Cantuar demands action on campus "intimidation" and "lack of free speech"

The Archbishop of Canterbury has called on the Government to put pressure on universities over reports of "no-platforming, intimidation and lack of free speech".

The Most Rev Justin Welby told ministers at Westminster that "mere exhortation" was not working.

The leading Anglican made the intervention as peers heard just five universities were known to have adopted an agreed definition of anti-Semitism.

The archbishop, who is President of the Council of Christians and Jews (CCJ), said: "We hear numerous reports of no-platforming, of intimidation and lack of free speech.

"I accept fully that the universities are autonomous but will the minister look for ways in which pressure can be applied to ensure these standards are kept? "Because mere exhortation, would she agree, is not really working."

Government frontbencher Baroness Berridge pointed out the Lords has legislated to ensure the independence of universities.

She said: "Although the secretary of state can issue guidance, that guidance has to take into account the autonomy of our academic institutions."

SOURCE  





University of Minnesota threatens faculty for ‘repeated misuse of pronouns’ in new policy

Gender pronouns have flummoxed the University of Minnesota for more than a year.

A draft policy released in summer 2018 stated that “university members and units are expected to use the names, gender identities and pronouns specified to them by university members, except as legally required.” The Star Tribune said failure to comply could get a person punished, “up to firing or expulsion.”

Sanctions were removed from the proposal early this year, following massive negative feedback, and faculty approved the relaxed language.

The taxpayer-funded university is now on the cusp of approving the “Gender Identity, Gender Expression, Names and Pronouns” policy, and the language is … the same.

More worrisome for those who care about academic freedom and the First Amendment, the FAQ document for the policy makes clear that sanctions are on the table for conscientious objectors to the new regime.

University members and units are expected to use the names, gender identities, and pronouns specified to them by other University members, except as legally required. University members and units are also expected to use other gendered personal references, if any, that are consistent with the gender identities and pronouns specified by University members.

The FAQ document puts the onus of learning this information about “colleagues, classmates, and peers” on everyone, but it particularly focuses on administrative leaders and faculty:

The point of the policy is to make explicit “the University’s commitment to non-discriminatory programs, activities and facilities and promotes a respectful University community free from discrimination based on gender identity or expression.”

It dubiously claims: “This policy is designed, and will be implemented, to uphold free speech and academic freedom principles.”

SOURCE