Warning. or so.

<p>From this weeks Swarthmore paper the Phoenix. Seems like these issues of race and class exist at many schools.</p>

<p>February 28, 2008</p>

<p>Swarthmore ideals fail to correct the problems of social justice
BY YOSHI JOHNSON | MY BIG NUMBER!
Last week, while conducting an otherwise routine triage of my inbox, I happened upon a most unexpected email from Mr. Anthony Jack, the recent Amherst graduate whose New York Times story, you might recall, I referenced repeatedly in a column last semester on Swarthmore’s financial aid and admissions policies. Aside from a congenial expression of camaraderie, Mr. Jack wrote to establish a rapport with me, interested particularly in my thoughts on the practices and policies of our all-too-similar institutions. </p>

<p>His questions about the on-the-ground realities of race and class at Swarthmore, though, had me at a loss as to how I might best respond, especially given Swarthmore’s precipitous capitulation on financial aid policies last semester, a commendable move in many people’s eyes. </p>

<p>And how fitting a subject to ponder — the truths about race and socioeconomic status as they play out on Swat’s campus — since tomorrow the sun sets on yet another Black History Month. This February’s commemoration, of course, is only the latest iteration of an innumerable many that have come and gone at Swarthmore. </p>

<p>This time around, though, we are graced with one more ‘tomorrow,’ a twenty-ninth day of recognition. Even this additional time for celebration, however, has not saved the month from its predictable fate of lackluster observance by a campus too indifferent or too preoccupied with itself to reflect meaningfully on blackness and black people. </p>

<p>Swarthmore’s ill-conceived approach to honoring Martin Luther King, Jr., likewise, passed somewhat under the campus community’s radar, and what’s more, it left ambiguous exactly what the College’s commitment to Dr. King’s legacy of social justice might be, especially since the institution’s effective stance was one of “observing without observance.” (Haverford, Bryn Mawr and Penn could spare that day; what costs were so great that we, at the last, could not?) </p>

<p>Still, in the end it is important to note that these efforts, while in no way commensurate with the causes and ideals they sought to honor, were commendable ones nonetheless … right? I mean, why frame my reflections for Mr. Jack on race and class realities at Swarthmore with such a dreary assessment when, however inadequate, these attempts are attempts nonetheless at engaging race- and class-related causes of social justice? </p>

<p>For the same reasons that I admonished Swarthmore and its half-hearted financial aid and admissions mandates do I now fault the institution for its failure to fully honor noble ideals in these past few weeks. My deep-seated love for the institution and its ideals has once again gotten the best of me. It makes all the more disheartening the letdown of encountering apathy and poorly formed understandings about what these days of remembrance and commemoration should mean for us. </p>

<p>As I have written before, at Swarthmore there is a way — certainly we have the means to do a great deal more than we do — but there is no will. The events leading up to last semester’s abruptly announced “no-loans” policy prove as much, particularly since we were told only weeks before that “the way” (read: the money) just wasn’t there. On the contrary, our “walking the walk” was not there, and it was merely that such a practice had suddenly become unfashionable. </p>

<p>I could hark back to a commitment the institution made to its students — and itself — forty years ago next January to better illustrate how these seemingly disparate issues —admissions practices and an apathy about black people, that is — are all symptoms of the same problem, but the word limit on this column unfortunately precludes me from such an explication. I have probably exhausted this excuse at this point, I’ll concede, but with the exception of my last column, it has always been a legitimate explanation for why I cannot treat a topic with the thoroughness it demands. </p>

<p>Suffice it to say, though, that I will report a good many more things to Mr. Jack, and I will revisit Swarthmore’s historic crisis in 1969 to demonstrate how, then as now, a singular problem persists, unresolved: the ‘good white liberal’ mentality reigns still at Swarthmore. In predictable fashion, a smug sense of self-congratulation prevails at the expense of real struggle, meaningful reflection, and fully realized ideals. What we get instead is a paltry substitute for justice. As soon as I can, I will make available an extended version of this column on my blog. </p>

<p>Dr. King, in his 1963 Letter from a Birmingham Jail, put into words what I and many others encounter when wrestling with the status quo and its keepers, not only at Swarthmore or Amherst, but everywhere. Dr. King, you see, also confessed his grave disappointment with a certain mindset, that of the “white moderate … who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice.” </p>

