Yale Daily News

I don't understand why everyone assumes this graffiti came from within the community (at least that is how this article portrays the incident). While I have no evidence that it was an outsider who spray painted Pierson, it could have easily been a random citizen of New Haven or even a student from SCU or QPac. With that in mind, a multicultural office would not solve this issue. It is a nice idea to have this office but even if every member of the Yale community agrees that this incident was wrong, that would not stop someone from outside the Yale community from defacing Yale property with racist language. Three or four years ago someone spray painted the sidewalks outside of JE on York Street with racially insensitive graffiti. However, it seemed clear at the time that this was an isolated event that probably did not involve Yalies. To imply that there is some greater racial tension beneath the surface at Yale because of an isolated incident that may not have even been perpetrated by Yalies is an overreaction. We can all stand up against these deplorable acts but let’s not jump to the conclusion that Yale is all of a sudden having major issues.

Umm why is everyone reacting as if the graffiti was done by a Yale student? Does it not occur to people that we live in a city of over 100,000 people?

A multicultural office is a great idea! Why wasn't this proposed sooner??

I am fascinated by these previous comments that seem convinced such acts could never be perpetrated by Yale students. How quickly we have forgotten the attack on Katherine Lo's suite in 2003.

Is it possible this was done by non-Yalies? Sure. But to act as though there's no problems with hate and hate speech at Yale is deeply ignorant.

I don't think it matters whether or not the graffiti was done by a Yale student -- did people not read the full article where it said that the dining hall worker heard Yale students in Davenport LAUGHING and using the N-word? THAT is the serious problem here. Reactions like that are unacceptable.

I agree that the graffiti was probably not performed by a Yalie - probably. But that should not discourage Yalies from supporting the start of a long-overdue multicultural office. This incident is only one in a long series of events (including nooses on old campus! BEFORE the recent rash across the nation) that have happened on campus with racial undertones. It is time for Yalies to recognize that even though you personally may have elevated and modern personal values, not every member of our community does and that needs to be addressed both officially and unofficially with concern, honesty, and a sense of community that is greater than the minority of students who choose to express themselves in this deplorable manner. I cannot underscore enough the need for Yalies not to react dismissevely to these events and create an opportunity for even more offensive statements being made publicly and privately.

I don't find that too terribly problematic. They could have been quoting a recent episode of "Curb Your Enthusiasm" or shunning Michael Richards or commenting farcically on the power of a word to inspire so much hatred, etc, rather than simply being intolerant imbeciles. I suspect that, given the PC police, these students were foolish insofar as they had their conversation publicly without censoring their language (who doesn't feel like a 4-year-old when saying "The N-word" ?). If they were more concerned with niceties, they ought to have spoken uncesored somewhere else. Nevertheless, their "reactions" are not inherently "unacceptable" out of context. Or would you outlaw the use of a word entirely? That sounds like empowerment of an idea that should be laughed into oblivion. E.g. racism.

I definitely agree with the last commentator. Using the word "nigger" or any other word in a vacuum, or when simply quoting it from somewhere or telling a story about it should not be seen as inappropriate -- as opposed to calling someone a nigger with some sort of malicious intent. I remember last year, during an African American Lit seminar I was taking, a student and, most outrageously, the professor! saying "the N word" or simply the letter "n" when the word "nigger" came up while reading from the text. If that doesn't signal the triumph of senseless political correctness over intelligence and common sense, I don't know what does.

I think that reason why the Dining Hall workers remembered that incident with students using the N word around them is because they find it inherently offensive and unnecessary. So yes, the students may have been discussing a book or telling a story (an idea i find highly implausible, but let's act like that might have been the case). But you must at all times be aware of your surroundings and the effect your words have on those around you; not because it is a law or a rule or even a societal expectation but because this is a community that you are priviledged to be a part of. There are very few spaces at yale that are literally private - And as part of a community, you should want, on your own volition, to contribute positively to the experience of those around you whether they are dining hall workers or young women in a courtyard or visitors to our campus. The comparison is unnecessary but i would offer the example of repeating the word 'b*tch' while the Dean's family walked by you; yes, you have every right to say the word 'b*tch' and you may be quoting a great author or telling a story - but i would hope that out of respect and a desire to strengthen our community you would respect the Dean's family just as those individuals should've respected the dining hall workers and everyone else by avoiding such divisive language.

