The recent incident on October 23 was a shocking reminder of the fragility of free speech on college campuses. As a board member and Chief of Staff for Turning Point USA (TPUSA) at UC Berkeley, I stood peacefully with a sign that read, "He created them male and female and blessed them." (Gen. 5:2) I intended to express a personal belief that children, too young to grasp the lifelong implications of hormone treatments or surgeries, should wait until adulthood to make such decisions. I embrace a perspective that is tolerant of all gender identities while maintaining my stance on medical interventions for minors. However, our call for dialogue was met not with conversation but with vandalism.
A visibly upset protestor drenched me in tomato juice, damaging my MacBook and scattering juice over our outreach materials. The response was not a critique or exchange of ideas but an assault. This act was not just an attack on me or our group but on the spirit of open dialogue that Berkeley should represent.
It was a particularly disappointing response because the attack happened not in response to a conversation or disagreement but simply to our presence. Chloe Cole, who joined us to share her experiences, hoped her story would spark dialogue. Instead, it was met with aggression, leaving us to question: where is the tolerance in the demand for inclusion?
UC Berkeley has a storied history of free speech, yet today, that legacy is all but gone. Instead of promoting mutual respect, some feel justified in shutting down voices they disagree with. The issue here goes beyond one protestor's reaction. It raises a more pressing question: can we, as students and thinkers, still engage in discussions without fear of hostility? Or are certain viewpoints to be sidelined, canceled, or even attacked?
Let me be clear—I believe passionately in each person's right to hold their views. I believe in each person's right to express those views openly, without threats or harm. In the same way, I hope that others can extend that respect to me, even if they disagree.
Ultimately, we must ask ourselves if we want our campus to be a place to exchange ideas freely or where dissent is met with threats and destruction. This is about more than one incident; it's about ensuring that UC Berkeley remains a space for true intellectual diversity. To uphold this, we must defend the right of all students to speak their minds without fear—no matter where they fall on the political spectrum.
I look forward to a future where we can engage in meaningful, respectful dialogue instead of retaliation—no tomato juice required.
