seen from Indonesia
seen from Indonesia
seen from Israel
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from China
seen from Israel
seen from China
seen from China
seen from China
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from Norway
seen from United States
seen from India
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
Critical Theory: Why the Argument Suddenly Becomes About You
Have you ever held your tongue during an otherwise friendly conversation because you could see exactly what would happen if you spoke your mind? Not because you lacked an answer, but because answering would transform the conversation into a trial of your character. Scope note: Critical Theory is a diverse and disputed intellectual tradition. This essay offers a broad introduction to a recurring…
View On WordPress
I can believe the following things simultaneously about noncon kink/fiction:
A) I am categorically and universally opposed to censorship of fiction. I am categorically and universally opposed to restrictions on what consenting adults do with their own bodies and those of other consenting adults. I am categorically and universally opposed to pathologization and the social construct of “mental illness.”
If the question is “Should this form of kink/fiction be censored?” my answer will always be no, because I am always opposed to censorship of fiction. If the question is “Should people be prevented from acting out this kink/roleplay/etc because it’s ‘bad for them’?” my answer will always be no, because I am always opposed to infringements of bodily autonomy. If the question is “Should this form of kink/roleplay/fiction/etc be considered ‘mentally unwell’ or should the people who do it be told that they ‘need therapy’?” my answer will always be no, because I am always opposed to pathologization.
2) I am entirely aware that fiction is not reality, consensual roleplay is not violence, and CNC is not assault. However, if the topic isn’t related to fiction/kink/roleplay, and you bring up your desire to violate someone else’s boundaries, people are going to be mad at you. People including me. I understand perfectly well that playing Grand Theft Auto doesn’t mean you’re going to shoot someone in real life. But if we’re not talking about Grand Theft Auto, if we’re talking about taking a walk on the beach, and you say “I’m going to shoot you,” I’m going to say “What the fuck? That’s a fucked up thing to say,” and if you respond with “It’s FICTION, it’s ROLEPLAY, it’s not REAL, can’t you tell the difference between FICTION and REALITY?” you are, at best, being hella rude. I understand perfectly well that people who like dark romance with rape scenes aren’t rapists in real life. But if we’re not talking about dark romance, we’re talking about getting a smoothie, and you say “I want to rape you,” our social interaction is over.
iii) If you talk about wanting to violate someone’s boundaries, your defense cannot simultaneously be “It’s kink/fiction/a joke” and “It’s okay to violate their boundaries in this context because it’s good for them.” Those are mutually incompatible defenses. Is it just pretend, or is it actual nonconsensual violence “for their own good”? Trying both of those mutually incompatible defenses at once makes me doubt that it really is pretend for you, actually. It makes me think you actually do want to do nonconsensual violence you think is okay “for people’s own good,” and are just hiding behind “it’s kink/ it’s fiction/ it’s just a joke (except it’s not)” as deflection. Feeding isn't my kink. I don't care if it's yours. You do you. Write your force-feeding fantasy to your heart's content, by all means. I never want to read it. If you threaten to force-feed me, I will hurt you. If you threaten to force-feed me and justify it as "for my own good," you are my enemy for life.
The sixth annual College Free Speech Rankings show a continued decline in support for free speech among all students, but particularly conse
By: Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression
Published: Sep 9, 2025
Claremont McKenna takes the top spot, while Barnard College, Columbia University, and Indiana University come in last.
166 of the 257 schools surveyed got an F for their speech climate.
For the first time ever, a majority of students would prevent speakers from both the left and right who express controversial views, ranging from abortion to transgender issues, from stepping foot on campus.
WASHINGTON, D.C., Sept. 9, 2025 – If America’s colleges could earn report cards for free speech friendliness, most would deserve an “F”— and conservative students are increasingly joining their liberal peers in supporting censorship.
The sixth annual College Free Speech Rankings, released today by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression and survey partner College Pulse, show a continued decline in support for free speech among all students, but particularly conservatives. Students of every political persuasion show a deep unwillingness to encounter controversial ideas. The survey, which is the most comprehensive look at campus expression in the country, ranked 257 schools based on 68,510 student responses to a wide array of free speech-related questions.
The rankings come at a notable moment for free speech on college campuses: clashes over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a vigorous and aggressive culture of student activism, and the Trump administration’s persistent scrutiny of higher education.
“This year, students largely opposed allowing any controversial campus speaker, no matter that speaker's politics,” said FIRE President and CEO Greg Lukianoff. “Rather than hearing out and then responding to an ideological opponent, both liberal and conservative college students are retreating from the encounter entirely. This will only harm students' ability to think critically and create rifts between them. We must champion free speech on campus as a remedy to our culture's deep polarization.”
The best colleges for free speech
1. Claremont McKenna College 2. Purdue University 3. University of Chicago 4. Michigan Technological University 5. University of Colorado, Boulder 6. University of North Carolina, Greensboro 7. Vanderbilt University 8. Appalachian State University 9. Eastern Kentucky University 10. North Carolina State University
The worst colleges for free speech
248. Loyola University, Chicago 249. Middlebury College 250. New York University 251. Boston College 252. University of California, Davis 253. Northeastern University 254. University of Washington 255. Indiana University 256. Columbia University 257. Barnard College
For the second time, Claremont McKenna has claimed the top spot in the rankings. Speech controversies at the highest-rated schools are rare, and their administrations are more likely to support free speech. The schools that improved their score the most, including Dartmouth College and Vanderbilt University, worked to reform their policies and recently implemented new programs that support free speech and encourage open discourse.
The lowest-rated schools are home to restrictive speech policies and some of last year’s most shocking anti-free speech moments, including threats to press freedom, speaker cancellations, and the quashing of student protests.
“Even one egregious anti-free speech incident can destroy students’ trust in their administration and cause a school to plummet in the rankings,” said FIRE Vice President of Research Angela C. Erickson. “If campus administrators, faculty, and students want to enjoy an atmosphere of trust on campus, they can start by protecting each other’s rights.”
Other key findings from the report include:
166 of the 257 schools surveyed got an F for their speech climate, while only 11 schools received a speech climate grade of C or higher.
Only 36% of students said that it was “extremely” or “very” clear that their administration protects free speech on campus.
A record 1 in 3 students now holds some level of acceptance – even if only “rarely” — for resorting to violence to stop a campus speech.
53% of students say that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a difficult topic to discuss openly on campus. On 21 of the campuses surveyed, at least 75% of students said this — including 90% of students at Barnard.
For the first time ever, a majority of students oppose their school allowing any of the six controversial speakers they were asked about onto campus — three controversial conservative speakers and three controversial liberal ones.
“More students than ever think violence and chaos are acceptable alternatives to peaceful protest,” said FIRE Chief Research Advisor Sean Stevens. “This finding cuts across partisan lines. It is not a liberal or conservative problem — it’s an American problem. Students see speech that they oppose as threatening, and their overblown response contributes to a volatile political climate.”
Explore the full rankings here.
––
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression's College Free Speech Rankings is a comprehensive comparison of the student free speech
The sixth annual College Free Speech Rankings show a continued decline in support for free speech among all students, but particularly conse
Cost Inflation
Nicole Cennamo, from NEA's Office of the General Counsel, shares guidance about your rights, responsibilities, and professional protections.
It's funny when celebrities open up "banned book libraries" and it's just 1984 and The Handmaid's Tale.
Americans love the appearance of freethinking while staying safely within the boundaries of acceptable discourse.
