Cancelling Dr. Seuss

[Wahoo Redux]

What?   I have asked this, ahem, individual, who continues to avoid my arguments, and who has made the hideous claim that I am mentally ill, because I am evincing opposition to homosexuality.  I am opposed to homosexuality. 

Again... why do you care? Unless you would like to have sex with a specific person, and they with you, how is it any of your business with which gender(s) they conduct such activities?

What is too bad is that kay's posts going back are intelligent and insightful, if slightly prolix, about curriculum, Latin 101, and academia generally.  Then came this Ashley Griner business and something just exploded out of this dude/dudette. 

[Wahoo Redux]

New Lines Magazine: An Academic Is Fired Over a Medieval Painting of the Prophet Muhammad

Lower Deck:

The dismissal of an instructor at Hamline University on baseless charges of 'Islamophobia' raises concerns about freedom on campus

The "Islamophobic incident" catalyzed plenty of administrative commentary and media coverage at the university. Among others, it formed the subject of a second Oracle article, which noted that a faculty member had included in their global survey of art history a session on Islamic art, which offered an optional visual analysis and discussion of a famous medieval Islamic painting of the Prophet Muhammad. A student complained about the image's inclusion in the course and led efforts to press administrators for a response. After that, the university's associate vice president of inclusive excellence (AVPIE) declared the classroom exercise "undeniably inconsiderate, disrespectful and Islamophobic."

Neither before nor after these declarations was the faculty member given a public platform or forum to explain the classroom lecture and activity. To fill in the gap, on Dec. 6, an essay written by a Hamline professor of religion who teaches Islam explaining the incident along with the historical context and aesthetic value of Islamic images of Muhammad was published on The Oracle's website. The essay was taken down two days later. One day after that, Hamline's president and AVPIE sent a message to all employees stating that "respect for the observant Muslim students in that classroom should have superseded academic freedom." The essay's censorship and the subsequent email by two top university administrators raise serious concerns about freedom of speech and academic freedom at the university.

The instructor was released from their spring term teaching at Hamline, and its AVPIE went on the record as stating: "It was decided it was best that this faculty member was no longer part of the Hamline community." In other words, an instructor who showed an Islamic painting during a visual analysis — a basic exercise for art history training — was publicly impugned for hate speech and dismissed thereafter, without access to due process.

The student newspaper, The Oracle, with its articles:

https://hamlineoracle.com/10750/news/who-belongs/

https://hamlineoracle.com/4293/news/conversation-combats-media-perpetuated-fear/


Another editorial on the event:

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2022/12/24/professor-fired-for-showing-art-class-image-of-muhammad-with-his-face-visible-something-not-unusual-in-the-history-of-islamic-art-students-and-university-go-wild-with-crazy-allegations-of-islamop/

[marshwiggle]

New Lines Magazine: An Academic Is Fired Over a Medieval Painting of the Prophet Muhammad

Neither before nor after these declarations was the faculty member given a public platform or forum to explain the classroom lecture and activity. To fill in the gap, on Dec. 6, an essay written by a Hamline professor of religion who teaches Islam explaining the incident along with the historical context and aesthetic value of Islamic images of Muhammad was published on The Oracle's website. The essay was taken down two days later. One day after that, Hamline's president and AVPIE sent a message to all employees stating that "respect for the observant Muslim students in that classroom should have superseded academic freedom." The essay's censorship and the subsequent email by two top university administrators raise serious concerns about freedom of speech and academic freedom at the university.

The instructor was released from their spring term teaching at Hamline, and its AVPIE went on the record as stating: "It was decided it was best that this faculty member was no longer part of the Hamline community." In other words, an instructor who showed an Islamic painting during a visual analysis — a basic exercise for art history training — was publicly impugned for hate speech and dismissed thereafter, without access to due process.

Wahoo, since you posted this, I'd be fascinated to hear your take on what university administrators should have said publicly when this came up, to be both respectful of Muslim students and academic freedom. Should they have said that "respect for academic freedom should have superseded the wishes of observant Muslim students in that classroom" or something of that nature?

[waterboy]

For me, the professor did the correct thing in announcing this was going to happen and giving the students the opportunity to opt out. If we acceded to not talking about things that offended people, there probably wouldn't be much to discuss. I think the professor was treated terribly.

