18 ms·

The New Intolerance of Student Activism

166 points by gearoidoc 11y ago

dudul 11y ago
I'm not gonna get down the rabbit hole of discussing if these students are coddled or if they behave like little kids, but it is very scary how their first reflex is always to go after the job of the person who disagrees with them. In today's society it is incredibly violent to go after another person's job. It is what they've been doing for many years, 8 hours a day, it is a way to provide for their families. You're basically trying very hard to hurt a whole household just because one person disagrees with you.
- masterleep 11y ago
  It is certainly a misguided and disproportionate tactic, but it is not a violent one.
  - jpindar 11y ago
    If you think of the phrase "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" (ironic in this context, isn't it?) making someone lose their job is closer to the sticks and stones side.
    - masterleep 11y ago
      Statements are not violent, even if they have harmful effects.
  - dudul 11y ago
    It is violent, not physical violence but it is violent. Especially in a world where people toss around the ideas of microaggression, death by a thousand cuts and others. How is publicly shaming someone and aggressively lobbying for them to be fired not violent?
    - wlesieutre 11y ago
      It may be aggressive, but it is not violent. Violence is generally understood as the use of physical force. Violently going after someone's job would be punching their boss in the face until they agree to fire the person. EDIT: Speaking from an American English perspective, anyway.
      - jerf 11y ago
        You know, I agree with you. But in a world of "microaggressions" and a systematic devaluation of the meaning of English words, I'm not sure the people you're sort of defending would necessarily agree.
        AnimalMuppet 11y ago
        If you mean the students, they'd call it violence when it was done to them, and not violence when done to the administration (or others they disagreed with).
        masterleep 11y ago
        Likely they would not. That does not mean we should cooperate with them to change the meaning of words to confuse people.
      - dudul 11y ago
        I confess, I'm not myself an English native speaker, but there seems to be a proper definition for non-physical violence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence#Non-physical https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence#Non-physical
        oldmanjay 11y ago
        That's not a definition, it's a modern attempt to hijack the emotions associated with violence into a non-physical setting. Definitionally, violence is physical. Redefining it to include non-physical acts is pure politics, and I for one will not let it pass without calling it out for the bullshit it is.
  - 7afc2c69fd4fde6 11y ago
    This is absolutely violence https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IEFD_JVYd0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IEFD_JVYd0
    - paganel 11y ago
      Damn, that was rough on that poor guy who had to stand there and be bullied like that. I'm half a globe away from this and at the moment that lady started shouting my blood started to boil. Also, it's absolutely not ok to shout at someone, it's a very dick move.
    - tptacek 11y ago
      No, it's not. It's yelling. Yelling is not violence. Words mean things, and if you need an illustration, think of all the times the police have used the false equivalence between discourteous or angry speech and violence in order to harm people.
    - joesmo 11y ago
      Professor's reply: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM-VE8r7MSI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM-VE8r7MSI
- whatok 11y ago
  When you've never had to work to provide for yourself and others, it's very hard to imagine the damage done from someone losing their job.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
mcgwiz 11y ago
I think understanding this situation completely requires an enormous amount of empathy. Whether one agrees with the protesters or not, it's unfair to characterize them merely as fighting against freedom of speech. I am sure they recognize the speech aspect of this, but to them, that is second to what they perceive to be the central issue: equality. Arguable perhaps, but I hold that the issue of equality trumps that of speech. This issue is related is part of a larger trend whereby arguably minor transgressions trigger significant protest (see the Atlantic's coverage of Oberlin). My take is that after an oppressed class completes the initial leaps and bounds toward equality, tactics of old (e.g. nonviolent peaceful protest) cease to effect further change. New tactics therefore must evolve in order to close the remaining gap. This gap is relatively small, but its size isn't the point - the fact that a gap, based merely on class identification, exists at all should not be accepted. The current tactics might not be perfect - I posit they are still evolving. But they do effectively utilize available resources and processes (e.g. content virality) to draw massive attention to issues. As for their characterization by MSM (e.g. the protesters are "bullies", they have fostered what is uncharitably called a "victimhood culture") we are simply observing (or participating in) the attempt to resolve cognitive dissonance between evidence of social inequality and the intellectual status quo.
pm24601 11y ago
As a liberal, I am embarrassed by the simplistic display of liberal values at Yale. It all seems rather childish. Erika wrote the most open wise letter that basically expressed the desire to not render judgement. The students are angry that they didn't want to judge others. Sounds a lot like the troubles Jesus got into personally.
CM30 11y ago
Anyone remember when students seemed to be actually fighting for freedom of speech, and universities were about challenging people's ideas and assumptions? What went wrong all those years ago? Seriously though, this sort of thing worries me more than any government activity or corporatism. Who needs authoritarian politics where (what seems like) a decent amount of the next generation wants to shut down anything they deem 'offensive' or 'uncomfortable'?
- wheaties 11y ago
  Remember when professors actively made you confront ideas that you felt were uncomfortable to explore yourself and examine if you had any inner biases? Those were the professors whose classes you _wanted_ to attend...
- dudul 11y ago
  Same here. I want to believe that it's just a minority of students, but it's like every day there is a new incident like that. It was reported that most of the administration in colleges is composed of liberals. To be clear, I have nothing against liberals but the over-representation of a specific political/societal opinion in an education setting is not a good thing. And I would say the same thing if it was mostly conservatives in charge of education. And to contrast with what I just wrote, I don't think colleges are responsible (not directly at least) for this new trend, I think they just go with the flow and try to cater to students to attract them, they just give them what they want (safe spaces, puppy time, trigger warnings, etc) to make sure they can keep bringing revenue.
  - chris_wot 11y ago
    Interesting observation. Can't understand why you have been voted down!
    - pjc50 11y ago
      Sweeping characterisation of college students as "liberals", especially in a thread where they're being accused of illiberalism. It's the continuation of the US 'culture war'.
joesmo 11y ago
'According to the Washington Post, “several students in Silliman said they cannot bear to live in the college anymore.”' Great. Tell them to get the fuck out. That's the only reasonable response to this. What a bunch of fucking children. If you act like a spoiled child, then you should be treated like one. EDIT: And no refunds either.
- unimpressive 11y ago
  As much as I'm sure many of us feel this in our hearts, let's not.
  - martiuk 11y ago
    Why not, are you afraid of hurting someone's feelings?
    - matthewmacleod 11y ago
      I think it's rather a matter of being an unproductive line of discussion. One of the key points to take from this article is that throwing your toys out of the pram because you disagree with others' viewpoints is counter-productive at best and illiberal at worst. I'm vehemently opposed to the kind of activism described here, but 'if you don't like it then fuck off' is exactly the wrong attitude and will not solve this problem.
      - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
        There comes a point, though, when you may have to say that they are disrupting the proper functioning of the university enough that they have to go, for the good of everyone else...
  - joesmo 11y ago
    Yeah, let's fire the professor.
- cavilatrest 11y ago
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- aetherson 11y ago
  "Intolerance" has never meant "violence," and it's baffling that you suggest that we reserve the word for cases of threats of violence. Nobody is suggesting that it's not free speech to call someone racist or demand their resignation. Free speech can express intolerance.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
    - Jtsummers 11y ago
      It depends on the manner of attack. I called out a friend (claimed libertarian views) for his view that "tax is theft", when he was paid by the government with money collected via taxes. His views are antithetical to his work situation, that's criticism. What I didn't do: I did not call for his firing from his position for his views, that would be intolerance, and not criticism.
    - dudul 11y ago
      If I were to say that I don't think gay people should be allowed to get married I would be called intolerant. If I were to say that I think islam is dangerous for democracy I would be called intolerant. But I would just be challenging someone's ideas.
    - aetherson 11y ago
      I mean, sure. Calling astrologers idiots and asking Yale not to hire them is intolerance towards astrologers qua astrologers. The professors didn't call for any students expressing different opinions to be expelled.
  - s73v3r 11y ago
    I cannot agree with the idea that denouncing racism or call for the resignation of someone who has shown to have racist views is intolerance.
Zikes 11y ago
