Ohio State's on FIRE
The university is red-hot, and not in a good way
Debbie Bitzan
Issue date: 1/22/09 Section: Commentary
|
In support of the red-light classification, FIRE specifically identified the university's "Diversity Statement" as a clear violation of freedom of speech. Selected in September of 2007 as FIRE's Speech Code of the Month, FIRE reported on the explicit regulations that are detailed in the Diversity Statement which, not only cross the line in terms of constitutionality, but are also self-defeating, if indeed they are meant to actually encourage diversity.
The first grievance which FIRE cites is a section of the Diversity Statement which at the time read "Do not joke about differences related to race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, ability, socioeconomic background, etc." Considering the ramifications of this instruction, it seems preposterous that only a year or two ago the university commanded that its student body refrain from joking about controversial matters. As FIRE points out, and as Ohio State students already know, joking in a certain manner about brash and seemingly offensive topics often diffuses tense situations and can aid in fostering understanding and communication between different students. Regardless of whether or not one agrees with OSU as to whether or not making jokes is a malevolent behavior, the policy still treads on first amendment rights. FIRE makes the point that "There is no exception to the First Amendment for ethnic jokes or dumb blonde jokes."
Another violation that the organization lists against Ohio State is also pulled from the Diversity Statement. In 2007, it stated that "Words, actions, and behaviors that inflict or threaten infliction of bodily or emotional harm, whether done intentionally or with reckless disregard, are not permitted." In an anecdotal manner, FIRE points out the ridiculousness behind this instruction. The foundation argues "How exactly does one threaten to inflict emotional harm? Would that mean shouting, "Hey you! Get out of here or I'm going to hurt your feelingsā¦"? When highlighted this way, one can see how it would be extremely hard to explain what the university's housing department was trying to say. It seems absurd to imagine such a situation being punishable, but luckily the Diversity Statement has been rewritten since FIRE's investigation. The new statement is far more pragmatic, and offers a more ethical, and constitutional set of guidelines for creating a safe environment on campus.


Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
Vincent
posted 2/19/09 @ 12:53 AM NA
"Speech codes" are where the mask really falls off of the anti-free speech attitudes of those who write and promulgate them.
For all too many in academia (and elsewhere, natch), the non-existent "right" to not be offended absolutely trumps the actual right to free speech that's enumerated in the Constitution. (Continued…)
samueljaxon
Master's Project
posted 2/10/10 @ 5:18 PM NA
Thanks for great commentary!
Post a Comment