Free speech on campus is apparently only for bigots and Puritans
The Universities of Wisconsin continues to fall far short of its stated ideals
Vol. 35
In This Issue: ESSAY | FAVORITE MUSIC OF 2023 | NOW READ THIS | FINAL FRAME
The Universities of Wisconsin (formerly known as the UW System) has long touted itself as a bastion of free speech and expression, as a place where people can go to engage in that “fearless sifting and winnowing by which alone the truth can be found.”
These days, however, it seems like sifting and winnowing are reserved only for people willing to toe the Wisconsin GOP’s hard-right line. As for fearless? Hardly. Most of the major actions taken by the folks in charge are entirely fear-based.
Behold the recent decision of the Board of Regents to utterly betray the faculty and students by reversing course and embracing a plan imposed by Republican legislators to undermine DEI-related positions and policies. Rather than seeing the deal for what it is–blackmail by the right-wing extremists in the Legislature–the Regents appear to have made the same mistake as so many Democratic lawmakers who still labor under the delusion that the GOP is ever negotiating or acting in good faith.
Instead of putting up a real fight and pointing out to the public that the deal was blackmail and antithetical to everything the UW says it stands for (not to mention the real harm it was doing to staff in terms of withholding needed pay raises), the Regents caved.
Of course, anyone paying attention over the last several decades knows all-too-well how hollow the UW’s purported commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion have been and continue to be. There are pockets within the system where people are making meaningful change and doing the hard work of engaging with and trying to undo the UW’s racist and homophobic legacies. But the bureaucracy overall–and the largely white, wealthy donor base behind it–has not shown itself to be particularly keen on making the fundamental changes necessary for meaningful progress.
I could go on, but my attention today has been grabbed by the most recent example of UW leadership being reactionary and censorious.
Outgoing UW La Crosse Chancellor Joe Gow has been placed on administrative leave and will face an investigation after someone (and we don’t yet know who or how) outed him and his wife as participating in and posting adult videos.
Based on the reaction of the Board of Regents, you’d think the married couple had engaged in something truly terrible, like non-consensual sex or, I dunno, persecuting queer and trans kids.
But no, what Gow is “guilty” of is posting apparently PG-13 vegan cooking videos alongside adult film stars, publishing books about how porn has helped his marriage (written with his wife and under pen names), and having a paid, subscriber-only OnlyFans account.
Heaven forbid that two consenting adults in a committed relationship want to participate in sex work-adjacent hobbies that they keep separate from work!
I’ve been heartened to read Gow’s interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel since the news broke, where he sticks to his conviction that he’s done nothing wrong (because he hasn’t, IMHO). If he’s guilty of anything, it’s of being naïve enough to believe that the recent focus on “free speech and expression” touted by the GOP legislators who hold the UW’s purse strings, as well as the UW and its Regents, actually meant freedom of speech/expression for anyone other than rightwing extremists and anti-sex Puritans.
"I did not expect that we'd end up where we are now," he said. "I thought at least the board, given their staunch support of free speech, would be a little more understanding. But clearly that's not the case."
Clearly. Gow had previously gotten into some hot water for inviting adult film star Nina Hartley to give an optional lecture on campus titled "Fantasy versus reality: Viewing adult media with a critical eye." Who better to speak on this actually important topic than someone with Hartley’s first-hand expertise? It’s not as though she planned to get on stage and perform sex acts. But apparently even a lecture by an adult film star is a bridge too far for the pearl-clutching set that includes former UW System President Ray Cross, the one who reprimanded Gow for the invite, claiming that he “exercised poor judgment” in doing so:
"As we continue to struggle for greater financial independence and public trust, your decision to spend money from this fund on a one-sided lecture by an '... (adult entertainment) performer, educator, and ... activist' unfortunately puts all of our funding at risk," Cross wrote. "I fear your actions also detract from our budget request and our capital plan, which should be one of your highest priorities."
This paragraph is, I would argue, incredibly telling. Because Cross and other presidents, the Board of Regents, etc. have not had anything to say about far-right speakers being invited to campus to give their own “one-sided” lectures. Of course, folks like Ben Shapiro and Matt Walsh espouse the kinds of dressed up, “respectable” bigotry that the aforementioned legislative purse-string-holders like very much, and so don’t tend to lead to threats against UW funding.
So never mind that Gow “oversaw gains in enrollment and guided the campus through the COVID-19 pandemic,” and that UW-La Crosse is one of three UW System campuses not currently facing a deficit.
Sex and sexuality that falls anywhere outside of the strict, puritanical, straight/Christian/patriarchal guidelines of the GOP and its ilk have to be punished and stifled swiftly and entirely. The UW’s Regents, it would seem, are all too happy to play right along with that view.
So much for fearless sifting and winnowing. Between the steady undermining of academic freedoms and funding carried out by the Wisconsin Republican Party over the past decade plus of their gerrymandered control over state politics, and the generally pervasive climate of sex-negativity in this country, Gow didn’t stand a chance.
The only other heartening thing I’ve seen from all of this is that the vast majority of comments on news articles about it are from people questioning and/or lambasting the Regents for the decision. I’m not alone in thinking that this whole thing is ridiculous and unnecessary, and that Gow has done nothing wrong.
Indeed, I have to hold out hope that attitudes toward sex and sexual expression are changing with the generational tides–and with rapid advances/changes in technology. At some point, we’re either going to have to accept that people have digital histories liable to include sexually suggestive and/or explicit content, or we’re not going to have anyone left to lead our institutions or elected bodies.
