Free Speech and Creepy Liberalism

Truth. I was an Opinion editor for a year in college. I didn't really understand what I was supposed to be doing but even still there was no line of submissions waiting to be born in print.

Bringing back painful memories of the terrible op-eds I wrote for my university paper, albeit from a very different political POV to Stascavage.

http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article35735889.html

This was a cynical attack on learning and an attempt to censor writing exploring the fraught histories of U.S. overseas military interventions. Yet reflecting on such topics is exactly the task that the memory of 9/11 and all other mass atrocities urgently requires of us.

Admirably, students at UNC have consistently opposed attempts to stifle public education and critical thought. This includes strong resistance to smear campaigns against UNC orchestrated by the John William Pope Center that aim to justify university budget cuts in order to advance the program of tax cuts being pushed by North Carolina’s state legislature.

It is time to end the hijacking of the public trauma of 9/11 for the service of such narrow political agendas. To ask critical questions about the legacies of mass atrocity is our collective responsibility. If we don’t answer that call, there will be no possibility of moving beyond the acts of retribution, hatred and fear that continue to remake today’s world in the image of Manhattan’s rubble.

Neel Ahuja is associate professor of English, comparative literature and geography at UNC-Chapel Hill. He is the author of “Bioinsecurities: Disease Interventions, Empire, and the Government of Species,” forthcoming from Duke University Press. He teaches the courses “Literature of 9/11” and “The New Wars” at UNC.

http://heterodoxacademy.org/2015/09/23/how-marcuse-made-todays-students-less-tolerant-than-their-parents/

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/10/05/incident-mount-holyoke-renews-debate-talking-about-race-classrooms

Brown called the letter insincere and “nonchalant.” She said the “briefness of the letter not only represents how much of a priority Professor Hill did not find this matter to be, but also how much administrators found it to be.”

In response, she wrote her own letter to college administrators, which she shared in Radix. She asked the administration to “take responsibility for your employees -- especially the tenured professors. Stop protecting them. Professor Hill is not and has never been the only professor to provide such a hostile, uncomfortable environment in a classroom. From sociology to politics to computer science, almost every student I've encountered can share a story about a time they were forced to feel belittled, humiliated and hindered by tenured professors.”

Brown also said that the college’s emphasis on cultural diversity in recruiting fell short in practice, once recruits arrived on campus.

Lastly, she said, “Recognize that, despite recent accounts from multiple old, white critics and professors, ‘freedom of speech’ has not been lost. Asking to be treated with basic human decency and not tolerating a mind-set appropriately placed in the 1950s does not make for a ‘softer’ generation.

“We are sick of your intolerance and portrayal of political correctness as a negative modern-day attribute. We have found that it is high time for your bullshit to be put on display for all to see.”

that classroom discussion sounds horrible, what a terrible thing for a prof to

I wish they could have gone to the prof first to complain, though a prof who would say those things in class seems like to be the kind of prof who likes to be "intimidating" to students, big loud fish in a little pond kinda thing, imagining himself as a drill sergeant (I'm sure you all know the type). I might just go to the chair in that case too.

sheesh, now i am sorry for starting that thread when i look at this one. just ignore that other one.

http://mancunion.com/2015/10/07/update-yiannopoulos-also-banned-from-censorship-event/

Following the decision to prohibit Julie Bindel from speaking at an event hosted by the University of Manchester Free Speech and Secular Society, the Students’ Union Executive Team have now moved to ban men’s rights activist Milo Yiannapoulos, who was originally scheduled to debate alongside her.

Bindel and Yianapoulos were both booked to speak at a debate entitled “From liberation to censorship: Does modern feminism have a problem with free speech?” to take place on the 15th of October.

In their initial statement the Students’ Union Executive Team rejected Bindel on the grounds that her appearance would be “potentially in breach of [ the ] safe space policy.”

Yiannopoulos was, however, initially permitted to attend, albeit under the conditions the event had increased security levels and was ticketed.

In a comment on the Manchester Students’ Union Facebook page to this original decision Yiannopoulos wrote, “I’m astonished that I wasn’t outright banned as well. I’ll have to up my game!”

