Muy said:

---

If you want to pretend you enjoy drag queen shows, do it on your own time and private property.

---

Should the head of a public university be allowed to dictate the protected legal activity on the campus based on his personal religious views?

Especially when such a show is allowed both by formal policy and state education law?

nai06 said:

---

Muy said:

---

If you want to pretend you enjoy drag queen shows, do it on your own time and private property.

---

Should the head of a public university be allowed to dictate the protected legal activity on the campus based on his personal religious views?

Especially when such a show is allowed both by formal policy and state education law?

---

To Godwin the thread, a Nazi rally would be a protected legal activity. Should he allow that?

CanyonAg77 said:

---

nai06 said:

---

Muy said:

---

If you want to pretend you enjoy drag queen shows, do it on your own time and private property.

---

Should the head of a public university be allowed to dictate the protected legal activity on the campus based on his personal religious views?

Especially when such a show is allowed both by formal policy and state education law?

---

To Godwin the thread, a Nazi rally would be a protected legal activity. Should he allow that?

---

Well if it starts a conversation…

He's a pretty good President for WTAMU. He's done stuff to boost the school, such as visiting EVERY high school in the Panhandle to encourage people to attend WT.

And for those who haven't been this way in a while, the WTAMU campus has made great strides in facilities and landscaping. It's also more of a real college than it used to be. When we moved here in the 1990s, it was dead on weekends. Now the students are hanging around campus, with lots of activities.

They've built amazing new facilities for their Ag Department, and even more great facilities for the Vet program. They are trying to encourage local kids to return to the area to purse their career. There are classes of 10-20 people each year, who are currently enrolled at the Texas A&M Vet school, but are taking classes at WT.

However, he has caved to the woke mob on another subject. Thread here:

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3311523/replies/62804276

CanyonAg77 said:

---

nai06 said:

---

Muy said:

---

If you want to pretend you enjoy drag queen shows, do it on your own time and private property.

---

Should the head of a public university be allowed to dictate the protected legal activity on the campus based on his personal religious views?

Especially when such a show is allowed both by formal policy and state education law?

---

To Godwin the thread, a Nazi rally would be a protected legal activity. Should he allow that?

---

Under the current rules signed by the governor, potentially yes.

So long as the speakers conduct is not unlawful and the event complies with the policy.

AGHouston11 said:

---

TAMU1990 said:

---

TommyBrady said:

---

He's very happy at WT and he is a hell of man. He knows he has the regents and Chancellor behind him.

---

That would be the same regents and chancellor we all know, right?

---

Does WT have a Diversity Equity Inclusion office in every department like the other Universities………… like TAMU

WT actually sounds like one of the few places that might have not gone completely off the rails

---

Oh, I agree that we need to eliminate DEI in every department at A&M. Sharp loves to consolidate and here's the perfect situation where it's a waste of millions of dollars.

Quote:

---

"WT endeavors to treat all people equally. Drag shows are derisive, divisive and demoralizing misogyny, no matter the stated intent," Wendler said in the letter. "Such conduct runs counter to the purpose of WT. A person or group should not attempt to elevate itself or a cause by mocking another person or group. As a university president, I would not support "blackface" performances on our campus, even if told the performance is a form of free speech or intended as humor. It is wrong. I do not support any show, performance or artistic expression which denigrates othersin this case, womenfor any reason."

Wendler goes on to say that mocking or objectifying members "of any group based on appearance, bias or predisposition is unacceptable." At the end of the letter, Wendler cites the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's purpose, stating that prejudice in the workplace, which Wendler said he believes drag shows are, is "harmful and wholly inappropriate" even if they are not criminal.

---

Nice to see a university president standing up for women. Tired of being mocked by drag queens and Tik Tok transgenders/autogynephiles.

fightingfarmer09 said:

---

There use to be specific funding and preferred enrollment for graduate school positions for those within the system. I think much of this has been morphed into a minority outreach program, but it is worth looking into.

I got additional money for my Masters for attending within the TAMU system and again when I returned to A&M College Station as a PhD.

It's a great campus. Lots of local opportunities to work in whatever field you want to.

---

We visited the Ag Dept last December and it was a great experience. It certainly had the feel that A&M used to have back in the day...back when the students were students and before they were just numbers. I think it will come down to how much in scholarships they come up with for him to make his decision.

Whats he want to do?

