Sat 9 Feb 2008
Willy E. N-word, Super Penis
Posted by David Dudley Field '25 under Willy E. N-word at 6:47 am
Apologies for the crudity, but this seems like a good first draft for the name and official mascot of the Spring 2008 Williams Campus Controversy. I asked for reader feedback on several occasions, but only “batman” chimed in with the suggestion for “Willy E N-word” and so he wins our contest. We needed to include some reference to the n-word, obviously, but using the slur itself seems over the top. There is some debate as to whether or not the “E” should have a period or the “w” in “N-word” should be capitalized.. And what about the font? Comments welcome! Given that the original event was in entry E in Williams Hall (generally abbreviated as Willy E on campus), the Road Runners’ friend is the obvious mascot.
Readers of a certain age will recall these cartoons. See Wikipedia. One of the more amusing aspects was the Coyote’s claim to be a “super genius.” Given the penis drawings in the original vandalism, the young-at-heart Eph in me could not resist the pun.
As best I can tell, many of the students involved in the Pact Against Indifference (folks like Kim Dacres, Morgan Goodwin and Will Slack) are very sensible. Indeed, the initial set of goals is something quite reasonable.
1) Construction of a social honor code, to which people would be held accountable in a similar manner as the academic honor code.
2) A discussion day, in which we will raise awareness about issues on campus in a positive way.
3) Addressing subgroups on campus so that everyone is in some way involved in the discussions and honor code (subgroups being clubs, sports, musical ensembles, etc.).
The first is, obviously, not that far away in spirit from an Eph Style Guide, although the “held accountable” part would need to be via a naming/shaming mechanism and not the College’s official disciplinary process. But, again, reasonable people can have an open-minded discussion about these goals; I was certainly wrong to worry that the goals would be some throw-back to the PC 80’s.
But knowing what I know about some of the faculty at Williams and seeing the tone of some of the student comments on WSO, I still think that this might turn into some major PC buffoonery. I am not betting that way but, if it does, our mascot above will work on many levels . . .
Print
• Email
| « 1988 Yearbook: Page 25 | Sinnenberg in Sports Illustrated » |
44 Responses to “Willy E. N-word, Super Penis”
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post
If a comment you submitted does not show up, please email us at eph at ephblog dot com. Please note that commenters are required to use a valid email address when submitting comments.
Neil says:
When you get it right, will you leave it alone or will you continue to prepare for failure so you can make a political point in the culture war?
I wonder, what is the untold story about what happened to dkane during his formative years at Williams?
Worried about major buffonary? Being prepared with a mascot and nickname might qualify.
February 9th, 2008 at 11:00 amfrank uible says:
Youse guys are way too timid, unimaginative and humorless. The glib paisans at the intersection of Mayfield and Murray Hill in Cleveland might have quickly come up with something like “moulinyan palo”.
February 9th, 2008 at 11:33 amFROSH mom says:
David:
Have you stopped to think that you may be playing right into what the “perp” may have wanted accomplished? That possibly his or her real purpose, was to cause humiliation and unwanted attention for all, or some of those entry students, with the slur being a “means to an end”?
Well, s/he has perfectly succeeded….and owes much to EphBlog for this success.
February 9th, 2008 at 11:56 amrory says:
spin! spin! Keep on spinning david!
and considering that in other threads you argue that accountability only is legit if one names names, which faculty are you accusing of desiring pc buffoonry? Out with your timid accusations…so we can all point and laugh at your boogeyman of PC and instead focus on trying to make sure that a college of 2000 elite students could avoid the yearly ritual of some racial ignorance.
I find the idea of a style guide to be the more absurd issue…a drunkard at 2 am is not thinking about a style guide. The social honor code, however, offers much more.
And public shaming only pushes the ignorant to be quiet instead of to be challenged publicly. public shaming is not the goal–the goal is to educate those dumb/ignorant/meansprited enough to act in such a way to see why they shouldn’t while making sure that these dumb/ignorant/meanspirited acts do not in any way affect the college experiences of other students.
February 9th, 2008 at 12:25 pmFROSH mom says:
And talk about irony….
The goals of the “Pact Against Indifference” published amidst a post of this tone….
They must be thrilled.
February 9th, 2008 at 1:16 pmdkane says:
Rory writes:
No. I don’t argue this. For example, the honor code achieves a great deal of accountability without naming names. It just punishes. I just think that naming names is, in this case, a useful tool. Indeed, it is the only technique that I have seen suggested (others would be?) with even a chance of accomplishing anything.
I am not accusing anyone in particular of “desiring” PC buffoonery. I am predicting that we will see some PC buffoonery from at least a few faculty members. Once it happens, I will be happy to point it out. In fact, the type of buffoonery we will use is an attempt to forbid free speech on campus in the name of sensitivity. You read it here first.
Your racial ignorance is, in some cases, my free speech. I do not think that Dave Barnard, for example, was guilty of racial ignorance. If anything, his critics were. I do not think that Mary Jane Hitler was guilty of “racial ignorance,” although her parody was not, to my mind, in very good taste. You want these people to not think what they think. I want Williams to be a place of “uncomfortable learning,” where debates over these issues occur. We both agree that drunken vandalism, whether racist or otherwise, should be severely punished.
