newly discoverd, DUMB antics by HARVARD's male soccer team results in cancellation of season

I apologize if this was previously stated. I admit to not reading this entire thread which is a violation of my personal criteria for posting. I am always amazed at how anything Harvard can go on and on.

Remember the racist song sung by University of Oklahoma fraternity members? This was the grounds for dealing with that issue:

"According to OU’s Student Rights and Responsibilities Code, abusive conduct is listed as:

“Unwelcome conduct that is sufficiently severe and pervasive that it alters the conditions of education or employment and creates an environment that a reasonable person would find intimidating, harassing or humiliating. These circumstances could include the frequency of the conduct, its severity, and whether it is threatening or humiliating…Simple teasing, offhanded comments and isolated incidents (unless extremely serious) will not amount to abusive conduct.”"

I think Harvard’s response was reasonable. There is probably a code of conduct in play here. The girls who were ranked 2s and 3s, the dogs and pigs were likely feeling some humiliation. The male team issued an appropriate apology and I hope it was sincere. Some things are just right or wrong, and the players were wrong. Missing their remaining games is painful, but hopefully, lesson learned.

**2nd Harvard team accused of lewd reports **

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/more-sports/2nd-harvard-team-accused-of-lewd-reports/ar-AAjXaE0?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp

Time to tell my DS17 to start BITBLEACHING the server!!!

“The girls who were ranked 2s and 3s, the dogs and pigs were likely feeling some humiliation.”

I agree with the thoughts you’ve expressed @csfmap but just for the record the comments made by the men’s soccer team went WAY beyond ranking them 1,2,3 or referring to them as dogs and pigs. It detailed sexual positions and other graphic and vulgar comments.

Glad to see that the men’s cross country team came forward of their own volition. It shows that the punishment doled out by Harvard to the men’s soccer team has had an impact and is implementing change, which is the goal after all.

@Gator88NE, I’d prefer to think that the conversations would be more aling the lines of, “See this? It is inappropriate, vulgar, demeaning to women, and DO NOT ENGAGE IN IT.”

MODERATOR’s NOTE:

Well, that’s good, because that would not happen.

On a related subject, I’m sure pretty much everyone on this thread has seen my earlier comments about keeping it on topic. Here are some posts I’ve deleted (although paraphrased)

“I’m gonna get you kicked off”
“His post was snarky”
“He’s a she”
“Your reading comprehension sucks.”

If you think I’m talking about one of your posts, I probably am. Keep to topic please.

One additional note:

Nowhere is there any indication of anyone on the Harvard Soccer team engaging in sexual activity with underage persons, so such a discussion is not even remotely on topic. More posts deleted.

"Remember the racist song sung by University of Oklahoma fraternity members? This was the grounds for dealing with that issue:
"According to OU’s Student Rights and Responsibilities Code, abusive conduct is listed as:
“Unwelcome conduct that is sufficiently severe and pervasive that it alters the conditions of education or employment and creates an environment that a reasonable person would find intimidating, harassing or humiliating. These circumstances could include the frequency of the conduct, its severity, and whether it is threatening or humiliating…Simple teasing, offhanded comments and isolated incidents (unless extremely serious) will not amount to abusive conduct


Any First Amendment scholar will tell you that OUs actions were unconstitutional. It wasn’t even a close case. Of course the students chosee not to fight their punishment. But I promise you if they had the school would have lost.
Just so it’s clear, when it comes to a public university, BEHAVIOR CODES CANNOT OVERRIDE THE CONSTIUTION. The fact that many people don’t know this chills civil rights attorneys to the bone.

Oh and also we are often despondent about the fact that many don’t understand that defending someone’s Constiutional free speech rights doesn’t mean we in any way agree with their position.
I decided to have First Amendment issues be part of my practice because I grew up with some amazing relatives with numbers etched on their forearms who taught me how important it was not to bar the Nazis from marching in my hometown.

But this thread is not about a public university.

Jera will probably answer but I do believe a private college has the right to censor speech

@momofthreeboys. A private university probably has that right to limit free speech . BUT The Fire.org made a very interesting argument that they have laid out in numerous writings that universities like Harvard put out a lot of statements about their commitment to free-speech rights. They argue that the University has contractually I committed to free-speech rights. This theory has never been tested in the courts. I don’t know if it could really prevail. But it is interesting

In any event I was writing about the person who is referred to OSU. And their implication that the behavior code was enough to get rid of the students rights. That is false.

I hope every student at a public university fully understands that

Lots of “ifs,” @Jara123 , and as for FIRE, well, here:

http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/discussion/comment/19596749/#Comment_19596749

http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/discussion/comment/19596771/#Comment_19596771

This is a fairly intelligent piece about “free speech” battles on college campuses and the unfortunate reality that many of the bankrollers and advocates of “free speech” on college campuses are interested not so much in free speech as in protecting speech on the political-economic right:

https://newrepublic.com/article/133531/free-speech-charade

This whole line of conversation is irrelevant – no one is going to litigate the free speech issue in this case.

…and (A) the soccer team appears to be in complete agreement with the Harvard administration, and (B) the cross-country team appears to concur as well, having essentially blown the whistle on itself.

This thread keeps veering off topic, so I am closing it.