Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 46

Thread: Colleges vs. Free Speech

  1. #1

    Default Colleges vs. Free Speech

    Moving this conversation out of the WTF thread.

    A quick catch-up and sampling of college issues:
    Yale
    Missouri University (Mizzou)
    Claremont McKenna
    Amherst

    (side note: It was surprisingly hard to find a news piece that isn't actually an opinion piece. I may have wound up lowering my standards.)

    There's plenty written on the subjects, so a quick news search will get you more.

    Here's the Yale e-mail that started things there:
    Dear Sillimanders:

    Nicholas and I have heard from a number of students who were frustrated by the mass email sent to the student body about appropriate Halloween-wear. I’ve always found Halloween an interesting embodiment of more general adult worries about young people. As some of you may be aware, I teach a class on “The Concept of the Problem Child,” and I was speaking with some of my students yesterday about the ways in which Halloween – traditionally a day of subversion for children and young people – is also an occasion for adults to exert their control.

    When I was young, adults were freaked out by the specter of Halloween candy poisoned by lunatics, or spiked with razor blades (despite the absence of a single recorded case of such an event). Now, we’ve grown to fear the sugary candy itself. And this year, we seem afraid that college students are unable to decide how to dress themselves on Halloween.

    I don’t wish to trivialize genuine concerns about cultural and personal representation, and other challenges to our lived experience in a plural community. I know that many decent people have proposed guidelines on Halloween costumes from a spirit of avoiding hurt and offense. I laud those goals, in theory, as most of us do. But in practice, I wonder if we should reflect more transparently, as a community, on the consequences of an institutional (which is to say: bureaucratic and administrative) exercise of implied control over college students.

    It seems to me that we can have this discussion of costumes on many levels: we can talk about complex issues of identify, free speech, cultural appropriation, and virtue “signalling.” But I wanted to share my thoughts with you from a totally different angle, as an educator concerned with the developmental stages of childhood and young adulthood.

    As a former preschool teacher, for example, it is hard for me to give credence to a claim that there is something objectionably “appropriative” about a blonde-haired child’s wanting to be Mulan for a day. Pretend play is the foundation of most cognitive tasks, and it seems to me that we want to be in the business of encouraging the exercise of imagination, not constraining it. I suppose we could agree that there is a difference between fantasizing about an individual character vs. appropriating a culture, wholesale, the latter of which could be seen as (tacky)(offensive)(jejeune)(hurtful), take your pick. But, then, I wonder what is the statute of limitations on dreaming of dressing as Tiana the Frog Princess if you aren’t a black girl from New Orleans? Is it okay if you are eight, but not 18? I don’t know the answer to these questions; they seem unanswerable. Or at the least, they put us on slippery terrain that I, for one, prefer not to cross.

    Which is my point. I don’t, actually, trust myself to foist my Halloweenish standards and motives on others. I can’t defend them anymore than you could defend yours. Why do we dress up on Halloween, anyway? Should we start explaining that too? I’ve always been a good mimic and I enjoy accents. I love to travel, too, and have been to every continent but Antarctica. When I lived in Bangladesh, I bought a sari because it was beautiful, even though I looked stupid in it and never wore it once. Am I fetishizing and appropriating others’ cultural experiences? Probably. But I really, really like them too.

    Even if we could agree on how to avoid offense – and I’ll note that no one around campus seems overly concerned about the offense taken by religiously conservative folks to skin-revealing costumes – I wonder, and I am not trying to be provocative: Is there no room anymore for a child or young person to be a little bit obnoxious… a little bit inappropriate or provocative or, yes, offensive? American universities were once a safe space not only for maturation but also for a certain regressive, or even transgressive, experience; increasingly, it seems, they have become places of censure and prohibition. And the censure and prohibition come from above, not from yourselves! Are we all okay with this transfer of power? Have we lost faith in young people's capacity – in your capacity - to exercise self-censure, through social norming, and also in your capacity to ignore or reject things that trouble you? We tend to view this shift from individual to institutional agency as a tradeoff between libertarian vs. liberal values (“liberal” in the American, not European sense of the word).

