# Rabois: My intention was to make a provocative statement
## 
### 
STANFORD HAS BEEN a very
active place over the past five years.
An institution once respected
across the nation for its educational
competence has been ridiculed, derided
and dismissed in every single publication
of note across the nation.
It has not been because of indirect
costs or misinformation. Rather, it is
precisely because of the multicultural
decision-making that has occupied Stan
ford's leadership over the past decade.
Quite simply, this school has subvert
ed its educational mission to the estab
lishment of a radical, destructive and
(surprisingly) anti-liberal agenda. CIV,
domestic partners, speech restrictions,
gender studies, a racially-based admis
sions policy, attacks on fraternities — all
of these policies were clearly wrong.
But our multicultural community
leaders realized the intellectual vulnera
bility of their policies and set out to
silence critics.
Labelling was the tactic. Every time a
genuine intellectual challenge was made to
the multicultural mythology, the person
making the argument was declared to be
insensitive, racist, sexist, homophobic, etc.

The Grey Standard was intended to
reinforce this tendency. An official policy
against particular kinds of speech could
only chill constructive comments.
Under such a prevailing atmosphere,
it usually isn't worth the hassle to speak
up. Most expect an education, and to
enjoy four years of California. Being
harassed for your views doesn't con
tribute to either objective.
Why, after every one of the 31
columns I've written, have I had many
people come up to me to congratulate me
on challenging trendy thinking?
I knew many people respected me for
my principled and forthright manner and
thus didn't worry about taking on the Peo
ple's Platform, the Black Student Union,
Michael Jackson, Don Kennedy, etc.
I was the abnormal case. I will always
consider my greatest accomplishment
that I encouraged others to do the same.
That was the intention of my com
ments on Sunday, Jan. 19. While walk
ing through Otero we encountered a
handful of residents. After asking where
we were located, I proceeded to make
comments similar to those reported in
The Daily.

While these words were about Dennis
Matthies, they were NOT directed at
him. There was absolutely no reason to
believe he was home. The entire point
was to expose these freshman ears to
very offensive speech.
Admittedly, the comments made were
not very articulate, not very intellectual,
nor profound. The intention was for the
speech to be outrageous enough to pro
voke a thought of "Wow, if he can say
that, I guess I can say a little more than
I thought."
There was no thought of prosecution at
the time — I knew the speech was shock
ing, but clearly protected. My last com
ment, "Go ahead — try to kick me out of
housing!" was designed to drive home the
lesson that there was nothing except fear
to stop criticism on this campus.
However, a week later, when the resi
dence dean called, I realized that the sit
uation had presented me with an inter
esting opportunity to demonstrate the
ridiculousness of the Grey Standard.
I hoped that the relatively minor Uni
versity officials then involved would be
stupid enough to make errors inconsis
tent with the true interpretation of the

Grey Standard — hence, my explicit
refusal to meet with Angela Rickford and
challenge to send the case to Sally Cole.
In other words, the original intent was
not to challenge the Grey Standard, but
to make a provocative statement to the
freshmen present. The University's deci
sion to investigate was a surprise — and
I then hoped that the administration
would bend the rules of the Grey Stan
dard in an attempt to prosecute me. I fig
ured it would look really bad if they tried
to do it to a student who had constantly
been a thorn in their side.
When all of the resources of the mul
ticultural agenda are directed against
you, you quickly find out who your real
friends are. In that way, this has been
one of the most valuable experiences of
my life. The words from those who
trusted or believed in me, and the offers
of support, will never be forgotten.
On the other hand, I now understand
what the Phi Delt protester meant when
he said, "I don't think I'm protesting
anything again, no matter how strongly
I feel about it."
My views about homosexuality are
now widely assumed to be those reported

in The Daily. Actually, I truly don't care
nor think too much about the issue. I
don't necessarily hate homosexuals, but
do believe in Jack Kemp's suggestion
that they may not be the best teachers of
young children in public schools and rec
ognize that the spread of AIDS has a
direct casual link back to their activity.
I hate Democrats, not homosexuals;
they're the ones that have hurt the country.
Unfortunately, I have also affected a
number of other people in a manner that
was certainly not intended. I have been
affiliated with a large number of organi
zations. None of these groups share any
of my views, nor should they be asked to
bear any responsibility for my actions.
While I may be willing to voluntarily
encounter the heat, none of these people
deserve it. I'm truly sorry for putting oth
ers with whom I am associated with in
such a position and would not do so again.
It has certainly not been fun. But if
my serving as the personification of
"evil" allows the rest of campus to reas
sure itself that it is "good," so be it. Oth
ers know better.
Keith Rabois
First-year law student