There is a disturbing trend over the past few years of using social activism as a pretense for outright harassment and bullying. The most disturbing part is that it allows the harassment to happen completely out in the open. The harassers will gladly sign their own name to the actions, with the implication that if anyone should question them then their detractors will be the next target. Welcome to the New McCarthyism.
- thaumasiotes 11y ago
  > The harassers will gladly sign their own name to the actions, with the implication that if anyone should question them then their detractors will be the next target. > Welcome to the New McCarthyism. New? How does this differ from the Old McCarthyism?
  - MCRed 11y ago
    It's a resurgence. The old McCarthyism died out after awhile, and he is saying this is it coming back, and thus "new" to distinguish it from the people who were going after "commies".
  - avn2109 11y ago
    >> "New? How does this differ from the Old McCarthyism?" I'm not the OP, but I think the OP's claim is that this McCarthyism pretends to be about social issues instead of pretending to be about communism.
    - thaumasiotes 11y ago
      Communism, as presented and as applied, was and is nothing but a social issue.
      - avn2109 11y ago
        Undoubtedly true in one sense of the word. But "social issues" for today's Yale undergrad probably pertain more to The Patriarchy and racist microaggressions than to the things that most self-professed communists discuss.
chris_wot 11y ago
If the students are bullying, then name them! The only way I can see to stop a bully is to fully expose them.
- Zikes 11y ago
  This is exactly the tactic those bullies use on their victims. "But it's okay because we're on the right side" is exactly the reasoning they use, as well.
  - 13thLetter 11y ago
    That's not a globally applicable principle. Kidnapping a person and locking them in a cell is wrong when a private citizen does it, but it's right when the state does it (after properly handled arrest and a fair trial and so forth, of course.) Honestly, I used to agree with you on this, but I'm starting to think that this craziness isn't going to end until the "activists" start getting a taste of their own medicine. And it's not like they won't claim they're being persecuted anyway...
    - Zikes 11y ago
      The state takes actions under reasoned and measured approaches (barring obvious bad actors), whereas the private citizen/vigilante approach historically does not practice reason or restraint in their application of justice. It's far too easy for activists and anti-activists alike to get caught up in the crusade, and it's not hard to imagine that someone names an "activist in need of a taste of their own medicine" that gets piled on before anyone realizes a mistake was made and an innocent was punished, perhaps even irreparably.
      - 13thLetter 11y ago
        Well, you're definitely right about that. But it's worth keeping in mind that vigilantism is much more likely when the state (or equivalent organization, such as the university in question) declines to enforce order.
  - 11y ago
vezzy-fnord 11y ago
When I saw the reemergence of postmodern feminism and critical theory brewing up over the past couple of years or so, initially on fringe alt-media like Tumblr blogs, I just expected it'd be another brief intellectual trend that would fizzle out. Nope, it exploded into an all-out culture war I couldn't have imagined. Unsurprisingly, all this identity politicking has been met by a swift reactionary movement in bile like The Daily Stormer becoming surprisingly popular given how niche the ideology generally is. It's a buffoonish competition of "more persecuted than thou". Meanwhile, liberal values get to bite the dust.
Mikeb85 11y ago
When political correctness goes wrong... Seriously though, what is wrong with people these days that they can't even have a dialogue? Is this the result of the us vs. them propaganda started by George W. Bush? The result of an education system which forces students to only memorize, and not to think? The result of a generation of helicopter parents? Regardless, it's scary to think that in this day and age in which we consider ourselves so 'progressive', people attack others' beliefs (even very moderate ones) with a zeal that would make ISIS proud...
- AnimalMuppet 11y ago
  > Seriously though, what is wrong with people these days that they can't even have a dialogue? Postmodernism. Seriously. When you teach that there is no real truth, that "truth" is merely a sociological construct, that all speech is only about power (because it literally cannot be about truth), and a bunch of impressionable 18-year-olds listen and believe you, and start to act on what they believe, this is what you get. Why would you expect something else to happen? [Edit: slight softening of language, so that it was not unintentionally accusative.]
  - Mikeb85 11y ago
    Not going to lie, wasn't expecting an answer. I really like your explanation (if not the direction it may lead society)... Edit - your language was fine. I still like your explanation. Provocative language belongs in discussions like this regardless, even though I didn't take your message that way.
carsongross 11y ago
It is unfortunate, but traditional liberals will have to ally with some rather distasteful right-wingers to end the insanity.
- sea2summit 11y ago
  SJW's are authoritarian, much like distasteful right-wingers. These people are like a secular version of the Christian Right.
  - rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
    Wow, I never saw it quite so clearly like that. You are right. The SJW angle really is the "logically" equivalent doctrine of religious dogma.
  - protonfish 11y ago
    "Left" and "Right" are better thought of as maternal versus paternal authoritarianism. Neither has any use for rational, independent thought.
marcoperaza 11y ago
Most troubling is that no one stands up to these bullies. I saw this firsthand as a student at a similar institution in the last few years. The faculty, administration, student leaders, and even trustees at these schools are split between a minority who support the activists and a majority who dare not speak out, lest they become the next target. Instead of standing firm and true to the age-old academic principles of free expression, inquiry, and exchange of ideas, they try to appease these groups in hopes that they'll go away or move on to another target. But each extorted victory only emboldens them more.
- sotojuan 11y ago
  They appeal to these groups because they bring money. I go to a Jesuit school and they appeal to these groups as well (even if they couldn't care less about Jesuit values) because well, they pay.
zeveb 11y ago
As far as I can tell, all the students in this outrage should be expelled. I doubt even a community college would want them; let them wallow in obscurity and reflect on their misdeeds.
- Zikes 11y ago
  It's their position as victims that lets them get away with these actions in the first place. Further "victimizing" them will only give them more power. It will let them further capitalize on the "David vs Goliath" war against the university itself, and the media will inevitably side with the underdog victims.
  - giardini 11y ago
    I disagree. Expel them, escort them off campus, get restraining orders to keep them away both physically and virtually. Shut down all of their student accounts and access. When they resist toss 'em in jail and sue them. Responding weakly to this kind of madness (and it _is_ madness) will only lead to anarchy.
    - Zikes 11y ago
      Individually, they are expressing freedom of speech. What is the basis for expulsion, jail, and civil suits?
      - giardini 11y ago
        No reason need be given for expulsion. Yale AFAIK is a private university and business and can do as it wishes. The reason for jail would be violation of a restraining order. The reason for civil suit would be damages to the university's image or property. The problem could be cleared out in 3 days and not a stir of it left after a week, were the administration willing to maintain control of their campus.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
jegutman 11y ago
It's pretty crazy to me that I fought with my campus 10 years ago for pro-speech issues, it seems the administrations haven't gotten any more tolerant of speech (if anything less tolerant) and the students now seem to be fighting the administration in the opposite direction! I think there are mix of issues going on here that are getting handled oddly. 1) Debating ideas versus the validity of groups. In my opinion if there's overt racism, there is room for the campus to intervene to make sure they have an inclusive environment. However if they're debating something (intentionally picking something else) like whether or not there should be dogs on campus or whether or not dog owning is a good idea in the abstract, this is a completely fair discussion. Unfortunately both types of discussions are happening which is making the debate more difficult. 2) Offensive speech Some people will hold and express ideas that others find offensive. As long as this speech is not designed to directly dehumanize or devalue contributing members of the community this probably has to be allowed to have a healthy dialogue. 3) Lots of poor judgement. I suspect many of the incidents (other than the overt racism which is separate) that have crossed the line were not intended to be offensive, but I think some of them were deeply offensive. If you do something deeply offensive I think it's reasonable to be received with a somewhat hostile reaction (demands for apology, anger towards group, etc). This is probably not the most effective way to engage people, better to try to explain why what they did is deeply offensive. I think it's completely reasonable for the school to try to encourage a positive, thoughtful interaction between people without trying to police every minor injustice.
- jegutman 11y ago
  This line pretty much summarizes the issue: "They’re behaving more like Reddit parodies of “social-justice warriors” than coherent activists"
tribeofone 11y ago
PCU into the Netflix queue!
rayiner 11y ago
Only $13.81, new: http://www.amazon.com/Closing-American-Mind-Education-Impoverished/dp/1451683200 http://www.amazon.com/Closing-American-Mind-Education-Impove.... > The student explodes, “Then why the fuck did you accept the position?! Who the fuck hired you?! You should step down! If that is what you think about being a master you should step down! It is not about creating an intellectual space! It is not! Do you understand that? It’s about creating a home here. You are not doing that!” Bloom places a heavy emphasis on extolling to college students the virtues of western intellectual tradition, and reactions like this one show why. Willingness to entertain ideas that could cause social disharmony is actually pretty unusual among world cultures. It's unusual in the western world, but even more so nearly everywhere else. It's not the natural order of things. It's a discovery, an achievement, but one that can be lost to time.
rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
I have a theory that the Internet has done two things to make people less tolerant of others, instead of more. First is the echo chamber phenomenon, which I'm sure we are all familiar with and requires no further introduction. Second, I suspect, is the amazing speed at which technology has upended the world. Where technology can have an impact, it can change things at light speed compared to what our parents and grandparents put up with. Take TV for example. For decades, televisions were tiny, expensive black-and-white boxes. Then after a while they became affordable, small-but-not-tiny black-and-white boxes. Took a bit longer until color television was the standard, less time for decent resolutions to be expected, even less for HDTV/4K. Not to mention the proliferation of content from 1-5 channels to thousands. I believe that as technology changes life at a rapidly increasing pace, people's expectation of a rate of change is accordingly affected. We want things now, or tomorrow, or next week if we're really looking forward. Mix that attitude with an echo chamber and you have a sizable cohort of well-meaning young people who are perturbed - if not outraged - that the societal ills of thousands of years of cultural development haven't been resolved yesterday, and anybody who calls to question the new attitude or the speed of its implementation must have a racist/sexist/pro-refined-sugars agenda.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- caskance 11y ago
  As long as the change is a good one, it's for the best that it be done quickly. Look at how quickly public opinion shifted on gay marriage and marijuana legalization relative to similar issues in the pre-internet age. I expect that most people on hn approve of those changes and are therefore happy that they don't have to wait another 30 years for them to be enacted.
littletimmy 11y ago
At least part of the blame lies in these colleges' Women and Gender Studies departments. I don't know if any of you have ever taken a WGST class, but at my school (Ivy) it was essentially institutionalized activism. People were taught that they were victims. It had very little intellectual depth, no alternate theories were taught, and the students who did best were the ones who "felt" the strongest about the "injustices". These students then take these lessons out into the open, and are infernally convinced that they are Right and everyone else is wrong. It is shameful that these pseudo-philosophies are allowed to be taught in school as if they have any intellectual depth. Their only purpose is to radicalize the students into being loud self-righteous people. So there's that, plus there are completely ineffectual helicopter parents who have coddled their children so much that they grow up spoiled. I saw the video of that person at Yale shouting at the professor - if my mother saw me do that she'd slap me in the face. What a despicable display of disrespect towards a reasonable man.
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
  > People were taught that they were victims. As opposed to what? Teaching that we live in a fantasy world where everyone is actually treated equally?
  - littletimmy 11y ago
    There's a middle ground between victimhood and equality. "To accuse others for one's own misfortunes is a sign of want of education. To accuse oneself shows that one's education has begun. To accuse neither oneself nor others shows that one's education is complete." - Epictetus
Avshalom 11y ago
Alternate theory: Professors may go on leave accept lucrative private industry jobs then come back 5 years later to a promotion. Mean while people who have social and institutional power will continue to pretend that these students were a threat to the status quo.
cousin_it 11y ago
Anyone who says "apologize to me" is a schoolyard bully imagining themselves as Rosa Parks.
- AnimalMuppet 11y ago
  There are situations where the only way to create progress is for the perpetrator to realize that what they did was wrong, why it was wrong, and try to fix things (as much as possible). It's not a totally wrong concept. The way it's being applied on college campuses is insane.
jimkri 11y ago
From what I have experienced in college so far is that either a student has experienced something or not, and the students who have not experienced something are the ones to protest. Students who have not experienced racism or Genocide-from the article- only know it from what they learned in school, online, or some other medium. So when they think they hear something that is about those "things" they jump up and go crazy. The last part of the article is what I am mostly talking about. I could also talk about the first part too, like the video of the girl yelling at Nicholas is so interesting. You want to stand up for something, yet you cannot have a conversation about it and just yell at the man?
imgabe 11y ago
Universities are dead a source of innovation and critical thinking. They'll probably lumber along for another century or so from pure inertia, but the people with really new, radical ideas are going to go elsewhere. Between the censorship, "safe spaces" where people refuse to even think about an idea they find offensive, the decline of academia as a viable career path, and the overwhelming tuition costs, I think talented and ambitious people are going to be spending as little time as possible at universities in the future.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
heapcity 11y ago
If the students articulated a reasoned response instead of acting out an emotional catastrophe; they would be ignored. The real issue is the 'viral promo' culture which encourages ridiculousness and outrage.
bendykstra 11y ago
I found one quote in an op-ed in the Yale Herald regarding the controversy especially surprising and revealing. > They [Erika and Nicholas Christakis] have failed to acknowledge the hurt and pain that such a large part of our community feel. They have again and again shown that they are committed to an ideal of free speech, not to the Silliman community. It is simply incredible to see anyone criticized for having a strong commitment to the freedom of speech. It's all the more amazing that it happened in a newspaper and on a college campus. The paragraph (as well as the rest of the piece) also seems to acknowledge that the demands of the protesters are at odds with the rest of the community's right to free expression. At a minimum, it acknowledges that the Christakises' position is one of principle, while failing to respect that fact. The newspaper is offline now, but the op-ed was located at http://yaleherald.com/op-eds/hurt-at-home/ http://yaleherald.com/op-eds/hurt-at-home/. It's still available in Google's cache.
- vowelless 11y ago
  > It is simply incredible to see anyone criticized for having a strong commitment to the freedom of speech. There does seem to be some kind of a racist pattern at Yale which I would imagine violates at least some free speech law: http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/2015/11/07/purported-white-girls-only-fraternity-party-yale-spurs-emotional-backlash/Nla4u4yOqENDeGkUMqpXeN/story.html http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/2015/11/07/purp... http://www.businessinsider.com/yale-university-racism-on-campus-2015-11 http://www.businessinsider.com/yale-university-racism-on-cam...
  - 13thLetter 11y ago
    Which "free speech law" would that be which is being violated here?
    - tedunangst 11y ago
      Freedom of speech and expression can exist as a concept outside the limited bounds of codified law.
dudul 11y ago
Considering the reactions here to this incident, I wonder if at some point there will be a counter reaction by certain colleges. I wonder if some universities will start advertising that they don't care about "safe spaces" and "puppy time". In the end, in the US, universities are in it for the money, and there seems to be a market for students who want to learn and not have to deal with this BS.
- sotojuan 11y ago
  > universities are in it for the money Which is why a lot of college are pandering to these people. They make them a lot of money. > and there seems to be a market for students who want to learn and not have to deal with this BS. I don't think colleges would necessarily brag about it, just not pander or do anything. Maybe I am wrong, but I haven't seen any engineering colleges do stuff like this. People just go, learn, and come out.
- natrius 11y ago
  The danger of cultural waves like this is that there might not be a market for schools that stand up to it. If this mentality is prevalent enough in a whole generation of students, there may never be a school willing to stand up to it. It'll just become the new normal.
  - caskance 11y ago
    Come on now. There will be at least a school that stands up to it. There are still universities that ban premarital sex, for crying out loud.
    - MrZongle2 11y ago
      Sure. But will they be around in another generation? If so, will they still hold on to their (current) set of values?
mcphilip 11y ago
Reminds me of the "In College and Hiding From Scary Ideas" NYT op-ed [1] that lists a lot of similar scenarios to the one at Yale. I have no problem with an NA group asking participants to respectfully focus on recovery and minimize talking about all the crazy shit you did as an addict -- participation is voluntary, after all. Imposing a similar "safe space" in the real world is obviously impossible. Attempts to ostracize those who dare suggest that a university campus should model the real world instead of a safe space is really insidious. [1]http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/22/opinion/sunday/judith-shulevitz-hiding-from-scary-ideas.html?_r=1&referrer= http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/22/opinion/sunday/judith-s...
Nadya 11y ago
