Last week I reported the case of a Miami University student who was fired from his job at the student paper (variously known as the Miami Student and, to locals, as the Miami Stupid) for writing a column that criticized French department faculty's use of sexually explicit material in their courses. French department chairman Jonathan Strauss objected strongly to Aaron Sanders' criticisms, and complained to Cheryl Heckler, the student paper's faculty advisor. Heckler promptly directed Jill Inkrott, the student editor of the paper, to fire Sanders. And that's when all hell broke loose. The Cincinnati Enquirer got hold of the story and reported it as a classic case of discrimination, arguing that Sanders was fired for expressing his views. Critical Mass picked up the story from the Enquirer, which drew a reply from Jonathan Strauss himself, which in turn sparked a debate about the nature of free expression and the responsibilities of faculty members to demonstrate a commitment to it (scroll down here). The Miami Student Senate put together a resolution defending Sanders and condemning campus censorship. Now the Enquirer is following up: yesterday it reported that the campus civil liberties group FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) is "eager" to take up Sanders' case. "This is an astonishing case," FIRE's CEO Thor Halvorssen said. "It shows utter contempt for freedom of speech." FIRE doesn't make such comments casually. If Miami administrators don't want their local scandal to become national news, they should start taking seriously the charge that free speech is compromised on their campus.

UPDATE: You can read a March 10 follow-up piece in the Cincinnati Enquirer here.

Modesty is a Virtue

Perhaps I should but this in a macro:

At a politically-correct university dedicated to being non-offensive, any professor who uses pornography in the classroom--something terribly offensive to a great many Americans--should be dragged in front of the campus star-chamber and sentenced to the appropriate brainwashing. Whatís sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

But let us start with an assumption: Modesty is a Virtue.

Modesty is hard-wired into the human person. There is a deep, natural desire not to display those parts of the body not normally displayed in public. There is an accompanying desire not to see these parts displayed by others or in pornography.

When teaching a foreign language there is no need to use pornography. The professor was clearly in the wrong and should be disciplined. It is absurd for a student to be disciplined for bringing this to the campusí attention.

AB, while I agree with your final paragraph, be aware that modesty is not "hard-wired into the human person." Little children often run around naked with no sense of shame. It's only when they become acculturated that they realize this is inappropriate.

As for the "desire not to see these parts displayed by others or in pornography," that depends on the individual, and varies widely. Judging by the amount of pr0n on the 'net, I'd say that plenty of people are keenly interested in seeing other folks' genitalia.

Let me add to my previous comment (don't the most salient ideas always occur to you after you've hit the "send" button?) that attitudes toward nakedness, either one's own or that of others, also vary widely according to (sub-)culture, as widely as Taliban-era Afghanistan differed from a nudist camp. In the former, modesty was defined as being entirely enclosed in a burqa. In the latter, modesty is defined as not staring.

"Modesty is hard-wired into the human person."

Been reading a little Wendy Shalit, have you, AB?

Nice spin, Mr. Prazer.

"Sanders never even saw the film."

And your point is? No reporter ever landed on the moon either. Are you suggesting that any reporter who opines about men landing on the moon should be fired? Or, are you saying that Sanders is a liar when he claims this (second-rate) movie has sexually-explicit content? Hard as you may try to spin things, the movie was NOT the issue. Sanders argument--his OPINION--was that, prior to "exposing" students to a movie containing sexually-explicit material, material that some students may find grossly offensive, faculty have an obligation to alert/warn students, and give those students who would be offended by such material the opportunity to satisfy this portion of the course by other means. Why, we might even call this "tolerance for the views of others".

"And his girlfriend was the main source"

And your point is? Are you accusing Sanders' girlfriend of being a liar too? And what exactly is a "main" source? Sanders' girlfriend tells him about the movie and says students were not alerted in advance of its sexually-explicit content. Sanders talks with other students in the class. These students, contrary to the assertion made by Jonathan Strauss, also claim that Goldstein did NOT warn students of the movies sexually-explicit content prior to showing it in class. Seems like good ole investigative journalism to me.

"It's an issue of responsible journalism."

No, it's an issue of censorship. Sanders writes an OPINION piece--an opinion piece that was read, edited, and approved by Jill Inkrott (the then-editor of the student newspaper) prior to publication. Heckler, faculty adviser to The Miami Student, goes on the warpath after reading his column. Sanders is fired for expressing his opinion, an opinion, I might add, that many faculty and students at Miami probably agree with.

If you want to see irresponsible journalism, read Heckler's piece in 2/27/03 issue of The Miami Report (see link below) in which she attempts to defend the firing of Sanders. Here is the link.

http://npio.ucm.muohio.edu/report/action.lasso?-database=report.fp3&-response=detail.html&-table=Detail&-sortField=Date&-sortOrder=descending&-op=bw&Archive=No&-maxRecords=1&-skipRecords=28&-search

Heckler engages in the very irresponsible journalism she claims as justification for Sanders' dismissal! She "slams" Sanders. She says Sanders "misrepresented the students' response to the movie" but provides no evidence whatsoever in support of her accusation. And indirectly, she uses the "his girlfriend must be a liar" defense. Finally, notice Heckler's constant attempt to turn this issue into one of "male attacks a female." Sanders' didn't criticise Goldstein, he "slammed" her. And Jill Inkrott isn't merely the Editor of the Miami Student, she's a 4.0 GPA student who has interned with Sports Illustrated! Could we perhaps get her measurements too?

Finally, see the Editor's note at the end of Heckler's column. Her most recent article was on prostitution in Italy! Did she see it first hand? Did Heckler land on the moon too!

whereare the rest of the postings? were too many people showing support for the (totally valid) firing?

Mary,

All comments that have been posted to this blog entry are here for you to read. Additional comments on the Miami situation are appended to my first Miami post, which is located here. That, too, is an unexpurgated discussion. I am not in the business of bowdlerizing my blog's comments section in order to favor particular views.