    Nicholas says, if you don’t like a costume someone is wearing, look away, or tell them you are offended. Talk to each other. Free speech and the ability to tolerate offence are the hallmarks of a free and open society.

    But – again, speaking as a child development specialist – I think there might be something missing in our discourse about the exercise of free speech (including how we dress ourselves) on campus, and it is this: What does this debate about Halloween costumes say about our view of young adults, of their strength and judgment?

    In other words: Whose business is it to control the forms of costumes of young people? It's not mine, I know that.

    Happy Halloween.

    Yours sincerely,

    Erika
    This e-mail kicked off the protests, with protesters demanding her resignation, among other things. Can anyone honestly read that e-mail and claim she deserves to be sacked over what it contains?

    A few more events making free-speech proponents wary (I tried to pick less editorialized sources, but again, lowered standards):
    Professor calls for muscle to eject reporter from public space
    Police urge students to report offensive speech
    Asian immigrant booed for not being totally in sync with protestors (here only for completeness; this is a total molehill)

    ACLU weighs in

    This all this follows several years of weakened free speech environments - Chris Rock & Jerry Seinfeld have both famously complained about the censorious conservatism at college campuses. The Stepford Students was an influential article on the subject written last year. This article written by the president of FIRE (essentially a college-focused version of the ACLU) is a more recent example.

    I am, of course, firmly on the side of free speech. I'm very worried about how extreme these protesters are getting, and the support that extremism is getting from many circles. In many cases with regards to these protests, there are actual, legitimate issues to have grievances with (Mizzou having the most serious), but as seems to be increasingly common these students celebrate finding something real to complain about by going completely overboard. This then encourages a similar reaction from outsiders, who stop hearing the legitimate grievances from the from the first side once that side has caused even more problems. They're making things worse in the name of making things better. These witch hunts and the clamping down on free speech are not the right reaction to these things.
    Last edited by Wraith; 11-14-2015 at 08:31 PM.

  2. #2
    This is the natural outgrowth from the microaggression and safe place movements. It took time for these ideologies to take root in the humanity departments (in fact, it's a lot of new professors pushing them; see the example in Missouri), but now that they have, good luck doing anything about it. Will write more later.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  3. #3
    Of course she shouldn't be sacked for that. But the crock that is "cultural appropriation" is unfortunately a sacred cow by a significant subgroup in academia.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  4. #4
    Meanwhile, a professor encouraging violence against students in Missouri still has her job...
    Hope is the denial of reality

  5. #5
    So in other words... liberals being liberal? Conservatives have long held that liberals don't value liberty of speech or thought. Consider their views of 'hate speech' attempts to push equal time nonsense on talk radio and restrictions on campaign financing (a form of free speech).

  6. #6
    So students at Princeton want Woodrow Wilson's name removed from all buildings because he was a racist. I mean, fair point, but Washington owned slaves. Should we rename Washington? We can recognize past injustice without whitewashing it (pun intended).

    Meanwhile, the protestgasm at University of North Carolina has issued an extensive list of demands: http://dig.abclocal.go.com/wtvd/docs...nc-demands.pdf

    - Mandatory courses about "racial capitalism, settler colonialism and cisheteropatriarchy structure our world". The course would be ungraded.
    - No more standardized tests for admission
    - In fact, do away with admission. Anyone can attend any class at any time, plus all state residents can access cafes, libraries and other facilities for free.
    - Fire the president (naturally)
    - Divest from Israeli apartheid (naturally)
    - Endowment choices must be delegated to a group of students and "workers" chosen by black students
    - Unlimited free psychological counseling
    - "Collectively owned housing projects"
    - $25 - $32/hour minimum wage for anyone who steps on university grounds, which will be paid-for by free tuition for all

    The statement ends with "We are here to take what is ours. Tear it down, or we shut you down."
    - Homeless people must be allowed to sleep on campus in any area they choose (seriously

  7. #7
    I like the part about white professors being discouraged from teaching about imperialism.

