>"The medical research industries attempts to remove the terms Male and Female from research language"

edited for clarity, thanks

Or... people who have no interest in having a good faith argument realize they can get publicity by getting protested at a liberal college and run full steam ahead with the plan.

The idea that colleges are places were 'discussions of difficult topic's can['t] happen' continues to be a stupid position. Most of the time it's people who are insisting that 1+1 does not equal 2 and then get annoyed that the person who has dedicated their life to math doesn't feel like spending their time fruitlessly explaining that it always has and always will equal 2.

Note: the podcast hosts said they were canceling the event themselves. Not Dartmouth.

Semantics. Dartmouth forced them to cancel by pulling the rug out from them 5 days before the event.

There's also the fact that by giving these people a platform attached to Dartmouth they help legitimize their position. These chumps could go on to say 'I have a well attended talk on this topic at Dartmouth,' which will give it an air of legitimacy that it does not deserve. These folks aren't being silenced or cancelled, they just aren't being handed a microphone from a college that doesn't feel like they're worth the trouble and headache.

I love that a Harvard evolutionary biologist talking about the biology of male and female is summarily dismissed as "these chumps" 😂

Your headline said Dartmouth canceled it. It didn't. Dartmouth canceling suits your narrative, the hosts doing it doesn't.

Yes. Well there are 666 floors of fright - they are not always going to be winners.

Look at then occasional fucknut in some election that touts his MIT or Wharton degree. Every once in a while madness takes it’s toll…

Again, it is semantics. The agreement was that they were doing the show in partnership with a student group and it was open to the public with no other restrictions. The student group was then removed as sponsor, the college restricted access to students only after tickets were sold and required an opening speech from someone with no association with the event. I believe they also said they would require all questions to be pre-screened. For all intents and purposes they forced the cancellation by adding all the changes.

I'm sorry, is your position that colleges are coddled playpens or do you believe that every member of faculty at a prestigious university knows best? Pick a lane buddy.

This person isn't new to the game and has been repeated corrected by many people in their field.

Dartmouth did not cancel the event. The attendees cancelled the event themselves.

This headline is BULLSHIT and was written for this purpose:

> it just ended up confirming what most of us know,

It sure does. Shitty liars lie about facts to push their agenda.

Also, Masterpiece may be lousy law, but it is LAW. A private institution is under no obligation to provide service (or space) to any individual. If your problem is that PRIVATE "colleges don't discuss" take it up with 5/9ths of the Supreme Court.

Again, semantics. Also - the College can do what it wants. The point is, they wanted to host the event until they did not want to host the event. If no one had filed for a protest no one would have even known the event had happened as the podcast has been doing live events in various locations for the last month with zero incident aside from people having an enjoyable night out.

Dartmouth cancels live event due to fear of protesters rioters.

Nothing has to be shut down for fear of protesters. They peacefully do their demonstration thingy while normal life goes on. It's called freedom of speech.

Dartmouth is bowing down to rioters. So, instead of being ruled by law, they are giving in to evil and chaos.

Grow a set. Allow the event. If someone tries to do something violent, they get arrested.

Honestly, colleges haven’t been a place for open discussion for years now. I went to a Massachusetts state school, and it was a one sided education.

I had to write papers a certain way to make sure I got the grade. Other opinions were graded lower.

Now I’m no MAGA Republican, not even close, but I can recognize that what colleges are doing right now is creating an even further divide in the country by only teaching one side of things.

There are issues which are right and wrong, 100%. But you have to at least be willing to hear someone else’s opinion, and colleges don’t allow for that anymore.

It’s not just semantics. Your title is wrong. But, you are right that this event is ultimately being cancelled because academia is flooded with people who cannot handle opposing views on emotional topics.

>Again, it is semantics. The agreement was that they were doing the show in partnership with a student group and it was open to the public with no other restrictions. The student group was then removed as sponsor, the college restricted access to students only after tickets were sold and required an opening speech from someone with no association with the event. I believe they also said they would require all questions to be pre-screened. For all intents and purposes they forced the cancellation by adding all the changes.

I could not disagree more about it being semantics, this would be a major piece of information.

> Again, it is semantics.

