The College Formerly Known as Yale

Parents Forum
641

*@CCDD14 expresses it well. No one is disputing the right to have a conversation or a debate on whether Yale should rename this or any college. What I at least am disputing is the idea that only individuals of a particular class get to have a valid voice. *

In the history of Yale (and the United States) what particular class has had the most voice and influence and power?

This is not a criticism of Yale. I think Yale makes an effort to give a voice to those who have previously been silenced. I don’t think middle class white folks are in danger of being silenced any time soon, but in the unlikely event we ever are silenced, by being of the minority opinion, it won’t be the end of the world.

642

While this statement is true, the major issue here is this can easily become, inadvertently, an argument that really is not dispositive as to what was really happening, en masse, at the time. We need to be careful of reviewing with morally-clouded, rose-colored glasses.

For every institution that man has created, there were always people on both sides. I cannot think of one insitution where there were not dissenters/proponents on one side or another, Therefore, to say that others at the time disagreed with and were questioning Calhoun and slavery is simply stating that different parts of the world and different peoples held different views and acted accordingly. However, was that the overriding, superior morally-held position at that time? It really depends on what you consider as proof of moral superiority.

For example, at that time, dictatorships, imperial rulers, and every form of totalitarianism were the norms, but there were dissenters which developed more freedom-based societies. However, these “free” societies were few, very few, and the dissenters re slavery were concentrated in those societies. If aliens were looking down on Earth at that time, they would think subjugation of people was the accepted practice, and that England was bucking the trend. The alien would easily judge England as strange and out of kilter with the rest of the world, not necessarily holding the morally superior position. In the case of majority rules, aliens could have easily seen England as at the end of line and not following what the rest of the “smart” majority of the world was doing.

My point is the fact that there were people who disagreed with slavery and Calhoun does not indicate or prove that, at the time, the non-slavery position was actually viewed superior. Given the governing evidence, it could be concluded that slavery was considered the more normal and superior of institutions.

In hindsight, yes, we can say that one position was superior to another, but to now use as an argument that people back then disagreed indicates a superior position is not supported by the governing evidence as practiced by the overwhelming majority of countries at that time.

643

“insidiously suffering in a subversive way by having to assume an identity of an oppressor and we want it to end.”

What does this statement mean - “having to assume an identity of an oppressor”? It’s so vague. Are Calhoun students required to change their legal names or something?

644

@Ohiodad51 “What I at least am disputing is the idea that only individuals of a particular class get to have a valid voice.”

We are talking harm here as a measurement of validity - doesn’t the need for the person subjected to the offensive environment outweigh the need to continue that oppressive environment … for example does the harm done to the secretary having to look at the stripper pics all day outweigh the bosses happiness in looking at those pics…? … Re Calhoun, Are you saying that black students are not being harmed at all or that the need to remember Calhoun in this environment outweighs any harm to the black students?

Yale has owned up, admitted, and removed the Portrait of Calhoun and stained glass windows bc they agree they create an offensive and oppressive environment… so if living there looking at the man himself and windows depicting that era are creating harm- how is having to call yourself “calhoun or Hounie” living, sleeping, dining, and playing as one w the identity of a Calhoun not as harmful ??

@hebegebe Your concept of choosing to be offended has been found to be invalid with regards to a hostile environment - its based upon the criteria of what a reasonable person (woman) would think is offensive. Interestingly, a majority of Yale students think the name Calhoun should be changed bc they think it does create an oppressive environment, and only a minority of Yale students wanted to get rid of the term Master bc they didn’t think that was harmful… Yet Yale immediately removed then term Master bc it is harmful…

@Pizzagirl apparently the house or residential college system is so strong at Yale that you are known and strongly relate to i.e. “identify with” your college house name

645

I’m actually pretty shocked that the stain glass image of slavery was still hanging around. Our elementary school removed Little Black Sambo from a library mural in the 1960s. I was part of a team that got that blank wall replaced with images from newer stories. While I don’t think it should have been destroyed, I totally get why someone would be fed up with looking at it.

I’ve got somewhat mixed feelings about renaming colleges. On the one hand if someone were to tell me that Mr. Dunster (my Harvard house) was a child-molester or worse, I don’t think I’d have a problem with renaming my old house. Maybe I’m just not as sentimental as Yalies? I do think Calhoun was an odd choice to name a residential college after, whereas Yale actually founded the university for better or worse. I think there’s a lot of shades of gray here, and that we don’t necessarily have to be completely consistent. If enough people are unhappy, I think one should seriously be considering a change. I don’t think it’s as simple as majority rules. I don’t think we need to have clearcut rules about when someone’s crimes are egregious enough that the name has to go. It’s okay to feel our way into what seems right and fair.

646

I remember hearing in a long-ago history class that the US went through a period of revived white supremacy in the 1920’s. At that time, membership in the KKK flourished and they had parades in major northern cities. Here in New Orleans, monuments were erected and streets were renamed for people like Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis. AFAIK, Lee never even visited New Orleans.

Here’s what I found when looking it up. The KKK was founded after the Civil War but then largely fell apart in the later decades. It was revived in 1915 after someone saw the film “Birth of a Nation”. Was the white supremacy that followed for decades all due to that film? I somehow doubt it but I’m not a historian. The KKK made it their mission to get their own people into government at all levels to enact what they wanted to enact. And, for the first time, they weren’t just going after blacks but also after Jews, Catholics, immigrants, bootleggers, etc.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/flood-klan/

Seems hard to believe, but there it is. Someone said earlier that the Calhoun residential college was founded in 1933. It’s not a stretch to think that the white supremacy of the era had something to do with it. Maybe it was even deliberate to choose someone who was such a staunch proponent of slavery.

