Hells Yes!

This leads me to wonder what he was doing at Smith in the first place. I don't know much about Smith, but it doesn't seem like those ladies would be his target audience. I know we at Mills would react similarly to the Smith students if he came here.

So why was he there?

Ann bran, trying to save the sinners bent on going to hell as throughly as possible, I think.

Anyway, this totally brightened my day. Listening to the asshat was kind of a trip too. "Endemic" indeed, does he really have to pull out the 'you're just being trendy' idea? I mean seriously, do these people realize how imbecilic their arguments sound when they speak?

“The born gay hoax was invented in 1985 by pro-sodomy activists in effort to overturn anti-sodomy laws by way of minority status. No one is born 'gay'-the idea is ridiculous."

You know what’s ridiculous? Pretending that it actually matters whether sexuality (excuse me, ‘sexual deviance’) is innate, a choice, or some more fluid mixture of a sundry of things. Last I checked, it isn’t hurting anybody, and I’m gonna do as I damn well please, thank you. Though I love that I’m to blame for the end of civilization, God, and probably kittens too. (And this wouldn’t be complete w/o a reference to DTWOF.) You’ve got a lot of nerve, blaming your crack-smoking children on me.

On the other hand, I’ve always wanted to be kind of sexually deviant…

Is shouting down an opponent, even one with very objectionable views and rhetoric, something to be applauded?

I always hear conservatives gripe about how liberal academia silences their perspective. Usually I think this is complete nonsense. But sometimes we on the left do simply shut down right wing perspectives out of anger and frustration. A similar thing happened with the minutemen at Columbia last year. I'm not sure this "shout them out of town" reaction is something condone.

Thoughts?

This leads me to wonder what he was doing at Smith in the first place.

According to Pam's post, the college Republicans invited him.

I had a similar thing happen my first year in undergrad--the chapel program (don't get me started) invited another "ex-gay" guy to speak at chapel as part of a series on Christian sexuality. In response, the women's studies department and a coalition of other groups brought in Mel White, who's an evangelical minister and openly gay. I know there's a fine line between free speech and hate speech, but it seems like protesting outside the event, asking challenging questiond during Q&A, and providing alternative viewpoints, etc. is one thing, but disrupting a campus event so much that it has to be shut down is another . . . I don't like the precedent it sets.

Blake, he might have the right to say such things in public (walking a tight rope on hate speech though), but in that same vein, I and a bunch of my friends also have the right to shout "We here, we're queer, get used it it". I don't think the right to free speech extends to not getting interupted or talked over by somebody else.

That guy is full of shit, but I'd hate to think about the same thing happening if one of us gave a pro-gay rights speech. Remember a few months ago when anti-choicers tried to disrupt a Clinton speech about abortion? If he hadn't been such a skilled speaker, that rally could easily have turned ugly. I'm glad somebody told this guy at Smith to STFU, but come on.

Faerylore, I totally agree with you--it makes me really upset when people on campus and on the internet claim that we were violating Ryan Sorba's right to free speech, that our behavior was inappropriate, that they're ashamed of Smith. It wasn't about silencing an objectionable opinion. It wasn't about us simply disagreeing with what he had to say. It was about preserving a space where young queer women are (relatively) free to express themselves. If he has the right to tell a whole community that they are illegitimate, then we have the right to tell him that he is not welcome on our campus. Yes, he has a 'right' to speak, but that doesn't mean that we have to be silent so that he can be heard.

TO the people who say that he should have been left alone and allowed to speak because of the precedent it sets or because the right wing nut jobs will use the story for their own benefit:

Would you say the same thing if the speaker had been a KKK member who wrote a book about how black people are supposedly less evolved, less intelligent and more prone to violence than white people? Like anti-gay propaganda, racist propaganda is based on non-scientific "studies," flawed papers and straight up lies. If a group of black students showed up and chanted some anti-racist slogans until the hate monger left town, would you blame them?

No...?

Then why are you blaming the homosexual students for doing the same thing?

who IS this guy anyway? i just tried to google him and i didn't really get a clear picture. i mean, what is all of this research that he's done. i have never heard of this book before. i'm very curious.

nothing annoys me more than conservative students whining about being silenced by liberals at their schools. then they go and invite the most polarizing possible figure to come represent their viewpoint on campus. clearly they are just trying to shock people into hearing them out. i went to an extremely liberal college for my undergraduate degree and it happened all the time. conservative student groups should make a good faith effort to join the discussion-- not just try to inflame the liberals. i really could not think of a reason smith college conservatives would invite this guy if it was not to get an inflammatory response.

Would you say the same thing if the speaker had been a KKK member who wrote a book about how black people are supposedly less evolved, less intelligent and more prone to violence than white people?

Probably I'd say you should invite your own speaker to refute his or her points.

Shouting someone down is the basest form of speech, and only addresses the issue of whether the target is "welcome." It doesn't do a whole lot to address whatever lies or disinformation that person is spreading.

As a current Smith student, I want to add that unfortunately the protest (and particularly the way it was handled by protesters) itself has become very controversial on campus.

Many students wanted a silent protest, and others wanted to protest through discussion during the Q&A period following Sorba's speech, but those were overpowered by the "riot" type protest. I've even heard people say they are ashamed of the reaction.

He's apparently promoting a new book, and I'm sure this will get him plenty of media attention.

Ayla,

I'm still not sure what I think, one way or another--I think the questions of who should be able to speak depends a lot on the context. In this situation, I think the larger question is who invited him to campus in the first place, and whether the administration should have perhaps put the breaks on even if he was invited by students. Although that, itself, is problematic from a student-free-speech point of view.

And I can only speak for myself as a white, bi woman, but in my own experience I think I was glad--on my own campus--that these things got talked about rather than silenced (on either side), even when it was painful. I don't know what I would say about a KKK speaker. I think protest is appropriate, and I think challenging the organization that brought that person to campus is appropriate. I'm not sure about a protest that shuts down the event as it is happening.

