Coulter lacked mutual respect, not free speech

I felt compelled to write this piece after attending the Ann Coulter event hosted by the Cal Poly College Republicans (CPCR).

As an openly queer man on this campus, and someone who advocates and volunteers for organizations such as the Pride Center, I was deeply offended by what I witnessed.

It is hard to describe what it feels like to sit in a room full of people cheering and clapping as the speaker promotes marriage inequality.

But I soon realized that I was not the only one belittled by her words. Her speech represented little else besides a particular type of sensationalism, one that includes making baseless statements and insulting anyone who offers a bit of critical thinking. By the end I had realized that not only was Coulter inflammatory, but she was not representative of the character of Cal Poly.

I first feel the need to address something that Brendan Pringle, the president of CPCR and a contributor to the Mustang Daily, said in one of his latest opinion pieces.

He said that by bringing Coulter to Cal Poly, CPCR was upholding what is mentioned in Cal Poly’s mission statement — specifically that she represents “intellectual diversity.” Indeed the mission statement makes mention of those words, but I find the two words following what Pringle quoted to be of particular relevance to my piece here today.

The expanded quote is as follows: “Cal Poly values free inquiry, cultural and intellectual diversity, mutual respect …”

Mutual respect. Before expanding on this I would like to briefly recall the Veritas Forum from earlier this year. Greg Ganssle and Cal Poly’s own Keith Abney led a discussion titled “What Does it Mean to Be Good?” The discussion, which covered (among other things) different moral theories, guided audience members on a path of critical thinking and challenging ideas.

As someone who is not religious, I am fascinated by discussions that involve spirituality. Unfortunately, I often find that such discussions quickly break down into aggressive language and defensive logic, resulting in circular or even short conversations. But what struck me about the Veritas conversation was the maturity of the presenters and the audience. Throughout the question and answer session, the atmosphere maintained by the presenters, even on the more critical questions, was of mutual respect. I truly felt the respect that all individuals displayed was fundamental to the success of the talk.

I think that is an example of intellectual diversity. But this respect was something that seemed to be lacking in Coulter’s talk. But it wasn’t just lacking — there was a void.

When she made a joke about people being unemployed, there was clapping. When she suggested that gay couples raising children causes increased criminality and sociological problems, there was laughter. When she called a student stupid merely for asking a question, there was cheering. Where was the respect? I believe that part of intellectual diversity is a willingness to allow for differences — for the topic to literally allow for a dialogue between people of different opinions. But Coulter did not allow that. She refused to answer questions, and worse, made a mockery of the students who sought honest answers.

I find it particularly interesting that people continue to justify the event as an example of free speech. There is no question that bringing her to speak here was an exercise of free speech. But just because something can be classified as free speech, does not mean that it upholds the ideals that our community stands for. Free speech does not imply intelligent speech. And it most certainly does not mean that the individual who is exercising that right has something meaningful or valuable to say.

Perhaps the most compelling evidence that the Coulter event was not representative of Cal Poly ideals was the demographic of those in attendance. The vast majority of those in attendance were not Cal Poly students, but older, white community members.

So yes, Coulter brought in a different perspective, but she also managed to create a demeaning, homogenous

and intellectually shallow environment. The fact that so many students were absent from this event is telling of the kind of talks many Cal Poly students find valuable.

Now, I am aware my criticism of the Coulter event will be deemed by some to be an example of “liberal whining,”  maybe even “progressive propaganda.” That is something I can live with.

I am frankly tired of the name calling. I am tired of this notion that just because someone has a podium and a forum, that their words will therefore possess some intrinsic value. I am not comfortable knowing that someone like Coulter, who advocates for inequality, demeans single mothers and insults the intelligence of inquiring students can be portrayed as anything other than hyperbolic and childish.

I am not suggesting bringing Coulter to Cal Poly was a mistake or was not an example of free speech. I am writing this piece as an affirmation of what it means to support “…free inquiry, cultural and intellectual diversity, (and) mutual respect…”

The nature of education is to allow for critical thinking and the exploration of answers we may not always be comfortable with. If that is going to be called, as Coulter puts it, “demonic,” then so be it. Call it whatever you like. Because the beautiful thing about progress as a product of education is that it will occur independent of what arbitrarily negative words will be ascribed to it.

As an educational institution, Cal Poly should seek to invite people with different perspectives in a way that supports critical thinking and an exploration of one’s beliefs. There is no prerequisite to achieving this, save a willingness to challenge and be challenged.

This, more than anything, is to reassure those in the Cal Poly community that there is still room for an agenda that supports progress. And I am absolutely a part of that agenda, as are many others.

There is an LGBTQIA agenda. There is a racial agenda. There is a progressive agenda. And so long as people such as Coulter give speeches like the one she gave here, there will be more of us. More of us fighting for change. So to those that feel belittled by Coulter, to the conservatives who feel disenfranchised by CPCR, to those of you who do not have strong opinions but know that extremism is not where you fall: know that you are not alone.

Aaron Rowley is a biomedical engineering senior.