• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Racial tensions at Yale lead to angry confrontations

Status
Not open for further replies.
She asked the students to act like independent adults. They wanted her head on a stick over just the potential of blackface costumes. I'd say that's a pretty hostile work environment.

What frame of mind leads you to push back on "think about being considerate"

The email she was responding to wasn't even addressing any specific incidents, just general advice. She chose to jump in and say she'll do whatever she wants, which she's free to do, and others are also free to criticize her on that. Seeing as how this fell off the map until this bump I'm guessing she didn't get much more after the fact, but if it was continued harassment that made her decide to resign then that is unfortunate. That would mean Yale did not feel she deserved their support.
 

Malyse

Member
A person being bullied out of her job because of a disagreement about halloween costumes? What's wrong with you?

She wasn't thrown out, she left. Try again.

I don't think she did. Just because she wasn't for banning offensive costumes doesn't mean she was endorsing them. She believed in freedom of speech more.

Yale students were on an either you're with us or against us crusade.

Free speech doesn't means freedom from consequences, a lesson I reckon she's learned quite clearly.
 

norm9

Member
What frame of mind leads you to push back on "think about being considerate"

The email she was responding to wasn't even addressing any specific incidents, just general advice. She chose to jump in and say she'll do whatever she wants, which she's free to do, and others are also free to criticize her on that. Seeing as how this fell off the map until this bump I'm guessing she didn't get much more after the fact, but if it was continued harassment that made her decide to resign then that is unfortunate. That would mean Yale did not feel she deserved their support.

I think the letter was in support of the students as free thinking adults and not needing a mass memo to tell these adults what's wrong and what's right, because as adults, they should know. Unfortunately, she overestimated the students' abilities to police themselves on what they think is appropriate and bet wrong.

Free speech doesn't means freedom from consequences, a lesson I reckon she's learned quite clearly.

And it's really unfortunate. She learned a lesson. The students did not.
 

Henkka

Banned
She wasn't thrown out, she left. Try again.



Free speech doesn't means freedom from consequences, a lesson I reckon she's learned quite clearly.

Yes, she left. Left because of hysterical campus bullies who will want your head on a platter for the slightest perceived microaggression.
 
I think the letter was in support of the students as free thinking adults and not needing a mass memo to tell these adults what's wrong and what's right, because as adults, they should know. Unfortunately, she overestimated the students' abilities to police themselves on what they think is appropriate and bet wrong.



And it's really unfortunate. She learned a lesson. The students did not.

The great thing is we can all read the letter and see what she actually wrote instead of guessing:)
 

norm9

Member
It's my opinion that when idealism includes blackface, you get what you get.

That's the thing though. Nobody was dressed up in blackface. She even mentioned if someone was to be dressed up offensively, as adults they can solve this problem themselves. The students didn't even want that. They wanted it out of sight out of mind. And that's unfortunate.
 

Malyse

Member
That's the thing though. Nobody was dressed up in blackface. She even mentioned if someone was to be dressed up offensively, as adults they can solve this problem themselves. The students didn't even want that. They wanted it out of sight out of mind. And that's unfortunate.
Not take a stance against in all actuality is support.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke

She was basically trying to do nothing.
 

Kinitari

Black Canada Mafia
It's my opinion that when idealism includes blackface, you get what you get.
She wasn't endorsing black face, she was

1. Questioning that the memo was a 'suggestion', based on the fact that it had the signature of the Dean and 11 members of faculty and

2. Asking if maybe something of value is lost by dictating what is and is not appropriate to wear on Halloween. That it would be more valuable for people to a) push the boundaries of what they think is right and b) be challenged by other students, and have healthy discussions about the ideas that come about it

The reaction to her not really offensive arguments, which can be summarized as "instead of demonizing and banning, let's challenge each other and debate", was basically a lynch mob.
 
Blackface isn't a microagression. Try again.

There were 0 incidents of Yale students wearing blackface for Halloween. There was an email that suggested that you probably shouldn't wear offensive costumes (which would include blackface), to which she responded that offensive costumes were not specifically banned, and if you were to come across someone in a costume that you considered offensive, that you could handle it like an adult.
 

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
Free speech doesn't means freedom from consequences, a lesson I reckon she's learned quite clearly.

So, if black students chanting #blacklivesmatter at a protest are all kicked out of the school for causing a disruption to the learning environment, or if all the white students complained to the dean that all these protests are making them feel unsafe, and the dean agrees with them and kicks out all the students at the protest; that's perfectly OK too? I mean, they had free speech, but hey, it doesn't mean freedom of consequences.

Because that's exactly what you just OK'd.

If you are a minority - you are absolutely fucking terrified of this. Because once this is codified, who the fuck do you think it's going to get targeted at? The rich white people in power? Or the minorities who say inconvenient truths that piss off the people in power.
 

Henkka

Banned
Blackface isn't a microagression. Try again.

Did she ever in her e-mail defend blackface? Well, let's take a look.

Dear Sillimanders:

Nicholas and I have heard from a number of students who were frustrated by the mass email sent to the student body about appropriate Halloween-wear. I’ve always found Halloween an interesting embodiment of more general adult worries about young people. As some of you may be aware, I teach a class on “The Concept of the Problem Child,” and I was speaking with some of my students yesterday about the ways in which Halloween – traditionally a day of subversion for children and young people – is also an occasion for adults to exert their control.

When I was young, adults were freaked out by the specter of Halloween candy poisoned by lunatics, or spiked with razor blades (despite the absence of a single recorded case of such an event). Now, we’ve grown to fear the sugary candy itself. And this year, we seem afraid that college students are unable to decide how to dress themselves on Halloween.

I don’t wish to trivialize genuine concerns about cultural and personal representation, and other challenges to our lived experience in a plural community. I know that many decent people have proposed guidelines on Halloween costumes from a spirit of avoiding hurt and offense. I laud those goals, in theory, as most of us do. But in practice, I wonder if we should reflect more transparently, as a community, on the consequences of an institutional (which is to say: bureaucratic and administrative) exercise of implied control over college students.

It seems to me that we can have this discussion of costumes on many levels: we can talk about complex issues of identify, free speech, cultural appropriation, and virtue “signalling.” But I wanted to share my thoughts with you from a totally different angle, as an educator concerned with the developmental stages of childhood and young adulthood.

As a former preschool teacher, for example, it is hard for me to give credence to a claim that there is something objectionably “appropriative” about a blonde-haired child’s wanting to be Mulan for a day. Pretend play is the foundation of most cognitive tasks, and it seems to me that we want to be in the business of encouraging the exercise of imagination, not constraining it. I suppose we could agree that there is a difference between fantasizing about an individual character vs. appropriating a culture, wholesale, the latter of which could be seen as (tacky)(offensive)(jejeune)(hurtful), take your pick. But, then, I wonder what is the statute of limitations on dreaming of dressing as Tiana the Frog Princess if you aren’t a black girl from New Orleans? Is it okay if you are eight, but not 18? I don’t know the answer to these questions; they seem unanswerable. Or at the least, they put us on slippery terrain that I, for one, prefer not to cross.

Which is my point. I don’t, actually, trust myself to foist my Halloweenish standards and motives on others. I can’t defend them anymore than you could defend yours. Why do we dress up on Halloween, anyway? Should we start explaining that too? I’ve always been a good mimic and I enjoy accents. I love to travel, too, and have been to every continent but Antarctica. When I lived in Bangladesh, I bought a sari because it was beautiful, even though I looked stupid in it and never wore it once. Am I fetishizing and appropriating others’ cultural experiences? Probably. But I really, really like them too.

Even if we could agree on how to avoid offense – and I’ll note that no one around campus seems overly concerned about the offense taken by religiously conservative folks to skin-revealing costumes – I wonder, and I am not trying to be provocative: Is there no room anymore for a child or young person to be a little bit obnoxious… a little bit inappropriate or provocative or, yes, offensive? American universities were once a safe space not only for maturation but also for a certain regressive, or even transgressive, experience; increasingly, it seems, they have become places of censure and prohibition. And the censure and prohibition come from above, not from yourselves! Are we all okay with this transfer of power? Have we lost faith in young people’s capacity – in your capacity – to exercise self-censure, through social norming, and also in your capacity to ignore or reject things that trouble you? We tend to view this shift from individual to institutional agency as a tradeoff between libertarian vs. liberal values (“liberal” in the American, not European sense of the word).

Nicholas says, if you don’t like a costume someone is wearing, look away, or tell them you are offended. Talk to each other. Free speech and the ability to tolerate offence are the hallmarks of a free and open society.

But – again, speaking as a child development specialist – I think there might be something missing in our discourse about the exercise of free speech (including how we dress ourselves) on campus, and it is this: What does this debate about Halloween costumes say about our view of young adults, of their strength and judgment?

In other words: Whose business is it to control the forms of costumes of young people? It’s not mine, I know that.

Happy Halloween.



Yours sincerely,

Erika

Surprise, she didn't. Instead what it is is a sensible, reasoned and utterly innocuous argument against the college making restrictions on Halloween costumes. Nowhere is blackface mentioned, yet you bring it up. Why?
 
Right ir wrong aside, I honestly don't understand what she thought she had to gain with that response. You have a suggestion (or demand if you really love culturally deaf Halloween costumes) going out from faculty members above your pay grade, so you respond with "hey you're all adults, do what you want! Don't listen to them, listen to me!" What was the endgame?

And for those who find intrinsic value in others being forced to confront what they don't like, does that not apply personally or what
 

Malyse

Member
There were 0 incidents of Yale students wearing blackface for Halloween. There was an email that suggested that you probably shouldn't wear offensive costumes (which would include blackface), to which she responded that offensive costumes were not specifically banned, and if you were to come across someone in a costume that you considered offensive, that you could handle it like an adult.
Just because they can allow it doesn't mean they should. People really need to learn up on institutional racism. Might help you figure out why shit like this (yes even soft support like this) isn't okay. I shouldn't be made a mockery of so some little shit can figure out it's a bad thing to do.
Did she ever in her e-mail defend blackface? Well, let's take a look.



Surprise, she didn't. Instead what it is is a sensible, reasoned and utterly innocuous argument against the college making restrictions on Halloween costumes. Nowhere is blackface mentioned, yet you bring it up. Why?
And that's three strikes. Good job literally only reading my direct responses and nothing else in the thread. FOH.
 

potam

Banned
Not take a stance against in all actuality is support.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke

She was basically trying to do nothing.

Are you serious with your posts? Jesus Christ. What a sad mindset to live with.
 

Malyse

Member
Are you serious with your posts? Jesus Christ. What a sad mindset to live with.
Thanks for contributing.

filing-nails-gif.gif
 

kirblar

Member
So, if black students chanting #blacklivesmatter at a protest are all kicked out of the school for causing a disruption to the learning environment, or if all the white students complained to the dean that all these protests are making them feel unsafe, and the dean agrees with them and kicks out all the students at the protest; that's perfectly OK too? I mean, they had free speech, but hey, it doesn't mean freedom of consequences.

Because that's exactly what you just OK'd.

If you are a minority - you are absolutely fucking terrified of this. Because once this is codified, who the fuck do you think it's going to get targeted at? The rich white people in power? Or the minorities who say inconvenient truths that piss off the people in power.
Exactly.

Me having any sort of PDA with a partner was and is "offensive" to a number of people. It is subjective, and that makes rule-making based on subjective whims very dangerous for minorities, because the majority can easily turn it on them at the drop of a hat.

The problem is that the people with a "live and let live" mentality (aka "sure you can dress like a racist asshat, just don't be surprised when we treat you like one.") aren't the ones with the drive to codify changes. Thus the tug of war from the extremes trying to dictate what other people can/cannot do.
 
Unbridled free speech is awful. I don't want to live in a world that's basically 4chan. Society is better for almost everyone when there's at least some basic etiquette to follow and I think asking people not to dress in blackface is a pretty reasonable request.

We don't have to see shit flowing in the streets in order to discuss how gross it is.
 

aeolist

Banned
i agree that there's gray areas wrt stuff like halloween costumes that people should be emotionally and rationally capable of civilly discussing like grown-ups

i also think that there's cases that are emphatically not ok and should never be condoned

the problem with her email is that she brings up the former and never the latter, and it comes across (to me at least) as if she is conflating the two to some extent
 

norm9

Member
Right ir wrong aside, I honestly don't understand what she thought she had to gain with that response. You have a suggestion (or demand if you really love culturally deaf Halloween costumes) going out from faculty members above your pay grade, so you respond with "hey you're all adults, do what you want! Don't listen to them, listen to me!" What was the endgame?

I guess it just depends how you interpret what she wrote. She doesn't believe in censorship. I don't either.
 

RedShift

Member
Why do people keep mentioning blackface?

Did anyone want to wear blackface? I'm really confused, I can't see anything about it in the article but people keep mentioning it.
 
I'm responding directly to her letter, and nothing that happened afterward:

Even if we could agree on how to avoid offense – and I’ll note that no one around campus seems overly concerned about the offense taken by religiously conservative folks to skin-revealing costumes – I wonder, and I am not trying to be provocative: Is there no room anymore for a child or young person to be a little bit obnoxious… a little bit inappropriate or provocative or, yes, offensive? American universities were once a safe space not only for maturation but also for a certain regressive, or even transgressive, experience; increasingly, it seems, they have become places of censure and prohibition. And the censure and prohibition come from above, not from yourselves! Are we all okay with this transfer of power? Have we lost faith in young people’s capacity – in your capacity – to exercise self-censure, through social norming, and also in your capacity to ignore or reject things that trouble you? We tend to view this shift from individual to institutional agency as a tradeoff between libertarian vs. liberal values (“liberal” in the American, not European sense of the word).

What a weak argument. There is no real reason to believe that saying "hey guys, don't wear clearly offensive costumes" essentially advocates "censure and prohibition". Her argument that "this comes from above therefore it is bad" is generic and contrary to her belief, isn't inherently convincing. Yes, people WOULD like to see an institution take a stand that "this is not okay" on a university level. Not because they want to be babied, but because they want to see a tangible shift in what is culturally accepted and what isn't. If a university is choosing to do something about it, it's a sign that this shift in culture is being normalized into something on an institutional level. She seems to think this is some crazy clash of cutting-edge ideas.

People who dress up in offensive costumes know they're being offensive. This isn't some deep struggle for a society to create inscrutable standards. She's overthinking and being overly dramatic over a letter that really just says "don't dress up like an asshole".

The reaction from students that followed was a bit much and quickly lost the plot, but if I'm being honest I don't really see any value in her letter beyond interjecting this fabricated cultural dilemma into something that's pretty fucking straightforward.
 
She wasn't thrown out, she left. Try again.



Free speech doesn't means freedom from consequences, a lesson I reckon she's learned quite clearly.
Women aren't being pushed out of the games industry, they just leave. Try again.

I'm not even on her side, but Dat Logic.
 

injurai

Banned
Just because they can allow it doesn't mean they should. People really need to learn up on institutional racism. Might help you figure out why shit like this (yes even soft support like this) isn't okay. I shouldn't be made a mockery of so some little shit can figure out it's a bad thing to do.

You seem to be making a false equivalence. She was never advocating for institutionalized racism or condoned the notion of protected antagonism. She was defending costumes that are far more innocuous. Like a little white girl wanting to dress as Mulan. Likewise a little black boy should be able to dress as Luke Skywalker.

If you paid attention, the original student letter made good points about offensive outfits being bad and hurtful. But it played into an interpretation of offense that involves assuming someone's intentions. A white girl dressing up in a kimono or even further as a geisha is not some how reducing Japanese women to that role. It's one person exploring cultural iconography of another one's culture. The person taking offense is stepping too far in this scenario, and when they do they are trying to speak for an entire peoples.

This was the nuance that she was defending. She didn't want to patronize or coddle people. She wanted to tread people as adults, and encourage them to be respectful of general multi-culturalism in all directions. Clearly blackface is derogatory and is not an exploration of another one's culture but a mockery. It's very different.

Yet the student body couldn't distinguish this focus on her point, and continued to extrapolate. As you are doing now. The group that rallied against her charged themselves with a misplaced authority to decree what is offensive and what is not. They promoted the view that offense does not come from intent, but interpretation. They didn't want to actually learn and understand the intention of other students in wearing costumes they wanted project. Even further, they were embolden in their efforts by very legitimate concerns that they held as minorities people. They have a good cause, fighting in defense of minority experiences. But they conflated fighting for a solution with seeking bandage solutions. They ended up seeking protection not just from the offensive, but from assumed offenses.

Now, a women has felt she needed to resign from her position due to the extreme student coercion. The students enjoy feeling that they have the control to create their own echo chamber at university, rather than using it as a place for academic growth. They made the women an enemy of their cause, because instead of really refuting her message. They instead took her message to be a dismissal of the problems they were hoping to alleviate. Never stopping to acknowledge or discuss where they may have overstepped themselves.
 
Why do people keep mentioning blackface?

Did anyone want to wear blackface? I'm really confused, I can't see anything about it in the article but people keep mentioning it.

The facts don't matter anymore.

From the Associated Press:
"Christakis came under attack in October for her response to a request from the Intercultural Affairs Committee that students avoid wearing racially insensitive costumes, such as Native American headgear, turbans or blackface"

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ya...-offensive-halloween-costume-email/ar-AAg9hcx
 
Why do people keep mentioning blackface?

Did anyone want to wear blackface? I'm really confused, I can't see anything about it in the article but people keep mentioning it.
If people are equating blackface to something that isn't blackface, I'm gonna fucking facepalm myself so hard. What the hell is it with people comparing everything to blackface??
 
"Her teaching is highly valued and she is welcome to resume teaching anytime at Yale, where freedom of expression and academic inquiry are the paramount principle and practice," the school said.

Really sad that she was successfully bullied out of the school. At least the above quote is good, I guess.
 

gohepcat

Banned
Her email was thoughtful and articulate. Her points were open to debate, and she approached the subject like an adult.

She was met with absolute hysteria.

It's stunning that this is coming from Yale. This is the home of over 200 Rhodes Scholars. It's just....stupefying
 

norm9

Member
You seem to be making a false equivalence. She was never advocating for institutionalized racism or condoned the notion of protected antagonism. She was defending costumes that are far more innocuous. Like a little white girl wanting to dress as Mulan. Likewise a little black boy should be able to dress as Luke Skywalker.

If you paid attention, the original student letter made good points about offensive outfits being bad and hurtful. But it played into an interpretation of offense that involves assuming someone's intentions. A white girl dressing up in a kimono or even further as a geisha is not some how reducing Japanese women to that role. It's one person exploring cultural iconography of another one's culture. The person taking offense is stepping too far in this scenario, and when they do they are trying to speak for an entire peoples.

This was the nuance that she was defending. She didn't want to patronize or coddle people. She wanted to tread people as adults, and encourage them to be respectful of general multi-culturalism in all directions. Clearly blackface is derogatory and is not an exploration of another one's culture but a mockery. It's very different.

Yet the student body couldn't distinguish this focus on her point, and continued to extrapolate. As you are doing now. The group that rallied against her charged themselves with a misplaced authority to decree what is offensive and what is not. They promoted the view that offense does not come from intent, but interpretation. They didn't want to actually learn and understand the intention of other students in wearing costumes they wanted project. Even further, they were embolden in their efforts by very legitimate concerns that they held as minorities people. They have a good cause, fighting in defense of minority experiences. But they conflated fighting for a solution with seeking bandage solutions. They ended up seeking protection not just from the offensive, but from assumed offenses.

Now, a women has felt she needed to resign from her position due to the extreme student coercion. The students enjoy feeling that they have the control to create their own echo chamber at university, rather than using it as a place for academic growth. They made the women an enemy of their cause, because instead of really refuting her message. They instead took her message to be a dismissal of the problems they were hoping to alleviate. Never stopping to acknowledge or discuss where they may have overstepped themselves.

Very well said.
 
She asked the students to act like independent adults. They wanted her head on a stick over just the potential of blackface costumes. I'd say that's a pretty hostile work environment.

Not to go over and over this topic again as I have already said my position previously in this thread, her position is entirely naive. It is sad she was being treated like shit but the whole "let students act like independent adults" shit is so naive, like she has never been to a halloween party or interacted socially with people. As I said early, her letter is the equivalent of saying "fuck it, yall can do what you want, who cares" because you really think a Halloween party or a bar is the place where deep social discussion about cultural appropriation and racial respect is gonna occur.

If I went to a party with people in blackface or dressed like "Indians" and I spoke out against it people are going to look at me with the "shut the fuck up, we were drinking and enjoying a good time til your dumb ass opened your mouth". Come on people, get real. Nov 1st no one gives a shit about the discussion so where do you realistically talk about this? If I went to a party and people were dressed like that I have 2 options to not come off like a douche, ignore it or leave. It's pretty incredible that the party that is being degraded has to debate it with the people who never gave a shit in the first place in public on a day they just want to have fun on.

This is the reality of what her email was doing. It was just handwaving a simple "no don't be a fucking dick, dont dress like this" into some deep commentary as though there really should have to be more to the conversation. Unfortunately the Yale students acted like shitty brats. But its misguided to think there was any academic nuiance in what she said. It sounded like someone so wrapped up in an ideal world she forgot that planet earth is not one.
 

RedShift

Member
Because it's the most obvious example of the kind of thing she was demonstrating a clear indifference towards whether or not it should be allowed to happen.

I don't see how it's the most obvious, it's not at all relevant.

The 'offensive' costumes in question seem to be more in line with Mulan, sombreros, Native American headdresses, henna etc. And while I can certainly see how some of those costumes could be problematic, I definitely agree with her that it's a matter for students to discuss amongst themselves, not for the university administration to enforce.
 

Kinitari

Black Canada Mafia
Where are all the references to blackface coming from?

Context that requires you to move pretty far back, or via editorializing articles.

There was an email sent out with pintrest boards that had what would be okay or not okay to wear for Halloween. I think one of the many many costumes discussed was blackface. Her reply doesn't mention it, but because it was on the original "don't" list, some are extrapolating that she is defending or even endorsing blackface.

I don't think those people are being very honest with themselves though.
 
Context that requires you to move pretty far back, or via editorializing articles.

There was an email sent out with pintrest boards that had what would be okay or not okay to wear for Halloween. I think one of the many many costumes discussed was blackface. Her reply doesn't mention it, but because it was on the original "don't" list, some are extrapolating that she is defending or even endorsing blackface.

I don't think those people are being very honest with themselves though.
What the fuck. That's it?
 
Context that requires you to move pretty far back, or via editorializing articles.

There was an email sent out with pintrest boards that had what would be okay or not okay to wear for Halloween. I think one of the many many costumes discussed was blackface. Her reply doesn't mention it, but because it was on the original "don't" list, some are extrapolating that she is defending or even endorsing blackface.

I don't think those people are being very honest with themselves though.

What do you think she would have to say about blackface costumes?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom