6
02.15.2016
news
GMUFOURTHESTATE.COM @IVESTATE
IV
Pizza and Perspectives: A healthy discussion about free speech on campus ALEC MOORE | STAFF WRITER
A panel of Mason experts led a discussion over pizza and soda on a much disputed issue in the world of higher education -- how to foster freedom of expression while protecting students from hate speech and other forms of discrimination. On Thursday, Feb. 4, Mason’s Arlington campus hosted the first Pizza and Perspectives academic discussion of the spring semester. The topic was “Protecting Students vs. Protecting Free Speech: How Can We Create Safe Spaces in Higher Education?” The goal of this discussion was to explore the balance between providing protection for students while also protecting free speech. This tension is by no means unfamiliar to the Mason community, which has witnessed numerous provocative instances of free speech, from anti-abortion activists that hand out graphic pictures of aborted fetuses to a violent confrontation between a student and a visiting preacher last fall. Though the Pizza and Perspective topics are usually weighty, the format of the discussions is usually casual. After they were introduced, each panelist took 15 minutes to present their thoughts on the night’s topic. The first panelist to speak was Dr. Peter Stearns, provost emeritus and university professor of history and art history. Stearns began his remarks by pointing out that he had a fundamental problem with the way the topic was framed in the title of the discussion. “I believe that in most cases, not all persuasion is better than compulsion,” Stearns told the forum. “I also believe deeply in academic freedom.”
success in reforming Mason’s speech code with the help of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) to promote greater freedom of speech on campus.
university campuses in the early 1960s. He explained that events like these end up as historical embarrassments, and we should not repeat those mistakes.
Zywicki began his presentation by agreeing with Stearns’s concern about how the issue was framed. He also disagreed with the subtopic presented in the discussion’s title, asking, “How can we create safe spaces in higher education?”
The final panelist to speak was Julian R. Williams, vice president of Compliance, Diversity and Ethics at Mason. Both Williams and his department have been extensively looking at this particular issue.
“The question is not how can we create safe spaces, it is ‘Should we create safe spaces?’, and I believe the answer is unequivocally ‘no,’” he said. Zywicki said there are already examples of limits on freedom of
However, he wants to refocus the argument. “I want to not look at these issues in a vacuum and center it around the current context as it relates to current events colleges are being challenged to confront,” he said. From that position, Williams said he has realized one of the most important factors in this discussion is how the community defines “safe.” “If we define safe as never being challenged or made to feel uncomfortable, then we will never achieve our goal,” he said. “If we define safe as an area in which ideas can be exchanged in a friendly and courteous manner, we may be able to succeed.” Williams explained he does not want safe spaces to be physical places but instead wants to create a widespread mindset of openness. “Proper policies and procedures is how you build your safe space,” he said. “It’s not a room; it’s about training and a focus on ensuring student conversations are courteous and productive.” He closed by saying safe spaces should not shield students from ideas that might make them uncomfortable but instead should encourage discussion about controversial issues to promote more understanding and growth. In this respect, Williams supported the views of academic freedom expressed by Stearns and Zywicki.
Stearns explained that he sees (MEGAN ZENDEK/FOURTH ESTATE) the issue of free speech as a A “Pizza and Perspectives” event was hosted at Mason’s Arlington campus in early February. A panel of experts discussed stumatter of protecting academic “Classrooms need to be a place dents’ rights and free speech -- issues that were also at the heart of the 2007 Supreme Court case, Morse v. Frederick where high freedom and the free exchange school student Joseph Frederick was suspended for bringing a banner to a school event that read “Bong Hits 4 Jesus.” where the free exchange of of ideas. The discussion’s title, ideas is possible,” Williams said. he felt, seemed to pit those speech listed in the first amendment, such as targeted harassment “Otherwise, we are losing sight of the mission.” standing up for academic freedom against those standing up for and libel. Beyond that, he believes that people already know what Once the panelists finished, the discussion was opened up to the minority rights. these hypothetical spaces would look like. audience for questions and thoughts, and the panelists weighed in “Partisans of academic freedom and partisans of minority rights “Let’s be honest, we all know what happens when these type of on each other’s positions. ought to be on the same side,” he explained. “We should both want spaces are created. Leftist views are allowed and conservative views Junior Marion Slack joined the conversation by expressing her to discuss problems openly so we may find solutions.” are rejected as entitled,” Zywicki said. “It’s obvious what this is. It view that it is productive to simply discuss the issue of free speech That being said, Stearns said there should be three basic rules is not about protecting their own ideas, it is about driving out ideas versus safe spaces. guiding these discussions to ensure they are productive and peace- that they don’t like.” ful: interlocutors should distinguish between opinions and insults, Zywicki also commented that he, much like Stearns, is concerned “I just really feel like not talking about things isn’t going to make them go away and definitely isn’t going to solve anything,” Slack remain courteous and genuinely think about others’ positions. about academic freedom and fears that freedom of expression said. “If people can’t talk about issues that make them uncomfortThe second panelist to speak on the topic was Dr. Todd Zywicki, would be limited in any established safe space. able, then they shouldn’t be able to force others not to talk about Mason professor and executive director of the Law and Economics Zywicki supported his argument by recalling past attempts to limit it, too.” Center for Mason’s School of Law. Zywicki is known for his past ideas, such when communists were banned from Hollywood and