Image 01 Image 03

Political Correctness Tag

Vermont ice cream maker Ben and Jerry's drew the ire of the political correctness brigade when they released "Hazed and Confused," a concoction of chocolate and hazelnut deliciousness. Part of their new Core series, "Hazed and Confused" is injected with a chocolate, hazelnut, fudge core. "Hazed and Confused" being a play off the hazelnuts and famed Led Zeppelin song "Dazed and Confused." "Dazed and Confused" was also an early nineties movie that gave us Matthew McConaughey, and is therefore one of the best movies in existence.

WAJ: This is a guest post by Robert L. Shibley, Senior Vice President of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE). As "Yes Means Yes" mania sweeps across college campuses, and the lives of innocent men falsely accused are ruined in a witch hunt atmosphere, the FIRE once again is at the forefront of standing up for the individual. ----------------------------------- On Monday, Vox co-founder Ezra Klein penned an op-ed about how he firmly supported the affirmative consent bill recently passed in California despite his candid acknowledgment that the bill was in fact “terrible.” The general tenor of his column, which I discussed in The Daily Caller yesterday, was that you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs—the eggs being people unjustly found guilty of rape. Critics on the left and the right were equally appalled, as well they—or anyone concerned with civil liberties—should have been. Under this barrage of well-deserved criticism, Klein returned with a longer piece yesterday, attempting to justify his candid-yet-horrifying position on California’s law. He fails. In fact, despite his column’s title, “What people get wrong about the Yes Means Yes law,” he fails to even get basic facts about the law right. Klein does the same thing that so many other supporters of the law have done, which is to present the law and the campus environment in inaccurate ways that just happen to make due process abuses seem less grievous. So allow me to present a mini-Fisking of the article, and you can be the judge of who’s right. I won’t address every line of Klein’s long, doomed attempt at self-justification, but I will hit the highlights (or perhaps lowlights). There are plenty of them. Klein opens thusly:

I've seen people writing and tweeting about #GamerGate. I have no idea what that is, still. Looks like it has something to do with Gamers and Liberal Feminists (image below of Christina Hoff Sommers, who has confronted liberal feminists herself): I received the email below, which intrigued me. I'm too caught up in #Ebola to research #GamerGate, so I'm issuing a cry for help -- What is #GamerGate?
This might look like another inconsequential Twitter war, but it intersects with issues you find relevant and is gaining traction. Gamergate is a growing movement by (don't laugh) video game enthusiasts who are fed up with: 1) favoritism within the $90 billion gaming industry, namely game journalists who have essentially become king-makers and who use their influence to benefit friends and patrons to the detriment of objectivity in reporting, the financial prospects of respected upstarts, and most of all community trust.

I've written previously about California's new "Yes Means Yes" law, which codifies a strict definition of "affirmative consent" as it applies to students on college campuses. It's a terrible bill, but some liberals are touting its absolute failure to address any real problems as its greatest achievement. A group of professors at Harvard Law School recently published a joint letter in the Boston Globe begging the university to rethink its implementation of a similar standard:
We call on the university to withdraw this sexual harassment policy and begin the challenging project of carefully thinking through what substantive and procedural rules would best balance the complex issues involved in addressing sexual conduct and misconduct in our community. The goal must not be simply to go as far as possible in the direction of preventing anything that some might characterize as sexual harassment. The goal must instead be to fully address sexual harassment while at the same time protecting students against unfair and inappropriate discipline, honoring individual relationship autonomy, and maintaining the values of academic freedom.
28 professors from one of the finest law schools on the planet believe that these laws go to far. They're not just a change in policy; they redefine the meaning of "sexual assault," and "consent." They're a gross overreach into the lives of students that flies in the face of the basic concepts of justice and due process. Chief Voxsplainer Ezra Klein recently penned an article explaining why he believes affirmative consent regulatory overreach---and subsequent overregulation of the sex lives of young Californians---will eliminate the alleged culture of "sexual entitlement" on college campuses. In Ezra Klein's illiberal utopia, we achieve that goal by making examples out of men whose only crime is that they are male:

We previously wrote about the deer sterilization program run by the Village of Cayuga Heights, NY, which borders the Cornell University campus and has large deer and faculty populations. After years of bitter debate, Cayuga Heights decided that the deer population would be controlled through sterilization at enormous expense: The Cayuga Heights deer control was mostly a failure because, you know, deer move around, so sterilizing deer in Cayuga Heights didn't prevent new deer from coming into the area.  And so on. As far as I know, no plans were made to control the faculty population. I was not aware that Cornell had its own sterilization program.  I was aware that deer are all over campus. The Cornell sterilization program combined on-campus sterilization with off-campus/regional hunting. What possibly could go wrong? As the Washington Post reports (via Ithaca Voice), just about everything, Trying to limit the number of deer, with surprising results:

As Americans become increasingly concerned about the spread of Ebola in the United States, there is a growing call to cut off flights to and from Liberia. Senator Ted Cruz has even contacted the FAA. Niels Lesniewski of Roll Call reported:
Ted Cruz Asks FAA About Ebola Flight Ban Sen. Ted Cruz is asking the Federal Aviation Administration what it’s doing to prevent the spread of Ebola after the first U.S. diagnosis, which came in his home state. “Given the severity of this virus and the fact that its spread to Texas has been associated with travel, it is imperative that the FAA take every available precaution in preventing additional cases from arriving in the United States. As you may be aware, several African nations have already restricted or banned air travel to countries with confirmed cases of the Ebola virus,” the Texas Republican wrote in a letter to FAA chief Michael P. Huerta. “British Airways, Emirates Airlines and Kenya Airways have also suspended flights due to the rising death toll and deteriorating public health situation in Ebola-stricken countries.”
One recent voice on CNN, an author named David Quammen believes doing such a thing would be wrong because of slavery. I kid you not. Brendan Bordelon of National Review has the story:
CNN Guest: ‘How Dare We’ Cut Off Liberia Flights When ‘American Slavery’ Created That Country An author on Anderson Cooper’s CNN program Thursday said the United States is uniquely obligated to maintain air links with the Ebola-ridden nation of Liberia, claiming it would be immoral to quarantine a nation created through “American slavery.”

Somehow, this seemed inevitable. Just-resigned Secret Service Director Julia Pierson allegedly is the victim of male privilege, and was treated differently than a man in a similar position would be treated. This video clip -- just before the resignation -- led to charges of sexism: Those charges increased after the resignation.
At The New Republic, Secret Service Director Julia Pierson Was a Victim of the "Glass Cliff": On Wednesday, Julia Pierson, the first woman to ever lead the Secret Service in its nearly 150-year history, resigned her post amid heavy criticism over an intruder who was able to get as far as the East Room of the White House. Reasonable people can disagree about whether, ultimately, she deserved to lose her job or whether anyone in charge during such an incident would have to resign. But it’s probably not pure chance that Pierson, who held that position for just a year-and-a-half, was a woman. Time and again, women are put in charge only when there’s a mess, and if they can’t engineer a quick cleanup, they’re shoved out the door. The academics Michelle Ryan and Alex Haslam even coined a term for this phenomenon: They call it getting pushed over the glass cliff.
On Twitter, the claim was made that Pierson was just the fall gal for male failure reflecting male privilege:

There are seemingly endless programs and advocates to increase the participation of women in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) as a means of addressing the gender imbalance, which is particularly dramatic at the graduate and doctoral levels. The National Science Foundation has special grant programs.  The White House emphasizes the issue.  Efforts are made at the elementary and secondary school levels to increase participation by girls. One of my daughters was a computer science major in college (the only female CS major that year), so I'm well aware of the extensive outreach to women. Despite years of concerted efforts, the STEM gender imbalance has barely moved. Men still dominate, by a lot. But the gender imbalance is equal or even more dramatic in fields dominated by women, as this chart shows (via AEI, h/t Ron Coleman): Total Graduate Enrollment by Gender 2013 AEI continues, Women earned majority of doctoral degrees in 2013 for 5th straight year, and outnumber men in grad school 137.5 to 100
The Council of Graduate Schools (CGS) recently released its annual report recently on US graduate school enrollment and degrees for 2013, and here are some of the more interesting findings in this year’s report:

A few weeks ago, we covered the story of Columbia studentEmma Sulkowicz, who alleged she was raped by another student. Rather than pursue the matter all the way through the legal system (she dropped her case), Sulkowicz took her case to the University tribunal. Her alleged rapist was not found guilty by the campus tribunal, so Sulkowicz decided to protest her trauma through performance art (and college credit) and carry a mattress around campus as long as her alleged rapist remained on campus.  Carrying the mantel of Sulkowicz's cause, what was supposed to be a national day of action and a million mattress march, was not widely protested.  The only two protests we could find are at Texas Tech and Cornell. At Texas Tech:

Some Texas Tech University students have demonstrated against what they say is a "rape culture" on campus by laying bed sheets spray-painted with "No means No" at three locations.