Semantics is meaning. When you say it is semantics, you are saying it is meaning. Yes, the meaning of some words is correct, and the meaning of some other words is incorrect. Meanings matter. When you say it is semantics, you are acknowledging that what you said is incorrect and what the other person said is correct.

Your definition of semantics is weird. One might say 100% wrong.

Think of it like this - you booked a wedding for 200 people with a band, food vendor and cake vendor. Five days before the wedding, the venue calls to tell you the guest limit is changed to 50 people only, you cannot have a band or your own food vendor but they will provide a DJ and food from their own vendor, take it or leave it. Of course you are going to walk away. Technically you cancelled but for all intents the venue put in so many restrictions it forced your hand. It is no different.

Nothing bad EVER happens at Dartmouth…

Report this dumb ass post for misinformation.

>Report this dumb ass post for misinformation.

I love that I'm being reported for posting about the "Blocked and Reported" podcast 😂

I see your point but lets take it a step further, what is your remedy? Force a private institution to hold an event? That seems like a bad precedent.

The difference is that you pay for the wedding space. Are these hosts paying to host a show, being paid to host a show, or was it free to host/attend? Kinda make a difference in this comparison.

Please give any evidence that there were rioters at Dartmouth. You have all the time you need to provide this evidence. Seriously... take a year. I'll wait for your completely unsubstantiated position to fizzle into nothing. You ask for them to grow a set, well perhaps grow up a bit and don't spread malicious rumors. Part of being an adult is telling the truth, and if you don't have the information needed to do so don't speak up.

Let’s be honest, they shut it down because they’re afraid of the lunatics on the left coming to destroy their campus. That is all there’s nothing else. This is the reason.

Or perhaps they're tired of this attention seeking bullshit. You don't see Planned Parenthood complaining that the Catholic Church won't host their lecture series on safe sex and abortion access. College's have widely taken the position that they respect the science around this issue and will provide a campus where people are free from harassment and belittlement. Just because they aren't welcoming people into their homes to attack people who live there (yes colleges are literally homes for their students) they aren't saying the conversation can't be had, they're just saying 'this isn't going to be your forum today.'

"Attack". And there's the problem.

I hear this complaint all the time, and consistently it's not because the student was arguing against the point, it was because they never bothered to figure out the point that the faculty member was trying to make. Most don't care if you disagree with them, but they get annoyed when students spout off about their views being ignored while not making even half an effort to understand the positions being taken by the readings. Sorry, but you're writing papers that show an understanding of the course materials not an op-ed for the newspaper. Some students seem incapable of understanding this.

Liberals: doing everything they can to get viewpoints they don't agree with cancelled.

"You must not be allowed to hear that message!"

I did hear that rioters were being bused up from NYC to burn down Hanover. But seriously, what sort of delusional world are you living in? This is a stupid position.

It's very ironic that in a post about alleged journalists, there is misinformation in why the event was actually cancelled.

Attendees cancelled. Not the school.

No, I understand that the college can pretty much do what they want when it comes to on campus events. I guess I'd say in this case, given how close it was to the event that the college should have stayed the course, added some extra security and then saw how it went. I suspect it would have been a big nothing burger as the show is really more about internet bullshit and the impact that cancel culture has on people who have been subjected to it. They are pretty vocal about trans issues but they are more in the Bill Maher school versus coming from a right wing or hateful perspective. Hell one of the hosts is a lesbian van lifer. If that is not enough street cred for coming to Dartmouth, I dont know what is.

This isn’t very true. In a Political Science class, for instance, you’re not writing about your understanding as much as your opinion on a subject. A history class may ask you to write an opinion on the use of the atomic bomb in WWII. That’s an opinion piece you back with facts (to show you understand the material). But if you disagree with the professors view on the topic, good luck!

It’s why college is largely a waste in my opinion. Get real world experience, even in fields like engineering or teaching or business, and get the professors out of it. They are there to push a narrative at many schools, and have a holier than thou attitude.

“When I’m attacked you’re wrong, when I’m attacking I’m right”.

You've dismissed the core of what I said and focused on one thing which I will stand behind. When you go to someone's place of habitation to tell them that you don't respect them it is an attack.

I thought you were for discussion of complex and emotional issues as you don't see them occurring on campuses. Or perhaps you think you are but aren't exactly sure how to start? There are some fantastic courses at universities that could help you with that.

