

As Dr. Frankenstein said just before he threw the switch, “What could possibly go wrong?”

More than 30 colleges and universities, including Dartmouth, Clark, Brown, and Brandeis have coed dorm room policies. This is part of the academic Left’s commitment to social justice, the battle against heteronormative bias, and a way for guys who look like Michael Moore to get a smokin’ hot roommate.

Not surprisingly, enlightened, socially progressive college males are giving this policy a resounding “Yeah, baby!”

This movement is led by the National Student Genderblind Campaign, which insists that colleges without gender-neutral housing are “heterosexist, oppressive, and anti-affirmative.”

“Heterosexist” means you think men and women are different. “Oppressive” means you won’t leave them alone in a dorm room long enough to prove you right.

“Anti-affirmative?” I think that means you’re not voting for Hillary. Or maybe Barack.

Note that all these schools already have coed dorms. They place very few restrictions on male and female mingling on campus.

But liberal academics aren’t content with coupling. They’re demanding cohabitation to make their point that acknowledging gender differences is, in and of itself, a form of oppression.

What oppression, you ask? Who’s being harmed by a same-sex roommate policy, you wonder? Isn’t this just asking for trouble?

You, sir, are clearly demonstrating misogynist, crypto-fascist tendencies.

Either that, or you have a daughter in college.

To every self-described progressive who blames conservative talk show hosts for making “liberal” a dirty word, I refer you to this story. Liberalism isn’t the victim of the Vast, Right-Wing Conspiracy. Its reputation has been ruined by its own loony adherents who promote ideas that fly in the face of common sense.

Seriously, is there any part of this idea that doesn’t scream “stupid” to every grownup who hears it? The campus advocates of this idiocy admit right up front that they believe there is no meaningful difference between the sexes.

“Among millennial students, whether it’s race, gender, or nationality, the borders are coming down,” James Baumann of the Association of College and University Housing Officers told the Globe. “The lines just aren’t there anymore.”

Get it? College kids don’t even notice each other’s sex anymore. That line has been erased, the gender-neutral utopia is here, hallelujah!

Why, if Angelina Jolie walked across the Brown campus naked today, the reaction would be “Who’s the lumpy guy with the big lips?”

Yeah, right.

The Knee Jerk Brigade of the Massachusetts Left want to turn issues like this into a debate over human sexuality. Sexual liberty is the only form of liberty still in vogue among campus liberals. The same people who would happily ban all gun ownership and impose speech codes will fight to the death defending your “right” to carnal knowledge.

But when liberals insist that college kids are going to have sex anyway - roommates or not - they are undermining their own “gender-neutral” nonsense.

Normal people understand that boys and girls are different, and that common sense dictates they be treated differently as a result.

And to quote that great French philosopher, Maurice Chevalier, “Vive le difference!”

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/o...amp;format=text

[WinCrimson 61]

Liberal became a dirty word because Dartmouth has co-ed dorm room assignments? I don't think that's a link you can draw.

I would think conservatives would be all for it. Would they not see this as an opportunity to force "young'ens" to learn personal responsibility and encourage the acceptance of heteronormativity?

Sarcasm aside, I wouldn't want my daughter living with a random male at college, either. I know a few too many to trust them -- with a girl across the room or concealed carry on campus.

[TitanTiger 20,542]

Liberal became a dirty word because Dartmouth has co-ed dorm room assignments? I don't think that's a link you can draw.

No, this is just one illustration of why. As the article said:

Liberalism isn’t the victim of the Vast, Right-Wing Conspiracy. Its reputation has been ruined by its own loony adherents who promote ideas that fly in the face of common sense.

It's not because of co-ed rooms. It's because of the mindset that leads to thinking co-ed room assignments are needed because without gender-neutral housing, colleges are being “heterosexist, oppressive, and anti-affirmative.”

I swear some of these groups must require a frontal lobotomy to join them.

[Tigermike 3,078]

Liberalism isn’t the victim of the Vast, Right-Wing Conspiracy. Its reputation has been ruined by its own loony adherents who promote ideas that fly in the face of common sense.

Liberalism has also been ruined by their deep seated need to acquiesce to any and all who have a grievance, real or imagined.

The decision by Harvard University to ban men from one of its gyms so that women -- especially Muslim women , would be a good example.

[WinCrimson 61]

Liberal became a dirty word because Dartmouth has co-ed dorm room assignments? I don't think that's a link you can draw.

No, this is just one illustration of why. As the article said:

Liberalism isn’t the victim of the Vast, Right-Wing Conspiracy. Its reputation has been ruined by its own loony adherents who promote ideas that fly in the face of common sense.

It's not because of co-ed rooms. It's because of the mindset that leads to thinking co-ed room assignments are needed because without gender-neutral housing, colleges are being “heterosexist, oppressive, and anti-affirmative.”

