In September 2026, a speaker booth was set up in the heart of campus to spread a message: “women should submit to men.”
The event was hosted by Uncensored America and sponsored by the University of South Carolina’s Student Government, after they reportedly spent $2,063 of student fees to fund the campaign.
The “Toxic Masculinity Tour” (yes, that is the actual name) is an event hosted by political commentator, Myron Gaines. It is described as “a debate table and speech on feminism, modern dating, and current events.” Gaines’ tour has passed through UofSC on four separate occasions, posting reactive statements such as “why women deserve less” and “I.C.E did nothing wrong.” His bold messages are displayed on campus to garner attention and engagement.
News reports on the recent event were met with varying responses from the public. Some defended that a university campus should provide all ideologies a platform to speak and debate, as it is protected by the Constitution’s First Amendment. Others challenged the idea and suggested that the campaign promotes hateful and discriminatory rhetoric, raising debates surrounding the mission of the tour and its effects.
Concerns turned to the student government for funding the event to begin with, to which the standing Student Body President, Cole Rotondo, issued a response:
“Student government does not exist to give preference to, endorse, or censor the views of any partisan organization, political movement, or individual speaker associated with student organizations. We are bound by specific codes, and when an event meets those established guidelines, we are required to allocate funding.” He adds, “I personally do not support or endorse this controversial speaker, nor do I align with the views he represents.”
Many peer responses were dissatisfied with the addressment.
With this, public opinion remains up in the air, while the university has stood by their decision to fund the event. While there are no scheduled returns, Myron Gaines will have the ability to tour on campus in the coming semesters.
Author’s Note
As a female student experiencing this firsthand on my own campus, it is a disappointing and complicated reality. Why should I have to debate my individual rights on my walk to class? Why should a trip to Russell House mean passing a man on a microphone declaring that I deserve less than my male counterparts — funded with my own student fees? This is bigger than whether the Student Government followed its funding guidelines or whether the university can legally allow controversial speakers on campus. It forces us to confront an uncomfortable question: what happens when the right to speak becomes a platform for belittling an entire group of people? If our campus is truly a place for debate, then students should not be afraid to keep fighting back, because the answer to harmful speech is not silence, but a stronger voice.