I am currently enrolled in a physics class that I enjoy. The professor is engaging, understandable and thoughtful. The demonstrations in his class are fun, appropriate for the material, and he always takes time at the beginning of class to answer any questions his students may have. These questions often result in interesting discussions, and I’ve found that I, contrary to popular belief, am learning something in this introductory level course designed for non-science majors. You would never know this professor is a fervent homophobe.
I wouldn’t have known, either, if a friend of mine hadn’t tipped me off to Professor Katz’ personal Web site-a Web site that is hosted on Washington University’s servers and linked to from a physics department page. The page seems innocuous at first; it has his picture, name and contact information on the top, followed by a summary of his research and a few select publications. There are links to his CV and other publications as well. Then there is a disclaimer: “These [essays] represent my personal views alone. Washington University would never take an official position which might deviate from the ‘politically correct’ line. I don’t know how they find out what the line is each day, but they sure keep up-to-date.” Now you know something good must be coming.
From that disclaimer to the bottom of that page are 16 essays, written by Katz over the past few years, detailing his personal opinions on political issues including homophobia and diversity. These essays are anything but the thoughtful, education-oriented articles one might expect.
In one article, entitled, “In Defense of Homophobia,” Katz states, “I am a homophobe, and proud.” He condemns homosexuals because he believes they are responsible for causing and furthering the AIDS epidemic, by way of unsafe and promiscuous sexual practices. In part, his argument is right: statistically, gays have a much higher rate of AIDS than heterosexuals, and the HIV disease grew out of the gay community in the U.S. Yet in his mind, because gays spread AIDS, they ought to be condemned. This reasoning is flawed. Heterosexuals transmit many diseases through sexual contact, including HIV, that are viral and potentially fatal. Some are also promiscuous, adulterous and quick to divorce their spouses. Yet he makes no argument with them.
Because I wanted to write this column, I called him to get more information about his opinions. His responses ranged from indignant to offensive to evasive, the latter more so as I challenged his reasoning. When I asked him how he felt about homosexuals who were in monogamous relationships, practicing safe sex and too young to have any involvement with the original AIDS outgrowth, his opinions didn’t change.
But it is not Katz’ opinions that raise red flags in my head. What I find more problematic is that these essays, along with others, are hosted on University-owned Web space, funded by our tuition. The professor didn’t seem to have a problem with this, and he detailed to me the tenets of academic freedom and the fact that he is seen as a “public intellectual” and thus looked to by the public for opinions on these issues.
This bears two problems. One, he is a physicist specializing in gamma ray bursts, and while political science professors don’t have a monopoly on opinions, I doubt scholars are looking to him for academic opinions on homosexuality. Two, the University maintains both a Computer Use Policy and a non-discrimination policy. From the former: “Moreover, while freedom of inquiry and expression are fundamental principles of academic life, assaults upon the personal integrity of individual members of the academic community and dissemination of offensive materials may undermine the foundations of that community… While incidental personal use is permissible in most settings, these resources are generally available only for University-related activities.” From the latter: “Washington University does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, age, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, veteran status, or disability in its programs and activities.” This professor’s opinions are not University-related and border on discrimination, which is defined in Merriam-Webster as “prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment.”
To be fair, Professor Katz stated clearly and honestly to me that his opinions do not affect his class, and that his students’ personal lives are none of his business. I believe him, and have witnessed nothing to the contrary in the seven lectures I have attended. I did ask him, though, what he would do if he had a friend who told him he was homosexual. “Well, I think he would be much less of a friend,” Katz responded. “I don’t have dope dealers as friends.”
I have no personal intent to request that Katz be fired, sanctioned or even “talked to” about his opinions. He is free to have them, as I am mine. But his opinions are offensive, discriminatory and bigoted. Are they appropriate for University Web space? I am not sure. After all, by his very nature as a public figure of the University, what he writes stands in some small part for the University, disclaimer or no disclaimer.
The Computer Use Policy states that student and faculty Web pages are not monitored for content, which is good. But that doesn’t mean offensive content shouldn’t be reported. Suppose his articles were about anti-Semitism. Would they receive as little scrutiny as they do now? Certainly not, especially on this campus. Sensationalist conservative speaker David Horowitz argues that campuses need more “balance” in academic thought. But surely he cannot equate balance with bigotry, can he? I’ll leave that for someone else to decide.
Professor Katz’ Web site is located at wuphys.wustl.edu/~katz. I encourage you to visit the site and form your own opinions about this conflict. My gut reaction wants the offensive portions of his Web site removed from University Web space and unlinked from his University site, but there are arguments to be made both ways regarding censorship, academic freedom, discrimination, offensive material, etc.-in short, too much for one man and one column. And too often the rules are used against the good guys, those who have legitimate opinions contradicting the established majority.
My other recourse would be to ask students to boycott his class, but sadly, that would cause the University to cancel it-causing me, and perhaps others, to not fulfill a cluster and therefore not graduate. Thus another way the University forces us to tolerate the opinions of this so unfortunately brilliant professor.
Jeff is a senior in Arts & Sciences and a Forum editor.