I swear some of these groups must require a frontal lobotomy to join them.

I understood, Titan. I just get tired of the word "liberal" being attached to anything and everything by the right in an attempt to avoid thinking about the merits of an argument.

Why is "liberal" or "conservative" attached to an issue as trivial and non-political as dorm room assignments? It has absolutely nothing to do with liberalism and conservatism. Conservative isn't automatically wholesome and liberal isn't automatically evil.

For what it's worth, I actually think we agree here. I don't think there is anything oppressive about dorm room assignments. If that ever existed, it was solved when most universities roomed males and females on the same floor.

[autiger4life 3]

I think the problem arises when we lump together main stream liberals and very liberals just like we sometimes lump together mainstream conservatives, and very conservative people. Examples would be, people for a reducement of troops or a timetable for withdrawal in Iraq(mainstream liberal) and the idiots at Berkely(very crazy Liberal) but instead they are given the same title when 90% of liberals wouldn't agree with them. Just like on the other side you have the Jesus Camp conservatives(some crazy conservatives) and then you have Bush(mainstream conservative). It just seems it is used with liberals a lot more, but it happens on both sides and there should be seperate groups.

[OldNewby 27]

While we all live on a sphere, I view the political spectrum as rather flat. Individuals and groups too far liberal or conservative are teetering on the edge. I consider myself slightly right of moderate socially, and fairly far right fiscally.

XL----------L----------M----------C----------XC

[TitanTiger 20,542]

I understood, Titan. I just get tired of the word "liberal" being attached to anything and everything by the right in an attempt to avoid thinking about the merits of an argument.

Why is "liberal" or "conservative" attached to an issue as trivial and non-political as dorm room assignments? It has absolutely nothing to do with liberalism and conservatism. Conservative isn't automatically wholesome and liberal isn't automatically evil.

For what it's worth, I actually think we agree here. I don't think there is anything oppressive about dorm room assignments. If that ever existed, it was solved when most universities roomed males and females on the same floor.

I will bet you a year's salary that the people who think that any college not having co-ed dorm room assignments are "heterosexist, oppressive and anti-affirmative" are liberals. That sort of thinking emanates from uber-liberal quarters like stink from a skunk. Conservatives don't even toss around terms like "heteronormative" as some pejorative for the way normal people think.

Again, not saying all people who call themselves liberal agree with these knotheads. But the thinking itself is liberal thinking and comes from liberal wackos.

[WinCrimson 61]

I think the problem arises when we lump together main stream liberals and very liberals just like we sometimes lump together mainstream conservatives, and very conservative people. Examples would be, people for a reducement of troops or a timetable for withdrawal in Iraq(mainstream liberal) and the idiots at Berkely(very crazy Liberal) but instead they are given the same title when 90% of liberals wouldn't agree with them. Just like on the other side you have the Jesus Camp conservatives(some crazy conservatives) and then you have Bush(mainstream conservative). It just seems it is used with liberals a lot more, but it happens on both sides and there should be seperate groups.

Speaking my language, bro. If those with an agenda would put down the stereotype that all conservative Republicans are clones of Fred Phelps and all liberals bow to Jane Fonda. An end to the politics of cynicism and generalizations would be a big help.

Titan, so what if they are liberals? That's not the point. Should I start painting all Republicans and Christians with the same brush as I would the Westboro Baptist Church? It'd be more than unfair for me to view those whackos in the same light as I would the Republican Party. I know too many good people, as misinformed as I think they are politically, to do that in good conscience. I could highlight Phelps' crusades and attempt to paint every conservative as some try to paint every liberal as a Berkeley radical, but that's just not fair to either side.

I'll put it like this -- Do you think that those protesting soldier funerals in the name of Christ are accurate cross sections over conservative ideology? I highly doubt it. I honestly don't care either way and have no axe to grind. I'm just looking for your input.

George Wallace, Orval Faubus, Ross Barnett, and James Eastland made "liberal" a dirty term and did so to choke the civil rights movement. Limbaugh, Coulter, Malkin, and the rest of their ilk owe them big time.

[TexasTiger 13,136]

Yes, there are "liberal wackos." There are also conservative wackos. The big difference is that the conservative wackos are more likely to get elected in conservative areas while the liberal wackos who get cited on this board and other conservative media usually aren't even politicians at any meaningful level. What the right has done very effectively is conflating a few extremists with mainstream democrats. On the right, the extremist have now become the mainstream Republicans. That's why McCain is viewed as "moderate." He's a very conservative guy who sometimes rejects the orthodoxy.

I understood, Titan. I just get tired of the word "liberal" being attached to anything and everything by the right in an attempt to avoid thinking about the merits of an argument.