Women’s Officer Jess Lishak posted an extended explanation in a blog post—since removed due to developments in this situation—to her official Facebook page. In this she described Bindel as a “famous transphobe,” and Yiannopoulos as a “professional misogynist.”

Since this, however, the Union has said that they have been made aware of new information and evidence regarding Yiannopoulos and have amended their original statement after seeking legal advice.

In an update to their original announcement, the Union stated: “Further to our previous decision to ban Julie Bindel from speaking on campus, we are extending this decision to Milo Yiannopoulos.

“We have been made aware of various comments lambasting rape survivors and trans* people, and as such we are concerned for the safety of our students on the topic of this event. He is a rape apologist and has repeatedly used derogatory and debasing ableist language when describing members of the trans* community.

“This undermines the principles of liberation enshrined in the Students’ Union, as outlined in the Safe Space policy. We believe these views could incite hatred against both trans* people and women who have experienced sexual violence. As we believe it is probable these views would be aired in this discussion should he be allowed to speak on campus, we have no choice but to ban him.

“As we made clear to the society, this means that this event with the proposed speakers will not be going ahead under the banner of the Students’ Union, with our support or using our resources.”

Yiannopoulos posted an article to his own blog last year titled “Transgenderism is a psychiatric disorder: Its sufferers need therapy, not surgery”.

The Free Speech and Secular Society is yet to officially respond to this development, but they promised in yesterday’s statement that they will postpone the event and “will not go ahead… until some of the conditions imposed upon us have been lifted.”

Julie Bindel also tweeted, directly to the Union: “I am going to fight you in this. You are the straw that broke the camel’s back.”

Talks are ongoing between the Executive and the Free Speech and Secular Society about this situation.

Responding to the news, Yiannapoulos told The Mancunion: “I’m a provocateur and it’s always going to be easy for uptight, censorious types to misrepresent my tweets, jokes and column-writing as ‘hateful.’

“And I know how badly I get under the skin of authoritarian finger-waggers, so I’m not surprised to have been banned. But I’m shocked that Julie Bindel is still getting this eleven years after a column she has apologised for many times.

“I make no apologies for questioning bullshit rape statistics and setting out my views on better treatment pathways for transgender patients. That I do so in strong and occasionally waspish language is irrelevant.

“Indeed, the whole point of the debate was to consider whether feminism has a problem with unfettered speech. I think now we know.”

Bindel and Yianapoulos were both booked to speak at a debate entitled “From liberation to censorship: Does modern feminism have a problem with free speech?” to take place on the 15th of October.

lol why

waspish

Bindel and Yianapoulos were both booked to speak at a debate entitled “From liberation to censorship: Does modern feminism have a problem with free speech?” to take place on the 15th of October.

so, they set a trap, and campus administrators walked right into it. congrats all!

Branwell just wrote an eloquent and great post on the other thread, but are we seriously discussing Milo under the banner of 'free speech'? The guy is organizing harassment of people he disagrees with, he is NOT a free speech advocate. He is a lying scumbag who's every word is about silencing dissent.

yeah he seems like a turd who's using this whole situation to his advantage. hence the "trap" i referred to earlier.

he sounds like a creep obviously, the point of interest was in the theme and the running of the invites, which you'd think organizers would be cautious with given THE NAME OF THE EVENT.

i don't know the speaker's rep. it sounds like she had her bona fides as a feminist prior to her notoriety from her 'no trans ppl in women-only spaces' views.

http://www.chron.com/local/education/campus-chronicles/article/campus-carry-ut-austin-dildo-dildos-texas-6563276.php?cmpid=fb-desktop#next

TRIGGER WARNING

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/10/pistol-packing-students-make-professors-nervous.html

“If people feel there might be a gun in the classroom, students have said that it makes them feel like they would be much more hesitant to raise controversial issues,” UT history professor and petition organizer Joan Neuberger told Daily Kos. “The classroom is a very special place, and it needs to be a safe place, and that means safe from guns.”

is carrying a gun to class an episode of free speech?