First, I agree that it's unlikely the students were involved in some sort of innocuous discussion. But, while I agree with the rest of above comment in theory, people must realize that it's a little bit hard to completely carry out in practice. First, because people have different comfort and sensitivity levels when it comes to words -- I personally know certain people who consider the word 'bitch' an awful insult and others who think it's barely vulgar and toss it around fairly carelessly. So, unless it's in a situation or around people (the Dean's family, a 6-year-old, the Pope) where it is really obvious that it would be inappropriate, a lot of times you never know when it's ok and when it's not.

In the case of the word "nigger" specifically, surely you're not suggesting that by being "aware of our surroundings and the effects your words have on those around you" we might look around to see if there are any black people within earshot before choosing our language in discussing a funny Dave Chapelle skit or Amiri Baraka text. That seems like an awfully worse alternative. So, what's the other option? Not saying it at all, just in case? I'm not sure I would like to be in an environment where I have to use abbreviations and asterisks to refer to certain words just because someone might hear and someone might feel some discomfort.

It appears the fourth person to post did not read "Anti-blackface columnists lacked rational argument" by Michael Wayne Harris

Published Friday, November 9, 2007. As he points out, while it is acceptable to disagree with someone else's opinion, it is not acceptable to dismiss that opinion without providing a counter argument. For the sake of proper debate, please stop rebutting an opinion simply by calling it ignorant or the commentor ignorant. Thanks.

The violent loss of free expression

Laura Hess

Published Thursday, April 10, 2003

Two weeks ago, Katherine Lo '05 hung an American flag upside-down outside her window, a symbol of distress and dissent with the U.S. government. She reported to the police that two Thursdays ago, several male students broke into her suite after midnight, armed with a two-by-four, and tried to enter her bedroom, the door of which, fortunately, was locked. According to Lo, they scrawled on her whiteboard a message violently calling for the killing of Iraqis and Muslims with threats specifically directed at women. It ended with the words, "I hate you, GO AMERICA."

Lo has since taken down her flag and moved out of her suite, afraid for her safety.

(I guess this was just another one of those isolated incidents, huh? The truth is that there is a history of bigotry on Yale's campus. Must we wait for it to rise to the level of violence again for our responses to be justified? By the way, those who broke into Kat Lo's room and left her violent threats were only placed on probation. Gee, thanks Yale.)

IN RESPONSE TO: "we might look around to see if there are any black people within earshot before choosing our language in discussing a funny Dave Chapelle skit or Amiri Baraka text. That seems like an awfully worse alternative. So, what's the other option? Not saying it at all, just in case? I'm not sure I would like to be in an environment where I have to use abbreviations and asterisks to refer to certain words just because someone might hear and someone might feel some discomfort."

Firstly, this word and words like it are not just offensive to "black people." I would say Im not sure why that is such a HUGE inconvenience not to scatter words with such hateful and incendiary denotations publicly. The problem is that while an individual or group of individuals might be using the word in a contextually appropriate way (and there are very few of those anyway), it is quite difficult for people in earshot to understand that your comments are innocent/conversational. Thus, out of consideration for your community, you have the option not to casually throw around words in public out of respect for people who are not a part of your profound intellectual discussion. What seems an inconvenience for one of us can easily be an experience-altering, hurtful and incisive moment for everyone else - so why go there.

Yawn, it' time to GET A LIFE. There’s something a bit stale about rallying against “hate” for the ten thousandth time. When 99.9% of the students agree with you, it doesn’t take a lot of courage to rally against an almost non-existent enemy.

Especially since the odds are about 50/50 that these grafitti were faked by some liberal anxious to rally the masses of the faithful. As the saying used to go back in the forties, if a totalitarian regime doesn’t have enemies, it has to invent them.

To most adults this response is just another example of self induced PC and mushy headed thinking. Is this Yale or a Pre School?