Another Angle | When to speak out against free speech?

Amanda Melillo Opinions Editor

What do you picture when asked what the “typical” Vassar student is? While some, particularly those from the Admissions Office, may point out that there is no typical Vassar student, during my time here I’ve mostly seen Vassar students express themselves to be intelligent, liberal, free-thinking, politically correct individuals. In fact, we seem so liberal that we’re beyond the Democrats and sometimes even the convention of clothing, and so PC as to prohibit any sort of discussion. However, certain events, particularly of this year, have called this image into question.

First, there has been talk of more than one gay-bashing incident at the Mug in recent history. It’s no secret what type of student body the College has, or that many lead so-called “alternative” lifestyles. Since so many students are accepting or supportive of sexual expression, it is a real eye-opener to encounter the sexually conservative here. But what is more surprising is to encounter someone who so offensively expresses these views. Certainly everyone is entitled to their opinion, without which we would never be able to have any sort of dialogue to reach an understanding, but there is an appropriate time and manner to do so. I’ve heard all sorts of explanations for the homophobic undercurrent on campus, ranging from the enrollment of more conservatives to the recruitment of more athletes. But I don’t think that it can be so oversimplified.

Why isn’t there such an easy explanation? The existence of the gossip site comes to mind, so aptly named “the cesspool.” Sure, innocent gossip can be fun, perhaps catty, to some a welcome study break or such. However, it seemed to degenerate from just a reprieve from academia and an update on who is dating whom into an embodiment of the worst of humanity. It was appalling to find such racist, sexist and homophobic remarks that spilled from the fingers of Vassar students, all of whom could not have fallen into categories such as “conservative” or “athlete.” Under the frightening guise of anonymity, students felt free to post any offensive comment that they would never say out loud. This, conveniently paired along with the Facebook, ensured that no student necessarily escaped victimization.

And what was the excuse given to justify all of this?

We have free speech and we have the right to say whatever we want.

Free speech covers all matter of sins. First of all, it’s easy to speak freely when you don’t have to own up to your opinions. Secondly, clearly people can’t say whatever they want, or else we would not have slander laws and the administration would not keep shutting these sites down. But most of all, it’s almost sickening that supposedly open-minded students could take one of the most valuable rights that we have and pervert it so much. We have the First Amendment so that we can speak out against our government without fear of imprisonment or death, so that we can discuss our ideas in the open. I’m not sure that the Founding Fathers included it so that we could tear people apart through anonymous venues.

Instead of using free speech to really accomplish something, so often we use it to demean, degrade, and insult. Recently, New York radio station Hot 97 broadcasted “The Tsunami Song,” a parody of the charity song “We Are the World” done by members of the Miss Jones show. The song contained offensive lyrics about the victims caught in the tsunami, such as, “And all at once you could hear the screaming ch*nks, and no one was safe from the wave, there were Africans drowning and little Chinamen swept away.” Regardless of what her motive was, lyrics such as, “go find your mommy, I just saw her float by, a tree went through her head, and now your children will be sold into child slavery,” cross the line from crass to callous. Asian Students Association (ASA) Co-President John Wang ’05 responded to the song’s racism against Asians: “My own personal view is that there’s free speech and there’s censorship, and censorship usually has a bad connotation, but there are certain things that are completely inhumane…I think free speech is perfectly valid, as long as it doesn’t reflect hatred in anyone. And I think that’s where free speech has its limits.” His Co-President Jason Wu ’07 agreed, “There’s a time and a place for everything; freedom of speech does not give people the right to spread hate and racism.”

Perhaps the time to self-censor is when your input turns from expressive to destructive. Instead of using free speech as an excuse for a derogatory free-for-all, perhaps we could say something that matters and progresses us forward as a refreshing change. Even more refreshing would be if we did so without threat of punishments such as a website shut-down or indefinite suspension from the air.