University of Missouri Football Strike

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

I just don't see how this reads as anything but white fragility.

So it's not possible to disagree with what the administrators did, or perhaps with how they did it, without being motivated by white fragility?

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

So it's not possible to disagree with what the administrators did, or perhaps with how they did it, without being motivated by white fragility?

I didn't say it was impossible. I said it was highly unlikely, given that administrators send out emails about all sorts of things you should and should not do on a college campus.

I have a really hard time believing that, if a bunch of cheaters were busted and there was a subsequent email about academic integrity, students would complain to their residential college directors.

Maybe there are students who had no idea about recent race-related incidents at Yale and elsewhere, and therefore saw the email as being unprompted, but that speaks to the privilege of those students rather than Yale's overreach.

[Sen's Revenge]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

I didn't say it was impossible. I said it was highly unlikely, given that administrators send out emails about all sorts of things you should and should not do on a college campus.

I have a really hard time believing that, if a bunch of cheaters were busted and there was a subsequent email about academic integrity, students would complain to their residential college directors.

Maybe there are students who had no idea about recent race-related incidents at Yale and elsewhere, and therefore saw the email as being unprompted, but that speaks to the privilege of those students rather than Yale's overreach.

Thank you.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

I have a really hard time believing that, if a bunch of cheaters were busted and there was a subsequent email about academic integrity, students would complain to their residential college directors.

Of course not, because academic integrity and cheating are at the core of the university's disciplinary powers. Who would question that?

Which is one reason why some of us have said we can see how the email here seemed like an implied threat of discipline.

Maybe there are students who had no idea about recent race-related incidents at Yale and elsewhere, and therefore saw the email as being unprompted, but that speaks to the privilege of those students rather than Yale's overreach.

If that's what happened, then yes, it does. But as far as I've seen, we know nothing about the students who expressed concerns (which is not the same as complaining or "crying"), nor do we know what concerns they expressed. We don't know that they were all white students. We just don't know.

It seems that an unwarranted and false dichotomy is being presented: either one supports the email completely and unquestioningly, or one is wrong, and that wrong-ness is motivated by privilege, fragility or the like. Is there absolutely no room for someone to say something like "I agree with what you're trying to accomplish, but I think there may better ways to get there, and I think the conversation needs to be broader"?

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Of course not, because academic integrity and cheating are at the core of the university's disciplinary powers. Who would question that?

I sure wouldn't, but I also wouldn't question that creating a safe environment for students of color is at the core of a university's duties as well.

Originally Posted by MysticCat

It seems that an unwarranted and false dichotomy is being presented: either one supports the email completely and unquestioningly, or one is wrong, and that wrong-ness is motivated by privilege, fragility or the like. Is there absolutely no room for someone to say something like "I agree with what you're trying to accomplish, but I think there may better ways to get there, and I think the conversation needs to be broader"?

Scott Woods says it better than I can:

https://scottwoodsmakeslists.wordpre...horrible-goal/

In short, we are WAY past the time for conversation.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

I sure wouldn't, but I also wouldn't question that creating a safe environment for students of color is at the core of a university's duties as well.

Again, a false dichotomy—that concerns about this email mean one is against creating a safe environment for students of color.

It's late; I'll read the Scott Woods article tomorrow, when I can digest a little better.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

It's late; I'll read the Scott Woods article tomorrow, when I can digest a little better.

Very good article, with much to think about. Thanks for sharing it.

I agree with him completely when he says:

A conversation about race in 2015 is not a goal.

It is not a good goal, it is not a reasonable goal, and it is not an equitable goal. In fact, treating the conversation like a goal is offensive to thinking people who have been having these conversations longer than you or your daddy or your grandfather have been alive, let alone the people forced to live as the subjects of your well-meaning conversations.

And I groan when at every catalyst, I hear something along the lines of "maybe this will start the conversation on race we need to have."

And I readily acknowledge that not all conversations are created equal, nor are all conversation entered into honestly. Making conversation the goal is indeed a smokescreen, a way of deflecting and avoiding. The goal is, or should be, a just society for all. In my view, honest dialogue is one of the ways we work towards that goal.

My issue is when the environment at an educational institution stifles that dialogue or dismisses it as unnecessary or inappropriate, or when dissenting views are stifled—not countered, but just shut out entirely.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

My issue is when the environment at an educational institution stifles that dialogue or dismisses it as unnecessary or inappropriate, or when dissenting views are stifled—not countered, but just shut out entirely.

Sure, but I don't read that in the initial email. I don't think you and I are that far apart on this, I just don't think that we can sit around and wait for students to make good choices. It would be really nice if they did, but again and again we have blackface or related incidents, and at some point, the university needs to step up and really do something concrete.

Which is to say, if Christakis heard concerns from students, I think the right path would be to ask the students to reflect on why that email may have been perceived as necessary.