I’m confused why people are being so judgmental about students and posters sharing their opinions and experiences about the situation at Haverford. I thought this site was to share information. You may have your own opinions about the strike, how it was handled, what it’s goals were and so forth. However, the students are on campus. The student that wrote the newspaper article is a current student. Whether similar things have happened at other schools isn’t relevant. But if my child were considering Haverford I’d definitely want to know about this situation and how the administration handled it at the time and going forward. I appreciate them taking the time to share their experiences.
7 Likes
I don’t think anyone has so much as mentioned the student who wrote the newspaper article except as an exceptionally good writer. I’m looking for instances of bullying and so far all I have read about are anonymous posts on social media. Again, how does that make Haverford unique or especially culpable as an institution? Do you have a solution?
2 Likes
The original post sets out the bullying experienced by the OP. The newspaper article addresses it in part by the fact that the writer felt the need to footnote his opinion piece and that putting his name on it was an act of courage. And the mother of a student wrote of her student’s experience as well early in the thread. While the quillette article wasn’t unbiased it does contain instances of what I’d consider bullying. And as a general statement any student activity that shuts down a majority of classes for atleast 2 weeks that’s not tied to Covid or some natural disaster should be questioned.
My disappointment is that the administration allowed it to continue for as long as it did. It also seems that they haven’t done anything to address the concerns of those bullied or the lingering toxic atmosphere felt by some of the students. I sincerely hope that there are some meetings between the parties to address the concerns.
7 Likes
Read this on another thread on CC, and it definitely belongs in this conversation.
@econpop - I truly appreciate your thoughtful posts and am going to respond. I just am an work right now, and it takes too much thought for my brain to do justice to the effort you put in. Cutting and pasting is pretty much my limit at the moment.
3 Likes
Hey, if your position is that internet baiting is a form of bullying, I’m open to the argument. But, you’re not giving me much to hang my hat on here. Just saying the word, “bullying” isn’t giving me any information.
Did you read this from a post on this thread?
I’ve read thru the string here and let me try to answer multiple questions raised. first yearford refers to a 2 week “strike” (actually a boycott where students/faculty suspended classes for 2 weeks at the end of Oct and early Nov).
This boycott erupted when the individual having a mental health crisis was killed by Philly police. Haverford has a strict COVID bubble so President Raymond asked students to protest on campus and not go into Philly. At this point she was attacked by various groups such as BSRFI (Black Students Refusing Further Inaction), etc. with a series of ad hominem attacks and language I really can’t reprint here. (As a means of showing the tone, one of the popular tunes played as a strike anthem during dialog with the President was “Smack that bi$#%”).
The strike organizers submitted a list of ~33 demands which include such things as returning all the land Haverford sits on to the Lenni Lenape (I suppose the strikers either hadn’t thought through or didn’t care about how the institution would continue), certain illegal demands like only hiring a person of color as the new Head of Diversity or no longer having mental health responders on campus report mental help incidents, some institutionally disturbing things for the future like demanding academic leniency and major curricular rewriting, and some economic/rent seeking demands like funding to renovate certain campus diversity centers and increasing Office of Multicultural affairs funding/staffing.
Significant segments of the faculty supported the activists. The Anthropology Dept signed their list of demands. At one point the Bio department said classes would be suspended the rest of the semester while they revised the curriculum (This threatened College accreditation so the administration stepped in). Other departments introduced seminars on race and justice so for example rather than learning about chemistry you might have an essay on race in America. The bullying came in when students would attempt to carry on with their academic work or attend a class (some professors continued holding them). Some students including my child were told they were racists. they cared only about their own success, and they were failing to support their BIPOC peers. Select sports teams were epicenters where some non-strike supporting students were hounded off the teams (and many others just resigned to avoid conflict) and then interestingly strike supporters were elevated to team captaincies. If you dared to oppose either any of the activists’ demands or the bullying tactics you couldn’t get your opinion published in campus newspaper The Clerk or if you went online you generally received a tirade of expletives and personal attacks as student who used the pseudonym Publius did. Additionally some students were told that activists were monitoring online forums and so knew what students’ parents were posting and there would be consequences. Students were told that if they didn’t support the strike “A list was being kept”. Also, BIPOC students who opposed the strike were frequently told “they weren’t really BIPOC because they were only one quarter…” this or that. Or they were completely ostracized as was a brave fellow from NYC (He had several well-spoken public comments on the activists and their tactics). Fundraising to support other BIPOC students was also a goal so one technique was circulation of a repugnant “bingo game” where you were supposed to donate for checking certain squares.
