...
Abbot, an associate professor of geophysics at the University of Chicago, recorded a series of videos explaining his concerns about how his department was implementing diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. Among other things, he rejected the idea that in order to hire and admit more women in science, the university needed to lower its standards.

“Let’s support women in science by treating women and their scientific ideas with respect,” he said. “Let’s fight bias in science by working hard to reduce bias, not by introducing it. Let’s treat each applicant for conferences, fellowships, and faculty positions as an individual worthy of dignity and respect. Let’s treat all applicants fairly by judging them only on the basis of their ability and promise as scientists.”

In response, more than 100 students and postdoctoral fellows submitted a letter asking for Abbot to be sanctioned, and (among other things) to “protect” students and postdoctoral fellows currently working with him by allowing them to “opt out” of being his Teaching Assistants (while still being paid to do that job). Although there were no threats of any kind to anyone’s actual safety in anything the professor presented, his ideas, the letter claimed, “threaten the safety and belonging of all underrepresented groups within the department.”

This kind of assertion has become increasingly common on campus. Fortunately for Abbot, the University of Chicago has an uncommon respect for freedom of speech and thought.

President Robert J. Zimmer is peerless in his staunch advocacy for a culture “where novel and even controversial ideas can be proposed, tested and debated.” The Chicago Principles (also referred to as the Chicago Statement) have been adopted in some form by more than 75 colleges and universities, largely with the help of FIRE. But if students and newly minted PhDs even at the University of Chicago ask the administration to sanction a professor whose ideas they believe “undermine Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion initiatives,” and even feel unsafe because his views run contrary to the prevailing view on campus, it demonstrates that even the most robust protections offered by a university administration are not enough. It takes more than just administrative leadership to create what Zimmer calls “an environment that promotes free expression and the open exchange of ideas, ensuring that difficult questions are asked and that diverse and challenging perspectives are considered.”
...