Why is "liberal" or "conservative" attached to an issue as trivial and non-political as dorm room assignments? It has absolutely nothing to do with liberalism and conservatism. Conservative isn't automatically wholesome and liberal isn't automatically evil.

For what it's worth, I actually think we agree here. I don't think there is anything oppressive about dorm room assignments. If that ever existed, it was solved when most universities roomed males and females on the same floor.

I will bet you a year's salary that the people who think that any college not having co-ed dorm room assignments are "heterosexist, oppressive and anti-affirmative" are liberals. That sort of thinking emanates from uber-liberal quarters like stink from a skunk. Conservatives don't even toss around terms like "heteronormative" as some pejorative for the way normal people think.

Again, not saying all people who call themselves liberal agree with these knotheads. But the thinking itself is liberal thinking and comes from liberal wackos.

[Tigermike 3,078]

So who is pushing the agenda for the dims? It's certainly not the moderates in the dem party. As for all those lib wackos cited here who "usually aren't even politicians at any meaningful level", I would agree about Pelosi, Kennedy, Kerry, Reid and Murtha. For the most part they are not meaningful, I mean relevant. I mean worthy of mention.

Yes the Republicians have done a good job of pointing out just how liberal dims are. But for the most part lib dims have done that all on their own. I would also say that the far left has subverted what it really means to be a liberal.

Yes, there are "liberal wackos." There are also conservative wackos. The big difference is that the conservative wackos are more likely to get elected in conservative areas while the liberal wackos who get cited on this board and other conservative media usually aren't even politicians at any meaningful level. What the right has done very effectively is conflating a few extremists with mainstream democrats. On the right, the extremist have now become the mainstream Republicans. That's why McCain is viewed as "moderate." He's a very conservative guy who sometimes rejects the orthodoxy.

I understood, Titan. I just get tired of the word "liberal" being attached to anything and everything by the right in an attempt to avoid thinking about the merits of an argument.

Why is "liberal" or "conservative" attached to an issue as trivial and non-political as dorm room assignments? It has absolutely nothing to do with liberalism and conservatism. Conservative isn't automatically wholesome and liberal isn't automatically evil.

For what it's worth, I actually think we agree here. I don't think there is anything oppressive about dorm room assignments. If that ever existed, it was solved when most universities roomed males and females on the same floor.

I will bet you a year's salary that the people who think that any college not having co-ed dorm room assignments are "heterosexist, oppressive and anti-affirmative" are liberals. That sort of thinking emanates from uber-liberal quarters like stink from a skunk. Conservatives don't even toss around terms like "heteronormative" as some pejorative for the way normal people think.

Again, not saying all people who call themselves liberal agree with these knotheads. But the thinking itself is liberal thinking and comes from liberal wackos.

[TexasTiger 13,136]

And exactly what agenda are those folks you mention "pushing" that most Americans disagree with?

So who is pushing the agenda for the dims? It's certainly not the moderates in the dem party. As for all those lib wackos cited here who "usually aren't even politicians at any meaningful level", I would agree about Pelosi, Kennedy, Kerry, Reid and Murtha. For the most part they are not meaningful, I mean relevant. I mean worthy of mention.

Yes the Republicians have done a good job of pointing out just how liberal dims are. But for the most part lib dims have done that all on their own. I would also say that the far left has subverted what it really means to be a liberal.

Yes, there are "liberal wackos." There are also conservative wackos. The big difference is that the conservative wackos are more likely to get elected in conservative areas while the liberal wackos who get cited on this board and other conservative media usually aren't even politicians at any meaningful level. What the right has done very effectively is conflating a few extremists with mainstream democrats. On the right, the extremist have now become the mainstream Republicans. That's why McCain is viewed as "moderate." He's a very conservative guy who sometimes rejects the orthodoxy.

I understood, Titan. I just get tired of the word "liberal" being attached to anything and everything by the right in an attempt to avoid thinking about the merits of an argument.

Why is "liberal" or "conservative" attached to an issue as trivial and non-political as dorm room assignments? It has absolutely nothing to do with liberalism and conservatism. Conservative isn't automatically wholesome and liberal isn't automatically evil.

For what it's worth, I actually think we agree here. I don't think there is anything oppressive about dorm room assignments. If that ever existed, it was solved when most universities roomed males and females on the same floor.

I will bet you a year's salary that the people who think that any college not having co-ed dorm room assignments are "heterosexist, oppressive and anti-affirmative" are liberals. That sort of thinking emanates from uber-liberal quarters like stink from a skunk. Conservatives don't even toss around terms like "heteronormative" as some pejorative for the way normal people think.

Again, not saying all people who call themselves liberal agree with these knotheads. But the thinking itself is liberal thinking and comes from liberal wackos.