I explain the background in the original post, Quite frankly people wanting to split hairs over whether Dartmouth cancelled the event or whether BARPod cancelled are just fixating on that point so they can side step the actual issue. The point is don't schedule an event and then force its cancellation due to adding a bunch of unreachable stipulations because you all of a sudden got nervous over a few potential protesters. This is an ivy league institution that apparently has no checks and balances, or consistent policies in place for events or speakers. Its a joke and we are all suppose to hold this school up as the premier institute of education in the area. They should be embarrassed.

actually I said- "Fear of rioters"

If you want to invent things that I never said, then it's all you. You can provide evidence for your fantasy.

Just FYI protesting is an exercise of 1st amendment rights.

If I say I have the opinion that there are two genders (male and female), is that an attack on someone who says they identify as neither male nor female?

"Semantics" as a response to "YOU LIED" is a valid response for this loser because truth does not matter - service to the agenda matters.

In this case, the OP is getting the "I got cancelled!" tale OP desired. It'll get fed back to the podcast, the podcast might mention OP, and then OP will get a dopamine rush of social acceptance (and make a Randy Marsh-ian mess of his keyboard). It's all very sad when you understand the 'point' of these posts: validation and attention for a starveling.

OP ignores the law because OP isn't incelligent enough to even know what Masterpiece is or why "their side" wanted it. And it's garbage law. But it is the law and it makes this whole whiny spectacle even more pathetic. Even if what OP lies about were true, it'd still be what OP's allies wanted.

Fuck liars. Or something semantically similar.

You: "Dartmouth cancels live event..."

Jesse Singal and Katie Herzog: "We've Cancelled Our Dartmouth Show"

Someone's lying here, both can't be true. Unless someone changed the rules of the English language and forget to tell me.

This has nothing to do with the govt so 1st amendment doesn’t apply

I completely agree with you. Anyone who doesn’t want to support the truth should have their platforms taken away. It’s just wasting everyone’s time. We shouldn’t have to fund theories that don’t support the majority of agreed upon science either!

The original poster is saying that the rules changed to such an extent they could not be met. Like changing the definition of a Recession to say you are not in a Recession.

I don't see how paying for it matters but you are right in that I don't think there was a contract in place. So assume the venue for the wedding in my example is at a friends backyard for no cost. Same theory applies.

They canceled due to a complex change in the rules, so much so they could not meet them and chose to cancel instead. It's the new way to say "It wasn't us, it was them". Like changing the definition of Recession.

Oh, does that podcast lie like you do? Is that why it "gets blocked and reported?" Ho ho, so much for the tolerant left AMIRITE?!?!?1!!

Show many any evidence that Dartmouth should fear rioters. There is still none. You are trying to walk on water and claiming that because there's a surface it's solid.

When you go to their home to do so in an attempt to stir shit and belittle them. Yes, it is. You see, context matters.

Lol. Adding giant assumptions apparently matters for you.

Your use of 'majority of agreed upon science' is a convincing argument that you don't understand science. Additionally, you are far less clever, ironic, or pointed than you think you are being. It's not about taking platforms away it's about not having to provide them to people who are bad faith actors. Much like your argument above, you aren't actually trying to think deeply about the issue but rather mock the very serious and complex question. Which... is basically what these stupid fucking content creators were looking to do. Whenever someone claims that they can't have an intelligent debate on campus they have always demonstrated resistance to seeing the other side's position, remained ignorant of the materials surrounding the issue, and really are just hoping to get cell phone footage that can be spun for 15 minutes on fox news and a little fawning over at CPAC next year.

They just want to fixate on the details of why the event was cancelled. Its obvious it was the college just putting in roadblocks to force it. The point is a college committed to having an event that they then forced a cancellation for because they feared some kind of pushback.

LOL. The evidence is above.

Just FYI protesting peacefully without breaking any laws sounds great.

Demanding that others not hear the message of the opposing viewpoint isn't protesting.

The 1st amendment entitles you to be free of persecution from the govt for holding and expressing your opinion.

It doesn't allow you to block traffic, entrance to buildings, pull fire alarms.

When you think that others shouldn't be able to simply hear a viewpoint, then you should check yourself.

