I can’t find where the center is without poking at it. You seem to already know, and you may be right. That’s fine, but it isn’t so clear to me. I don’t think the act of exploring the nuances and testing assumptions about the boundaries of personal responsibility is racist. I hope it isn’t.
It feels to me like you are lumping all of the statements made on this thread (and things not said on this thread) together as if they come from one person with one perspective and one opinion. That just isn’t true. (EDIT: I see you modified your response on this. Thank you)
I agree with you that Ms Kanoute is a victim, but where I think we differ is whether there is anything to explore about her behavior after that label is slapped on her. Victims can respond badly to what happened to them. Assessing whether victim responses are reasonable is done all the time in civil lawsuits having nothing to do with race. I read your comments as saying Ms Kanoute’s victimhood is different in a way that renders that examination off limits. But maybe you are saying that it is off limits to certain people because they can’t be a fair judge of what is reasonable in this situation because they are not people of color? (Edit: this is a fair perspective to consider, btw, not sure what I think about it, but fair)
I now understand you are traumatized by it, and won’t use the term again. Where I am from privileged is not a pejorative, and to not fear for your physical safety from strangers is certainly a form of privilege many people do not share. Now can we can back on topic?
"When writing your messages, please use the same courtesy that you would show when speaking face-to-face with someone. Flames, insults, and personal attacks will not be tolerated. It’s fine to disagree with opinions, ideas, and facts, but always with respect for the other person. "
I actually think a student who can’t eat lunch in peace without having a police officer called because her presence “doesn’t fit” is the one who is traumatized.
While I appreciate your concern for my mental state it is misplaced. I don’t feel fear based on preconceived biases or take umbrage when people don’t know me (or my loved ones) make unfounded assumptions.
Ok. Totally respect that. And the feelings are deeper and more complicated than can be done justice here. Thank you again for even trying.
I hope you can understand, for someone like me anyway, where that line is isn’t obvious - what is appropriate for me to judge from my perspective and when I shift from objectivity to subjectivity. Being in the dominant perspective and objectivity are not the same thing. When you are there, though, it sure feels like objectivity.
This thread has had an interesting life. I started this in Oct 2020 before I knew about Ms. Kanoute (so, no EconPop, this thread was not created to devalue her). It died after two posts. Someone brought it back to life in February of this year due to the NY Times article, and I responded for a while before letting it die.
My decision to stop posting after early March was an explicit one. While I dislike Smith’s political views, many students would be thrilled to attend Smith, and I did not want to diminish anyone’s joy about being admitted to Smith at the end of March. I am very happy that there was no activity on this thread between early March through May 1st. If someone on CC wanted to search multiple threads on Smith, they could find this one, but I didn’t want this thread front and center at the time.
It’s interesting that this thread exploded again a few days ago after 5 months of inactivity. But we are far enough from decision time that I think it’s actually useful for prospective Smith applicants to read about this and judge for themselves.
While I do not think many of the opinions voiced in this thread accurately describe the Event and SC’s reaction to it, I agree wholeheartedly that prospective applicants should consider the Event and SC’s reaction before deciding to apply.
Smith, like Haverford, made a bold clear unwavering statement about its stance on civil rights, its approach to racial equity, and the way it wants to respect all students on its campus. Was it perfect? No, but it was clear which way the college was moving. Haverford did something similar.
Some students will not be happy at such places, and those students should probably take Smith and Haverford off their lists for now. The good news is there are thousands of colleges and hundreds of thousands of applicants. There is a school for everyone, and there is a student body for every school.
They were so close to getting it right. To get it right it, they just need a slight change:
“the way it wants to respect all people on its campus.”
A college campus is a community. The community includes students, faculty, and staff. Everyone there deserves respect, even those helping feed you and clean up after you.
@CateCAParent, almost one hundred posts ago you responded to my frustration with a thoughtful post posing some important questions. I’ve thought a lot about your comments and questions, and think you deserve a response which will hopefully clarify my take on the core issues and better explain their importance beyond this particular instance.
