> ex-mormons

Actually, I think this is a valid case. But, let's be honest here, the only place you'd possibly be prevented from living your life is in some highly concentrated area like Salt Lake City. Sure, you'd definitely lose all your Mormon friends, but you are being rejected from what many people consider to be nothing short of a cult, comparing this to not being able to exist in society at all, or that it is geographically widespread, is a bit of a stretch.

So yes, this is most definitely wrong, and it is a "biggish" problem, but it is also very specialized and I would expect one of the very last "prejudices" (if you can even call it that) that will ever be solved.

> I mean, I'm sure those people exist - I've seen no evidence of it being more than extremely isolated cases though, definitely not "a significant number" - as with any cause, there are people who go to extremes, but they don't reflect on "the left" any more than neo-nazis reflect on "the right" - they are a subsection. You appear to be implying that this is somehow commonplace, but it's not.

Actually, I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that there are universities in the US where you can not host right wing speakers, the students will literally riot and attack people. Will they do this always, I do not know, but I think you'd be very hard pressed to find genuine modern day video of neo-nazis being physically violent, whereas there is plentiful evidence of leftists attacking people and rioting.

> Now, are you equating "girls only computing clubs" and examples like that I've given to "safe spaces" or "self-segregation"? Because they aren't.

Actually, this is a far better point. Yes, here society definitely still has a problem. But exactly what the problem is I don't think anyone knows. Part of the problem is that many/some of society/individuals see females as simultaneously the same and different. I think it is going to take some quite a bit more time for society to reach the point of emotional maturity where we can even have a reasonable conversation about this.

In the meantime, "Those kind of targeted groups are used as a force to push back on those barriers and societal expectations, allowing minorities opportunities they might otherwise not get" is an excellent way to go about it, and if everyone could just chill out and get rid of the chips on their shoulders I think we'd be about 80% of the way there.

> I'll be absolute: I am a firm believer in free speech and debate, and universities are places to learn, and you need active debate for that. While people have a right to not be harassed (I've seen the claim that it's free speech to follow someone around a university campus or invade their living space, which is clearly just as dumb), that doesn't require infringing on debate to achieve.

Thank you, because boy it's not very hard to find people that absolutely outright reject this idea nowadays. Hardly surprising as some of them host extremely popular news/comedy shows.

> The self-segregation thing I've literally never even heard of.

Graduation ceremonies for blacks only would be one example. In Canada of all places, not exactly a hotbed of racism.

> I hear a lot of claims that there is some plague of "SJW"s destroying freedoms in a quest for safety - I've seen no evidence of this being anything other than a vanishingly small minority.

No one claims it's a plague, but it seems to be growing (it is well beyond a few isolated cases) and it is genuinely a quite serious problem. I make no claim that this is absolutely proof in any way, but it is thought provoking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K92rOsjyLBs

> The vast majority of "the left" is strongly in favour of protection of free speech.

The vast majority? I guess it depends on the specifics of the definitions, but that the left, especially younger people, are increasingly unwilling to participate in genuine dialogue (because "the debate is over"), is unfortunate. And I think in time we will see that it will hurt your cause more than your opponents (see: the last US election).

> Again, you were the.....

Generally, I think mine was a general protest against a (perceived) instance of exaggerated victimhood, for lack of a better term. I hope you can see from what I say that my root concern is the lack of genuine dialogue in resolving the differences that still remain in society. The number of injustices for this stage of the game are absolutely disgusting, but as long as our two sides continue to fight about stupid things, the people who are served from us being split down the middle will continue to pick our pockets. I am of the belief that much of the remaining disagreement in society is engineered, as opposed to grassroots ignorance.