Rick Kamdar, a senior at American University, has been expelled for calling another student a gay slur.
But there’s more to the story (reg required)…
Kamdar said the incident began when he asked a student on the quad for a light, and the student’s friend told Kamdar to “Go back to India.” Kamdar then used an anti-gay slur against the student and the two began pushing each other. The fight was quickly broken up by Public Safety.
Although Kamdar was expelled, the student who allegedly started the whole thing faces no disciplinary action whatsoever.
Kamdar is appealing the decision, hoping that he will be allowed to finish his last semester or at least have the dismissal removed from his transcript. “After three years of fighting cancer, I was only going to graduate a year late,” he said. “I would not throw [my education] away.” Kamdar said he is planning to sue the university over the hearing.
Before I go any further, I’d like to acknowledge that I couldn’t find much else about this case. So my comments are limited by what I know from this article (and if we have any readers from AU who are more familiar with this story, feel free to let me know if there are any factual errors in this post).
First, it’s never ok to use a gay slur. I don’t care what the context is — even if you’re surrounded only by straight people and you say it in jest, it’s still not ok. I’m not going to defend Kamdar’s use of it, nor am I going to defend this silly excuse of his:
“The word fag is a very common word; it doesn’t always mean gay,” Kamdar said. “Did I know he was gay? No. Apparently American University has concluded that people can look gay.”
That being said, why is he being disciplined and not the person who provoked him in the first place? Why the double standard?
And is an expulsion really necessary? If Kamdar had committed a hate crime, or had verbally harassed a gay student for no reason, then yes, I would think that an expulsion is appropriate. But this situation is a little bit more complex. And I also have to wonder: has every person who has ever used this word at AU been expelled? I assume not. If the university wants to make an example of Kamdar, fine — sentence to him community service or put him on probation. Expulsion, on the other hand, seems pretty extreme. (And yes, I would argue that if someone were to use a racial slur in a similar situation, then an expulsion wouldn’t be warranted, either.)
I’d be interested to see how this story develops. Again, feel free to let me know if you’re more familiar with this case and/or there are details that I’m unaware of.
Is this true? I think the defender would need some pretty clear evidence the assault was imminent. For example, If a guy held up a gun to another guy and said “I am going to shoot you now” but the second guy shot him back first. But then the threat is more than just verbal.
razib sahib u seem quick to rush into judgements of others. well when u quoted me saying well bottom line is indians always take the worst of it well plz read it in context. i am not claming that indians are most discrimated race in USA. i am speaking about the use of slurs and being abused verbally. and i have heard my fair share some even directed at me. and plzzz dont tell me u hear every day a white guy calling a black guy the N word????? plz restrict the discussion to the topic and dont try to put words into my mouth.
“go back to india” isn’t a slur on the level as the n-word or even “f*g.” perspective. and browns aren’t slurred at every day. perhaps a cabbie is, but not a doctor. so, context.
p.s. i don’t think someone should be expelled for using anti-gay slurs, but being the only brown guy in a high school of 900 (where only 5 other non-whites attended) was a lot less trying than being the only out gay guy from what i recall.
p.p.s. to be clear, the gay guy was beat up regularly (once every few months from what i recall). i was subject to slurpy jokes and “compliments” about my command english.
Razib, I agree with the gist of your point, but I don’t think the desi kids in Queens who got beaten up post 9/11 would agree that slurs on desis are generally harmless and desis are always protected by “privilege.”
This statement is a bit contradictory, isn’t it? If we’re “privileged”, how can we be exposed to racism? Seems like there’s a way to go before we can be called the oppressors.
This issue is just sad, although it’s been emerging more and more. I hate that we’re getting into the business of determining who’s more oppressed. But, as always, there are lots of people willing to misuse identity politics (and yes, I mean BOTH racial and sexual identity). This issue reminds me of various problems around the borders of the major “gay neighborhoods” in Chicago. I predict that in the next 5 to 10 years we’re going to see this happen again and again, as these two major strains of disadvantage start colliding more and more.
well yes i think itz more offensive to be called gay than be told to go back to india. but the only reason for that is everyone is making fun of the brown ppl so it has become accepted in our society. so many jokes are made on desi’s these days even in recent superbowl ad where they had the indian dude saying booodlight instead of budlight. I think brown ppl have alot of tolerance and i havent seen anyone making a complaint about this ad. on the other hand the hispanics went crazy wid that yo quiero taco bell ad saying it insulted them. so just bcoz we are more tolerant shudnt mean open season on brown ppl. there is a limit. in this case maybe kamdar overeacted abit but i am sure many of us said things in the heat of the moment we regret.
