In an excellent WSO thread, Tamanna Rahman ’07 writes

i have been thinking about tolerance, for intolerance.

. . .

ever since i have been at williams, i’ve gotten the impression that i’m supposed to exist in some sort of moral vacuum. i’m allowed to have my opinion, which everyone around me will duly respect and, yes, tolerate, and meanwhile, i am expected to keep that opinion safely locked up somewhere where it won’t interfere with my bland, monotonous, “respectful” interactions with other students, lest i should upset someone. well, that’s not how i work, and i don’t really think it’s how anybody who really cares about anything CAN work. engaging in discussions with people over the course of the last year, i was often met with intense resistance or criticism for expressing myself with unwavering conviction, or daring to say that someone might be just plain WRONG. in fact, pressing the issue on one particularly heated occasion, one individual informed me that it wasn’t fair for any of us to say what might be right or wrong, and that he was offended by my implying there was. everyone in the room seemed to agree. even trying to attain a basic level of moral agreement made everyone uncomfortable and “offended.”

And there is the rub. Read the whole thread. The writing is well done and the ending is happy.

I would be curious to know what Rahman’s take on the Queer Bash e-mail or Barnard/VISTA controversies last year would be . . .

Print  •  Email