Yale is Imploding over a Halloween Email

[moonchild]

What we are seeing at Yale is not happening in a vacuum. I believe that the young people who are “complaining” about being marginalized are experiencing the discrimination not just their own lives, but they also identify with what is currently in the media around the country. This is a national issue. It’s this broader context that probably prompted the original email from the Dean. Seems reasonable to me. For EC to send out what is essentially an argument against the reminder to the community to be sensitive regarding the way they celebrate the evening seems out of touch with what’s going on in across the country right now, and I doubt very much that she thought it would elicit such an angry blow back.

From classicalmama’s links:

We have a few ground rules, and some restrictions, on what and where you will be permitted to shoot while on campus.

Out of concern for the privacy of our students, faculty and staff, we do not allow cameras or any other recording devices into our residential colleges or the gymnasium. In rare circumstances, we may allow cameras into our classrooms, but this must be arranged well in advance.

The courtyard of a residential college is much like the backyard patio of your house. It isn’t considered a public space by the residents.

Lergnom, I would agree that Yale students are not particularly isolated from the town. Students frequent restaurants, bars, theaters, museums in the community often, and meals are not required in the dining halls, as meal plans have some flexibility. Students commonly volunteer in the community. The four years we visited my Dd, students were off campus frequently. Mine would run around the residential neighborhood, grab food while she was out, go back to campus to clean up and go to class, and then head out to meet people at a pub or pizza place. When I think of isolated from real life, I think of Williams, Middlebury, Dartmouth, - rural campuses that aren’t set in the middle of a city. New Haven is real life, and it’s pretty hard to escape it even if students wanted to.
Several of my Dd’s friends moved into an apartment in town for senior year. Not the norm, but not uncommon.

[mom2and]

Thanks Zinhead. All should read that oped. The saddest part is that students at Yale (not clear if the poll was there or wider) think it is OK to set limits on speech. His take - that only Christakis begging for forgiveness - would satisfy those students - seems to be accurate based on the videos.

Edited to add:

However, the things being written about this girl on the internet due to that video are horrific. It is completely unfair. While he may have had reasons for recording it, releasing it may not have been necessary to protect NC. And by the way, google Christakis and very little negative comes up.

I don’t know how as a country we can support free speech without having to be subjected to hate speech.

[HarvestMoon1]

@@exacademic

And NC seems to be taking the same stance in the courtyard when the kid says you want to protect speech even when it hurts me and his response is especially when it hurts you.

I don’t think what Kristakis is saying is all that much different than what Yale says on it’s “New Students” page regarding freedom of expression:

Yale’s commitment to freedom of expression means that when you agree to matriculate, you join a community where “the provocative, the disturbing, and the unorthodox” must be tolerated. When you encounter people who think differently than you do, you will be expected to honor their free expression, even when what they have to say seems wrong or offensive to you.

Full text:

http://yalecollege.yale.edu/new-students/class-2019/academic-information/intro-undergrad-education/freedom-expression

[Demosthenes49]

@exacademic: EC is arguing for the protection of speech some disapprove of from official censure. EC is not arguing that no one may challenge that speech. By contrast, the students are demanding official censure to prevent speech they disapprove of.

I do not believe there is a reasonable reading of ECs position that mirrors the students’. They are diametrically opposed on the position of the university. Moreover, EC invited criticism so long as it came without the weight of university authority. The students require no criticism at all.

[Cardinal_Fang]

The courtyard of a residential college is much like the backyard patio of your house. It isn’t considered a public space by the residents.

Do all the Yalies and Yale parents here agree with this? I’m trying to understand the context of what we see in the video. As I said before, I think that a screaming fight in (what the students regard as) a private area is completely different than a screaming fight in a public area. Posting a video of students losing their temper in private, when you’re posting it just because you disagree with what they said, is in my view reprehensible.

[cobrat]

Do all the Yalies and Yale parents here agree with this? I’m trying to understand the context of what we see in the video. As I said before, I think that a screaming fight in (what the students regard as) a private area is completely different than a screaming fight in a public area. Posting a video of students losing their temper in private, when you’re posting it just because you disagree with what they said, is in my view reprehensible.

I’d be interested as well.

However, if such a private space is easily viewable to the greater public on an adjacent public street/area, to what extent does the “right to privacy” apply…especially legally or is it even applicable?

And even if it isn’t applicable legally, would the expectation of privacy still apply morally/ethically vis a vis the college’s residents and the larger Yale community.?

[prospect1]

I recall seeing cameras being held up in the video. If that is accurate, then these students knew they were being filmed. If they knew they were being filmed, there could be no expectation of privacy.

[exacademic]

I think the Christakises’ tone is really different – it’s one thing to say I especially want to protect hurtful speech and another to say freedom of expression means nothing if it doesn’t extend to speech that is hurtful. Raison d’etre vs regrettable necessity.

The students never asked for censorship. And, in fact, the students are supportive of the university’s position (as expressed in the original IAC email and subsequent emails from President and the Dean of Student Life) that people should be thoughtful and consider how their words/actions affect others as they decide how to exercise their freedom to express themselves. It’s EC who critiqued the university’s position.

[jonri]

The Silliman courtyard is NOT open to the public. If it’s ever been open to the public, it hasn’t been in at least 20 years. If you want to visualize it, see this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtc4V41pvtk Fast forward to about 2:25. Silliman is about the size of a city block. You could NOT film this exchange from the street. You can see into part of the courtyard from the street, but not the part where this was filmed.

And, no, Yale would NOT want this open to the public if it weren’t for safety reasons. As @ moonchild explained,this is basically the backyard of a private residence. A private residence with about 450 residents, but nevertheless, a private residence. I live in a large NYC apartment building. It has an outdoor space for use by residents. You can see into part of it from the street. It’s not closed to the public for safety reasons. It’s closed to the public because if it were open it would be filled with tourists who would find the tables, chairs and umbrellas very inviting, who would try to engage me in conversation when I’m trying to read a book in the sunshine, who would make noise that would bother the people who live in the apartments that overlook it. The Silliman courtyard is closed to the public for similar reasons.

The students were writing chalk messages on the stones. This is not unusual. It washes off in the rain and doesn’t hurt anything. The messages protested EC’s email. While the students were doing this, NC went down and confronted them. Apparently Lukianoff of FIRE went with him and videoed the exchange.

BTW, IMO, in the first few videos Christakis is very rude himself. He doesn’t raise his voice, but he cuts off one student speaker after another. Again, the student was rude and obnoxious. However, when he tries to interrupt her and she tells him to be quiet, I understand where she’s coming from.

Yale undergrads have no say in who gets hired as an assistant prof by the chemistry or philosophy departments. Traditionally, they participate in the search for a new master. Masters have an entirely different relationship with their RC residents than professors do. The Dean deals with the academic issues. The masters don’t.

This is part of what NC himself wrote about the role of master:

The college master is in some important ways a last defense against the encroachment of the bureaucratic university, with its uniform standards and procedures and its occasionally impersonal tone. College masters see their students up close, unfiltered, for better and, indeed, for worse. The Masters are aligned with the college administration, of course, and we report to the Dean and President, but, in some key way, we stand apart from the administration, too, by virtue of living and eating with students. We fulfill our master’s role in communion, in companionship, in camaraderie. It is this sort of fellowship, above all, that I hope to foster and safeguard here in Silliman College.

That truly is the role of the master. Christakis and his wife failed in that role. Sending the students that email as the “associate master” was completely inappropriate. IMO, for the master to allow Lukianoff to take and post that video is also a violation of what being a master is all about. I think the way the young woman behaved was completely unacceptable. However, she is now the subject of death threats because the MASTER OF HER COLLEGE–the person the other student said was supposed to be her advocate–allowed his friend to take and post that video.

[momcinco]

Silliman is “home” to its students but the courtyard is not off-limits to other Yale community members.

Tho they were responding to important concerns on campus and around the country, and people have different opinions about what EC was saying, some students singled her out for public humiliation, inviting even non-Yale people to sign on. I agree that the email was insensitive. ( I also think that it raised related, relevant issues about free speech and campus culture for this generation.) But an open letter about the loss of yet another faculty member of color would have been both specific and general enough to address the racial tension which seemed to be reaching a boiling point. The Cs should be held accountable for their role and their failings in it, not for every incident in an apparently racially charged atmosphere. The Silliman situation should have gone through mediation. These are not disenfranchised kids. They are some of the most accomplished and frankly best-connected young people in the world. It is terribIe to see faculty vilified and now it must be terrible for the student who lost it.

25 years ago on my campus when we (student activists) dealt with issues, we made mistakes, and learned from them, tho not immediately. I just hope that Yale can come together even if as a country we still can’t.

[al2simon]

I’d call the courtyards semi-public. Some might call them semi-private. For example, most days thousands of strangers tromp through and observe the RC courtyards on the Yale tour.

The RC courtyards were open to the public when I was in college. I vaguely remember the debates the occurred when they were closed up; it was a safety issue and most everyone thought it regrettable.

[circuitrider]

@“Cardinal Fang”

Posting a video of students losing their temper in private, when you’re posting it just because you disagree with what they said, is in my view reprehensible.

I was going to say the same thing. This is like someone coming to a house and filming an argument that spills into the backyard. I might not take what I ovehear very seriously, but, I would defend their right to yell and scream at each other so long as no one gets hurt. Btw, I also think that’s the risk you take when you attempt to take matters into your own hands and confront someone for the costume they’re wearing. .

[boolaHI]

A couple of items are obvious, at least to me: one, the associate master is an adept academic, but lacks in some real world experience and dexterity; that the master is patently rude and intellectually condescending; and three, they, both the master and his wife, made the calculated guess, that the court of public opinion would sway in their favor, and thus released the video. They were wrong in their calculation, and are (as has been told to me from other Y deans and folks communicating with the chancellors office) now hanging on by their fingernails, for their positions at Y.

[Cardinal_Fang]

I recall seeing cameras being held up in the video. If that is accurate, then these students knew they were being filmed. If they knew they were being filmed, there could be no expectation of privacy.

I don’t think this is right as a point of law, but I’m happy to be corrected by any lawyers here.

First of all, that people were holding up cameras does not mean that the students in the disagreement knew other people were filming them. Secondly, knowing someone is filming you is not the same as giving permission for them to film you.

Suppose my husband and I were estranged (we aren’t). Suppose my husband and I were famous people that other people were interested in (we aren’t). Suppose he invited a friend over, and while the friend was there, in my house, my husband and I had an argument, I lost it and started screaming, and the friend videoed the interchange and put it up on YouTube. Does the friend have the right to video me, in my own house, without my permission, and post that video on YouTube? If he has the legal right, does anyone think he has the moral right?

[Hunt]

An excerpt for the Harvard Crimson article linked above, about the Christakises leaving their somewhat similar positions there:

Earlier this month, the Christakises published an op-ed in Time criticizing the College administration’s response to flyers with inflammatory language distributed on campus. In their article, they critiqued administrators for prioritizing issues of free speech over “more pressing problems for our students, such as the sexist and dangerous behaviors that still go unchecked behind closed doors” in student social spaces.

Wha…?

[circuitrider]

^Ha ha. We cross-posted the same observation.

[HarvestMoon1]

@@jonri

she is now the subject of death threats because the MASTER OF HER COLLEGE–the person the other student said was supposed to be her advocate–allowed his friend to take and post that video.

Do we know if she is the only student in the video getting death threats?

[Hunt]

I don’t think the specifics of permission to film will matter. I think what will matter is the perception that Lukianoff is using an unsuspecting student as a pawn to further his agenda. That isn’t very nice, either.

[cobrat]

Perhaps there is a difference to you, as someone raised in the US, but perhaps not so to someone raised in another country.

Jym626,

No. The difference I am wondering about is whether your H growing up in Japan grew up as an active integral part of the local Japanese society or whether he grew up in a community of American/Western expats…especially ones so insular like the ones I and relatives observed in China and Taiwan to the point they were living lives practically no different from what they’d live back in their respective home countries with the exception of having translators/go-betweens to handle business with the local society.

In the former, one will naturally pick up the local language and culture and have an understanding close to/akin to the locals.

In the latter, it could easily be no different than living in an American locality with the exception that its located in a foreign country unless the one living in an ex-pat community goes out of his/her way to spend time and interact with the local society. Incidentally, this very issue is one a few relatives and family friends…including White American and Europeans discuss and sometimes criticize about their fellow American/Western expats/colleagues during their stints working abroad in non-Western societies.

And in my own observations of the more insular American expat communities in China and Taiwan, I can clearly understand why some Americans who desire a greater level of meaningfully interacting with and learning local culture go out of their way to completely avoid or minimize the amount of time spent in such communities.

As for myself, it’s one reason why I and some similarly minded classmates spent most of our time with Chinese students in the Chinese student dorms/locals. It’s also a reason why some older American family friends in their youth went so far as to insist on being assigned to live in the same crowded dormitories as local college students while studying abroad in the '50s and 60’s rather than accept being assigned to a more comfortable less crowded “American/foreigner dorm”*. A choice which was considered highly unusual for American students to make, especially during that period.

• In the ROC(Taiwan), the typical dormitory room for a local student in the '50s and '60s would be the equivalent of a small American double with 6-8 students assigned with barely enough room for the requisite number of bunkbeds and lockers and a small table between them. This arrangement was still prevalent in the (ROC)Taiwan and China when I visited/studied abroad in the mid-late '90s though I have heard the former may have replaced them with better roomier accommodations with more amenities closer to the American residential college experience.
  

[prospect1]

they, both the master and his wife, made the calculated guess, that the court of public opinion would sway in their favor, and thus released the video.

Is there evidence that the master and his wife released the video? I thought an invited speaker filmed and released the video.

I think we have to presume that it was not a privacy violation to publish these videos, or we would have been hearing about the illegality of that by now. Regarding the morality, if the whole thing was a purposeful setup, for shame. But I have yet to see the evidence of a setup.