by Ben Shapiro
• Column headlined “Do it the risky way: out in the open”: “Sex was around long before societies came into existence or houses were built or the word ‘conservative’ had any legitimate meaning. . . . For some, exhibitionism is simply having sex in front of the window with the curtains pulled aside—living across the street from some of the fraternities, as I have, will give you a good idea of how to do this. For the really devilish ones, there is always the public bathroom at a bar.”17
• From “Spice up your life by attending strip clubs”: “Now the female body is definitely beautiful to all and therefore pleasing to watch. Many of you men out there may already know what I’m talking about. After all, you dominate the female strip club scene. Now ladies, isn’t it high time you, too, realized what strip clubs have to offer? . . . How many of you ladies have ever felt something more than friendship for another female? . . . Of course, the thought left as quickly as it came because you were told that such a way of life isn’t normal or accepted.”18
• From a column entitled “Casual sex: it’s not just for ‘sinners’ anymore”: “College: the place where virginity gets lost in oblivion and where sex is usually only one party away. For most, it is not until college that we truly begin to understand the prevalence and nonchalance of sex—especially with the introduction of co-ed dorm halls. . . . Indeed, casual sex is a reoccurring theme of college life. . . .”19
Some of the raunchy sex trash isn’t even relegated to the sex column. On May 9, 2002, the Daily Bruin ran an article on the front page titled “Recipes for Hot Sex.” The graphic showed lingerie panties, handcuffs, and a sex toy. The piece described a lecture by Dr. Joan Irvine to a group of retirees, middle-aged couples, and younger women. “We were always taught the way to a man’s heart is through his stomach—forget that, it’s about six inches lower,” she said. Irvine went on to describe myriad ways to spice up sex life, including the use of sex toys like whips. The Bruin gleefully reported this as news. “Sexual salvation may be only a pack of batteries away,” the reporter panted.20
It’s not just the Daily Bruin. The Yale University and University of Kansas newspapers also carry sex columns containing similarly graphic material. Tufts University’s sex column is called “Between the Sheets”; California State University at Long Beach’s is “Sex at the Beach.” UC Santa Barbara has “The Wednesday Hump” column, and Cornell has “Come Again.” Advice and discussion from these and other such columns include commentary on:
• canned phrases to use during sex21
• body-cavity searches to retrieve lost condoms22
• the porn industry’s biggest sin being forgoing the use of condoms (“a bad example for the viewers”)23
• various techniques for anal sex24
• how lesbians can have sex like heterosexuals25
And here’s a gem from Ohio State University:
No, sex is not like a porno—like most guys think from their experiences. And sex is not something beautiful between two people—like most girls are taught to believe. Sex might possibly be the most absurd thing that can happen between two people. . . . Two people—faces contorted in a combination of pure joy and an Indian burn—fart as their two bodies writhe against each other.26
How charming. College papers make sex as romantic and spiritual as flatulence.
THE VAST LEFT-WING CONSPIRACY
A quick sampling of student newspapers around the country reveals that the incredibly leftist viewpoint on the editorial boards isn’t relegated to the Daily Bruin. Pick a random date and a random college newspaper, and you’re sure to find consistently liberal opinions from the editors. In this case, I used October 1-2, 2002. Let’s see what the editors have to say:
The Columbia Spectator ran editorials on both days opposing an American attack on Iraq. The October 1 editorial stated: “The Bush administration’s proposed war with Iraq is ill-conceived. It is grounded in tenuous assumptions, shallow rhetoric, and a reckless desire for glory. . . . President Bush’s plan is a mistake. The United States should not go to war with Iraq.” The following day, the editorial staff followed up by calling on Congress not to even debate an attack on Iraq: “The sudden debate over war with Iraq is robbing Americans of the government’s attention at a time when it is critically needed. . . . Bush’s personal ties to oil should not send America to war.”27
The Harvard Crimson editorial staff lauded Senator Tom Daschle for his tantrum over a President Bush remark supposedly calling Democrats uninterested in national security: “Rightly infuriated, Daschle accused Bush and other Republicans of exploiting the war on terrorism for political gain and countered Bush’s ridiculous claim . . . Daschle’s speech is a welcome sign that the Democrats may actually begin acting like an opposition party, and Daschle like an opposition leader. It is their responsibility to offer much-needed criticism of Bush’s budding doctrine of preemptive strikes.”28
The Yale University Daily News editors called on the students to reject the US military recruiters’ “occupation” of campus because of the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy banning open homosexuals: “when military recruiters come to campus this month, the News urges law students and faculty to sign up for interviews, flood their Holiday Inn suite, and do as Harvard students did last month: Don’t ask them about career options. Tell them about equal rights.”29
Boston College’s student newspaper ran the following editorial asking the administration to be more tolerant of homosexuals: “The BC administration’s official stance on sexual orientation plays perhaps the biggest role in perpetuating BC’s perceived intolerance. . . . We are the people who live in a community where people are not protected against discrimination based on sexual orientation, the people who live in a community where the administration chooses not to allow support for its gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender students, the people who endure the reputation of being bigoted against those who are different.”30
You might think I’m only quoting universities where leftism is a part of the state heritage. But check out this random sample of quotes from editorial boards in heavily right-wing states from October 1-2, 2002:
At the University of Kansas, the Daily Kansan editorial board decried the university’s supposed lack of minority students, despite a 12 percent increase from 2001 to 2002: “while we can congratulate KU recruitment for their baby steps in solving this diversity problem, that’s really all they are: baby steps.”31 (Sixty-one percent of Kansans voted for George W. Bush in the 2000 election.)
An editorial from the University of Montana Kaimin bashed big business: “little by little, piece by piece, our environment and our allegiance are being sold to the highest bidder. . . . Our campus is a community, not a battleground for corporate dollars. We are students, staff and faculty, not consumers waiting for our next buying impulse to hit. Our space and our allegiance shouldn’t be sold to the highest bidder.”32 (Bush won 64 percent of the vote in Montana.)
Editors of the Idaho State University Bengal insulted President Bush for his support of an attack on Iraq: “As Congress passes a resolution that gives bloodthirsty President Bush power to take military action against Iraq, the possibility of a conflict is more real now than ever before.”33 (Idaho went for Bush at a clip of 71 percent.)
The University of Utah Chronicle editorial staff begged the administration to shell out bucks for an inefficient recycling program: “You thought losing to Air Force was bad. Now we’ve been beaten by Brigham Young University. The U’s conservative counterpart to the south has out-liberalled, out-environmentalled and out-social conscienced our venerated school in a battle of commitment to progressive ideals. . . . They’re making the world a better place by recycling their waste, and we’re not . . . Administrators can change the situation by giving greater funding to recycling and looking at programs already working on other campuses.”34 (Seventy-two percent of Utah voters pulled the lever for Bush.)
PEER PRESSURE
It isn’t only
the professors who shape the views of college students. The opinions of already-brainwashed peers also influence their views. And student newspapers have quite a reach. The Daily Bruin reaches approximately sixteen thousand people per day, on and off campus. Altogether, student newspapers are read by hundreds of thousands of students.
Student newspapers are interesting sources for another reason as well: They constitute a window into the mind of the indoctrinated student body. Students express their thoughts and feelings, their experiences and their views. Almost all of it is slanted to the left.
Rival student newspapers that print conservative material are often subject to student crime. On October 24, 2001, students stole one thousand copies of the UC Berkeley Daily Californian after the Ayn Rand Institute placed an ad entitled “End States Who Sponsor Terrorism.” “What Germany was to Nazism in the 1940s, Iran is to terrorism today. Whatever else it does, therefore, the US can put an end to the Jihad-mongers only by taking out Iran,” read the ad.
