That sentiment is picked up by Kent State LGBTQ Studies Professor Lauren Vachon, who known as the documentary hate speech. After providing the perfunctory acknowledgment that free speech is “tremendous vital,” she added “we all know that the intent was antagonism. I do assume there needs to be penalties for that. It’s not about free speech.”
I perceive how this documentary may be offensive to many, significantly transgender college students and school. Nevertheless, it’s all “about free speech.” We can’t merely label documentaries or advocacy “hate speech” as a result of folks reject your core beliefs.
Vachon is a self-described “queer activist and educator” who writes on “queer pedagogy […] and amassing queer oral histories.” That’s precious perspective for this (and any) campus and I anticipate most school and college students agree along with her underlying objections to this documentary. But, these college students are additionally a part of that range of opinion.
Each college should try to protect an surroundings that’s welcoming and tolerant. That’s the reason this controversy actually places Kent State between a rock and a tough place. Nevertheless, as a state college, it’s topic to the First Modification. Even when it will be inclined to take motion in opposition to these college students or blocking the documentary, it will be prevented from doing so.
This isn’t the primary such controversy attributable to “the Rock.” Three years in the past Kent State a similar situation arose after somebody painted “White Lives Matter” on the rock. The college president denounced the portray as a part of an general drawback with racism in our society.
The deliberate protests in opposition to the movie and the rock are exactly why that is all a matter of free speech. Professor Vachon and others can voice their opposition with equal vigor. One would hope that there may additionally be room for a substantive and civil dialogue of the underlying points. Nevertheless, as for calls to carry these college students “accountable,” the college ought to proceed its place of supporting the free speech rights of each side.
The anti-free speech motion is a dying knell for our greater schooling, significantly at non-public universities, which aren’t straight impacted by First Modification protections. The anti-free speech motion is making public universities the final line of protection for these struggling to protect boards without spending a dime speech.
Within the petition, organizers referenced the college mascot the “Golden Flasher,” and requested “how can flashes help flashes when the college is allowing hate speech?” The reply is that the college helps all “flashes” when it helps free speech. In any other case, free speech will likely be gone in a flash.