<p>He concludes, “Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will,” and admonishes those who believe that they can paternalistically set a timetable for social justice. For Mr. Jack and me, I think, this problem bears directly on the matter at hand: how our institutions choose to admit and aid students; how they treat issues of race and class; and how they honor causes of social justice more generally. </p>

<p>The way in which Swarthmore’s no-loans policy came to be is representative of this larger problem. You will forgive me, then, if I wax discontent when, with the means to an end so obviously within grasp, our dream remains inexplicably deferred.</p>

<p>Is repeating the same op-ed column four times suppose to make some kind of statement that is hardly clear from the op-ed itself?</p>

<p>As near as I can tell, the author seems to be complaining that Swarthmore went to a no-loan financial aid policy?</p>

<p>
[quote]
They may not be a part of the general campus culture, but I'm sure that racist/sexist/homophobic/anti-semitic remarks and actions happen behind closed doors...I re-iterate that these actions are unacceptably common across all strata in society....

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Behind closed doors is NOT what we are talking about here. We are talking about Williams College where racism and anti-semitism is out in the open. Where students call each other "nigger". Where white students gathered outside a black students party joke about not going in because "they might get shot". Where pro-Hitler posters are hung on students' doors in a mind-numbingly anti-semitic response to Holocaust Rememberance.</p>

<p>All out in the open. So don't give me crap about hidden racism and anti-semitism and how every college must be as bad as Williams. That is NOT what we are talking about.</p>

<p>What's next? Are you going to claim that all colleges have students who smear feces on the wall like Williams students? Please.</p>

<p>I'll make it easier for you. It's not about loans.</p>

<p>"Swarthmore ideals fail to correct the problems of social justice</p>

<p>Swarthmore’s ill-conceived approach to honoring Martin Luther King, Jr., likewise, passed somewhat under the campus community’s radar, and what’s more, it left ambiguous exactly what the College’s commitment to Dr. King’s legacy of social justice might be, especially since the institution’s effective stance was one of “observing without observance.” (Haverford, Bryn Mawr and Penn could spare that day; what costs were so great that we, at the last, could not?) </p>

<p>I could hark back to a commitment the institution made to its students — and itself — forty years ago next January to better illustrate how these seemingly disparate issues —admissions practices and an apathy about black people, that is — are all symptoms of the same problem, but the word limit on this column unfortunately precludes me from such an explication. I have probably exhausted this excuse at this point, I’ll concede, but with the exception of my last column, it has always been a legitimate explanation for why I cannot treat a topic with the thoroughness it demands. </p>

<p>Suffice it to say, though, that I will report a good many more things to Mr. Jack, and I will revisit Swarthmore’s historic crisis in 1969 to demonstrate how, then as now, a singular problem persists, unresolved: the ‘good white liberal’ mentality reigns still at Swarthmore. In predictable fashion, a smug sense of self-congratulation prevails at the expense of real struggle, meaningful reflection, and fully realized ideals. What we get instead is a paltry substitute for justice. As soon as I can, I will make available an extended version of this column on my blog."</p>

<p>How many times are you going to post the same student op-ed piece complaining about the white liberal students at Swarthmore?</p>

<p>There are much better examples of bitter African American op-ed writers at Swarthmore in recent years. It's kind of a literary genre.</p>

<p>I would note that Swarthmore didn't celebrate Black History Month by scribbling "nigger" on Barack Obama posters on black students' doors. I imagine the op-ed pages would have been humming had that happened.</p>

<p>BTW, here's the schedule of events for the just concluding Black History Month at Swarthmore:</p>