And let’s work on the de-stigmatization of sex work generally while we’re at it, yeah? Adult film stars and sex workers generally are human beings with valuable expertise and experience to offer. Continuing to marginalize and penalize people for that work makes our society less whole and healthy, while needlessly driving those individuals into often precarious–if not outright dangerous–living conditions.
Gow is comparatively lucky. He’s a white man with tenure and a committed partner, someone who will undoubtedly find a way to land on his feet when the dust settles. That’s not to underplay the no doubt incredibly stressful and hurtful situation that the two of them are in right now. But let’s look at the repercussions faced by this relatively privileged person for daring to have an interesting sex life, and then think about the countless people in far less secure positions who are outed and ostracized for the same (or similar) things.
I hope we can raise enough of a stink about big, public stories like this one to start meaningfully pushing back on and changing our society’s bizarre and unhealthy relationship with sex and sexuality. We have to be loud and consistent in our condemnation of Puritanical, retrograde policies and attitudes, so that everyone benefits.
I am fortunate to know and be friends with a number of people who are sex workers. We should all be listening to them when they tell us what they need to live healthy and fulfilling lives. Because, as it turns out time and time again, when a society decides to prioritize the needs of its most marginalized members, the rest of us reap the rewards, too.
Recommended further reading: Tryst.Link/Blog (articles, interviews, blog posts by and about sex work/ers)
My favorite music of 2023
As per tradition, every year I keep a playlist (now on Tidal, because Spotify is trash) where I keep track of some of my favorite songs and albums that come out during that time.
I used to burn physical CDs of the short list and hand them out to friends and family, but times have changed, the playlist has become the easier and cheaper method of tracking things. It’s still a really fun way for me to create a sort of sonic scrapbook - I can look and listen back as far as 2007, when I first started doing this. Music has always been something that creates strong connections and associations with particular times, places, people, emotions, etc. I also stick with this because it helps me make sure I’m paying attention to new music and artists, instead of just resting on the laurels of what I loved when I was 16 or 22 or 31.
There’s great music being created every day.
Anyhoo, head on over to Tidal for the full list, or if you’re not able to access that, I’ve created a short list over on YouTube. As a taste, some of the artists included are: boygenius, Jessie Ware, Caroline Polachek, Jean Deaux, Channel Tres, MUNA, Christine and the Queens, Daniel Caesar, Janelle Monae, Jorja Smith, Yazmin Lacey, The Linda Lindas, Kat and the Hurricane, Yumi Zouma, Mitski, and Brittany Howard.
I’d love to hear from you if anything on the list sticks out to you, and/or if you have recommendations for music released in 2023 that I missed!
Now Read This.
“Comparison is the way we know the world” [Masha Gessen for N+1]
We are not any smarter, kinder, wiser, or more moral than people who lived 90 years ago. We are just as likely to… remain willfully ignorant of darkness as it’s dawning. But we know something they didn’t know: we know that the Holocaust is possible.
“In the shadow of the Holocaust: How the politics of memory in Europe obscures what we see in Israel and Gaza today” [Masha Gessen for the New Yorker]
Some of the great Jewish thinkers who survived the Holocaust spent the rest of their lives trying to tell the world that the horror, while uniquely deadly, should not be seen as an aberration. That the Holocaust happened meant that it was possible—and remains possible.
“Slouching Toward Jerusalem: Evangelicals love Israel. Why?” [Sam Theilman at Forever Wars]
The only obituary of Henry Kissinger that matters (courtesy of Spencer Ackerman):
Every single person who died in Vietnam between autumn 1968 and the Fall of Saigon — and all who died in Laos and Cambodia, where Nixon and Kissinger secretly expanded the war within months of taking office, as well as all who died in the aftermath, like the Cambodian genocide their destabilization set into motion — died because of Henry Kissinger. We will never know what might have been, the question Kissinger’s apologists, and those in the U.S. foreign policy elite who imagine themselves standing in Kissinger’s shoes, insist upon when explaining away his crimes. We can only know what actually happened. What actually happened was that Kissinger materially sabotaged the only chance for an end to the war in 1968 as a hedged bet to ensure he would achieve power in Nixon’s administration or Humphrey’s. A true tally will probably never be known of everyone who died so Kissinger could be national security adviser.
“Born This Way? Born Which Way?” [Lydia Polgreen at NYT - gift link]
The notion that people who diverge from social norms under existing hierarchies deserve basic human dignity only if they have no choice about that divergence is fundamentally degrading. Undergirding it is the unspoken but clear judgment that this identity is regrettable but in a civilized country must be tolerated.
“The Limits and Possibilities of an Anti-Zionist Hanukkah” [Drew Burnett Gregory for Autostraddle]
What strikes me most about this obvious reframe [of the story of Hanukkah] is the decentering of Jewish people as uniquely oppressed. It’s possible — nay, necessary — to honor the realities of antisemitism in history and in the present without pretending as if we’re alone in our experiences of oppression. It’s also important to acknowledge that a group being oppressed does not mean it can’t also be an oppressor.
Final Frame.
I recently took my first visit to Waubesa Wetlands. Just south of Madison, this is a gem of a spot, best seen by canoe or kayak but more accessible by land in the winter, if you hike in via an access point on land owned/managed by The Nature Conservancy (find info and a map here). On my walk, I saw a flock of probably 500 Canada geese flying overhead, listened to the trumpets of sandhill cranes echoing off a nearby ridge, and spotted a weasel in its white winter coat.
‘Til Next Time.
Thanks so much for reading! Feel free to send your hiking, book, and music recommendations. Wishing you all a safe and healthy New Year. May we create more justice and more peace for all.