America’s college campuses are experiencing rapid change. The 21st century has seen drastic increases in campus diversity, making student bodies a more accurate reflection of the American “melting pot.” Simultaneously, mental health issues continue to flood the headlines of university newspapers around the nation. And in the shadow of it all, a debate over political correctness has been brewing. College administrators, comedians, and politicians alike have reinvigorated a debate about the tradeoffs between freedom of speech and policies protecting the mental health of students from historically marginalized backgrounds.
Diversity, Inclusion and Safe Spaces
Few places have dealt with more press coverage and scrutiny regarding so-called “political correctness” than American colleges and universities. Institutions of higher learning across the nation are now faced with the most diverse generation in American history. According to a study by U.S. News and World Report on college diversity, there is a 66 percent chance that two Harvard students meeting randomly will have different racial backgrounds. Stanford University sits even higher at 73 percent, and Rutgers University tops the list at 76 percent.
Growing concerns over college students’ mental health have prompted many universities to institute “safe spaces,” places where individuals from marginalized groups are sheltered from mainstream stereotypes. The HPR tackled the subject earlier this year in an HPRgument focused on the criticism of such spaces in a New York Times op-ed. One such location at Harvard is Room 13, a valuable resource for students who need an emotional outlet. “We offer a supportive, sympathetic ear and maintain strict confidentiality,” Room 13 states on its website. “We can talk about anything that’s on your mind, and we won’t criticize you or pass any judgments.”
In its yearly handbook to freshman, Harvard College affirms the ideals promoted by safe spaces, stating, “There are times, of course when freedom of speech and expression may allow words and ideas to be spoken which may offend and cause discomfort to others in the community.” The University goes on to acknowledge that it has a role to “foster education about and better understanding of why such ideas or words may be unfair to or painful for others.”
That being said, Harvard College also guarantees First Amendment rights to free speech in a statement from its guide for Freshman: “The College cannot, and probably should not, take it upon itself to censor or restrict such speech or ideas.” It is this divisive issue—free speech vs. acceptable speech—which now commands the attention of college administrators, politicians, and students alike. The debate reached a tipping point at Harvard last year, when a group of students planned a Black Mass on campus. The administration’s response was consistent with its outlined policy: one of verbal condemnation absent any effort to stop the gathering.
Harvard visiting lecturer on government, Professor Sanford J. Ungar, teaches his students that the First Amendment is a living text. “It’s a beautiful statement of principle that constantly needs reinterpretation, and gets it,” he told the HPR. Recent events in the political arena and at certain colleges represent such a reinterpretation of the meaning of free expression in American society.
Seinfeld and Speech Codes
This past summer, an administrator at the University of New Hampshire published a “Bias-Free Language Guide,” which, among other things, claimed the word “American” was problematic. Unsurprisingly, the guidelines were lambasted in bi-partisan fashion. UNH president Mark Huddleston released a statement on July 29 stating, “It is ironic that what was probably a well-meaning effort to be ‘sensitive’ proves offensive to many people, myself included.” The university has removed the guide from its website and issued no replacement.
It is clear that the university was not malicious in its intentions. According a school statement, Huddleston “supports efforts to encourage inclusivity and diversity on [UNH] campuses. He does not believe the guide was in any way helpful in achieving those goals.” Ironically, the UNH president took “offense” to the very actions meant to advocate political correctness. Notably, the University of New Hampshire scored a 15 percent on the U.S. News and World Report diversity scale, placing it among the least diverse schools in the country.
UNH is just one example of a school featured on national news and highlighted by media pundits. Earlier this fall, multiple protests at Yale, the University of Missouri, Princeton and a host of other institutions, attracted attention as they called for new policies to promote minority inclusion on their respective campuses. Harvard too, had its own fair share of coverage. Following the lead of peer institutions, Harvard’s “house masters” voted unanimously to change their title, due in part to the historical relationship between the word master and slavery. During finals week, Harvard was again in the spotlight for “Holiday Placemats for Social Justice” provided by the Office for Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. With hypothetical questions and responses on topics like “Islamaphobia” and “Black Murders in the Streets”, the placemats were intended to provide students with “a guide for holiday discussions with loved ones”. The university later apologized for releasing the placemats after facing criticism from students and the press. Harvard President Drew G. Faust said in a statement, “I don’t think the University should be directing people—students, staff, faculty—what to say or what to think.”
Are individuals simply becoming more readily offended by efforts at political correctness, or is the idea of political correctness actually restricting free expression in practice? Much evidence seems to point to the latter. Earlier this year, famous comedians like Jerry Seinfeld, Chris Rock, and Larry the Cable Guy confessed their fear of performing on college campuses. “I don’t play colleges, but I hear people tell me, ‘don’t go near colleges they are so PC,’” said Seinfeld. Comedians believe that the climate on college campuses today isn’t conducive to free expression of ideas.
Changing Attitudes?
Indeed, attitudes toward political correctness may be changing. This past September, President Obama commented on the current climate at universities around the nation. “I don’t agree that you, when you become students at colleges, have to be coddled and protected from different points of view.” If liberal politicians like Obama, who according to conservatives support politically correct policies, are changing their views, perhaps the roles of safe spaces and other such programs on college campuses are changing. Many liberals and conservatives seem to increasingly agree that certain PC policies, like speech codes at UNH or placemats in Harvard’s dining halls, are not conducive to free expression.
Shifting attitudes on college campuses and in the political arena show that perhaps the meaning of “political correctness” is not set in stone. “People are understanding more and more how dangerous it is to suppress opinions or to make some opinions unacceptable,” said Ungar.
Image credit: John Walker/flickr