at first, the fighting words doctrine was almost equivelent to porn or obscenity, ie certain words were so inflamatory that they had lower constitutional protection. but since then, scotus has consistently narrowed the doctrine to mean threat of immediate violence.
convictions based on the fighting words doctrine are extremely rare in this country as free speech is the critical value in a democracy. one word is ususally not enough, but if someone were to repeatedly scream obscenities at another person, the courts may uphold a conviction.
but universities have been abandoning this liberal tradition of jurisprudence, as dinesh d’souza reminds us in illiberal education. (hope u don’t consider the d’souza ref a fighting word, HMF)
Like Razib I want to high school that was 95% white [8 brown students out of 750] and a couple of people who were gays. At worst I get a joke about Apu and the simpsons. But the few gay students in my school were treated like crap.
This statement is a bit contradictory, isn’t it? If we’re “privileged”, how can we be exposed to racism? Seems like there’s a way to go before we can be called the oppressors.
are you a manichaean? i’ve been reading this blog for more than 2 years now, and there are comments about “crackers” and “white trash” now and then and plenty of generalizations about “white people.” what do you think the average SES of these people are who are making these jokes?
anyway, let me give you an example. a good looking brown dude with an M.D. is probably in a better life situation than a fat, ugly white female high school drop out. in fact, perhaps it’s my own personal biases, but i think being a man of any race today might very well be a better situation than being a female of any race (depending on what your values are).
if non-whites are, no matter their looks, their wealth and their education oppressed, then i think it is a good argument go back to a national origins policy and admit only white immigrants, because no matter the skills they bring visible minorities are clearly an inevitable social stress.
I think brown ppl have alot of tolerance and i havent seen anyone making a complaint about this ad. on the other hand the hispanics went crazy wid that yo quiero taco bell ad saying it insulted them.
jokes between ethnic groups can be a signal for levels of comfort, as well as mockery and discomfort.
Neal with no ‘e’.
Good point.
When systems of incentive are created (affirmative action for one, and no, I am not arguing for or against aa), or the narrative of oppression becomes the main narrative (as in, class doesn’t matter), then it is a perfectly natural outcome to have groups try and ‘rate’ their oppression on some kind of scale. Well, not all people in a particular group. But some.
absolutely agree, umang. for example, personal experience has shown me that cornell university (the opposite of that university above) doesn’t seem to care if my white roommate fails to censor herself when telling me she “doesn’t date short, stumpy asian men who smell bad,” or that she thinks “jewish russians and white russians should not mix and is why she will not join hillel.” calling her a “cossack” or “bitch” on the other hand got this brown girl reprimanded easily (bad choice on my part entirely). but the controversy-cover-ups at universities like mine extend from race to gender and sexuality as well. even if a boy harasses me for several weeks questioning my sexuality and intimidating me by making me react to his calling me lesbian in many different ways (subversively and directly), i apparently “don’t have a strong enough case” to seek higher administrative intervention. both of these boys deserve serious punishment, not just a slap on the wrist. i don’t feel expulsion is the solution, but coach diesel has some good ideas 🙂
coach diesel,
i sure wish you were around here last year to lend me a…erm…foot or two! that is simply awesome…especially the pushups. i bet it worked to teach them that superiority and strength are not manifested in the ways they thought they were!
i’m sending my (future) sons to military school to have them learn self-discipline and determination.
anecdote about conflict. a friend of mine was consulted about an issue a local gay group had at a university in the midwest (he works for a civil rights group in NYC). the issue was that the gay group and the black student union petitioned for money to make a building extension to house their orgs offices from the uni, but after completion the BSU requested that they get the whole wing. the argument made in some of the meetings was that the BSU needed a comfortable “safe space,” and those terrifying white gays made them uncomfortable. but a black member of the LGBTA heard through back channels that there was talk of not wanting to be next to “f**gots” everyday in some of the internal meetings of the BSU officers.
diversity is strength!
Race privelage exists within class, or SES. Compare a good looking brown dude with an MD to a good looking white dude with an MD. or a Fat white dropout with a fat non white dropout. It’s really in only these contexts can racial comparisons hold any value.