Student Zorros left flyers to mark their robberies. “We must take a stand against the continuation of a systematic policy of eliciting and reinforcing hatred and racism from our student newspaper,” the flier stated. “Until the Daily Cal shifts policy we will not allow business to continue as usual. As a result, we have taken copies of today’s issue of the newspaper.” The flyer also called the Rand ad “irrational and inflammatory.” Of course, instead of arguing about how “irrational” the ads were, the students stole the papers. The Keystone Cops of UC Berkeley vowed to hunt down the perpetrators. Despite eight previous newspaper robberies at Berkeley, the UC police has failed to arrest anyone.35
So students are left with only one side of the story—the smutty side. From censoring conservative students in the name of political correctness to printing pornographic garbage on the front pages of the paper, student newspapers are examples of the kind of thought that dominates the universities. And with each student who enters the university system, indoctrination grows.
12
COLLEGE CLIQUES
Student groups are the lobbyists on campus. They print pamphlets. They hold protests. They whine. They shout. They fight. Groups like the African Student Association, Gay and Lesbian Association, Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán (MEChA), the Muslim Student Association, and their media outlets, like Nommo, TenPercent, LA gente de Aztlán, and Al-Talib all receive tuition money to spout their radical agendas.
At UCLA, the funding isn’t split proportionally among groups, either. In the corrupt system, money is funneled into whichever group happens to control the student government. For example, in 2001-2002, the USAC budget review director was Mohammed Mertaban, a man who justifies suicide bombings. “We’re in no position to condemn a suicide bombing because none of us has experienced what they’ve been though under fifty-three years of oppression,” Mertaban states.1 Not surprisingly, the Muslim Student Association received a total of $12,322.72 for programs; the Jewish Student Union received $0.00.2
What is more surprising is the base budget allocation to both groups. Up until the 2003-2004 school year, this money was supposed to be allocated based solely on the number of constituents in each student group. While there are at least as many JSU members as MSA members, the MSA received a whopping $5,203 while the JSU received only $1,243.3
In all, the JSU was the group that lost out the most in the money count, due to the fact that of all the student groups, they are the most conservative. The African Student Union received $7,803; the Gay and Lesbian Association received $2,608; and MEChA received $7,636.75. The allocations were in no way proportionally representative of the different groups on campus.4
The trend continued in 2003-2004. While the standard for base budget funding changed from membership to a points system based on member retention and outreach, JSU continued to get the short end of the stick. In the end, JSU was forced to file a case with the Undergraduate Students Association Council judicial board.5
The cash keeps on flowing to the most radical student groups, and those who pay tuition can’t do anything to stop it. And what these groups stand for is frightening.
“AFRICAN” STUDENT GROUPS AND NOMMO
The African Student Union is a national union with offices at most major colleges. These offices run independently of one another in general, but what they have in common is a goal to separate black Americans from other Americans.
The University of Georgia ASU constitution identifies all black Americans as Africans only, and lists as one of its goals “enabl[ing] African students and other Africans to share the cultural wealth of the African continent,”6 despite the fact that many blacks have been living in America for generations and have never even visited Africa. The purpose of the University of Texas ASU is to “create critical student awareness of African issues, its pride, unity and development,” according to its Web site.7 The goal of ASU at the University of Syracuse is to “provide African student [sic] with a forum to express their culture.”8
The ASU isn’t the only “African” organization on campus. Another important black organization is the African Student Association. The purpose of the ASA perfectly reflects the purpose of the ASU: splintering the student body. The assumption that all black students are “Africans” is implicit in the name of the African Student Association. ASA members are “a dynamic group of students, mostly Africans, who undertake various activities including talks and cultural events with the goal of promoting awareness of the rich African culture and people,” according to the University of Massachusetts ASA.9 But how many members of the ASA are actually African citizens? My guess is few.
