In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Quick hit: Duke freshman refuse to, can’t wait to read Fun Home

On the one hand: Several Duke University students have publicly announced their unwillingness to do the suggested freshman summer reading. They refused to read Fun Home, Alison Bechdel’s graphic memoir about her experiences with her father and her relationship with her sexual identity, because it offends their Christian values. Freshman Brian Grasso took issue with the “graphic visual depictions of sexuality” and said that “[he] would have to compromise [his] personal Christian moral beliefs to read it.” Others said that while they might have been willing to read it in plain print, the graphic format was unacceptable, with one saying it would “violate [his] conscience due to its pornographic nature.” Some students found it offensive that the book was included on the reading list at all.

Although the book selection has prompted valuable discussions for some first ­years, others said it changed their perception of Duke.

“I thought to myself, ‘What kind of school am I going to?'” said freshman Elizabeth Snyder-­Mounts.

Grasso noted that he felt the book choice was insensitive to people with more conservative beliefs.

“Duke did not seem to have people like me in mind,” he said. “It was like Duke didn’t know we existed, which surprises me.”

On the other hand: Other students, not locked into a fearful, fundamentalist view of the world around them, are excited to read Fun Home and gratified to see it on the reading list. For some, the book and subsequent discussions have been their first exposure to the lives, experiences, and identities of LGBT people. For others, just the fact that Duke included the book on the freshman reading list, and invited Bechdel to speak on campus, is a gratifying sign that they might feel accepted on a welcoming campus.

Zephyr Farah, a first year student who attended the Bechdel lunch on August 20, described to us the “surreal” feeling she experienced when finding out “a book that talked so frequently and so deeply about being a lesbian was assigned [as] summer reading for school.” Farah grew up in places as far apart as Qatar, Angola and Texas, and was shocked at the openness she found when she got to campus, based on discussions of Fun Home. Marveling over the moment when she had the chance to shake Bechdel’s hand, Farah remarks, “It wasn’t the basketball, the school spirit, or the enormous Brodie Gym that excited me about Duke; it was the acceptance, the advocacy and the willingness here to treat people as people. Fun Home is a symbol of that for me.”

[…]

It is unfortunate that the Duke Chronicle did not reach out to some of these students, LGBTQ or not, who have engaged so thoughtfully with Bechdel’s work. For example, Duke student Jasmine Lu told us that she was glad that Fun Home was selected as recommended reading because she had “never familiarized [herself] with the very common identity crisis that lesbian women go through.” She points out that while she appreciates the book for how it opened her mind to thinking about the difficulties that face LGBTQ people in coming to terms with their identities, what she got most out of the book was a meditation on how Bechdel’s relationship with her father had shaped her life. Lu wrote to us, “It was [Bechdel’s] revelation to us on how much of a mystery her father was even after all the facts of his life came out that really resonated with me as I’m sure it could with almost anyone. [… S]o while I respect the others’ choices to not read the book, I’m also sad that it wasn’t able to touch them as it had touched me.”

tl:dr: Some Christian students at Duke believe that anything depicting sexuality in a visual format is by definition biblically condemned wank fodder and are offended that their summer reading list was not crafted around their delicate sensibilities; other students acknowledge that college will likely be full of challenging ideas and that sometimes the things that offend them are the ones they most need to understand, and embrace the opportunity to learn something.

Bonus Bechdel: Unrelated to Christian sensibilities or Duke’s reading list, Bechdel has said that while the test that bears her name did appear first in her comic strip, the actual standard was created by her friend Liz Wallace and should really be called the Bechdel­-Wallace test. Adjust future movie analyses accordingly.


24 thoughts on Quick hit: Duke freshman refuse to, can’t wait to read <em>Fun Home</em>

  1. Students shouldn’t be forced to read literature that deals with sexuality, particularly homosexuality. Duke should stick to teaching the classics, like Plato’s Symposium.

    1. Sure, and maybe they should limit engineering students to the abacus and track stars to the under-four minute mile.
      Pseudo, that’s one calf you just can’t unlick.

    2. Oh, my, Pseudonym (and Brian and Elizabeth), the very cockles of my heart weep for your delicate sensibilities. I know your fragile soul will be shattered by encountering people who are different than you, and for that, I has a sad. Surely the existence of people who insist on having bodily autonomy and not allowing you to control their sexuality is a sign of the coming apocalypse.

