The case of criminal rape charges against the Duke Lacrosse players has been troubling. I am troubled by two elements: First, the situation from which the case stems. Second, the reaction from Duke faculty members.
The grounds for this case stems clearly from an event in which all participants had no need to be involved. That is, of course, a raucous party in which strippers were employed. Had all participants chosen to avoid this act of immorality in the first place, there would have been no occasion for any of the alleged acts to have taken place. Normally, many who identify themselves as liberals embrace the type of “parties” where participants are free to “express” themselves without inhibition. In their routine, convoluted ways, they decry any attempts to label such socially poor behavior immoral as violations of Constitutionally guaranteed rights of free expression. Normally. However, in this case, it became the celebrated liberal cause of protecting the “helpless innocent” from the power and corruption of the privileged white male.
Thus enters some of the great defenders of the poor and downtrodden – Duke University professors. On the basis of nothing but allegations of rape, and even in the face of a continuing body of evidence that favors the alleged perpetrators, 88 members of the Duke faculty fanned flames of needless hysteria by writing and/or signing a letter declaring that they were “listening” to students “who knew themselves to the objects of racism and sexism.” (The link is to another blog which contains the content of the letter – the only location I found in my quick search for it. Interestingly, the blogger notes that it was removed from the Duke University site where it was originally posted). These are University professors who would normally jump at the chance to defend anyone accused of a crime being heralded as guilty without a trial, except that in this instance the alleged perpetrators represent to them the “privileged” and the “powerful” who must be stopped.
Defending her signing of the “listening” letter, Duke English Prof. Cathy Davidson writes that she remains “dismayed by the glaring social disparities implicit in what we know happened on March 13.” The incident, she states, “underscores the appalling power dynamics of the situation.” As the evidence of the case has been collected, though, the “dynamics of the situation” has proved to be made up. By all the indications given, the defendants in this case will be forever guilty to some of the Duke faculty’s "best and brightest" no matter how innocent they prove to be.
The grounds for this case stems clearly from an event in which all participants had no need to be involved. That is, of course, a raucous party in which strippers were employed. Had all participants chosen to avoid this act of immorality in the first place, there would have been no occasion for any of the alleged acts to have taken place. Normally, many who identify themselves as liberals embrace the type of “parties” where participants are free to “express” themselves without inhibition. In their routine, convoluted ways, they decry any attempts to label such socially poor behavior immoral as violations of Constitutionally guaranteed rights of free expression. Normally. However, in this case, it became the celebrated liberal cause of protecting the “helpless innocent” from the power and corruption of the privileged white male.
Thus enters some of the great defenders of the poor and downtrodden – Duke University professors. On the basis of nothing but allegations of rape, and even in the face of a continuing body of evidence that favors the alleged perpetrators, 88 members of the Duke faculty fanned flames of needless hysteria by writing and/or signing a letter declaring that they were “listening” to students “who knew themselves to the objects of racism and sexism.” (The link is to another blog which contains the content of the letter – the only location I found in my quick search for it. Interestingly, the blogger notes that it was removed from the Duke University site where it was originally posted). These are University professors who would normally jump at the chance to defend anyone accused of a crime being heralded as guilty without a trial, except that in this instance the alleged perpetrators represent to them the “privileged” and the “powerful” who must be stopped.
Defending her signing of the “listening” letter, Duke English Prof. Cathy Davidson writes that she remains “dismayed by the glaring social disparities implicit in what we know happened on March 13.” The incident, she states, “underscores the appalling power dynamics of the situation.” As the evidence of the case has been collected, though, the “dynamics of the situation” has proved to be made up. By all the indications given, the defendants in this case will be forever guilty to some of the Duke faculty’s "best and brightest" no matter how innocent they prove to be.
(photo: Collin Finnerty, one of the Duke University lacrosse players charged with rape in Durham, N.C., in connection with an off campus party held by lacrosse team members)
2 comments:
Chuck,
Do you read La Shawn Barber's blog? She's been following the Duke non-rape case from the beginning, coming back to it as events happen.
www.lashawnbarber.com
Great post.
I am not familiar with her blog. I'll give it a look. The link I had to the letter signed by Duke faculty was one I ran across during my search. I found it quite interesting. In truth, I have not followed the case too closely. Just read an article about it in Human Events and wanted to comment. Thanks!
Post a Comment