Here in New Orleans, many people are screaming about the mayor’s desire to remove/rename the confederate monuments and streets, claiming they are historically valid. But they had different names before the white supremacy era of the 1920’s. Lee circle was called Tivoli circus, for example. People named these things, it wasn’t an accident or act of God. People can choose to rename them - and that isn’t “whitewashing”, it’s a correction.

647

*This goes back to intentionally offending (the stripper posters in the office), vs. choosing to be offended. *

It really hasn’t been that long ago that women who objected to sexism in the workplace were chided for choosing to be offended. I’m glad you seem to be unaware of it. I guess that shows how the world has changed for the better.

648

I think that’s a big stretch.

649

“how is having to call yourself “calhoun or Hounie” living, sleeping, dining, and playing as one w the identity of a Calhoun not as harmful ??”

So, in other words, if Calhoun were simply an administrative/academic building, the case for its renaming would not be anywhere near as strong, because it’s not something where students live / sleep / eat and call themselves members of. Is that an accurate statement of your position?

I’m not trying to be difficult (honest!) but I’m really trying to understand the core principles here. If, hypothetically, some other elite college had a Calhoun Academic Hall, you wouldn’t consider that a high priority for renaming, since no one lives there. Right?

Because if your feeling is still “no, that hypothetical Calhoun Academic Hall should be renamed too, post-haste” then the fact that this Calhoun is a residence hall is irrelevant in your argument.

650

@runswimyoga said:

You misunderstood. I agree with you that the stripper poster is out of line, because it is intentionally offending. Someone objecting to Calhoun’s name is choosing to be offended. Quite a difference.

651

From Yale’s president a couple of weeks ago…

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/08/02/yale-will-reconsider-keeping-john-calhouns-name-residential-college

652

How do we know the guys didn’t always have those sorts of posters in the office and it is a tradition? They never meant it to be offensive. They don’t know why the women are upset. They need to just get over it and move on. Jeeze louise.

653

@Alh oh, I am aware of it but thankfully in as far as court opinion (as to whether you have to work in a sexually harassing environment or not) the fact that a reasonable woman would be offended is the standard therefore your choosing to be offended has no validity, regardless of intention. Equating this to Yale, a majority of students have said they think the name should be changed bc they think it does constitute an offensive environment … so one could say a reasonable student would say that it is offensive…

@Pizzagirl nothing is irrelevant and no, that is not what I am saying. I am merely giving argument for the case as it stands in hand… not “what if it was x building instead”… and it is not an “either or” to have relevancy.

654

@dstark and @runswimyoga, what I am saying is that everyone associated with Yale has the right to have a voice in the decision to rename the college. The idea that you can restrict the validity of someone’s opinions based on their membership in some favored class is anti democratic.

In addition, and to your point about girlie calendars, the test is whether a reasonable woman under the same conditions would be offended. No one recognizes the concept that a particular woman or a particular subset of women can say I am offended, and the rest of you shut up and do what I want.

Just taking a wild guess, but I would bet that neither of you would be all that excited about an argument that only
members of the military should be eligible to vote in a presidential election because they are the ones most effected by who serves in that office. And yet that is exactly the point you are pressing here. I think it is wrong.

655

@alh, I would rather not silence anybody, but you are entitled to your opinion.

656

^I’m grateful for that clarification. It wasn’t coming through to me in your posts.

657

^ I think he/she missed the point.

658

@hebegebe regarding the (black) cafeteria worker … The students don’t feel he is someone merely with psychological issues because they funded and paid for his lawyers in FULL and are demonstrating and advocating on his behalf… they agree that having to work and look at pictures of slaves creates an offensive enough environment for him to destroy them in anger… http://yaleherald.com/bullblog/menafee/

and I disagree that all posting pics of strippers/sexy women are" intentionally" trying to offend I am an airline pilot I have seen many posters in mechanics offices -they think they are honoring the female form not intentionally trying to offend … much like the pictures of Calhoun that Yale removed -they weren’t removed bc they were intentionally trying to offend they were removed bc they Do offend intentionally or not.

Interestingly and controversial IMO is that Yale is now forcing silence on the black cafeteria worker:

“Yale Gags Rehired Cafeteria Worker”
http://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/menafee/

659

I got caught up in this once, and it was rather funny.

Back in the early 2000s, had a newly-minted Harvard MBA complain that the pictures of a woman in one of her colleagues offices were distracting and objectified women in a negative way… Hm… the pictures were three pictures of a stunning woman - no nudity, nothing suggestive, just beautifully done shots.

I had not a clue why this person would be offended, but I had the perfect response for her. I said, “You are free to go in there and tell him that pictures of his wife offends you.” She left about a year later - I think she figured out that by the tone of my response I was not having any of that "choose to be offended:’ nonsense.

660

@awcntdb So why would Yale remove the oil portrait of Calhoun (in agreement that it was offensive to black students) ??? re your I was not having any of that "choose to be offended:’ nonsense.

http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2016/01/22/calhoun-paintings-to-come-down/