The women's actions Wednesday came a day after university officials sent an email to students and faculty that called activities at a recent off-campus fraternity party "reprehensible."

A picture of a banner at the Sept. 20 Phi Delta Theta fraternity gathering, briefly posted online, read, "No means yes," followed by a graphic sexual remark.

University spokesman Chris Cook said the school learned of the banner the day after the party and began investigating immediately. Last week the university established a task force to review Greek organizations.

The bed sheets displayed Wednesday were removed by police after about 30 minutes.

Cornell took the call to action more seriously and approximately one hundred students showed up to protest. According to Casey Breznick at The Cornell Review (he also writes for Legal Insurrection and College Insurrection), a National Day of Protest Against Rape Culture took an odd turn yesterday. The protest was co-sponsored by Students for Justice in Palestine, Black Students United, Crunch: The Kinky Club at Cornell, Cornell Organization for Labor Action, the Cornell Progressive, DASH: Direction Action to Stop Heterosexism,Women of Color Coalition, and Grrls Fight Back. The protest was meant to be the decisive blow to "rape culture" on Cornell's campus. To that end, students read poems aloud. Breznick reports:

We've written previously about California's proposed "affirmative consent" bill, which codifies -- for lack of a more delicate terminology -- what constitutes acceptable foreplay between consenting adults on college campuses. On Sunday, that bill became law. Via Fox News:
[Bill author Sen. Kevin] De Leon has said the legislation will begin a paradigm shift in how college campuses in California prevent and investigate sexual assaults. Rather than using the refrain "no means no," the definition of consent under the bill requires "an affirmative, conscious and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity." "With one in five women on college campuses experiencing sexual assault, it is high time the conversation regarding sexual assault be shifted to one of prevention, justice, and healing," de Leon said in lobbying Brown for his signature. The legislation says silence or lack of resistance does not constitute consent. Under the bill, someone who is drunk, drugged, unconscious or asleep cannot grant consent.
The bill holds hostage funding for colleges and universities unless "the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing boards of independent postsecondary institutions shall adopt a policy concerning sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking..." That policy is strictly defined within the bill, and mandates new, uniform procedures for the reporting, counseling, and investigation of alleged sexual misconduct on campus.

S. Truett Cathy, the founder of Chick-fil-A, died today at the age of 93. The Wall Street Journal reports:
Mr. Cathy, an entrepreneur from an early age, built Chick-fil-A from a small diner founded in an Atlanta suburb 68 years ago into the top fast-food chicken chain in the U.S. Known for its grounding in the tenets of the founder's religious devotion as well as for its fried-chicken sandwiches, the closely held company has expanded to more than 1,800 stores in 40 states. Its sales have grown for 47 straight years, to $5 billion last year, Chick-fil-A says.... After some early setbacks, Mr. Cathy invented the original Chick-fil-A sandwich in 1964, considered to be the first fast-food chicken sandwich, and opened the company's first restaurant in Atlanta in 1967, according to a timeline on the company's website. He expanded the company in part by setting his restaurants in suburban shopping malls. Throughout, Mr. Cathy emphasized Christian values. The chain's locations are closed on Sundays and play religious-themed music. Mr. Cathy founded a youth-ministry organization, WinShape Foundation, in 1984, which provides leadership training and college scholarships to young people. Through the foundation, 13 foster homes have been created to provide long-term care for foster children in a family setting.
Chick-fil-A drew attention when activist groups and local politicians tried to force Chick-fil-A out of some cities because of its founding family's views on marriage and charitable donations. There never was an allegation of discrimination in the workplace -- this was pure political retribution, a precursor to purges such as that against Brendan Eich. We had extensive coverage of the anti-Chick-fil-A movement, including these posts: The anti-Chick-fil-A protests turned ugly at times, as Anne's video showed when this street preacher wa "chaulked": We covered Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day with many reader pictures, such as these:

This is a thing that's actually happening at Columbia University in New York City. Rather than taking her allegations of rape to local law enforcement, Emma Sulkowicz has decided to carry around her mattress as long as her alleged rapist remains on campus. Sulkowicz didn't report the rape immediately after it happened, but was convinced to report the alleged incident months later. The case was ultimately dismissed by university authorities. According to the Columbia Spectator:

As long as her alleged rapist goes to Columbia, Emma Sulkowicz, CC ’15, plans on carrying a navy blue, extra-long twin-sized mattress wherever she goes.

