by James A. Bacon
Wokeness is so all-pervasive in Virginia higher-ed that I cannot possibly keep readers abreast of it all. Today I settle for quoting the thoughts of others.
Today The Wall Street Journal op-ed section highlights litigation surrounding Virginia Tech’s Bias Incident Response Team (BIRT).
The advertising catchphrase “see something, say something” calls to mind suspicious packages that might be bombs. At Virginia Tech, that slogan applies to the school’s official Bias Intervention and Response Team, or BIRT. Hokies are encouraged to report one another’s ill-considered opinions or crass jokes. On May 31 the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals declined to end this, but a dissent by veteran Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III is a persuasive signal flare for the Supreme Court to take the case and defend free speech.
Read the whole editorial. Even better, if you have the time, read Wilkinson’s minority opinion on the litigation. Some excerpts:
Virginia Tech has constructed a complex apparatus for policing and reporting whatever administrators may deem “biased speech.” The intricate program has a straightforward effect: students self-censor, fearing the consequences of a report to BIRT and thinking that speech is no longer worth the trouble….
The University has somehow managed to offend virtually every cardinal principle of First Amendment law. The First Amendment comes in dead last by its reckoning. The Amendment exists at the sufferance of a bureaucracy dedicated to eliminating “bias.”
The plain language of its policy makes [the Bias Incident Response Team] even more troubling. Virginia Tech provides a vague but expansive definition of “bias.” Students are told that “bias incidents” are “expressions against a person or group because of the person’s or group’s age, color, disability, gender (including pregnancy), gender identity, gender expression, genetic information, national origin, political affiliation, race, religion, sexual orientation, veteran status, or any other basis protected by law.”
With a definition this loose and rambling, almost anything could be framed as a bias incident….
In effect, the prolix text of the policy permits students to report speech for no other reason than they were offended by what was said. In fact, the district court recounted a few such reports of bias, including the following:
[1] a report that the words “Saudi Arabia” were written on a whiteboard outside of a student’s dorm room, alleging bias based on “national or ethnic origin;”
[2] a report that a student in a University residence hall overheard several male students privately “talking crap about the women who were ‘playing’ in a snowball fight,” calling them not “athletic,” which the complainant reported as discrimination based on “gender;” and
[3] a report that a student told a joke that included “Caitlyn Jenner’s deadname” during a classroom lecture, which was reported as discrimination on the basis of gender identity.
The real bias in BIRT is whose offended feelings are deemed worth protecting and whose are not. Some people slough off insults and indignities, and get on with their lives. Other people make a fetish of finding offense and nurturing grievances. BIRT empowers those who wallow in victimhood.
Note to Hokie alumni: where the heck are you? Are you going to let this stand? Follow the lead of alumni at University of Virginia, Washington & Lee, Virginia Military Institute, James Madison University and, embryonically, at the College of William and Mary, of organizing to push back. Contact me at jabacon@thejeffersoncouncil.com if you’d like help on how to do it.
