7 ms·

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 fai

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.
    - 13thLetter 11y ago
      Sure, but in that conceptual form they're not laws. The original comment seemed pretty confident about some law that was being violated, so I wanted to know which one it was.
      - tedunangst 11y ago
        Sorry, the mobile design has subtler indentation and I lost track of who's us and who's them.
    - anonbanker 11y ago
      I'm a little disgusted that this self-evident fact is greyed.
      - DanBC 11y ago
        >>> I would imagine violates at least some free speech law: >> Which "free speech law" would that be which is being violated here? > Freedom of speech and expression can exist as a concept outside the limited bounds of codified law. I didn't downvote it, but it's pretty obvious why it got downvoted.
gozo 11y ago
"It is simply incredible to see anyone criticized for having a strong commitment to the freedom of speech." That's because you ignored the word "ideal". It's not saying he can't have a commitment to freedom of speech. It's saying that he can't excuse not taking the students concern seriously because of it. Just because I like to promote e.g. human rights doesn't mean it's appropriate to troll every military thread on HN about it. Anyone can hold stubborn views and it's fine to do so, unless it's actually your job to takes peoples concerns seriously. > When students tried to tell him about their painful personal experiences as students of color on campus, he responded by making more arguments for free speech. It’s unacceptable when the Master of your college is dismissive of your experiences. [...] We are supposed to feel encouraged to go to our Master and Associate Master with our concerns and feel that our opinions will be respected and heard. [...] He seems to lack the ability, quite frankly, to put aside his opinions long enough to listen to the very real hurt that the community feels. He doesn’t get it. And I don’t want to debate. Cache: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ayaleherald.com%2Fop-eds%2Fhurt-at-home%2F&oq=cache%3Ayaleherald.com%2Fop-eds%2Fhurt-at-home%2F&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i58.976j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8 http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ayaleh... It's almost never about opinions in these cases, but about trust. If you're unrelenting now, what says you want be that when I have some other concern?
- nosuchthing 11y ago
  And I don’t want to debate. The sickening part of political discourse is how often people will eagerly explain their beliefs without any willingness to listen, investigate, or understand other perspectives.
  - zyxley 11y ago
    In the particular context given, it seems more like an attempt to say "I will not submit to sealioning under the flag of reasoned debate". Mind you, that's not saying that the perception of sealioning is necessarily correct, but it certainly reads to me like the perception is there.
    - 11y ago
locopati 11y ago
They seem to be okay with freedom of speech for themselves, but not for the freedom of speech that goes with a reaction. Furthermore, why should freedom of speech trump community? We all recognize that in certain groups you don't just say whatever you want for the sake of it (e.g. try that at work and see how long you last); harmony within a community is important. Arguing for knowingly offensive speech/actions negates the importance of harmony.
- gambler 11y ago
  > They seem to be okay with freedom of speech for themselves, but not for the freedom of speech that goes with a reaction. The concept of freedom of speech exists to preserve people's ability to communicate and express ideas. The "reaction" you refer to is merely an attempt to control the behavior of others. They are not equivalent.
- harryh 11y ago
  For reference here is Erika Christakis's original email: http://pastebin.com/egSQGfgK http://pastebin.com/egSQGfgK Describing it as "knowingly offensive" seems pretty crazy to me (though obviously others disagree).
- Jtsummers 11y ago
  Per the letter she isn't arguing for offensive speech, she's asking (among other things) when does certain speech (here represented by costumes) become offensive? A paraphrase: Why can my friend's 5-year old white daughter dress as Mulan, but a 22-year old white woman can't? That's a valid question. She's not declaring that the latter is ok, but asking why we currently accept the former and not the latter. At what age is the distinction made between "Oh, she's so precious" and "She's appropriating a culture that's not her own!"? And if you want to go with community and what's appropriate. It's a fucking college. Colleges are places of discussion, learning and debate. College is the place to be offended. To learn why something is offensive, why something else is not, and determine whether offense is appropriate or not.
  - iofj 11y ago
roymurdock 11y ago
For those who have read the letter and are wondering what the big deal is: "There was so much coded language in that e-mail that is just disrespectful," said Ewurama Okai, a junior. I, too, read the letter, which was my impetus for doing further research of my own. It seems pretty benign and progressive when read with no surrounding context (as the author presents it), so I found it hard to believe that some of the smartest students in the country would have such a poor reaction towards it. Clearly there is a larger theme that many here are failing to discuss, which is the wide perception of a pervasive and ingrained culture of racism at Yale. It's unfortunate but understandable that some students got so worked up that they behaved poorly and acted on emotion, rather than rationally, which they later did with the petition and various letters/articles addressing the issue. We should be focusing on the overall themes of the argument rather than the specific anecdotes of what one student said or did which may not be representative of the entire body. See my (downvoted) comments below for a more thorough discussion between myself and tptacek.
- 13thLetter 11y ago
  > so I found it hard to believe that some of the smartest students in the country would have such a poor reaction towards it. Intelligence is orthogonal to wisdom. They could theoretically be the smartest students in the country, but even if so that doesn't mean they're wise or emotionally stable. I would recommend that you obey your own judgement here.
- radu_floricica 11y ago
  Occam's Razor. All direct evidence points to students being utterly misguided to the point where you're tempted to call it a mental healthcare issue, and you have reasons to believe this is an endemic problem in US colleges. If you see a house burning you call the fire department, you don't start speculating that maybe it's a movie set.