The regents actually are about to be a lot more conservative. Also anybody that thinks John Sharp is a woke follower doesn't know John

Dr Blaser was on my committee. Awesome guy.

Tons of big ag internship opportunities out there too. Many College Station students don't take those chances because it's so far from the home campus.

CanyonAg77 said:

---

He's a pretty good President for WTAMU. He's done stuff to boost the school, such as visiting EVERY high school in the Panhandle to encourage people to attend WT.

And for those who haven't been this way in a while, the WTAMU campus has made great strides in facilities and landscaping. It's also more of a real college than it used to be. When we moved here in the 1990s, it was dead on weekends. Now the students are hanging around campus, with lots of activities.

They've built amazing new facilities for their Ag Department, and even more great facilities for the Vet program. They are trying to encourage local kids to return to the area to purse their career. There are classes of 10-20 people each year, who are currently enrolled at the Texas A&M Vet school, but are taking classes at WT.

However, he has caved to the woke mob on another subject. Thread here:

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3311523/replies/62804276

---

Happy to read about the progress. Back in the 70's - 80's when I was still in Amarillo it was named West Texas State University but commonly referred to as "Buffalo High". Good to see them rise above that with some well earned respect

Quote:

---

Good to see them rise above that with some well earned respect

---

The money and prestige of being part of the A&M system has been a huge win for them.

He's going to cost the school money they don't have defending a lawsuit they're going to lose. Clear viewpoint discrimination violating the first amendment.

It's sad to see so many "conservatives" in here cheering on suppression of free speech just because they are against the content of the speech. Too much of this from both sides.

Allow the speech. Protest it. Start a debate. Don't suppress it.

96LawAg said:

---

He's going to cost the school money they don't have defending a lawsuit they're going to lose. Clear viewpoint discrimination violating the first amendment.

It's sad to see so many "conservatives" in here cheering on suppression of free speech just because they are against the content of the speech. Too much of this from both sides.

Allow the speech. Protest it. Start a debate. Don't suppress it.

---

It's not suppression of speech, it's preventing an insane action that is misogynistic and derogatory and hurtful towards real women. As president he has every right to deny their request.

Ag87H2O said:

---

96LawAg said:

---

He's going to cost the school money they don't have defending a lawsuit they're going to lose. Clear viewpoint discrimination violating the first amendment.

It's sad to see so many "conservatives" in here cheering on suppression of free speech just because they are against the content of the speech. Too much of this from both sides.

Allow the speech. Protest it. Start a debate. Don't suppress it.

---

It's not suppression of speech, it's preventing an insane action that is misogynistic and derogatory and hurtful towards real women. As president he has every right to deny their request.

---

Except he doesn't in part because of the SB 18 which Governor Abbott signed into law in 2019. It specifically protects Expressive Activity Rights for students an bars a school from taking action "against a student organization or deny the organization any benefit generally available to other student organizations at the university on the basis of a political, religious, philosophical, ideological, or academic viewpoint expressed by the organization or of any expressive activities of the organization."

Ag87H2O said:

---

"WT endeavors to treat all people equally. Drag shows are derisive, divisive and demoralizing misogyny, no matter the stated intent," Wendler said in the letter. "Such conduct runs counter to the purpose of WT."

"Wendler goes on to say that mocking or objectifying members "of any group based on appearance, bias or predisposition is unacceptable." At the end of the letter, Wendler cites the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's purpose, stating that prejudice in the workplace, which Wendler said he believes drag shows are, is "harmful and wholly inappropriate"

"No amount of fancy rhetorical footwork or legal wordsmithing eludes the fact that drag shows denigrate and demean women ... "A harmless drag show? Not possible."


That's how you beat liberals at their own game. Wendler's letter is a thing of beauty. It's impossible for anyone to be intellectually honest and argue with his rationale. Of course, nobody ever accused leftist of being intellectually honest.

---

Ag87H2O said:

---

96LawAg said:

---

He's going to cost the school money they don't have defending a lawsuit they're going to lose. Clear viewpoint discrimination violating the first amendment.

It's sad to see so many "conservatives" in here cheering on suppression of free speech just because they are against the content of the speech. Too much of this from both sides.

Allow the speech. Protest it. Start a debate. Don't suppress it.

---

It's not suppression of speech, it's preventing an insane action that is misogynistic and derogatory and hurtful towards real women. As president he has every right to deny their request.

---

No he doesn't. And that's going to become clear. Either he'll reverse course or a court will tell him to.

