SafeZone Ally but only for some?

They face a dilemma

I took ASU’s SafeZone Ally class. The premise of the class is that all students should be respected at ASU, which is absolutely true. As a philosophy professor, I have found that one of the best ways to do this is to understand each belief system and be able to explain it correctly. For this reason, the class was helpful.

But it left me wondering about a dilemma ASU faces: Is this class simply explaining one of the many belief systems we will encounter among our students, or is it telling us “the truth of the matter” as if this belief system is the correct one?

If the first option, then why not have such classes for the many other belief systems we will encounter among students? In fact, we should have these classes for the belief systems which are most often attacked and misrepresented by professors and that probably means conservative and Christian. As it is, by having only one “SafeZone” class, we are privileging this belief system unfairly in a state university that is not to discriminate between ideologies.

If the second option, then the class has stepped over the line and is teaching a specific political or ideological position is true contrary to the Arizona Constitution and anti-discrimination laws. That’s a big issue.

The essence of the SafeZone belief system is that we have a problem. That problem is we use our minds to make “mind-maps” or categorize the world. That is, we use reason to distinguish things like “male” and “female.” That then turns into prejudice because not everyone conforms to these categories. The idea is that reality is fluid and ultimately unknowable. According to this class, there is an unlimited number of genders. But how do they know?

It comes back to their epistemology. The individual is the ultimate standard. Whatever the individual says he “is” true for him. And therefore, there is no end to what he can imagine for himself in gender identity. He is in the place of the Creator. Does that sound familiar?

It brings me back to my original dilemma. Is ASU presenting this as one among many belief systems our students will hold? Then let’s have many more such classes about the many other belief systems. Or is ASU claiming that this belief system is the correct one and we must all adopt it? I believe that ASU’s commitment to intellectual freedom means it cannot be that second one. Therefore, I look forward to the SafeZone class about Christianity.