Author's Note: This case has set off quite an international debate, both for and against Dr. Evans. As I linked to below in the updates, you can check out the charging documents and findings in this case here, and see the discussion by following the #Fruitbatgate thread on Twitter. While everything I have read still indicates to me President Murphy badly mishandled the case, I encourage you to make up your own minds.
I had heard of "the love that dare not speak its name," but I had no idea it referred to the sexual habits of fruit bats. According to a professor at University College Cork in Ireland, however, sharing with colleagues a peer-reviewed article about observed oral sex among fruit bats was enough to get him put on double secret probation.
Printed below in its entirety is a letter from the censured professor, Dr. Dylan Evans, explaining what happened and asking people to join a petition protesting his ludicrously unjust punishment. (Hat tip to Steven Pinker of Harvard for forwarding this along.)
Subject: Please help me fight the sanctions imposed on me by University College Cork
Dear Colleagues,The President of University College Cork, Professor Michael Murphy, has imposed harsh sanctions on me for doing nothing more than showing an article from a peer-reviewed scientific article to a colleague.
The article was about fellatio in fruit bats. You can read it online at http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0007595
It was covered extensively in the media, including the Guardian - see http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/nov/10/oral-sex-bats-improbable-research
The colleague to whom I showed the article complained to HR that the article was upsetting. I had been engaged in an ongoing debate with the colleague in question about the relevance of evolutionary biology to human behaviour, and in particular about the dubiousness of many claims for human uniqueness. I showed it the colleague in the context of this discussion, and in the presence of a third person. I also showed the article to over a dozen other colleagues on the same day, none of whom objected.
HR launched a formal investigation. Despite the fact that external investigators concluded that I was not guilty of harassment, Professor Murphy has imposed a two-year period of intensive monitoring and counselling on me, and as a result my application for tenure is likely to be denied.
I am now campaigning to have the sanctions lifted. I would be grateful for your support on this matter. I have created an online petition at:
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/freedebate/I'd be grateful if you sign the petition and ask your colleagues to do so. If you also felt like writing directly to the President of UCC, his address is:
Professor Michael Murphy
The President's Office
University College Cork
Cork
Republic of Ireland.Your support would be greatly appreciated.
Dylan Evans
----------------------------------------------
Dr. Dylan Evans
Lecturer in Behavioural Science
School of Medicine
University College Cork,
Cork, Ireland.
Anyone who has read previous entries of mine here on The Huffington Post already knows that even the most inadvertent offense can lead to students and faculty members being charged and often found guilty of various campus crimes. (Do I need to mention again the student punished for "openly" reading a book?)
But thankfully, here in the United States we have the awesome protections of the First Amendment to vindicate the rights to both free speech and academic freedom. Ireland, to my knowledge, does not have such powerful protections, leaving Dr. Evans in a bind.
So it is up to us to let the misguided President Murphy know that running an institution of higher education means placing the search for knowledge above the sensibilities of the inordinately squeamish. Ridicule sometimes wins where common sense fails, so I encourage you to spread the word about this case, write President Murphy, and sign the petition.
Seriously, President Murphy: A lot of facts about animals are weird, gross, and in this case, sort of funny. But if you're going to be a grown-up at a grown-up university, you really need to, well, grow up.
UPDATES: I just received the official documentation from Professor Evans. You can judge for yourself: http://felidware.com/DylanEvans/. While the accuser alleges more than the Fruit Bat article was at play, it was the incident that inspired the complaint, and which President Murphy targets in particular and in a very odd way. While the additional details are helpful I ultimately agree with the letter from the Irish Federation of University Teachers http://felidware.com/DylanEvans/ifut.pdf.
Also you can check out the article in New Scientist about the incident (NEW on Monday, May 17).
This incident is also promoting some fierce and interesting discussion through social networks. If you want to follow some of it check out the #fruitbatgate thread on Twitter.
AND Irish Times reports: "Authorities at UCC wrote to Dr Dylan Evans, a lecturer in behavioural science at the school of medicine, yesterday to advise him that they are initiating disciplinary procedures over the posting of confidential material on the web."
A thoughtful and critical opinion of the case by originator of the hash tag #Fruitbatgate, Stephen Kinsella. (NEW on Tuesday, May 18)
Follow Greg Lukianoff on Twitter: www.twitter.com/glukianoff
This is not about collegiality and discussion of ideas - the article had no relevance to the person who made the complaint.
We now have a witch hunt online and in newspapers of a woman who made a complaint of sexual harassment. There are plenty of well-known advocates for free speech in the science community but how many senior scientists are women and who is an advocate for women working in science and their right to make confidential sexual harassment claims without having their name splashed online and in newspapers?
Way to go Greg and others for stoking up a witch-hunt of a woman who made an allegation of sexual harassment - great "post-enlightenment" values there.
First, academics aren't just interested in the 'research interests' they list on their university webpage bios. It is quite expected that work colleagues talk about issues outside their narrow scope of research. Second, one would hope that academics are curious about research outside their individual research areas. Individual research is deep yet narrow. The whole point of an academic community is to provide different views to, hopefully, bring together knowledge.
The fact is unless one is very intimately involved with the case, we don't know the scope of subjects they talked about. Evans shouldn't be criticised for bringing up a subject just because it is outside the scope of her 'official research interests'.
If your criticism relates to the content of the article, then that is a different matter altogether.
One suspects that there is a lot more to this than bat bliss, and that the unfortunate chap hasn't been toeing the line on turning education into a privatised commodity.
Dr Evans claims that an external inquiry into the incident cleared him of all charges. The president of the university claims that the external inquiry cleared one charge and upheld another. The inquiry document itself is ambiguous.
I do not know whether Dr. Evan's female colleague's statement is true. But I feel very passionately that to dismiss a sexual harrassment complaint as absurd is wrong. I applaud UCCs actions in taking the woman's complaint seriously and addressing the behaviour that was making her feel unsafe and uncomfortable in her place of work.
I am astounded that so many people have signed Dr. Evan's petition, which calls for changes to UCC's policy on harrassment. I am astounded at the representation of this sexual harrassment case as an issue of academic freedom.
The fact that the other actions (touching, hugging, etc) were never brought up with the accused or followed up by her husband shows a lack of understanding of conflict resolution or that maybe the claims are simply on too shaky a ground to have warranted even an informal "please don't be so familiar with me it makes me uncomfortable"? Regardless however those past actions if true have nothing to do with the event in question because they were never brought into account previously.
We are not psychic we cannot read or influence the thoughts of another without there participation. It takes two too tango and it takes two people for this situation as well. Instead of placing blame and creating that classic Us Vs Them mentality the supervisory powers should have kept a clearer head.
I say if the accused is forced to go through counseling and treatment that the same should be demanded of the accuser to be sure she has the tools in the future to confront situations like this before they create a fear climate for her.
Ireland has a strong freedom of speech protection:
Firstly under Art 40.6.1 of the constitution (which, to be fair has been more narrowly interpreted than the First ammendment in the US)
Secondly under the ECHR: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_10_of_the_European_Convention_on_Human_Rights
Uh, we are a state roughly 200 years younger than you, and were founded, in part, by an American citizen, Eamon de Valera. Our freedom of speech is just fine, thank you - save for the recent embarrassment of the revival of a blasphemy law which is soon to be struck out of the constitution.
Without reference to this particular case (I work in UCC, but don't know either party personally), can I suggest that if you would like to equate tolerance of allegations of sexual harassment to free speech, the frequency and success rate of sexual harassment law suits for which the USA is famed would indicate a far worse provision of said free speech!