Again, I'm open to thoughts. But I think the censorship question is a real one--even (perhaps especially?) when we abhor the thoughts of the people who wish to speak.

This is the best day ever! I and the GSA at my highschool successfully pulled off our Day of Silence today without incident (despite the administration's wish to stop the event from happening). I also found out that our GSA is receiving grant money so that we can hire public speakers to come to our health classes and discuss, you know, the EXISTANCE of other sexual orientations and gender identities and about nondiscrimination.

and now I come home to this!!! A big congradulations to the Smith students. They have the right to show Sorba where his homophobic and hateful ideas are not welcome. It was empowering and wonderful to just watch them stand together and declare, unapologetically, "we're here, we're queer, get used to it!"

How many times do you have to debunk the same baseless info before you're allowed to stop listening to the people spewing it? This same stuff has been flying around for at least the last 10 years (and longer I'm sure), because it was 10 years ago last December that my best friend was sent (by his parents) to a christian program to "turn him straight" and the basis of this book sounds pretty much just like the crap they were trying to brainwash him with back then.

Annie: I don't think this is a free speech issue: Sorba had the right to say his piece, and Smith students had the right to shout him down. It's an issue of valuing tolerance and reasoned debate, and of effectively countering the rhetoric of homophobic conservatives. Tolerance and debate are valuable because they expose all claims to reason, so that whoever's right is shown to be right.

Tolerance and debate are also politically expedient for liberals. Shouting conservatives down creates the impression that we're not secure enough in our beliefs to actually provide arguments defending them. It makes it seem like liberals can't tolerate intellectual diversity. It also feeds the conservative fantasy of a "culture war" in which dialogue stops and right and left compete for domination of the public sphere. Being open to debate--and winning debates--shows that our appreciation for diversity and openness is genuine, and that we are on the right side of the issues.

I'm not at Smith, so I don't know all the context. And I'm not gay, so I can't fully appreciate how someone like Sorba would make members of the gay community there feel. Nonetheless, from afar, I think it was a mistake to choose disruptive protest over debate. Now Sorba can go home and tell all his conservative friends about his battle on the front lines of the culture war, and about how liberals can't tolerate any opinions but their own.

I am proud of the women of Smith for standing up to this guy's archaic, idiotic ideas, but also agree that it could have been done through reasonable debate. Yet, I'll flip back to the other side and say that what this guy has to say is not intellectual diversity. He's not discussing how our economy should be dealt with, he's saying that my way of life is, in essence, a complete lie. It's not about liberals' ability to tolerate opinion; as far as im concerned, sexuality has no room for opinion. I might as well walk up to every blonde on the street and tell them i disagree with their haircolor, whether they were born with it or dyed it last week.

Silence is a form of activism. If you stay silent when someone bashes a gay or speaks a racial slur, you are silently accepting their decision. So whether it was through a screaming protest or reasonable debate, these women did the right thing in letting Sorba know they do not accept his ideas.

Congrats to the women of Smith for standing up for their beliefs...and for staying true to Audre Lorde...
"When we speak, we are afraid our words will not be heard nor welcomed but when we are silent we are still afraid. So it is better to speak remembering we were never meant to survive." -AL

I'm more curious as to why the Republican group on campus invited an anti gay activist to fucking Smith.
Don't get me wrong, I wanted to go there. But come on. The rumours aren't 100% false.

I'm more curious as to why the Republican group on campus invited an anti gay activist to fucking Smith.
Don't get me wrong, I wanted to go there. But come on. The rumours aren't 100% false.

I am frankly disappointed about this protest. Shouting down a speaker accomplishes nothing at all, other than perhaps making the protesters feel satisfied with themselves. It would have been so much more effective for the protesters to have used questions to show the guy how inane he is, or perhaps to have a silent protest, or perhaps to have everyone face away from him, or no doubt many other more creative responses. Or just not show up at the event. Shouting him down is just childish and ineffective. And yes, I would say the same thing in response to a Klan speaker, and have.

Silence is a form of activism. If you remain silent when someone bashes homosexuality or mutters a racial slur, you are silently accepting their behavior. So whether these Smith women provided a screaming protest or reasoned debate, they had the right to open their mouths and show they did not approve. let's remember Audre Lorde's "When we speak, we are afraid our words will not be heard nor welcomed but when we are silent we are still afraid. So it is better to speak remembering we were never meant to survive."

Also, let me note that I hardly agree that debate on sexuality has it's place in "intellectual diversity". This isnt a discussion on the economy or politics, it's a discussion on whether someone's lifestyle is valid.

Awww, Smith College, this makes me miss you more. . . Of course, a couple years ago the Republicans invited Ann Coulter. That did NOT go well.

I wouldn't say I'm surprised about how this went down. Smith is in the town of Northampton (MA), a town which has a prominently visible & open gay population (I used to live near there AND my out sister lives there now). I would have been much more satisfied to seen some of those students really challenge Sorba with incisive questions and sharp logic.

First, I'm with Ayla.
We have been fighting this nonsense with reason, logic and compassion for a long time. It's like politely debating relentless trolls. There comes a point when it's just as (in)effective to tell them to fuck off.

Second, why would anyone with Republican leanings choose to attend Smith in the first place?

i have to echo some of the posters on this thread, shutting this guy down is not the way to go. Invite a counter-speaker, silently protest, grill him on the Q&A but dont just scream so no one can hear him. He was invited by the school yes? He wasnt just standing somewhere in the quad yelling his views. It accomplishes nothing but to make some people feel good for a bit and give ammo to the wingnuts like the speaker. I know I am far too naieve but damn, if we cant have open discourse at a college, where the heck can we? This guy is a loon in my opinion but as someone else brought up in this thread, if the administration saw fit to invite a Klan member, I'd be all for it as there is nothing better you can do than grill that kind of person and embarass them publicly.

I also agree with Ayla here. While this Sorba guy is clearly full of shit and spreading dis-information he still has the right to free speech and those who are interested in hearing him, for whatever reason, have the right to hear to him speak.

I'm an activist myself and have attended and even helped organize many equal rights and anti-war protests/rallies, so yes, I'm glad to see these students take action. I think these students should invite another speaker to counter Sorba and even organize an open debate. They have every right to rally and make noise outside (which I would've have been proud to join) and even protest silently inside, but to shout this man down does infringed on his right to free speech.

What SarahMC said.

There's a place for discussion, respectful protest and disagreement and for "incisive questions and sharp logic." That place is NOT with someone who comes to a community with the simple mission of spewing hate speech. If he came with the intention of a dialog, they owed him one. From what I can tell, that wasn't the case. Annie said it beautifully, "but that doesn't mean that we have to be silent so that he can be heard." They didn't silence his right to write what he wants or believe what he wants. They were angry at the hate he brought to their community. I think thats fair.

Cha-el-see, commenter names appear below their comments. I think you may be in disagreement with Ayla.

This is not a free speech issue. Unless the government shut down his speech, his rights have not been infringed upon.

No, this has nothing to do with free speech. No government body infringed on his right to speak.

But, it does have everything to do with civility in the public discourse. Regardless of your opinion of this anti-gay activist's views (of course, like everyone else, I think that they are unfounded, irrational, hateful, disgusting and infuriating) it degrades us all to shout him down in this manner. Denounce him, yes. Protest, yes. But to actually speak over him in an effort to drown him out is unacceptable. I'd say the same thing regarding a speaker for the KKK or any other group.

As much as I understand and empathize with the emotions that lead some of Smith's feminists to do this, frankly I'm a little ashamed of them. The feminist community should be above this sort of thing.

"The feminist community should be above this sort of thing."

I dread the day when feminism will be above passion... above letting people use their voices on their own campus... above coming together to be stronger than the sum of our parts... above being brave enough to yell "we're queer" in a public place...above calling a spade a spade.

*I also agree with Blake here.

(Whoops. Thanks SarahMC. Clearly, Im a new poster.)

Well, what I was getting at was his right to speak was not respected and I think it would have been much more effective to go about protesting as suggested. While they succeeded in getting him off the stage they didn't really prove anything (other than the fact that they didnt welcome him) or change anyones mind.

I am one of the chairs of Smith's feminist organization and I was not at the Sorba lecture, as we are firmly entrenched in our last week of classes, and I felt attending the lecture would just make me upset. However, many of our members were there, and there were three contingents of students who wanted to protest. There were some yelling outside, who got inside, there were some doing a silent protest inside, and there were some at a Love-In in another space on campus to boycott him. I think that all the students have a right to protest, though I too wish that we could've protested him without causing us to be viewed badly by fellow activists and other Smithies.

On the other hand, I am proud of my fellow Smithies for organizing over an issue that is so important to us, regardless of the manner in which they chose to do so, and I'm sick to death of being tolerant of people's views who hold that my very existence is illegitimate. Smith is a safe space. He doesn't belong on our campus- he's not a scientist or an expert, his "facts" are plain wrong, he's just (to quote a favorite professor) a hater.

I don't want a dialog or a discussion with him, I don't think it's possible, and he doesn't matter anyway. If there's going to be any productive dialog, I would want it with the people who invited him, the Republican organization, our fellow Smithies, for better or for worse.

It's nice to hear from a Smithie knows a bit more about what exactly went on.

and let it be known that in spite of my critique, I still give kudos. :)

"Would you say the same thing if the speaker had been a KKK member who wrote a book about how black people are supposedly less evolved, less intelligent and more prone to violence than white people?

Probably I'd say you should invite your own speaker to refute his or her points. "

This is an academic/intellectual ideal.

But come on, we know this isn't really how most opinions in the world are contested/formed.

"Rational debate" usually just becomes repetitive, and the "status quo" will always have the advantage.

I'm not saying their aren't cons to shutting down a speaker, and that that might not hurt your cause among certain people. But "rational debate" also has it's disadvantages, and can obscure certain facts... And "direction action" is also capable of getting some people to think...

I'm just not for idealizing one approach above the other, all the time... I think they both have their place in a movement.

gah. *there* and *direct action*

"I dread the day when feminism will be above passion... above letting people use their voices on their own campus... above coming together to be stronger than the sum of our parts... above being brave enough to yell "we're queer" in a public place...above calling a spade a spade."

None of this is an argument for shouting down someone. Feminism must be about all of these things, but it shouldn't cheapen the public discourse. Let me be clear: Like any feminist (and any decent human being) I don't simply disagree with the viewpoints of this anti-gay activist, I despise them--the man is a worthless, hateful, harmful, infuriating piece of trash. I applaud the courage and passion of Smith's feminists in speaking out against him. But, I will never be for silencing someone in this manner.

Using these kind of tactics cedes the moral high ground and invites your opponent to use them on you. How would the feminists of Smith react if the Republican Club shouted down their next invited speaker such that the event couldn't go on?

"but to shout this man down does infringed on his right to free speech."

By that standard, speaking in a typical tone of voice infringes the right to free speech of anyone speaking with a quieter voice (for example, someone with a very sore throat who doesn't feel comfortable raising her or his voice).

There was absolutely no room for civilized debate because there was no Q&A session planned.

On another note, the YAF, a group closely associated with Sorba is officially classified by the SPLC as a hate group. There is no room for hate speech in an academic environment and we are not obligated to host it at our home.

There was absolutely no room for civilized debate because there was no Q&A session planned.

