Ridiculous 'Study': Physical Design of Universities Makes 'Racially Minoritized' Students Uncomfortable

If that's the biggest crock of you know what you've read today, raise your hand. (Note: all hands raised.)

The "scholars" wrote, in part (emphasis, mine):

Many institutions of higher education were created by and for wealthy White men, to educate ‘young men of good hope’ for careers in law, medicine, and other high-status professions. 

Today, intentionally or not, American institutions of higher education continue to serve the interests of wealthy White people and they have done little to dismantle socioeconomic and racial inequity.

Seriously? 

University campuses are now the hotbed of radical leftism in which "the interests of 'wealthy White people'" are hardly promoted. On the contrary, leftists of all stripes and ethnicities — including White radicals — regularly wail against successful White people. Make that "rail against all White people who aren't leftists." In addition, support for Hamas, antisemitism, and condemnation of Israel, has never been higher — or more dangerous — than on today's university campuses. 

Yet, for leftist ultracrepidarian "scholars," all of the above isn't enough. Nope, it's the buildings and public spaces themselves that "marginalize" non-White students. 

Here's more:

Together, [the scholars] argued, these feelings of being an outsider are downstream of the “exclusionary function” of public spaces like parks and libraries on college campuses.

American universities are designed as “defensible spaces” that “undermine inclusion and perpetuate inequities” through territoriality, surveillance, and symbolism, the scholars noted.

The scholars responsible for the August 2025 article include Diane-Jo Bart-Plange from the Department of Psychology and Neuroscience at Boston College, Kyshia Henderson from the University of Chicago Department of Psychology, and Kelly Hoffman and Sophie Trawalter, both of whom have listed affiliations with the University of Virginia, Charlottesville and JP Morgan Chase.

The territorial nature of universities, they wrote, embodied by such structures as walls and gates, serve to cut universities off from their surrounding communities, thus engendering an us versus them mentality.

As I wrote in an unrelated article on Tuesday, leftists — including a majority of today's Democrat Party — are tantamount to hopelessly spoiled children. Give them an inch, and they'll do their damnedest to take a mile, regardless of how long it takes them to take that mile. They're insatiable. The more they get, the more they want. 

ALSO CHECK OUT: 'Adaptive' Learning in the No Longer Hallowed Halls of Academia

TSU Issues Jaw-Dropping Lie About Leftist Mob That Ran Two Conservatives Off Campus

The more these geniuses wrote, the more farcically preposterous they became:

We contend that ... these institutions, created by and for White elites, have left everyone else feeling like outsiders—socially, culturally, and spatially. In the current review, we focus on the spatial dimension. 

We draw from human geography, urban planning, architecture, and related fields, and propose that the university campus is a territorial, surveilled, and symbolic space, in ways that leave marginalized students feeling like trespassers on campus. 

We then review existing evidence and offer new evidence that the physical setting of university life—the university campus—can make marginalized students feel out of place. 

We conclude that if universities are serious about their commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion, and in their mission to be the engine of economic mobility, they must change, in part, by reimagining physical spaces.

You can't make this stuff up. Unfortunately, these out-of-touch-with-reality "scholars" already did.

The same illogical "logic" would apply to all buildings designed and created by "White wealthy men for White wealthy people," would it not? I mean, the U.S. Capitol, White House, Library of Congress, and on and on. What, should we "reimagine" those "physical spaces" as well? 

Should we tear down those bastions of "Whiteness"? 

This story is a perfect example of how White guilt on the left leads to absurd studies and proposals, which then lead to hair-brained, indoctrinated students and others protesting — often violently — people, places, and things that they likely wouldn't have otherwise even thought about. 

The geniuses also condemned campus surveillance programs as disproportionately impacting the previously identified students.

Then, this — which made me laugh out loud:

Symbols such as university logos and mascots, the authors argued, serve to “reaffirm wealthy and White students’ belonging,” while Antebellum architecture, “markings of exclusive groups,” Confederate monuments, and statues of figures such as Thomas Jefferson, can “signal to racially minoritized and lower-SES students that they do not belong.”

Other exclusionary symbols noted by the authors include the Greek organizations, "Star Trek" posters and soda can pyramids in computer science buildings, ornate plaques near gates, and anything celebrating individual self-expression or independent thinking.

So what's the solution to the made-up problem, according to these clowns? 

Glad you asked. Here ya go:

Universities] must transform their cultural and social context, and they must reimagine their spatial context, their physical campuses. Universities must no longer be places where lower-SES and racially minoritized students are made to feel like trespassers. They must be inclusive places, culturally, socially, and spatially.

Ooh, big red flag: 

When the left refers to "inclusive" — as in DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) — we know all too well that they really mean "if you don't support our narratives and policies," you are to be ignored, ridiculed, censored, or destroyed if necessary.

This one gave me a headache — I'm out.