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.
  - 13thLetter 11y ago
    Sure, but in that conceptual form they're not laws. The original comment seemed pretty confident about some law that was being violated, so I wanted to know which one it was.
    - tedunangst 11y ago
      Sorry, the mobile design has subtler indentation and I lost track of who's us and who's them.
  - anonbanker 11y ago
    I'm a little disgusted that this self-evident fact is greyed.
    - DanBC 11y ago
      >>> I would imagine violates at least some free speech law: >> Which "free speech law" would that be which is being violated here? > Freedom of speech and expression can exist as a concept outside the limited bounds of codified law. I didn't downvote it, but it's pretty obvious why it got downvoted.

gozo 11y ago

"It is simply incredible to see anyone criticized for having a strong commitment to the freedom of speech." That's because you ignored the word "ideal". It's not saying he can't have a commitment to freedom of speech. It's saying that he can't excuse not taking the students concern seriously because of it. Just because I like to promote e.g. human rights doesn't mean it's appropriate to troll every military thread on HN about it. Anyone can hold stubborn views and it's fine to do so, unless it's actually your job to takes peoples concerns seriously. > When students tried to tell him about their painful personal experiences as students of color on campus, he responded by making more arguments for free speech. It’s unacceptable when the Master of your college is dismissive of your experiences. [...] We are supposed to feel encouraged to go to our Master and Associate Master with our concerns and feel that our opinions will be respected and heard. [...] He seems to lack the ability, quite frankly, to put aside his opinions long enough to listen to the very real hurt that the community feels. He doesn’t get it. And I don’t want to debate. Cache: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ayaleherald.com%2Fop-eds%2Fhurt-at-home%2F&oq=cache%3Ayaleherald.com%2Fop-eds%2Fhurt-at-home%2F&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i58.976j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8 http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Ayaleh... It's almost never about opinions in these cases, but about trust. If you're unrelenting now, what says you want be that when I have some other concern?

nosuchthing 11y ago
And I don’t want to debate. The sickening part of political discourse is how often people will eagerly explain their beliefs without any willingness to listen, investigate, or understand other perspectives.
- zyxley 11y ago
  In the particular context given, it seems more like an attempt to say "I will not submit to sealioning under the flag of reasoned debate". Mind you, that's not saying that the perception of sealioning is necessarily correct, but it certainly reads to me like the perception is there.
  - 11y ago

locopati 11y ago

They seem to be okay with freedom of speech for themselves, but not for the freedom of speech that goes with a reaction. Furthermore, why should freedom of speech trump community? We all recognize that in certain groups you don't just say whatever you want for the sake of it (e.g. try that at work and see how long you last); harmony within a community is important. Arguing for knowingly offensive speech/actions negates the importance of harmony.

gambler 11y ago
> They seem to be okay with freedom of speech for themselves, but not for the freedom of speech that goes with a reaction. The concept of freedom of speech exists to preserve people's ability to communicate and express ideas. The "reaction" you refer to is merely an attempt to control the behavior of others. They are not equivalent.
harryh 11y ago
For reference here is Erika Christakis's original email: http://pastebin.com/egSQGfgK http://pastebin.com/egSQGfgK Describing it as "knowingly offensive" seems pretty crazy to me (though obviously others disagree).
Jtsummers 11y ago
Per the letter she isn't arguing for offensive speech, she's asking (among other things) when does certain speech (here represented by costumes) become offensive? A paraphrase: Why can my friend's 5-year old white daughter dress as Mulan, but a 22-year old white woman can't? That's a valid question. She's not declaring that the latter is ok, but asking why we currently accept the former and not the latter. At what age is the distinction made between "Oh, she's so precious" and "She's appropriating a culture that's not her own!"? And if you want to go with community and what's appropriate. It's a fucking college. Colleges are places of discussion, learning and debate. College is the place to be offended. To learn why something is offensive, why something else is not, and determine whether offense is appropriate or not.
- iofj 11y ago

roymurdock 11y ago

For those who have read the letter and are wondering what the big deal is: "There was so much coded language in that e-mail that is just disrespectful," said Ewurama Okai, a junior. I, too, read the letter, which was my impetus for doing further research of my own. It seems pretty benign and progressive when read with no surrounding context (as the author presents it), so I found it hard to believe that some of the smartest students in the country would have such a poor reaction towards it. Clearly there is a larger theme that many here are failing to discuss, which is the wide perception of a pervasive and ingrained culture of racism at Yale. It's unfortunate but understandable that some students got so worked up that they behaved poorly and acted on emotion, rather than rationally, which they later did with the petition and various letters/articles addressing the issue. We should be focusing on the overall themes of the argument rather than the specific anecdotes of what one student said or did which may not be representative of the entire body. See my (downvoted) comments below for a more thorough discussion between myself and tptacek.

13thLetter 11y ago
> so I found it hard to believe that some of the smartest students in the country would have such a poor reaction towards it. Intelligence is orthogonal to wisdom. They could theoretically be the smartest students in the country, but even if so that doesn't mean they're wise or emotionally stable. I would recommend that you obey your own judgement here.
radu_floricica 11y ago
Occam's Razor. All direct evidence points to students being utterly misguided to the point where you're tempted to call it a mental healthcare issue, and you have reasons to believe this is an endemic problem in US colleges. If you see a house burning you call the fire department, you don't start speculating that maybe it's a movie set.