On another note, the YAF, a group closely associated with Sorba is officially classified by the SPLC as a hate group. There is no room for hate speech in an academic environment and we are not obligated to host it at our home.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. On one hand, the person is technically allowed to speak, but by shouting them down, you are effectively silencing them and preventing them from saying what they have to say. I don't agree with that and I don't think it's very effective. I remember when Ann Coulter spoke at Smith, a group of students walked out in organized protest. Unfazed, she made a snarky comment, the audience laughed, and the students looked rather foolish. I heard her side, but because the students didn't engage, I'm not sure what theirs was.

On the other hand, Ann Coulter is a bigot, a buffoon, and the embodiment of everything that is wrong with today's political discourse. If engaging her implies that there is anything remotely legitimate about her vitriolic garbage, I want no part in that.

Still, I think the problem with the Coulters, Horowitzes, and Savages of the world, is that they do have more credibility (deserved or not) than the KKK or what have you. They're objectionable, but people are listening to them (not sure about this Sorba guy). I think we have to find an effective way to both condemn and challenge their ideas.

While they succeeded in getting him off the stage they didn't really prove anything

I disagree. They proved that Smith does not tolerate hate speech.

I absolutely agree with you WheresTheBeef.

I hope that every student at Smith showed up outside of this event and screamed and shouted until they were hoarse, letting the world know that they would NOT tolerate this and that they would NOT accept this.

As feminists, we may find Mr. Sorba's rhetoric to be offensive--we may even classify it as hate speech. But, others will disagree. I'm sure there is no shortage of anti-feminists ready and willing to classify feminist viewpoints as hate speech. If we shout down someone because we find their speech hateful, we invite others to do the same to us because they find our speech hateful.

I usually find feministing to be a source of self-affirmation, but today I was horrified to scroll down and read a fellow feminist laud a manner of protest that I feel hurts us all.

Anyway, I think this boils down to a fundamental disagreement so I'm not sure how productive continuing to discuss it would be. As a final thought, I'd just urge everyone, regardless of your opinion, to leave the issue of Free Speech out of this--it has nothing to do with what happened.

As a junior at Mount Holyoke who was at the protest, I am 110% proud of all those women [and trans students as well!] who came out to say, enough is enough and we will no longer stand silently by as you spew hate against our very identities and lives. There was no way we could have had "rational discourse" with Sorba - when our very "intellectual" foundations are so very different, i.e. he lacks critical thinking skills and merely repeats already-debunked right-wing garbage, it becomes pointless after awhile.

Also, how did Smith even get to be an institution that values and promotes sexual diversity? By standing by and keeping our mouths shut? How has any civil rights movement progressed in the U.S.? By refusing to sit down and "play nice"! It comes to a point where we have to assert our rights.

An incredibly beautiful thing happened last night: LGBTQ students came together to raise some incredible, unified, inspiring energy, and our solidarity with each other spoke *volumes*. It got to the point where it wasn't even about Ryan Sorba and his ridiculous book - it was about getting together to express our common dignity and be able to have a voice that encouraged and supported each other's basic right to existence and legitimacy and happiness. I have never in my life been to such an inspiring protest, and I will remember it for the rest of my life. That is what matters to me.

I went to Smith, and I could not be prouder of the students who shut this idiot up. Hatred on that level does not deserve an audience, any more than a speech by David Duke would "deserve" a respectful audience at Morehouse. The campus Republicans should be ashamed that they brought this person to Smith at all.

Hello all,

Amazing to see this linked to on Feministing! I am a Mount Holyoke College student, but my girlfriend and I showed up at Smith [Seven Sister neighbors!] to show solidarity and support for protesters of Ryan Sorba last night. I have never felt passion and energy like that from my fellow peers.

For those people who do not agree with the method of protest, I understand your concerns. We, too, prize measured debate, intelligent conversation, and open dialog. Unfortunately for all involved, the Smith College Republicans' choice of speaker did not provide that forum. If you have not seen Sorba's lecture, feel free to head to Youtube.com and search under his name. There is a recording for a lecture he gave at another college- it seems that he gives the same lecture repeatedly. The first 10 minutes of his speech that he managed to belt out were almost verbatim what is on youtube, and it was ridiculous and offensive [he was going on about how gay people are pedophiles].

It is easy to see from the video clips and other information about him that Ryan Sorba does not provide a space for civil discussion, and trying to engage him in a debate, or a Q&A isn't possible. His facts are skewed, his re-telling of "history" is beyond reprehensible and filled with anti-gay bias, and the things he says are meant for no other purpose than to emotionally hurt those he opposes. He supports making gayness ILLEGAL.

How long do we have to sit around and listen to ignorant, hate-filled speech before we raise our voices against it? Does every single person with a half-brained opinion deserve a public forum in which to voice it? I would answer no to that. I am so sick and tired of being told that we have to be "ladies" and act "professional" and somehow rise above Ryan's bullshit... but why? Can't we interrogate the issues inherent with those very terms? There are significant race, class, and gendered expectations inherent in the idea of being "civilized" and "professional." Be quiet. Be a lady. Don't be unruly. Sit around politely as poorly-spoken, overgrown frat boys demean your existence. Stop being so hysterical!

Or... not.
Because what happened in that room last night was much larger than Ryan Sorba. Let's face it- he's a not very well known, poorly researched, hateful little man with no significant power to speak of. He is like a hundred thousand other ignorant people in this country who speak hatred from positions of privilege and have their opinions accommodated regardless. He is nobody, really. Driving him away was not necessarily a significant goal of any kind if you think about HIM and who he is. But for us, for young queer people coming together and raising our voices [literally] to make it quite clear to Sorba and others like him that hatred like his is NOT welcome on campuses like Smith is a HUGE DEAL. It was a show of solidarity and celebration of our strength and identity that Ryan Sorba wanted to undermine.

