The Coddling Of The American Mind (Trigger Warning Article In The Atlantic...)

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (2447 of them)

I think what's weird about the current campus youth movement, to the extent that it really exists, is that it looks a lot like an anti-authoritarian movement, but actually seems to be calling for the establishment of a better, more righteous authority -- us and our fair unbreakable social norms, not you and your bullshit unbreakable social norms.

Three Word Username, Friday, 13 November 2015 22:09 (ten years ago)

Also it should be mentioned that the email was met with immediate backlash and had few vocal supporters. It didn't really do much damage. It seems to me that the activists already won on the ground of offensive costumes being understood to be uncool by the Yale community. What they seem to want is not change but total deference to their new consensus, which seems less reasonable.

Btw, want to restate I think the activists are right to want to discourage ppl from wearing offensive costumes. My issue has to do with their disproportionate response to someone who lightly objected to elements of their position

Treeship, Friday, 13 November 2015 22:11 (ten years ago)

So your concern TWU is that the people upset about the "just a bit of blackface, be cool" housemaster is that they're not being radical enough

Listen to my homeboy Fantano (D-40), Friday, 13 November 2015 22:11 (ten years ago)

it's not that weird - left-wing totalitarianism has always had a campus cache. xxp

Mordy, Friday, 13 November 2015 22:11 (ten years ago)

deej you've basically ducked the question in twelve different ways which is essentially why i stopped replying to you before. do you believe that this email deserves to get this woman fired?

Mordy, Friday, 13 November 2015 22:12 (ten years ago)

and if not - does threatening someone's job over something that they said that is inoffensive constitute an attempt to suppress speech that disagrees w/ you?

Mordy, Friday, 13 November 2015 22:12 (ten years ago)

@ treesh her response email is such a troll, "if you respond to this and disagree then you're overreacting by definition"

Listen to my homeboy Fantano (D-40), Friday, 13 November 2015 22:13 (ten years ago)

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/194874/person-up-yale-students

Treeship, Friday, 13 November 2015 22:14 (ten years ago)

That is one way of looking at it; the other way is that the students' position boils down to "society's assumptions and rules expect us to be [X] and we want to force society to recognize and acknowledge that we are [ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ]"

They are not looking to overthrow American society as it currently exists; they are demanding that society accepts their input as being as valid and important as the input from the demographic that has largely defined its parameters and actors over the past two and half centuries.

I Am Curious (Dolezal) (DJP), Friday, 13 November 2015 22:16 (ten years ago)

^ this piece argues that the yale protesters "aren't radical enough." It's not a weird position. They want institutional muscle to back up their worldview.

Treeship, Friday, 13 November 2015 22:16 (ten years ago)

Sorry xp

Treeship, Friday, 13 November 2015 22:16 (ten years ago)

People in all kinds of jobs say things in emails that make the boss think, "this person isn't right for our organization" literally every day. They're not a team player, they're not working well with others, they are not knowledgeable. Whatever. If your job is housemaster, and you say things that seem to reflect negatively on your ability to do your job well, of COURSE it's fireable. Not every time coworkers or customers complain = they should be fired...but sometimes it does mean that, which is why customers or coworkers or students complain

That this is controversial at all is a red herring

Listen to my homeboy Fantano (D-40), Friday, 13 November 2015 22:16 (ten years ago)

I think what's weird about the current campus youth movement, to the extent that it really exists, is that it looks a lot like an anti-authoritarian movement, but actually seems to be calling for the establishment of a better, more righteous authority -- us and our fair unbreakable social norms, not you and your bullshit unbreakable social norms.

This is the gist of Freddy deBoer's argument, at least a piece of it: students seeking administrative redress when administrators shouldn't be their friends.

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 13 November 2015 22:17 (ten years ago)

That's Freddy's ex post facto rationalization of being annoyed by student protesters IMO but maybe I'm just "casting aspersions"

Listen to my homeboy Fantano (D-40), Friday, 13 November 2015 22:19 (ten years ago)

x-post In a sense, Deej, yes -- "you aren't fit to be my mom" vs. "fuck this shit, none of you people are my mom". But I still think the conservative backlash is a bigger threat to humanity at this point.

Three Word Username, Friday, 13 November 2015 22:21 (ten years ago)

That's Freddy's ex post facto rationalization of being annoyed by student protesters IMO but maybe I'm just "casting aspersions"

― Listen to my homeboy Fantano (D-40), Friday, November 13, 2015

I'm not a fan of his but I'm quoting a piece he wrote in September, way before this shit.

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 13 November 2015 22:26 (ten years ago)

I'm kinda glad I had whiskey with dinner and then vomited all over this thread because it made me realize I have some shit to unpack about this stuff in general. Some insufficiently examined conclusions / assumptions about campus protests based on my own college experience AND I think I learned some wrong lessons from growing up and going to school in the southeast, i.e. some institutional racism is just unfixable, so worry about other stuff if you can, shit like that.

