Interesting article, because it's a nice example of framing a topic in such a way that the lefties unfairly come out looking like lunatics. Let me break it down:
Tensions have flared at the University of Melbourne after a workshop suggested “white males” and those who look like “Liberal voters” be forbidden from speaking during classes in a bid to dismantle privilege.
Participating students at the “How privilege manifests in tutorials” workshop held last week were told that “white, male students” and “students resembling Liberal voters” should be discouraged from speaking to provide more space for women and non-binary people to contribute to discussions during tutorials.
So for most of the article, this is all we know about the UMSU's proposal. A very brief description of the UMSU's proposal framed in a negative light ("silencing conservative white men" vs "amplifying the voices of minorities" you dig?). We will soon get to hear plenty of people talking about how stupid they think this is before the topic is properly laid out. Also, interestingly enough, the writer starts off saying white males and Liberal voters should be "forbidden" to speak according to the UMSU, only to weaken it to "discouraged" one sentence later. What's up with that? Judging by the second sentence, nobody is trying to forbid anyone from doing anything here, so to say the UMSU "suggests" that white males should be censored seems like a bit of a stretch.
The workshop was part of the university’s “Radical Education Week”, which is organised by the University of Melbourne Student Union’s Environment Collective.
Other workshops included “Why & How to Be Less Employed”, “A School Striker’s Experience” and “Climate vs Capitalism: Eco-socialism as an Alternative”.
Dropping some other controversial workshop titles to further discredit the UMSU's stance. How to be less employed? Striking? SOCIALISM??? Clearly these guys are lazy fucking cultural marxists!
The student union funded the series of workshops through the Student Services and Amenities Fee, a mandatory annual fee paid by full-time students to fund student support services as well as societies and the university magazine.
Chris Kounelis, president of the Melbourne University Liberal Club, said the workshop was a ridiculous use of the SSAF, which this year cost full-time students $303, and contributed more than $6 million to the union’s coffers last year.
“Yet another initiative from our student union which provides little benefit for the mainstream students who pay for it,” Mr Kounelis said.
“Students should not be expected to fund this left-wing lunacy out of their own pockets.”
And of course they pay this lunacy out of OUR POCKETS!!1! Now maybe this person has a point here, but some quick research showed me that the offices of the UMSU are democratically elected so I figure it's a matter of "if you don't like what they're doing with your taxes, vote for someone else."
Student Thomas Carlyle-James, 21, did not attend the workshop but said he was not surprised that white males would be discouraged from speaking.
"I didn't actually listen to them but I'm sure that what they said was really offensive!!" lmaooo. Anyway moving on.
“The tutors and lecturers have a very heavy left-wing bias and generally sort of belittle any other opinion,” he said.
“They represent capitalist authors and Liberal thinkers like (John Stuart) Mill as old racists.”
The politics student, a member of the Liberal Club, said university life was increasingly hostile to students who held conservative views, an atmosphere stoked by the regular presence of GetUp and groups such as Socialist Alternative.
“There’s generally this sort of idea that Liberals are all racist, rich, white kids,” he said.
“I know plenty of Liberals and none of them are racists and they aren’t as wealthy as people think and are also from all different nationalities.”
Students are graded on their participation in tutorials and Mr Carlyle-James said white, male students could potentially be marked down if they weren’t allowed to speak.
So now we go from "we don't like what this one workshop said" to "there is a leftist propaganda war against conservative students." Three different guy's get to say a bunch of anecdotal shit to give off the impression that the university is some sort of oppressive leftist bulwark with no room for dissenting voices and at no point are these statements countered in the article. Notice also how in the final sentence quoted here, mister "Carlyle-James" (lol) talks about the UMSU workshop as though it is actual university policy, when in reality no university would ever combine "students' grades are based in participation" with "white males are not allowed to participate" (and in fact the latter would never even be considered for university policy but whatever). Really insidious and dishonest framing tbh.
UMSU president Molly Willmott said the workshop aimed to support students from diverse backgrounds.
“This is not about stopping people from speaking,” she said.
“We’re a university that encourages free speech.
“It’s about giving space to people who don’t feel included on university campuses because of things like gender, language (and) queerness.”
A University of Melbourne spokeswoman said there was no policy that prevented white male students from talking during tutorials. “This is a workshop run by UMSU,” she said.
“What is discussed is not university policy.”
The nuance has finally arrived, but only at the very bottom of the text, and in rather minimal quantities. We've already seen alarming stuff about white males being forbidden to speak during classes (which now turns out to be based on absolutely nothing), biased leftist tutors, and tax-paid socialist workshops. Conservatives are crying wolf over nothing as per usual, it's literally about one workshop at one university attended by a very limited number of people and it's blown up into this grand conspiracy against everything not socialist and politically correct. And then that shit gets printed in a national newspaper, lmao.
