This isn’t good for the legal profession. Actually, the law itself is all but dead. The active practice is in shambles both ideologically and in terms of operation. But the following represents a blow to the underpinnings of basic legal education that will be hard to recover from.
Howard University Professor of Law Reginald Robinson has been found “guilty” of sexual harassment. His offense was asking a question on an exam.
A college law professor has been found guilty of sexual harassment because he gave students a test question about a bikini wax.
Reginald Robinson included the question in a test for students at Howard University in Washington D.C. in September 2015.
It described a hypothetical situation in which a person sued a beauty salon claiming to have been touched inappropriately by a therapist after falling asleep while undergoing a bikini wax.
The question asked whether a court would support the person’s claim against the salon owner as opposed to the therapist and if it would even be upheld given that the person had consented to the somewhat invasive wax on their genitals.
Two students complained to the university. claiming that the question made them feel as though they had to reveal if they had ever undergone bikini waxes themselves.
They said they did not like the use of the word ‘genitals’, according to The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE).
A lengthy investigation was launched and on Thursday, it concluded that Robinson was guilty of sexual harassment.
As a result, he has to undergo sensitivity training, have all of his test questions screened by another member of staff and his classes will be supervised.
The university also warned that he could face termination if other students complain about him.
The university in Washington D.C. found Robinson guilty of sexual harassment after a lengthy investigation.
Robinson is outraged by the university’s decision which he said stops him from being able to properly educate students.
‘My case should worry every faculty member at Howard University, and perhaps elsewhere, who teaches in substantive areas like law, medicine, history, and literature.
Why? None of these academic areas can be taught without evaluating and discussing contextual facts, especially unsavory and emotionally charged ones.
‘I also can’t prepare my students adequately for legal practice if I can’t teach them new developments and require them to read unedited, unfiltered cases,’ he said in a statement.
The university did not respond to DailyMail.com’s request on Sunday morning. A spokesman for FIRE slammed its findings.
‘Robinson’s test question clearly does not constitute sexual harassment.
‘Howard’s overreaction to a simple hypothetical question is a threat to academic freedom and a professor’s ability to effectively teach students,’ they said.
Here’s the “offensive” question:
Daily Mail / Reginald Robinson.
The subject matter may sound a little silly and even “skanky.” Please rest assured that at least half of all real life civil cases may accurately be described as such. This case, this exact question, is bound to happen somewhere in America if it hasn’t happened already. The real plaintiff will probably be (is) another SJW.
These are the pathetic, demented souls that complain of everything. Then they complain about their complaints. They’re everywhere now, including law schools. That’s the funny part (or another funny part).
Robinson is a full professor; he’s been teaching since 1991 and at Howard since 1994. He has tenure. He’s also a black man. He researches, writes, and teaches extensively about “race theory” and the law. This would seem to be the ideal liberal combination for any law professor in 2017. Then again, he also teaches Business Law and actually has the insane idea that he’s supposed to equip his students for the real world.
Any shrieking, blue-haired, malcontent that can’t handle the word “genitals” won’t fare so well when it comes time to examine in court, in-depth and with a medical examiner’s testimony, the internal autopsy photographs which document exactly how the five-year-old murder victim died. I’ve been there and done that. That sort of thing turns cast iron kettles to say nothing of stomachs. The SJWs will have to be revived by paramedics and rushed to the safe room (surely coming to a courthouse near you).
But coloring books and play mats won’t be able to save what little is left of the legal profession if this kind of bullsh!t is allowed to stand. F.I.R.E. (a likely hate group by SPLC standards) is on the case.
With or without F.I.R.E., Robinson should sue the school. And every other normal law student should implead himself as a third-party plaintiff. This utter nonsense threatens the integrity of every JD granted by Howard. It screams that the graduates are not prepared to leave kindergarten, let alone enter the demanding arena of the juridical combat.
And if a tenured black professor, who actively advances “race theory” can become an SJW target, anyone can be a target. Except, maybe, those who bait the crybabies. By the way, this harassment story reminded me: I didn’t know “harass” was one word until the Clarence Thomas debacle. Ha! Get it? Harass. Her-a…? ??? Eh well.
Seriously, it’s time to drive these pitiful nuts out of the schools, the HR department, out of everywhere of importance, and back into the play pens of make-believe.
For a better understanding of how these losers operate and how to deal with them, please buy and read SWJs Always Lie by Vox Day.