Ten years ago, the University of Pennsylvania became a national laughing stock when it unfairly prosecuted an undergraduate student for yelling at a group of noisy black women beneath his dorm window, "Shut up, you water buffalo!" There was nothing racist about Eden Jacobowitz' remark, which was in fact an unconscious translation of a common, racially-neutral Hebrew term of insult. But the women thought it was racist, and complained. Jacobowitz was charged with verbal harassment under Penn's racial harassment policy, and it was not until the national media tore Penn and its policies to shreds that the school backed down. The fallout included the repeal of the speech code, the ignominious end of Penn president Sheldon Hackney's reign, and the hiring of current Penn president Judith Rodin. Rodin has strenuously upheld the commitment Penn made to free speech in the wake of the Water Buffalo Incident ... mostly.

As Rodin enters the final five months of her presidential career (she is stepping down in July and will be replaced by Princeton provost Amy Gutmann), Penn is reaffirming its sexual harassment policy--even though that policy contains a speech code.

Here are the vital passages:

For the purposes of University policy, the term "sexual harassment" refers to any unwanted sexual attention that:

1. Involves a stated or implicit threat to the victim's academic or employment status;

2. Has the purpose or effect of interfering with an individual's academic or work performance; and/or;

3. Creates an intimidating or offensive academic, living, or work environment.

The University regards such behavior, whether verbal or physical, as a violation of the standards of conduct required of all persons associated with the institution. Accordingly, those inflicting such behavior on others are subject to the full range of internal institutional disciplinary actions, including separation from the University. Likewise, acts of retaliation will be subject to the same range of disciplinary actions.

As noted in the Handbook for Faculty and Academic Administrators, Policies and Procedures, the Academic Bulletin, and other University publications, persons engaged in such harassment within the University setting are subject to the full range of internal institutional disciplinary actions, including separation from the institution.

Not every act that might be offensive to an individual or a group necessarily will be considered as harassment and/or a violation of the University's standard of conduct. In determining whether an act constitutes harassment, the totality of the circumstances that pertain to any given incident in its context must be carefully reviewed and due consideration must be given to the protection of individual rights, freedom of speech, academic freedom and advocacy.

Think I'm over-reaching? Think again. Penn publishes a list of behaviors that qualify as sexual harassment under its policy. They include:

* Continuous idle chatter of a sexual nature and graphic sexual descriptions
* Sexual slurs, sexual innuendoes, and other comments about a person' s clothing, body and/ or sexual activities
* Offensive and persistent risquÈ jokes or jesting and kidding about sex or gender-specific traits
* Suggestive or insulting sounds such as whistling, wolf calls, or kissing sounds
* Sexually provocative comments or compliments about a person's clothing or the way their clothes fit.
* Comments of a sexual nature about weight, body, shape, size or figure
* Comments about the sensuality of a person, or his/ her spouse or significant other
* Distribution of written or graphic materials that are derogatory and are of a sexual nature
* Repeated unsolicited propositions for dates and/or sexual relations
* Asking about sexual fantasies, preferences or history

Sexual looks such as leering and ogling with suggestive overtones
* Licking lips or teeth, winking, or throwing kisses
* Holding or eating food provocatively
* Lewd gestures, such as hand or sign language to denote sexual activity
* Persistent and unwelcome flirting
* Staring at an individual or looking a person up and down (elevator eyes)
* Giving personal gifts
* Displaying sexually suggestive pictures calendars posters, statues, etc.

Is Penn a more civil place because I can file charges against any fool who calls me a name or, for that matter, sucks his straw the wrong way in my presence? No. Penn's sexual harassment policy--which has been in effect since its companion speech code, the racial harassment policy, fell in the mid-90s--adds to the already considerable problem of academic incivility by encouraging members of the Penn community to respond to inappropriate or offensive speech not with more and better speech, or even with dignified silence, but with an equally inappropriate and highly vengeful quest for censorship, prior restraint, and institutionally imposed punishment for those who cross a listener's invisible line.

A sexual harassment policy that is also a speech code promotes a victim mentality, inviting women to see themselves as helpless in the face of insult, as fragile beings so vulnerable to wounding words that they cannot cope with them on their own. It implies that the school is placing a commitment to protecting women's sensibilities above its commitment to learning. And it converts the atmosphere of the campus into an absurd parody of threat--one where danger is created by the code, rather than controlled by it. Reaffirming such a policy--rather than revising it to bring it into closer conformity with Penn's stated commitment to free expression--is a sad way for President Rodin to conclude her career at Penn.

Thanks to Maurice Black for the link.