Asking him questions as he stood at the podium would have given him the positioning of an expert. I refuse to give him that, regardless of how foolish it would make him. He looked just as foolish if not more so as he got red in the face and exclaimed "y'all are intense!" with an embarrassed expression when we spoke out louder and prouder than he ever imagined we would. He looked foolish when we snickered at his ridiculous speech, when he was interrupted by boos and shouting from the audience, and when the people outside [who were not let into the event] banged on the windows to make their voices heard since they could not be inside. Our laughter and joy at who we are and what we could accomplish for OURSELVES was more powerful than any "civilized" discussion we could have engaged him in- simply because he is not civil, and is incapable of having intelligent discussion.

Although I can only speak for myself when I say this, I have full faith that the majority of the people involved in this protest last night would be in favor of having a REAL discussion about this issue. For many of us, the actual title of Sorba's lecture [about gay-ness not being biological] is something that deserves attention and intelligent discussion. I, personally, will try to make a panel discussion happen sometime this coming year discussion the origins of sexuality and different approaches to understanding queer identity: biological determinism, political lesbianism, etc etc. There can certainly be productive forums for this conversation, and room for both "liberal" and "conservative" [and anything and everything between] viewpoints at them without validating hate-mongers like Sorba and their anti-intellectual rants.

Saying that the students were wrong to drown the douche out gives credence to the argument that all points of view are valid therefore must be given equal "airtime." WRONG. If someone came to Smith saying the Holocaust never happened, would it have been wrong for students to drown the speaker out? The fact is is that some people are just WRONG. Completely and utterly wrong. And while you certainly have every right to be completely and utterly wrong, you also run the risk of being drown out by people who are RIGHT. I'm tired of this false argument that all viewpoints are valid and deserving of recognition. It's a moronic meme.

There was absolutely no room for civilized debate because there was no Q&A session planned.

Well, I don't know, you could hold an informal session after the fact, or hand out literature, or organize your own event, or invite your own speaker, or set up a website, or write an op-ed or at least a letter to the editor, etc.

You could also petition the school to require Q&A sessions at these sort of events.

rocket-

We are doing many of those things. However, the fact remains that Sorba WAS holding an event last night, and him being there did need to be addressed then and there. Doing one thing [protesting] does not preclude other actions such as the ones you listed.

Last I checked I am not required to be polite. Nor quiet, nor sweet, nor pretend to be straight, nor 'turn the other cheek'. You give me the opportunity for a cool, intelligent, and *respectful* debate about sexuality and identity... and I will so be there.

You come onto a college campus and spew your hatred-filled fanaticism all over my safe space (that queers have fought and fought and keep on having to fucking fight for), and I will certainly join the crowd shouting to let you know that you cannot shame or scare me.

He can have his free speech, he just cannot expect me to be civil, quiet, or polite about it.

And can I just say that I for one am really proud of everything I've heard about the queers at Smith (and all the rest of the 7 sisters)? You guys rock.

I'm really icked out by the "ashamed" comments. You can disagree but being ashamed means these people did something shameful. I can't speak for them but I would bet that they felt anything but ashamed for themselves.

this asshat spoke at my school (framinham state college), and i honestly wish i hadn't sat through his entire lecture. all he did was READ to us, admitted he didn't even do his own research (yeah, someone gave him a box full of info), and talked out of his ass and around questions. at the time, i was pleased that no one was blatantly rude to him during his speech, but asked pointed questions at the end of it. now i really wish that we had had a protest like smith did. unfortunately the college republicans at my school considered the event a success because so many people were there (not in support of the event, but more to satisfy curiousity). our gsa, myself included, each dressed in a color of the rainbow and sat in order, in an attempt to subtly protest, but no one noticed. i really wish someone had had the courage at my school to stand up and stand out and say something about it.

I'm pretty frustrated with the fact that this entire controversy has become about the protesters, as opposed to actually discussing what the Smith Republican Club did, by bringing an anti-gay speaker to a campus like Smith College.

Freedom of speech is ABSOLUTE. We don't make exceptions for speech we don't like. If you think it's ok to have an angry mob shout someone down, then you lose the moral right to speak in public. It's extremely hypocritical to expect to be heard, while denying others that same right. I hope everyone here who thinks it's fine to shout someone down thinks of that before they post again or say something in public. Shame on the commenters here who would stamp on the rights of others. Shame on the people at Smith who felt that they couldn't handle someone else's speech.

This is a sad day for liberalism.

I miss Smith so much...

Someone asked why Republican students would even choose to attend Smith in the first place. Because it's an amazing school that provides an incredible education!! That being said...

It's a shame that the Republican Club hadn't picked up on the first lesson we learn at Smith: everyone is allowed to experience and identify with their sexuality and gender however they may choose without fear of judgement or repression. My Smith education extended far beyond the classroom. I was introduced to so many aspects of sexuality and gender, and I developed a deep respect for everyone who is proud of their sexual identity.

Inviting that speaker to campus was an insult to Smith's prominent LGBTQ population, and I completely support their reaction.

"Freedom of speech is ABSOLUTE. We don't make exceptions for speech we don't like."

That's the thing- freedom of speech is not, and never has been absolute.

That's the thing- freedom of speech is not, and never has been absolute.

Yeah well I'm not sure we should be proud that we're keeping that tradition alive.

ok, Smith is not a public place. It is private property and therefore the whole "absolute freedom of speech" does not apply.

Also, I'm assuming Smith has some sort of a policy regarding hate speech and harassment. That man came onto PRIVATE PROPERTY and engaged in HATE SPEECH! That man BROKE THE RULES! If Disneyland has a rule against chewing gum and I go onto their property and chew gum they have the right to kick me out of Disneyland, even though the United States constitution grants me the freedom to chew gum in public places.

However, Smith did not kick that man out. They let him stay (which I think was the right decision). But the students did the right thing by not putting up with his garbage. He can say it in any public place, but not a private safe space that people PAY to have access to.

