海角大神

Northwestern University professor Laura Kipnis acknowledged she was being a little irreverent when she wrote about student-professor relationships.

鈥淔orgive my slightly mocking tone,鈥� she wrote in the article, 鈥淪exual Paranoia Strikes Academe." 鈥淲hen I was in college, hooking up with professors was more or less part of the curriculum.鈥�

She was surprised, and a little amused, when she heard that students were lugging mattresses up to the college president鈥檚 office in protest of the article.

It became less funny when the professor, who writes about gender identity and sexual politics, was notified that a sexual discrimination complaint under Title IX had been filed against her, leading to a two-month investigation before she was cleared of all charges.

While Professor Kipnis says she does not want to be held up as a test case, many academic observers wrote about her story. Some called it a lesson on the cultural sensitivities that, some critics say, are increasingly turning college campuses into a free-speech minefield.聽

Take the 鈥渂ias-free language guide鈥� developed by students and staff at the University of New Hampshire in 2013. It found the use of the world 鈥淎merican鈥� problematic because it didn鈥檛 recognize South America.

The guide was never campus policy, President Mark Huddleston Wednesday after the guide went viral.

鈥淚 am troubled by many things in the language guide, especially the suggestion that the use of the term 鈥楢merican鈥� is misplaced or offensive,鈥� he said. 鈥淭he only UNH policy on speech is that it is free and unfettered on our campuses.鈥澛�

But 鈥渇ree and unfettered鈥� speech is increasingly coming up against a new generation of students, some of whom have an expectation that they have a right not to read or hear ideas that differ from their worldview or make them uncomfortable.

What began in the 1990s as political correctness 鈥� a desire not to offend others 鈥� has now morphed into what one academic observer calls 鈥渆mpathetic correctness鈥� 鈥� a desire never to be offended. Even celebrities have weighed in on the debate, with comedians Jerry Seinfeld and Bill Maher saying the environment at college makes it almost impossible to do their routines without someone becoming upset.

While many have pointed to or the as root sources of a politically correct culture on campus, much of the criticism is oversimplified, academics say.

According to professors and higher-education experts, the trend is driven by financial realities in the American higher education system, and exacerbated by a contemporary world in which opinions are catalyzed and publicized by the intellectual echo chamber that can exist online. With a drop in the number of college-age students, as well as decreased funding from states, increased competition among colleges and universities has resulted in an atmosphere where students are treated like consumers and more emphasis may be placed on their satisfaction rather than how much they are learning, critics charge.

Professors can feel disincentivized to bring up controversial issues in class for fear of getting in trouble either with administration or with students that they may offend, critics say.

Liberty University Professor Karen Swallow Prior says she does not personally feel afraid to speak freely, but over the past few years she has observed a shift among students from the desire to not offend other people, into an effort to protect one鈥檚 self from being offended. 聽

Professor Prior coined the term 鈥溾�� to describe this phenomenon and used the classroom example of students refusing to read texts that challenge their own personal comfort.

鈥淭he problem is when this kind of culture bleeds into an environment where open-mindedness and being challenged are inherent to the process of learning,鈥� Prior says.聽

The shift toward a consumer-catered higher education system means resort amenities like rock walls and lazy rivers on campuses, says Richard Arum, a professor of sociology and education at New York University, but also in the rise of academic environment where student comfort is held up over open debate.

鈥淣ow, because you鈥檙e interested in catering to the 17-year-old, you鈥檝e set up a system where the administration chooses to disinvest from academics and invest in students鈥� whims,鈥� says Professor Arum. He traces the roots of the trend back to the 1960s, when the federal government started shifting funding from institutional grants to student grants 鈥� meaning that if colleges wanted those dollars, it needed to attract and keep the most students.

The ubiquitous nature of social media also can cause some faculty members to feel that they are under constant public scrutiny, with off-the-cuff comments online having serious ramifications on academic careers.

鈥� Saida Grundy was a recently hired Boston University professor who was forced to apologize after tweets emerged in which she criticized white male college students.

鈥� Steven Salaita had a tenured job offer from the University of Illinois rescinded over tweets about his thoughts on the Israel-Palestine conflict.

鈥� In the case at Northwestern, one of the pieces used as evidence in the Title IX investigation came from Kipnis鈥檚 Twitter account.

鈥淚 think the Internet and social media does have something to do with it. It鈥檚 almost like it was communicable or catching,鈥� says Kipnis, who works as a cultural theorist and wrote about the details of the Title IX investigation in in The Chronicle of Higher Education. 鈥淚 mean that鈥檚 how culture works: Students learn to be more sensitive and more vulnerable because there鈥檚 this conversation about sensitivity and vulnerability.鈥澛�

Recent media attention surrounding trigger warnings also may be an example. At first trigger warnings, which聽 as a way to facilitate open discussion about sexual assault, were used with regard to material that had graphic descriptions of sexual violence. Recently, students and universities have on increasingly mundane curriculum, including literary classics like 鈥淭he Great Gatsby.鈥�

Administration policies may not explicitly block controversial speech on campus by either faculty or students. Instead, it鈥檚 more likely to be threatened implicitly, says Eugene Volokh, a law professor at UCLA and founder of the .

鈥淢any faculty members will get the message that if they want to move forward in their careers then they won鈥檛 express those views,鈥� Professor Volokh said.

He gave an example of one case at the University of California (UC) where the system encouraged faculty to stay away from so-called 鈥渕icroaggressions.鈥�

Microaggressions are defined as 鈥榖rief, subtle verbal or nonverbal exchanges that send denigrating messages to the recipient because of his or her group membership.鈥�

But Volokh said the UC policy basically equates microaggressions 鈥� which includes criticism of affirmative action 鈥� to a form of racism.

For its part, the University of California refutes the characterization that censorship has been institutionalized on its campuses.

鈥淭o suggest that the University of California is censoring classroom discussions on our campuses is wrong and irresponsible. No such censorship exists,鈥� it said in a statement. 鈥淯C is committed to upholding, encouraging, and preserving academic freedom and the free flow of ideas throughout the University.鈥�

The evidence is not just anecdotal: A 2013 of 165,743 college freshman done by the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA found that they 鈥渟cored themselves lowest on their openness to having their own views challenged.鈥�

This mindset also can affect other students.

Take the case of Omar Mahmood, a student at the University of Michigan, who wrote a last year in the university's conservative newspaper on the overbearing PC culture that he believed was rampant on his college campus.

The article set off a firestorm that culminated in his termination from the main student newspaper. His apartment was vandalized, with people throwing food at his door and writing vulgar messages.

While he says he doesn鈥檛 harbor any ill will toward the newspaper or his critics, Mr. Mahmood said in an interview that he is concerned about the effect what he characterized as a fear-based environment has on free speech on his campus. 聽

鈥淚t鈥檚 become like this private club,鈥� Mahmood says. 鈥淚f you agree with us and speak out, then you鈥檙e praised; if you don鈥檛 and speak out, then you鈥檙e a bigot.鈥