Apology too little, too late
Re Laurier apologizes to TA who aired debate clip and Protect debate on
campus, Editorial, Nov. 22 Your connection of Wilfrid Laurier University’s “apology” to Lindsay Shepherd with the word “Bravo” is dumbfounding.
In the 30-minute harangue by two professors and a university official, Shepherd was accused of being a bigot, a white supremacist and a Trojan horse for the alt-right. At the very least, her treatment by those in a position of power is a clear example of workplace harassment and bullying.
In most institutions, her treatment would have led to disciplinary action, not half-hearted apologies. Simon Trevarthen, Toronto
“Many professors in universities across this country, blinded by a cult of political correctness, have betrayed their true purpose and mission: to promote freedom of speech and diversity of opinion in the quest for truth.” SAL RITACCA TORONTO
The so-called apology from Wilfrid Laurier officials to Lindsay Shepherd, most particularly the equivocal tone from Prof. Nathan Rambukkana, borders on satire.
You can almost imagine the brass at the school winking while they created it. These folks aren’t sorry at all about the shameful way they treated Ms. Shepherd; they’re sorry about getting caught.
The timing of this episode makes it even worse, in my mind, as this is the month where we offer our thanks to the brave men and women who have served and died over the years to protect our freedoms.
Yet here we have the latest example of progressive bullies trying to shut down a fellow academic for daring to posit a view that differs from the zeitgeist. For those struggling to understand why U.S. President Donald Trump appeals to many people sick of the scourge of identity politics, this is a clear example. Jeff Barker, Mississauga
Despite the extensive coverage given to the case of Wilfrid Laurier teaching assistant Lindsay Shepherd, I have yet to see anyone say the obvious: that the university treated her in exactly the same manner as they wrongly accused her of treating her students.
She was told she had made people uncomfortable and had created a toxic environment, an environment in which she had the advantage of power and position.
Imagine that Shepherd really did make people in her class feel uncomfortable, and when they objected she took advantage of her position in a power relationship by berating them, invoking Hitler, and making them cry. The university rightfully would have sanctioned her, or perhaps removed her from her position.
This leaves one to wonder, apologies aside, just what sanctions are being administered to the two professors, as well as the school official whose sole function appears to be to make sure people are treated equitably, sensitively and fairly. Len Bulmer, Aurora
Let’s not be naive and think that Wilfrid Laurier University and those administrators who interrogated Lindsay Shepherd have actually changed their opinion. The only reason they have suddenly become the champions of free speech and expression is the audio recording.
Her academic supervisor, Prof. Nathan Rambukkana, has been turning somersaults since its airing and miraculously has come to the realization that his speech was a little too free, and that “making a space for controversial or oppositional views is important and even essential in a university.”
Let’s hope that I am wrong. Greg Sheehan, Mississauga I would hope that respect for transgender people — or for any individual — and respect for freedom of debate and confrontation of ideas are compatible.
But the actions of Wilfrid Laurier University show there is no respect for ideas, for debate or for discussion; that students are encouraged to spy on each other, on instructors and on professors; and that they are encouraged to report any thought that is deviant from the inculcated dogma. The spying remains anonymous, inviting all sorts of abuses.
The inquisitors who interrogated the young woman demonstrated they were incredibly obtuse ideologues without even a basic understanding of the nature of intellectual debate or intellectual freedom.
This little secret process was shameful in almost every respect and does not serve the interests of transgender people or anyone else.
The inquisitors and the university showed no awareness of the basic tenets of freedom. If we create a society consisting of an amalgam of snitches and victims, and a cult of eternal victimhood, then we create a society of puppets and slaves, easy victims for any demagogue who comes along, from the right or left. Gilbert Reid, Toronto
Re Stifling free speech makes Wilfrid Laurier
unsafe, Opinion, Nov. 16 I congratulate Wilfrid Laurier Prof. David Millard Haskell for his thoughtful and courageous defence of truth and free speech.
His voice of reason stands out as a refreshing beam of hope and light among the many professors in universities across this country who, blinded by a cult of political correctness, have betrayed their true purpose and mission: to promote freedom of speech and diversity of opinion in the quest for truth.
Any institution of higher learning that does not encourage free speech is a breeding ground for some other political or personal agenda. Haskell does a superb job revealing the blatant hypocrisy of his politically correct colleagues who are great advocates for diversity in their schools of higher learning, except when it extends to diversity of thought and opinion on topics of social relevance.
I commend the Toronto Star for publishing Haskell’s essay and presenting readers with a reasoned view on a very important matter. Sal Ritacca, Toronto