<p>Swarthmore</a> College :: Black Cultural Center :: Black History Month</p>

<p>ID,
Where does all this rage against Williams really come from? You obviously don't have a child there who could tell you how you misrepresent and twist reality to your own liking. Racism and anti-Semitism open or accepted? You really have no idea. But then again, you obviously have your own agenda. For one so "concerned" about bigotry, perhaps you might reflect upon on how that terrible word might be used to describe how YOU demagogue Williams. Your speech here appears intended to be hurtful towards a wonderful college community--its parents and their kids by association. I would never disparage Swarthmore in such a way, and would never make it my mission to try and dig up, and repeat, and repeat, ad nauseum anything over the years in the publlic record on another great school. Your constant negative posting about Williams is pretty darn similar to the same behavior you seem to abhor in others when directed against your D's school. I have respect for your obvious love of Swarthmore, and understand your desire to "defend" it against ill-formed criticism--same as I guess us Williams parents feel. Maybe its time to give this stuff a rest.</p>

<p>treefarmer:</p>

<p>Again, this is a Swarthmore forum. Count the number of Williams students and parents here trying to pitch the notion that "Swarthmore is bigoted, racist, and anti-semitic, too".</p>

<p>Just go away. Go back to the Williams forum and discuss whatever you want, there rather than keeping a two-year old drive-by shooting thread alive, here.</p>

<p>And, while you're at it, take the Williams parents who are interrupting a simple thread about transportation from Swarthmore to NYC with you. I mean, honestly...what's the point?</p>

<p>This article from the Williams newspaper of 2/27/08 is rather sobering in that there appears to be a pattern of harrassment at Williams, according to a Dean. Also, no one came forward to either reveal who the perpetrators are or admit to it. Very sad. I hope this is not happening at other schools, elite or not. Personally, I thought the world had progressed a lot more than this. </p>

<p>"Racist graffiti inquiry dropped"
Erin Brown - EDITOR-IN-CHIEF The Williams Record</p>

<p>College administrators have called off the investigation into the Feb. 2 incident of racist graffiti and phallic drawings in Williams Hall E. Over the last three weeks administrators have interviewed 38 students, including members of the entry in which the graffiti was found, but were unable to identify the responsible party.</p>

<p>The decision to close the investigation was made by Dean Merrill over the weekend at the recommendation of the investigative team of Dean Charles Toomajian, Dean Gina Coleman and Dave Boyer, associate director of security. Members of the investigative team conducted student interviews and followed up on any leads stemming from these conversations. “After finishing all the interviews and ironing out any inconsistencies, the investigative team recommended to Dean Merrill that the investigation come to an end,” Toomajian said.</p>

<p>Campus Security has been tight-lipped about the interview process, as both Boyer and Jean Thorndike, director of campus security, declined to comment on the investigation.</p>

<p>According to an all-campus e-mail sent by Merrill yesterday morning, the investigation into the Williams Hall incident brought several other incidences of harassment to the administration’s attention, including the possible use of a racial slur at a party in Prospect on the evening of Feb. 1, the repeated defacement of a female first-year’s personal white board in, the Record has learned, Williams E, and the use of the word “nigger” in a conversation involving six students.</p>

<p>The administration declined to comment on the number of students identified as responsible parties in the incidents, but would confirm the process resulted in “the administration of some disciplinary sanctions,” according to Toomajian.</p>

<p>Student interviews were also used to gain insight into student life at the College. “In addition to disciplinary sanctions, we have also talked to several students just about community life issues that have come up as a result of these incidents,” Merrill said in a phone interview.</p>

<p>Seeing a concentration of harassment on campus was somewhat unexpected, “but it was also disheartening, it was infuriating,” Merrill said. “I think it was something that also was galvanizing, certainly to me and other faculty and staff. It was such a multi-layered emotional response to see it come out relatively quickly.”</p>

<p>Among the administration’s concerns, Merrill cited a pattern of harassment that extends beyond racially motivated acts, including sexism and homophobia. “We do see a pattern, so I think the more we can understand the prevalence, the more we’ll be able to do something about it,” she said. “In my office, we might be able to do something about it in terms of consequences. And we can figure out the things we need to do institutionally to eliminate the most egregious behavior.”</p>

<p>Though the investigation has been suspended, administrators are quick to point out that new information could lead to further action. “I don’t want people to feel that if we found anything new, we wouldn’t follow-up,” Toomajian said. “If new information surfaces, then the College would take a closer look, as it might take the investigation further.”</p>