    Also, learn to use a scanner.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  8. #8
    http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2015/no...d-class-discu/ New story. Professor uses N word in following context:

    We students in the class began discussing possible ways to bring these issues up in our classes when COMS 930 instructor Dr. Andrea Quenette abruptly interjected with deeply disturbing remarks. Those remarks began with her admitted lack of knowledge of how to talk about racism with her students because she is white. “As a white woman I just never have seen the racism…It’s not like I see ‘N_ [the professor used the full word] spray painted on walls…” she said.
    Everyone's calling for her head now.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  9. #9
    At Smith College in Northampton:

    "We are asking that any journalists or press that cover our story participate and articulate their solidarity with black students and students of color," she told MassLive in the Student Center Wednesday. "By taking a neutral stance, journalists and media are being complacent in our fight."

    Smith organizers said journalists were welcome to cover the event if they agreed to explicitly state they supported the movement in their articles.
    With us or against us

  10. #10

  11. #11
    9/11 is often used as reasoning for Islamophobia that takes both physical and verbal forms. The passing of this resolution might make a space that is unsafe for students on campus even more unsafe. Islamophobia and racism … are alive and well. I just don’t think that we can act like something like a moment of silence for 9/11 would exist in a vacuum when worldwide, Muslim and Middle Eastern folks undergo intense acts of terrorism around the 11th of September each year, and have since 2001.


    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...f-islamophobia
    Hope is the denial of reality

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2015/no...d-class-discu/ New story. Professor uses N word in following context:

    Everyone's calling for her head now.
    I was about to hop aboard the hate-train here because these students seemed to be uncommonly stupid but the original letter, if accurate, makes the situation a little easier to understand. It wouldn't be the first time a university teacher is found guilty of being unprofessional or untactical or just bad at herding the extremely prickly group of cats that are grad students. Judging from the letter, this particular case is not about freedom of speech so much as it is about being a bad fit.

    https://medium.com/@schumaal/what-fo...bd5#.81z0zjgf4

    (filter out hyperbolic BS and melodramatic language)

    Her comments that followed were even more disparaging as they articulated not only her lack of awareness of racial discrimination and violence on this campus and elsewhere but an active denial of institutional, structural, and individual racism. This denial perpetuates racism in and of itself. After Ph.D. student Ian Beier presented strong evidence about low retention and graduation rates among Black students as being related to racism and a lack of institutional support, Dr. Quenette responded with, “Those students are not leaving school because they are physically threatened everyday but because of academic performance.” This statement reinforces several negative ideas: that violence against students of color is only physical, that students of color are less academically inclined and able, and that structural and institutional cultures, policies, and support systems have no role in shaping academic outcomes. Dr. Quenette’s discourse was uncomfortable, unhelpful, and blatantly discriminatory.

    [...]

    2. The assertion that an inability to see racism means that it does not exist on this campus.

    Dr. Quenette indicated that because she has not experienced or witnessed discrimination, it is not happening at KU. She asked for more evidence, and was dismissive of the multiple examples provided. These comments demonstrate not only an unwillingness to accept evidence contrary to her own ideas and experiences but also exemplify the dismissal and questioning of minority students’ experiences that has reinforced the very structural discrimination they seek to destroy by speaking up.

    These comments betray a lack of empathy and care for students of color who are facing academic struggles, which is particularly troubling for our incoming cohort of graduate teaching assistants as we are crafting our own teaching pedagogy. Furthermore, it denies the necessity for social and academic institutional programs in support of disenfranchised students.

    3. The assumption that retention rates of African-American students is solely due to their lack of academic ability rather than discrimination, structural racism, or institutional barriers.

