"Hostile environment" blowback [Turning the tables on the campus Left]

Volokh.com ^ | 03/29/2004 | David Bernstein

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

"Hostile Environment" Blowback: A few weeks ago, as part of a lecture on academic freedom at Emory University, I noted that censorious campus feminists have been the leading force behind campus speech restrictions masquerading as "hostile environment" rules, and stated the following:

One does not need much of an imagination to come up with examples of how antidiscrimination law could be used to silence left-wing academics....

Consider how the concept of “hostile educational environment” could be applied to Women’s Studies classes taught by radical feminists. Students from traditional, white middle-American Christian backgrounds are often told that they are inherently racists, that the traditional religious values that they grew up on are reactionary principles that serve to support an oppressive patriarchy, and, that if they are men, that much of the sex that have or will engage in amounts to rape.

Just recently, a student at Univeristy of North Carolina expressed religious objections to homosexual conduct and criticized homosexuality as "disgusting" in class. His professor sent out an email to the entire class lambasting this student:
what we experienced, as unforunate as it is, is, however, a perfect example of privilege. that a white, heterosexual, christian male, one who vehemently denied his privilege last week insisting that he earned all he has, can feel entitled to make violent, heterosexist comments and not feel marked or threatened or vulnerable is what privilege makes possible.

The chairman of this professor’s department was notified of this ill-tempered outburst, and under pressure from him, she apologized. That’s all appropriate; professors shouldn’t be singling out students in vituperative emails. But what if this student filed a “hostile environment” complaint against his professor for creating a hostile environment for him as a Christian, and perhaps as a white male? Isn’t it clear he would have a good case? And wouldn’t his winning such a case have a chilling effect on what other feminist professors say in class, even if they say it in a more moderate and appropriate way?

Even the weakest discrimination complaints can lead, at a minimum, to a mandatory investigation by the Department of Education. Internal university investigations and, most chillingly, lawsuits against both universities and feminist professors as individuals for promoting and tolerating hostile environments for Christian students are other things that one could look forward to if academic freedom is weakened. Conservative Christian groups seem to have not yet realized the weapon they have in their hands, but they undoubtedly will.

Now comes word, via John Rosenberg, that the University of North Carolina professor in question, Elyse Crystall, is, along with UNC, being investigated by the Department of Education for violating federal civil rights law by creating a hostile environment for white, male, Christian students. A conservative Republican Congressman, Rep. Walter Jones, helped instigate the investigation. I predict that this will not be the last we hear of hostile environment blowback. As I wrote in You Can't Say That!, the fact that radical feminists and criticical race theorists living "in a society that has long been, and continues to be, hostile to their ideology would want to weaken the principle that government may not suppress expression because of hostility to its viewpoint seems counterintuitive and shortsighted, to say the least."

[jigsaw]

Excellent.   Just like children, the left doesn't think they're subject to consequences,
and just like children, they're slowing learning they are, and just like children
their whining increases.

[Adder]

Bravo. Whats good for the Ganders is dandy for the Gooses [Goosettes? Goosarinas?].
It will apply against "people of color" too, and everyone else who seeks to use their new powers to commit the same oppressions they accuse other of committing....wrongly for the most part.

[Casloy]

The problem is, academic leftists are incapable of seeing any viewpoint to the right of center as being worthy of the same extra rights they want afforded their own favorite minority group. When I went to college in the early 80's a self-styled "humanist" group was attempting to get a rule passed which would ban any non-humanist books from the library on the basis they hurt certain minority groups. I pretended to support them in an impromptu classroom debate and suggested we take all the books that didn't fit our humanist criteria and burn them. Several were nodding enthusiastically until they realized they had been had.

There is little that seperates these academic leftists from Nazis. Fortunately, the students they brainwash most often forget the nonsense once they have to try and function in the real world.

[Tribune7]

bump

[wildbill]

As a student and teacher in liberal arts classes in a university, my comment is that white males have no inherent rights of free speech any more--according to the prevailing opinion.

Anything we say is hate speech, based on our privileged position in an oppressive society; anything they say is gospel truth.

Whoops, I shouldn't have said "gospel"

[Robert357]

My wife works for a University, one of the dirty little secrets is that some Universities are now contemplating preferential admision policies for male applicants.

Most universities feel they are OK as long as the female/male percentages dont get beyond 65%/35%. There are some universities that have more than a 70%/30% ratio and they are worried and contemplating how to get men to apply.

Any thing that could be legitimately argued to be hostile toward "---any kind of--male" would get top University administration attention.

[Jeeper]

Nice post. The academic liberals are having to swallow a bitter pill.
It never occurred to them that true diversity includes everyone.

[Swanks]

A conservative Republican Congressman, Rep. Walter Jones, helped instigate the investigation.

Actually, so did I. My paperwork beat Rep Jones into DOE. The neat thing is that when 2 or more complaints are rec'v; a 'compliance' review kicks in, which gives DOE more latitude and power to conduct an investigation.

BTW 'religeous' discrimination is not their jurisdiction. But race and sex is. So they are going after UNC on theose two basis alone. Time to extract a price; even if its bad press, emberassment, and lots of administration time and meetings to extract themselves from sanctions.

They'll think twice before being so agressive next time. because next time, the pain brought on to UNC will be worse.

[talleyman]

Bump!

[RightWingConspirator]

Back when I was an undergrad (early 1960's) the leftists started what they called "the free speech movement". This was a real misnomer because the lefties believed in free speech for only themselves, but for not for anyone else who had a different opinion.

It is good to see the tables being turned, and perhaps with a little luck we'll see real free speech in academia.

[cwb]

I've been wondering how long it would take for this to happen. The very people who promote tolerance and diversity, are themselves, intolerant and non-diverse. These people worship at the alter of progressivism, yet anyone who does not, is targetted and demeaned for their inability to pay homage. Tammy Bruce's book "The New Thought Police" perfectly outlines how it is the Left, under the guise of tolerance and PC, that has become the arbitors of free-speech in this society, as they now dictate what is tolerable.

What liberals are essentially trying to do (e.g. w/Hate Crimes) is set up a system were they, their constituients and their agendas are protected by law. They are trying to institute laws that would basically set up a government were any one who disagrees with the liberal point of view could be classified as a hater, racist or bigot...thereby silencing the opinions and speech of those with a descending point of view.

These liberals have effectively demonized anyone who holds an opposition view to their agenda and thus, has made any reasoned debate or discussion a reason to classify those people as unreasonable and extreme. In labeling these dissenters in such a fashion, liberals don't even have to respond as the debate ends with the personal attack. The New Thought Police...indeed.

[BadAndy]

It's about time conservatives learned to use the leftists tactics against them. Next we will learn how to shop for judges that will declare laws WE don't like unconstitutional.

[Old Professer]

Be ever fearful of the caring, for they will love you to death.

[martin gibson]

a rat is a dog is a pig is a feminist (with profound apologies to rats, dogs and pigs)...