I’d agree with you and say South Asians are privelaged, but it’s class privelage we have, not race privelage. And it can be yanked away at any time.
Manju:
Lower constitutional protection doesn’t immediately translate to sufficient and reasonable cause for violence.
Damn razib, down. I’ve been agreeing with most of what you say.
Sure, SES changes the way that individuals are treated by the larger society. A wealthy Indian can overcome a lot of racial baggage, the same way a wealthy African-American or Latino can. And that’s great — it’s part of what makes this country so much better able to handle diversity than most of the world. But that doesn’t mean the racial baggage is not present, and it may assert itself at times. The handsome brown doctor is not privileged because he’s brown — he’s privileged because he’s WEALTHY (and male, and good-looking to some extent).
If “South Asian privilege” exists, it’s merely a reflection of American immigration policy only allowing the wealthiest/best educated immigrants in. It’s not a systemic product of American social history the way that white privilege is. Brownness is considered an aberration here. It’s something you have to overcome, and it’s something that weighs heavily on the members of our community who happened to make it here without the graduate degrees or siginficant family investment. The day is coming when many Indians in this country are not going to be the wealthy MD types.
I’m not saying that our situation is terrible. The stereotypes about us are far less damaging than African-Americans, Latinos, or other groups. But they’re still real and they still impact life chances. I don’t call that “privilege”.
What shimi said.
Privilege does not indicate absolute authority/power. we are ALL privileged in some areas, and face oppression in others. take me, for example: I’m a person of color in the U.S. (oppressed), but I’m well-off financially (privileged), but my family is Hindu (privileged within desi community), oh but I’m queer (oppressed) and a woman (oppressed) and trans (oppressed), but wait I’m college-educated (privileged), and I’m able-bodied (privileged).
IMO, the problem wasn’t that one idiot used a racial/ethnic slur and the other used a gay one in particular; the problem is that they reduced each other to one dimension and used that as a basis for not getting along. And then they hit each other. D’oh.
And it can be yanked away at any time.
doubt it. america runs on $$$, and class is predominantly inherited now (look at the regression for south asian male immigrant father’s educational level and their sons, and the drop off isn’t very large).
well said!
Jaya: that was great. I loved that comment.
The point is: We are each individuals as well as part of a group. Anyway, in some instances (much, much rarer than the opposite, true) being white and male doesn’t protect you. Duke, anyone?
🙂 This is the best summation I’ve seen.
I mean it usually comes down to idiots hitting each other in these great ideological struggles, doesn’t it?
but my family is Hindu (privileged within desi community)
that’s a subjective perception. if you remove the confounding class factor i think christian south asians are prolly privileged because they don’t “worship monkeys and cows.” before 9/11 being of muslim origin was a definite positive in social situations since i could make fun of the weirdness of hinduism vis-a-vis abrahamic faiths.
The day is coming when many Indians in this country are not going to be the wealthy MD types.
last i checked the census numbers it isn’t 1975, but neither are south asians mostly a cabbie community. i know many children of motel-patel’s who are in medical school, so there is professional advancement (if you think that is advancement). if check the slope in drop of education over the last 25 years it’s really modest (i can relook up the numbers later).
But, the question is whether the punishment (or lack thereof) meted out to each student was proportional to the crime.
You’d be hard pressed to find a bigger advocate of gay rights than me but the idea of speech police at universities (of all places!) is a bit alarming. I think the Economist wrote an interesting piece that reasoned against speech police (in the context of whether to make holocaust denial a crime), while considering both sides of the argument:
http://economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8592923
Here are some of the best quotes:
As Jacques Chirac says, Holocaust denial is a perversion of the soul and a crime against truth. But that does not mean it should be a crime in law.
Brigitte Zypries, the German justice minister, is surely justified when she says, “We believe there are limits to freedom of expression.” The question is where you draw those limits. In the liberal tradition, they have been put at the point where speech becomes a threat to others.
Holocaust-denial laws, then, may not be the best way of dealing with the problem of Holocaust denial. In addition, they impose their own, often hidden, costs. Such laws can take you down a slippery slope. One may think the Holocaust was a uniquely dreadful event. Even so, it is hard, once you have passed a Holocaust-denial law, not to extend it. Asked why the EU proposed to pass a law about the genocide victims of one of 20th-century Europe’s totalitarian ideologies (fascism) but not the other (communism), Ms Zypries replied it was just a matter of timing. By implication, the EU will one day propose banning gulag-denial too.
