Rocky Mountain Low

Screen-Shot-2012-08-17-at-9.34.59-AMSteven F. Hayward is the author of Greatness: Reagan, Churchill and the Making of Extraordinary Leaders, Age of Reagan (two volumes) and other acclaimed books. Last year the University of Colorado at Boulder brought Hayward on board as Visiting Scholar in Conservative Thought and Policy, something of a breakthrough in diversity for the liberal university. But now the campus thought police have targeted the visiting scholar.

In a March interview with National Public Radio, Hayward addressed the subject of sexual harassment: “You know, my mother and my mother-in-law both said, ‘You know when those kinds of things happened to us, usually a lot worse 40 or 50 years ago when they were in the working world, they slapped people.’ Maybe we ought to get back to that.”

In an October 13, 2013 Powerline blog about Nadine Schweigert, a North Dakota woman who married herself, Hayward wrote:

So why is this gender-bending diversity mandate so prominent at universities these days?  The most likely explanation is that it is simply yielding to the demands of the folks who dislike any constraint of human nature in what goes by the LGBTQRSTUW (or whatever letters have been added lately) “community.”  I place “community” in quotation marks here because the very idea of community requires a certain commonality based ultimately in nature, while the premise behind gender-bending is resolutely to deny any such nature, including especially human nature.

These were “oppressive and discriminatory” ideas, according to Chris Schaefbauer, student government president of student affairs, and Caitlin Pratt, student government director of safety and inclusion. Hayward, they wrote, has engaged in “victim-blaming.” The onus should be on the harasser and “on the university to create an environment where people feel safe and supported in reporting conduct violations.”

Shaefbauer and Pratt charged that Hayward’s blog comments “invalidate the lived realities of transgender individuals and mock the LGBTQ community as a whole.” Further, “The lived realities and rights of women and LGBTQ individuals should not be open to be denied, dissected, refuted or used as talking points in a conflict between liberal and conservative politics.” So in the students’ concept of free speech, some ideas “should not be open” to challenge and examination, and even discussion. Those are rather strange sentiments for a university environment but they inspired faculty assembly chairman Paul Chinowski to go after Hayward.

“I found this offensive, bordering on what I think most people would say is hate speech,” Chinowski told colleagues. “If any (other) faculty member said this, we would find ourselves in a dean’s office or possibly on suspension for writing this. I applaud the students for having the nerve to stand up to this. The question is, are we going to allow this or condone this from someone in our own faculty?”

Chinowski further said: “I don’t think we should allow that behavior, even if somebody is doing it for effect,” he said. “It’s offensive, and there’s no place for that in this community.”

Law professor Aya Gruber said she didn’t want the faculty to become the “free speech police,” adding “I don’t like what he said, but I want the right to say that I don’t like what he said.” Hayward “has an absolute right to say what he wants, but along with that right, he has to expect this kind of backlash when you say things that are deliberately provocative and not very well thought out.”

Hayward teaches Constitutional Law II and one of his students, Will Hauptman, went on record that the professor maintains a respectful and professional classroom environment, does not promote a political agenda in class, and has even included the university’s suggested statement about preferred gender pronouns in his syllabus. Hauptman said the professor had never belittled anyone’s statements or ideas and “treats students with respect and courtesy.”

The ludicrous accusation of “hate speech” suggests that Hayward is not getting much respect and courtesy from politically correct student and faculty bosses who fancy themselves liberals. That should come as no surprise given the venue.

From 1990 to 2007 the University of Colorado at Boulder was the happy hunting ground of Ward Churchill, who falsely claimed to be a Native American to qualify for an affirmative action position in Ethnic Studies. Churchill also regarded the United States as a genocidal nation and denounced the victims of the 9/11 attacks as “little Eichmanns.” This hatemongering fraud held on for 17 years before the university fired him for plagiarism and fabricated research. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld his dismissal.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • L. Wessell

    I was a prof. at CU when the left sown by cultural marxism entered CU. I will not tell the story, but it did contribute to mangling my health and early retirement, There was a Yugoslave prof., expert on Marxism with so many article untouchable. But he was isolated.