Entitled “Carry That Weight,” the mattress is both the visual art major’s senior thesis and a step in her journey to come to terms with her experience. Over the past year, Sulkowicz has become a prominent critic of the University’s sexual assault adjudication policies, retelling her story to various administrators and media organizations to raise awareness.

“The past year of my life has been really marked by telling people what happened in that most intimate and private space,” Sulkowicz said, referring to the dorm bed where she was allegedly raped on the second night of her sophomore year.

“I was raped in my own dorm bed and since then, that space has become fraught for me. I feel like I’ve carried the weight of what happened there since then,” she added.

Months after her alleged rape, Emma reported the incident to the school. Her case, one of three individual complaints filed against the same student, was closed, and her rapist found “not responsible.” She appealed, but it was denied and the decision was upheld.

Sulkowicz has turned what she says was a horrible tragedy into performance art.

Performance art that will suffice as her senior thesis. A fact I'll just leave there without commenting on further:

Sulkowicz plead her case to the university. But why didn't she go to the police?

Last March we covered how California Seeks to Redefine Consensual Campus Sex as Rape, and we asked the question: "How does classifying most consensual sex as rape help rape victims?" It doesn't, of course. The California affirmative consent legislation was not about preventing rapes or other sexual assaults, which already are crimes, but about redefining inter-personal relationships in accordance with radical feminist demands which always view the female as victim of the male patriarchy. The affirmative consent obligation now is on the verge of becoming law (emphasis added):
To address the problem of rape on campuses, California colleges and universities would have to adopt a standard of unambiguous consent among students engaging in sexual activity under a proposal passed by state lawmakers Thursday. If signed by Gov. Jerry Brown, such policies would be required at all public colleges and other institutions that receive state funds for student aid. They would have to include a detailed protocol for assisting victims of sexual assault, stalking, domestic violence and date violence.... Students engaging in sexual activity would first need "affirmative consent" from both parties — a clear threshold that specifically could not include a person's silence, a lack of resistance or consent given while intoxicated.
Campus relationship regulation now is about the predominance of "rape culture" theory which ensnares men into kangaroo campus courts, and even opposes objective preventative measures, like "Undercover Colors" nail polish that reacts to date-rape drugs. The normal sequence of romantic interaction now is a violation of law unless there is something more than objectively willing conduct. It's no longer "against our will," but rather, a matter of procedural steps imposed on willing, consensual participants in order to avoid creating a crime where none exists:

In Rotherham, England, a group of Pakistani immigrants and others of Pakistani descent deliberately targeted white teenage girls for sexual exploitation, with a religious angle to the targeting. The authorities knew of the exploitation, but were fearful of talking about it or going public with it for fear of being called racist or Islamophobic. So the abuse continued for over a decade, with approximately 1400 girls gang raped and otherwise sexually abused. It's all detailed in The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham, 1997 - 2013 (embedded at bottom of this post) released on August 21.  From the report: Rotherham Child Exploitation Cover
No one knows the true scale of child sexual exploitation (CSE) in Rotherham over the years. Our conservative estimate is that approximately 1400 children were sexually exploited over the full Inquiry period, from 1997 to 2013.... It is hard to describe the appalling nature of the abuse that child victims suffered. They were raped by multiple perpetrators, trafficked to other towns and cities in the north of England, abducted, beaten, and intimidated. There were examples of children who had been doused in petrol and threatened with being set alight, threatened with guns, made to witness brutally violent rapes and threatened they would be next if they told anyone. Girls as young as 11 were raped by large numbers of male perpetrators.... By far the majority of perpetrators were described as 'Asian' by victims, yet throughout the entire period, councillors did not engage directly with the Pakistani-heritage community to discuss how best they could jointly address the issue. Some councillors seemed to think it was a one-off problem, which they hoped would go away. Several staff described their nervousness about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist; others remembered clear direction from their managers not to do so.....
This has been in the British papers for days, with The Daily Mail leading the way: