A Student Bar Association was going to host a party called “Hawaiian Day,” but after submitting the event idea to the University of South Dakota law school, apparently got told to change the name and ended up going with “Beach Day,” reported Campus Reform. The bar association told partygoers to come dressed in floral shirts and leis, the little flower wreaths, but then scrapped the leis, allegedly because “It was determined that these are culturally insensitive by the administration after doing research based off of the essay written by [a] complainant.”

The law school administration didn’t tell the group not to wear leis, but did suggest not to hand them out on the basis that they’re items of cultural significance. Now, this seems to be a decision that was poorly received across the board. First, USD’s president, Sheila Gestring, put out a press release, saying “Administrative censorship of student speech and expression is a serious matter and not something USD condones without compelling justification consistent with Board policy, such as a genuine threat.”

Sheila said the university would be investigating whether the law school violated the school’s policy on free speech. But to make things even more humiliating for cultural authoritarians, Hawaii state Republican Rep. Bob McDermott bashed the law school in USD’s student newspaper.

He said “Someone in South Dakota has their head stuck in a snowbank. The lei is a symbol of our Aloha spirit in Hawaii, inclusive and welcoming. One individual’s objection to its use at a festive event is both patronizing and an insult to our island tradition. It is also a demonstration of ignorance about the cultural significance of the lei.”

Here’s the thing about all of this cultural appropriation claptrap. It operates from two faulty assumptions. One, that culture operates by some sort of perverse property rights system in which white people are forbidden from embracing trends started by other races, but not the other way around. Remember that Hawaii fits into that paradigm because it has less than 25% whites.

And two, the concept of cultural appropriation mistakes the donning of sombreros and the like as part of a jovial, themed party for contemptuous mockery. I used to think that those two assumptions were simple mistakes, until they happened over and over and over again. It’s high time we stopped treating these guys as wayward children and started recognizing them as entirely self-conscious fraudsters and killjoys. 

It’s been a while since we’ve covered some news out of Canada here on Campus Unmasked. But don’t worry, fam, I’ve got you covered with an especially zany story today. The University of Toronto recently hosted a free handjob workshop.

The question of the century has got to be, which is more embarrassing for a university, conservatives consistently getting shut down, punched, bike locked, etc. like at UC Berkeley, or public funding going towards a free handjob workshop, like what happened last week at the University of Toronto?

“Learn how to give a memorable handjob,” reads the flyer, obtained by Campus Unmasked. “This is a sex positive workshop teaching anatomy and penis massage techniques. If you’ve never been to a pleasure-based workshop before, this is a great introduction…a fun, relaxed, non-judgemental, and educational workshop!”   

Now, here’s the thing, I’m not objecting to the concept of a handjob workshop. But chances are, most of the people who gave the funding to the center hosting this event, are not AT ALL interested in attending. That and the workshop is offered during the University of Toronto’s sexual health awareness week. I’m still not a fan of student and taxpayer dollars getting funneled into these things, but it would make a BIT more sense if it were about contraception or STDs.

Gonzaga’s College Republicans had tried to invite Shapiro to campus, but the school said “Mr. Shapiro’s appearances routinely draw protests that include extremely divisive and hateful speech and behavior, which is offensive to many people, regardless of their age, politics or beliefs,” reported Campus Reform.

Yeah but is it Ben who creates the “divisive and hateful speech and behavior” or petulant, progressive crybullies? The school also went on to say it stood with “vulnerable members” of the campus and insinuated that an event featuring Shapiro would contradict the teachings of Jesus. I don’t think they’re talking about Ben being Jewish there.

So, that was back in November. Gonzaga conducted a risk assessment in January and the school president announced this month that Shapiro could come, but gave three conditions, reported Campus Reform. The College Republicans have to work with one of the VPs. OK, that doesn’t sound too bad. Next, the group has to charge attendees for tickets to help with the security cost. Well, as long as there are no insane security fees deliberately hiked to stop the event from happening, that should be fine too. And third, Shapiro has to respect Gonzaga’s mission statement.

This last one could also be a bit — I hate this word — problematic. As you might guess, Gonzaga’s mission statement is chock-full of vague platitudes and, at one point, it explicitly says “the Gonzaga experience fosters a mature commitment to dignity of the human person, social justice, [and] diversity.”

Yeah I don’t think Ben’s message is going to fit too cleanly in those last two categories. And there you are: perfect pretext for Gonzaga to kick Ben out to appease progressive journos or simply out of spite towards some of those thought criminals in the College Republicans. You can’t trust these guys as far as you can throw them. I mean figuratively throw them — with free speech. Don’t sue me for incitement to violence, fam.