The Committee on Student Life (CSL) ruled with swift sagacity on Monday when it dismissed senior Iris Halpern's sexual harassment complaint against The Primary Source. The Source argued that the questionable material was not directed at Halpern, and the CSL was correct to give the magazine the benefit of the doubt.
At the hearing, Dangremond argued that the Source illustration was a parody of an Observer cartoon, and that the "oh-so-tight tank tops" comment satirized the Student Labor Action Movement 's use of clothing to promote its cause. By focusing his defense on the claim that the offensive material was not directed at Halpern, Dangremond did not address the issue of free speech as directly as he did in a surprisingly eloquent Source column last week.
The Source, displaying little sensitivity and even less journalistic integrity, in all likelihood did direct the attacks at Halpern's breasts. Dangremond was brave enough to cite Supreme Court cases at his hearing, but instead of relying on the First Amendment, he allowed for the defense that the attacks were impersonal, giving the CSL a loophole on which to acquit the magazine while making no truly meaningful statement about free speech.
If Dangremond was the constitutional crusader he claims to be, he could have said that the material was directed at Halpern and asserted that the magazine had a right to publish the attacks. Had Dangremond told the CSL that the attacks were aimed at Halpern, this page would still have argued that her case was not compelling enough to merit punishment. But this strategy would have put his magazine in serious jeopardy, as Tufts has historically erred on the side of protecting students at the expense of the Constitution.
Perhaps Dangremond did not use the First Amendment as his only defense because he recognized that the Source's material was dangerously close to deserving rebuke and understood that free speech ends where harassment begins. The Source should not push the limits of the First Amendment to publish sophomoric invective that bares no relation to a student's political agenda. The Source's reckless disregard for decency will only damage students' right to expression, creating enemies to free speech.
