OK, I just spent way too much time reading up on this case. First off, if you read the comments posted below the original article, do not miss someone's adaptation of the Police song "Don't stand so close to me." It's kind of brilliant. The second thing I got from reading the comments was a reference to an organization called FIRE, which is involved in attempting to protect free speech rights on college campuses. I went to their website (thefire.org) and if you, like me, have a somewhat obsessive personality and an ability to ignore the things you really should be doing, you can find and read the journal in question plus the university's letter to the student and his written response to the charges. (You have to go to the various articles about the case on the FIRE website, then click on links when they refer to these sources. So I just spent some of my precious limited time here on earth reading 33 pages of the bad handwriting of a fairly creepy guy. But I think it's unusual that you get to see so much of the original source material in a case like this. Obviously, the student provided all this to the FIRE group... Anyway, the student claims in his letter to the university that the assignment was to be free-form on any topic (and this is supported by the teachers' written instructions, also available on the website, also read by me, geez!), but also claims that he asked several times if there were any restrictions on the subject matter for the journals, and was told (at least once in front of a witness, he says) that there were no restrictions. HOWEVER, if you read the actual journal, there is a note in it from the teacher after his "Hot for Teacher" entry that it was inappropriate, she was removing the pages, if he wrote nothing further she would drop the matter but if he persisted she would inform the Dean. Well, a few pages later there is "Hot for Teacher 2," again going on about the sexiness of that particular instructor and another one at the same school. (The other instructor was pregnant at the time, which he discusses in a slimy way, did I mention creepiness?) So despite his claims, he was given a chance to stop and chose to continue. So, so far we have creepiness, poor judgment, and he comes across as quite the self-centered, self-deluded kind who thinks his own writing is endlessly fascinating. (Says stuff like "I'm going to be completely honest and open here and I find it so freeing!" "I'm nervous that my wife will find this but I guess that's a great sign that I'm being honest!" ) (Those are just my paraphrases...) But. But. I do not feel that it's a sufficient reason to take away someone's free speech rights because they are a creepy jerk. He did not threaten anyone. Yes, he is an advocate of legalizing concealed carry on campuses (as brought out by an unrelated episode) but again, having that opinion does not mean you lose your rights to free speech. I can see how the instructor felt very uncomfortable having this student in class when he continued to write sexually suggestive journal entries about her after she had told him not to. And I'm sure, given his known opinion on guns on campus, the Powers That Be made a leap to imagining him in a Virginia Tech style scenario. So I have sympathy for their reaction. Still, I have to conclude it's an over-reaction. Expelled from school, banned for three semesters if I remember correctly? I think getting a poor grade in the class for not following the teacher's guidance would be enough. I can understand that teacher not wanting him in class, and I don't know how that should be handled when it's not a case of threats but of having to put up with an inappropriate jerk.. Or backside hole, thank you NovaAman. OK, I'm really tired of all these shades of gray. (Courtesy of my mother, in case you were wondering, but I'll leave that can of worms just barely cracked open). And if any of you are still with me after all this... at least it's legible. I've got that over our student friend, anyway.
High school but still...) Anyone else?