Examples “Doesn’t have an on campus job”, “Isn’t on financial aid”, “Parents attended college”, “Doesn’t send money home”, or “White”
Academically, progress largely halted and has only fitfully restarted. Grades are being allowed as P/F again for any class. Much course material was skipped. Curricula in some departments are being rewritten to be less rigorous. Extraneous subjects are being introduced into the sciences.
The administration has not publicly admitted to any bullying nor to any consequences. Most disturbing they are NOT issuing any go forward statements on what is acceptable and unacceptable protest behavior. A THRIVE program is being started to dive deeply into racial issues (Its unclear what is mandatory or what isn’t). Also, it seems one could be targeted for not wanting to participate. Speakers like Angela Davis are being invited to campus. Also, a mandatory class is envisaged around “Blackness and Unpacking whiteness”. There are also some students mentioning when they apply for campus jobs, academic opportunities or fellowships, they are being asked to sign pledges to support the strike. Or they are being asked what was their position on the strike.
Many of the behaviors listed constitute bullying in my opinion.
3 Likes
You’re conflating a lot of different issues, IMO. It might be helpful if you jumpstarted things by suggesting what you think is acceptable and unacceptable protest behavior.
I began reading this thread because a good friend of my D is thinking of applying to Haverford. I sent the info regarding the strike/boycott to her mom because I know she would be concerned about it and would not want to pay for her D to attend a school where this occurred. If my kid was at this school, I’d have pulled them as soon as it started and sent a bill to the administration for lost class time. School is for education first and foremost.
I’m not getting drawn into a debate about protest etiquette. Suffice to say, in my opinion, I think the school handled it poorly. Others are free to disagree with me and have on this thread. I hope it doesn’t hurt Haverford in the long run and my prediction is it won’t because a majority of the kids (and by extension their parents) who attend are ok with what happened and those that aren’t will transfer. I feel sad for the original OP who chose Haverford only to find out it isn’t the right place for them. It must be incredibly disappointing.
One lesson this teaches is researching the culture at schools, and in particular LACs where small student population can be really impactful on the general campus atmosphere , is an important part of the college process that often gets overlooked.
5 Likes
Yeah, I’m three and out. Someone else will have to carry on the conversation.
If my kid was at this school, I’d have pulled them as soon as it started and sent a bill to the administration for lost class time
That is likely penny wise and pound foolish. You would have gotten nothing back from the school (based on timing). Without grades, you would then spend another $35K for the semester you bailed on. And BTW…the school didn’t go on strike, the students did. You’re going to go out on strike and demand a refund? That would have fit in well with the demands…surprised they didn’t think of it.
The other question about your research…are you really going to tell someone to avoid a school based on comments by 10 or 20 or even 100 of Haverford’s 1450 students? I disagree with the strike, and obviously would disagree with any bullying…but when I asked the OP for specific examples to support the inflammatory language used…crickets. Keep in mind, a majority of the students agreed with the strike. What if your D’s good friend is one of them?
You can’t assess culture in an online forum. Students at a 1.400 person school have as many friends (or more) than they would at a 50,000 student school. I would suggest that the biggest issue with Haverford culture is athletics, not this stirke.
If you’re researching schools to apply to, then half of the students who experienced this strike will be gone by the time they arrive on campus. If you’re thinking you should prioritize schools based on leadership…it changes all the time. 2 kids for 8 years of college…5 Presidents. Pick the program…everything else is a total crap shoot.
3 Likes
First, the person looking at the school would be transferring in this Fall so the current atmosphere is relevant. Second, my D would not be striking and would have finished the semester remotely to the extent there were actual classes being taught and the refund request would have been for the classes that weren’t. If she was uncomfortable with the atmosphere then we’d have started looking at transfer options and taken a leave of absence second semester.
I agree that the writings of a few students should not be determinative, but the overall situation was concerning to my friend. There are many schools to choose from and this incident and the leadership’s response to it is very recent and worth consideration. I do agree with your sentiment regarding friends, but Haverford is a small campus. I’ve walked around it often with friends. It’s about the same population as my high school was back in the day, and it doesn’t take much to poison the well when it’s not very deep. Thank you for your insight regarding athletics. I’ll pass that along to her as well.
Also agree about choosing a program but where you study is equally important IMO. 2 kids and 8 years and no change in leadership.
4 Likes
“Now, I get where you’re coming from, and I’ve walked this slow walk many times. OTOH, some POC are less patient with what they view as persistent intentional ignorance by non-POC. To some POC, it seems impossible that non-POC do not recognize the big picture and the history of it all.”