I think J0rdan's piece on Gawker about this was actually very good btw

El Tomboto, Friday, 13 November 2015 22:34 (ten years ago)

thank you tomboto

J0rdan S., Friday, 13 November 2015 22:40 (ten years ago)

this is excellent:

http://chronicle.com/article/When-Free-Speech-Becomes-a/234207

― goole, Friday, November 13, 2015 4:04 PM (2 hours ago)

this is by far the best thing i've read on the yale thing, thanks for linking

k3vin k., Friday, 13 November 2015 23:24 (ten years ago)

I thought it was pompous bullshit and I really don't like that particular use of the term "violence" but as above I have some attitudes I bring to the table.

I liked this comment from an LGM thread:

This, by the by (which I sort of posted on below) is a liberal/leftist split that goes back literally to before most of us were born, in which the liberal position is “Listen, you guys are angrily and hastily jettisoning what I consider to be core societal values in pursuit of laudable goals” and the leftist position is “Those core societal values are being wielded as a cudgel against oppressed groups, and as such their value is negative. And by starting this intraleft argument out in public you only strengthen conservatism, which would love to be having a conversation about whether we’re actively dangerous or simply wrong.”

El Tomboto, Saturday, 14 November 2015 00:34 (ten years ago)

Paris attacks end coddling (maybe Ozymandias plan?):

Judith Miller ‏@JMfreespeech 4h4 hours ago
Now maybe the whining adolescents at our universities can concentrate on something other than their need for "safe" spaces…

Why because she True and Interesting (President Keyes), Saturday, 14 November 2015 03:27 (ten years ago)

makes sense -- she listened to Bush administration whining about Saddam for a year

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 14 November 2015 03:37 (ten years ago)

Bush "kept us safe" too

Why because she True and Interesting (President Keyes), Saturday, 14 November 2015 03:45 (ten years ago)

https://twitter.com/SteveKrak/status/665294956987179008

ffs

mookieproof, Saturday, 14 November 2015 04:04 (ten years ago)

the shock and senseless horror of a balcony shooting in a crowded theater must be similar to the same from an unmanned aircraft in your home town. the accusation of ideological complicity from the perpetrators similarly chimerical.

mattresslessness, Saturday, 14 November 2015 04:20 (ten years ago)

Not even interested in going into this on Twitter, why signal-boost her horribleness, but that Judith Miller tweet made me want to push the red button on the entire human race, jfc

Guayaquil (eephus!), Saturday, 14 November 2015 13:20 (ten years ago)

"a lot of people were murdered in conditions of unimaginable horror, this is just the newspeg for my culture-war zing I've been looking for"

Guayaquil (eephus!), Saturday, 14 November 2015 13:21 (ten years ago)

"Did you notice I put free speech right there in my Twitter handle? That's because I'm so daring that my free speech is in danger from the prudes who don't get me"

Guayaquil (eephus!), Saturday, 14 November 2015 13:22 (ten years ago)

Alfred Soto ‏@SotoAlfred 10h10 hours ago

@JMfreespeech makes sense -- you listened to Bush administration whining about Saddam for a year

The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 14 November 2015 13:26 (ten years ago)

It's all double stupid because the kinds of racism and bigotry that the Yale and Missouri and other students are fighting is the *exact same* bigotry and racism that makes Muslims in Western countries targets for radicalization by terrorist groups. When one side is offering "Go back to where you came from" and calling you a terrorist and a camel jockey and whatever else; and the other is offering acceptance and glory and martyrdom and the approval of Allah himself, which one would you choose?

Resting Bushface (Phil D.), Saturday, 14 November 2015 13:38 (ten years ago)

It's all double stupid because the kinds of racism and bigotry that the Yale and Missouri and other students are fighting is the *exact same* bigotry and racism that makes Muslims in Western countries targets for radicalization by terrorist groups.

no, no it's not. sorry.

wizzz! (amateurist), Saturday, 14 November 2015 15:55 (ten years ago)

oh ok well if you say so

Resting Bushface (Phil D.), Saturday, 14 November 2015 15:59 (ten years ago)

Erika Christakis did 9/11

Treeship, Saturday, 14 November 2015 16:12 (ten years ago)

Fine, it's a *manifestation* of the same kinds of bigotries. Or, maybe not. I'm sure people who would consider wearing blackface costumes or making poop swastikas will humbly refrain from wearing "suicide bomber" costumes or sarcastically referring to the "religion of peace" when terrorist attacks occur.

Resting Bushface (Phil D.), Saturday, 14 November 2015 16:25 (ten years ago)

i guess i'm just not sure of the point you are trying to make outside of some "bigotry is the same everywhere" banality. i don't mean to be rude or dismissive, i just don't get.

wizzz! (amateurist), Saturday, 14 November 2015 17:03 (ten years ago)

Today's a bad day to be drawing really shit parallels and its a bad day to overreact to really shit parallels. Peace.

MONKEY had been BUMMED by the GHOST of the late prancing paedophile (darraghmac), Saturday, 14 November 2015 17:09 (ten years ago)

sarcastically referring to the "religion of peace" when terrorist attacks occur.

everyone should mock the phrase "the religion of peace".

doing my Objectives, handling some intense stuff (LocalGarda), Saturday, 14 November 2015 17:31 (ten years ago)

as in the very concept

doing my Objectives, handling some intense stuff (LocalGarda), Saturday, 14 November 2015 17:31 (ten years ago)

or "war on terror"

AdamVania (Adam Bruneau), Saturday, 14 November 2015 17:47 (ten years ago)

CLearly whatever I'm trying to say, I'm not saying well, which is a common failing of mine, so I'll drop it.

Resting Bushface (Phil D.), Saturday, 14 November 2015 18:37 (ten years ago)

I noticed that the NY Times and Breitbart are trying to slander activists by claiming they wanted their struggle to be more important than the events in Paris. They used two anonymous accounts and one who said the opposite to prove this.

inside, skeletons are always inside, that's obvious. (dowd), Sunday, 15 November 2015 18:09 (ten years ago)

They made it to the top of /r/news regardless.

inside, skeletons are always inside, that's obvious. (dowd), Sunday, 15 November 2015 18:10 (ten years ago)

the "new york times" said this, eh?

k3vin k., Sunday, 15 November 2015 18:12 (ten years ago)

ilxor admrl was in that library when that picture was taken. naked and high on acid. okay, maybe not. but he could give us an eyewitness report if he still posted here. my next door neighbor was there too.

scott seward, Sunday, 15 November 2015 18:12 (ten years ago)

Sorry, meant the Washington Times - been a long weekend, Kev.

inside, skeletons are always inside, that's obvious. (dowd), Sunday, 15 November 2015 19:13 (ten years ago)

My alma mater sent out an e-mail this weekend:

November 15, 2015

Dear Students, Faculty, Staff, Alumni, and Families,

On Thursday night I attended a student-organized protest against racism and other entrenched forms of prejudice and inequality. The sit-in was held in Frost Library. It had started Thursday at 1 p.m. and there were several hundred people from all parts of the campus in Frost when I arrived from out of town. The gathering of students continued throughout the day on Friday and into the evening and through the night. Students have continued to gather through the weekend.

Over the course of several days, a significant number of students have spoken eloquently and movingly about their experiences of racism and prejudice on and off campus. The depth and intensity of their pain and exhaustion are evident. That pain is real. Their expressions of loneliness and sense of invisibility are heartrending. No attempt to minimize or trivialize those feelings will be convincing to those of us who have listened. It is good that our students have seized this opportunity to speak, rather than further internalizing the isolation and lack of caring they have described. What we have heard requires a concerted, rigorous, and sustained response.

The organizers of the protests also presented me with a list of demands on Thursday evening. While expressing support for their goals, I explained that the formulation of those demands assumed more authority and control than a president has or should have. The forms of distributed authority and shared governance that are integral to our educational institutions require consultation and thoughtful collaboration. When I met yesterday in my office with a small group of student organizers, I explained that I did not intend to respond to the demands item by item, or to meet each demand as specified, but instead to write a statement that would be responsive to the spirit of what they are trying to achieve--systemic changes that we know we need to make. I also talked about why apologies of the sort that were demanded would be misleading, if not downright dishonest, suggesting, as they implicitly would, that I or the College could make guarantees about things that are much larger than a single institution or group of people. Reacting immediately to strict timetables and ultimatums and speaking in the names of other people and for all times would be a failure to take our students seriously. I was asked to read this statement to students today in Frost Library and did so at noon.

Our students' activism is part of a national movement of students who are devoted to bringing about much-needed change. They are exercising a fundamental American right to freedom of speech and protest. Student protesters at Amherst have been threatened on social media with physical violence. The College police are, as always, doing their job of keeping the campus safe. And the administration will ensure that no students, faculty, or staff members are subject to retaliation for taking advantage of their right to protest.

Amherst has committed itself to equal opportunity for the most talented students from all socio-economic circumstances. That commitment involves more than assembling a diverse population of students. It includes a duty to provide a learning environment that is equally welcoming to all our students and one that is supportive of all students, faculty, and staff. When staff and faculty of color leave Amherst because they do not have faith that they can thrive here, it is a serious loss for our students and for the campus as a whole, and requires greater attention to the conditions and cultures we need to change or to create.

