We have recently discussed a number of incidents of professors acting badly in shouting down student protesters or journalists on campus. (here and here and here). This has include prior attacks on pro-life demonstrators. Now a teenage pro-life demonstrators has accused a University of California (Santa Barbar) professor of taking her sign and assaulting her on campus. Thrin Short, 16, and her sister Joan, 21, have posted a videotape of Feminist Studies Associate Professor Mireille Miller-Young walking away with their sign and getting into a confrontation with the teenagers.
The Shorts were handing out pro-life pamphlets when they say Miller-Young confronted them and became irate over their demonstration. They videotaped her after she appeared to organize students in yelling “take down the sign.” They say that she grabbed the sign and walked off–ignoring the protests of the teenagers. Campus police were called and Short says that she was pushed by Miller-Young three times — leaving bruises on her wrists — at an elevator confrontation.
On the video below, Miller-Young is seen taking the sign with graphic images and saying “I may be a thief but you are a terrorist.” At the elevator, she can be seen shoving the teenagers and blocking them. The fact (as noted by her students) that the teenagers do not go to the school is no excuse for this type of conduct. If there was some real violation in the protests (which seems dubious), Miller-Young has no authority to quash the speech. This appears a clear content-based act by Miller-Young. It is even more disturbing to see her encouraging her students to silence opposing views by stealing a sign. It is the very antithesis of the academic mission which is based first and foremost on free speech and association — and civility.
Miller-Young lists her areas as “Pornography; Sex Work; Black Film, Popular Culture and Art; Feminist & Queer Theory; African American & African Diaspora Studies; Visual Archives; New Media; Ethnography; Oral History.” Her bio states that she focuses on pornography and African-American women.
According to reports, Miller-Young has retained an attorney. Catherine Swysen of law firm Sanger Swysen & Dunkle (Notably, Swysen draws not only from her considerable legal experience but experience as a former teacher in the University of California system). She is making no comment but a student her Women of Color class, insisted that she was write to do what she did because “She’s pregnant, so she’s very sensitive to horrifying images like that.” It is very distressful to see a student supporting anti-free speech conduct, a concern expressed recently with regard to French students in suing Twitter.
She could face assault charges based on the videotape. My greatest concern is with her conduct as a faculty member. There are few violations as serious by an academic than attacking free speech or violently trying to stop the expression of viewpoints. Her actions are clearly incompatible with the position of a faculty member. The question is whether the university will act to remove her from the faculty based on this videotape. Putting aside the criminal allegations (that should be left to the criminal justice system), there is the separate question of her judgment and conduct as an academic. The delay in issuing an apology is only going to reaffirm concerns in the minds of some faculty. I fail to see a viable defense for this conduct. Once again, regardless of the status of these teenagers or the disturbing images of the protests, this was an act of free speech. If there is a prohibition on such displays (which would itself raise free speech issues), this was not how academics address controversial speech. If Miller-Young had a legal concern, she can call the police — not lead students in stealing signs and trying to silence their speech.
The faculty code states that faculty “accept the obligation to exercise critical self-discipline and judgment in using, extending, and transmitting knowledge.” This includes a prohibition on “any exploitation, harassment, or discriminatory treatment of students.” Misconduct includes:
1. Intentional disruption of functions or activities sponsored or authorized by the University.
2. Incitement of others to disobey University rules when such incitement constitutes a clear and present danger that violence or abuse against persons or property will occur or that the University’s central functions will be significantly impaired.
The admission on the tape that she has stolen the sign will not help in any university investigation. Regardless of any claim of provocation by Miller-Young, the means chosen by the professor is clearly unacceptable and inimical to the academic mission. To call people with opposing views “terrorists” is a shocking view for an intellectual. To enlist students in an act of censorship only magnifies that violation.
What do you think should be the proper discipline (if any) for Miller-Young?
Are you self-diagnosing Charlton?
I am not a fan of coerced confessions by cops and I am very aware of them. We got a new sheriff because of coerced confessions which no one would believe. The new sheriff threw out the charges and found the actual murders. One of them was just retried and sentenced to 125 years.
However, I am also aware, given the testimony of Vietnam POWs that torture does work. And the US Armed Forces trains its personnel that there is a certain point when they can start giving up information. However, there is a difference between how I would treat terrorists and how I would treat civilians. Since terrorists have no ethical standard for torture or execution of prisoners, I would play the game the same way they do.
The APA can make all the ethical rules they want to but it isn’t going to stop it happening. This is the same APA that thought homosexuality and narcissism were deviant behaviors.
Annie,
I was disappointed to find the new DSM5 nomenclature did not cut through all the wordiness and keep the definition of Passive Aggressive Personality simple. They could have summed it up in four words: Pain in the ass.
Chuck, yes indeed.
Spinelli, you could learn from guys like Chuck and Pete.
Paul, The anti religious folks and the “experts” hate AA. The facts don’t matter.
Annie,
Ever see a dog trying to eat a raw oyster? That’s what this reminds me of. Slippery and hard to hold on to as it squirts in every direction.
Good link Chuck!
pete – I only have my personal experience to speak from, but I have never been to a meeting I thought was religious in nature. Here we have hundreds of meetings, so if you don’t like one there are plenty more. My brother is active in AA in Missouri and he would not tolerate a meeting like that.
As Bill W. said, there are good meetings and bad meetings.
“Few really good guys in the world” say an awful lot about a person’s world view.
Not rogue? Did you read my story about confessions? They. Don’t. Work.
APA Ethics Committee Statement — No Defense to Torture
I got it pete, I know your thought on me.
Chuck, you’re one of the few really good guys in this world, it shows.
Somehow I don’t think they will understand the unethical nature of forced counseling for pregnant women seeking an abortion. I suspect they don’t see her as being in pain.
My friend was committed in the good old days when your family could have you committed and being homosexual was a highly deviant behavior, especially for a married woman. Thus the shock therapy..
the above was for nick
=============================
AA is not based on a religious belief
go to an A A meeting in georgia and tell them that
Jealousy is always ugly.
paul
i know judges sentence people to A A.
what i quoted was the third tradition of A A.
The exception to forced therapy is if the person is adjudicated non compos mentis, and has a guardian who can sign an informed consent for therapy. Declaring a medical emergency is only done if there is a condition that causes risk of death or injury to the patient or another person. I have signed off on MOT recommendations myself, but it takes a judge to write the emergency order. (MOT = Mandatory Order for Treatment).
We come full circle once again. Forcing a woman to undergo some sort of “counseling” and arbitrary waiting period is a clumsy attempt at brainwashing or intimidation. Such actions only risk added psychological trauma to what is already a traumatic situation. Your comment is worded in such a way as to suggest disapproval of forced treatment of your friend. However, my educated guess is that she was probably suicidal or had a psychotic break. Shock treatment is a last resort treatment, and is proven to work on breaking a severe suicidal depression 85% of the time after medications fail. Those are the exceptions, not the rule.
Forcing some sort of bogus politically or religious driven “counseling” on an unwilling woman already in psychological pain is unconscionable.
Paul, Chuck disparages AA every chance he gets. You see, the people who run AA aren’t people w/ alphabets after their name. They just get results where shrinks strike out almost every time. Jealousy is always ugly.