That’s privilege in a nutshell, isn’t it though? That a person doesn’t have to think about anything the person doesn’t want to? Whether privilege is willful is an interesting debate. Here’s a catch 22 that I struggle with: I get - at least I think I do - the exhaustion and the unfairness of POC having to constantly educate non-POC about history and systemic racism. It is a bonus burden on people who are already burdened. It should be on me to educate myself. I don’t want you to have to walk the slow walk with me or anyone else. But at some point, educating myself involves talking to POC friends and people I trust and respect about it all. The dialogue is the point, isn’t it? But the dialogue is also what gets in the way. Being human, people BIPOC and non-BIPOC alike avoid it - from exhaustion/frustration on one side and discomfort on the other. How can the dialogue be the trigger and the solution at the same time?
I don’t have a problem with the siren being loud and hard on the ears. I don’t even have a problem with change being laced with rough language and insults. I don’t have a problem with it being totally irrelevant whether I have a problem or not. I am ok with disruption (good trouble). But when other people take in the message protesters are putting out there for consumption, the people it is directed at, especially people accused of something, should be allowed to respond and work through it. (No dispute here that historically lots of accused POC have been systemically denied a meaningful opportunity to respond). I just don’t understand how citing past gaslighting justifies current gaslighting, or how gaslighting furthers the stated goals. It is hard to reconcile - the necessary demand to be heard, the predictable imperfect response, and the shut down of the conversation because the response was imperfect, predictably imperfect though it may have been.
My point above was that if that is where the conversation ends, both sides feeling exasperated, unheard and insulted, then we are all worse off than when we started. If people walk away and go back their lives, as we seem to always do, at the point where things were torn down and before they were built back up, then we leave a construction site with a lot of toxic waste. I am not saying the divisiveness is the protesters’ fault, but there has to be an acknowledgement that our collective short attention spans and tribalism have to be dealt with when we are contending with such long-term problems. Maybe this is a bad analogy, but I am thinking about it like antibiotics that lose their effectiveness when used to often and people don’t finish the full course. History is full of us not finishing the work on race issues. And as a result we have a huge white supremacy issue and police violence issue and systemic racism issue and riots. Did the Haverford strike make us healthier in the long run? Honest question. You say yes. I am not so sure.
The listening seems to be the missing part. Fortunately the Haverford administration did listen to the demands, some of which were very reasonable. I am not sure how much the protesters listened to the administration, and I don’t think anyone listened to the non-protesters. I looked at the demands of the protesters- they weren’t directed at students, but the strike impacted the entire student body. Non-protesters had no seat at the table. Some were targeted. I doubt targeting fellow students was part of a plan. There were probably some rogue protesters that were more aggressive than others. Like the looters v the BLM protesters- the looters made it easy for people to blame BLM for the destruction. But the “if you’re not with us you are against us” and making lists of names, name-calling of other students and some of the other behaviors were wrong and off message.
“One move I would like to see, is for the president to convene group discussions of non-POC only, to allow a more comfortable venue for the students who feel uneasy about the current events. Sometimes, it’s better to get such conversations going in a “safe space” for people who feel uneasy.
I tend to think there is less to learn by fellow non-POCs talking amongst themselves. People don’t know what they don’t know. This is going to sound offensive to some ears, but historically hasn’t the US been a non-POC safe space forever, and isn’t that the core of the problem? Making the unfamiliar familiar is the way to go, IMO. I think we have to learn to have the conversations all together. And we suck at conversations these days.
“No sensible person says, “women aren’t asking politely enough.””
I agree, and yet … women still get punished for not asking politely enough all the time. What is the saying? Men are assertive and Women are B****es. I wish we were past that, but we aren’t. Lots of insensible people out there.
6 Likes
People may not believe that what happens at other colleges is relevant. But, I find that a remarkable line of thinking considering that the knee-jerk reaction is to immediately transfer to another school. Suffice it to say that the pattern of upper-middle-class sensibilities meeting the unfamiliar language of anger and (perceived) ingratitude of the inner-city has been playing out on the playing fields of prestigious colleges for more than a half-century and, I daresay, has remade much of the landscape of American higher education:
The Two Nations At Wesleyan University - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
2 Likes
This topic has run its course. The only reason I have been following is because our DS was looking into several LAC’s. That is no longer the case and unlike the previous poster, I’m leaving this thread for good.
2 Likes
@circuitrider - I completely agree. Didn’t read your article yet, but no question Haverford is part of a bigger picture.
These conflicts are not only happening on college campuses, they are happening in corporations and non-profits, too. I am involved with a professional organization that had almost identical tactics going on. Especially the taking down of names, name calling, and “if you aren’t with us you are against us” tactics. This particular organization has been actively working on diversity issues for as long as I can remember (mentorships, developing pipelines for talent, creating awards, educational programs for its members, so many things), dare I say with great success. The leadership is remarkably diverse, more so than its membership or the population where it is. Great, committed people have created a thriving, productive organization that serves ALL its members. They are now deeply concerned that their work could unravel based on what they think is bullying behavior - from people who are new to the organization and are reacting to the big events of our time - not anything specific to the organization. Personal attacks have forced good (non-POC) people to resign. What to do?
3 Likes
There is a lot to unpack here and I fear if I tried to get to it all, this response would be too long. But a couple of things stand out to me.
You spoke of privilege earlier in this comment. I think much of that entire comment, the bulk of the complaints about the protesters, the bulk of the wider discussion outside CC, reeks of privilege. I mean no disrespect in stating what I, and other POC, see as a truth as clear as a sunny day.
You say you understand the “burden” African-Americans have been under in America since its inception, and you say you want bridge the divide, yet as soon as something about the conversation makes you (and I’m using “you” more as all-non-POC-who-feel-offended-by-the-conversation than as you specifically) feel a little uncomfortable, you want to put up more rules concerning the conversation. Because, God forbid if any non-POC have to feel the least bit uncomfortable while having a discussion to undo centuries of hate, oppression, and systemic racism. POC have suffered far more than a little discomfort dealing with centuries of hate, opression, and systemic racism. Every time a non-POC says something in the line of “why does the discussion have to be like this?” is a massive red flag that screams PRIVILEGE.
Then non-POCs further use that privilege to declare an end to the discussions (because POC obviously cannot behave civilly), table those discussions to some unknown time, and things don’t change.
Non-POC have to realize - the conversation will be uncomfortable. There is no way around it. Occasionally, a POC who has dealt with a lifetime of racism and oppression, whose family has handed down lessons learned from dealing with centuries of racism and oppression, will maybe sound excited, exasperated or maybe even angry while having this discussion. Yet, instead of non-POC using that outburst of lifetime-repressed emotion as an excuse to complain about and exit the conversation, it would really be helpful if non-POC made an attempt to understand why that emotion is bursting through the dam that has held it back for so long.
Privilege allows non-POC the right to deny the conversation until now. Privilege allows non-POC to dictate the terms of the tone of the conversation. Privilege allows non-POC to end the conversation whenever they desire. Privilege allows non-POC to refuse to enact true change because they feel a little discomfort about the process. And all along, privilege allows non-POC to feel justified with every step that delays and ends the discussion.
This is not an easy process. It’s too important to abandon, but it is not the least bit easy. And as hard as non-POC may think it is, trust me, it has been harder for centuries for African-Americans by immense factors of magnitude. I beg you to focus more on the goal of equity, and so much less on what you may determine to be breeches in etiquette.
I agree with you that non-POC will learn less in such safe spaces than they might in an inclusive conversation. I agree with you that in a perfect world, such breakaway groups might not be needed. Unfortunately, in this world I think they are necessary for some people. Especially the non-POC who self identify themselves as feeling very uncomfortable in such discussions.
As long as non-POC use privilege to find reasons to exit the conversation, I think it is important that some non-POC meet in groups without POC present to discuss the topic. When a person of color says something, sometimes many factors result in the message not being received. If a non-POC delivers that message in a safe setting, other non-POC might better receive the message.
Then, after a certain level of common understanding of the lessons of history have been delivered and received in the safe space, future meetings that include POC might contain fewer moments of discomfort for non-POC.
Exactly! When people complain about women’s rights in that way, you (again, not necessarily or only you Cate) have no trouble saying those people are being “insensible.” Yet, when some non-POC focus on what they don’t like about conversations regarding equity, it seems to be more difficult to call out as “insensible” the act of complaining about tone while ignoring the concept of equity.
It seems that some non-POC find it very sensible to focus on random outbursts of emotion, rather than keep moving along the conversation of enacting equity.
We’ve all been in a meeting where someone gets off subject and starts talking about their vacation for too long. Before long, someone says, “let’s get back to the matter at hand,” and gets the group focused on what is important.
What is important is enacting equity. Yet we spend an inordinate amount of time talking about what is not nearly as important. That is how privilege keeps things from progressing. That is what ensures the important walk forward is a s…l…o…w walk. It always has been a slow walk, and it appears it will always be a slow walk as long as the important topics are overshadowed by the petty issues.
Thanks for engaging.
16 Likes
Incredible post, @EconPop.