The College also has a foundational and inviolable duty to promote free inquiry and expression, and our commitment to them must be unshakeable if we are to remain a college worthy of the name. The commitments to freedom of inquiry and expression and to inclusivity are not mutually exclusive, in principle, but they can and do come into conflict with one another. Honoring both is the challenge we have to meet together, as a community. It is a challenge that all of higher education needs to meet.

Those who have immediately accused students in Frost of threatening freedom of speech or of making speech "the victim" are making hasty judgments. While those accusations are also legitimate forms of free expression, their timing can seem, ironically, to be aimed at inhibiting the speech of those who have struggled and now succeeded in making their stories known on campus. The shredding and removal overnight of protesters' postings, which were reported to me this morning, is, on the other hand, unacceptable behavior according to the student Honor Code.

Student protesters themselves are engaged in serious conversations about the importance of free speech and have asked themselves questions about uses of language that respect that freedom. They are also asking themselves and us how the College protects free expression while also upholding our anti-discrimination policies and our statement of Respect for Persons. Censorship and silencing are not the answer. I believe our students know that. It takes time, attention, and serious discussion to sort out and make clear how we protect free speech while also establishing norms within our communities that encourage respect and make us responsible for what we do with our freedom. That is the discussion we need to have. It must involve all members of the community--students, faculty, staff, alumni--and it must be the kind of discussion that reflects the traditions of Amherst and a liberal arts education at its best.

We agree with the students that racism and other deeply entrenched forms of prejudice and inequality continue to affect our institutions and our culture as a whole. And we acknowledge that our efforts to achieve a more inclusive and egalitarian environment are insufficient. I could not be sadder about the pain that many of our students are feeling or more determined to meet their demand for change. We are committed not only to continuing the efforts we are already making, but also to stepping up the work that needs to be done in order to:

1) build a more diverse staff and faculty, with more aggressive recruitment and effective hiring and retention strategies;

2) support our faculty as they develop innovative ways of teaching our students;

3) ensure that faculty, staff, and students have opportunities and incentives to develop their analysis and understanding of the issues our students are raising;

4) acknowledge and support the work done by those staff and faculty who are primary sources of support for low-income students and students of color;

5) consider what messages our symbols send;

6) provide more opportunities for conversation, collaboration, and shared responsibility in the classroom and in residential life for students from different backgrounds;

7) make sure that students, staff, and faculty find a mix of physical spaces and opportunities for social interaction, some of which will provide comfort and familiarity and others of which will put us in a position that challenges us and guarantees our growth; and

8) as we did in response to disclosures about sexual assault and the College's handling of it, establish a multi-constituency committee charged with studying issues of race and racial injury and making recommendations to the administration and the Board of Trustees.

This is a list of some, but not all of what we want to do.

What is going on at Amherst right now is not at odds with our educational mission or an aberration from its course. It is part of a struggle in the direction of greater awareness, understanding, and freedom from ignorance, prejudice, and narrow ideologies. On urgent questions ranging from race to gender to war and peace, members of the Amherst community have been deeply engaged for as long as there has been such a community. The complexity of the issues is challenging, yes, but also energizing at institutions like Amherst--which is certainly flawed, as any human institution is. Like other colleges and universities, however, Amherst is also openly committed to getting better at what we do, for our students, for the larger society, and for the generations to come.

Sincerely,

Biddy Martin

Students have tried to drop Lord Jeff as the school’s mascot for decades. It’s even a topic on the school’s FAQ:

4. I've heard that Lord Jeffery Amherst distributed smallpox-infected blankets to the Indians during the French and Indian War. True?

In the summer of 1763, attacks by Native Americans against colonists on the western frontier seriously challenged British military control. In a letter to Colonel Henry Bouquet dated July 7, 1763, Amherst writes "Could it not be contrived to send the Small Pox among those disaffected tribes of Indians?" In a later letter to Bouquet Amherst repeats the idea: "You will do well to try to inoculate the Indians by means of blankets, as well as to try every other method that can serve to extirpate this execrable race." There is evidence that the Captain at Fort Pitt (outside Pittsburgh, PA -- then the western frontier) did give two infected blankets and one infected handkerchief to Indians in June of 1763. This action happened before Amherst mentioned the idea in his correspondence. It is also highly unlikely that the tactic caused any infection.

It is accurate to say that Lord Jeffery Amherst advocated biological warfare against Indians, but there is no evidence that any infected blankets were distributed at his command. For more about Lord Jeffery Amherst's military career, see Professor Kevin Sweeney's article "The Very Model of a Modern Major General." For a detailed examination of Amherst's role in the Fort Pitt smallpox episode, see "The British, the Indians, and Smallpox: What Actually Happened at Fort Pitt in 1763?" by Philip Ranlet.

Allen (etaeoe), Monday, 16 November 2015 14:32 (ten years ago)

The True? in that question is hilarious.

Allen (etaeoe), Monday, 16 November 2015 14:35 (ten years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.