Looking back at my posts, I understand why you might assume this, but I don’t believe I’ve called him a racist or even accused him of “subconscious racism.” More importantly, dwelling on his state of mind misses the point and distracts from the core issues.
We don’t need to speculate about his mental state or assign moral culpability in order to know that:
This should never have happened. The student did nothing to justify having the police called on her.
These types of dehumanizing, humiliating, frightening, and potentially dangerous confrontations happen to all too often to people of color.
This student had every reason to feel victimized, racially profiled, scared and scarred by this person’s action, and by her College.
All three of these things are true regardless of the employee’s state of mind, and they are at the core of everything that happened. To my mind, this is what it is all about.
Yet, rather than directly address these core issues, we’ve had an endless (and continuing) barrage of excuses, rationalizations, justifications, minimalizations, and mischaracterizations, all of which serve to deflect and distract from these core issues. Forgive me for the length, but this is only a partial list:
There were “little kids” present (not true.)
There was “heightened security” in effect (not true.)
She was in a restricted area (not true.)
Lunch ended ten minutes before (irrelevant.)
He was required to call the police pursuant to policy (not true.)
He couldn’t see much (except that she was black.)
He was hard of hearing and wasn’t wearing his glasses, and couldn’t tell if she was male of female (but he knew she was black.)
The door was closed and the air conditioning off (irrelevant to these core issues.)
We can’t see into his heart (irrelevant to these core issues.)
The law firm found that none of the employees did anything wrong (not true.)
The officer was polite, unarmed, and only there for a few minutes (irrelevant and insulting to the extent it implies she overreacted.)
This wasn’t that bad (insulting and condescending, and irrelevant to these core issues.)
This student is privileged; she attends Smith and went to a fancy prep school (irrelevant and insulting to the extent it implies she overreacted.)
She should have just let it go (insulting, condescending, and irrelevant to these core issues.)
We can all agree that "no employee at Smith is going to report anyone for anything” now. (irrelevant and we don’t all agree.)
She shouldn’t have doxed the employees (maybe true, but irrelevant to these core issues.)
She overreacted (insulting and irrelevant to these core issues.)
This could have happened to a white person (irrelevant and delusional.)
The treatment of the employees is akin to the Salem witchhunts (hyperbolic, inaccurate, and irrelevant to these core issues.)
Calling the police on an innocent student wasn’t the “worst thing that happened” (insulting and condescending to the student.)
Smith is “no hotbed of racism” (irrelevant.)
The townspeople have been thrown under the bus (irrelevant and hyperbolic.)
Multiple employees’ lives have been ruined (hyperbolic and irrelevant to these core issues.)
The employee comes from "a completely different level of education and life skills” (condescending, insulting, and irrelevant.)
Regardless of the good intentions of those posting this stuff, it boils down to the same old approach; blame, belittle, and undermine the victim, sympathize with and rationalize the actions of the aggressor, and sweep the obvious wrong under the rug. It’s less consequential here, but this stuff is akin to he was wearing a hoodie, or he had a counterfeit twenty, or police have hard jobs so who are we to question their judgment? All of it further marginalizes people of color and perpetuates these types of harms.
You asked . . .
The extensive airing of grievances against Smith College (and especially against its president) would put Frank Costanza to shame, but fortunately OP did offer a concise summary of his position early in the thread:
There you have it. Smith should have expelled the student. Refused to defend her. Controlled her social media and her interaction with the press. Defended the employees, including the one who who called the police on her. And not required staff training, at least if it wasn’t required for faculty as well.
As for the notion that Smith shouldn’t have defended the student who was treated like a criminal for having lunch, and that, rather than defending her, Smith should have expelled her? It boggles the mind. I hope OP has reconsidered.
As for the rest, much of this strikes me as hyperbolic and unrealistic. None of the employees involved were fired. Smith took no disciplinary action against any of them. Rather, Smith initiated an investigation that cleared or partially cleared the employees. And (as you noted) Smith apologized to them, even though Smith didn’t dox them. So it is hard to understand how Smith College ruined their lives. As for the doxing, Smith didn’t dox them, and had no means of controlling the student’s social media or press contact.
