Social Justice Warriors Cannibalizing Each Other: PC Professor In Hot Water For Using The “N-Word” To Describe Her Own “White Privilege”
http://downtrend.com/robertgehl/social-justice-warriors-cannibalizing-each-other-pc-professor-in-hot-water-for-using-the-n-word-to-describe-her-own-white-privilege Robert Gehl
March 4, 2016
Social Justice Warriors are eating their own.
It was inevitable that he movement would begin cannibalizing themselves and it’s happening at the University of Kansas.
Professor Andrea Quenette was talking about “white privilege” – like a good little white academic that she is – when she uttered the “N-Word” in a discussion about how she fails to see everyday racism.
It caused such chaos and angst among students that she was placed under investigation, her students refused to come to class and she wa forced to take the semester off, The Daily Beast is reporting.
So what exactly did she say? Here’s how it went down, according to the students:
We students in the class began discussing possible ways to bring these issues up in our classes when COMS 930 instructor Dr. Andrea Quenette abruptly interjected with deeply disturbing remarks. Those remarks began with her admitted lack of knowledge of how to talk about racism with her students because she is white. “As a white woman I just never have seen the racism… It’s not like I see ‘bleep’ spray-painted on walls…” she said.
That’s it. She didn’t call anybody a racist. She didn’t use the term disparagingly. She only used it to explain her own “white privilege.” But for that, she’s in big trouble.
Quenette later clarified in an email to Inside Higher Ed that “I did not call anyone this word, nor did I use it to refer to any individual or group. Rather, I was retelling a factual example about an issue elsewhere.” The exact phrasing she used is disputed.
But she did not use inappropriate language to describe any of her students—or to describe anyone else. She was describing her own blindness to racial animus. Could she have used different language? Sure. Should she have? Probably. But genuine self-reflection isn’t usually rehearsed. This wasn’t a public address—it was a classroom discussion about a controversial topic. Some imprecision should be expected, and tolerated.
One can hold the position, I suppose, that it is never OK to utter the n-word, even in a merely explanatory way. I would argue that doing so gives the word additional power to inspire fear, like saying “You Know Who” instead of “Voldemort.” Wendy Kaminer, a lawyer, feminist, and former board member of the American Civil Liberties Union, argues persuasively that there is an “obvious difference between quoting a word in the context of discussing language, literature or prejudice and hurling it as an epithet.”
In any case, given that Quenette’s intention was to shed light on her own lack of experience with racism, rather than to offend her students, it seems like a simple apology and promise to be more cautious with hurtful words ought to have sufficed.
Quenette’s use of the n-word, however, was not her students’ only complaint. She also suggested that students were dropping out of KU not because they were victims of racism or felt threatened on campus, but because of their low grades. Uh oh.
The students wrote:
This statement reinforces several negative ideas: that violence against students of color is only physical, that students of color are less academically inclined and able, and that structural and institutional cultures, policies, and support systems have no role in shaping academic outcomes. Dr. Quenette’s discourse was uncomfortable, unhelpful, and blatantly discriminatory.
The letter goes on to describe Quenette’s conduct as “morally abhorrent,” “dangerous,” and “racially violent.” The students demanded her immediate termination on grounds that her very presence was making the campus unsafe for persons of color. Again, Quenette is a communications professor—one making a good-faith effort to understand her students’ emotional pain—not the grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.
Quenette’s remarks are defensible on the usual free-speech grounds: Public universities are bound to follow the First Amendment, and faculty and students have every right to engage in controversial and offensive expression. By launching an investigation into her behavior, KU is chilling her speech.
What’s more, even deeply disturbing statements can serve an educational purpose. If someone is saying something wrong, or offensive, on campus, the solution is to call them out for it. Everyone will walk away from the exchange a little smarter.
Quenette made statements about phenomena she had witnessed. That’s all. Those statements might be wrong, but how can anyone figure out if they are wrong if they are un-sayable in the classroom?
Furthermore, if it’s offensive and racially discriminatory to use the n-word in any context—even an observational, apologetic, I-don’t-suffer-abuse-from-this-word context—aren’t Quenette’s students guilty of the same crime? After all, they used the word, too: in their open letter.
Perpetually offended students are engaged in a campaign of repression against faculty members who bother them. Their victims include: Teresa Buchanan, an instructor who was fired used for using adult humor and language in class (gasp!); Professor Laura Kipnis, who was subjected to a witch hunt for disagreeing with modern feminists; Erika Christakis, whose indifference to offensive Halloween costumes provoked the mob; and countless others whose ordeals have inspired fewer headlines. What will happen when no one is left on campus to tell students they might just be wrong?
They will have gotten exactly what they want.
“KU students are demanding that the university end academic freedom in any meaningful sense of the term,” wrote Bonilla.
