PC Culture

University Harassment Policy Bans ‘Offensive Jokes,’ Posters, Cartoons

To make students subject to punishment over something that is so unclear is, quite frankly, unfair.

The “discrimination and harassment policy” of Southeastern Louisiana University lists “offensive jokes,” “posters,” “cartoons,” and “drawings” as “prohibited conduct” that can be considered “harassment.”

“This conduct need not have intent to harm; if severe enough, it does not have to
consist of repeated incidents; and it need not be directed against a specific individual/group of
Individuals,” the school’s policy states.

As The College Fix notes, the university has received a “Red Light” rating from the pro-free-speech group Foundation for Individual Rights in Education — a rating reserved for schools that have “at least one policy that both clearly and substantially restricts freedom of speech.” FIRE’s senior program officer Laura Beltz told The Fix that, although she did not know of any students who had recently been disciplined under the policy, that doesn’t mean that the existence of such a restrictive policy was harmless.

“It’s important to remember that, even when not enforced, policies that restrict constitutionally protected expression have an impermissible chilling effect on speech,” Beltz told The Fix. “To use two policies at Southeastern Louisiana as an example, students may be discouraged from expressing themselves if they read a policy that requires registration of expressive activities a full seven days in advance, or one that calls things like ‘offensive jokes’ punishable harassment.”

Beltz is absolutely right. Whether students are actually being punished under this policy or not, its very existence could be enough to shut them up for fear that they will be punished. It is, after all, very restrictive — for a couple of reasons.

For one thing, the term “offensive” is completely subjective. What one person might find “offensive,” another might consider completely innocuous. Making students subject to punishment over something that is so unclear is, quite frankly, totally unfair — because it leaves plenty of room for bias in enforcement.

For another thing, I just don’t see how something like an “offensive” cartoon constitutes harassment. When I was in college, my friends and I used to meet every Wednesday and watch the new episode of South Park. According to this policy, we were all basically harassing each other with the very existence of these viewing parties. South Park could, after all, easily be deemed an “offensive” cartoon.

The thing is, though, the vast majority of college students are adults. Shouldn’t most adults be able to handle seeing a cartoon — even an “offensive” one — without needing to report it as “harassment” to the university? I mean, I know people who might even find Bob’s Burgers or The Simpsons “offensive.” Could an adult student get in trouble for viewing these cartoons somewhere in a public place at the university? It’s true: According to this policy, doing something like viewing The Simpsons in a public area on campus could be enough for a student to be found guilty of “harassment” — and I don’t think that anyone would consider that to be reasonable or just.

Southeastern Louisiana University is a public university, and its students are supposed to have First Amendment rights. It claims that the aim of its current policy is to ensure that the administration is “maintaining an educational and workplace environment free of any type of discrimination and/or harassment which is illegal and which will not be tolerated,” but it’s clear that the scope of this policy clearly goes far beyond what’s “illegal” — and the policy should be changed for the sake of the protection of these students’ free speech.

Most Popular

Film & TV

The Manly Appeal of Ford v Ferrari

There used to be a lot of overlap between what we think of as a Hollywood studio picture (designed to earn money) and an awards movie (designed to fill the trophy case, usually with an accompanying loss of money). Ford v Ferrari is a glorious throwback to the era when big stars did quality movies about actual ... Read More
Politics & Policy

ABC Chief Political Analyst: GOP Rep. Stefanik a ‘Perfect Example’ of the Failures of Electing Someone ‘Because They Are a Woman’

Matthew Dowd, chief political analyst for ABC News, suggested that Representative Elise Stefanik (R., N.Y.) was elected due to her gender after taking issue with Stefanik's line of questioning during the first public impeachment hearing on Wednesday. “Elise Stefanik is a perfect example of why just electing ... Read More
White House

Trump vs. the ‘Policy Community’

When it comes to Russia, I am with what Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman calls the American “policy community.” Vindman, of course, is one of the House Democrats’ star impeachment witnesses. His haughtiness in proclaiming the policy community and his membership in it grates, throughout his 340-page ... Read More
Law & the Courts

DACA’s Day in Court

When President Obama unilaterally changed immigration policy after repeatedly and correctly insisting that he lacked the constitutional power to do it, he said that congressional inaction had forced his hand. In the case of his first major unilateral move — “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals,” which ... Read More
White House

Impeachment and the Broken Truce

The contradiction at the center of American politics in Anno Domini 2019 is this: The ruling class does not rule. The impeachment dog-and-pony show in Washington this week is not about how Donald Trump has comported himself as president (grotesquely) any more than early convulsions were about refreshed ... Read More