The OP added:
I guess this refers to either the other employees or to the graduate/librarian who quit her job because she was uncomfortable with the atmosphere at the school? Either way, this seems more a distraction and deflection to me. From my perspective, a more pertinent concern should be whether students of color are wrongfully treated like criminals, but I guess some parents may have different priorities.
Anyway, to address your question from my perspective, what Smith could have done better would have been to better educate and train their employees on how to interact within a diverse and inclusive environment, so that minority students aren’t treated like criminals. Unfortunately, such efforts would be (and have been) mocked and vilified. Apparently, discouraging a white middle aged librarian from rapping during her presentations is a much greater harm.
I don’t think the student did anything wrong with regard to the initial incident. The aftermath just takes us further away from the core issues, but if we are going to consider the aftermath, we should also consider that she had just been through a dehumanizing experience, and that she was extremely frustrated at what she viewed as the College’s failure to immediately address and correct the issue. While she shouldn’t have doxed anyone not involved, it is unsurprising that she reacted the way she did, and worth noting that once she figured out it was in error, she apologized and deleted the information. That’s not good enough for the OP. He not only expressed that she should have been expelled, he also blames the school for her actions.
I understand why you might think this, but from my perspective I have had to focus on stripping away all the various excuses and misinformation and distractions (see the list above) so that we might get to the core issues. Unfortunately my efforts have obviously been for naught, and the core issues are still being ignored.
Anyway, thank you for your comments. They helped me better understand the issue, whether or not I can effectively articulate my thoughts.
There’s a lot to unpack in your post, and I am busy with work today, but I will start with this part. Yes, I have reconsidered. Calling her to be expelled was over the top. Even a suspension would be too much.
However, there must be atonement for the damage she did, especially as that was not done in the heat of the moment, but after thinking about it for some time. What that should be is up for debate.
IANAL, but I wonder if she was an adult with assets who made the statements she made against Mr. Patenaude and Jackie Blair, if she could be sued for libel, as it is clear in Mr. Patenaude’s case that he was completely uninvolved, and also clear that her statements were damaging. The fact that she is a student with likely no assets makes this moot of course, but I think others are letting her skate far too easily for her actions.
Thank you thank you thank you for coming back to respond! You lay out a great summary. It helps clarify a lot for me. It is a lot to think about.
I agree with pretty much everything you say, fwiw. The one thing that I want to follow up on the campus police officer. In my opinion he did a good job. It may not be relevant to assessing how anyone else acted, but in your opinion should he have done something different?
One more quick hit. Since everyone in my family are POC, I care a great deal about equal treatment. I do not tolerate racism. But nor do I reflexively see it everywhere.
I am not Black, but am dark enough to be mistaken for Black, and my children could be too, especially if behind a large teddy bear. If this had happened to my daughter I would be upset too. But I am pretty hopeful she would know better than to act as Ms. Kanoute did. I would also tell her not to assume racism, but at the same time would be leading the charge to see if there is a history of bias.
This is a long thread so sorry if I may have missed if there was already a reference to the Woodson letter here. I just read the letter from Bob Woodson of the 1766project sent to Smith College in March. I can’t find what came of it and what response , if any, there was. Thought someone here might know.
Wow. Still out but following along and had to say: that was a great post. It wasn’t until now that your summary made me realize all at once how many facts, scenarios, spins and hypotheticals have been subtly added; while on the other hand the student’s perspective has been acknowledged on a spectrum ranging from “[begrudgingly] ok yeah I can see her point, but but” to " who cares? just blow it off. you’ll be happier in life that way." The latter of these is a close cousin to the infamous “just lay back and enjoy it.”
Also, aren’t we somewhat denying the janitor his agency (and respect) when we take the tone that “he’s undereducated and underpaid. don’t expect much.”?
The whole thing smacked of people working just a little too hard. And standing back down, as Kramer would say, “Starting Now!”