[Wahoo Redux]

New Lines Magazine: An Academic Is Fired Over a Medieval Painting of the Prophet Muhammad

Neither before nor after these declarations was the faculty member given a public platform or forum to explain the classroom lecture and activity. To fill in the gap, on Dec. 6, an essay written by a Hamline professor of religion who teaches Islam explaining the incident along with the historical context and aesthetic value of Islamic images of Muhammad was published on The Oracle's website. The essay was taken down two days later. One day after that, Hamline's president and AVPIE sent a message to all employees stating that "respect for the observant Muslim students in that classroom should have superseded academic freedom." The essay's censorship and the subsequent email by two top university administrators raise serious concerns about freedom of speech and academic freedom at the university.

The instructor was released from their spring term teaching at Hamline, and its AVPIE went on the record as stating: "It was decided it was best that this faculty member was no longer part of the Hamline community." In other words, an instructor who showed an Islamic painting during a visual analysis — a basic exercise for art history training — was publicly impugned for hate speech and dismissed thereafter, without access to due process.

Wahoo, since you posted this, I'd be fascinated to hear your take on what university administrators should have said publicly when this came up, to be both respectful of Muslim students and academic freedom. Should they have said that "respect for academic freedom should have superseded the wishes of observant Muslim students in that classroom" or something of that nature?

Well, firstly, I am simply cataloging these stories when I find them.  We have a form of hysteria banging around our schools right now coming from all angles.  Four innocuous books in a high school library ignite a federal investigation because some people cannot stand other people who are not like them, for instance.  Or the University of Idaho has to pay $90K to Christian students because admin panic over a peaceful and legitimate campus debate and issue a "no contact" order. 

But since you asked...

Admittedly, it is easy to armchair quarterback.  What would I, or any of us, do if we were an administrator who suddenly finds themselves confronted with the potential for protests and headlines and calls for my head because a minority student made a charge regarding racial or religious bias?  It would take a strong personality not to panic (which is what I suspect happened at the U of Idaho and Oberlin and countless other campuses); it would seem that the default is to leap dramatically to the defense of the complaining student and to thoroughly denounce the "offending" faculty member. 

And part of this gestalt is the reaction of students themselves.  I didn't much care for the Netflix series The Chair (predictable in many ways and then boringly unlikely in others), but I did like the subplot involving a professor who makes an ill-advised, off-the-cuff comment in class and is accused of being a Nazi.  No matter how the professor character tries to explain, the students insist on being outraged and the administration insists on extremes of damage control.  This seems like accurate satire to me.

So, I admit that, if I were in the captain's seat, I might do exactly what admin in this case did.

However!  I HOPE that I would have the strength of character not to ruin the career of an academic (not to mention exposing the school to a lawsuit----which is what I hope happens) over a perfectly legitimate, voluntary, and announced exercise appropriate for the subject matter of the class and supported by other academics and subject-matter experts because of a student's phobic hypersensitivity.  And I say "phobic hypersensitivity" realizing that I too might feel the same way as a Muslim growing up in the two decades since 9/11...but that does not change the dynamic.

That is a long way around saying that I would hope, if I were the provost (or whatever), that I would say something along the lines of

'While we realize and respect that images of the Prophet Mohammad are sacred and considered offensive to those who believe that the Prophet should not be portrayed, we also recognize that Persian paintings from the middle ages, created by practicing Muslims of the era, are also important and beautiful artifacts from art history.  In an effort to better understand cultures from around the world and from other ages, we support the academic freedom of our faculty to respectfully engage..." blah, blah, blah boilerplate, and then suggest a public forum in which to discuss the controversy, including the student who made the complaint.  Or something like that.  I hope. 

[kaysixteen]

Awright I have been cogitatin' on it, and I guess, what the hey, I will answer the question as to why it is I have been so strident in my views here.  Put simply, there are several factors: 1) I believe that, irrespective of religious views on the matter, non-monogamous sexual relationships ,and indeed any sexual relationships outside of a one man-one woman marital one, are greatly injurious to public morality, the family, children, etc., and my religious views only intensify and solidify my thinking here, 2) I am concerned about the tendency amongst ostensibly bible-believing evangelicals to ignore scriptures that violate the trends and fashions of the day, and these not only including those concerning sexual mores, and, like it or not, well, ahem.... 3) I am concerned that our acceptance of alternative sexual mores (including abortion on demand) greatly risks our country being punished by God.  I get that this last thing is likely very strange to almost all of ye here, but it is what it is.   I read the scriptures, and I do not like what I find.

[Wahoo Redux]

Awright I have been cogitatin' on it, and I guess, what the hey, I will answer the question as to why it is I have been so strident in my views here.  Put simply, there are several factors: 1) I believe that, irrespective of religious views on the matter, non-monogamous sexual relationships ,and indeed any sexual relationships outside of a one man-one woman marital one, are greatly injurious to public morality, the family, children, etc., and my religious views only intensify and solidify my thinking here, 2) I am concerned about the tendency amongst ostensibly bible-believing evangelicals to ignore scriptures that violate the trends and fashions of the day, and these not only including those concerning sexual mores, and, like it or not, well, ahem.... 3) I am concerned that our acceptance of alternative sexual mores (including abortion on demand) greatly risks our country being punished by God.  I get that this last thing is likely very strange to almost all of ye here, but it is what it is.   I read the scriptures, and I do not like what I find.

So, the long and short of it is that your Christian beliefs dictate your views regarding LGBTQ.  Yeah, okay.  You sure took a long way around finding that out.

As a classicist you know all about Gilgamesh, Zoroaster, the rebirth of Osiris, Deucalion, the Essenes, the Apocrypha, and the many, many revisions and translations of the Bible throughout millennia.  You understand metaphor, parable, and analog.  You must know a fair amount about ancient history.

Do you eat ham?

Do you bring two doves to a priest after the birth of a child?

Well, never mind.  The thing about religion is that it is often----not always, but often----insulated from these kinds of discussions.  Faith is nonempirical.  It does not require history or logic, it simply requires that you believe.  You can believe in UFOs in the tail of a comet if you want or the prophetic power of the Tarot deck-----and who can tell you differently?

Fair enough.  You read the scripture and it dictates your fear.

Your method of saving culture seems to be backfiring, however.

Specifically, 1) prove it.  Prove that homosexuality is bad for culture.  Infidelity, polyamory, abortion, and homosexuality have always been part of the human fabric, rightly or wrongly.  You seem most fixated on LGBTQ issues, or at least they sure fire you up.  You can "believe" whatever you want but that system no longer seems to be working.

[kaysixteen]

I suppose we could continue the discussion on the merits and effects of homosexuality later, but I am not sure anyone else here would want this.   But I do have to comment on your use of various Levitical laws, and how Christians do not follow these laws.   You do realize that things like the dietary laws and the OT animal sacrifice systems were specifically and unambuously repealed in the NT, right?

[marshwiggle]

That is a long way around saying that I would hope, if I were the provost (or whatever), that I would say something along the lines of

'While we realize and respect that images of the Prophet Mohammad are sacred and considered offensive to those who believe that the Prophet should not be portrayed, we also recognize that Persian paintings from the middle ages, created by practicing Muslims of the era, are also important and beautiful artifacts from art history.  In an effort to better understand cultures from around the world and from other ages, we support the academic freedom of our faculty to respectfully engage..." blah, blah, blah boilerplate, and then suggest a public forum in which to discuss the controversy, including the student who made the complaint.  Or something like that.  I hope.

Thanks. That's a reasonable response.

A question I have for anyone in general, is this: When did we as a a society forget that young people have lots of passion but very little experience, so that what gets them upset and what they think needs to happen are understandably over-the-top?

In all of the "culture wars", the really disturbing part is that those who should be the "adults in the room", e.g. parents, academics, journalists, university administrators, etc. just automatically treat not only the emotional response of young people as genuine, but their specific demands for action as reasonable and even necessary. I am not remotely an expert on everything (or even anything) that I teach, but I know enough more than my students to be able to increase their knowledge. Admitting that is not arrogance; it's just the logical justification for why I was hired.

Maybe much of this will continue for another decade or so until enough millenials and Gen Z's have children of their own and realize their need to arbitrarily assert their own authority for their kids' benefit.

[downer]

I'd just like to give a shout out to promiscuous gay sex as a moral good.

[apl68]

New Lines Magazine: An Academic Is Fired Over a Medieval Painting of the Prophet Muhammad

Lower Deck:

The dismissal of an instructor at Hamline University on baseless charges of 'Islamophobia' raises concerns about freedom on campus

The "Islamophobic incident" catalyzed plenty of administrative commentary and media coverage at the university. Among others, it formed the subject of a second Oracle article, which noted that a faculty member had included in their global survey of art history a session on Islamic art, which offered an optional visual analysis and discussion of a famous medieval Islamic painting of the Prophet Muhammad. A student complained about the image's inclusion in the course and led efforts to press administrators for a response. After that, the university's associate vice president of inclusive excellence (AVPIE) declared the classroom exercise "undeniably inconsiderate, disrespectful and Islamophobic."

