University of Rhode Island Condemns Faculty Member For Publishing Criticism Of “Trans-Sex/Gender Ideology”

Last week Women’s Studies Professor Donna Hughes was convicted at the University of Rhode Island for composing an op-ed that criticized what she called the LGBTQ ideology.  The op-ed actually criticized the way right too for exactly that which Professor Hughes calls intense”philosophical dreams” however, the college just items to her criticism of LGBTQ viewpoints from a feminist standpoint. The college also warned that, while”school possess exactly the very exact rights, duties, and responsibilities as other American citizens” under the First Amendment those rights are not”boundless.”
We wrote about academic freedom issues at University of Rhode Island because of its Director of Graduate Studies of History Erik Loomis, that has defended the murder of some conservative protester and stated he saw”nothing wrong” with such acts of violence. Loomis also announced that”Science, data, and technology are all inherently racist as they are developed by racists that live in a racist society, whether they identify as racists or not.”
Hughes actually starts and spends a lot of her op-ed criticizing the way right and its violent history and ideology.  But she then criticizes what she calls similar dreams on the far left. In doing so, Professor Hughes was espousing a view shared with other feminists that aspects of LGBTQ writings undermine feminist values and intentions. She asserts that”The American political left is now increasingly diving headfirst in their very own world of lies and fantasy and, unlike at the imaginary universe of QAnon, actual children are getting to be actual victims. The trans-sex dream, the belief that a person could change his or her gender , either from male to female or from female to man, is spreading largely unquestioned one of the political left”  She added that”[w]omen and girls are expected to give up their places of privacy including restrooms, locker rooms, and even prison cells”
From a free speech and academic standpoint, the issue is not the merits of this debate but the conclusion of the college to issue a public condemnation. The announcement comprises the following:
As stated in the above referenced papers, faculty have a unique duty to show due respect for the views of other people and to”exercise critical self-discipline and ruling” and”appropriate restraint” in transmitting their private opinions.
The University, College of Arts and Sciences and Department of Gender and Women Studies are working to encourage our students and the area as we move throughout — and learn from — that situation.
I’m concerned what students will”learn in this situation.”  The college states that professors don’t like”boundless” rights and they need to”demonstrate due respect for the views of other people and to”exercise critical self-discipline and judgment” and”appropriate restraint” On the other hand, the objection is that Hughes released her views regarding LGBTQ writings.  What would the mandatory”restraint” look like in such a situation? The University says categorically her”perspectives” of LGBTQ bases”can cause pain and discomfort for many transgender individuals” and the college”doesn’t encourage” them.
The only way that Hughes couldn’t cause such injury would be to remain quiet on her criticism of the motion. This is a matter that runs to the core of her writings as an academic and individuality for a feminist. I’m happy that the university hasn’t taken to fire Hughes or Loomis. I don’t have any problem with President David Dooley talking in his personal capacity against Hughes or composing a counter post addressing her different points of criticism.  But he chose to have the college as a complete condemn an academic for expressing her nod to LGBTQ writings from her very own feminist perspective.
The silence of additional faculty at the college to help their student’s rights to free speech and academic freedom is, deafening.
Just like this:Like Loading…