-(hopefully) a future Smith student

rocket-

There are a few very specific provisions in law that forbid certain types of speech at certain times for very good reasons. Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with those exceptions before you imply that any suppression of any speech whatsoever is a negative thing.

Furthermore- Ryan Sorba did not have his speech censored. He spoke. We spoke louder. There is really no provision in free speech that says that I have to sit around quietly and politely listening to every word he says without saying anything in return, and no rules that I defer to that dictate when and if I am allowed to respond and how.

ok, Smith is not a public place. It is private property and therefore the whole "absolute freedom of speech" does not apply.

Also, I'm assuming Smith has some sort of a policy regarding hate speech and harassment. That man came onto PRIVATE PROPERTY and engaged in HATE SPEECH! That man BROKE THE RULES! If Disneyland has a rule against chewing gum and I go onto their property and chew gum they have the right to kick me out of Disneyland, even though the United States constitution grants me the freedom to chew gum in public places.

However, Smith did not kick that man out. They let him stay (which I think was the right decision). But the students did the right thing by not putting up with his garbage. He can say it in any public place, but not a private safe space that people PAY to have access to.

-(hopefully) a future Smith student

In several discussions on campus it has been brought up that the space chosen by the Smith College Republicans was the Neilson Browsing Room, which is a small room at the entrance to the library which is commonly used for lunch time lectures on the stock market and managing money, or academic lectures from visiting professors. The emphasis is that this is a SMALL space on campus for anything which might be controversial. The Republican Club advertised this event with a banner in the campus center, which everyone would have had the opportunity to see. I have very little respect for the Republican Club on campus, and I believe they intentionally chose a space which would not accommodate a crowd. In a long series of emails sent around prior to the lecture, there was a heavy emphasis on a "respectful" protest--signs, turning backs as he said things which were offensive, an alternative love-in event. I did not attend the protest, (although I could hear the shouting from the class I was in) but I have been told by several people that the situation escalated because there was not sufficient room and people were barred from entering. Additionally, the Republicans betrayed an internalized victimhood in how they introduced Sorba--while the protest was still quiet and before there was any shouting.

Message to the Smith College Republicans (although clearly they won't be reading this thread): STEP IT UP. If you want to participate in a dialogue, stop antagonizing your fellow students and intentionally provoking this kind of protest. Also, please stop getting manipulated by sleazy conservatives with book deals who invite themselves over for publicity. It makes you look bad. (That's right, Sorba asked the Republicans if he could come speak, for free, and they agreed, and paid for his travel expenses.)

(whoops, sorry about the double post, my computer is not refreshing)

sorry

for someone to say they're "anti-homosexual", to me, is like saying you're anti-hair. how can you be anti-something that's a natural part of who a person is? I understand the history of (sick, twisted, discriminatory, violent, etc.) thinking behind it.. but sometimes it just boggles my mind.

For all the discussion of the need for reasoned debate with Sorba and his ilk, it seems that something is being lost from sight.

Some things should not be part of "debate". Hate propagandists crave "debate", because it implicitly recognises their "viewpoint" as a legitimate position.

Sometimes engaging in "debate" is giving up the store.

What Elise said.

I mean, I don't think these students could have made it any more clear that they don't think they have anything to gain from nor any good reason to engage in a discourse with someone espousing these views. And can anyone with any sense really argue otherwise? Did you hear what they were chanting? "we're here, and we're queer, get used to it." They don't want a discussion about it, because there's nothing to discuss. They're here. They're queer. Get used to it.

I mean, do I really need to engage with someone and talk it out and argue logically when they say something else completely ridiculous? Say, that because I'm a woman I have no right to an education? No. I have nothing to gain from, nor any moral compulsion to engage with such an argument. Does this mean I shout it down? Well, I suppose I could ignore the person. But when the person comes into my space, a space I'm going into debt to pay for, a space I should feel safe in, a space I expect to treat me, without any question or hesitation, as a legitimate person living a legitimate lifestyle, ignoring them is allowing them to violate, infiltrate, and define your space. That isn't acceptable. Shouting was called for and I can't imagine anyone doing it more beautifully or eloquently than these women at Smith did... :)

...Shouting was called for and I can't imagine anyone doing it more beautifully or eloquently than these women at Smith did... :)

Much more eloquently put than I managed.

Sometimes, the only reasonable response to something is: Shut the fuck up.

"Freedom of speech is ABSOLUTE. We don't make exceptions for speech we don't like."

Here you say freedom of speech should have no exceptions...

"If you think it's ok to have an angry mob shout someone down, then you lose the moral right to speak in public."

...and here you make an exception for loud speech by groups, instead of treating freedom of speech as an absolute.

"I mean, do I really need to engage with someone and talk it out and argue logically when they say something else completely ridiculous? Say, that because I'm a woman I have no right to an education? No. I have nothing to gain from, nor any moral compulsion to engage with such an argument."

Exactly!

"Freedom of speech is ABSOLUTE. We don't make exceptions for speech we don't like. If you think it's ok to have an angry mob shout someone down, then you lose the moral right to speak in public."

The irony here is pretty freaking flawless.

By speaking--even civilly--someone does not automatically have the right to silence those who protest.

"Freedom of speech is ABSOLUTE. We don't make exceptions for speech we don't like. If you think it's ok to have an angry mob shout someone down, then you lose the moral right to speak in public."

The irony here is pretty freaking flawless.

By speaking--even civilly--someone does not automatically have the right to silence those who protest.

thank you leslle. i hardly find it acceptable to tell a blonde or brunette that i disagree with their hair color whether they were born with it or dyed it last week. consider this relevance when considering sexuality...