    3. I feel like this is sarcastic, though I have not actually read Symposium.

      Hmmmm….Google says that, yes, this comment is tongue-in-cheek.

  2. “I thought to myself, ‘What kind of school am I going to?’”

    Duchess Seeking Duke for Heteronormative Time

  3. What odds can I get that the ones who refused to read it agree with the people who object to trigger warnings?

  4. I love the idea that the books I assign should agree with students’ “beliefs.”

    No. I assign the books that best fit the topic about which the students are being educated. If they don’t wish to be educated, that is their problem.

    (And I do give trigger warnings verbally, unless I flake out and forget. But I sure as hell wouldn’t give a trigger warning for “portrays lesbianism positively,” because that isn’t a trauma, even if you are conservative. Disagreement is not trauma.)

    1. because that isn’t a trauma, even if you are conservative. Disagreement is not trauma.

      So I agree with you, but a surprising number of liberal arts schools don’t seem to. Or, more specifically, the administrators at said schools.

      1. That’s because administrators are looking for ways to consolidate power over professors, and this is a way.

      2. Well, maybe I oversimplify. It’s also the logical outgrowth of the corporatization of the university. When you buy into a mindset that positions students as customers…that’s the kind of thing that’s bound to happen.

      3. That, plus a federal financial aid system that has lead to massive hikes in tuition, meaning there’s a ton less pressure to keeps staff sizes reasonable.

  5. the head of a giraffe against a bright blue sky: its mouth is pursed sidewaysI wonder whether this snarky tone would have been used if it were Muslim students who were objecting to this (and I guarantee no Muslim students will be reading this).

    1. No Muslim students, huh? None at all? No queer Muslims, or generally socially progressive Muslims, or even Muslims who are questioning their beliefs?

      No Muslim students at all. None.

      1. I called a mod, Mac.

        That’s some poor xtian islamaphobe crap right there, Gail. Stop it.

      2. Yeah, no shit. I mean, sorry not sorry, but there are queer Muslim writings in India dating back hundreds of years. But of course all THEM MOOZLUMS are all bigotfanatichatemonsters. Fucksake.

    2. A professor whose blog I follow had a Muslim student walk out of her lecture. What was she teaching, you ask? Gilgamesh. The frank depiction of sexuality (Enkidu and the prostitute who civilizes him), totally unacceptable.

      So yes, we do deal with (some) Muslim students over these issues.

      (Not as many, interestingly enough. Why that would be is left as an exercise for the student.)

      And yes, our snark is equal. I think my exact words were, OMG, WTF?

    3. ….
      The fuck?

      Mods we need a giraffe here.

      [thank you for sending a giraffe alert ~ mods]

    4. Interestingly, I’ve taught plenty of observant Muslim students, and not one of them has behaved in such a solipsistic, entitled way.

    5. (and I guarantee no Muslim students will be reading this).

      This is really stupid for reasons other people have already pointed out.

      I wonder whether this snarky tone would have been used if it were Muslim students who were objecting to this

      This, however, is probably a fair question. Because of a long history of colonialism, racism, and Orientalism, progressive white Western feminists are often much more hesitant to criticize or even discuss issues relating to Islam as opposed to issues relating to Christianity (which is the dominant religion in the US). As someone from a majority-Muslim country, I understand why you might find this intensely frustrating; Islam is full of massively crappy ideas, and Muslim bigotry should be condemned just like Christian bigotry. However, I can understand why someone from a culture in which Muslims are routinely harassed or discriminated against would exercise more caution in approaching Islam; even if those criticism are fair, rational, and empirically correct, the history and context is such that making them is much more sociopolitically fraught.

      Hopefully that makes sense?

      1. Just one addendum; it’s worth noting the reverse is true in other places/contexts. In Indonesia, Christians are a small minority (about 9% of people) who frequently face serious discrimination. Among Indonesian progressives, there’s a relatively strong critique of Muslim beliefs, practices and traditions, and there’s also a relatively strong norm against criticizing even the parts of Christianity we in the US find most intolerable- such as homophobia- for identical reasons to the ones I discussed above.

Comments are currently closed.