Perhaps someone on Brown’s honorary degree committee has a keen sense of ironic humor. Though I suspect most would not find much to laugh about.

During commencement ceremonies this weekend, Cecile Richards (Brown ‘80), president of Planned Parenthood, is to receive an honorary degree: Doctor of Humane Letters.

It is one thing to consider abortion an acceptable (though unfortunate, i.e. “safe, legal, and rare”) medical service; quite another to consider its provision an act of the highest human morality. Among the other recipients of this award in 2010 is Nelson Mandela — a man whose great accomplishments are now placed at moral equivalency with those of Mrs. Richards.

Why is Planned Parenthood controversial, even among many who accept abortion in principle? After all, the organization does a great deal of health counseling and other genuinely helpful work. The answer lies in its history: Planned Parenthood was founded by eugenicists for the express purpose of limiting the growth of “undesirable” minority populations. (Cf: Sanger, Margaret.) Indeed, while more subtle in modern times, over 40% of abortions today are performed on black women — an over-representation of nearly 400%. The organization serves primarily in poorer communities, heavily biasing the demographics of the clientèle served. And, while clearly an exceptional case (though not out of line with the above), a recent sting operation found a number of Planned Parenthood clinics eagerly willing to accept donations earmarked specifically for abortion procedures for black mothers. (Not to mention illegally covering up cases of statutory rape.) So extreme is Planned Parenthood in its advocacy of abortion that it opposed legislation in Illinois designed to protect babies “born alive” following botched abortion procedures, and has admitted to a policy of “negligent homicide” in these cases elsewhere.

But the situation regarding Cecile Richards is actually more complex. Mrs. Richards is not simply the president of Planned Parenthood. She has in fact been championing the most extreme causes on her side of the spectrum for her entire career. She she spent the 1990’s attacking religious groups in Texas (some admittedly deserving of criticism, though many far from it), and serving as a labor activist for the most forceful and politicized labor unions, such as the SEIU (of which her husband is a high ranking director). In 2004, she presided over the “Get Out the Vote” efforts of ACORN, MoveOn.org, and an assortment of large labor unions, under the auspices of her umbrella organization “America Votes.” And she was deputy chief of staff to (of course) Nancy Pelosi.

My point in saying all of this is simply that one would be hard-pressed to find a more intensely partisan individual than Mrs. Richards, or a more controversial organization than Planned Parenthood. Brown has given its highest endorsement to the left-wing equivalent of Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson. Declaring America’s foremost abortionist to be a “doctor of humane letters” is a political statement of unprecedented magnitude, even for Brown.

Regardless of how one feels about abortion per se, therefore, I believe that it is in the interests of the entire alumni community to oppose the conferring of this award: at the very least, this action is likely to ostracize a significant number of graduates. Personal belief is one thing; institutional advocacy quite another.

We are pleased to announce that we are bringing Dinesh D’Souza to speak at Brown on April 26. Below is our press release with more information.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Stephen Beale                                                                            sbeale@idiversity.org

Noted Conservative Commentator Dinesh D’Souza to Speak at Brown U. April 26

PROVIDENCE, RI – Noted author Dinesh D’Souza will be speaking at Brown University April 26 in an event sponsored by the Foundation for Intellectual Diversity and the Brown College Republicans.

The speech, entitled ‘Is God the Problem’ will be delivered 8 p.m. April 26 at MacMillan Hall Room 117 on the Brown University campus. The event is free and open to the public.

Many people, notably atheists, allege that belief in God is not merely unscientific and irrational but also dangerous. They argue that religion is the cause of many of the evils in the world, from the Crusades and the Inquisition to 9/11 and the current unrest in the Middle East.  In his talk, D’Souza will challenge this critique of religion and show that God, far from being the problem, is actually the main part of the solution. He will not just be making case for the utility of religion, but also an argument for the truth of religious belief.

“In the past year, we have consistently criticized Brown University for its lack of intellectual diversity,” said Stephen Beale, President of the Foundation for Intellectual Diversity. “Our purpose is not merely to criticize, but also to provide constructive alternatives to the dominance of left-wing ideology and pervasive political correctness on campus. We think this speech is the perfect example of an event that brings intellectual diversity to Brown.”

Student organizers said the event would debunk common misperceptions of religious belief and highlight the personal and societal benefits of faith in a Creator.

“I am extremely excited for Dinesh D’Souza’s arrival. His topic, “Is God the Problem?”, is ever pertinent in our current age of rampant, baseless criticism against the presence and role of religion within society,” said Anish Mitra, the vice president of the Brown College Republicans. “While there have been many unsavory actions fueled by religious fervor (which currently continue) throughout history, I am confident Mr. D’Souza will not only elucidate the myriad misconceptions of past religious behavior, but reveal the true evils of society, and ultimately show how dangerous a world without religion can be.”

“Though the buildings, letterheads, and merchandise of Brown University are adorned with its motto, ‘In Deo Speramus,’ most Brown students do not understand the paramount discipline of hoping in God,” added Keith DellaGrotta, the president of the College Republicans. “Such a principle was integral to the foundation of the country in which we reside, not to mention America’s continued political successes since. In bringing Dinesh D’Souza to lecture on campus, the Brown Republicans seek to promote discussion of the most valuable quality of faith in a Creator.”

About Dinesh D’Souza

Dinesh D’Souza is a best-selling author, leading conservative commentator, and former policy analyst for the Reagan administration. He is the author of the widely acclaimed Illiberal Education and The End of Racism. His more recent works include What’s So Great About Christianity, The Enemy at Home, Letters to a Young Conservative, and What’s So Great About America. His articles have been published in every major magazine and newspaper, including The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, The Atlantic Monthly, Vanity Fair, New Republic, and National Review and he has been a guest on The Today Show, Nightline, The News Hour, and the O’Reilly Factor. D’Souza has been called one of the “top young public-policy makers in the country” by Investor’s Business Daily and The New York Times Magazine named him one of America’s most influential conservative thinkers.

For more, visit. http://dineshdsouza.com/more/about.html

Below is a press release from Brown Students for ROTC.

Brown Students for ROTC today launched a petition drive demanding that the University bring the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps back to campus.

“The current stance taken by Brown with regard to ROTC is discriminatory in nature,” said Keith DellaGrotta, the president of Brown Students for ROTC. “The University deters potential cadets from participating in the program by minimizing opportunities and incentives to do so. We hope to change that.”

The petition can be viewed online at www.brownrotc.com.

To raise awareness about their campaign, Students for ROTC has organized two upcoming events:

1. MONDAY, APRIL 19 – Sharpe Refectory. 6:30 p.m. Private dinner for Brown students, faculty, and alumni to discuss the future of ROTC at Brown.

2. TUESDAY, APRIL 20 – Wilson Hall, Room 102. 7:30 p.m. Discussion panel, open to the public, on the importance of ROTC to students, colleges, and the nation. Guest participants will include ROTC colonels and Naval War College officers.

Interested persons are encouraged to visit the website listed above, add their name to the appeal, and attend the Tuesday discussion panel.

Anti-military protesters effectively lobbied the Brown administration to discontinue ROTC on campus in the early 1970s. Before then, Brown offered Navy and Air Force programs with high participation rates. Currently, Brown students have one ROTC option – participate in Providence College’s Army battalion down the road. For the 2009-2010 academic year, Brown involvement stands at one student, representing all four classes.

DellaGrotta noted, “It is impressive Brown currently boasts one cadet, considering cadets must transport themselves to PC for early-morning training exercises, and the Registrar does not award course credit for their efforts. I know personally at least two Brown students who turned down ROTC scholarships because Brown makes the program needlessly difficult.”

For more details, email rotc.brown@gmail.com or call Keith DellaGrotta at (603) 965-5848.

We appeared in our second Brown Daily Herald story of the week today. This story focused on perceptions of Brown and we spoke to the issue of how intellectually diverse the University is. Here is more:

A 2006 article by Herald Opinions Columnist Sean Quigley ’10 in the Brown Spectator, Brown’s publication for conservative and libertarian views, called the post-O’Reilly iteration of the party “an abomination, whose justification is an affront to logical reasoning, let alone spiritual well-being.”

In recent years, conservative students and alumni have vocalized criticism of Brown as a particularly left-leaning institution.

Stephen Beale ’04, who started the Spectator in fall 2002, formed the Foundation for Intellectual Diversity after encountering difficulty funding the Spectator as a student organization. A non-profit dedicated to promoting “underrepresented ideas, beliefs and perspectives” at Brown, the foundation provides money and assistance to conservative and religious student groups, according to its Web site.

“The most important kind of diversity on college campuses is intellectual diversity and so when you’re talking about other forms of diversity — racial diversity, ethnic diversity, sexual diversity — Brown may do very well,” Beale said. “But when you talk about intellectual diversity, that is something that Brown is very much lacking in.”

One “encouraging development,” according to Beale, is the Kaleidoscope Lecture Fund, which Beale said was started after members of the foundation discussed a perceived lack of diversity in campus speakers with President Ruth Simmons.

The fund is used to bring speakers that “in the stereotypical view are seen as being ‘not Brown,’ ” said Assistant to the President Hannelore Rodriguez-Farrar ’87 MA’90 PhD’09.
Started in 2005, the fund was originally constituted with $100,000 of the president’s discretionary funds. Past Kaleidoscope speakers include Sally Winn, then vice president of Feminists for Life of America; Peter Singer, a Princeton professor who is vocal on animal rights issues; and diplomats John Bolton and Richard Holbrooke ’62.

“What we need to do is fulfill our mission,” Rodriguez-Farrar said. “Part of that mission is intellectual diversity.”

Click here to read the whole article.

FID President Stephen Beale was quoted in a Brown Daily Herald story today about President Ruth Simmons. Below are excerpts:

Stephen Beale ’04, co-founder of the Foundation for Intellectual Diversity — a non-profit that funds the Brown Spectator and brings speakers to campus — said Simmons’ resignation from the Goldman Sachs board “shows that she puts her ideological principles above pragmatism.” Her commitment to her values may be the reason why there was so little backlash, he said.

Though he is concerned about the University’s promotion of “left-wing” issues, Beale spoke positively about Simmons herself. “I think President Simmons is charismatic and inspirational,” he said, adding that she is “very diplomatic about how she presents her views” and “extends olive branches to other groups.”

Click here to read the whole story.

At the Foundation for Intellectual Diversity, we endeavor to not only create awareness about some of the political radicalism taking place on campus, but also to offer constructive alternatives. Over the course of this year, we have exposed Brown’s plan to make reparations payments to Providence public schools, the University’s hiring of a radical, postcolonial professor, and a number of left-wing race-related events. The most recent example of such radicalism is Sex Week, which brought us such edifying and educational forums on using strap-ons, fulfilling sexual fantasies, and making polyamorous relationships work. Please consider donating to us today, to help us continue to expose such radicalism on our Web site and through our student publication, The Brown Spectator. With additional funding, we also will be able to bring speakers to campus who challenge the dominance of leftist thought at Brown and offer alternative views. Please donate by clicking here. Checks or money orders can be mailed to The Foundation for Intellectual Diversity, PO 2861, Providence, RI 02906.

Our recent commentary and criticism of Sex Week at Brown has stirred a lot of reaction among students—as well as an some internal discussion at The Foundation for Intellectual Diversity. Many students seem confused that an organization with diversity in its name could have a problem with Sex Week, presumably because the series of events enhances diversity. But it is precisely this false conception of diversity that we aim to critique. As our name might suggest, we advocate for diversity that is intellectual in nature, rather than based on racial or sexuality identities. On a college campus, we believe it is the latter kind of diversity that is most important.

Of course, it could be pointed out that forums such as Sex Week or Latino History Month voice ideas, but, with few exceptions, these conform to political correctness and left-wing ideologies. That’s where the diversity part of our mission comes in. During Sex Week, for example, most of the events seemed to focus on extolling the virtues of alternative, non-heteronormative sexual lifestyles and activities. We wanted to know why there wasn’t an event that discussed the benefits of abstinence and chastity. Likewise, peruse the list of events for Black History Month and Latino History Month, and you will be hard-pressed to find forums where center-right ideas are expressed for any purpose other than putting them down. So, while these theme weeks and months may bring a measure of sexual and racial diversity to Brown, they are quite lacking when it comes to true intellectual diversity.

Some students, in the comments section, have suggested that our position is contrary to freedom of speech. It is not. In fact, a careful reading of all our official commentary on Sex Week will show that while we have been critical of the various events, we have been very careful to not explicitly call for them to be defunded. Our main objective is to expose the absurdly left-wing and politically correct bias of such events, in order to bolster our case for constructive alternatives, in the form of conservative student publications like The Brown Spectator and speakers—including one we will be announcing at the end of this week.

We understand that some students may dispute our characterization of Sex Week or our distinction between intellectual and identity-based diversity—and we invite them to express their views in the comments section and continue the dialogue.

In light of our recent commentary on Sex Week at Brown, we publish the below letter which draws attention to two other related events held earlier this semester. We think the author raises a number of important points.

Dear President Simmons,

I am writing to you as a Brown alumna, as a professor and academic leader, and as a parent to bring an issue to your attention that could seriously impact Brown’s reputation, its safety, and its future.

Over the last month, Brown student groups have organized two sex-related events that were advertised to the community. The first, Kink for All, was held in Wilson Hall on February 6. The second, Get Your Heart on Sex Educator Showdown (part of an Iron Slut Sex Educator Showdown series), was held in Solomon Hall yesterday on February 14. (Click here and here for more information.)

I expressed my objections regarding both these events to Brown administrators and to Brown legal counsel. I provided supporting documentation within those emails as well. All of the information I found is freely available on the Internet. I have not met, nor do I personally know, any of the individual organizers. Please note my summary concerns below:

• the Kink for All presenter’s written statements that sexual materials can be presented to children as young as 9 in the interest of promoting what he calls “age diversity”

• the promotion of BDSM activities which can be inherently unsafe for students (for example sadism and bondage)

• the possible inadequate Brown University supervision or responsibility at these events, which I believe were open to all, even sex offenders

• an unsafe structure called “unconference” where no one is responsible for content, outsiders can attend and use pseudonyms

• the lack of qualifications and concerns about the ability of presenters to handle discussions in a safe and respectful manner

• the videotaping and broadcasting of Brown students at a BDSM event which could adversely impact students’ future employment opportunities

• the organizers’ use of derogatory slurs such as “slut” to demean women

• the possible use of Brown students for sex “demos” at College-hosted events

• the potential harm to Brown’s reputation for being the publicized host for such events, which could result in fewer alumni donations and reduced numbers of applications to Brown.

Despite my communications to senior Brown staff and legal counsel, it appears that both the Kink for All and Sex Educator Showdown events were allowed to run.

I understand there are issues of free speech, and that these events were organized by Brown student groups. As someone who did her dissertation in the field of law and economics, I understand the issues surrounding free speech. I also understand what it’s like to run an undergraduate student group at Brown, having served as president of one myself at Brown in 1980-81.

I am not in any way saying that Brown faculty cannot speak about controversial subjects like BDSM within their own classes or at a campus forum. I expect that a Brown faculty member or permanent staff member teaching about this subject would be knowledgeable about the content, be sensitive to students’ needs and feelings, be aware of Brown’s sexual harassment policies, and be accountable if university policies were in some way violated.

However, the recent Kink for All and Iron Slut events are a different type of situation. These are run by individuals who are not Brown employees, whose credentials are questionable, who are here-today-and-gone-tomorrow, and who have a profit motive.

While these outside individuals may be arguing that they have a right to free speech, please note that they are free to speak elsewhere. Brown is not required to provide outsiders with the use of its facilities and its name. Allowing external, profit-driven groups to offer sex-promoting events such as these at Brown University could bring the university in a direction that is detrimental to its other goals and its mission.

Consider that Sex Week at Yale has just wrapped up, and over the past week there have been many events and talks related to topics like pornography, polyamory, and sex techniques.  See today’s headline stories in the Yale Herald: Mirth and jiggles: My first time at a gentleman’s club and Back to a time when lawyers watched porn together. Please see this YouTube video and story about what was happening in the Yale frats this week. Please also read this piece, which talks about lube and wrestling event, and also a Senior Seminar entitled “Feb Club: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Alcohol.”  Nathan Harden provided day-by-day description of events at Yale published in the National Review.

From these and a number of other related news stories, it appears that Yale has become a highly-sexualized environment. Is this what Brown University wants to become? It will certainly do so if Brown student groups are allowed to set the agenda by continuing to organize campus events such as Kink for All and the Sex Educator Showdown.

And if Brown does go down this road and allow the institution to become a platform for radical sex groups to promote their products and services, then please be aware that this choice is inconsistent with Brown’s other institutional initiatives, such as offering summer programs for middle and high school students.

How can parents be expected to send their children to Brown’s pre-College and SPARK summer programs if the university brings in speakers who call women sluts, even in jest, or where someone speaking from a podium in Wilson Hall is allowed to tell women they must be subservient to the men who hit them?  How could parents send their children to Brown summer programs when there’s even a chance that they could see violent pornography while they’re on the Brown campus?

Brown can’t have it both ways. A highly-sexualized, anything-goes environment is inconsistent with setting up programs to bring middle and high school children for campus programs. In addition, a campus environment that is perceived as a hotbed for uncontrolled sexual activity and potential sexual harassment will attract fewer undergraduate applicants, particularly women. There are long-run implications for alumni giving as well.

It’s one thing to have a well-structured classroom discussion or campus debate on a controversial issue like BDSM, with capable full-time Brown faculty/staff moderating the discussion. It’s another thing to hand the microphone to unqualified outsiders who are advocates for only one perspective, and who stand to financially profit from its acceptance.

Kink for All’s organizer Moscovitz is a self-described bi-polar, middle-school dropout in his mid-twenties who says he learned about sex through watching porn as a child. He now wants to teach young people and even minors about BDSM. Thanks to Brown administrators allowing the event, Moscovitz can now use the Brown University name to promote his web sites, t-shirts, and videos. Kink for All is a brand that he is seeking to develop, as shown by the logo on the t-shirts he sells.

Iron Slut creator Mihalko describes himself as someone who graduated from Brown in 1992 and was a bartender for fifteen years before launching his Cuddle Parties and Iron Slut events in recent years. Now he, too, can claim the Brown University name for building his brand name and his credibility for his web site, workshops, and DVD’s.

Megan Andelloux participated in both the Feb. 6 and Feb. 14 events. In another recent public setting, she described herself as a sex worker, and she has been identified in several news sources as a dominatrix. (Click here here here and here for more information, note the curriculum on the last site.)

Unless Brown administrators take immediate and strong actions to assume responsibility for the sex education activities being offered on its own campus, special-interest sex groups and businesses such as these will be able to hijack Brown’s name and reputation, and set Brown on a destructive path that is inconsistent with its mission.

Sincerely,

Margaret (Barber) Brooks

‘81 A.B, ‘83 A.M, ‘89 Ph.D. Economics

Chair and Professor of Economics

Bridgewater State College

We recently received a letter from an alum raising a number of important and interesting questions about Sex Week. Below is the letter:

Here are some additional questions I have about Brown Sex Week activities:

1. Did the Wet Spots’ spanking of audience members cause injury
to someone? It is clear from their publicity materials that this is part of
their show.

2. Student organizers plan to post the best “erotic” story on Brown SHEEC
web site. Does Brown allow obscene material on its web site?

3. Sarah Sloane taught a workshop for sex assault survivors. Is she
a psychologist? She is a sadist, etc. Her statements could be harmful to
anyone who is attending this session looking for help
http://www.sarahsloane.net/?page_id=208

4. Sarah Sloane taught a class on safe sex. Is she qualified? She teaches
BDSM. How safe is that?

5. Megan Andelloux’s class is asking for audience participation, both mind
and body. Are there could be sexual harassment issues with what took place?

6. Raffles were held. Were appropriate licenses obtained? Can
dildos, etc legally be raffled? What about minors who may have been
present or who may buy a ticket?

7. Did Brown check IDS of all people attending Sex Week events,
given the content?

8. Were these events be open to the community, and were their IDs be
checked?

9. What is the policy about photographing students who attend any Sex Week
workshops? Do attendees have a right to privacy, including the possible
taking of their names for raffles?

10. The Raunchy Bake Sale was held on the Main Green. Passersby including
children could have seen these items. It’s not only offensive but could
violate RI Laws.

11. Is SHEEC ever going to identify all the Brown Sex Week sponsors
(including sex toy companies who donated products for the raffles?) Will
this raffle funding be made public? See Aida Manduley’s twitter for mentions
of companies that made donations: http://twitter.com/pledgemistress (scroll
back by hitting “more” at the bottom of the page)

As stated in our initial post, out main objection to Sex Week 2010 was not even that it was happening, but that the offices of Residential Life, Campus Life & Student Services, and Institutional Diversity were listed as sponsors. We are willing to grant that there is some validity to the claim that the University should instruct students on how to have safe sex—although that is certainly debatable—but we don’t think that obligation extends to every conceivable combination of male and female sex acts or the insertion of every imaginable object into every orfice of the body—as liberal as Brown is, it has to draw the line somewhere and a good place to start was the not-s0-subtly titled forum on ‘F*cking Fantasies,’ which was held Saturday evening and featured sex educator Megan Andelloux.

We wanted to get to the bottom of what was going on at the Sex Weeks events, so we dispatched our reporter to sit in on the forum. To be sure, there were some useful safety tips on sex toys and various lubricants, but much of the forum dwelled on how to maximize pleasure and fulfill various sexual fantasies. It seemed that no fantasy was too taboo for Andelloux, whose main point was that it is OK to think about incest, rape, and bestiality, as long as students don’t act on those thoughts. Andelloux has a right to her opinion, but we find it impossible to believe that this is an accepted proposition among the mental health community or that the University really thinks it is appropriate to teach students that such fantasies are healthy. At the end of the event, Andelloux showed clips from a pornographic video that she said was an example of ‘sex positive’ porn—the video depicted a man choking a woman and slapping her breasts while they were having sex—we can only be grateful that she declined to show any examples of what she considers ‘sex negative’ porn.

In the description of the event, which is posted on the comments section under our first post, organizers cheekily remark that students are in “college to get a challenging education.” While the event was educational, we don’t see how encouraging students to indulge in desires and sexual fantasies could in any way be considered challenging. Now, a lecture on the virtues of chastity—that would be truly shocking for an audience that didn’t even blink when showed a video of a man choking and slapping a woman during sex.