More info on the Republican Club -

I saw their newsletter, The Right View, last night. First of all, the entire club appears to consist of about nine students (one African-American, one Indian, the rest white), almost all of them first years and sophomores. They do not seem to accept SGA funds (at least to publish The Right View), so I'd like to know where they got the money to pay for anyone to come to campus in the first place.

Second, The Right View is the worst written publication I've ever seen that was produced by students at Smith. I matriculated in 1978, graduated in 1978, and have lived near the campus since 1988. The newsletter (all eight pages of it) looked like something a bunch of high schoolers would have produced, not students at one of the top schools in America.

Even worse, The Right View is *not* primarily written by Smith students. Most of the contributors were students at UMass or Western New England College (25 miles away!), and the two worst articles were by men (one of them a middle aged graduate student at UMass, the one a smarmy looking fratboy type from WNEC). Articles included one on the "link between abortion and breast cancer" and a long, adulatory obituary of William F. Buckley, Jr.

Even worse, they proudly state that they do not accept school funds, and that The Right View is funded entirely by "generous contributions from our supporters." This sounds very much like a Dartmouth Review situation, where right-wing conservatives funded an ultra-conservative magazine that published deliberately inflammatory material.

Regardless, this whole thing smells of an attempt by a marginal group to get attention by bringing in a hate monger just before exams. I wonder how those Republicans were treated by their housemates when they returned to their dorms after the debacle?

First off, what was that idiot doing at Smith?

Second, I love how the feminists showed up in force. It was brilliant. I wish we could see such turnouts at anti-women speakers.

Finally, as much as I love the message and the mass of people that showed up, is yelling over your opponents really that great of thing? It only shows that you have more people to your cause, not that you're right.

ok, Smith is not a public place. It is private property and therefore the whole "absolute freedom of speech" does not apply.

I wasn't talking about government restriction on speech. I was talking about people's moral right in a free society to use their faculties (or lack thereof as the case may be), and engage with other people. If Smith, itself, had shut down the speech or pre-emptively cancelled it, there would be different issues, though I think that Smith probably recieves some public funds, which means the first amendment does apply to it.

...and here you make an exception for loud speech by groups, instead of treating freedom of speech as an absolute.

umm... no. shouting down someone is either not speech, or as someone said above, is the basest form of speech. I think it's probably better classified as a form of violence rather than speech. No one has any moral right to do that. I don't care how much you hate the speech.

The irony here is pretty freaking flawless.

By speaking--even civilly--someone does not automatically have the right to silence those who protest.

I'm not quite sure what you mean. I'm saying that no one has the right to silence any one else's speech. The only irony I can see is that here we have smart, proudly outspoken people who are cheering on the silencing of someone else's speech.

Lastly, in response to those who say that we can't have a debate with his ideas. I pretty much agree. But that doesn't give us the right to stop his speech.

STOP. STOP appealing to Freedom of Speech when you don't even understand what protections are granted by the 1st amendment.

I am getting really fucking sick of having to say this in every other comments thread.

I'm all for a free exchange of differing viewpoints, but when someone's viewpoint involves a radical negation of another person's rights and existence I think the principle underlying the free exchange is shattered. The only adequate response to 'You are a mistake and you should not exist' is 'Shut the fuck up.'

I think it's probably better classified as a form of violence rather than speech. No one has any moral right to do that. I don't care how much you hate the speech.

Who are you to say that no one has a moral right to shout? Objective morality is a dangerous road to go down, my friend. I'll say it again: just because he has the 'right' to speak doesn't mean that we have to be quiet so that he can be heard. I'm so tired of people saying 'FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS ABSOLUTE' as if you have can't utter a peep while someone else is speaking. He got his chance to speak, and so did we.

Also, it's not about hating the speech or disagreeing with what he has to say. It's hate speech (Ryan Sorba is closely associated with Young Americans for Freedom, which is designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center). It's hate speech that targets a huge portion of the Smith community. If a speaker had targeted any other community on campus with hate speech, the administration would never allow the event to go forward. This just fits in with the Smith administration's long-held tradition of ignoring or downplaying the existence of the queer population on campus.

Someone mentioned being frustrated that this whole discussion has become about the protesters, rather than the Smith Republicans. I regret that, so I just wanted to add, “Smith College Republicans, you suck!�

Nothing shames feminists, LGBT activists and liberals more than silencing conservative speakers through disruption of scheduled speaking events.

As a lesbian I find his views dehumanisingly offensive, but if he has been afforded a specific forum to speak, then he should be allowed to use it without mob intervention.

Not one of you would condone such behaviour if the shoe were on the other foot, e.g. a pro-choice advocate being shouted down by screams of “baby-killer�. Just because we know that we as feminists are the progressive ones, with human rights and dignity on our side, does not give us licence to act like thugs.

Denying your opponent the ability to express their views is typical of well...The Patriarchy, where might-makes-right and opposing views are so ‘dangerous’ that they must be crushed. This trend is sadly typical of any group who come to hate their enemy so much they come to reflect the very values they fought against.

Those screeching "hate speech," even if accurate in this instance, should perhaps look at their own depth of hatred.

Ellid- the Smith Republicans DO receive funding, The Right View (which, while almost identical member-wise to Smith Repubs and therefore are justly conflated with them) does not. Just clarifying. :)

STOP. STOP appealing to Freedom of Speech when you don't even understand what protections are granted by the 1st amendment. I am getting really fucking sick of having to say this in every other comments thread.

I wasn't talking about the first amendment. I was talking about our moral obligation to let others speak. This is an obligation we have as humans. See Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights

It's also an obligation we have as members of the reality based community. We don't have to listen to every idea, but we can't decide to silence any of them.

Who are you to say that no one has a moral right to shout?

It is your hypocrisy that gives me that right. If you believe that you have the right to silence other's speech, you have no right whatsoever to speak yourself.

It's hate speech (Ryan Sorba is closely associated with Young Americans for Freedom, which is designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center). It's hate speech that targets a huge portion of the Smith community.

