Been one of those weeks, but a forum poster alerted me to this article. It is always wonderful when ugly happens that is close to where one works and lives.
An English professor at the University of North Carolina illegally subjected a student to “intentional discrimination and harassment” because he was “a white, heterosexual Christian male” who expressed disapproval of homosexuality, the U.S. Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights has ruled.
The good part is the the US gov’t did right. Bad part is that it happened in the first place. UNC Chapel Hill is a bastion of Liberalism, anti-conservative, and, if you really look at it, against anything that goes against the flow.
Professor Elyse Crystall violated student Timothy R. Mertes’ civil rights, the agency said, by improperly accusing him of “hate speech” in an e-mail sent to students after a class discussion in which Mr. Mertes said he was a Christian and felt “disgusted, not threatened” by homosexual behavior.
The civil rights probe of UNC involved “a discussion seminar on diversity issues — required for graduation” for which Ms. Crystall was the professor, according to Ms. Wender’s 11-page letter announcing the agency’s decision.
In a session in February, students told investigators that they were discussing one author’s views “that society affords whites, males, and heterosexuals privileges that others, for example, blacks, women and homosexuals, do not have,” the decision letter stated.
A topic of the session was “whether heterosexual men felt ‘threatened’ by homosexual men.” Toward the end of the class, Mr. Mertes stated that ” ‘threatened’ was the wrong word to use.”
So it was ok for Ms. Crystall to abuse and make disparaging remarks against a section of the population in what was supposed to be an exchange of opinions, yet, when Mr. Martes expressed his Constitutionally give Right to disagree, she abused him in email. Wonderful what the values are that they teach in school these days.
In her e-mail, Ms. Crystall told students: “I will not tolerate any racist, sexist, and/or heterosexist comments in my class. What we heard Thursday at the end of class constitutes ‘hate speech’ and is completely unacceptable, it has created a hostile environment. I am deeply sorry and apologize to those of us who are now feeling that the classroom we share is an unsafe environment, for those of us who feel vulnerable or threatened. I will do my best to counter those feelings and protect that space from further violence.”
Naming Mr. Mertes in the e-mail, Ms. Crystall wrote: “What we experienced, as unfortunate as it is, is, however, a perfect example of privilege, that a white, heterosexual, Christian male, one who vehemently denied his privilege last week insisting that he earned all he has, can feel entitled to make violent, heterosexist comments and not feel marked or threatened or vulnerable is what privilege makes possible.”
Yet, was she not responding in a hateful, racist, sexist manner, that was hate filled, and putting Mr. Mertes in a position to feel threatened? It is a real shame that this type of conduct is occuring more and more in institutions of higher learning, where the free exchange of ideas is accepted only if one agrees with the original position.
People are free to disagree with my ideas, thoughts, and positions. And, no matter how venematley I may disagree, I will allow even the nuttiest to have their say. Apparently, some teachers at UNC Chapel Hill do not.