<p>In Merrill’s all-campus e-mail, she expressed support for the student group Stand With Us, which has a social honor code subcommittee. When asked about the administration’s position on a social honor code as a means of discouraging harassment, she proposed communication as the next step. “Let’s have the conversation, let’s talk about the language we use,” she said. “How do we want to think about the language to describe community standards? Let’s be deliberative about it and talk about it in a structured way. All of us are interested to see what comes out of it.”"</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Sheesh, indeed. or so.</p>

<p>

Didn't Swarthmore have something like that happen in years gone by? Maybe it wasn't a wall, but rather someone's floor? And wasn't there an incident of some guy micturating on someone else's dorm room door? Maybe you don't know this, but when you take take a population of 18-22 year olds and mix in easy access to alcohol... well, **** happens.</p>

<p>

I find this offensive. ID's Williams tangents and rants are nothing like my critical analysis of Swarthmore. You didn't name me by name, but given my vocal presence on this forum and the reputation I have for being "anti-Swarthmore" (even though I'm not... I just happen to know it's far from perfect), I must assume you were including me in that group. I went to Swarthmore and I have opinions about Swarthmore. This happens to be a forum about Swarthmore, so I figure it's as good a place as any to share my opinion with people who might be interested. I'm not here making irrational, irrelevant arguments about other institutions and their apparent cultures of Nazism and fecal matter.</p>

<p>1) “Drive by shooting”? Considering the only experience most of us have remotely comparable to the physical harm of a “drive by” is when we go to a McDonalds “drive thru”, how about we all relax and remember the context of this thread and our lives. Interesting that suburban people are equating CC posts with bullets. No wonder it gets heated sometimes.</p>

<p>2) I think territorial p1ssing does a disservice to the free flow of ideas. It’s a sad commentary on the dynamics of this forum that someone as reasonable and nice as mythmom feels the need to preface her posts with a legitimization of why she can be here. The fact is that most applicants interested in a LAC apply to more than 1 college and, if individuals on college forums use other colleges as sounding boards or if the topic suggests comparisons be made, then that is an invitation for others to participate. I agree that there are many subjects that can only be commented upon by current students or recent alums, (financial aid, food, internship opportunities, ect…) but if you notice, non-Swat people don’t touch these things. Correcting factual inaccuracies (“they need to get a grip on their grade deflation!!!”, “same # of classes as W/A”, stem cells, ect…) and misrepresentations are fair game. </p>

<p>I think students/parents/alumni should be proud of their colleges but that means that they have to differentiate what is TRULY unique about their school from characteristics shared with others and the only way you can do this honestly is by listening to the experiences of others. Constructing an identity around inaccuracies, mischaracterizations and half-truths is what my colleagues in psychiatry call “delusional” thinking... and having an open dialogue keeps people grounded.</p>

<p>3) I agree that acts of intolerance can occur on all campuses and it’s only luck or situational characteristics of a school (larger size and more feeling of anonymity?) that cause it to be more openly expressed at some places than others. I don’t think it’s necessarily bad however because it can be a good learning opportunity to prepare students for what occurs once they leave. If colleges were perfect communities, then students will not be able to handle frustration later in life as effectively. The caveat with this, however, is that events such as these are only positive if students mobilize upon it. I agree that the main point isn’t that these events occurred but rather students' response (or lack of an overwhelming response). </p>

<p>Well-intentioned people with strong opinions but who stay at home don’t count for much. The civil rights movement became a powerful force because enough white people felt that the injustice they saw on TV outweighed any issues in their own personal lives and they mobilized accordingly. All Americans gripe about the government but only 60% vote… sometimes, it counts to show up regardless of whatever excuse one has.</p>

<p>Personally, if I were to generalize across all departments, I think Williams offers the best academic experience among LACs. With its size, it can offer a breadth of course work not matched by smaller Swat. With its endowment/student, it offers more luxury offerings than a Bi-college experience. Some of us though would conceptualize that an education should go beyond what can be learned in a book or in a class and value the notion of student empowerment and social responsibility as important preparation for the world, which (for historical reasons) are branded into the campus culture of some schools and not others...</p>

<p>"Very sad. I hope this is not happening at other schools, elite or not. Personally, I thought the world had progressed a lot more than this."</p>