Nommo is the black magazine at UCLA. Here are a few choice samples from Nommo:
• Here’s a gem from the issue following September 11: “About 4,000 people lost their lives that morning. That is also when the slow torture of the meaning of justice began. Immediately after the attacks, just like the aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing, Osama bin Laden, Muslims, and people of Middle Eastern descent were suspected. . . . Attorney General ‘Ass’croft issued a national order to detain 5,000 men of Middle Eastern descent to be ‘interviewed’ by law enforcement. . . . The US government does a lot of dirt in the name of the American people and wonder [sic] why the United States and its interest are targeted by so-called terrorist groups. As f—ed [sic] we maybe [sic] over the events of 9-11, we can not allow ourselves to be blinded and fed bullsh— by our government. . . . President Dubya and Attorney General ‘Ass’croft got their little kicks in by detaining hundreds for no reason. . . . Black folks, of all people, should not be silent on this issue. As black folks, we know what it is to be suspect in hiring and housing. And we know what it is like to always fit the description when pulled over. Our voices must be heard in support of Sikh, Middle Eastern, and South Asian brothers. Otherwise, our silence can potentially lend us to a similar fate as the 12 million people who died in Nazi death camps.”10
• Askari Abdul Muntaqim weighs in with his take on American civilization: “I’m not suggesting that Amerikkka is civilized . . .”11
• Noluthando Williams asks if America is a terrorist state: “the US is a covertly dictatorial regime which stops at nothing to protect the interests of its elites. . . . So, before we rush to post up an American flag, sign up for the US armed forces, or spit slurs at Middle Easterners, because we truly want to do the right thing, we should ask ourselves what the right thing is. Who are the real culprits of global terrorism?”12
• On Zimbabwe: “Why are they kickin’ white folks off the land in Zimbabwe? Of course, one reason is obvious. The land was violently stolen in 1890. . . . The white farmers, now the descendants of the original terrorists, have held the position that since they personally did not steal the land, they should be compensated for their land before leaving. . . . Now, before we start high-fivin’ each other, we better examine the bigger picture, because if this is to become the trend in Africa, it should be a trend that improves the quality of lif
e for those who suffer today as a result of colonialism and neocolonialism.”13
Besides bashing “Amerikkka,” black student groups specialize in finding opposing political viewpoints “offensive.” After the Indiana University Daily Student ran an anti-affirmative action cartoon by Dan Carino of San Jose State University, the Black Student Union went ballistic. The story made national headlines. A one-hundred-person town hall meeting was organized to discuss the “insensitive” cartoon. “We’re basically here because we feel the [Daily Student] has a blatant disregard for the student body and constantly disrespects us,” whined BSU President Gerald Mitchell. BSU political action chair Carolyn Randolph claimed that the Daily Student was “very exclusive and elitist.” This despite the fact that 41 percent of IDS front pages during the time period in question contained at least one story about black issues.14
Cartoons are apparently a touchy subject. In 1999, the Rutgers University Daily Targum ran a cartoon strip entitled “Flaming Cyclops,” by Gary Gretsky. The strip depicted a bunch of white people from “Hicksville”—these “white folks” insult anything unlike them. Speaking about black people, a white girl states that blacks are “always complaining” and that she’s sick of them getting a “free ride.” Another white character in the strip replies, “On a slave ship!” Obviously the point of the cartoon was to blast perceived white racism. As Professor Steve Adubato of Rutgers wrote, “Any responsible person—black or white—would understand that Gretsky was making an ‘anti-racism’ statement. Any idiot would know that the ‘On a slave ship!’ comment was intended to mock anyone, particularly a white person, who would never want to trade places with a black American.”15 But the Black Student Union at Rutgers responded to the cartoon like a wounded tiger. “It could very well be true that [Gretsky] attempted to dispel racist notions. That, however, neither denies nor justifies the use of a comic strip to discuss a sensitive issue that affects a large part of the Rutgers population,” sniveled Nadir Joshua, secretary of the Black Student Union. People who attended a rally to protest the anti-racism comic strip demanded that the Daily Targum “actively seek more representation from the minority community to prevent similar occurrences,” give the staff sensitivity training, allow minority groups to run free ads in the newspaper, fire the editors that allowed the comic strip to run, and run a formal full-page apology in the Targum.16
