According to the complaint, her votes against granting tenure to various politically correct candidates have won her the lasting enmity of certain powerful colleagues who have embarked upon, as the complaint charges, “an unrelenting campaign of verbal abuse and isolation” refusing to allow Professor Wolff to teach in the Women Studies Program, denying her release time, spreading groundless rumors to impugn her integrity, and bad-mouthing her to junior colleagues as “poison.” Although she is apparently a firm believer in affirmative action, Professor Wolff has nonetheless based her judgment of candidates for appointment or promotion on their scholarly credentials, not their politics. Professor Wolff’s commitment to traditional scholarly standards has shown itself not only in her scholarly work but also in her behavior regarding promotion and tenure. As the Times conceded, Professor Wolff “still believed in applying traditional scholarly standards in her academic work.” And this retrograde belief, at least for some of her colleagues at MIT, was enough to brand her as that unspeakable thing, a “neo-conservative.” The New York Times noted in its recent report on the case that Professor Wolff considers herself a “progressive feminist.” “Progressive” perhaps, but obviously not progressive enough. A specialist in the works of Emily Dickinson and Edith Wharton, she has long been an advocate of Women’s Studies, Cultural Studies, and other up-to-date items on the academic multicultural menu.
What makes this case more than business as usual in the PC-haven of the academy is Professor Wolff’s own impeccable credentials as a feminist scholar. According to a complaint dated April 7, 1992, Professor Wolff is seeking damages for MIT’s “acquiescence in and perpetuation of a persistent and continuing pattern of professional, political and sexual harassment.” The complaint proceeds to detail both the obloquy and ostracism that Professor Wolff has allegedly suffered at the hands of her politically correct colleagues as well as MIT’s consistent refusal to intervene effectively on her behalf. Cynthia Griffin Wolff, a noted scholar of American literature and a tenured professor at MIT’s School of Humanities, has filed suit against her employer for breach of contract. The movement for political correctness has not-not yet-turned murderous, but such telltale markers characterize it as surely as they characterized the totalitarian movements of the twentieth century.Įven as we write, a splendid illustration of political correctness at work is unfolding at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology -not, thank goodness, among the scientists or engineers, but, as usual, among the “humanists” the professors of literature. And, finally, there is a generalized cynicism, at least among leaders, that encourages one to regard every matter of principle as a power struggle. There is also a deliberate vagueness about aims and goals that allows one to contradict oneself with impunity while constantly raising the ante on one’s demands. Then there is the tendency to transform every contested matter of fact into a question of personal motivation and character: if you disagree with me you are a traitor to the cause. There is, first of all, a blatant disregard for what is contemptuously described as “empirical reality” in the name of slogan-like “ideals” (“diversity” “sensitivity” “ethnic pride” etc.). It is no secret that the demand for political correctness has more than a whiff of the totalitarian about it.
0 kommentar(er)
