When The End Doesn’t Justify The Means
There is an old expression that says, “The end justifies the means.” That applies to situations where the overall goal is considered a good thing and if it’s achieved using questionable methods, people tend to look the other way. That said, there are also situations that have a happy ending, the process was questionable, but the ending didn’t justify the means.
The difference in the two situations that I’ve described above comes down to intent. In the first example, the goal was always positive, so if the methods used to achieve that end were a little shady, then ok. However, what if the goal wasn’t a positive one? What if the goal was to punish someone without cause, and they were acquitted of the accusation? Then the end was still positive, but getting there wasn’t justifiable.
That is exactly the scenario that played out at The School of the Art Institute of Chicago (SAIC). A student, Ann Gould, was not only falsely accused of discrimination, but the complaint could also be classified as irrational. The investigation was launched under Title IX, where an obviously thin-skinned snowflake asked Gould about her religion and then was somehow offended by her response.
Gould, who is an artist, mentioned a bible verse, 1st Timothy 4:2 during one of her presentations. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), describes what occurred next:
“The next day, as Gould moved a cart of her paintings and presentation materials, another student approached and asked Gould if she believed the student was going to hell for having gay sex. Caught off guard, Gould told the student she did not know the student was having gay sex and attempted to change the subject.”
The student, for reasons only known to a disturbed woke mind, then filed a complaint against Gould. What is particularly egregious according to FIRE, was that Dushko Petrovich, the school administrator, then called Gould into his office, where he threatened her saying: “You probably think you have the right to freedom of speech, but you don’t here, because we value diversity.”
The school then launched a formal investigation against Gould under Title IX, placing Gould under unjustified duress for absolutely no reason. The complaint was eventually dismissed, but as FIRE rightly explained this investigation was launched over what was “clearly protected speech.”
“Although FIRE is pleased SAIC dismissed the complaint, we remain concerned with the fact that an investigation was launched over clearly protected speech, the manner in which it was handled, and the school’s unwillingness to transparently address its misstep.”
“When schools receive Title IX complaints about speech, they should, to avoid chilling protected expression, conduct a threshold analysis to determine whether any of the allegations could even be constitutionally construed as harassment. Here, the brief, one-off interaction between [the investigation target] and the student would never be “severe and pervasive” enough to meet Davis, and therefore should never have triggered an investigation. This process of vetting claims is a critical aspect of protecting students’ expressive rights. Any investigation brings stress, reputational damage, and the threat of disciplinary action. Routinely notifying students of potentially unmeritorious claims chills student expression, even when the investigation is ultimately resolved in the student’s favor.”
FIRE offered this final sentiment concerning the school, stating that it needed to, “revise its policies to align with the First Amendment.”
This woke Marxist student was so narcissistic that they trashed a portion of another students life for no reason. The woke institution then followed suit with a clown show of an “investigation.”
In my humble opinion, the accuser needs to be punished for bringing a false claim against another student, otherwise these zombies with such delicate sensibilities will continue harassing those of us living in the real world. Sadly, this school is so woke, we would probably have more luck getting blood out of a turnip.