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.
Ethics Alarms 
He is in Chicago, so it is possible that no lawyer would represent him. That petition had 400 signatures of (probably radical) students. I could see a law firm decline because they didn’t want to see their offices vandalized and torched. It is almost a certainty that it would happen.
I do note that the students have no problem using the same terms in their petition that they are complaining about. Shouldn’t they be given the same punishment? Oh, that goes back to selective enforcement. No one caught ‘faking’ a hate crime has ever been prosecuted for committing a hate crime. It seems like an obvious free pass, however.
I am confused. Did the exam question use “n____” and “b____” as substitutes for real words in the questions or were the unspeakable words actually spelled out? Not that it matters.
Each and every law student who either created the petition, signed it, or demanded action by the law school against the professor should be expelled forthwith, forfeiting every dime they paid in tuition. If they do not have the intellectual fortitude to read a word in a law school civil procedure final exam question, then they should not be allowed anywhere near the practice of law. They have declared themselves mentally, emotionally, psychologically, and ethically unfit to practice law.
I am a fairly tolerant fellow but this is beyond the pale. Yes, the professor caved, which does not speak well of him or the law school. However, law school is supposed to be intellectually and scholastically demanding. You read case law in criminal law courses that describe horrific crimes being prosecuted. Same with civil cases where nasty injuries form the basis of lawsuits. Many of those cases have graphic descriptions of bodily injury – hell, I represented a guy involved in a chemical plant accident resulting in terrible disfigurement. Nowhere in my contract did I state that my representation would not involve discussing or looking medical records containing photos of injuries and medical procedures undertaken. Likewise, :I represented a man accused of molesting a 5 year old girl. Nowhere in my representation did I tell him I would only represent him if I didn’t have to think about the implications or the facts forming the basis of the accusations.
If these students are too emotionally unstable to deal with some stupid word in an exam, how are they going to represent actual clients in the real world? Are they going to represent ABC Corporation up until they find out there are some sketchy facts about the company’s business, and that, yes, in fact, the company did dump toxic waste in a drainage ditch because it was cheaper than taking to the storage facility? Or, that, yes, the company’s boss routinely referred to the employees by racial epithets, creating a hostile work environment? Or, that, yes, the investment bank was actually a scam resulting in the loss of tons of money for investors swindled out of their fmoney? What will they do then? Abandon their clients because their tender sensitivities prevent them from doing their jobs? The whole lot of them should be jettisoned before they do real damage to society.
jvb
Now you know me better than THAT. I added this just now:
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.
That’s what I thought. You have been consistent with the application of your policy. I couldn’t tell from the other sources whether the words were spelled out or if the professor sanitized them in his exam. If it is the latter, then the professor needs to be fired as well because he has capitulated to The Mob and is not doing his students any service whatsoever.
jvb
And, you wonder why someone like Kristen Clarke could be nominated to head the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division?
jvb
“Is it that conservatives are weenies, college administrators professors are weenies, Americans are weenies or all four?”
There’s no lack of courage. The deck is stacked because leftists have been working on this stuff full-time for 90 years, and they’re organized. If the individual wins a skirmish, then the group will simply pick another field of battle and fight there, instead.
What? I see very little courage. Ted Cruz. Rand Paul. The University of Chicago. Professor Jacobson. Most of what I see are people and politicians trying to go along to get along, and apologizing whenever things get hot. So the deck is stacked. You expose the deck and the dealers, you make a massive stunk and make sure as many people know about it as possible. You keep fighting.
The defeatism is frightening. And un-American to the core.
The bad man made me think of the n word !
Jack said:
Related issue: Is it that conservatives are weenies, college administrators professors are weenies, Americans are weenies or all four?
All four, and it’s unethical as hell. Worse, it’s shameful. Grand Moff Tarkin, played ably by the outstanding Peter Cushing, gives us the quote to paraphrase:
“Fear will keep our ideological opponents in line. Fear of our media battle station.”
Conservatives live in fear of the AUC’s triple-threat of social media, pop culture and “news,” and its power over the American mind. That power is real, tangible, and devastating.
Then again, so were the British Armed Forces at the time of the Revolutionary War, if I recall. What’s different now? Courage, fortitude, honor and determination. Until those things are found again in the the proletariat, the Left will roll us up like the Russian Army during Case Blue in June 1942. Al Stewart’s unforgettable Roads to Moscow gives us the experience in his under-appreciated masterpiece (if you’ve never heard it, YouTube is your friend):
All summer they drove us back through the Ukraine;
Smolensk and Viasma soon fell;
By Autumn we stood with our backs to the town of Orel.
Closer and closer to Moscow they come;
Riding the wind like a bell;
General Guderian stands at the crest of the hill.
That’s how it feels to me right now. But we know how that ended — with the flames of two burning Tigers lighting the road to Berlin.
The Woke Left has taken control of the language away from the citizens of this country, and it driving hard to destroy its founding documents with every faux impeachment, every academic dismissal over some made-up violation of an ad hoc regulation, and every firing of an employee for being members of the wrong club, association, or Internet service. It is a Case Blue run through the culture, leaving nothing but destroyed careers and livelihoods in its wake, and very soon, bodies of their enemies as well both by legal and lawless process. Will we ever cry, “Enough!”?
Those who capitulate deserve their fate, which will be identical to those who do not. You can never be Woke enough. In the immortal words of Thomas Paine, if we do not hang together, we shall surely hang separately. This gentlemen just proved that to be true.
Finally, the ACLU getting on the Woke train: It’s about time. Now we can consign its ethically rotted and moldering corpse to history and remember fondly what it used to represent.
If the words are not explicitly spelled out I conclude that those who inferred the professor’s meaninings were to blame. If I saw n_ _ or b_ and I decided what was implied was a derogatory reference the responsibility for the slur would be on me. Any number of words could suffice as adjectives to fill the blank such as nut case or bullshitter.
He is a weenie for lying down and not fighting.
Everyone needs to listen to Prejudice by Tim Minchin (YouTube) and how he plays with the N—– word. Maybe some one can set up a speaker on the University’s campus, so the students can hear it as well.
It’s a gift that keeps on giving, as his snowflake students graduate and become actual, practicing attorneys!