This Is Not a Day Care. This Is America.




America has become a coddled nation. And a coddled nation is a crippled nation.

Regardless of what you might think of President Trump’s recent “fire and fury” rhetoric with North Korea, at least he’s not passing out teddy bears and whining about microaggressions.

Meanwhile, with every day that goes by another college snowflake melts down over chalk on a sidewalk or an unsanctioned opinion being expressed. Why?

I had the privilege of collaborating with Dr. Everett Piper on the new book Not a Daycare: The Devastating Consequences of Abandoning Truth.



You may recall his blog post that struck a chord with so many: “This Is a University, This Is Not a Daycare.”  As the President of Oklahoma Wesleyan University,  he offers an insider’s perspective on higher education, doing what few university leaders will do—speak up.

Not a Daycare is a must read for parents, grandparents, student, and academics seeking a way out of the snowflake crisis.

The new book exposes the problem—it’s worse than you think—explains how we got here, and proposes solutions for parents, student, and university leaders.

What drew me to the project was not only the state of our college campuses, but also the harrowing implications of a coddled America.

Soft, Because They Can Be

According to Oxford Dictionaries, the Word of the Year in 2016 was post-truth.

They defined posttruth as “relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.”

It isn’t that truth no longer exists, per se, but it takes a back seat to emotions, feelings, and other subjective standards. In other words, truth is irrelevant.

How does such an approach to life work in the real world where distinctions such as good and evil, pass or fail, and up or down govern life? I would argue it doesn’t work at all and that we are preparing the “softest” generation for a rude encounter with reality.

The snowflake insanity sweeping across university campuses in the Western world is all about student satisfaction, not student preparation. In the United Kingdom, proposed legislation would make student satisfaction a key factor in ranking colleges. Such efforts would encourage colleges to treat students even more like customers to be sold, rather than students to be coached.

Baroness Wolf, a professor at King’s College London (KCL), warns:

Universities are increasingly nervous about doing anything that will create overt dissatisfaction among students because they are being told that student satisfaction is key…. The student satisfaction measure is fantastically dangerous. The way to make students happy is not asking them to do any work and giving them a high grade. This will reduce standards and undermine quality.  I just think this is totally mad, and destructive of everything universities stand for.

The truth is that our students and universities are soft—because they can be.

Millennials have come of age in an era largely devoid of any existential threat to their existence. Even the attacks of 9/11 have faded from consciousness and turned instead into a call for normalizing radical Islam and seeing terrorists as victims of Western oppression.

Will the College Snowflake Melt ?

Previous generations didn’t have the luxury of whining about safe spaces and complaining about a lack of trigger warnings.

When Pearl Harbor was bombed, students didn’t protest the attack as a microagression.

They enlisted to fight for freedom. When Nazi boots marched across Europe, young Americans didn’t demand coloring books or insist on being paid to hold signs. They signed up for service to stand against the spread of evil. Many of them heroically gave their final measure of devotion on bulkheads and beaches halfway around the globe.

But students today live lives that are largely insulated from such harsh realities.

They enjoy a peace dividend won by the hard work and sacrifices of previous generations and maintained by those they ridicule.

The realities of the Cold War, two World Wars, a Civil War between the States, and even the efforts to carve out a new nation called America defined reality for previous generations.

They presume someone will bail them out of any conflicts or pay their way to obtain any desire. And today’s universities, for the most part, perpetuate the lie by catering to their every whim.

Imagine what will happen if, God forbid, this coddled generation is called upon to stand and fight for freedom, for the survival of all they believe to be right and true.

If they can summon the courage to fight at all, will they even know what they’re fighting for?

The hazard of which John Steinbeck warned is now upon us:

We now face the danger, which in the past has been the most destructive to the humans: Success, plenty, comfort and ever-increasing leisure. No dynamic people has ever survived these dangers.

And no free people ever will.

As long as we continue to teach tomorrow’s leaders that life is all about you, there will be no tomorrow worth fighting for.

This is not a day care. This is America.


Get your copy of Not a Day Care: The Devastating Consequences of Abandoning Truth now and claim a Back-to-School Bonus Package with exclusive videos from Dr. Piper and other resources like a Parents Guide to Preparing Kids for College.  Click here to learn more.

Youngstown State Students Triggered By Chicken Sandwiches





Another day, another college up in arms over the presence of a mere Chick-fil-A restaurant.

Liberal students and faculty at Youngstown State University are supporting a Change.org petition calling for the removal of a Chick-fil-A from campus grounds. They argue anti-LGBT comments made by the company’s deceased founder and continued financial support to family-oriented organizations disqualify them from serving students. They feel that replacing the popular fried chicken restaurant would be an act of solidarity for gay and lesbian students.

The online petition itself is quite ridiculous. Created by YSU student Emmett Ray, the petition only boasts (as I write this post) 122 supporters – not even reaching its modest goal of 200 supporters, despite the publicity. The headline of the article currently reads: “Close YSU’s Chick Fil A And Replace It With Somewhere Less Homophobic.” Which, of course, makes no grammatical sense. The petition begins by acknowledging how the popular fried chicken chain is a huge convenience for students: the Chick-fil-A is one of the few eateries open for students past 3:00pm and the only restaurant open on campus during the evening.