Holocaust denial laws are wrong whoever imposes them. But they are at least understandable in countries where Nazism had indigenous roots. No such excuse can be made for the European Union as a whole.
wat are u saying razib????
Duke, anyone?
Are you referring to David Duke? In his day, he had quite a run. He got lot of traction when ran for Governor of Louisiana against Edwin Edwards (55% of the white vote).
Or are you referring to Duke U. recent rape case? That is also not that simple either.
No such excuse can be made for the European Union as a whole.
the “liberal tradition” differences in france in comparison to the anglo nations. for that matter, in canada they “respect” freedom of speech, they don’t “worship” it.
Kush, indeed, I am referring to the Duke rape case. Have you been following K.C. Johnson?
wat are u saying razib????
i’m saying most americans think that hindus are bizarre pagans. e.g., remember the simpsons when there was a show about religious ecumenicalism and when they moved to apu they showed a 6 armed statue of kali and were uncomfortable? hindus might perceive themselves as being privileged, but christians regularly mock the religion and would certainly think that christian indians were more normal in their religious beliefs.
personally, i think all religious exhibit the same sophistication as papuans worship a penis fetish, but most religious people tend to believe their own delusion is somehow more natural and rational. that’s life.
razib: that’s cow worshipping idolator to you, sir! (okay, kids, I’m kidding).
Kush: there have been few people who have written as much about the case as K.C. Johnson. The details are pretty terrible and embarrassing (for Nifong).
Have you been following K.C. Johnson?
Yes, and the whole mess.
Hmmmmm.
let’s try this.
MD and her ilk are so thrilled to finally find a white defendant who got screwed by the system. Hallelujah! This of course translates to the end of institutional racism against blacks in the justice system as we now know that being a whitey in the justice system is as bad as being a black man. If you disagree with that, please read about the Duke case.
fighting words” are recognized in common law as an initiation of violence, and a punch in retaliation could be self-defense
Where in the Common Law is punching in retaliation to words constitute a self defense?
I think you might be thinking about Pushtun code of honor and not the Common Law 😉
What an incredibly rude thing to say, Al M., and after all this time commenting to each other on this blog. You know me better than that.
I’m not happy when any innocent person is railroade: white, black or brown. You read a million things into my comment that are not there. Wow. You must be proud.
I guess I was rude to you as you didnt really express that sentiment.
Ok, I apologize for overstating my case.
However, I do think there is too much chest beating in some corners of the right about this Duke case as if this case is ANYTHING BUT AN ABERRATION. You of course did not echo that there so I was wrong in lashing out at you.
yeah AMJ, that wuz rude. mebee you think it is warranted, but you’re a lawyer, you know that presentation matters in argument. if your argument is angelic it sure displayed an ugly face.
Does this discussion have to be about gay ( apparently code word for white) priviledge versus brown? Where in this conversation is the place for the brown and gay? Or will that mess up the neat little dichotomy?
Once again, the two guys we’re talking about=idiots.
You know, usually, I let this stuff pass because it happens all the time in the comments section. Show me where I said there was the end of all racism. Show me Al M. Show me in the comments above.
Where I say it is a much, much rarer event than the reverse? Is it when I say racism exists? Is it when I said that class exists? Point out to me where I say what you interpreted through my comments? Sheesh. My ilk, indeed. Where have I ever said that there is no such thing as racism against blacks? Where?
Okay, we missed each other in commenting, Al M. Sorry for getting mad.
I guess I do take the contrarian position a lot here, so I see how someone could misinterpret me.
keep fighting itz healthy
This of course translates to the end of institutional racism against blacks in the justice system as we now know that being a whitey in the justice system is as bad as being a black man.
And you won’t even be warned! Thanks for reinforcing my characterization, in comment # 27, of this blog’s lopsided policing. Why the hate though? I am curious. Oh it’s not a slur it’s just a metaphor for privilege, power, bla bla bla. Right?
if a person could resonably construe that the words themselves are a threat to violence. If i said to you, “AMFD, i don’t like you, the aclu, and your ilk, so i’m going to kick your ass”…you could launch a pre-emptive strike.
i don’t know of any case law where someone retaliated as the cases in question have been govt ordinances against certain words. but right now, the standard seems to be words that “reasonably incite the average person to retaliate” and risk “an immediate breach of the peace” can be regulated. i think that would make for a good self-defense acquital.
but suffice to say, the courts have been wisely narrowing what constitutes a fighting word, while american univeristies have been expanding it. for that reason, civil libertarians like yourself should really join forces with MD and her ilk.
