LAST SPRING, Playboy magazine approached the student bodies of several universities in the Big 12 conference, including Baylor University, and solicited offers for students to appear in their publication. More than 50 students from Baylor signed up, including several members of the Sigma Phi Epsilon fraternity whose members appeared fully clothed next to bikini-clad female students. Although Playboy is a periodical known for nude photography, only one student from Baylor actually appeared naked in the magazine. Yet, all 50 students are being disciplined simply for being featured in the publication. The Sigma Phi Epsilon chapter of Baylor has been suspended and will not be allowed to sponsor events or accept pledges for this academic year.
Baylor University adminisrators must realize that the punishment they have meted out are not commensurate with any offense they envision was committed. Ultimately, they should retract or soften their penalties against these students. Baylor, the largest Southern Baptist University in the world, claims in an Aug. 29 press release that among its reasons for suspending these students is that the student handbook asks students to act "in accordance with Christian principles as commonly perceived by Texas Baptists." In addition, when Playboy announced they were going to be coming on campus, Eileen Hulme, the Vice President of Student Life, warned that appearing in the magazine was not something on which the University looked favorably: It would be a violation of the student handbook of "expression that is inappropriate in the setting of Baylor University and in opposition to the Christian ideals which it strives to uphold."
Although Baylor students were aware that the school did not favor students posing in the magazine, those who posed -- the fraternity brothers involved in particular -- could not have foreseen the severity of their punishment. Not being able to accept pledges for an entire year will severely weaken their fraternity. In upcoming years, there will be an entire class which is not represented, fewer members and, as a result, higher dues.
Although Baylor University has offered reasons for the penalty, the justification for the high degree of this punishment is flawed. Being a private institution, Baylor has generated its own legal code as defined by its student handbook and has the jurisdiction to interpret its law in the ways it sees fit. This, however, doesn't mean that Baylor's punishment for its students is correct. Unfortunately, there isn't another decision-making body within the school that can offer adissenting opinion on Baylor's current understanding of its law and check the administration's overreaction.
It should be noted that the students didn't break any U.S. laws. Ultimately, it is the students themselves who have control over their personal appearances and have to give their consent to be published in a periodical. These rights are protected by the First Amendment freedom of speech, and by the freedom of association.
Also, in consideration of practicality, Baylor is making a big deal out of an issue that is relatively offhand. In comparison to a truly atrocious incident involving students where clearly stated university rules were violated or U.S. laws broken, appearing in Playboy magazine while fully clothed seems to be a relatively minor offense, one not deserving of a year-long halt of fraternity recruitment.
Baylor University has the jurisdiction to punish its students whether the reasoning behind it is correct or not. But, in this case, the punishments appear to be much graver than the original offense. In a statement released by Baylor, it acknowledged that "a number" of Sigma Phi Epsilon members were in the photographs. Yet, the entire fraternity is being punished. Although by wearing their letters in the photo shoot, the members were representing their fraternity to a degree, the brothers acted as individuals. Because the information is not being released, it is unclear if the Playboy photography session was a fraternity-sponsored event or if it was simply a number of members who happened to show up for the photo shoot. Still, because the entire fraternity was not involved, it seems cruel to punish members that had no say in what their fellow fraternity brothers did. Yet, that is exactly what is happening with the punishment given out by the Baylor University administration.
Perhaps coming through the mindset of a public university such as our own, founded by an advocate of separation of church and state, it is difficult to conceive how such a relatively innocent act could move a university's administration to punish students. Baylor administrators are not justified in laying down such a severe punishment for an infraction that is only vaguely defined by their own rules and also completely legal by U.S. laws. The administration of should think twice about its actions and take back its punishments.
(Alex Rosemblat's column appears
Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily.
He can be reached at
arosemblat@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | YesterdayThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | 6 days agoEvery student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