  • DaCoachK

    So some flit gets his feelings hurt, and it is the end of the world? Toughen up Tinkerbell. But, of course, the entire bogus GiBLeT movement is one based entirely on feelings, as in “I can’t help the way I feel.” Normal people can’t expect this crowd to behave in any fashion that resembles normalcy. After all, look at what they do to each other, which is anything but normal.

    • Alleena

      As far as I know, there is no proof that people are transsexual other than their personal belief that they are.

  • The Facts

    Oh! For a moment there, I thought Mr. Hayward was fired and wasn’t going to be paid a lot to stay on at the University. This is just an ad.

    • Gislef

      Nope, just a report of intimidation.

      You don’t have a problem with attempts to intimidate?

      • The Facts

        Not when they are bogus.

  • A Z

    “Caitlin Pratt, student government director of safety and inclusion.”

    Many universities in the U.S. have misled prospective students and their parents about crime on and around campus. The article linked below pertains to the UK. However, similar articles have been written about U.S. universities. Mr Haywood has a very sarcastic wit, which Caitlin chooses to interpret as misogyny. Why is Caitlin doing so? Has she lied about University of Colorado at Boulder crime statistics?

    “University crime rates: are students being misled?
    (University crime rankings are flawed – let’s hope this year’s school-leavers don’t take them seriously)”

    • A Z

      How safe is University of Colorado at Boulder? I think Caitlin is making a tempest in a teapot to misdirect people.

      ” the federal Clery Act—named for a Lehigh freshman raped and murdered in her dorm in 1986 before her parents discovered there’d been a slew of violent incidents at the university—to report annually to the U.S. Department of Education about crimes on and near campus, including murder, assault, sexual offenses and robberies.”

  • bob smith

    “The lived realities and rights of women and LGBTQ individuals should not be open to be denied, dissected, refuted or used as talking points in a conflict between liberal and conservative politics.”

    really? and that is enlightened thinking? thought provocation?

    sure it is

    • nightspore

      Make that irrealities.

  • tagalog

    If hate speech is that speech which offends, and it’s true that ANYTHING that is said is likely to offend SOMEONE somewhere, then we might as well all shut up for good right now.

  • Chris Shugart

    The hate card gets played almost as often as the race card and is used in the same way: to stifle, intimidate, and eliminate opposing views and discussion. When someone throws down the hate card all they’re saying is “shut up.”

  • Infovoyeur

    Please. We are all puppets of our hidden puppetmasters, jumping to whatever tune. The professor’s comments merely reflect his Implicit Presupposition or fact/value system, which is one of the central world-views of Conservative thought. Namely, in Natural Law: “In all things, structure and function etc., there is One Main Centerline Right-Natural Way, and any deviation from this, risks individual and social disarray or harm.”……..This is why the good Prof. believes in this; arguments pro con are merely rationalizations (he likely does not even realize the above about himself)…..THIS is what an institute of true education should pursue: “competency in thinking,” dispassionately examining this and other factors, to give students power toward objective impersonal elucidating.
    Boy that’s pretty stuffy and academic. But it notes a valuable goal which the Left (with its Steamroller Egalitarianism, Rampant Relativism, and Rubber-Stamp Respect) and the Right (needing psychologically to embrace One Right Way for safety), seem to be neglecting. (Reasoned thought is valuable, difficult, rare….)
    In ANY case, the answer to bad speech, is more speech…..TTFN


      There is no fair comparison between Left and Right. The Left believes in suppressing opposing views through force if it can and through intimidation (including threats of force) if it can’t. The Right believes that certain values and institutions have proven themselves over time and do not need to be continually reinvented. That is hardly the same thing.

      For example, the Right believe in traditional marriage but would never suggest that same-sex “marriage” proponents be muzzled and unable to make their case. The Left however believes in stigmatizing opposition to SSM as “hate speech,” “bigotry,” etc. to shut down the debate on the issue entirely.

  • antioli

    A return to the dark ages.