I Can Instantly Tell Whether Someone Is African-American With My Amazing ‘Blackdar’
I have this amazing gift. It’s called “blackdar,” and it enables me to tell whether someone is African-American without even knowing anything about them. To be honest, I don’t know where I got the skill. But wherever I did, I can pass somebody on the street and just instantly know.
Like that guy from Saturday Night Live? That Kenan Thompson? That guy is definitely black, no doubt about it. He gives off all the signals.
And Missy Elliot? You better believe she’s black. [link]
Manju: Though you usually know what you are talking about and know a LOT for a non-lawyer, I am afraid you are confusing the issues here.
Whether a government regulation (here: criminalizing certain words) has to jump through the hoops of constitutional protection (first amendment protections of free speech) has nothing to do with the fact of whether the fighting words here (go back to India/ faggot) constitute a self-defense or even mitigating circumstances for throwing a punch under criminal law.
For example: Even if the Supreme Court were to give the highest level of First Amendment constitutional protection to all fighting words including unambiguous invitations to a physical brawl, it would have no bearing on whether they would constitute a self-defense or mitigating circumstances if a punch were thrown in retaliation to that unambiguous invitation to a brawl.
Do we actually have proof that he was provoked? He may just be playing the race card after saying something stupid. I find it hard to believe the AU would simply suspend him without first checking up on his side of the story. People usually tend to be more politically correct about race than about homosexuals.
Wishful self-delusion. South asians are socially handicapped in America by their dark colored skins, their lack of athleticism, their general “uncoolness”. South asians also are more likely to be below the american poverty line than whites and less likely to own their own homes, which is part and parcel of the american dream.
A typically dumb desi argument. As if the best of desis compared to the worst of whites proves desis are “privileged’!
And just for your information Razib, desis on average aren’t seen as “good looking” by americans. Quite the contrary. East asian females are probably the only non-caucasian group that are considered as good-looking on average by white americans.
amfd:
interesting. i’m mixing up constitutional and criminal law. so the question is, is there any case law where a defendant was acquitted of assault because he was responding to a fighting word (said in a context that a reasonable person could interpret as an immanent threat)?
Al M picked up on the basic sentiment behind the fighting words doctrine [though Manju did mention the imminent threat aspect]. Even though the doctrine was heralded in the middle of the twentieth century [particularly during wartime – WWII and Vietnam]the basic jurisprudential view is that the word must have the effect of being an actual threat of immediate violence, and cannot be judged merely on the offensive nature of the content. That is why there is a distinction between protected and unprotected fighting words, and most fighting words are protected under the First Amendment. In response to somebody else’s question that there could never be a threat without more than speech – the law looks at both objective and subjective factors, so the context/circumstance play a heavy role. Essentially, fighting words will almost always be protected. In this case, I think many are right to say that it was the violence that did it for AU. Also, I find it somewhat odd that Kamdar used the defense of fighting words as provocation, since his immediate reaction to the comment was not violence, but rather to lobby back his own slur. Of course, it all must have happened in the span of seconds, but I don’t think any court [and rightly so] would ever look at the other student’s comment as sufficiently provocative, just as [also right so] no court would consider the gay slur sufficient provocation.
yeah, i’m skeptical too. i think he hit the guy first. however, many of these university courts have descended into kangaroo ones…totally neglecting liberal traditions–right to confront accuser (especially in sexual assault cases), tranparancy, etc. d’souza documented a lot of it in illiberal ed, ergo the title. fire is a good place to see what’s gont on.
for gods sake Doordarshan; please start lifting weights, learn a sport, go out to bars and get a sense of humor. projection ain’t only what happens in movie theaters.
razib at #61, dude that’s an awesome insult. what a smart ass insult that his haha!
anyway back to being relevant. um interesting the direction this conversation went. naina asked twice in her blog if someone from american university could step up and enlighten us more on what is going on. but i guess sm is not read over there.
i’d be real pissed to find out if kamdar was expelled and that was the end of it.