Comments on: Paternalism and the Pregnant Tree

By: michelle

michelle — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 07:11:46 +0000

well my friend (breanna) is the one who had got kicked out of harding with mr. knighton and mr. knighton’s story is not accurate whatsoever. what happened is that the two had went to a party together and they had both decided that she should spend the night, so the two could spend time with each other. the dorm mom and deans got involved thinking something had happened to her and called in her roommates/suitemates/close friends and had questiones them asking where breanna was at. they had known who she was ‘seeing’ at the time and told them about her and mr. knighton’s relationship. the deans then drove by his house to check if her veichle was there. and sure enough it was. the next day or so she got called down to the deans office and they had wondered where she was at. they had already knew where she was at and her and mr. knighton were called to be questioned. they both pleaded guilty and were suspended. if anyone knows this girl she is the most sweetest and kindest girl. she is none of the things that mr. noah grant said. there are two sides to every story and i know breanna would appreciate me telling the truth.

By: justthisgirl

justthisgirl — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 23:32:52 +0000

I don’t have any problem believing the story, and I don’t know any of the parties involved. I do, however, know a lot of people who went to Harding and spent many nights scrabbling to find a place to stay to avoid missing curfew. I understand Harding’s rule when looking at it from an appearance of evil angle. I think more important, though, is encouraging young men and women to make the right decision because it’s right, not because Harding has a rule for every single possible eventuality.

By: Ian

Ian — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 18:46:35 +0000

They were probably informed by an angry, under-appreciated offensive lineman.

By: j_ball

j_ball — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:23:28 +0000

yeah, i’m inclined not to believe this story for exactly the same reasons you gave, kolby.

how did harding find out about this slumber party though?

By: jkkuwitzky

jkkuwitzky — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 22:13:58 +0000

Do you seriously believe the suspended student’s story? It could be true, but it also seemed to pop up a bit too frequently when the lascivious/awesome kids got caught when I was at Harding. I think the rule is dumb, but I’m more than a bit skeptical of the circumstances.

By: Edward Carson

Edward Carson — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 13:18:31 +0000

This is why I cannot get my best students to consider HU; they heard about his and have been dogging the school to death; I did explain to them that rules are rules; the real problem here is the double standard that exist at HU. I am surprised more women do not stand up for the sexism that exist.

By: noah grant

noah grant — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 05:26:32 +0000

Did the young lady involved also receive suspension from HU? Why didn’t she go back to the dorm and receive whatever discipline that would be given to her instead of involving another student? It would seem to an outsider that she was being selfish, protecting herself, and not thinking of what would happen to her benefactor. As a football player, he knew he had to abide by the rules of the game. Life is full of rules, and without them we would have chaos and anarchy.

By: S.C. Denney

S.C. Denney — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 23:55:47 +0000

I’ve been thinking about this event a bit and have come to what I think is an accurate representation of what this events signifies.

We (non-traditional progressives) see the enforcement of the “sex prevention” rule as anachronistic, backwards, and just plain silly. We see the attraction this event produces as harmful to the image of Harding, because, to us, it represents ridiculous and harmful paternalistic attitudes.

However, Harding, and “the board,” probably perceive the attention as something good, insofar as it reinforces its traditional stance on gender relations. I doubt the old, white, conservative men who run Harding see this event for what it is (backwards). They see it as Harding standing up for what it believes is right. They see conservative paternalism as helping to shape the consciousness of the student body; this event serves as an example to all who dare break their righteous rules. What is backwards and antithetical to progress for us is a moral stance for them.

Also, what is David Knight and his Dad appealing? David has admitted to letting a female student spend the night, a clear infraction of the rule that prohibits such actions. The punishment for breaking this rule is suspension. Are they appealing the absurdity of the rule? If so, that really isn’t an appeal, just a protest.

Best case scenario (and an impossible one at that), would be to lobby Harding’s board to change the rule, then grandfather David in.

I think the appeal might be to just create some tension and bring light to Harding’s outlandish rule.

Conservative Southern Culture, the philosophical underpinning of such policies as these, are what I look forward to leaving behind and never coming back to.

By: jessie f-f

jessie f-f — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 17:09:39 +0000

It has also been covered by Sports Illustrated…

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/football/ncaa/11/05/knighton.suspension.ap/index.html?eref=si_ncaaf

By: Brett Keller

Brett Keller — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 18:10:09 +0000

I love it when my alma mater gets coverage like this!