I am uncertain what I would do if a student were to show me a paper that said " To me, the biggest turnoff in the world is a woman with a briefcase in her hand." I would most likely follow the same footsteps as Steve Sherwood. I would probably advise the student of the dangers of his "belief." I, one can say, would be censoring him. But I think we do more censoring than we think we do. Sherwood says that, as tutors, "we censor or urge self-censorship in the interest of helping students to adjust and to succeed in the academic world. We want to protect students from the practical and political effects of their words" (131). Besides the fact that we're not "protectors" protecting students from this cruel world, these two sentences make me scrunch my eyes a bit, almost cringe, in fact. Our "helping" of students to "succeed in the academic world" is similar to a censorship. We're prescribing a way of writing and a way of thinking to fit into what one considers "academic," into what one considers "good." And, of course, a good paper must get an "A", so we "help" students get what is already prescribed as "good" --- an "A."

On a similar note, knowing what professors like or dislike can also "censor" one's paper. A tutor can tell a client how to form an argument, essay, thought, or idea to satisfy a teacher's tastes. As Sherwood pointed, censorship is defined as someone who "had the responsibility of the supervision of public morals." Are tutors not "supervising?" I agree at the Writers' Room no one's morals will be on the table but one's papers will be on the table. To a lesser degree, the tutor is censoring a student, holding responsible the tutoring, the helping, the consulting of a client's writing and as a client's future essays. We mustn't forget that the the essay is more than just words on paper. These words are often a client's ideas, beliefs, and thoughts. In "protecting" one's thoughts --- one's ideas, beliefs, and thoughts --- we may also, as Sherwood says, do more harm than good.

"Think about opposing viewpoints" is something I've told myself many times when writing an argumentative paper. It is something all students should do. In the Writers' Room, this is something consultants can do to really strengthen a client's thesis, essay, and/or belief. Among many other things, however, this must be done to a certain degree and being "on the fence" could be bad news. A consultant must remember the motives when helping a client. Though many see tutors as the authorial figure in the tutor/student binary, there are instances where a consultant must be defenseless. A consultant must forget his beliefs when they oppose a student's. A consultant must remember that even if he may be reduced, criticized, ridiculed, or plainly made fun of, he shouldn't intend to defend himself. He must remember that the student needs help with his writing, and it's the student and the his writing that must me the goal of the session, not defending or attacking.

Sherwood, Steve. "Censoring Students, Censoring Ourselves: Constraining Conversations in the Writing Center." The St. Martin's Sourcebook for Writing Tutors 3rd ed. Eds.