The use of poisoning language is what has given them power for so long. Luckily their overuse of labeling everything to be problematic/racist/sexist is going to be their downfall. When air conditioned offices began to be labeled sexist [0], reasonable people began to see through all the bullshit. It is sad that the absurdity has been allowed to go on for so many years before the average person decided to be reasonable and push back. I'm glad that people are finally waking up and realizing that a culture where dressing up for Halloween is "potentially offensive" is absurd [1]. I fear a world where I can no longer purchase a kimono because it has been labeled as "potentially offensive" and "cultural appropriation" of the Japanese people by a group of disproportionately white "progressives". While ignoring how the Japanese people feel about it, of course. Also - even if you were Japanese you wouldn't be allowed to wear a kimono. After all, it is possible to appropriate your own culture [2]. [0] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11760417/Air-conditioning-in-your-office-is-sexist.-True-story.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11760417/Air-co... [1] http://www.geneseo.edu/community/show-your-true-face-2015 http://www.geneseo.edu/community/show-your-true-face-2015 [2] http://www.mrctv.org/blog/ontario-high-school-halloween-costume-can-t-appropriate-your-own-culture http://www.mrctv.org/blog/ontario-high-school-halloween-cost...
gregshap 11y ago
The problem with this article is that the author is claiming that all this outrage is over one email, and thus the reaction is disproportionate and damaging. The outrage might be over the top for a single email, but that is not the context experienced by the students protesting. As a white guy with a good job, the Atlantic author and I share the privilege to experience race if and when we choose. From that perspective, it's easy to call this "a fight over Halloween costumes" For the women who say they were turned away from a "white girls only" party, and for many others, it's not a fight over an email about Halloween costumes. It's about having administrators who acknowledge the reality that they experience on an ongoing basis: It's worth reading another side of the story before jumping to conclusions: https://medium.com/keep-learning-keep-growing/what-s-really-going-on-at-yale-6bdbbeeb57a6 https://medium.com/keep-learning-keep-growing/what-s-really-... When you see all the context that the Atlantic author, Mr Friedersdorf, chooses to ignore, you should think about the political agenda behind a piece like this.
- gambler 11y ago
  I fail to see any major difference between that Medium article and quotes in the Friedersdorf's piece. It would be reasonable to speak about missed context if students protested something that was an example of a larger issue. But that's not the case. They protest something that they view as a symbol of that larger issue. Example. Symbol. Different things, but it seems people no longer can tell them apart. I mean, really, Halloween costumes? What's next? Banning toy soldiers to protest war?
- gearoidoc 11y ago
  It's a shame that those stories of the racial discrimination experienced at Yale haven't been the central point instead of this letter.
- morgante 11y ago
  In fairness, the activists have done themselves a major disservice for protesting this email. By doing so, they've made that the focal point and it's just not a very compelling argument. If protests were primarily over the party, then a lot more people would be supportive.
- 11y ago
roymurdock 11y ago
The author fails to give this story proper context, and it seems like many in this thread have not read the article and are simply venting based on the title and a brief glance over of the author's arguments. This is not a demonstration of "SJW" or students acting like sheltered children. It's about students protesting against a campus culture that they feel discriminates against them. Such as when a frat house explicitly banned black girls from entering on Halloween. [1] This is the closest the author comes to addressing the real issue, rather than picking anecdotes and quotes to defend his thesis while hyperbolically [2] bashing the "activists": Some Yalies are defending their broken activist culture by seizing on more defensible reasons for being upset. “The protests are not really about Halloween costumes or a frat party,” Yale senior Aaron Lewis writes. “They’re about a mismatch between the Yale we find in admissions brochures and the Yale we experience every day. They’re about real experiences with racism on this campus that have gone unacknowledged for far too long. The university sells itself as a welcoming and inclusive place for people of all backgrounds. Unfortunately, it often isn’t.” But regardless of other controversies at Yale, its students owe Nicholas and Erika Christakis an apology. And they owe apologies to other objects of their intolerance, too. This is bad and misleading journalism written to generate views and stoke a flame war by bringing in the popular theme of college-student-as-inept-coddled-child-who-fights-for-trivial-things-and-bullies-others. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2015/11/05/a-confrontation-over-race-at-yale-hundreds-of-students-demand-answers-from-the-schools-first-black-dean/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2015/11/0... [2] This beggars belief. Yale students told to talk to each other if they find a peer’s costume offensive helplessly declare that they’re unable to do so without an authority figure specifying “any modes or means to facilitate these discussions,” as if they’re Martians unfamiliar with a concept as rudimentary as disagreeing in conversation, even as they publish an open letter that is, itself, a mode of facilitating discussion.
- tptacek 11y ago
  I read the context for the article in several other places, and the original Christakis mail, and I think you're incorrect. There was apparently a racist incident at a frat house, but Christakis had nothing to do with it. The ire Christakis faces appears to derive entirely from the email Erika Christakis wrote. When the girl in the campus quad screams at Christakis that he's disgusting, should resign, and should not be able to sleep at night, she's yelling because he refuses to apologize for the email.
Steko 11y ago
No surprise that literally the worst article on the Yale race issue would be the one that shoots up HN. > Erika Christakis' ... message was a model of relevant, thoughtful, civil engagement. That is a parody of bullshit. She refers repeatedly about "censure and prohibition but do read the email she is complaining about [1] and tell me where the requirements are: [1] http://pastebin.com/TLGSdaTg http://pastebin.com/TLGSdaTg > Yale is a community that values free expression as well as inclusivity. And while students, undergraduate and graduate, definitely have a right to express themselves, we would hope that people would actively avoid those circumstances that threaten our sense of community or disrespects, alienates or ridicules segments of our population based on race, nationality, religious belief or gender expression... There is growing national concern on campuses everywhere about these issues, and we encourage Yale students to take the time to consider their costumes and the impact it may have. So, if you are planning to dress-up for Halloween, or will be attending any social gatherings planned for the weekend, please ask yourself these questions before deciding upon your costume choice From the genius annotations to her email [2] by April Joyner: [2] http://genius.com/8083098 http://genius.com/8083098 > it is hard for me to give credence to a claim that there is something objectionably “appropriative” about a blonde-haired child’s wanting to be Mulan for a day This is an example of a straw man argument. The original email from the Intercultural Affairs Council said nothing about blond-haired children wanting to be Mulan—or children at all. The email listed “wearing feathered headdresses, turbans, wearing ‘war paint’ or modifying skin tone or wearing blackface or redface” as examples of Halloween costumery that could be culturally insensitive. Christakis also likens college students, most of whom (legally speaking) are adults, to young children.
- tptacek 11y ago
  There are plenty of things in Erika Christakis email I disagree with too. But the student protesters aren't demanding that their disagreement be heard. They're demanding that Nicholas and Erika Christakis resign from their position over it.
  - Steko 11y ago
    My main point here was the tone of Friesendorf's article and his ridiculous glorifying of Erika Christakis' email which starts off 'I don't wish to trivialize' and then proceeeds to (foreshadowing) actually trivialize the issue by reducing concerns about college students in blackface to 6 year olds wanting to dress up like Mulan. For the larger issue of whether her husband or she or both should resign/be fired or not that's a more complicated issue and I don't see much of a serious conversation in the comments here. For people who's job description includes being "responsible for the physical well being and safety of students" to be this tone deaf on race[1], resignation strikes me as a legitimate demand. [1] "Nicholas says, if you don’t like a costume someone is wearing, look away, or tell them you are offended." The less said about 'look away' as a policy, the better. As far as 'telling people what is offensive', correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that exactly what was happening in the first place when they sent out an email that essentially said 'maybe don't be an asshole this Halloween'?
Overtonwindow 11y ago
College is changing so much. Ten years ago college was a place where you went to be challenged in your beliefs, ideals, perceptions on reality and society, and be regularly offended by people and ideas that were not your own. I can't imagine trying to go to college today. We've traded freedom to learn and express ourselves, for the freedom to be free from anything uncomfortable or offensive in any way. WTF.
Overtonwindow 11y ago
Who was it that said "You have freedom of speech, not freedom from speech" ?
metaphorm 11y ago
seems to me like a huge part of the problem here is treating the screeching of tantrumming children as if it were the reasoned speech of mature adults. at some point the university administration needs to simply stop acknowledging this as an acceptable form of communication. it isn't. once those children leave the university they'll discover that for themselves all too soon.
the_watcher 11y ago
The Atlantic (and, unsurprisingly, the current season of South Park) have done a great job highlighting the problems that extreme PC-culture can create.

