News: Now even “N-Word” will get you in trouble with the thought-police.
Related issue: Is it that conservatives are weenies, college administrators professors are weenies, Americans are weenies or all four?
University of Illinois law professor Jason Kilborn used a hypothetical about a employment discrimination case for his final exam. The exam referred to the use of racist and sexist rhetoric such as “n——” and “b—-“. The same question has been on the exam for ten years, but with compelled speech and the the enforced conformity with progressive cant on the ascendant, more than 400 people signed a petition condemning Kilborn, saying in part,
“The slur shocked students created a momentous distraction and caused unnecessary distress and anxiety for those taking the exam,” said the petition. “Considering the subject matter, and the call of the question, the use of the ‘n____’ and ‘b____’ was certainly unwarranted as it did not serve any educational purpose. The question was culturally insensitive and tone-deaf.”
[Clarification: Apparently some readers were confused regarding whether the actual words were used or the version with dashes instead of letters so as not to offend. I thought the opening sentence of the post would make the facts clear: the words themselves were not used. I state once again that the Ethics Alarms policy is to use words themselves if the words themselves are the issue. The coded versions were used in this post because they were what was used in the exam.]
The petition also demanded that Kilborn be removed from all faculty committees, and that the school implement “mandatory cultural sensitivity training” for faculty and staff.
If the school did not have damaged ethics alarms and a lack of respect for academic freedom and fairness, it would have responded to the petition by explaining that the signatories were censorious and ignorant, that their petition was irresponsible, unfair and wrong, and if they could not accept this, their tuition would be refunded as they sough education elsewhere. Instead, the institution announced an investigation The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) in turn sent a letter to the University of Illinois-Chicago demanding that it protect the rights of faculty members. It said in part,
“As a public institution bound by the First Amendment and to fundamental principles of academic freedom, UIC is obligated to refrain from initiating investigations or disciplinary action over faculty members’ protected expression…We call on UIC to immediately end any such investigation.”
Now Kilborn says his classes were cancelled for the entire semester. He had to endure weeks of administrative leave as he was barred from campus and prevented from participating in normal faculty communications and activities, including his position on the university promotion and tenure committee. Worst of all, the professor says he was compelled to submit to three hours of mental examination and a drug test by university doctors and a social worker, broken into two segments spanning the course of a week.
He complains to Campus Reform,
“This whole episode is an unfortunate reflection of the state of public debate in our country today. Compromise and moderation have been left completely behind in almost all dialogues on any issue today, and the students’ and administrators’ reactions here illustrate the no-holds-barred and take-no-prisoners approach to modern conflict. It would have been so easy to foster understanding, compassion, and growth by engaging in meaningful and open discussion with me, but my dean and other university administrators in particular took the easy way out (as administrators so frequently do today) and succumbed to the lust for instant gratification of righteous indignation. There were so many options for a healthy, healing reaction to the students’ pain; none of those options was taken, and probably none was even considered.”
Yes, yes, BUT; you are a weenie, professor—a coward and a submissive victim. You are part of the problem and the threat to individual liberty, as are all of the cringing and blubbering victims of the rampaging thought police who lack the integrity and fortitude to say, “No. You will not treat me this way when I have done nothing wrong.”
You should have immediately employed lawyers on your behalf. You should have issued your own public rejection of the petition. You should have appeared on every radio and TV talk show that you could—I’m sure Tucker Carlson would have loved to build a show around you. In short you should have fought, not just for yourself but for the core academic principles and American values that the university’s treatment of you threatens. Instead, you prostrated yourself.
I have no sympathy for you after you claim to have been “compelled” to undergo Soviet-style “examinations” for the speech-crime of writing “n——“.
Meanwhile, the now fully partisan and race-obsessed ACLU announced that it will be making its primary focus “racial justice” instead of protecting free speech. Liberal supporters of the organization who have integrity should immediately stop their support and transfer their future contributions to FIRE.