The Yale Controversy

More

Yale

Yale University (Source: Wikipedia)


Yale’s Halloween controversy raises chronic issues that won’t go away. Prior to the holiday, the University’s Intercultural Affairs Committee sent students a memo: To quote directly:

While students . . . definitely have a right to express themselves, we would hope that people would actively avoid those circumstances that threaten our sense of community or disrespects, alienates or ridicules segments of our population based on race, nationality, religious belief or gender expression.

The memo claims that some Yalies previously made “culturally unaware or insensitive” choices, choices that had a deleterious impact on various marginalized groups. Intended or not, such actions “sent a far greater message than any apology could after the fact.” (No evidence is cited nor are claims made regarding the seriousness and extent of the alleged impact.)Accordingly, Yalies dressing-up for Halloween are urged to consider whether their costumes:

  • Make fun people and their traits or cultures?
  • Promote historical inaccuracies?
  • Reduce cultural difference to jokes or stereotypes?
  • Belittle faith traditions?

Finally, students are directed to a site presenting acceptable and unacceptable costumes:
“Rosie the Riveter” is acceptable; women dressing in traditional Muslim garb is not – not even for Muslim women?
Erika Christakis (an administrator – master – of Yale’s Silliman college) hazarded a rejoinder “Dressing Yourselves.” It proved – to understate the case – controversial. She argued that avoiding hurt and offense is laudable in theory; however, in practice even laudable goals can create a bureaucratized, stifling environment that undermines student autonomy. It’s inappropriate for administrators to foist their Halloween standards on young adults. College administrators shouldn’t act in loco parentis. If a student finds a costume offensive, it’s up to him or her to act: “Whose business is it to control the forms of costumes of young people? It’s not mine, I know that.”
Taken literally, this exchange of administrative memos is nothing more than just that – something faculty and students usually ignore. Taken at face value – without considering the symbolic import – we witness certain well-intentioned administrators urging students to avoid potentially offensive costumes. In response, another well-intentioned official finds such exhortations patronizing. At worst – or so it seems – this is a first-world dispute that pales beside the third-world problems surrounding the campus: New Haven is not noted for safe spaces for its less fortunate inhabitants.
The textual harassment, the vitriol hurled at Christakis is ironic and – to understate the case – disproportionate. I find it ironic since, as a student, I protested against administrators acting in loco parentis. In a video that went viral, scores of students are heard hurling vulgar insults and Christakis, and demanding her resignation. Here’s an example:

In your position as master,” one student says, “it is your job to create a place of comfort and home for the students who live in Silliman. You have not done that. By sending out that email; that goes against your position as master. Do you understand that?!”

“No,” she said, “I don’t agree with that.”

The student explodes, “Then why the fuck did you accept the position?! Who the fuck hired you?! You should step down! If that is what you think about being a master you should step down! It is not about creating an intellectual space! It is not! Do you understand that? It’s about creating a home here. You are not doing that!”

Less vociferous students blamed the Christakis memo for their quiet despair: It was so upsetting that they couldn’t sleep or concentrate on their studies. As one commentator quips: apparently these students can’t bear to be in a milieu that millions of people would risk their lives to inhabit because one woman wrote an email that hurt their feelings. Believing, apparently, that no good deed goes unpunished, Christakis resigned.
Unlike some commentators, I don’t mock the students’ overreaction, nor do I suggest they’re feckless victims of some bizarre, PC ideology. In the spirit of tikkun, I’m concerned with understanding and healing.
Could it be that the Christakis Memo became what social psychologists call a “condensation symbol”: redolent with surplus meaning it evoked the train of rejections and injuries experienced by minority students. The vociferous response was not merely about the master’s apparent indifference to offensive costumes. It stood for collective memories of slavery and Jim Crow. It evoked searing current injuries such as Ferguson – or closer to home–being tracked in local stores, and lack of acceptance – real and imagined – at Yale. As Freud taught, the effect (in this case the affect) is often greater –
much greater – than the cause.
We’re left with a dilemma demanding Solomon-like wisdom. Shall we comfort the afflicted or afflict the comfortable? Who doubts we should foster a campus environment where students feel at home, rather than alienated. Even so, as educators, are we called upon to afflict the comfortable by promoting their autonomy and by provoking them to question deeply held assumptions and beliefs? Is there a proper balance, a Golden Mean? I invite readers’ responses.

Ron Hirschbein authored five books taking radical, humanistic approaches to the causes of war and prospects for peace.

3 thoughts on “The Yale Controversy

  1. This is a great presentation. first the author argues the pro and then the con… effectively, I say, since it no one gets the hint that the author is prejudice to one side or the other… and in fact, ask the reader to comment and ponder both sides of the issue.
    This is what education should be like. Where the professor is unbiased and presents not only the pro, but the con and even the in-between by asking us to comment… all in a objective manner without prejudice for either side.
    Personally, I find it very difficult to do… how to present both sides without a hint of prejudice… it’s an art… a rt in that one continually learns… Like the actor of twenty years… still each time he play Shakespeare, he is never satisfied… always honing, adding, deleting, the as slight more emphasis here and more their. I always As you can guess , I’m a frustrated actor… I read once that Gauguin was never satisfied with his paintings.. hence refused to show them… Question: Should he show them… or not? I would say show them… Why, because as people we need to evaluate and come to conclusions… and not too , defeats understanding…and adaptation and progresses the human spirit.
    Woody Allen in one of the last interviews with Ingmar Bergman asked his how did he feel reading a bad review of his movie… Bergman paused… and than said, “for about 30 minutes”. And he went on with his life… and then he said, ” Yes, I did make some lousy movie, too. ”
    Yes… pondering the issues… make us humble… And that too takes a effort… even often when some pundit, argues as hirschbein has

  2. Continue… ops, clicked the wrong button..and entered the above. .
    …. argues as Hirschbein has… but the reader discerns or perceives bias to one side or the other, even when the writer wants to try to present both sides and the in-between with equal weight.
    I mention this because like I said. to be perceived objective… is very difficult and an art. Yes, just because one perceives some bias… that is not a reason to totally reject his comments… but one must truly ponder the issue free of his own bias… and that’s super hard. We can never achieve perfection… but that should be the goal to strive for. thanks for the great article.
    How do we overcome this… simple as bucky fuller said look for the simple answer… and that is… do not automatically reject arguments that upset you… force yourself to ponder them… and continue this throughout life. If not… You are dying on a vine… and that is not living. … ron hansing 2.1.16

  3. Continue… ops, clicked the wrong button…
    …. argues as Hirschbein has… but the reader discerns or perceives bias to one side or the other, even when the writer wants to try to present both sides and the in-between with equal weight.
    I mention this because like I said. to be perceived objective… is very difficult and an art. Yes, just because one perceives some bias… that is not a reason to totally reject his comments… but one must truly ponder the issue free of his own bias… and that’s super hard. We can never achieve perfection… but that should be the goal to strive for. thanks for the great article. ron hansing 2.1.16

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *