Butthurt white guys, an Asian virgin and an angry lesbian walk into a bar...

Jenner tells Bissinger about how she suffered a panic attack the day after undergoing 10-hour facial-feminization surgery on March 15-a procedure she believed would take 5 hours. (Bissinger reveals that Jenner has not had genital surgery.) She recalls thinking, "What did I just do? What did I just do to myself?" A counselor from the Los Angeles Gender Center came to the house so Jenner could talk to a professional, and assured her that such reactions were often induced by pain medication, and that second-guessing was human and temporary.

Click to expand...

Indeed, a cycle of retaliatory charges seems to be what keeps this farce going. Just look what happened to Kipnis's "support person":

Click to expand...

As of this writing, I have yet to hear the verdict on my case, though it's well past the 60-day time frame. In the meantime, new Title IX complaints have been filed against the faculty-support person who accompanied me to the session with the investigators. As a member of the Faculty Senate, whose bylaws include the protection of academic freedom - and believing the process he'd witnessed was a clear violation of academic freedom - he'd spoken in general terms about the situation at a senate meeting. Shortly thereafter, as the attorneys investigating my case informed me by phone, retaliation complaints were filed against him for speaking publicly about the matter (even though the complaints against me had already been revealed in the graduate student's article), and he could no longer act as my support person. Another team of lawyers from the same firm has been appointed to conduct a new investigation.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

This anecdote, I think, reveals the men behind the curtain: it's the lawyers and bureaucrats. The Title IX inquisition must be a cash-cow for the people tasked with handling such broad and outlandish claims. Northwestern flew a team of a lawyers out to meet with Kipnis; these men would have interviewed anyone she deemed relevant to her case. Their colleagues would have initiated retaliation investigations against anyone she accused (this calls to mind recent Game of Thrones episodes, in which characters levelling accusations against each other merely manage to get absolutely everyone, accusers and accused, confined to dungeon cells). Is it any wonder that tuition prices are skyrocketing so that universities can continue to pay all these Title IX lawyers, bureaucrats, and coordinators?

I wonder how many of the students who initiate reckless, Orwellian investigations are also apt to complain that American higher education is becoming unaffordable.

Click to expand...

The reality is that the more colleges devote themselves to creating "safe spaces"-that new watchword-for students, the more dangerous those campuses become for professors. It's astounding how aggressive students' assertions of vulnerability have gotten in the past few years. Emotional discomfort is regarded as equivalent to material injury, and all injuries have to be remediated.

Most academics I know-this includes feminists, progressives, minorities, and those who identify as gay or queer-now live in fear of some classroom incident spiraling into professional disaster. After the essay appeared, I was deluged with emails from professors applauding what I'd written because they were too frightened to say such things publicly themselves. My inbox became a clearinghouse for reports about student accusations and sensitivities, and the collective terror of sparking them, especially when it comes to the dreaded subject of trigger warnings, since pretty much anything might be a "trigger" to someone, given the new climate of emotional peril on campuses. . . .

A tenured professor on my campus wrote about lying awake at night worrying that some stray remark of hers might lead to student complaints, social-media campaigns, eventual job loss, and her being unable to support her child. I'd thought she was exaggerating, but that was before I learned about the Title IX complaints against me.

Click to expand...

Many of the emails I received from people teaching at universities pointed out that I was in a position to take on the subjects I did in the earlier essay only because I have tenure. The idea is that once you've fought and clawed your way up the tenure ladder, the prize is academic freedom, the general premise being - particularly at research universities, like the one I'm fortunate enough to be employed at - that there's social value in fostering free intellectual inquiry. It's a value fast disappearing in the increasingly corporatized university landscape, where casual labor is the new reality. Adjuncts, instructors, part-timers - now half the profession, according to the American Association of University Professors - simply don't have the same freedoms, practically speaking.

What's being lost, along with job security, is the liberty to publish ideas that might go against the grain or to take on risky subjects in the first place. With students increasingly regarded as customers and consumer satisfaction paramount, it's imperative to avoid creating potential classroom friction with unpopular ideas if you're on a renewable contract and wish to stay employed. Self-censorship naturally prevails. But even those with tenure fear getting caught up in some horrendous disciplinary process with ad hoc rules and outcomes; pretty much everyone now self-censors accordingly.

When it comes to campus sexual politics, however, the group most constrained from speaking - even those with tenure - is men. No male academic in his right mind would write what I did. Men have been effectively muzzled, as any number of my male correspondents attested.

Click to expand...