    This discourse is academically irresponsible, morally abhorrent, and patently untrue. To deny the historical legacies of slavery, racial discrimination, and oppression is to perpetuate a space where students are discouraged to ask for access and support as needed. Our concern is that we are being taught that if a minority student approaches us for additional resources or support, we would have no obligation or compelling reason to do so. Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance.

    [...]

    5. Aggressive, unprofessional behavior unacceptable of a university faculty member and public employee.

    We have consistently been concerned throughout the semester with Dr. Quenette’s frequent and extreme defensiveness, continued belittlement of graduate student feedback, and confrontational demeanor in response to anonymous evaluations of the orientation process. Comments that reflected an increased desire for diversity training, representation, and discussion during orientation were cast as irrelevant and unnecessary at multiple junctions in the COMS 930 course. Furthermore, in the COMS 930 course, Dr. Quenette consistently misrepresented and denied speech calling attention to sexist remarks, racially insensitive comments, inappropriate jokes, constant swearing, hostility to alternative teaching methods, and ridicule of incoming GTAs that were all made apparent in the evaluations of orientation and/or during COMS 930 class sessions. Further cause for concern is Dr. Quenette’s multiple violations of anonymity and targeting individual student comments for direct confrontation in relation to these orientation evaluations and in-class comments.

    6. A pattern of behavior that indicates recent issues are far from isolated and warrant Dr. Quenette’s termination.

    Aside from these most recent transgressions, there are a number of other concerns we have about Dr. Quenette’s continued appointment and presence in the department. These concerns include, but are not limited to: jokes about suicide when asked how we should discuss a recent on-campus suicide with our students, disclosing personal information about other students that may pose external safety risks, and disdain and mockery for graduates in the COMS 930 course who request additional resources and support.

    Dr. Quenette has created a culture of disrespect for all students by calling undergraduates “stupid” and doubting their intellectual abilities. Dr. Quenette has made it a habit to disparage the reputations of veteran GTAs in the Communication Studies department by naming them and mocking their classroom policies and procedures, and disclosing private information regarding research projects involving other GTAs. Dr. Quenette exposed information about the personal location of a former GTA in the midst of a domestic violence situation. Dr. Quenette breached FERPA regulations by showing the midterm grades of previous students during the new GTA orientation, specifically, the grades of Cassandra Bird and Michael Eisenstadt.
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  13. #13
    #2 and #3 are complete bullshit (disagreeing with someone's views is not grounds for firing them; the fact that they even bring this up is a reason to ignore the rest of their demands). #5 might be as well. I don't really trust these students to be honest given the rest of their claims. And from another story on this topic:

    "The belief that democratic deliberation is neutral is wrong and dangerous," the open letter reads. "Do not allow the guise of free speech to be invoked and crowd out our demand."
    Hope is the denial of reality

  14. #14
    Taken as a whole it makes it far more clear why she was being portrayed as being unfit for teaching there. While one isolated incident may not justify any formal sanctions repeated problems that undermine credibility certainly do. If you are an abrasive person and you go around saying things that go against things that are considered to be true in your field--ignoring reasoned debate as if your opinion trumps everything else--and then on top of that you act like a dick towards your team as well as your clients then it's not very surprising if it bites you in the ass one day. And, when it does, it won't be just one thing--it will be everything even remotely unwise that you've ever done.

    this case was not what you made it out to be and it's a bad example of the problem that is the topic of this thread. Best to keep it focused.
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  15. #15
    Academic freedom means being free to ignore things in your field (and she's in communications, so I doubt she's ignoring any literature from her field). And using the N word in the context "I haven't seen any signs with it" is in no way racist and no reasonable person can interpret it as such. She was asked about race and she used the word in its proper context. If she's a nasty person, the students should have tried to do something before this. The fact that they're doing this now and openly claiming that their poor hurt feelings trump free speech and academic freedom tells me that they're probably the ones who shouldn't be in academia.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  16. #16
    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/11.../?intcmp=hpbt2

    "The Student Federation, which operates the center, went on to say that many of those cultures “have experienced oppression, cultural genocide and diasporas due to colonialism and Western supremacy... we need to be mindful of this and how we express ourselves while practicing yoga.""

