It’s Wisconsin — I’m surprised they didn’t fire him for veganism


Joe is the one on the right.

Joe Gow was a successful academic, chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, and he had an unusual hobby: he and his wife made porn. This is a case where we can even say it’s harmless stuff that isn’t exploitive at all, since it’s just the partners (they called themselves “@SexyHappyCouple”) and a few friends making home videos about the value of intimacy.

The university Board of Regents freaked out.

Regents are weird people selected for being staid and wealthy, and they tend to be far more conservative than the universities they manage. They forced Gow to step down from his position and threatened to strip him of his tenure.

They’ve gone and done it.

The University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents unanimously voted to revoke the tenure of University of Wisconsin-La Crosse’s former Chancellor Joe Gow.

The decision followed the recommendation to remove Gow by the UWL faculty committee in June and a hearing in front of the Regents on Sept. 20, the final step in a drawn-out faculty disciplinary process after discovering Gow’s involvement in pornographic content in Dec of 2023.

On Sept. 27. the Regents discussed Gow’s case in a closed-door session at UW-Parkside. They voted 17-0 to “dismiss with cause” and adopted a dismissal order in an open session with no discussion. Under Wisconsin state law to dismiss a tenured position there must be “just cause and only after due notice and hearing.”

Because of the termination, Gow will lose his faculty salary of $91,915 and over $310,000 in unused sick leave.

They called him “abhorrent” and “disgusting” who did “reputational harm” to the university. I actually looked at some of the videos. They weren’t to my taste, but sure, fine, they are optimistic and enthusiastic, and have a good message, even if I personally prefer privacy as part of my intimate life. These videos are examples of free speech that do absolutely no harm. And they fired him over them?

Meanwhile, in Pennsylvania, Amy Wax has been saying…

  • Telling a Black student “that she had only become a double Ivy ‘because of affirmative action.’”
  • “Stating in class that Mexican men are more likely to assault women and remarking such a stereotype was accurate in the same way as ‘Germans are punctual.’”
  • Telling a student “invited to her home, that ‘Hispanic people don’t seem to mind…liv[ing] somewhere where people are loud.’”
  • “Stating in class that people of color needed to stop acting entitled to remedies, to stop getting pregnant, to get better jobs, and to be more focused on reciprocity.”
  • “Commenting after a series of students with foreign-sounding names introduced themselves that one student was ‘finally, an American’ adding, ‘it’s a good thing, trust me.’”

Wax was suspended with pay for a year. She did not lose her tenure.

Who is doing the most harm to their university?

Comments

  1. stuffin says

    We can thank organized religion for society’s attitude toward sex. Sex bad unless you are making more Christians, Jews or Muslims.

  2. birgerjohansson says

    Please, please sue the university. In fact, with the publicity many lawyers may be willing to do the work pro bono.
    .
    There is even a film about how the odious televangelist Jerry Falwell sued a porn mag owner and lost (the lawyer is played by the guy that got injured by Hannibal Lecter in another film).

  3. StevoR says

    ^Based on the real legal case :

    Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988), is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that parodies of public figures, even those intending to cause emotional distress, are protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

    In the case, Hustler magazine ran a full-page parody ad against televangelist and political commentator Jerry Falwell Sr., depicting him as an incestuous drunk who had sex with his mother in an outhouse. The ad was marked as a parody that was “not to be taken seriously”. In response, Falwell sued Hustler and the magazine’s publisher Larry Flynt for intentional infliction of emotional distress, libel, and invasion of privacy, but Flynt defended the ad’s publication as protected by the First Amendment.

    In an 8–0 decision, the Court held that the emotional distress inflicted on Falwell by the ad was not a sufficient reason to deny the First Amendment protection to speech that is critical of public officials and public figures.

    Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell

  4. johnson catman says

    re StevoR @5: With the extreme right-wing outlook of the current SCOTUS, I wonder if the outcome of the same case would be the opposite today.

  5. cjcolucci says

    I have more respect for this character than I do for most academic administrators. Probably for all the wrong reasons.

  6. Walter Solomon says

    Larry Flynt and Jerry Falwell later became good friends by the way (no lie). They respected the each other’s hustle.

  7. Reginald Selkirk says

    Because of the termination, Gow will lose his faculty salary of $91,915 and over $310,000 in unused sick leave.

    I think this needs elaboration. They are booting him off the faculty now, and his faculty salary may be $92K. His salary when he was chancellor was $263K according to teh interwebs.

  8. Akira MacKenzie says

    They have to fire him to keep the donations from uptight rich prigs flowing in.

  9. unclefrogy says

    well I would have to say that those decisions may actually reflect the values and the reputation of their respective institutions. They are not outliers nor forward thinking but right down the middle of historical norms resisting change at all times.

  10. Kagehi says

    There are numerous cases like this, though the most common one has tended to be school teachers, cops, or others, who have done things “not approved of” on their time off, and which where deemed to, “badly reflect on the institution they where members of”. As far as I am aware, none of them ever successfully sued, because somehow the supposed “reputation” of the company/school/college, etc. was always deemed “more important”. Mind, this has almost always only ever been the case when its been making porn. Other things where either actually illegal, so had some technically real standing, or where, even if illegal, handled other ways, including leave time to go through rehab, etc. But, we just can’t have people having and filming sex. Nope, not allowed…

Leave a Reply