PVR “on the conflict in Israel and Gaza”

Twentieth Century Boston radio personality Dave Maynard had a full length raccoon coat he would parade around in at H-Y and HC-BC football games.

The poor performance at the hearing was preceded by a failure to have long ago adopted clear standards as to what speech is acceptable, what speech is not allowed, a process for adjudicating claimed violations, the penalties for violation of the standards, and the services to be provided to those who are attacked in speech. Making decisions on the fly is a bad way to run a large organization. The standards ought to include examples of what is and is not allowed to guard against viewpoint discrimination when a crisis develops. I understand that not every scenario can be anticipated, but a large percentage of them can.

The poor performance was also preceded by a failure to create detailed written testimony in advance of the hearing which would have explained the rules of speech on campus, discussed the application of the rules to actual incidents which have happened and suggested ways, in light of the facts of this crisis, in which the university will seek to improve its rules and responses. If the statement was too long, email it to the members and post it on the website. The advantage of taking these steps is that when committee members try to demand yes or no answers to poorly phrased questions, the witness can calmly say, "I'm sorry, but it is dishonest to expect someone to answer a question in that way. You have failed to include sufficient facts by which I can answer it. Therefore, unless you allow me to expand on my answer beyond yes or no, I can only refer you to my written statement."

The presidents did a lousy job. Should they be fired? I leave that to someone else.

Contrast PVR’s comments with the recent congressional testimony of H, MIT and Penn. Well done HC and PVR!!

I agree the university presidents did a lousy job. They should have come out & unequivocally condemned the anti-semtism on campus. They were terrible.
However, it is the role of universities to foster the free exchange of all ideas, namely, free speech no matter how repugnant /different the ideas. As such one would expect the university to support/protect all speech.In fact in recent years the complaint has been that universities rather than protect free speech have  discriminated against conservatives who do not take progressive stands on issues. I have read that  conservative/MAGA  members of the teaching staff have been let go and students have been bullied into silence for not following the progressive line. And, this should never have happened.
Maybe there should not be a line on speech itself. Rather than what one says, the line should be on how one uses one's words. Is the speech not merely words but threats or harassment? Clearly, hate speech directed at an individual or individuals crosses the line. Mobs of demonstrators vandalizing buildings, or disrupting the campus, blocking others crosses a line. Students chanting in support of Hamas' extremist brutal murders of Israeli Jews creates a climate of fear on campus.  These threats along with chanting "From River to Sea" which would as of necessity result in the genocide of Israeli Jews , create a climate of terror  on campus. No doubt under the circumstances Jewish students would be frightened, possibly not wearing skull caps or dis[playing the Menorah in this type of campus climate. These demonstrators in fact went beyond speech as their speech consisted of threats/harassment  which are clearly outside the free exchange of idea integral to academia. Their actions cannot  be tolerated.
Currently, we are living in a super charged world.  This morning at my weekly diner breakfast a dear friend told me he & his wife are not displaying their Menorah in their window due to their  fear of violence, maybe a rock hurled through their window or worse. Historical family memory? They live in suburban Westchester County. Later, we hugged as usual as a show of close friendship and mutual support during these difficult days.

Israelis characterized as colonizers/oppressor by some on the left  is quite often mentioned in  right wing press criticisms. It's a long standing issue. In fact  it was a class at HC in 1966 taught by Dr. Jacob Hen Tov that I first heard of Israelis being viewed as European colonizers by Arabs.  Although I disagree some identify Israelis as the oppressor as is their right. People can believe & say whatever as long as it does not involve conduct, namely threats/harassment of others. The issue on campus goes beyond ideology and  it is more about practices which threaten/harass others. PS Dr. HenTov was an Israeli freedom fighter who brought this Israeli colonizer thinking to spur class discussion. No threats, no harassment by anyone.

Issuing a gag order to student organizations seems to be as complicated as issuing them to high profile defendants. It shouldn't be. The first amendment is not absolute and must yield to public safety such as not being able to yell "fire" in a crowded theater.