<p>Just because you don't take the time to read about it in your own campus (or others') newspaper and recognize it doesn't mean it doesn't occur -- to think otherwise is simply naive or "delusional" (see posts #s 157, 160, and 172).</p>

<p>Not all colleges try to "brush it under the rug":</p>

<p>The</a> Amherst Student | Opinion | Treatment of Visitors from Hampshire Outside Crossett Outrageous</p>

<p>The</a> Amherst Student | News | Like Amherst, Williams Responds to Intolerance</p>

<p>I realize there is prejudice in the world. I would have hoped that students who are part of the elite group accepted to these highly ranked schools would have a better value system. This hope is not delusional. I can see from the way you post that you would not be surprised at this, because you must be more exposed to these students than I have been. My children and their friends attended schools that addressed these issues from an early age, as we did in our homes. I remain shocked and surprised that this exists on these campuses, such as Williams. I do not think that Swarthmore has the type of racial and religious predudice exhibited by these Williams students. To me, that is a fault of Williams and any other school that is so inept at handling incidents of prejudice, and accepts these behaviors to a certain extent.</p>

<p>I would suggest that if this behavior is so widespread and accpted/expected, that you move this discussion over to Parents Cafe, so that others can share their experiences.</p>

<p>I'll leave it to others to assess harrassment and anti-gay violence at Amherst, but since this is a Swarthmore forum, I will say that Swarthmore College is a welcoming environment for openly gay students and one of the more gay-friendly colleges in the country. Gay students are not beat up or harrassed on campus at Swarthmore. Gay students are very actively involved in the campus community and prominent in leadership positions.</p>

<p>The campus culture is such that "gay bashing" would be nipped in the bud very, very firmly and quickly...as would anti-semitic attacks or racial slurs.</p>

<p>"students who are part of the elite group accepted to these highly ranked schools would have a better value system."</p>

<p>What assumptions you make, and how you cast aspersions on 2,000 plus students based on the actions of a handful of what may not even be Williams students! This is an exhibition of the very "prejudice" you claim to decry -- how hypocritical. The Williams students I know are decent, honorable, respectful, socially conscious individuals who, in their daily interactions with others of all stripes and from all walks of life, uphold the finest principles held by the vast majority of the students at all "elite" institutions. </p>

<p>"I can see from the way you post that you would not be surprised at this, because you must be more exposed to these students than I have been."</p>

<p>How presumptive, again. I personally do not know students such as these, but I do not live in a cave, nor do I wear self-righteous and self-congratulatory blinders.</p>

<p>"I would suggest that if this behavior is so widespread and accpted/expected, that you move this discussion over to Parents Cafe, so that others can share their experiences."</p>

<p>I have no interest in acting on your suggestion -- if you are so inclined, you are welcome to do the same. I am simply responding to your obvious misconceptions and misunderstandings.</p>

<p>I'm sure that most of the students at Williams and Amherst are disturbed by the incidents of anti-Semitism, racial slurs, and anti-gay violence taking place at their schools.</p>

<p>Vivid mental image: desperate organ-grinder with a hat that matches his little monkey's.</p>

<p>Pathetic. Cheap. Tawdry. One would have expected more of a Williams grad -- at least less blackness of heart.</p>

<p>"The Williams students I know are decent, honorable, respectful, socially conscious individuals who, in their daily interactions with others of all stripes and from all walks of life, uphold the finest principles held by the vast majority of the students at all "elite" institutions."</p>

<p>I will accept your opinion that Williams students are deeply disturbed by the prejudice being exhibited on campus.</p>

<p>And please no sarcastic remarks about this. I am genuinely pleased to hear this.</p>

<p>"I will accept your opinion that Williams students are deeply disturbed by the prejudice being exhibited on campus and will live the dreams of Martin Luther King."</p>

<p>I did not state this. The Williams students I know of course do not condone disrespectful expressions of anti-Semitism or racism, being themselves not racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic, mysogynistic, etc., etc., but by the way they live their lives day in and day out they make it very clear where they stand. At the same time, they are not necessarily "deeply disturbed" as you put it, because of their confidence that exemplary person-to-person conduct can serve as an inspiration to others who may not be so inclined.</p>