Butler U. stikes back at student who exposed Professor’s ‘American-ness, maleness, whiteness, heterosexuality’ diatribe
There is a fascinating update to the story we recently covered, Butler Prof. jumps the “American-ness, maleness, whiteness, heterosexuality” shark.
In The College Fix, editor Nathan Harden reports that the Butler University admissions office blog has targeted the student author who decried bias against straight, white males at the institution — blaming the victim, yet completing making his case about institutional discrimination.
Butler University is striking back at the student whose recent article exposing anti-male, anti-white, anti-heterosexual bias at the university has gained national attention.
In the original article, Ryan Lovelace, Butler student and Fix contributor, explained how he was presumed guilty of racism, sexism and homophobia when he enrolled in a political science class taught by a black female professor:
Butler University asks students to disregard their “American-ness, maleness, whiteness, heterosexuality, middle-class status” when writing and speaking in the classroom – a practice the school’s arts and sciences dean defended as a way to negate students’ inherent prejudices…
Clearly, the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at Butler University believes its students were raised as racist and misogynist homophobes who have grown to harbor many prejudices, a stance that is both offensive and hostile to any student’s ability to learn.
As a student at an institution predominantly focused on the liberal arts, I expected to hear professors express opinions different from my own. I did not expect to be judged before I ever walked through the door, and did not think I would be forced to agree with my teachers’ worldviews or suffer the consequences…
Presumably, Lovelace did not expect to be singled out and publicly criticized on his university’s website either, simply for expressing his views.
Penned by fellow student Andrew Erlandson, and published on the university admissions office blog, two articles on the university’s official website take aim at Lovelace for blowing the situation “out of proportion” and for failing to be “adaptable.”
One article, entitled “The Real Problem is the Student,” takes direct aim at Lovelace. “’To write and speak in a way that does not assume American-ness, maleness, whiteness, heterosexuality, middle-class status, etc. to be the norm…’ is rather reasonable for a political science class,” the article states.
The university seems to have missed the point of Lovelace’s complaint, which had to do with presumption of guilt inherent in the above statement–as well as the hypocrisy behind the idea that American-ness, maleness, whiteness, etc. must be singled out as invalid in an academic world that creates entire departments dedicated to narrow world views such as black studies, chicano studies, women’s studies, or gay and lesbian studies.
The failure of left-wing academics to recognize the hypocrisy of continually talking about the need for “diversity” while simultaneously seeking to suppress or discredit people who happen fall outside the left’s list of favorite victim groups shows that diversity is the last thing on their minds. This is about class warfare, gender warfare, and perpetuating racial grievance.
Nevertheless, Lovelace’s article has helped focus national attention on the issue of liberal bias and reverse discrimination in the classroom. (See here, and here, and here, for just a few examples.) In so doing, Lovelace has advanced the true and proper goals of higher education, which are to advance knowledge and provide a forum for free academic expression–not to demonize white male heterosexual Americans or enforce speech codes.
Butler Univ. Criticizes Student Who Exposed Attack on ‘American-ness, maleness, whiteness, heterosexuality’ (The College Fix)
Comments
Two classic communist tricks at play here.
Alinski Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.
Group self-criticism.
Both of these are aimed to bend the individual to group-think. Each person is presumed guilty -When did you stop beating your [wife, spouse, significant other, Party A/B, choose whatever au courant PC term is in vogue] – in order to immediately shift the burden of proof, thereby putting the target on the defensive.
Pure Samokritika (Russian; but the technique was/is widely used in Communist China and anywhere else totalitarism rules such as contemporary college kempii),
“Scholars long ago noted that Soviet party meetings and congresses had changed by the 1930s. Before that time, they had been lively forums for policy debate and discussion. In the 1930s, when open opposition was no longer tolerated, these meetings seem at first glance to have been pointless scenes where policies already decided above were dictated to the assembled members, where challenges to and debates about those policies were prohibited, and where those decisions were approved unanimously.
“It was always the same. Attendance was mandatory. A reporter read a long report and draft resolution, carefully prepared in advance with attention to the approved slogans and linguistic conventions. Then, each speaker (and most activists were expected to speak) expressed “complete agreement” with the report and provided appropriate embellishments. In short, party meetings from the Central Committee down to the party cell had become apparently empty rituals.”
http://universityforstrategicoptimism.wordpress.com/2012/01/18/samokritika/