Not exactly the best pitch to potential students activists.

The petition closes by admitting that a removal from campus would likely not change the company’s stance on anything. Speaking to Campus Reform, Ray basically gave up on the idea of closing the restaurant. “…my goal with the petition was more to start a discussion than actually get Chick-fil-A closed.” Nevertheless, he is convinced the company is run by “homophobes.”

The petition does carry support by progressive students and teachers at Youngstown. One incensed professor commented: “I am a professor at YSU. I have not set foot up there since they became Chick-fil-A. I ate there when it was Pete’s Place, and in several previous incarnations. A long time ago it used to be a respectable place where you could take an invited speaker out to lunch and even have table service. We now have no such place and I will not support Fried Food for Homophobes, which is what I think of Chick-fil-A.”

This is by far not the first time students have called for the removal of a Chick-fil-A from their respective schools. In April, students at Duquesne University demanded a resolution calling for the school to reverse its decision to allow a Chick-fil-A to open on campus. Similar demands have been made at the University of North Texas, Fordham University,  University of Nebraska Kearney – basically anywhere you have teenage social justice warriors.

Many students across the country are triggered by simple, delicious chicken sandwiches.

 

 

 

 

Oxford University Changes Core History Exam To Give Higher Grades To Women

Oxford University – long held as one of the premier educational institutions in the world – is changing one of its core history exams in order to ensure that more women get the highest possible grade on the test.

One of Oxford’s five final-year history exams will be replaced by a paper that can be done at home to try to improve results for female students.

The move, which begins in the next academic year, comes as statistics showed 32% of women achieved a first in history at Oxford, compared with 37% of men.

Under the new exam structure, students most likely will be given similar questions to the existing exam, but rather than completing the test within a specifically designated time frame, students will have several days at home to finish.

University officials say that the “gender gap” was a major factor in considering the new exam, along with the fact that the new format would “reward research skills rather than memorisation, or performance under pressure.”

The decision isn’t without its controversy, however. Even the university admits that the risk of plagiarism grows with a take-home test. There’s no guarantee that students won’t collaborate, cheat, or seek outside help with the exam.

The exam isn’t exactly a hit with professors either.

Not everyone in the faculty welcomed the move away from traditional exams. While the introduction of a “take-home” paper was supported by staff and students, some of those who attended meetings about the reform warned that it increased the risk of plagiarism and could reduce academic rigour. “We don’t want girls within the faculty to be blamed for ‘softening’ the course,” one said.

So in this era when the college experience seems more and more like a joke, even highly acclaimed institutions like Oxford are changing important exams simply for the sake of giving higher grades to one group. Even if the new exams are a good idea and truly become a better barometer of academic performance, the reason behind it is totally ridiculous.

It’s enough to make you worry about the future – as if we didn’t have enough to create concern to begin with.

Many Millennials Refuse To Connect Radical Islam To Terrorism

A shock poll that is, quite frankly, not so shocking.

An online Daily Wire/Whatsgoodly survey asked students across the country, “Do you believe radical Islam has connections with terrorism?” The survey was conducted from June 6 to June 12 and included 1,489 students across the political spectrum. The results: 66 percent said “yes,” 15 percent said “no,” and 17 percent stated they were “unsure.”

Before we move forward, let’s make one point very clear. This poll did not ask students if they associated Islam with terrorism. It specifically asks if they associate radical Islam with terrorism. One-third of the students who responded (the survey has a margin of error at +/-3 percent) wouldn’t make a connection between the two.

Has liberal academia really taken us this far?

The breakdown of respondents and how they answered makes a little more sense.

Respondents who identified as “pro-Clinton” refused to associate radical Islam with terror by a tune of almost 40 percent (19 percent said no and 19 percent were unsure). On the other hand, almost 90 percent of “pro-Trump” college students connected the two – with “pro-Gary Johnson” students not far behind at 83 percent. Also, men were more likely to associate radical Islam with terrorism than their female counterparts.

The answers are certainly troubling, and come at a time when extreme liberal activism on college campuses has strangled universities across the country.

The University of Missouri has been forced to close numerous residence halls after the 2015 race protests there scared off prospective applicants – enrollment to the university has plummeted by the thousands. UC Berkeley literally becomes a war zone every time a right-wing speaker attempts to visit their campus. When Evergreen State College professor Brett Weinstein had the audacity to question the propriety of having a “no white people on campus day,” he was was forced to leave for fear of his safety by liberal student activists – kids carrying baseball bats have been spotted on campus “policing” the area.

Liberal activism on college campuses has gone from bad to worse, to absolutely insane. The poll conducted by Daily Wire/Whatsgoodly only confirms what we already know.

Petition: LSU’s Tiger Mascot Symbolizes “White Oppression”

I’m starting to believe that the Left doesn’t realize that there are real problems in this world that need to be solved. Case in point: among all the other craziness going on at America’s college campuses, a student at Louisiana State University has decided that the school’s tiger mascot is a symbol of “white oppression” and has started a petition at change.org demanding its removal.

