A paper examining homosexuality in naval adventure literature was removed from the Naval Academy’s upcoming history symposium, sparking accusations of censorship. Professor Seth Stein LeJacq, whose work was accepted in May, was informed of his exclusion on June 4, 2023, just one day after Tom McCarthy, chair of the Naval Academy’s history department, resigned from his position. LeJacq contends that his paper was censored due to an anti-LGBTQ stance within the Department of Defense under the administration of former President Donald Trump.
McCarthy resigned after stating in his resignation letter that he had been instructed to withdraw LeJacq’s paper “for reasons having nothing to do with scholarship.” He expressed concerns about violating trust and potentially damaging the department’s reputation. The Naval Academy has not commented on the matter publicly.
Graduates of the Naval Academy have voiced their disapproval of the decision. William Marks, co-founder of Operation Caged Bird, criticized the censorship as inconsistent with the academy’s educational ideals. Marks, a graduate from 1996, stated, “The largest regular meeting of naval historians in the world requires that all perspectives be given fair and equal review — not just ones approved by the Trump administration.”
The backdrop to this controversy includes a broader initiative by the Trump administration to reshape diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies within military institutions. This year, the Naval Academy has altered its curriculum, library materials, and admissions policies, adhering to Trump’s executive order titled “Restoring America’s Fighting Force.”
Scheduled for September 18-19 in Annapolis, the McMullen Symposium is recognized as the “largest regular meeting of naval historians in the world.” LeJacq had intended to present his research on the portrayal of gender and homosexuality in the works of authors like Patrick O’Brian, whose novels, including “Master and Commander,” are highly regarded for their historical detail and narrative depth.
LeJacq’s paper, titled “Liberation, Homophobia, and Historical Memory: Queer Pasts and Futures in Historical Naval Adventure Fiction,” was initially accepted by the symposium committee, which included Capt. Stan Fisher and then-Deputy Director Abby Mullen. Both have since declined to comment on the situation.
In a conversation with a Naval Academy staff member, LeJacq was explicitly told that the decision to uninvite him was not based on the quality of his work. “The problem here is not fellow academics,” LeJacq remarked. “The problem is the Department of Defense and the presidential administration. That’s where the censorship is coming from.”
LeJacq, 39, holds a bachelor’s degree from Cornell University and a doctorate from Johns Hopkins University. His academic focus includes early-modern Britain and the history of medicine, with a particular emphasis on gender and sexuality. He has previously explored sexuality within British naval culture and is working on a book about sex and gender in the British Navy from the 1600s to the mid-1800s.
The McMullen Symposium has been a platform for scholars to exchange ideas and research since its inception in 1973. LeJacq expressed disappointment over the decision to exclude his paper, emphasizing the importance of rigorous academic discourse. “I wanted experts and other people who really know the work to look at it closely,” he said.
McCarthy’s letter to Provost Samara Firebaugh highlighted that the withdrawal of LeJacq’s paper was incompatible with the academy’s values, stating, “This order amounts to shaping conference content for reasons having nothing to do with scholarship.”
The controversy surrounding LeJacq’s paper is indicative of a wider trend of censorship and re-evaluation of DEI initiatives within military institutions, particularly under the Trump administration. Earlier this year, the Naval Academy removed a list of 381 books from its library that were deemed inconsistent with the administration’s directives regarding DEI materials.
Critics argue that these actions undermine the very foundation of academic inquiry and intellectual freedom. LeJacq challenged those who censored his work to engage with his research, asserting, “I’ve done serious work and I stand by it. It should be judged on its merits, not just because of the topic or a word they don’t like in the title.”
The Naval Academy’s history department is now at a crossroads, facing scrutiny from both its alumni and the broader academic community. The implications of this incident extend beyond LeJacq’s paper, raising questions about the future of academic freedom within military educational institutions.
