A month ago Columbia University revealed its “sexual respect” education program — a requirement designed “to reinforce that community citizenship is a critical part of being a Columbia student at any school, and that sexual respect is integral to what it means to be a member of this community.”
There are several ways for students to meet the requirement, even including submitting an art piece.
But it seems the program wasn’t put together very well, which is bad thing considering students were to have completed it by yesterday.
The Columbia Daily Spectator reports that “a number of issues have surfaced with the program’s implementation, from technical difficulties with signing up for workshops to student complaints about the content of some workshop options.”
For example, eight survivors of sexual assault had showed up for a workshop back on February 25, only no one from the university was there to run it.
Some other concerns are more of the PC variety: Some students of the “working group” that helped put together the program are upset that an option of watching a video and “reflecting” on it was added early this year:
“The content being discussed in these workshops and in these videos and these reflections is so specific and so complicated, and people will have so many misconceptions about that going in that students will benefit most from a workshop,” working group member Abby Porter, CC ’17, said.
In other words, “we’re upset because the video option doesn’t allow us to ‘re-educate’ students and to direct them to the ‘proper’ mode of thinking.”
If you’re skeptical of my bit of editorializing there, then check out how these working group folk felt about the art option: “Some student members of the working group expressed concerns that the arts option was a less effective and less educational way to learn about sexual respect in comparison to the workshops.”
How dare these leaders diminish the learning style of those who prefer to express themselves artistically!
The Spectator’s Dan Garisto says that even the very definition of “sexual respect” can be found nowhere on the school’s website, nor in any university press release.
Looks like he’s right — here’s Columbia’s Sexual Respect website. Maybe they’ve added a definition since Garisto’s column, but I don’t see it.
And as Garisto says, “… how about we actually define ‘sexual respect’ and stop using it as a buzzword?”
But perhaps most embarrassing is this ridiculous video about the program. Tell me President Lee Bollinger doesn’t look like he’s thinking “What the &*%@ am I doing here”?
He’d rather be rearranging his sock drawer.
Not to mention, the production value of this thing seems to rival that of any public middle school. Hell, the academic “rigor” of this entire program appears to rival that of a middle school.
At best it’s akin to the material from a typical ed school or an assorted “studies” class.
Check it:
“This is an opportunity to create art about the connection between sexual respect, and membership in the Columbia University community”? and “We encourage the expression of all identities and all … ‘villages’?
“Villages”???
This is from the Ivy League, folks.
Dave Huber is an assistant editor of The College Fix. (@ColossusRhodey)
Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter
IMAGES: airsoenxen/Flickr, YouTube screencap
Please join the conversation about our stories on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit, MeWe, Rumble, Gab, Minds and Gettr.