Stanford University’s Structured Liberal Education (SLE) program hosted dominatrix and author Brittany Newell as a guest speaker for its students last week, a decision that has drawn criticism from at least one student publication.
According to a report from the Stanford Review, the choice to invite Newell divided students. Newell, who describes herself as a “silly bimbo,” spoke to students about her background as a drag performer, kink worker, journalist and archivist of San Francisco’s queer sexual community, the report said.
Some students who attended the talk received a free copy of Newell’s latest book, Soft Core, which recounts a woman’s sexual relationships, including with her cross-dressing ketamine-dealer ex-boyfriend.
The SLE program is built around a curriculum intended to give students a grounding in Western thought aimed at living a good life, and includes required reading such as Meditations by the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius.
A Stanford Review opinion piece questioned the relevance of Newell’s background to the program’s stated goals.
Does SLE mean to tell 18-year-olds that profiting off of others’ vulnerabilities and shame is preferable to working 50-hour weeks at a big company?
The piece also asked whether the program was endorsing the idea that “men should pay for expensive, temporary ‘intimacy’ instead of trying to address the root cause of their problems with a licensed therapist,” and questioned whether the answer to depression was “simply giving in by appeasing desire through drugs, fantasy, and sex.”
The student writer also argued that Newell’s writing did not justify the invitation.
What does SLE materially gain from hosting her? Even if she has unconventional interests, is she at least a fabulous writer? Does she explore the topic in a novel, interesting way?
The piece concluded that Newell “is not an amazing writer” and that her “expertise in dominating men — and not the pen — is relevant to SLE and its purported goals” was unclear.
The Stanford Review did not call for the program to be shut down, but argued for more careful selection of speakers going forward.
SLE is a respectable program with noble aims, and it has the right to choose which speakers it wishes to platform. I believe it should, and can, do better.
Stanford has not issued a public response to the criticism as of this report.