166 points by gearoidoc 11y ago

dudul 11y ago

I'm not gonna get down the rabbit hole of discussing if these students are coddled or if they behave like little kids, but it is very scary how their first reflex is always to go after the job of the person who disagrees with them. In today's society it is incredibly violent to go after another person's job. It is what they've been doing for many years, 8 hours a day, it is a way to provide for their families. You're basically trying very hard to hurt a whole household just because one person disagrees with you.

masterleep 11y ago
It is certainly a misguided and disproportionate tactic, but it is not a violent one.
- jpindar 11y ago
  If you think of the phrase "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" (ironic in this context, isn't it?) making someone lose their job is closer to the sticks and stones side.
  - masterleep 11y ago
    Statements are not violent, even if they have harmful effects.
- dudul 11y ago
  It is violent, not physical violence but it is violent. Especially in a world where people toss around the ideas of microaggression, death by a thousand cuts and others. How is publicly shaming someone and aggressively lobbying for them to be fired not violent?
  - wlesieutre 11y ago
    It may be aggressive, but it is not violent. Violence is generally understood as the use of physical force. Violently going after someone's job would be punching their boss in the face until they agree to fire the person. EDIT: Speaking from an American English perspective, anyway.
    - jerf 11y ago
      You know, I agree with you. But in a world of "microaggressions" and a systematic devaluation of the meaning of English words, I'm not sure the people you're sort of defending would necessarily agree.
      - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
        If you mean the students, they'd call it violence when it was done to them, and not violence when done to the administration (or others they disagreed with).
      - masterleep 11y ago
        Likely they would not. That does not mean we should cooperate with them to change the meaning of words to confuse people.
    - dudul 11y ago
      I confess, I'm not myself an English native speaker, but there seems to be a proper definition for non-physical violence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence#Non-physical https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence#Non-physical
      - oldmanjay 11y ago
        That's not a definition, it's a modern attempt to hijack the emotions associated with violence into a non-physical setting. Definitionally, violence is physical. Redefining it to include non-physical acts is pure politics, and I for one will not let it pass without calling it out for the bullshit it is.
- 7afc2c69fd4fde6 11y ago
  This is absolutely violence https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IEFD_JVYd0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IEFD_JVYd0
  - paganel 11y ago
    Damn, that was rough on that poor guy who had to stand there and be bullied like that. I'm half a globe away from this and at the moment that lady started shouting my blood started to boil. Also, it's absolutely not ok to shout at someone, it's a very dick move.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    No, it's not. It's yelling. Yelling is not violence. Words mean things, and if you need an illustration, think of all the times the police have used the false equivalence between discourteous or angry speech and violence in order to harm people.
  - joesmo 11y ago
    Professor's reply: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM-VE8r7MSI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM-VE8r7MSI
whatok 11y ago
When you've never had to work to provide for yourself and others, it's very hard to imagine the damage done from someone losing their job.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

mcgwiz 11y ago

I think understanding this situation completely requires an enormous amount of empathy. Whether one agrees with the protesters or not, it's unfair to characterize them merely as fighting against freedom of speech. I am sure they recognize the speech aspect of this, but to them, that is second to what they perceive to be the central issue: equality. Arguable perhaps, but I hold that the issue of equality trumps that of speech. This issue is related is part of a larger trend whereby arguably minor transgressions trigger significant protest (see the Atlantic's coverage of Oberlin). My take is that after an oppressed class completes the initial leaps and bounds toward equality, tactics of old (e.g. nonviolent peaceful protest) cease to effect further change. New tactics therefore must evolve in order to close the remaining gap. This gap is relatively small, but its size isn't the point - the fact that a gap, based merely on class identification, exists at all should not be accepted. The current tactics might not be perfect - I posit they are still evolving. But they do effectively utilize available resources and processes (e.g. content virality) to draw massive attention to issues. As for their characterization by MSM (e.g. the protesters are "bullies", they have fostered what is uncharitably called a "victimhood culture") we are simply observing (or participating in) the attempt to resolve cognitive dissonance between evidence of social inequality and the intellectual status quo.

pm24601 11y ago

As a liberal, I am embarrassed by the simplistic display of liberal values at Yale. It all seems rather childish. Erika wrote the most open wise letter that basically expressed the desire to not render judgement. The students are angry that they didn't want to judge others. Sounds a lot like the troubles Jesus got into personally.

CM30 11y ago

Anyone remember when students seemed to be actually fighting for freedom of speech, and universities were about challenging people's ideas and assumptions? What went wrong all those years ago? Seriously though, this sort of thing worries me more than any government activity or corporatism. Who needs authoritarian politics where (what seems like) a decent amount of the next generation wants to shut down anything they deem 'offensive' or 'uncomfortable'?

wheaties 11y ago
Remember when professors actively made you confront ideas that you felt were uncomfortable to explore yourself and examine if you had any inner biases? Those were the professors whose classes you _wanted_ to attend...
dudul 11y ago
Same here. I want to believe that it's just a minority of students, but it's like every day there is a new incident like that. It was reported that most of the administration in colleges is composed of liberals. To be clear, I have nothing against liberals but the over-representation of a specific political/societal opinion in an education setting is not a good thing. And I would say the same thing if it was mostly conservatives in charge of education. And to contrast with what I just wrote, I don't think colleges are responsible (not directly at least) for this new trend, I think they just go with the flow and try to cater to students to attract them, they just give them what they want (safe spaces, puppy time, trigger warnings, etc) to make sure they can keep bringing revenue.
- chris_wot 11y ago
  Interesting observation. Can't understand why you have been voted down!
  - pjc50 11y ago
    Sweeping characterisation of college students as "liberals", especially in a thread where they're being accused of illiberalism. It's the continuation of the US 'culture war'.

joesmo 11y ago

'According to the Washington Post, “several students in Silliman said they cannot bear to live in the college anymore.”' Great. Tell them to get the fuck out. That's the only reasonable response to this. What a bunch of fucking children. If you act like a spoiled child, then you should be treated like one. EDIT: And no refunds either.

unimpressive 11y ago
As much as I'm sure many of us feel this in our hearts, let's not.
- martiuk 11y ago
  Why not, are you afraid of hurting someone's feelings?
  - matthewmacleod 11y ago
    I think it's rather a matter of being an unproductive line of discussion. One of the key points to take from this article is that throwing your toys out of the pram because you disagree with others' viewpoints is counter-productive at best and illiberal at worst. I'm vehemently opposed to the kind of activism described here, but 'if you don't like it then fuck off' is exactly the wrong attitude and will not solve this problem.
    - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
      There comes a point, though, when you may have to say that they are disrupting the proper functioning of the university enough that they have to go, for the good of everyone else...
- joesmo 11y ago
  Yeah, let's fire the professor.
cavilatrest 11y ago

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

aetherson 11y ago
"Intolerance" has never meant "violence," and it's baffling that you suggest that we reserve the word for cases of threats of violence. Nobody is suggesting that it's not free speech to call someone racist or demand their resignation. Free speech can express intolerance.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
  - Jtsummers 11y ago
    It depends on the manner of attack. I called out a friend (claimed libertarian views) for his view that "tax is theft", when he was paid by the government with money collected via taxes. His views are antithetical to his work situation, that's criticism. What I didn't do: I did not call for his firing from his position for his views, that would be intolerance, and not criticism.
  - dudul 11y ago
    If I were to say that I don't think gay people should be allowed to get married I would be called intolerant. If I were to say that I think islam is dangerous for democracy I would be called intolerant. But I would just be challenging someone's ideas.
  - aetherson 11y ago
    I mean, sure. Calling astrologers idiots and asking Yale not to hire them is intolerance towards astrologers qua astrologers. The professors didn't call for any students expressing different opinions to be expelled.
- s73v3r 11y ago
  I cannot agree with the idea that denouncing racism or call for the resignation of someone who has shown to have racist views is intolerance.