I do remember my wife crying uncontrollably after watching Ms. Doubtfire. She was so hurt.

Ag87H2O said:

---

96LawAg said:

---

He's going to cost the school money they don't have defending a lawsuit they're going to lose. Clear viewpoint discrimination violating the first amendment.

It's sad to see so many "conservatives" in here cheering on suppression of free speech just because they are against the content of the speech. Too much of this from both sides.

Allow the speech. Protest it. Start a debate. Don't suppress it.

---

It's not suppression of speech, it's preventing an insane action that is misogynistic and derogatory and hurtful towards real women. As president he has every right to deny their request.

---

Who exactly gave him permission to white knight on behalf of all of these women who are apparently so offended? Drag shows have been going on for years. I wont say they are without controversy but when have women been so staunchly opposed to them? In my experience women make up a significant amount of the attendees and enjoy them.

This is a clear content-based restriction of speech by a public university president on the basis of his religious beliefs. Clear first amendment violation, and a slam dunk win for the drag show in court. And all it does is bring negative attention to the university and get people riled up.

Maybe next week he'll try to ban students from watching Mrs. Doubtfire.

Jack Squat 83 said:

---

Do yourselves a favor and read the entire letter he wrote. Picasso ain't got nothing on that gentleman.

He needs a bigger platform to get more of his words to more of "our" ears. Wow that was beautiful.

---

Absolutely, 100% agree. Loved this part:

"The WT community should live by the Golden Rule. As a Christian, I personally learned this in the book of Matthew, 'So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets." Buddhism expresses it this way: "Hurt not others with that which pains yourself." Judaism states, "What you yourself hate, do to no man." The law of reciprocity is at work in every known religion and society on the planet.

Colloquially speaking, it is a manifestation of Newton's Third Law of Motion, "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."

redcrayon said:

---

All of the sudden, liberals are happy to create a hostile work environment for women.

---

Please explain how an optional drag show after the business day has ended creates a hostile work environment for women?

I'm old enough to remember when some guy named Richard Spencer was going to speak at Rudder. The University admin came out & basically said "we don't agree or like the guy but they filled out all the forms and we are a public university so he gets to speak." The admin also put on some sort of "Aggie United" event at Kyle that same day & encouraged students to go to that instead and to not protest. The way I saw it, they were trying to encourage/promote certain speech over others, but that is just my opinion.

Would these same students/media be upset if the WTAMU president cancelled an on campus Minstrel Show? Even if the funds of the show were going to go to the NAACP? I have my doubts they would be fine with it, and would probably be cheering and praising the president for cancelling it.

There are several examples of students/leftist trying to cancel conservative speakers from speaking at universities (Ben Shapiro, Michael Knowles, Charlie Kirk, etc). They tear down posters, the try and pressure the admin to cancel the event, the protest and cause destruction.

So they are completely fine with using the power of govt to control speech they don't like....they just hate it when that same hammer is used against them. "If it wasn't for double standards, the left wouldn't have any standards."

As a conservative and a free speech absolutist I do not like the WTAMU president's actions. HOWEVER, the leftist have made the rules of the game and when you play stupid games you win stupid prizes. The left deserve this, they are getting exactly what they wanted...more daddy govt.

nai06 said:

---

redcrayon said:

---

All of the sudden, liberals are happy to create a hostile work environment for women.

---

Please explain how an optional drag show after the business day has ended creates a hostile work environment for women?

---

Normal women are offended and appalled

TJaggie14 said:

---

I'm old enough to remember when some guy named Richard Spencer was going to speak at Rudder. The University admin came out & basically said "we don't agree or like the guy but they filled out all the forms and we are a public university so he gets to speak." The admin also put on some sort of "Aggie United" event at Kyle that same day & encouraged students to go to that instead and to not protest. The way I saw it, they were trying to encourage/promote certain speech over others, but that is just my opinion.

Would these same students/media be upset if the WTAMU president cancelled an on campus Minstrel Show? Even if the funds of the show were going to go to the NAACP? I have my doubts they would be fine with it, and would probably be cheering and praising the president for cancelling it.

There are several examples of students/leftist trying to cancel conservative speakers from speaking at universities (Ben Shapiro, Michael Knowles, Charlie Kirk, etc). They tear down posters, the try and pressure the admin to cancel the event, the protest and cause destruction.

So they are completely fine with using the power of govt to control speech they don't like....they just hate it when that same hammer is used against them. "If it wasn't for double standards, the left wouldn't have any standards."

