According to Andrew J. Rotherham, safe spaces are doing no good to college students in the world. In his U.S News &World Report article- Safe Spaces Shield College Students From Real-World Challenges- Rotherham claims that instead of challenging themselves with seeing a different view point, students are running to a fairy tale bubble of comfort. The author feels that in addition to the safe spaces colleges have changed "where students can gravitate toward courses the reinforce rather than challenge their worldview."
"Elsewhere on campus, there is debate about whether words are violence-and not hate speech or threats, nor the kind of speech already exempt from First Amendment protection, but rather if simply exposing students to ideas they find offensive, or worse, constitutes violence." Rotherham continues stating that Middlebury students are encouraged by this kind of attitude to assault a professor and disrupt a planned talk. (Transition to Reaction) Rotherham says something that shocks me and finally causes a reaction: "The instinct to protect students is borne of good intentions."
(Reaction) The line reminded me of the saying the road to hell is paved with good intentions. It's one of my favorite aphorisms as …show more content…
"A majority of students do not actively endorse safe spaces on campuses, according to a recently released study." The leading statement of the piece leaves me feeling a bit mislead as I read it. Willis makes the result sound final; Students do not want safe spaces at all. However, this is simply not the case- Willis felt to better accent her point to add those who didn’t want the space with those didn't care one way or the other. Only thirty-seven percent thought the spaces were unnecessary. One percent off of those who thought the spaces were absolutely needed. This left twenty-five percent to be