Students Lead Free Speech Forum, Ignite Discussion

Exonians congregated at a student-led panel to address issues of free speech on campus. It examined whether all members of the Exeter community feel comfortable expressing their views openly and without harsh judgement from their peers and teachers on Thursday, Feb. 4. The panel featured students and teachers representing different genders, sexualities, ethnicities, backgrounds and political beliefs.Republican Club co-heads Lily Friedberg and Peter Luff, both seniors, and Exeter Political Union co-head Michael Shao, also a senior, planned the forum. They ordered $450 worth of pizza and saw such a good turnout at the event that many students had to stand.The forum began with a 40-minute question and answer session, moderated by Shao. Shao asked the panel controversial questions which addressed relevant problems in Exeter and in America. The discussion covered topics ranging from Exeter Confesses and Fred Grandy ’66 to the acceptance of liberal and conservative viewpoints on campus.Following these questions, the conversation opened up and audience members posed questions and concerns to the panel. Students requested that clear definitions of terms being used by the panel, including “Islamophobia” and “social conservatism” be established.

“We selected an intellectually diverse panel of the students and faculty who would be able to express their views cogently and rationally.”

Many audience members said that they appreciated how respectfully people engaged with one another at the forum. Postgraduate Mathias Valenta said that he found that students listened receptively to each other’s views. “The big message I took away was that our community is very aware of differences in opinion and custom,” he said. “I think liberals acknowledged that conservatives worry that their opinions are too easily dismissed, and conservatives agreed to pay attention to what they say and not abandon civility in the name of intellectual freedom.”As to whether or not free speech is suppressed on campus, the jury is still out. Lower Liz Janko, who spoke several times over the course of the night, explained that in her opinion, free speech is not always tolerated on campus. “Certain political opinions may be attacked by others,” she said. “I, and other students, have felt that grades and respect at the Harkness table can even be affected by our political views. Both teachers and students can be observed acting favorably to liberals, especially in humanities, and I believe this causes a large slow in the desire to express other opinions.”Prep Miles Mikofsky said that he feels secure speaking his mind at Exeter because he understands that other people are under no obligation to endorse his beliefs. “Though my peers and teachers may—and often do—challenge and judge my thoughts, I recognize that it’s not their job to be comfortable with my beliefs, it’s mine,” he said.While the forum hoped to help the community better understand how tolerant Exeter is of varying opinions, it also sought to investigate if there should be a certain limit to free speech. Lower Katie Goyette, who raised a question about the grey areas surrounding bigotry, said that respecting other opinions should not extend to prejudice ideas. “I think that the people who are being discriminated get to decide what’s bigoted or not, since they’re the one’s who’ll be hurt by it,” she said.Though history instructor Michael Golay advocated for the great importance of free speech in an intellectual conversation, he acknowledged that there is little to be said for being deliberately offensive. “Sometimes curbing one’s speech is simply a matter of good manners,” he said.On the other side of the spectrum, many students at the event worried that an exaggerated desire for political correctness limits free speech at Exeter. Janko explained that “while it is important to understand and speak about people and issues in a respectful light, some people are questioning whether this sort of censoring is going too far.”Despite minor complaints, the forum and its student-initiated nature impressed many. “Part of the value was that this was a student organized and led program,” Golay said. “There wasn’t any faculty shaping or steering.”At the event, history instructor Erik Wade and senior Tan Nazer both stood up to express concerns about a perceived lack of racial diversity among panel members. Both said that their recommendations to student organizers for a more diverse panel had been poorly received. Luff justified the selection of panel members, saying “The panel was balanced. We selected an intellectually diverse panel of the students and faculty who would be able to express their views cogently and rationally.” He continued, explaining that any doubts about the panel’s composition or the organization of the event were vindicated by the success of the forum.Panelist and English instructor Mercedes Carbonell agreed. “My hope is that there will be time and we will find ways to have open conversation, listening, vulnerability and effective communication about certain points that emerged,” she said.Overall, organizers of the event, panel members and audience alike were impressed with the success of the event. Golay explained that it offered a chance for people with commonly marginalized opinions to express their views. He marveled at the turnout of the event and expressed hope that it will act as a catalyst for more conversations. “It was standing room only at the start,” he said. “This suggests to me there is a great demand for this sort of thing. We should do more of it.”