“It is incredibly insulting for any African American to have to attend to a school that honors Confederate militantism, [sic]” the petition declares. “It is already hard enough to be black at LSU, and these symbols must be changed.”

Almost as an afterthought, the author adds that “it’s also cruel to cage a wild animal for the amusement of privileged white people” who have “never been in a cage!”

Of course, the logic of the student who launched the petition is that, because the mascot’s name comes from a Louisiana division during the Civil War, it’s automatically racist. According to the LSU Tigers website, all the soldiers who fought for the state in that conflict were called “Tigers.”

It was the custom at that time, for some occult reason, to call football teams by the names of vicious animals; the Yale Bulldogs and the Princeton Tigers, for example. This is still the vogue. It struck me that purple and gold looked Tigerish enough and I suggested that we choose “Louisiana Tigers,” all in conference with the boys. The Louisiana Tigers had represented the state in Civil War and had been known for their hard fighting. This name was applied collectively to the New Orleans Zouaves, the Donaldsonville Cannoniers, and to a number of other Louisiana companies sent to Virginia, who seemed to have the faculty of getting into the hardest part of the fighting and staying there, most of them permanently. One company I knew of went in 200 strong; only 28 returned and many of these were wounded.

So “Louisiana Tigers” went into the New Orleans papers and became our permanent possession.

It’s a show of bravery, and there’s no obvious racist intent to the nickname. In fact, the petition offers no evidence that the school had such nefarious intentions beyond the Civil War references. What the author does offer, however, is a fistful of Leftist cliches:

“We must speak truth to power, and continue to march toward justice,” [the student] declares. “That day is coming, the day when every symbol of white oppression is torn down.”

As of this writing, the petition has acquired 500 of the 1,000 signatures required, but we can gain something more important from the comment section of the page: don’t mess with Southerners and their football teams!

To tell you how stupid you are. The Tiger is based off the Irish workers, not slave holders. The Irish were forced to do such terrible labor that even slaves were not made to do because the slave owners felt their their slaves lives had more value than the Irish. Bunch of morons!

I am putting a period on this once and for all. LSU is my home school, I grew up on this campus. This thing actually started as a facetious joke by a friend of mine commenting on the removal of the statues in New Orleans. This is nothing more than an out of town loser trying to make a name for himself. If this, whatever, goes after these Tigers… well, it better have more than “racism” to come at us with. We have trained for this battle our whole lives. LSU has the most diverse student body and alumni of any institution of higher learning in the world. We are as famous for our academics as our atheletics. Way back in the dark ages, someone decided that because tigers in the wild live are solitary, a group of tigers should be called a “Streak or an Ambush.” You wanna go after LSU Tigers you need to remember this, in Baton Rouge, a group of Tigers is called a, “Team.” Forever L. S. U.!

This is the dumbest thing that I have ever heard of… Stupid snowflakes… Many kids of all colors have benefitted from LSU, and their Fighting Tigers teams… dont you have anything better to qhine about?

Congratulations to the petition writer for having a life so perfect, so problem free, that the only issue to worry about is a sports mascot.

And those are among the handful that I can quote on a family site! But the last comment rings pretty true. Maybe we should worry about the legitimate problems facing this world and less about college football mascots.

If we could all agree to that, the world would be a much better place.

Stranger Than Fiction: Wood Paneling Threatens University Of Michigan Students

Today’s college students are a rare breed. When I was at the University of Georgia, I focused on my studies and keeping my grades up enough to not lose my scholarships. These days, it seems like students only focus on what offends them.

The latest case involves the most bizarre aggression ever: wood paneling. That’s right, some students at the University of Michigan have made it known that they are “marginalized by quiet, imposing masculine paneling” in one of the school’s historic buildings.

The Michigan Union building, set to undergo a three-year, $85 million renovation, is the target of student outrage because Anna Wibbleman, the former president of an organization called Building A Better Michigan, which is dedicated to giving students a voice in building projects, shared concerns that the paneling marginalized some students, though she apparently offered no further explanation. The paneling is a prominent feature of the century-old structure and looks to remain prominent in the renderings of the renovated facilty.

Fortunately – and perhaps refreshingly – the school isn’t putting much stock into the complaints:

Asked to weigh in on Wibbelman’s comments, campus spokesman Rick Fitzgerald stated in an email to The College Fix that “concern about the paneling is not something that has been brought forward to the university as a concern from students, who have been involved with developing this project for several years and through dozens of meetings. Students certainly have expressed a desire that the renovation assures a welcoming, inviting, and student-oriented building. It is their building.”

“There is a significant presence of wood paneling on the interior of the building and we expect most, if not all of it, will remain after the renovation,” he said.

The current president of Building A Better Michigan claims that Wibbleman really meant that the quiet nature of the building was the issue more so than the actual materials in the structure itself. But whatever.

It’s nice to see an institution stand firm against such ridiculous assertions, rather than simply bowing to the weird whims of a few squeaky-wheel complainers. Hopefully, other schools will follow suit.