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/10/pistol-packing-students-make-professors-nervous.html

“If people feel there might be a gun in the classroom, students have said that it makes them feel like they would be much more hesitant to raise controversial issues,” UT history professor and petition organizer Joan Neuberger told Daily Kos. “The classroom is a very special place, and it needs to be a safe place, and that means safe from guns.”
― j., Tuesday, October 13, 2015 1:33 AM (7 hours ago)

talk about a
.
.
.
.
trigger warning

if a student brought a gun to class i'd just leave and refuse to teach

what about a gun made out of clock parts?

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-1012-rini-microaggression-solidarity-20151012-story.html

People of color, women, gay people, immigrants: none could rely on the authorities to respond fairly to reports of mistreatment.

The cultures of honor and dignity left many types of people with no recognized way of responding to moral mistreatment. But they did not stay quiet. What they did instead was quietly call one another to witness. They offered mutual recognition amid injustices they could not overcome. And sometimes, when the circumstances were right, they made sure that their mistreatment would be widely seen by organizing sit-ins and hunger strikes.

The new culture of victimhood is not new, and it is not about victimhood. It is a culture of solidarity, and it has always been with us, an underground moral culture of the disempowered. In the culture of solidarity, individuals who cannot enforce their honor or dignity instead make claim on recognition of their simple humanity. They publicize mistreatment not because they enjoy the status of victim but because they need the support of others to remain strong, and because public discomfort is the only possible route to redress.

Of course, until recently, marginalized people were reliant on word of mouth or the rare sympathetic journalist to document their suffering. Now they have social media. So we read on Twitter about dozens of offenses, some that seem incredibly small, even petty. It's probably a bad idea to obsess too much over the details of any one microaggression; there will be some honest mistakes. But over time, social media allows us to see the pattern as a whole.

The Anti-Free-Speech Movement at UCLA

Haven't read it yet, 'cause its a Conor Friedersdorf piece for The Atlantic so I'm not sure I even need to. Just tossing the link onto the landfill.

is this all the Atlantic publishes about anymore?

basically.

Nothing says defending free speech like focusing the the history of legal battles and the power of mass media to shame some protesting college students.

it's a topic squarely in line with the "feminism might be bad?" pieces they ran endlessly a few years back.

Weird that they ran a whole article about free speech under fire at UCLA and didn't mention the attempts to get them to disinvite Cornel West from giving a talk there.

so profoundly uncomfortable with stuff like this.

https://i.gyazo.com/84e1a0ac057e1ab161c65567da46a40a.png

just the practice of "let's get this guy fired because of his comments on this facebook post" is so challenging to me--i'm a guy who believes (say) fascists should be physically confronted & run out of town on a rail at every opportunity, but something about this kind of practice is so clangorous to my soul

tbf that guy should be fired for having a Vanilla Ice haircut in 2015

who ironically is a Black Female

what you're missing is that his boss is not actually a black woman, but a white man who is striking the pose of "Black Female" ironically

'omg bros could you even believe'

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2015/10/what-row-over-banning-germaine-greer-really-about

By way of (to my mind, more convincing) counterpoint to that Helen Lewis column: http://www.out.com/news-opinion/2015/11/04/op-ed-germaine-greer-censorship-red-herring

The official NUS no-platform list is mainly populated by white nationalists and other people prone to rhetoric inciting violence. Greer is not on this list. She’s not even on a smaller list of people that the Cardiff Student Union no-platforms. (To my knowledge, there is no such list.)
Here’s what actually happened: Cardiff University’s Women’s Association had a conversation with its members about Greer’s planned lecture on November 18, 2015. They decided they couldn’t welcome Greer’s unapologetic transphobia into their community. Bearing in mind the way that ideology like Greer’s materially affects trans women—by limiting their health care options as a result of Janice Raymond’s report to the American government on trans health care, by pushing trans women out of domestic violence shelters even though trans women are disproportionately affected by domestic violence—that choice makes sense. It is also worth mentioning that this is an issue of money. Greer doubtless demands a hefty fee to speak at an institution. The Cardiff University Women’s Association seems not to want to line her pockets with money that might otherwise go towards what they view as more worthy goals.
Germaine Greer then wrote an op-ed for The Guardian, a U.K. newspaper read internationally, discussing how she’d been silenced and censored. Then she went on BBC Two, on a show called Newsnight, and she talked about how she’d been silenced and censored. In both of these outlets, she reiterated in even stronger terms her distaste for trans people. I won’t quote her remarks. The inherent irony—that The Guardian and Newsnight are much larger platforms than the Cardiff Student Union—seems lost on Germaine Greer. The facts about free speech and censorship—that censorship is categorically the province of the state, which was not involved here, and that absolute free speech does not legally exist in the U.K.—seem lost on her too.

