I do agree that Yale itself promotes the idea of “Mother Yale,” and Master and spouse being, in effect, surrogate parents whose role is, in fact, to create a “home away from home” and is completely non-academic in nature. Which is why I understood where that girl in the video yelling at the Master (as rude as she was) was coming from with her references to “home,” and to feeling betrayed by the Master and his wife (essentially, Mom and Dad). Yale and its residential college system were like that when I was there, and it seems that it’s still so.
In the email, MUPD readily admits that hurtful or hateful speech is not against the law. But, they write, “if the individuals identified are students, MU’s Office of Student Conduct can take disciplinary action.”
In a statement to Mediaite, the MUPD confirmed that the email was real. When asked about the potential First Amendment implications, a spokesman responded simply, “We are simply asking them to report what they feel is hurtful and/or hateful speech.”
He added that the police did not consider the hateful speech “a criminal matter.” However, “We also work for the University and uphold the Universities Rules and Regulations.”
“To draw a “feminist” analogy, her statement is like “boys will be boys.””
In context, I don’t agree with that. Christakis acknowledged that we can expect some youthful behavior might be offensive or obnoxious, but suggested that the solution should come from within the student community rather than from above. She’s saying, “If boys are boys, if it really bugs you, call them on it.” She thinks it ought to be up to the students to decide what crosses the line and what to do about it. Agree or disagree with that strategy, it’s not the same as saying we should all take it for granted that behavior will never change.
“By taking a side or even giving an appearance in doing so, she’s effectively communicated that she cannot be trusted to be an honest broker in the issue”
Why should she be a broker? Her whole point is that she thinks this is a student matter and that her opinion about a costume shouldn’t be controlling. So why should she meet the standards of mediator/judge? The email is about her NOT being a judge.
One thing’s for certain: the fallout has proven her faith in the students to be misplaced. They are not capable of having a civil, productive exchange about this issue, and they need more adult guidance than they are getting.
The Christakis position isn’t much different than a parent telling children to work it out among themselves. This is a good or a bad parenting strategy that is highly dependent upon the circumstances of the “fight.”
I don’t think the Christakis position is that any kind of costume or behavior should be allowed without consequences. For example, a KKK outfit with a noose in hand – or even going stark naked – would prompt some university retribution under anybody’s standard.
I think the Christakis position is asking adult students to examine the behavior of their fellow students and handle it the way we all do as adults in the real world: if the bounds of decency have been exceeded, then there will be retribution, either legal or disciplinary. If the offense is more mild, you need to learn to handle these things yourself, as all adults in the real world must.
University should be a training ground, not a playground. The best thing anybody can learn is how to stick up for themselves; and when outnumbered, how to seek help from authorities.
Why? The initial email voiced the concerns of one faction of students and the Christakis response did the same.
The initial 'Howard" email it is actually signed by the university’s Intercultural Affairs Committee, a 13-member group of administrators from the Chaplain’s Office, campus cultural centers, and other campus organizations. Dean Howard also signed and then distributed the email to the entire student body.
Also, included in the body of the full email were links to Pinterest which depicted pictures of examples of “costumes to avoid” and acceptable ones. If that doesn’t invite conversation I am not sure what does.
I lost track of the thread in the middle, so what I’m going to say might’ve been said earlier already (but that shouldn’t be too much a surprise I guess. One has to believe that there’re larger systematic problems related to racial relationship on Yale campus than just the SAE incident and the Halloween costume emails to justify such STRONG reactions from the students.It has become obvious that the school administration was caught off guard by just how deep the resentment has been built in the community. The question is - if there is no overboard discrimination such as people throwing around N-words on Yale campus (I hope not), then what is it that has made the minority students feel so painful? I honestly want to hear a full account of how minority students have been discriminated in Yale. Was it “all true”, or was it somehow somewhat dramatized by a group of “social justice crusaders”? It’s depressing to think that minority students have such a hard time to find “safe space” on a notably liberal college campus. (if not here, where?)
One thing I am fully aware of is the racial stereotyping that is rampant, which Yale shouldn’t be immune from. Some of the stereotypes are "softer’ than others. For example, automatically labeling an Asian student a nerd with tiger parents while hurtful is not as hurtful as labeling a black student as someone less qualified to but be there anyway just to “diversify the student body”. Not to diminish the gravity of such a hurtful stereotype, is there something else?
@panpacific, that’s a valid point. Yale’s a pretty small school, isn’t it? 2000? 3000? Idk, but judging from the crowds protesting, it seems that a good proportion of the university is deeply upset about something.
@donnal You bring out a great point about both the nuance and intimacy of the master/student relationship at Yale. If one is not either a parent/student/faculty member this narrative might be completely lost or not recognized. In short, one can imagine, the betrayal, either perceived or real, that some students might feel…
For a little levity would high recommend the Caitlin Flanagan segment linked in @Saona63’s post #399 - especially the last 90 seconds on the “bias free language guide.”
I found an article on the Washington Post which linked to this posting by the editor of the Yale Herald. I think it says what I’ve been trying to say more clearly than i have:
I just don’t conclude that because students feel hurt and betrayed, the parents/masters must have erred. Good parents don’t make the kids feel warm and fuzzy all the time. Good parents hold kids to high standards that often provoke tantrums. There are strong arguments about why this email was a bad call, but “You made me feel yucky, so you’ve failed in your nurturing role” is not one of them.
The issue wasn’t specifically about cultural appropriation in regards to Halloween costumes - that was merely the catalyst. Yale along with thousands of colleges over the country has had a history of systematic racism, which has often been ignored or swept under the rug by the administration.
This is not to excuse the behavior of the girl in that video, she was extremely disrespectful towards her professor. However, it is important to understand that her explosive reaction was the result of years and years in an environment that condoned micro-acressions and other toxic behaviors.
That is very dependent on the situational context and debatable in this particular case. In light of recent incidents involving racial/cultural insensitivity on Yale and other college campuses, is Christakis holding Stillman students to high standards or as judging from the reactions…effectively endorsing as a representative of the Yale administration “I don’t care and I don’t give a damn” to students from marginalized groups and allies who have already been on edge from those recent incidents when she said offended students should turn the other cheek or confront the offending individual themselves?
It’s a message which also completely absolves Yale of its responsibility to use its natural role in shaping the institutional tone of the campus.
Hanna said “There are strong arguments about why this email was a bad call, but “You made me feel yucky, so you’ve failed in your nurturing role” is not one of them.”
How about “I can’t believe that you just encouraged people to be LESS thoughtful and considerate toward others. What kind of tone does that set in what is supposed to be a diverse and inclusive environment?”
“effectively endorsing as a representative of the Yale administration “I don’t care and I don’t give a damn” to students from marginalized groups and allies”
I’ve already stated why I believe that is an unfair mischaracterization of the email. I agree with you that that’s how students are reading it, but I don’t think that a close, fair reading of a text is a lot to ask of Yalies, even in a family setting.
@ballsohard2020 I agree. I certainly don’t agree with her comportment or tone, but eloquence is not a 24/7 activity. That said, the frustration is merely the tip of the spear of both cultural and institutional malfeasance. As an AA Yale parent, I have qualms on both sides of the ledger.
If the students and most are reading it that way, and thus having that negative effect, shouldn’t there be some sort of clarification made? The fact that none (that I know of) has been made suggests that the “unfair mischaracterization” is the actual intended meaning.
I don’t know that we can necessarily conclude that the email encouraged anybody to be less thoughtful or considerate toward others. It sounds like the Yale Master has a pseudo-parent role, and it is a valid parental philosophy that thoughtlessness is best cured by direct communication and confrontation between people, not by overt bans and rules.
Admittedly I’m an outside to Yale, but I would have thought that Yale students would be people better suited than many to use interpersonal communication to resolve their differences. By advocating “confrontation,” I don’t think this Master was advocating thoughtless, physical confrontation, or any type of assaultive confrontation. I think she was urging these students to not rely on bans and rules and vague costume guidelines, but instead to rely on their own personal skills to resolve these types of issues. Which, of course, is how it works in the real world these students will soon find themselves in.
Although, it is certainly possible that an undercurrent of bad relations was already going on that is not perceptible to an outsider like me. The strong reaction of these students could certainly be indicative of that.
It may be now, but that assertion would have struck several HS classmates and colleagues who attended Y in the late '90s and before as odd at best and a strong possibility the one holding that belief has strong right-leaning political views.
Back when my graduating HS class were applying to colleges, Y was considered one of the more right-leaning Ivies alongside Princeton and Darthmouth. That was only underscored by how many young GOP/Libertarian-right HS classmates gravitated towards applying to those schools and how most radical left leaning classmates refused to apply to those particular elite colleges.
One dormmate at my LAC was forced by her parents to apply to Y despite the fact she already had serious misgivings about personal fit with her radical-left political leanings and neo-hippie inclinations which were only further confirmed during ASD. What she experienced during that ASD was the last straw where she drew a line in the sand and told her parents she wasn’t going to accept Y’s admission offer because of the casual negative comments against hippies and otherwise dismissive obliviousness towards students who didn’t fit the conservative upper/upper-middle class preppy set.
One has to believe that there’re larger systematic problems related to racial relationship on Yale campus than just the SAE incident and the Halloween costume emails to justify such STRONG reactions from the students.It has become obvious that the school administration was caught off guard by just how deep the resentment has been built in the community. The question is - if there is no overboard discrimination such as people throwing around N-words on Yale campus (I hope not), then what is it that has made the minority students feel so painful? I honestly want to hear a full account of how minority students have been discriminated in Yale. Was it “all true”, or was it somehow somewhat dramatized by a group of “social justice crusaders”? It’s depressing to think that minority students have such a hard time to find “safe space” on a notably liberal college campus. (if not here, where?)