Zikes 11y ago

There is a disturbing trend over the past few years of using social activism as a pretense for outright harassment and bullying. The most disturbing part is that it allows the harassment to happen completely out in the open. The harassers will gladly sign their own name to the actions, with the implication that if anyone should question them then their detractors will be the next target. Welcome to the New McCarthyism.

thaumasiotes 11y ago
> The harassers will gladly sign their own name to the actions, with the implication that if anyone should question them then their detractors will be the next target. > Welcome to the New McCarthyism. New? How does this differ from the Old McCarthyism?
- MCRed 11y ago
  It's a resurgence. The old McCarthyism died out after awhile, and he is saying this is it coming back, and thus "new" to distinguish it from the people who were going after "commies".
- avn2109 11y ago
  >> "New? How does this differ from the Old McCarthyism?" I'm not the OP, but I think the OP's claim is that this McCarthyism pretends to be about social issues instead of pretending to be about communism.
  - thaumasiotes 11y ago
    Communism, as presented and as applied, was and is nothing but a social issue.
    - avn2109 11y ago
      Undoubtedly true in one sense of the word. But "social issues" for today's Yale undergrad probably pertain more to The Patriarchy and racist microaggressions than to the things that most self-professed communists discuss.

chris_wot 11y ago

If the students are bullying, then name them! The only way I can see to stop a bully is to fully expose them.

Zikes 11y ago
This is exactly the tactic those bullies use on their victims. "But it's okay because we're on the right side" is exactly the reasoning they use, as well.
- 13thLetter 11y ago
  That's not a globally applicable principle. Kidnapping a person and locking them in a cell is wrong when a private citizen does it, but it's right when the state does it (after properly handled arrest and a fair trial and so forth, of course.) Honestly, I used to agree with you on this, but I'm starting to think that this craziness isn't going to end until the "activists" start getting a taste of their own medicine. And it's not like they won't claim they're being persecuted anyway...
  - Zikes 11y ago
    The state takes actions under reasoned and measured approaches (barring obvious bad actors), whereas the private citizen/vigilante approach historically does not practice reason or restraint in their application of justice. It's far too easy for activists and anti-activists alike to get caught up in the crusade, and it's not hard to imagine that someone names an "activist in need of a taste of their own medicine" that gets piled on before anyone realizes a mistake was made and an innocent was punished, perhaps even irreparably.
    - 13thLetter 11y ago
      Well, you're definitely right about that. But it's worth keeping in mind that vigilantism is much more likely when the state (or equivalent organization, such as the university in question) declines to enforce order.
- 11y ago

vezzy-fnord 11y ago

When I saw the reemergence of postmodern feminism and critical theory brewing up over the past couple of years or so, initially on fringe alt-media like Tumblr blogs, I just expected it'd be another brief intellectual trend that would fizzle out. Nope, it exploded into an all-out culture war I couldn't have imagined. Unsurprisingly, all this identity politicking has been met by a swift reactionary movement in bile like The Daily Stormer becoming surprisingly popular given how niche the ideology generally is. It's a buffoonish competition of "more persecuted than thou". Meanwhile, liberal values get to bite the dust.

Mikeb85 11y ago

When political correctness goes wrong... Seriously though, what is wrong with people these days that they can't even have a dialogue? Is this the result of the us vs. them propaganda started by George W. Bush? The result of an education system which forces students to only memorize, and not to think? The result of a generation of helicopter parents? Regardless, it's scary to think that in this day and age in which we consider ourselves so 'progressive', people attack others' beliefs (even very moderate ones) with a zeal that would make ISIS proud...

AnimalMuppet 11y ago
> Seriously though, what is wrong with people these days that they can't even have a dialogue? Postmodernism. Seriously. When you teach that there is no real truth, that "truth" is merely a sociological construct, that all speech is only about power (because it literally cannot be about truth), and a bunch of impressionable 18-year-olds listen and believe you, and start to act on what they believe, this is what you get. Why would you expect something else to happen? [Edit: slight softening of language, so that it was not unintentionally accusative.]
- Mikeb85 11y ago
  Not going to lie, wasn't expecting an answer. I really like your explanation (if not the direction it may lead society)... Edit - your language was fine. I still like your explanation. Provocative language belongs in discussions like this regardless, even though I didn't take your message that way.

carsongross 11y ago

It is unfortunate, but traditional liberals will have to ally with some rather distasteful right-wingers to end the insanity.

sea2summit 11y ago
SJW's are authoritarian, much like distasteful right-wingers. These people are like a secular version of the Christian Right.
- rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
  Wow, I never saw it quite so clearly like that. You are right. The SJW angle really is the "logically" equivalent doctrine of religious dogma.
- protonfish 11y ago
  "Left" and "Right" are better thought of as maternal versus paternal authoritarianism. Neither has any use for rational, independent thought.

marcoperaza 11y ago

Most troubling is that no one stands up to these bullies. I saw this firsthand as a student at a similar institution in the last few years. The faculty, administration, student leaders, and even trustees at these schools are split between a minority who support the activists and a majority who dare not speak out, lest they become the next target. Instead of standing firm and true to the age-old academic principles of free expression, inquiry, and exchange of ideas, they try to appease these groups in hopes that they'll go away or move on to another target. But each extorted victory only emboldens them more.

sotojuan 11y ago
They appeal to these groups because they bring money. I go to a Jesuit school and they appeal to these groups as well (even if they couldn't care less about Jesuit values) because well, they pay.

zeveb 11y ago

As far as I can tell, all the students in this outrage should be expelled. I doubt even a community college would want them; let them wallow in obscurity and reflect on their misdeeds.

Zikes 11y ago
It's their position as victims that lets them get away with these actions in the first place. Further "victimizing" them will only give them more power. It will let them further capitalize on the "David vs Goliath" war against the university itself, and the media will inevitably side with the underdog victims.
- giardini 11y ago
  I disagree. Expel them, escort them off campus, get restraining orders to keep them away both physically and virtually. Shut down all of their student accounts and access. When they resist toss 'em in jail and sue them. Responding weakly to this kind of madness (and it _is_ madness) will only lead to anarchy.
  - Zikes 11y ago
    Individually, they are expressing freedom of speech. What is the basis for expulsion, jail, and civil suits?
    - giardini 11y ago
      No reason need be given for expulsion. Yale AFAIK is a private university and business and can do as it wishes. The reason for jail would be violation of a restraining order. The reason for civil suit would be damages to the university's image or property. The problem could be cleared out in 3 days and not a stir of it left after a week, were the administration willing to maintain control of their campus.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

jegutman 11y ago

It's pretty crazy to me that I fought with my campus 10 years ago for pro-speech issues, it seems the administrations haven't gotten any more tolerant of speech (if anything less tolerant) and the students now seem to be fighting the administration in the opposite direction! I think there are mix of issues going on here that are getting handled oddly. 1) Debating ideas versus the validity of groups. In my opinion if there's overt racism, there is room for the campus to intervene to make sure they have an inclusive environment. However if they're debating something (intentionally picking something else) like whether or not there should be dogs on campus or whether or not dog owning is a good idea in the abstract, this is a completely fair discussion. Unfortunately both types of discussions are happening which is making the debate more difficult. 2) Offensive speech Some people will hold and express ideas that others find offensive. As long as this speech is not designed to directly dehumanize or devalue contributing members of the community this probably has to be allowed to have a healthy dialogue. 3) Lots of poor judgement. I suspect many of the incidents (other than the overt racism which is separate) that have crossed the line were not intended to be offensive, but I think some of them were deeply offensive. If you do something deeply offensive I think it's reasonable to be received with a somewhat hostile reaction (demands for apology, anger towards group, etc). This is probably not the most effective way to engage people, better to try to explain why what they did is deeply offensive. I think it's completely reasonable for the school to try to encourage a positive, thoughtful interaction between people without trying to police every minor injustice.

jegutman 11y ago
This line pretty much summarizes the issue: "They’re behaving more like Reddit parodies of “social-justice warriors” than coherent activists"

tribeofone 11y ago

PCU into the Netflix queue!

rayiner 11y ago

Only $13.81, new: http://www.amazon.com/Closing-American-Mind-Education-Impoverished/dp/1451683200 http://www.amazon.com/Closing-American-Mind-Education-Impove.... > The student explodes, “Then why the fuck did you accept the position?! Who the fuck hired you?! You should step down! If that is what you think about being a master you should step down! It is not about creating an intellectual space! It is not! Do you understand that? It’s about creating a home here. You are not doing that!” Bloom places a heavy emphasis on extolling to college students the virtues of western intellectual tradition, and reactions like this one show why. Willingness to entertain ideas that could cause social disharmony is actually pretty unusual among world cultures. It's unusual in the western world, but even more so nearly everywhere else. It's not the natural order of things. It's a discovery, an achievement, but one that can be lost to time.

rm_-rf_slash 11y ago

I have a theory that the Internet has done two things to make people less tolerant of others, instead of more. First is the echo chamber phenomenon, which I'm sure we are all familiar with and requires no further introduction. Second, I suspect, is the amazing speed at which technology has upended the world. Where technology can have an impact, it can change things at light speed compared to what our parents and grandparents put up with. Take TV for example. For decades, televisions were tiny, expensive black-and-white boxes. Then after a while they became affordable, small-but-not-tiny black-and-white boxes. Took a bit longer until color television was the standard, less time for decent resolutions to be expected, even less for HDTV/4K. Not to mention the proliferation of content from 1-5 channels to thousands. I believe that as technology changes life at a rapidly increasing pace, people's expectation of a rate of change is accordingly affected. We want things now, or tomorrow, or next week if we're really looking forward. Mix that attitude with an echo chamber and you have a sizable cohort of well-meaning young people who are perturbed - if not outraged - that the societal ills of thousands of years of cultural development haven't been resolved yesterday, and anybody who calls to question the new attitude or the speed of its implementation must have a racist/sexist/pro-refined-sugars agenda.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
caskance 11y ago
As long as the change is a good one, it's for the best that it be done quickly. Look at how quickly public opinion shifted on gay marriage and marijuana legalization relative to similar issues in the pre-internet age. I expect that most people on hn approve of those changes and are therefore happy that they don't have to wait another 30 years for them to be enacted.

littletimmy 11y ago

At least part of the blame lies in these colleges' Women and Gender Studies departments. I don't know if any of you have ever taken a WGST class, but at my school (Ivy) it was essentially institutionalized activism. People were taught that they were victims. It had very little intellectual depth, no alternate theories were taught, and the students who did best were the ones who "felt" the strongest about the "injustices". These students then take these lessons out into the open, and are infernally convinced that they are Right and everyone else is wrong. It is shameful that these pseudo-philosophies are allowed to be taught in school as if they have any intellectual depth. Their only purpose is to radicalize the students into being loud self-righteous people. So there's that, plus there are completely ineffectual helicopter parents who have coddled their children so much that they grow up spoiled. I saw the video of that person at Yale shouting at the professor - if my mother saw me do that she'd slap me in the face. What a despicable display of disrespect towards a reasonable man.

TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
> People were taught that they were victims. As opposed to what? Teaching that we live in a fantasy world where everyone is actually treated equally?
- littletimmy 11y ago
  There's a middle ground between victimhood and equality. "To accuse others for one's own misfortunes is a sign of want of education. To accuse oneself shows that one's education has begun. To accuse neither oneself nor others shows that one's education is complete." - Epictetus

Avshalom 11y ago

Alternate theory: Professors may go on leave accept lucrative private industry jobs then come back 5 years later to a promotion. Mean while people who have social and institutional power will continue to pretend that these students were a threat to the status quo.

cousin_it 11y ago

Anyone who says "apologize to me" is a schoolyard bully imagining themselves as Rosa Parks.

AnimalMuppet 11y ago
There are situations where the only way to create progress is for the perpetrator to realize that what they did was wrong, why it was wrong, and try to fix things (as much as possible). It's not a totally wrong concept. The way it's being applied on college campuses is insane.

jimkri 11y ago

From what I have experienced in college so far is that either a student has experienced something or not, and the students who have not experienced something are the ones to protest. Students who have not experienced racism or Genocide-from the article- only know it from what they learned in school, online, or some other medium. So when they think they hear something that is about those "things" they jump up and go crazy. The last part of the article is what I am mostly talking about. I could also talk about the first part too, like the video of the girl yelling at Nicholas is so interesting. You want to stand up for something, yet you cannot have a conversation about it and just yell at the man?

imgabe 11y ago

Universities are dead a source of innovation and critical thinking. They'll probably lumber along for another century or so from pure inertia, but the people with really new, radical ideas are going to go elsewhere. Between the censorship, "safe spaces" where people refuse to even think about an idea they find offensive, the decline of academia as a viable career path, and the overwhelming tuition costs, I think talented and ambitious people are going to be spending as little time as possible at universities in the future.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

heapcity 11y ago

If the students articulated a reasoned response instead of acting out an emotional catastrophe; they would be ignored. The real issue is the 'viral promo' culture which encourages ridiculousness and outrage.

bendykstra 11y ago

I found one quote in an op-ed in the Yale Herald regarding the controversy especially surprising and revealing. > They [Erika and Nicholas Christakis] have failed to acknowledge the hurt and pain that such a large part of our community feel. They have again and again shown that they are committed to an ideal of free speech, not to the Silliman community. It is simply incredible to see anyone criticized for having a strong commitment to the freedom of speech. It's all the more amazing that it happened in a newspaper and on a college campus. The paragraph (as well as the rest of the piece) also seems to acknowledge that the demands of the protesters are at odds with the rest of the community's right to free expression. At a minimum, it acknowledges that the Christakises' position is one of principle, while failing to respect that fact. The newspaper is offline now, but the op-ed was located at http://yaleherald.com/op-eds/hurt-at-home/ http://yaleherald.com/op-eds/hurt-at-home/. It's still available in Google's cache.

vowelless 11y ago
> It is simply incredible to see anyone criticized for having a strong commitment to the freedom of speech. There does seem to be some kind of a racist pattern at Yale which I would imagine violates at least some free speech law: http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/2015/11/07/purported-white-girls-only-fraternity-party-yale-spurs-emotional-backlash/Nla4u4yOqENDeGkUMqpXeN/story.html http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/2015/11/07/purp... http://www.businessinsider.com/yale-university-racism-on-campus-2015-11 http://www.businessinsider.com/yale-university-racism-on-cam...
- 13thLetter 11y ago
  Which "free speech law" would that be which is being violated here?
  - tedunangst 11y ago
    Freedom of speech and expression can exist as a concept outside the limited bounds of codified law.

dudul 11y ago

Considering the reactions here to this incident, I wonder if at some point there will be a counter reaction by certain colleges. I wonder if some universities will start advertising that they don't care about "safe spaces" and "puppy time". In the end, in the US, universities are in it for the money, and there seems to be a market for students who want to learn and not have to deal with this BS.

sotojuan 11y ago
> universities are in it for the money Which is why a lot of college are pandering to these people. They make them a lot of money. > and there seems to be a market for students who want to learn and not have to deal with this BS. I don't think colleges would necessarily brag about it, just not pander or do anything. Maybe I am wrong, but I haven't seen any engineering colleges do stuff like this. People just go, learn, and come out.
natrius 11y ago
The danger of cultural waves like this is that there might not be a market for schools that stand up to it. If this mentality is prevalent enough in a whole generation of students, there may never be a school willing to stand up to it. It'll just become the new normal.
- caskance 11y ago
  Come on now. There will be at least a school that stands up to it. There are still universities that ban premarital sex, for crying out loud.
  - MrZongle2 11y ago
    Sure. But will they be around in another generation? If so, will they still hold on to their (current) set of values?

mcphilip 11y ago

Reminds me of the "In College and Hiding From Scary Ideas" NYT op-ed [1] that lists a lot of similar scenarios to the one at Yale. I have no problem with an NA group asking participants to respectfully focus on recovery and minimize talking about all the crazy shit you did as an addict -- participation is voluntary, after all. Imposing a similar "safe space" in the real world is obviously impossible. Attempts to ostracize those who dare suggest that a university campus should model the real world instead of a safe space is really insidious. [1]http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/22/opinion/sunday/judith-shulevitz-hiding-from-scary-ideas.html?_r=1&referrer= http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/22/opinion/sunday/judith-s...

