We recently discussed the controversy surrounding a confrontation between Thrin Short, 16, and her sister Joan, 21, and Feminist Studies Associate Professor Mireille Miller-Young. Miller-Young was then charged with criminal conduct including Theft of Person; Battery; and Vandalism. While initially pleading not guilty, Miller-Young has now entered a no contest plea to charges to the three misdemeanors. Despite the videotape of the incident and violation of both criminal law and presumably university regulations, Miller-Young remains employed at the university.
Miller-Young will now be sentenced on August 14th, though jail time is unlikely.
The more pressing question is, now that she has admitted to criminal conduct in stopping free speech on campus, how will the university respond. I previously wrote a critical piece of the response by Michael D. Young, Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs which seems to treat the pro-life demonstrators as the problem while encouraging faculty and students not to attack such “outsiders.”
The response from some faculty supporting Miller-Young and her actions has been itself alarming. Some 2000 faculty and students have signed a petition in support of Miller-Young while only 150 have signed a counter petition calling for her termination.
Students have clearly learned a lesson from Professor Miller-Young that free speech is only protected when we agree with the message. Consider the truly chilling view of UCSB sophomore Katherine Wehler, a theater and feminist studies major: “They are domestic terrorists, because the definition of a terrorist is someone who terrorizes.” Wehler added:
“I have a lot of feminist friends that went to them [pro-life protesters] with an educated academic response, because they were extremely triggered by these images, and the activists were saying this is for ‘women’s rights,’ . . . As feminist scholars and activists, we were insulted to hear that their cause is for women’s rights, because we felt personally attacked as women. Then, we were repeatedly called murderers. That is not okay. . . In my opinion, Professor Miller-Young would never attack anyone as the media suggests unless feeling an invasion of her own personal space like anyone else would in a fight or flight situation . . . If the university did decide to revoke her employment, there would be a large uproar because she is so celebrated.”
I cannot tell you how depressing it is to read a student who holds such views of free speech. Colleges and universities were once the very bastion for free speech. Faculty once instilled core values of pluralism and free expression in students. Wehler is a former student of Miller-Young, who appears to have had quite an influence on her understanding of free speech in our society.
Source: Independent
Too many of the students are Liberals and Liberals don’t have the beliefs as Americans.
Free speech and debate is what helps us all to think, analyze, and hopefully make sound comprehensive decisions.
I’m so much into free speech, I can hardly wait for “Masculine Studies,” to be embraced on college campuses. Wouldn’t that be an interesting debate between the two gender studies departments.
Seriously, until public college campuses stop hiring their liberal brand of professors and give all thinkers an opportunity to teach, free speech will continue to be hindered and we will continue turning out limited thinking graduates who, in turn, will destroy our society as we have known it. Just take a good look at Yaki, Pelosi, Boxer and several other Northern California grads–scary isn’t it.
Mike Appleton: “Her argument essentially permits the censorship of academic views that counter what may be the acceptable or prevailing academic truths at a moment in time.”
What does that imply? To me, it implies that “academic justice” requires the dominant power to enforce one’s preferred truth in the community so it is set as the acceptable and prevailing academic truth at the moment in time – for all time.
Paul Schulte:
My views on social justice are heavily influenced by the Catholic Compendium of the Social Doctrine (which includes a large body of writings) and the work of people as diverse as John Rawls and Thomas Merton. However, I am opposed to any attempts, from either the left or the right, to control speech or thought.
Mike -since I am agnostic, I care little for what the Catholic Church is teaching or preaching, except as it may or may not affect me. As a concept, I am against ‘social justice’ as promulgated by progressives.
I also agree with Darren. Prof. Miller-Young’s antics, regardless of the criminal disposition, create civil actions for assault and battery. She and UCSB should anticipate a lawsuit.
language is used to keep the people in check. repeat something enough times and eventually it becomes the truth for those who are susceptible to the brainwashing of it