2008 Woodie Awards
Community Voice: Against the stifling of free speech
Dr. Robert Huesca
Issue date: 10/5/07 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 2 next >
I was very troubled by what I read in the Trinitonian and from what I have been told by one of the students involved in the Affirmative Action Bake Sale recently held on campus. In particular, I was disturbed that the College Republicans were asked to change their bake sale banner by the staff of the Office for Student Affairs. I am also disturbed that the College Republicans did not resist this request and insist on their right to provoke discussion by hanging a banner that some considered insensitive to ethnic minorities.
As disturbing as these occurrences are, neither is surprising. Both are consistent with the "culture of politeness" that afflicts our campus. In the 13 years that I have worked at Trinity University, I have resisted the strong tendency in some quarters of this institution to infantilize its students by imposing stultifying norms of decency on them. I am not alone in this sentiment.
In fact, a large number of faculty and staff came together two years ago to apply for a national grant to encourage "difficult dialogues" on campus around issues that have polarized sectors of our society. In part, our grant application was based on the argument that Trinity's culture of politeness works against the direct engagement of students, faculty and staff in contentious issues. One purpose of the grant, therefore, was to begin working to extinguish this suffocating, oppressive and boring quality of our campus.
The Ford Foundation evidently found merit in our appeal and included Trinity University among the handful of institutions that received funding to encourage campus dialogues. Trinity has accepted the grant and has organized a wide range of provocative and high quality events. But it is hypocritical of this institution to take money from the Ford Foundation with one hand to encourage the discussion of difficult issues, while using the other hand to muzzle speech it finds uncivil, rude or foolish about those very issues, thereby fostering the conditions that the grant is meant to eradicate.
As disturbing as these occurrences are, neither is surprising. Both are consistent with the "culture of politeness" that afflicts our campus. In the 13 years that I have worked at Trinity University, I have resisted the strong tendency in some quarters of this institution to infantilize its students by imposing stultifying norms of decency on them. I am not alone in this sentiment.
In fact, a large number of faculty and staff came together two years ago to apply for a national grant to encourage "difficult dialogues" on campus around issues that have polarized sectors of our society. In part, our grant application was based on the argument that Trinity's culture of politeness works against the direct engagement of students, faculty and staff in contentious issues. One purpose of the grant, therefore, was to begin working to extinguish this suffocating, oppressive and boring quality of our campus.
The Ford Foundation evidently found merit in our appeal and included Trinity University among the handful of institutions that received funding to encourage campus dialogues. Trinity has accepted the grant and has organized a wide range of provocative and high quality events. But it is hypocritical of this institution to take money from the Ford Foundation with one hand to encourage the discussion of difficult issues, while using the other hand to muzzle speech it finds uncivil, rude or foolish about those very issues, thereby fostering the conditions that the grant is meant to eradicate.
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
gill
posted 10/06/07 @ 11:01 PM CST
White people suck - the white man is a scourge that must be eliminated.
Post a Comment