  • Randy Townsend

    I love it when the “defenders of tolerance” (usually the deviant “community”) find themselves hoisted on their own petard…. So much for diversity of opinion then, huh? BTW, since when did student-ANYTHINGS have so much clout? That’s what you get when you allow the inmates to run the asylum…

  • The Facts

    It’s rather hard to believe Mr. Billingsley’s claim that Mr. Hayward was the victim of the thought police. After all, he is still retained and well paid by the University. It seems that pointing this out gets your comment deleted, so maybe the thought police really work at Frontpagemag.

  • Ben

    Sad to say I think the exact same thing may be happening right here on the FrontPage Mag comment section. I left what i considered to be a caustic but completely truthful reply to an individual’s religious comment just the other day. My comment never got posted, as it was supposedly subject to a moderators review.

    I can’t honestly say if it was due to a tech glitch or just plain old heavy handed censorship because the moderator didn’t agree with what i said. There was absolutely no profanity or unwarranted name calling. However i did label the individual a Pharisee and accused him of suppressing the truth.

    I have similar problems at CBS News and the LA Times as neither post my comments. But due to the far left slant of those rags it is not a surprise nor a disappointment there.

    • dynbrake

      He has a right to his ideas, and he has a right to express them, whether you like them or not. Be careful lest you become the very thing that you denounce, suppressing the Truth.

      • Ben

        You’ve missed the point of my post entirely. I’m the one who was censured here, and my thoughts and opinions weren’t allowed to be shared in the discussion. That is what censorship is. Watch a video of David Horowitz on any hostile college campus as he is shouted down, that dynbrake is censorship. The type of censorship I’m describing is a leftist etiology and doesn’t belong here, PERIOD!

        FrontPage Mag bills itself as a beacon of truth and a champion of the freedom of thought. For them to censure a comment is rank hypocrisy, especially if it contains no profanity or other socially offensive material.

        The question you have to ask about censorship is, “What are you afraid of, and why?”

        The truth is it’s own defense and stands independently because it is self evident.

        • dynbrake

          Enough of the “victim” mentality, please. It happens to all of us! I thoroughly agree with your last sentence. But, try telling that to an atheist or evolutionist. They do not believe in Truth, so they laugh at that idea.

          • Ben

            This isn’t a pity party, and I’m not crying oh poor old pitiful me. However I am concerned and troubled by the situatiion.

            This is about trust, reliability, and integrity. If you can’t trust your friends then who can you trust?

            If you fail to see the irony of this situation especially in light this page’s article, then I am inclined to think you don’t appear as wise to others as you do in your own eyes

          • dynbrake

            Oh! Another typical liberal tactic: insult others when you have no argument. I see.

          • Ben

            I ask a question. Where is the answer? I said, “If you can’t trust your friends who can you trust?”

            It wasn’t rhetorical, it was for you! Now quit your crybaby antics and give me an answer.

            You come onto this board and insult me with patronizing and cynical advise saying and I quote, “Enough of the “victim” mentality, please. It happens to all of us!”

            Why don’t you send Steven F. Hayward an email and tell him the same thing! You sir are a dolt who is wise in his own eyes but you are oblivious and clueless to the nuances of real issues happening all around you.

          • dynbrake

            Oh! Another typical liberal tactic: insult others when you have no argument. I see.

  • ratonis

    Let’s stop calling the “community” by the term LBGT, and refer to it for what it is. It is a movement to promote “reproductively impotent sexuality.” No euphemism there. It’s just a fact. That is what it is. And if it were to become mainstream, the human race would disappear. That’s not hate. It’s called biological reality. The professor is right, they keep adding letters. Now there’s “pansexualism.” Maybe we should just refer to the “alphabet people.”

  • American1969

    Isn’t it interesting how the ones who scream the loudest about “tolerance” and “diversity” are anything but?
    Hypocrisy, thy name is Liberal.

  • AugustineThomas

    Just another day in Baby Murder Nation.

  • AugustineThomas

    Par for the course in Baby Murder Nation.

  • Tradecraft46

    Sounds like when Scientologist call someone a Suppressive Person.

  • butpygmies

    “Caitlin Pratt, student government director of safety and inclusion” — Is this satire?

  • SoCalMike

    In the name of the State, the bureaucracy and the Holy Environment, Amen.
    The Ultimate Aim of the Modern State;