I agree its awful speech, but that doesn't change the fact that it should be heard. Bad ideas should be exposed to the full scorn of everyone else. Censhorship gives bad ideas unwarranted attention.

And Kali, while you're entitled to your own view of the reported events, as another lesbian I think it's awesome that they felt empowered enough to stand up to this hater and the segment of the religious right he represents.

I don't think that any of us have the right to say that they should be ashamed of standing up for themselves, in any way they felt necessary. Nobody here has said that they've done anything illegal. Just because it's not something you would personally do, doesn't mean it's wrong, and doesn't mean it wasn't an appropriate response.

And god-damn it, I'm tired of people saying that this guy deserved an intellectual debate. That sort of debate needs mutual respect to go well. There is nothing like that here, as we all know.

And besides, like I (and others above this post) have said before, nobody has the right to require me or anybody to be polite and sweet and accommodating no matter what hate-filled propaganda they promote.

There are a million different things that could have been done, and from the sound of it, they're already doing lots of those different things already. So I while I see the situation, there's nothing here I have a problem with.

Besides of course that the school let this idiot on campus specifically to insult and degrade a segment of that campus population. But it's a 'learning situation' you know. Or a reality check, in that yep, it's still not safe to be queer no matter where you go. Like we didn't already know that.

“...there's nothing here I have a problem with.�

That is the problem, that people like you cannot extrapolate the consequences of your actions (or actions that you support) past this specific instance. What would be the effect on public debate if people responded to every speaker they disagreed through shouting and intimidation?

Sure you got the right-wing Christian this time (and on an emotional level I find it very satisfying), but what about when it is the fundamentalist Muslim spewing misogyny and homophobia? What if you wanted to speak on that subject and the Muslim Student Association and certain ‘anti-War’ groups shouted you down as an ‘Islamophobe’, ‘racist,’ etc.? From their perspective condemning religious-based bigotry is ‘hate speech’ you know.

If you want a society where free speech is beholden to the whim of a mob, then you need to be prepared for sexual and gender minorities to be crushed by religious conservatives in the world because there are a lot more of them than there are of us and their threshold to actual violence is a hell of a lot shorter.

Really some of you have no enlightened self-interest.

More videos have gone up on youtube from earlier on in the lecture, when he was really just speaking to a packed room (and I say room, not auditorium, because it had a max 50 person capacity). I think it's important to see that the protest evolved based on a collective in the midst of various practices of protest, and also grew out of the specifics of the event (students barred from entering, plain clothes police, hired videographers on Sorba's end, but otherwise camera's were shut off, students being man-handled)
Here's one example, but look at the rest under "sammylyon":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lVEm_L7G3A

"What would be the effect on public debate if people responded to every speaker they disagreed through shouting and intimidation?"

Nobody here is saying that they would support doing that to any and every speaker. I certainly haven’t. Maybe you should read through the comments again. If somebody seriously wants to have a respectful and nuanced conversation about the intersections of faith and sexuality, I am fully supportive. That isn’t what happened here. And he isn’t somebody whom I would like to have that conversation with. Excuse me while I demand a little respect and accountability from both sides.

Where you and I disagree is that I won't waste my time arguing with idiots who can't be reasoned with. I’m not going to debate my own right to exist to someone who thinks I deserve to go to hell. What’s the point? His position is ridiculous, disrespectful, and I will not lend his opinions legality by pretending that they're worth responding to in a respectful manner. That guy deserved a large (and loud) fuck-off. If he had been willing or capable of having a respectful debate, where at minimum everyone was treated with human dignity, I would agree with you. However I am not willing to give the time of day to every hate-spewing idiot who wants to judge me or my ‘lifestyle’, and responding to such speech gives it an air of validity that it doesn’t merit.

I understand that you don't want the homophobes trying to silence us in turn. I see your viewpoint, and if this had happened on public property I might have even agreed with you. But it wasn’t public property, and I don’t believe that anyone may just go anywhere and say whatever they want. Smith is a private university that I thought was committed to maintaining a safe and respectful space for queer people, I want to know why this guy was allowed on campus in violation of that space.

Cscarlet - thanks for the clarification about the Republicans. I honestly couldn't tell from reading their newsletter who funded what.

I graduated in 1982, btw, back before the campus Republicans found it necessary to have major chunks of their newsletter written by men old enough to be their father....

ROFL! Freedom of speech is not "absolute," though it's adorable you think it is. There's a reason you can't yell "bomb" on an airplane. No, sometimes people are just wrong. And they're drown out for a reason. Listen. I'm about a man-crazy as it gets, but had that fucknut been speaking at my school, I would have been close to rioting. I don't understand why people who have a serious problem with women and gays are always afforded some sort or weird courtesy. Again, I ask, if someone had come to a school saying Jews or Blacks had CHOSEN their race or culture, would everyone have been so amenable to a "discussion" on the issue. Give me a fucking break.

As a huge fan of Smith College (class of '04 and former SGA President), as well as one of the people who walked out of the Ann Coulter talk on campus a few years ago, I want to express how fucking pissed I am that the Smith Republicans chose to bring this type of speaker to campus. It is an open slap in the face to a large portion of the Smith community, and as far as I can tell Ryan Sorba adds nothing to legitimate intellectual or academic discourse. I think that if the Smith Republicans want the respect of the Smith community - which, though I don't agree with them politically, I think they should have - then they need to earn it.

And to all the kickass Smithies and others who stood up and said, NO, not in MY community, kudos to you. I won't glorify the silencing of a guest speaker, but I will say that what you did took a great deal of courage and pride. Keep being noisy!

"ROFL! Freedom of speech is not "absolute," though it's adorable you think it is. There's a reason you can't yell "bomb" on an airplane."

That's not speech. That's a crime (as is child porn, conspiracy to commit a crime, etc.).