    Someone please tell me this is a hoax.

  17. #17
    Hope is the denial of reality

  18. #18
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    6,435
    I am curious how many people are upset, sorry, I mean offended to the very core of their being, because I find it hard to believe it really is a big part of the campuses or just the very vocal ones, amplified by (social) media.
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  19. #19
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    It's enough to get people to quit (before getting fired).
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  20. #20
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    6,435
    Quote Originally Posted by Veldan Rath View Post
    It's enough to get people to quit (before getting fired).
    Yes, but is that due to media blowing things up, and things blowing up on social media, or do really that many people overreact this badly? It's just hard to imagine, coming from a Dutch university where nobody freaked out like this over stuff like that.
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  21. #21
    I agree there is a loudness vs. numbers issue here. But if the media and social media are hounding the targets of rage, the numbers of actually aggrieved people starts to become less relevant.

    There is also the larger issue that these students are operating in an academic/media environment that does operate on the assumption that enormous portions of the population believes in ideas that are basically subhuman.

    Surprised to see the NYTimes of all places summarize this well:

    mherst seems an unlikely place for such debate and strife. It prides itself on its diversity — only 42 percent of Amherst students identify themselves as white. And it promotes itself as the kind of liberal arts college where students have small classes and meaningful mentoring by professors...

    ...Some critics admire the protesters for this youthful passion, but worry that they are promoting a culture of victimization that sees claims of oppression as a badge of honor. Others say students are vilifying classmates and professors for unintentional racial slights, which could be dealt with more gently. Some say the alienation expressed by black and Hispanic students is experienced by all students in some form when they find themselves at competitive colleges.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/29/us...ch-debate.html

  22. #22
    A Lewk managed to become president of a college.

    http://theweek.com/speedreads/591456...d-not-day-care
    Hope is the denial of reality

  23. #23
    Hah - sounds like my kinda guy.

  24. #24
    Hope is the denial of reality

  25. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    While I have no doubt that the quoted president is full of shit, I don't really understand the connection between two sections of Corinthians that are a good half dozen chapters apart. Should I object to a reading from Huck Finn because elsewhere in the book they use the n word? Not an NT scholar, but guessing there is little to no connection between the two passages. As a rhetorical point, this fails to impress.
    "When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first." - Werner Heisenberg (maybe)

  26. #26
    I don't really understand the connection between two sections of Corinthians that are a good half dozen chapters apart.
    The connection is that the college used that particular passage as part of an attack on transgender people in their student handbook.
    When the sky above us fell
    We descended into hell
    Into kingdom come

  27. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    The connection is that the college used that particular passage as part of an attack on transgender people in their student handbook.
    But you're missing Wiggin's point. They're not the same passage, they're not even in the same roughly grouped thematic "part." The two passages have nothing to do with each other. They're six pages and ten topic changes apart.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  28. #28
    Why do you think the author was making an explicit connection between the two verses, beyond contrasting the colleges use of the two passages?
    When the sky above us fell
    We descended into hell
    Into kingdom come

  29. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    Eh? The author is tilting at windmills here now. Few people were saying "yeah lets go to that college!" they were saying "yeah this PC nonsense is full blown retardation." (oops was I not supposed to say that word)

  30. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    Why do you think the author was making an explicit connection between the two verses, beyond contrasting the colleges use of the two passages?
    Because he was throwing the kitchen sink to see what would stick. He'd made the point you're trying to put the emphasis on already, he added "If you’re appalled by the fact that a school would use the same biblical passage to both encourage love and to shame transgender people, you’re starting to understand conservative evangelical colleges," anyway. Because he's taking shots at the concept of this kind of school and he's emptying out the bag looking for rhetorical tricks to do it. Like with the later point implying horror that the Department of Education subsidizes college educations even at these properly accredited colleges.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •