THOUGHTS
Academic freedom/freedom of speech
The battle cries are heard from one end of the pseudo-world of academe` to the other . . . “Academic Freedom!” And “Freedom of Speech!” Once again the intelligentsia of Kansas is telling those who advocate responsibility and decency to be silent in view of their more enlightened views.
Respectable Kansans are blamed for the “shame” brought upon Kansas University by those who object to Professor Dennis Dailey’s class on human sexuality that imports erotic and obscene videos of all forms of sexual behavior and showcases the professor’s ideas about incest not harming children. Governor Kathleen Sebelius line-item-vetoed an amendment that would have cut some funding to the professor’s department, the Department of Social Welfare at K.U., opining that the Legislature had no business meddling in the affairs of the university. The Legislature just spent days agonizing over the Omnibus spending bill that includes funding for state universities.
So which is it? I guess the Legislature is just supposed to appropriate the moneys provided by hard-working taxpayers to fuel the university’s special projects and the university should not be held accountable for how they spend it. Kansas University has a reputation for being a fine institute of learning and is highly acclaimed . . . cutting edge . . . which I suppose now includes “new” thinking on child abuse and incest.
It seems more logical that those who are so concerned about the reputation of the university they love would want to get more information before they shoot the messenger. Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to make sure that Kansas University maintains an aura of propriety and decency in all the classes they offer rather than sink to the lowest common denominator?
The idol
K.U. fans who understandably love their university (my son attended there) feel affronted that anyone should attack their beloved alma mater. Since when has criticism been barred from the public arena?
Those who so strongly advocate academic freedom and freedom of speech have no problem denying our right to question the university’s policies concerning this class. Indeed, the university recently rewarded Professor Dailey with another award for excellence in teaching. That excellence in teaching includes discussions of masturbation, showing of young children’s genitals, and discussion of “attraction templates” and other really important things for our students to learn . . . as if they had not already heard and seen enough on television and in sex education classes already.
Where are the sexual harassment police?
Allegedly included in the professor’s repertoire is an invitation for students to come to him and discuss any sexual problems that they might be having, as he is a renowned sex therapist. Professors have a power relationship with their students; doesn’t it seem a bit inappropriate for a professor to encourage intimate discussions on sex?
In addition, according to one witness, those who object to the erotic nature of materials used in the class are ridiculed. Some of the reported talk in the class, particularly with females, would be construed as sexual harassment in the workplace, but I guess “academic freedom” trumps that too.
License?
Freedom of speech and academic freedom are NOT license to say or do anything they please. None of us have absolute freedom of speech ... I cannot slander someone; I cannot speak of bombs in an airport; and I cannot yell fire in a theatre when there is no fire. “Hate” speech is becoming a bigger issue everyday, with certain groups claiming that any mention of the inappropriateness of their behavior is “hateful”, yet when ordinary folks who work hard to send their tax dollars to the state coffers object to the material being offered to their children, it is off limits and “shameful.” There is such a mixed message in our society today with the “thought police” in full force, except when it is about their pet paraphilia. Parents who should know better say their kids “enjoyed” the class; these are the same parents who would not approve of their kids going into an adult book store and would be horrified if they acted on some of the things they saw in the class. Somehow if erotica and pornography reside in ivy-covered buildings it becomes okay.
The consequences
It is not okay. It is so easy to swallow the latest “theory” without looking at the awful consequences of what these people promote. What about those children used for the photographs to illustrate sexual immaturity? Why is that not covered by Kansas statutes prohibiting the sexual exploitation of a child? What about the child who is abused by a parent or uncle who is told that it doesn’t harm them; that this kind of sex can be consensual? What about the young woman who shares this class with young men who view this erotic material and subsequently is raped? What about the sexual harassment? What about the waste of time and taxpayer money?
Think about it.
In Him,
Judy Smith
State Director
Kansas University is not the only place this is happening:
Check out this article on WorldNetDaily.