Neither before nor after these declarations was the faculty member given a public platform or forum to explain the classroom lecture and activity. To fill in the gap, on Dec. 6, an essay written by a Hamline professor of religion who teaches Islam explaining the incident along with the historical context and aesthetic value of Islamic images of Muhammad was published on The Oracle's website. The essay was taken down two days later. One day after that, Hamline's president and AVPIE sent a message to all employees stating that "respect for the observant Muslim students in that classroom should have superseded academic freedom." The essay's censorship and the subsequent email by two top university administrators raise serious concerns about freedom of speech and academic freedom at the university.

The instructor was released from their spring term teaching at Hamline, and its AVPIE went on the record as stating: "It was decided it was best that this faculty member was no longer part of the Hamline community." In other words, an instructor who showed an Islamic painting during a visual analysis — a basic exercise for art history training — was publicly impugned for hate speech and dismissed thereafter, without access to due process.

The student newspaper, The Oracle, with its articles:

https://hamlineoracle.com/10750/news/who-belongs/

https://hamlineoracle.com/4293/news/conversation-combats-media-perpetuated-fear/


Another editorial on the event:

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2022/12/24/professor-fired-for-showing-art-class-image-of-muhammad-with-his-face-visible-something-not-unusual-in-the-history-of-islamic-art-students-and-university-go-wild-with-crazy-allegations-of-islamop/

The prof gave a trigger warning and everything, and still ended up fired!  Without any sort of due process.  And it wasn't even an anti-Muslim image in any way--merely a product of a different tradition within Islam.  And most of the college's community seems afraid even to speak up in support of the prof.  This is pretty appalling.

I guess as a practical matter, other instructors in Islamic studies and religious studies courses going forward are going to have to content themselves with talking about the fact that some Islamic traditions had no problems with artistic depictions of The Prophet, without attempting actually to show any such images.  Even as an option.

[Wahoo Redux]

I suppose we could continue the discussion on the merits and effects of homosexuality later, but I am not sure anyone else here would want this.   But I do have to comment on your use of various Levitical laws, and how Christians do not follow these laws.   You do realize that things like the dietary laws and the OT animal sacrifice systems were specifically and unambuously repealed in the NT, right?

No.  That is interesting.  Do you have a source that explains these changes?  What I find are atheists websites pointing out the contradictions or Christian apologists trying to justify the contradictions.

As far as a further conversation, I have no more really to say.  I grew up Episcopalian and considered becoming a priest, but in the end my faith was not that deep. 

My only problem with Christianity, contradictions and all, is when Christians attempt to foist their moral or religious views on other people or when Christians use the Bible to justify prejudice.   

[Wahoo Redux]

A question I have for anyone in general, is this: When did we as a a society forget that young people have lots of passion but very little experience, so that what gets them upset and what they think needs to happen are understandably over-the-top?

This is not necessarily true, Oh Mighty Marsh Beast.  Plenty of kids are perfectly rational beings, and more than plenty of adults are passionate in the idiotic sense.  Just look at the Trumpees.

You may just be observing the perennial generation gap in North American culture in which the kids appear "over-the-top" because they do not align with our own elder ideas and ideals.

[marshwiggle]

A question I have for anyone in general, is this: When did we as a a society forget that young people have lots of passion but very little experience, so that what gets them upset and what they think needs to happen are understandably over-the-top?

This is not necessarily true, Oh Mighty Marsh Beast.  Plenty of kids are perfectly rational beings, and more than plenty of adults are passionate in the idiotic sense.  Just look at the Trumpees.

You may just be observing the perennial generation gap in North American culture in which the kids appear "over-the-top" because they do not align with our own elder ideas and ideals.

But student newspapers, for instance, have forever been very easily enraged. Even if their cause is good, they are anything but measured in their response. Anyone here seen a student newspaper that was not extremely outspoken?
 

[Wahoo Redux]

A question I have for anyone in general, is this: When did we as a a society forget that young people have lots of passion but very little experience, so that what gets them upset and what they think needs to happen are understandably over-the-top?

This is not necessarily true, Oh Mighty Marsh Beast.  Plenty of kids are perfectly rational beings, and more than plenty of adults are passionate in the idiotic sense.  Just look at the Trumpees.

You may just be observing the perennial generation gap in North American culture in which the kids appear "over-the-top" because they do not align with our own elder ideas and ideals.

But student newspapers, for instance, have forever been very easily enraged. Even if their cause is good, they are anything but measured in their response. Anyone here seen a student newspaper that was not extremely outspoken?

I find the teapot-tempests on FOX News, occasionally on CNN, and always on Newsmax, One American News and the like.  These are the publications driving the culture wars.

I have actually never seen a grenade in a student newspaper.

I hate to keep asking this (and usually no one answers), but what student newspapers are you talking about?  I'm just asking.