4 Likes
Happy to engage, hard though it is. I am going to put some thought into what you wrote and get back with more.
My knee jerk response, which is probably important to call it what it is and then put it out there (since knee-jerking is powerful stuff and sometimes that is all people get to), is that you only heard part of what I said. Either I am saying it wrong (likely), or you are hearing it wrong. Either way, that’s proof the dialogue has to continue.
3 Likes
EconPop, there is a difference between being made to feel uncomfortable and being harassed. I am happy to hear from POC about their experiences and engage in dialogue, as long as they are willing to listen to my perspectives as well. I might not always agree with everything that everyone says, but that is certainly okay. I am happy to be made uncomfortable. It is a part of civil conversation.
However, while discomfort in conversation is welcome, harassment is not. Being fat shamed is not just being made uncomfortable. Having people post online about killing and hurting you is not just being made uncomfortable. Having a psychotic professor come after you for not supporting a student strike is not just being made uncomfortable.
Regardless of the cause the strikers claim to represent, these actions must be called what they are: bullying. I find it utterly reprehensible that the strikers used a cause as important as racial justice to justify their harassment, but they did. If anyone objected to their directed harassment, the strikers justified their actions through invoking racial equity.
These were not just random outbursts of emotion. They were tactics used by strike organizers to harass and silence anyone who questioned any of the strike’s tactics or goals, including many international students and POC.
What happened at Haverford can not be simplified to POC supporting the strike, and non-POC criticizing the strike. In fact, some of the students most vocal about the problems with the strike were POC. The strikers criticized and dismissed these people, suggesting that they were racist themselves.
What happened at Haverford was a symptom of a bigger problem. For many members of the community, respecting those who held differing viewpoints from you is not important. Far from being respected, any dissent was immediately silenced and the messenger targeted with harassment, including much coming from the strike organizers.
I urge those reading this forum to understand that I, like all the other students who opposed the strike, believe in the principles of racial justice. I find it sad that people used this important principle to target others with bullying. The Haverford community is broken, and sadly I am not sure it can be fixed. PLEASE do not come here if you value trust, concern, and respect, the principles Haverford claims to hold dear. The community does not have any of these anymore.
9 Likes
@haverfordstudent I am sorry this process at Haverford is difficult for you. If your life and/or safety was threatened, you should certainly point out those messages to the administration.
I’m glad you are willing to participate in the conversation, which is the first part of enacting change. After everyone has had their say, the next step is to enact true change that will result in true equity. Apparently, as it appeared things were not actually progressing beyond talk toward actual change, the students decided to organize a strike. Whether individuals agreed or disagreed with the decision to strike, the result is after the strike the administration began to enact actual change.
Change is hard. Strikes, no matter the setting, reason, or method, result in harsh words and hurt feelings, from teamsters, to teachers, to garbagemen, to sports strikes. It is an unfortunate byproduct of the act of striking.
Does that make it okay for anyone to make you feel assaulted? I say no, it is not okay. Does your situation mean the strike should never have taken place? Again, I say no, the movement to enact equity at HC should not have ceased. These are difficult questions. Change is hard. 75 Million people died during WW2. MLK was assassinated while working in the Civil Right struggle. Seven brave brilliant wonderful people were killed during the Challenger disaster. Sometimes in the effort to progress to a better day, good people are hurt. Should every move forward be halted because of the unfortunate byproducts of the movement? Tough questions.
IMO, I can lament your feeling of being treated unfairly, while I also celebrate the great change that is happening at Haverford. Neither invalidates the other.
BTW, here are some photos of students who, like you, were subjected to unfair treatment in past struggles for equity in education. I post these to show that other students have, like you, suffered throughout the decades of this struggle for educational equity. This is how a high school student was treated as she walked onto campus in Charlotte. I can’t imagine the fear she must have felt as the crowd jeered, taunted, threatened, shouted obscenities and even put their hands on her and her uncle.
Change is hard. George McLaurin was forced to sit in the hallway and could not ask questions when the courts finally allowed him to attend the University of Oklahoma. Other students across America were spat on, cursed, beaten, and the government even had to call out soldiers to ensure some students could begin the first steps toward seeking equity in education. Change is hard, but the difficulty does not invalidate the righteousness and beauty of the goal.
Please continue to seek relief for your situation with the administration. It may be that your desires and Haverford College’s equity goals (and the methods HC supports to that end) will never truly align. The administration felt it worthy to respect and support the strike, and some students disagree with that decision. I imagine, some of those who disagree will decide to transfer to other universities that haven’t made the strides HC is now undergoing.
Best of luck to you in your education!
7 Likes