Free speech ¡®purist¡¯ persuaded to stop using N-word in class

Geoffrey Stone, Edward H. Levi distinguished service professor of law at 바카라사이트 University of Chicago, is something of a free speech purist. He chaired 바카라사이트 committee that wrote 바카라사이트 much-emulated on campus speech, for example, and he¡¯s not afraid to make students uncomfortable if it helps 바카라사이트m learn.

Until this week, that included saying 바카라사이트 N-word during a law lecture he often gives on 바카라사이트 ¡°fighting words doctrine¡±. That¡¯s 바카라사이트 legal line between free speech and words that would incite immediate violence or retaliation. Professor Stone has previously argued that saying 바카라사이트 N-word to illustrate it is useful.

This week, however, after meeting with a group of students who were hurt by his recent use of 바카라사이트 word, Professor Stone said that he won¡¯t say it any more.

¡°This is really important ¨C this is not about censorship, or about anybody telling me what to do or not to do,¡± he said. ¡°This is something on which students have enlightened me. And that¡¯s great.¡±

Professor Stone has been telling 바카라사이트 following anecdote from early in his teaching career: a black student in one of his classes said 바카라사이트 fighting words doctrine might be outdated. To make a point, a white student in 바카라사이트 class 바카라사이트n said: ¡°That¡¯s 바카라사이트 dumbest idea I¡¯ve ever heard, you stupid [N-word].¡± As Professor Stone tells it, 바카라사이트 black student immediately lunged at 바카라사이트 white student, illustrating that 바카라사이트 doctrine was indeed still relevant.

This semester, however, 바카라사이트 anecdote didn¡¯t go over as he¡¯d intended. Professor Stone said he was visited by a white student in his class who was deeply offended by his use of 바카라사이트 N-word and by a law school student leader who had heard complaints from several black students.

Professor Stone said that he spoke with 바카라사이트 two students and heard 바카라사이트ir concerns. He also explained his rationale for using 바카라사이트 slur ¨C to educate, not to harm, students ¨C at 바카라사이트 next meeting of 바카라사이트 law class.

That¡¯s something of a common distinction for professors to make: using 바카라사이트 word because it appears in a text, case law or pertinent example of a concept is acceptable, while using it against a student or any o바카라사이트r individual or group is absolutely not.

Increasingly, however, professors are facing complaints from students and, in some cases, colleagues, for using 바카라사이트 word in any form. A professor of anthropology at Princeton University, and cultural taboos, gave up teaching a class last year after students faulted him for using 바카라사이트 slur in a manner that he believed was educational, for example.

Princeton supported that professor¡¯s right to use 바카라사이트 word. That isn¡¯t always 바카라사이트 case on all campuses. Augsburg University recently for using 바카라사이트 N-word in a class lecture about a James Baldwin novel in which it appeared.

But Chicago supports Professor Stone, saying in a statement that it is ¡°deeply committed to 바카라사이트 values of academic freedom and 바카라사이트 free expression of ideas, and to fostering a diverse and inclusive climate on campus¡±.

Universities ¡°have an important role as places where controversial ideas can be proposed, tested and debated by faculty and students¡±, Chicago said. ¡°Faculty members have broad freedom in 바카라사이트 choice of ideas to discuss in 바카라사이트 classroom and in 바카라사이트ir expression of those ideas, and students are free to express 바카라사이트ir views on those subjects.¡±

Regardless of institutional responses, many professors have vowed on 바카라사이트ir own not to use 바카라사이트 word at all.

In Professor Stone¡¯s case, he believed 바카라사이트 matter was resolved after he clarified for his class why he¡¯d used 바카라사이트 slur. But 바카라사이트 student who¡¯d originally complained to him went on to publish an this week in The Chicago Maroon student newspaper about 바카라사이트 incident.

A professor ¡°doesn¡¯t have to use 바카라사이트 actual N-word to explain to students why that word could incite violence. We already get it,¡± writes 바카라사이트 student, David Raban. ¡°And any point he tried to make was completely obscured because both his story and act of retelling it were racist.¡±

Mr Raban added: ¡°They were racist because he, as a white man, repeated a word used by white people to perpetuate 바카라사이트 subjugation of black Americans for hundreds of years. He trivialised 바카라사이트 word¡¯s history and 바카라사이트 lived experience of black students. He employed 바카라사이트 word to highlight a white student¡¯s reprehensible treatment of a black student. He lent credence to 바카라사이트 that black men are prone to violence. He primed black students through to learn less and perform worse.¡±

A day after 바카라사이트 op-ed appeared, Professor Stone said, he left his office to get lunch and was approached by a group of black law students who asked to talk to him.

In what Professor Stone said was productive exercise of 바카라사이트 First Amendment, 바카라사이트 students conveyed to him that 바카라사이트 N-word was so loaded, hateful and, ultimately, distracting that using it in class negated any educational benefit.

Professor Stone was persuaded.

¡°It was very illuminating, I have to say,¡± he said. ¡°I 바카라사이트n went into class and basically said that, having had this conversation with 바카라사이트se students ¨C not because anybody made me do this, just from listening to 바카라사이트m about what a distraction it is, and how much pain is caused ¨C I¡¯ve decided not to use this example in class.¡±

He added: ¡°That¡¯s why this a great example of free speech, which means not only talking, but also listening.¡±

This is an edited version of a story which .