As a conservative and a free speech absolutist I do not like the WTAMU president's actions. HOWEVER, the leftist have made the rules of the game and when you play stupid games you win stupid prizes. The left deserve this, they are getting exactly what they wanted...more daddy govt.

---

Wrong. We should always defend freedom of speech. Most importantly speech we don't agree with.

And you're clearly not a "free speech absolutist," because you're saying "oh they didn't care about the constitution so now I'm not going to care about it either."
Always funny when someone claims to be for freedom of speech while making the argument that it's ok to suppress speech.

And to your last sentence - evidently what "they" want is also what you want: more daddy government. Because here you are supporting it.

CanyonAg77 said:

---

nai06 said:

---

redcrayon said:

---

All of the sudden, liberals are happy to create a hostile work environment for women.

---

Please explain how an optional drag show after the business day has ended creates a hostile work environment for women?

---

Normal women are offended and appalled

---

And your comment doesn't answer his question. How does an optional drag show after the business day has ended create a hostile work environment for women?

I'm sure women are so glad some men are there to step in and decide what they should be offended by and put a stop to it. Thank God! Can you imagine what would happen if people were allowed to decide for themselves whether to attend this show or not?

96LawAg said:

---

He's going to cost the school money they don't have defending a lawsuit they're going to lose. Clear viewpoint discrimination violating the first amendment.

It's sad to see so many "conservatives" in here cheering on suppression of free speech just because they are against the content of the speech. Too much of this from both sides.

Allow the speech. Protest it. Start a debate. Don't suppress it.

---

So should he have to let strippers do a show on campus? That's simply freedom of expression, right?

TJaggie14 said:

---

I'm old enough to remember when some guy named Richard Spencer was going to speak at Rudder. The University admin came out & basically said "we don't agree or like the guy but they filled out all the forms and we are a public university so he gets to speak." The admin also put on some sort of "Aggie United" event at Kyle that same day & encouraged students to go to that instead and to not protest. The way I saw it, they were trying to encourage/promote certain speech over others, but that is just my opinion.

Would these same students/media be upset if the WTAMU president cancelled an on campus Minstrel Show? Even if the funds of the show were going to go to the NAACP? I have my doubts they would be fine with it, and would probably be cheering and praising the president for cancelling it.

There are several examples of students/leftist trying to cancel conservative speakers from speaking at universities (Ben Shapiro, Michael Knowles, Charlie Kirk, etc). They tear down posters, the try and pressure the admin to cancel the event, the protest and cause destruction.

So they are completely fine with using the power of govt to control speech they don't like....they just hate it when that same hammer is used against them. "If it wasn't for double standards, the left wouldn't have any standards."

As a conservative and a free speech absolutist I do not like the WTAMU president's actions. HOWEVER, the leftist have made the rules of the game and when you play stupid games you win stupid prizes. The left deserve this, they are getting exactly what they wanted...more daddy govt.

---

You aren't very principled then if you are in favor of free speech you like but against free speech you don't like. Sounds like you aren't for free speech at all and are no better than the liberals who try to cancel Ben Shapiro speaking events.

I remember the Richard Spencer event too. I also remember the reaction on this forum. It was shocking how much anger was directed at Aggies United. As if it's completely insane for a university, getting bad PR because of a highly controversial speaker, would organize an event in hopes of unifying the students and overall being more positive than someone as disgusting and divisive as Spencer.

Sort of like white CEOs and university presidents decide what is offensive to racial minorities?

nai06 said:

---

redcrayon said:

---

All of the sudden, liberals are happy to create a hostile work environment for women.

---

Please explain how an optional drag show after the business day has ended creates a hostile work environment for women?

---

Women employed by the university work at the facilities hosting these events. Do you care about women? Do they have a right to a non-hostile work environment?

It seems you aren't concerned with a hostile environment when it's people you agree with, like autogynephiles, causing it.

Spenser was only divisive for idiots. And yes, I'm angry that the university could not simply let his talk sink or swim on its own, and instead wasted money on a stupid counter event.

TJaggie14 said:

---

Would these same students/media be upset if the WTAMU president cancelled an on campus Minstrel Show? Even if the funds of the show were going to go to the NAACP? I have my doubts they would be fine with it, and would probably be cheering and praising the president for cancelling it.

---

And drag shows are, in essence, minstrel shows in womanface instead of blackface.