http://www.thenation.com/article/feminism-needs-more-thinkers-who-arent-right-100-percent-of-the-time/

That Pollitt essay and the Lewis essay above both seem weirdly reluctant to deal with how the often uncritical climate around transphobic or trans-exclusionary rhetoric in 70s white feminism (by Janice Raymond, but also Robin Morgan, Mary Daly, Greer, Steinem for a time, and others) played out in terms of material consequences for trans people, and how knowledge of that history might inform contemporary feminism.

http://thenavelobservatory.com/2015/08/25/is-there-a-principled-distinction-between-refusing-to-watch-american-sniper-and-refusing-to-read-fun-home/

stupid article that can't distinguish between a class assignment in the course of studies and light entertainment sponsored entirely separately from an academic program.

at this point the thread seems to just be chronicling the ongoing efforts of the conservative oppression-complex to gin up controversy.

thread's more complicated than that

b/c liberalism is complicated

liberalism is boring

The Pollitt essay is discussed a little more here (slightly snarkily, maybe, but I agree with Thériault): https://twitter.com/anne_theriault/status/662391719535771648

ows, do you happen to know what greer's insistence on an insuperable difference between 'real women' and trans women is supposed to amount to (ontologically-politically, let's say)? i see it cited constantly and construed primarily in terms of who is included/excluded (both by her and by her critics), but never explained. how is the essential difference supposed to ground a response to gender oppression that can't be grounded any other way? i've seen greer mentioning specific (embodied) experiences of women that she says others couldn't have had, but experiences are… relatively politically fungible. and sympathies and identifications and alliances can be forged in ways that circumvent particular experiences even if the latter can't always be shared.

j., Greer's writings on trans issues (I'm thinking of her chapter on trans people in The Whole Woman, her review of Jan Morris's admittedly problematic transition memoir Conundrum, her condescending comments on April Ashley in The Female Eunuch, and her statements in 1996 while attempting to block Rachael Padman from a fellowship at Newnham College, Cambridge on the basis of Padman's trans status) seem to be motivated mostly by disgust and a dogmatic insistence on the objective truth of sex assignment at birth. Her main claims seems to be that trans people reify existing gender roles by claiming to have a gender identity different from their birth assignment, and secondarily that trans women endanger cis women's spaces by their presence. In The Whole Woman, for instance, she claims that

When a man decides to spend his life impersonating his mother (like Norman Bates in Psycho) it is as if he murders her and gets away with it, proving at a stroke that there was nothing to her. His intentions are no more honourable than any female impersonator’s; his achievement is to gag all those who would call his bluff. When he forces his way into the few private spaces women may enjoy and shouts down their objections, and bombards the women who will not accept him with threats and hate mail, he does as rapists have always done.

Whatever Greer's ideas about political strategy are, I can't really overlook the kind of disgust that seems to motivate that kind of rhetorical slippage.

*"Her main claims seem to be"

well that seems stupid of her.

i don't recall if it's come up, i'm not well versed in political philosophy, but i've wondered lately how much the creepy-liberalism-and-discontents phenomenon could be summed up as a form of left communitarianism rather than just highlighting its anti-liberalism, likening it to totalitarianism for alarmist purposes, etc.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/11/09/a-clash-between-administrators-and-students-at-yale-went-viral-why-that-is-unfortunate-for-all-concerned/

the yanked student letter linked there seems like a really pure expression of that possibility. it's interesting how it frames free speech as an ideal or as a venue pertaining to intellectual matters in opposition to the duties of care pertaining to community.

Re: getting people kicked out of their jobs upthread about Ed Roy and a feeling that it was wrong - I agree with that feeling. At least partly because I've seen it blow up on facebook where the target is someone much less obnoxious than that

There's also the problem that however awful someone is you'll never know if they have any kids or dependent relatives that they support