A troubling new development has transpired this year in USD’s residence halls: a severe restriction on students’ freedom of expression. In an effort to clean up the tacky door decorations and white boards with questionable messages and pictures, they have been banned completely.
Lets see — a ban on expression just because that expression has a history of being distasteful. Since when does this constitute an outright ban on expression? Speech and expression are regularly deemed inappropriate or in poor taste in any particular person’s opinion, but that does not necessarily mean that one can limit another’s right to express themselves.
Unless the door decorations are facilitating racist, libelous or physically threatening words or messages, the university should not be restricting the students’ rights. That’s a given. But, to go so far as to ban the practice entirely? That looks more like a major knee-jerk reaction to a minor issue.
Did the decorations look bad to prospective students and their parents who tour the premises? Perhaps. Does it look worse to have a university — a center of knowledge, growth and inclusion — directly violate the rights of students? Absolutely.
What if this policy is only the first of many limiting expression on campus? Are we to expect a future of school uniforms just because many students wear inappropriate Dakota Days shirts to class? A rational person might say that’s ridiculous, but then again a rational person probably wouldn’t have expected such a wide ban on expression in the residence halls.
The residence halls are deemed to be private and only residents and guests of residents are allowed inside, with few exceptions. Many students are required to live in the dorms — why shouldn’t they expect some semblance of personal freedom?
Expression isn’t always pretty and we’ve come to accept, as a society, that the dangers of limiting free speech and expression far outweigh the dangers of allowing it. Door decorations are (were) fun, creative and often sparked conversations among a hall’s residents — not to mention, the community advisers used decorations with names on them in order to learn the names of their residents.
Associate Dean of Students Kirsten Compary said the policy is being discussed by SGA and RHGA, however. We hope the final product will reflect rational discourse and reverse the extreme measures taken by the current policy.
The priority of the university should be on personal growth and enlightenment. What happens when the priority is on conformity at the cost of personality?
Be the first to comment on this article!