Posted on 11/20/2018 5:50:25 AM PST by Kaslin
On October 16, I filed a Title IX sex discrimination complaint against administrators at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington where I have been teaching for the last twenty-six years. Readers will also recall that it is the same institution I successfully sued on First Amendment grounds back in 2014. The facts leading to the present controversy are briefly recapitulated below.
Two females, one a student at UNCW, the other an alumna at UNCW, paid a visit to the Women’s Resource Center (WRC) located in Bear Hall on the UNCW campus. The student is a member of a campus Christian club, which also employs the alumnus. Their purpose was to request funding and co-sponsorship from the WRC for an upcoming campus debate on the topic of abortion, which is scheduled to occur on February 21st in 2019. The debate is between Dr. Willie Parker, a physician who has aborted over 10,000 innocent human beings, and myself.
The director of the WRC denied the funding and co-sponsorship request. A very concise explanation for the denial was provided by the director; namely, that abortion is a “women’s issue” and that the debate participants are both male. To be clear, there was no other explanation offered for refusing to provide funding and co-sponsorship for the debate except for the gender of the participants in the debate. The explicit admission of gender-based discrimination was made in front of two reliable witnesses.
In fairness, the WRC Director did indicate that she would consult her board for a second opinion. However, after consulting with her board, there was no reversal of the original decision. That is hardly surprising. One of the members of the WRC board is an avowed Marxist feminist and the principal defendant in my previous lawsuit against UNC-Wilmington. In other words, it appears that at least one feminist who previously lost a discrimination suit to me is now advising other feminists who wish to discriminate against me. These educators give the appearance of being willfully uneducable.
The incident at the WRC happened on August 28th. It did not occur to me to report it until I later received an email from Chancellor Sartarelli informing me of my legal obligation to do so. Portions of the text of that email are included below. I have bolded some specific portions for emphasis:
Dear Faculty and Staff,
As the 2018-19 academic year begins, I would like to bring to your attention the revised Student Gender-Based/Sexual Misconduct Policy that includes reporting requirements for all employees. At the start of each academic year, the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights requires that all faculty and staff are given notice of the campus policy and are reminded of their need to report any incidents of gender-based discrimination, harassment and sexual misconduct … Acts of gender-based discrimination, harassment and sexual misconduct, including dating violence, domestic violence and stalking, will not be tolerated at UNCW … Allegations of gender-based/sexual misconduct will be promptly investigated, findings will be issued, acts of discrimination will be redressed and appropriate remedial action will be taken.
Sincerely,
Jose V. Sartarelli
It is worth noting that I am not the only victim of discrimination in this case. Dr. Parker, who happens to be black, is also a victim of discrimination. It is my hope that the university will take the refusal of the WRC to fund his speech on the basis of his gender just as seriously as they would take the refusal to fund his speech on the basis of his race. Either form of discrimination is reprehensible.
As my readers can see, I had no choice but to file a formal complaint. I would have been content merely to publicly ridicule the WRC for its rank hypocrisy. But the tenor of Dr. Sartarelli’s email suggested I really had no choice but to contact the Title IX office. In other words, I am just trying to be a good employee and abide by the university’s rules.
Regrettably, over a month after filing the complaint, I have not been advised of the university’s ruling in the case. Thus, I am writing publicly to remind the powers that be that I am not going away quietly.
The public needs to know whether those in charge of fighting sexism are guilty of promoting it.
… To be continued.
“title 9” is wrong not just because it is the name of a section in a book, but because it is unconstitutional and illegal.
It is discriminatory. It is illegal. It is not binding.
Sex is the correct term when delineating the chromosomal makeup of a person. Gender is a function of grammar.
My comment: Easy solution, throw on a dress, march into the office, say you now identify as a woman and have the debate.
Title IX is redistribution. Redistribution is communism.
Exactly. This is why I use the term "gender" to refer to the biological status conferred by having or lacking a Y chromosome, and "sex" to refer to a physical act.
The use of "gender" as a grammatical construct in languages that use gender is a direct consequence of the existence of biological gender. If there were no conceptual relation between biological gender and the grammatical construct, the terms would be essentially neutral, like using "animate" or "inanimate" or any other words used to differentiate classes of objects. Furthermore, the claim that "gender" only refers to grammar is ludicrous. Considering that speakers of English typically are unaware of grammatical constructs of other languages, this claim begs the question of why we would even know about this grammatical construction since we do not use it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.