(RNS) — “Plato Censored as Texas A&M Carries Out Course Review” — Inside Higher Ed
Persons in the Dialogue: Antiphon, Bubbacrites, Christophoros, Kolokalupsos
Scene: Zoom
ANTIPHON: Welcome to Free Speech Or Else, the podcast that tells you how to think, not what to say. I’m your host Antiphon, and today we’ll be talking about how Texas A&M canceled the Greek philosopher Plato as part of its campaign to shut down discussion of gender in college courses. To help us understand what happened, I’m joined by Bubbacrites, a member of the A&M board of regents; Christophoros, a YouTuber whose “The Bible Tells Us So” channel boasts a million subscribers…
CHRISTOPHOROS: A million two, Antiphon, as of yesterday.
ANTIPHON: OK, thanks. And finally we have Kolokalupsos, vice provost at Bended Knee State College, who’s been following this controversy closely. Let’s start with you, Dr. K. Plato? I mean really? Isn’t he one of those dead white Western Civ. guys the state board of ed. is promoting to make education in Texas great again?
KOLOKALUPSOS: It’s not quite that simple, Antiphon. It turns out some of the things those dead white guys wrote aren’t, so to speak, with the program we’re charged to enforce.
ANTIPHON: Before we get into the thing in question, then, what is the program we’re talking about here? Bubbacrites?
BUBBACRITES: Great to be here, Antiphon. And Go Aggies! I still can’t believe we got beat by the ‘Canes at home. In the last two minutes! Anyhow, it’s like this. Back in November we figured we needed to do something about this trans stuff that professors are teaching. So in November we amended the — wait, I have it here — Civil Rights Protections and Compliance policy to stop them from doing gender I.D.-ology.
ANTIPHON: What do you mean by gender ideology?
BUBBACRITES: Let’s see. The definition says that it, quote, “means a concept that self-assessed gender identity should replace the biological category of sex or that biological sex has less value or legitimacy than self-assessed gender identity.” The policy says no course can advocate this. So when a philosophy prof. tried to assign something that did, his department chair told him to take it out of his syllabus. And he did.
ANTIPHON: Got it. Back to you, Dr. K. What was the thing Plato wrote that violated this policy?
KOLOKALUPSOS: It was from his Symposium — the dialogue about the drunken dinner party where Socrates and friends talk about what love is. It’s the speech where Aristophanes says that in the beginning humanity had three genders. The idea was that human beings were originally four-armed, four-legged, rounded creatures with two sets of genitals: male-male, female-female and male-female. So quick and powerful were we that we climbed Mount Olympus to fight with the gods. To make sure that couldn’t happen again, Zeus divided us all down the middle, such that each of us seeks as a love partner someone with the same genitals as the other half of our original selves.
ANTIPHON: That sounds pretty ridiculous.
KOLOKALUPSOS: Well, some scholars think Plato meant it to be a joke. After all, Aristophanes was a professional humorist who wrote a play making fun of Socrates himself.
ANTIPHON: Makes sense to me. But here’s what I don’t get. Joke or not, the story is all about how there now happen to be two genders, male and female, determined at birth. How can that violate the A&M policy against privileging self-assessed gender identity?
CHRISTOPHOROS: I’m sorry, I’ve got to break in here. It does violate the policy. Plus the whole speech is a satire on the Book of Genesis.
ANTIPHON: How so?
CHRISTOPHOROS: The business about Zeus splitting people up is a takeoff on God making Eve out of Adam’s rib. And the punishment for climbing Olympus is a takeoff on God punishing people for building the Tower of Babel to reach heaven.
ANTIPHON: Well, maybe, but how does it violate the policy?
CHRISTOPHOROS: What Bubba forgot to mention is that the policy also says that no course will advocate, and I quote, “topics related to sexual orientation or gender identity.” The speech is all about pretending that same-sex relationships are basic to human nature. If that doesn’t violate the Bible, I don’t know what does.
ANTIPHON: So you’re saying that the purpose of the policy is to ban teaching of things that are against the Bible?
CHRISTOPHOROS: Yes, I am. And while we’re on the subject, the policy also bans advocating race ideology — which, it says, “means a concept that attempts to shame a particular race or ethnicity, accuse them of being oppressors in a racial hierarchy or conspiracy,” etcetera.
ANTIPHON: Well, that’s a topic for another day. For now, our time is up. Thanks to our guests for participating in — and to all of you in the audience for coming to — another episode of Free Speech Or Else.