Sure, Dartmouth as a private institution can allow or bar anyone from discussing anything, but if one is going to claim that 'liberals' are 'cancelling' viewpoints by expressing contrary viewpoints then a reminder that all expressions are equally protected seems appropriate.

>Demanding that others not hear the message of the opposing viewpoint isn't protesting.

Sure it is. Enforcing a ban, for example by physically attacking people trying to attend, would cross the line from protesting to assault.

While I find it massively obnoxious that rightwing religious nutjobs conduct perpetual protests at abortion clinics, demanding that women not get abortions, I recognize that it is their right to conduct such protests. Wouldn't you agree?

Attempting to prevent, by breaking laws, whether successful or not... others from hearing the opposing viewpoint, is unacceptable.

You can have your opinion. You can organize your own public speaking event at the school to express your viewpoint. You can stand to the side and not impede others from entering the building, just like the anti abortionists are required to, and shout till your heart is content, without breaking any laws, and be free from persecution by the govt.

If you glue yourself to the doors, pull fire alarms, call in threats, or, like many loony liberals do: assault, throw concrete milkshakes, etc -- you should be arrested and prosecuted.

You are either openly dishonest to other, or both others and yourself. But you're trying to conjure a reality that doesn't exist. There is no fear of rioters on Dartmouth campus and there hasn't been. Conversely a middle age racist did try to start shit with some foreign students recently. They mostly remained calm.

OK. But none of that happened here. In fact it was the event organization itself that cancelled the event. No assaults occurred, no protest happened. It wasn't even Dartmouth that cancelled. These snowflakes decided that there was more to be gained by playing the victim than by presenting their shitty case for bigotry.

In both history and political science you are not writing your opinion. You are creating a fact based argument, something which is very different from an opinion and needs to show a full grasp of the arguments others have made in the readings. If you approach it from the angle of writing your opinion you are going to end up with a badly written assignment. I'm sorry that this was not made clear to you, but it's an important distinction.

I strongly disagree that college is a waste, but will agree that there are other options and that it shouldn't serve as the roadblock to employment that it currently does. However, for the careers you outlined both teaching and engineering are going to require a base knowledge that is best learned in the classroom before real world experience makes the needed impact. If you've ever worked with an engineer you would know that they don't have the time to cover 101 topics with every new hire because they never learned it in school.

There are many issues with universities and colleges that need to be addressed and our path from school to work needs to be cleaned up. There is so much space here for compromise. But unfortunately the arguments around what happens at institutes of higher education are too often made from a position of ignorance or bad faith which prevents us from even being able to start discussing how we could re-imagine it's relationship to society & work. People need to put in the minimal effort needed to understand how and why colleges are an invaluable resource before they can start to dismantle why they're also kinda fucked up. Like the papers you wrote in college and did poorly on, it should start with understanding the position you are against.

Funny, I didn’t do poorly. I graduated at the top of the class. I appreciate you making the assumption.

I also said you are writing an opinion, BACKED WITH FACTS. In these classes you aren’t just writing facts. Anyone can regurgitate facts on a page. It’s an opinion piece typically backed with facts.

Read the entire comment before you make yourself look bad next time.

You are just being a disingenuous. Dartmouth forced the cancellation of the event by adding insurmountable roadblocks. If the original logistics had been allowed by Dartmouth the event would have proceeded. Why do think it is justified that Dartmouth limits the event to students only when they had previously said it was okay for the public to attend? Why do you think it is acceptable to screen questions? Why would they want to insert an unaffiliated speaker ahead of the event? None of that makes any sense unless you look at it from the perspective of wanting to force the event organizers into not coming.

I'm sorry, so you weren't penalized for writing opinion pieces, or that top graduates in your class didn't do well in their courses? I'm just trying to figure out what you are saying.

But whatever it is... I'm not sure you're interested in a good faith debate and would rather just keep shitting on things you don't understand despite my holding out a huge fucking olive branch to you in the above response. You seem kinda like snowflake who can't take a little criticism or engage in a real discussion. Colleges can be rough for people who are used to be coddled.

There’s some serious boomer speak if I have ever seen it. I’ll get off your lawn - but I’m doing just fine, thank you. College just didn’t do a damn thing for me or many others.

Ok George Orwell lmao I think you missed the meaning in 1984