About Critical Mass [dot] Writing [dot] Reviews [dot] Contact
« previous entry | return home | next entry »

September 15, 2007 [feather]
Chemerinsky is not alone

He has good company in former Harvard president Lawrence Summers. The UC Regents had invited Summers to speak at their upcoming board meeting--but they rescinded the invitation after women faculty at UC Davis circulated a petition opposing Summers' visit:


UCD professor Maureen Stanton, one of the petition organizers, was delighted by news of the change this morning, saying it's "a move in the right direction."

"UC has an enormous historical commitment to diversity within its faculty ranks, but still has a long way to go before our faculty adequately represent the diversity of our constituency, the people of California," said Stanton, professor and chairwoman of the section of evolution and ecology.

When Stanton heard about the initial invitation to Summers, she was "stunned."

"I was appalled that someone articulating that point of view would be invited by the regents," she said. "This is a symbolic invitation and a symbolic measure that I believe sends the wrong message about the University of California and its cultural principles."

Stanton and other women on campus began circulating a petition Tuesday night by e-mail to colleagues at several campuses in the UC system. In two days, they had collected more than 150 signatures.

"None of us go looking for a fight," Stanton said. "We were just deeply offended."

The petition states that "this invitation is not only misguided but inappropriate at a time when the university is searching for a new president and continues to build and diversify its community."

"The regents represent the leadership and public face of the University of California," the petition states. "Inviting a keynote speaker who has come to symbolize gender and racial prejudice in academia conveys the wrong message to the university community and to the people of California. It is our fervent hope that the regents will rescind this invitation and seek advice elsewhere."


This is so pathetic. I used to write long disquisitions on the ethical dimensions of behavior like this, but years of it can make a girl get very tired. And that's because this stuff is tiresome, and boring, and wrong, and pathetic, and so very indicative of the derailed character of academic life. It's more important to keep punishing Summers for a comment he made years ago--and apologized for many times over, and essentially lost the presidency of Harvard over--than it is just to move on and let free exchange happen on campuses. I doubt Summers would have devoted his time before the Regents to theorizing gender (not that I would personally care much if he did--I was not so mortally wounded by his observations as others were), and he is a brilliant man with much of value to bring to a visit with the Regents. But what does that matter when the opportunity to mob a politically incorrect academic presents itself?

posted on September 15, 2007 12:16 PM




Trackback Pings:

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.erinoconnor.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/1316






Comments:

It really does seem that academics (at least those outside the hard sciences) are, in general, more hostile to free speech than is the average citizen. Why might this be?

One hypothesis is that it is inherent in the very nature of their work--if you work exclusively with words, then words tend to become your primary reality. For a welder or a factory manager or even an electrical engineer, the distinction between "speech" and "action" is pretty clear. For someone who works with words rather than things, however, speech *is* his form of action, and hence, there might seem no more reason why speech should be unregulated than (say) aviation safety should be unregulated.

Posted by: david foster at September 16, 2007 12:17 PM



"Inviting a keynote speaker who has come to symbolize gender and racial prejudice in academia. . . "

Huh? Sounds like they confused Summers with someone else.

Posted by: AYY at September 16, 2007 4:28 PM



At what point, Erin, do scholars have some kind of ethical obligation to start ignoring their colleagues at places like the UC system if the UC system's faculty continues to perpetrate this kind of inane thinking?

Something along the lines of "I'm sorry, but I really don't go to conferences/accept email inquiries/collaborate on scholarly matters, because your institution's members don't behave in an ethical manner."

It's not worth sacrificing friendships over, but still...don't we ostracize friends who start acting kooky and disreputably?

Posted by: Armitage at September 17, 2007 3:15 PM





Post a comment:




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)