Nadya 11y ago

The use of poisoning language is what has given them power for so long. Luckily their overuse of labeling everything to be problematic/racist/sexist is going to be their downfall. When air conditioned offices began to be labeled sexist [0], reasonable people began to see through all the bullshit. It is sad that the absurdity has been allowed to go on for so many years before the average person decided to be reasonable and push back. I'm glad that people are finally waking up and realizing that a culture where dressing up for Halloween is "potentially offensive" is absurd [1]. I fear a world where I can no longer purchase a kimono because it has been labeled as "potentially offensive" and "cultural appropriation" of the Japanese people by a group of disproportionately white "progressives". While ignoring how the Japanese people feel about it, of course. Also - even if you were Japanese you wouldn't be allowed to wear a kimono. After all, it is possible to appropriate your own culture [2]. [0] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11760417/Air-conditioning-in-your-office-is-sexist.-True-story.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11760417/Air-co... [1] http://www.geneseo.edu/community/show-your-true-face-2015 http://www.geneseo.edu/community/show-your-true-face-2015 [2] http://www.mrctv.org/blog/ontario-high-school-halloween-costume-can-t-appropriate-your-own-culture http://www.mrctv.org/blog/ontario-high-school-halloween-cost...

gregshap 11y ago

The problem with this article is that the author is claiming that all this outrage is over one email, and thus the reaction is disproportionate and damaging. The outrage might be over the top for a single email, but that is not the context experienced by the students protesting. As a white guy with a good job, the Atlantic author and I share the privilege to experience race if and when we choose. From that perspective, it's easy to call this "a fight over Halloween costumes" For the women who say they were turned away from a "white girls only" party, and for many others, it's not a fight over an email about Halloween costumes. It's about having administrators who acknowledge the reality that they experience on an ongoing basis: It's worth reading another side of the story before jumping to conclusions: https://medium.com/keep-learning-keep-growing/what-s-really-going-on-at-yale-6bdbbeeb57a6 https://medium.com/keep-learning-keep-growing/what-s-really-... When you see all the context that the Atlantic author, Mr Friedersdorf, chooses to ignore, you should think about the political agenda behind a piece like this.

gambler 11y ago
I fail to see any major difference between that Medium article and quotes in the Friedersdorf's piece. It would be reasonable to speak about missed context if students protested something that was an example of a larger issue. But that's not the case. They protest something that they view as a symbol of that larger issue. Example. Symbol. Different things, but it seems people no longer can tell them apart. I mean, really, Halloween costumes? What's next? Banning toy soldiers to protest war?
gearoidoc 11y ago
It's a shame that those stories of the racial discrimination experienced at Yale haven't been the central point instead of this letter.
morgante 11y ago
In fairness, the activists have done themselves a major disservice for protesting this email. By doing so, they've made that the focal point and it's just not a very compelling argument. If protests were primarily over the party, then a lot more people would be supportive.
11y ago

roymurdock 11y ago

The author fails to give this story proper context, and it seems like many in this thread have not read the article and are simply venting based on the title and a brief glance over of the author's arguments. This is not a demonstration of "SJW" or students acting like sheltered children. It's about students protesting against a campus culture that they feel discriminates against them. Such as when a frat house explicitly banned black girls from entering on Halloween. [1] This is the closest the author comes to addressing the real issue, rather than picking anecdotes and quotes to defend his thesis while hyperbolically [2] bashing the "activists": Some Yalies are defending their broken activist culture by seizing on more defensible reasons for being upset. “The protests are not really about Halloween costumes or a frat party,” Yale senior Aaron Lewis writes. “They’re about a mismatch between the Yale we find in admissions brochures and the Yale we experience every day. They’re about real experiences with racism on this campus that have gone unacknowledged for far too long. The university sells itself as a welcoming and inclusive place for people of all backgrounds. Unfortunately, it often isn’t.” But regardless of other controversies at Yale, its students owe Nicholas and Erika Christakis an apology. And they owe apologies to other objects of their intolerance, too. This is bad and misleading journalism written to generate views and stoke a flame war by bringing in the popular theme of college-student-as-inept-coddled-child-who-fights-for-trivial-things-and-bullies-others. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2015/11/05/a-confrontation-over-race-at-yale-hundreds-of-students-demand-answers-from-the-schools-first-black-dean/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2015/11/0... [2] This beggars belief. Yale students told to talk to each other if they find a peer’s costume offensive helplessly declare that they’re unable to do so without an authority figure specifying “any modes or means to facilitate these discussions,” as if they’re Martians unfamiliar with a concept as rudimentary as disagreeing in conversation, even as they publish an open letter that is, itself, a mode of facilitating discussion.

tptacek 11y ago
I read the context for the article in several other places, and the original Christakis mail, and I think you're incorrect. There was apparently a racist incident at a frat house, but Christakis had nothing to do with it. The ire Christakis faces appears to derive entirely from the email Erika Christakis wrote. When the girl in the campus quad screams at Christakis that he's disgusting, should resign, and should not be able to sleep at night, she's yelling because he refuses to apologize for the email.

Steko 11y ago

No surprise that literally the worst article on the Yale race issue would be the one that shoots up HN. > Erika Christakis' ... message was a model of relevant, thoughtful, civil engagement. That is a parody of bullshit. She refers repeatedly about "censure and prohibition but do read the email she is complaining about [1] and tell me where the requirements are: [1] http://pastebin.com/TLGSdaTg http://pastebin.com/TLGSdaTg > Yale is a community that values free expression as well as inclusivity. And while students, undergraduate and graduate, definitely have a right to express themselves, we would hope that people would actively avoid those circumstances that threaten our sense of community or disrespects, alienates or ridicules segments of our population based on race, nationality, religious belief or gender expression... There is growing national concern on campuses everywhere about these issues, and we encourage Yale students to take the time to consider their costumes and the impact it may have. So, if you are planning to dress-up for Halloween, or will be attending any social gatherings planned for the weekend, please ask yourself these questions before deciding upon your costume choice From the genius annotations to her email [2] by April Joyner: [2] http://genius.com/8083098 http://genius.com/8083098 > it is hard for me to give credence to a claim that there is something objectionably “appropriative” about a blonde-haired child’s wanting to be Mulan for a day This is an example of a straw man argument. The original email from the Intercultural Affairs Council said nothing about blond-haired children wanting to be Mulan—or children at all. The email listed “wearing feathered headdresses, turbans, wearing ‘war paint’ or modifying skin tone or wearing blackface or redface” as examples of Halloween costumery that could be culturally insensitive. Christakis also likens college students, most of whom (legally speaking) are adults, to young children.

tptacek 11y ago
There are plenty of things in Erika Christakis email I disagree with too. But the student protesters aren't demanding that their disagreement be heard. They're demanding that Nicholas and Erika Christakis resign from their position over it.
- Steko 11y ago
  My main point here was the tone of Friesendorf's article and his ridiculous glorifying of Erika Christakis' email which starts off 'I don't wish to trivialize' and then proceeeds to (foreshadowing) actually trivialize the issue by reducing concerns about college students in blackface to 6 year olds wanting to dress up like Mulan. For the larger issue of whether her husband or she or both should resign/be fired or not that's a more complicated issue and I don't see much of a serious conversation in the comments here. For people who's job description includes being "responsible for the physical well being and safety of students" to be this tone deaf on race[1], resignation strikes me as a legitimate demand. [1] "Nicholas says, if you don’t like a costume someone is wearing, look away, or tell them you are offended." The less said about 'look away' as a policy, the better. As far as 'telling people what is offensive', correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that exactly what was happening in the first place when they sent out an email that essentially said 'maybe don't be an asshole this Halloween'?

Overtonwindow 11y ago

College is changing so much. Ten years ago college was a place where you went to be challenged in your beliefs, ideals, perceptions on reality and society, and be regularly offended by people and ideas that were not your own. I can't imagine trying to go to college today. We've traded freedom to learn and express ourselves, for the freedom to be free from anything uncomfortable or offensive in any way. WTF.

Overtonwindow 11y ago

Who was it that said "You have freedom of speech, not freedom from speech" ?

metaphorm 11y ago

seems to me like a huge part of the problem here is treating the screeching of tantrumming children as if it were the reasoned speech of mature adults. at some point the university administration needs to simply stop acknowledging this as an acceptable form of communication. it isn't. once those children leave the university they'll discover that for themselves all too soon.

the_watcher 11y ago

The Atlantic (and, unsurprisingly, the current season of South Park) have done a great job highlighting the problems that extreme PC-culture can create.