Here is the Penn Code of Conduct.  I am pretty sure that one student cannot threaten to kill or physically harm another, but other than that, I think that just about anything goes.  It looks like it has been the policy since 1994. It allows, from what I can see, advocacy for the destruction of the state of Israel and speech condeming gay people.  I think that they can do better than this. 

catalog.upenn.edu/pennbook/code-of-student-conduct/


Code of Student Conduct
I. Preamble
When Benjamin Franklin founded the Pennsylvania Academy, he defined its mission as “education for citizenship.” In pursuit of this mission, the University of Pennsylvania is committed to achieving academic excellence, to creating an environment for inquiry and learning, and to cultivating responsible citizenship in the larger society.

The University of Pennsylvania is a community in which intellectual growth, learning from others, mutual tolerance, and respect for freedom of thought and expression are principles of paramount importance. In an environment that promotes the free interchange of ideas, cultural and intellectual diversity, and a wealth of social opportunities, Penn students take advantage of the academic and non-academic opportunities available to them, deepening their intellectual insights through formal instruction, and expanding their educational experience beyond their academic programs. Members of the Penn community participate actively in the greater Philadelphia, state, national, and international communities in which they reside. “Citizens” of the University community include students, faculty, staff and those otherwise affiliated with the University.

Accepting membership into the University of Pennsylvania community as a student entails an obligation to promote its welfare by assuming the rights and responsibilities listed below. Each individual member of this community is responsible for his or her own actions and is expected to respect the rights of others.

II. Rights of Student Citizenship
Membership in the University of Pennsylvania community affords every student certain rights that are essential to the University’s educational mission and its character as a community:

The right to have access to and participate in the academic and non-academic opportunities afforded by the University, subject to applicable standards or requirements.
The right to freedom of thought and expression.
The right to be free from discrimination on the basis of race, color, gender, sexual orientation, religion, national or ethnic origin, age, disability, or status as a disabled or Vietnam Era veteran.
The right to fair University judicial process in the determination of accountability for conduct.
III. Responsibilities of Student Citizenship
Students are expected to exhibit responsible behavior regardless of time or place. Failure to do so may result in disciplinary action by the University. Responsible behavior is a standard of conduct which reflects higher expectations than may be prevalent outside the University community. Responsible behavior includes but is not limited to the following obligations:

To comply with all provisions of the University’s Code of Academic Integrity and academic integrity codes adopted by the faculties of individual schools.
To respect the health and safety of others. This precludes acts or threats of physical violence against another person (including sexual violence) and disorderly conduct. This also precludes the possession of dangerous articles (such as firearms, explosive materials, etc.) on University property or at University events without University authorization.
To respect the right of fellow students to participate in University organizations and in relationships with other students without fear, threat, or act of hazing.
To refrain from conduct towards other students that infringes upon the Rights of Student Citizenship. The University condemns hate speech, epithets, and racial, ethnic, sexual and religious slurs. However, the content of student speech or expression is not by itself a basis for disciplinary action. Student speech may be subject to discipline when it violates applicable laws or University regulations or policies.
To refrain from stealing, damaging, defacing, or misusing the property or facilities of the University or of others. This also precludes the disruption of University computing services or interference with the rights of others to use computer resources.
To be honest and truthful in dealings with the University, about one’s own identity (e.g., name or Social Security number), and in the use of University and other identification.
To cooperate fully and honestly in the Student Judicial System of the University, including the obligation to comply with all judicial sanctions.
To comply with all contracts made with the University, such as Residential Living Occupancy Agreements and Dining Services contracts.
To comply with policies and regulations of the University and its departments (e.g., the University’s Guidelines on Open Expression, Anti-Hazing Regulations, Drug and Alcohol Policies, Sexual Harassment Policy, etc.).
To comply with federal, state and local laws.

Source: Almanac, September 27, 1994, Volume 41, No. 5)

At the risk of getting too political, it does seem inconsistent to call "From the river to the sea. . ." free speech, but say that referring to  a genetic male, who self identifies as something different, as "he" is hate speech

Israelis are on the wrong side of the oppressor / oppressed continuum and they don’t score many diversity points. In the higher academia elite circles, this is a losing proposition every time.

Harvard is also in more hot water surrounding their president, Claudine Gay. 

Lots of evidence out there that she's plagiarized her way throughout her career. 

www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/12/12/allegations-plagiarism-gay-dissertation/

My favorite plagiarism connection was when I used our school's plagiarism identification software on some older documents/articles of mine to find that I had been guilty since I cited thoughts and comments of "my name" without citing myself as their author.

"He just stole from me, I steal from everybody"   - Woody Guthrie