I never said that a Eph Style Guide would stop drunken vandalism. If you have a suggestion for that problem, then make it.
A social honor code with College enforced punishments is doomed to failure. Consider a student who writes: “The average SAT score of Chinese American students at Williams is significantly higher than that of African American students.” Would your honor code punish that student? If not, what behavior (that is not already illegal, like harassment) would it punish?
As my daughters say, “And that would be bad because . . . ?”
I want the ignorant to be quiet. I want the drunks to stop vandalizing. Naming names might accomplish that goal. Got a better suggestion that the College has no already tried?
Neil asks:
You really want to know? Fine! Scans of the relevant Record articles will be coming soon . . .
February 9th, 2008 at 1:52 pmNeil says:
Public shaming, shaming of any kind, is the wrong approach. Respect is the element that’s needed most. If a student uses a slur, showing respect for them as a person while making it clear why the slur is inappropriate are exactly the two elements necessary for an effective, non-traumatic learning experience. We all know people live with a trauma long after the moment is over. Why introduce a method that’s sure to cause it?
If dkane wishes to share information about what happened to him at Williams… my point was not to pry but to point out that his efforts in the area seem driven by a sense of righting an injustice – inappropriate and counterproductive overreaction referred to as PC buffoonery – which to my judgment has not occurred here.
If it – shaming and PC buffoonery – occurred in the past, I would not be surprised. I too am advocating that it does not happen here.
We are still on track to make a constructive, thoughtful and reasoned response to the problem. Let’s wait to react to the overreaction if it happens…why borrow on our misery?
February 9th, 2008 at 2:27 pmFROSH mom says:
Neil,
You are a voice of reason. But it seems kind of hard to have “a constructive, thoughtful and reasoned response” with Wile E. Coyote at the helm…
February 9th, 2008 at 2:57 pmrory says:
david:
http://etftrends.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/07/24/etf_spin.jpg
i said NOTHING about free speech.
again, what faculty do you predict will promote some pc buffoonry? Or is this just some talking point to bash the academic left that when it comes true you look prescient and when it doesn’t, everyone forgets you predicted it?
Debates over race and its role in society and individual experiences are good. However, those debates NEVER should start because of racial ignorance/free speech. They should come out of an interest in engaging those difficult issues with respect. This is not a good impetus for such “uncomfortable learning” because the learning is mostly for the majority and the discomfort is for the minority. A white person generally does not feel anything like the discomfort of a non-white person when such events happen.
A social honor code offers the potential for serious punishment. that can sometimes stop a drunkard from idiocy. Public shaming does not stop drunkards…if anything, it eggs them on. Personally, I don’t really want either, but a style guide is so flimsy as to be a joke. a social honor code might actually accomplish something.
I do not want ignorance silenced at Williams because then these students will be leaders in society and they better not still be ignorant then. Let the ignorance and learning come out at williams, not when they’re in charge of hiring or firing people (or other such position of power). But when it comes at Williams, it shouldn’t come at the cost of a fellow student’s sense of belonging.
February 9th, 2008 at 3:52 pmLarry George says:
Rory,
You taught me something important with this:
“I do not want ignorance silenced at Williams because then these students will be leaders in society and they better not still be ignorant then. Let the ignorance and learning come out at williams, not when they’re in charge of hiring or firing people (or other such position of power). But when it comes at Williams, it shouldn’t come at the cost of a fellow student’s sense of belonging.”
Thank you.
February 9th, 2008 at 6:03 pmfrank uible says:
Who is the arbiter who decides what is or is not ignorance? I aspire to hold that position.
February 9th, 2008 at 7:35 pmdkane says:
“A social honor code offers the potential for serious punishment.”
Please be specific. Give an example of an action that is currently not proscribed by either Massachusetts law or College regulations that this “social honor code” would cover and then punish. If all we are talking about is an Eph Style Guide, violations of which would lead to no official action by the College, then we already agree. But it seems like you, and the students involved, have something more in mind. But, we can only make progress with concrete examples.
How about Mary Jane Hitler? The College clearly allows students to place posters on other students doors (it seems) and certainly allows it in designated spots on campus. Would your social honor code punish students who put up posters like that?
How about the students who, Morty described, engaged in “an outdoor conversation among several students that included the cavalier use of the same racial slur that appeared last weekend in Williams Hall”? Would these students be punished (suspended? expelled?) by the College?
How about a student making the same claim as former baseball Dave Barnard, that Hispanic baseball players are more likely than, say, Japanese baseball players to engage in on-field fights, taunting and so on? Would a student (or coach!) who made that claim be in violation of the social honor code?
I think that the answer to these real cases has to be No. Therefore, talk of a Social Honor Code with College-enforced punishments is ridiculous. Take a few steps down that path and PC buffoonery is not to far away.
February 9th, 2008 at 7:46 pmWill Slack '11 says:
Two points to clarify:
Students are reacting to more than the episode of drunken foolishness in Willy E.
The social honor code group is only the beginning of a formal process on this issue. Its complete purpose and scope have not yet been decided.
February 9th, 2008 at 8:01 pmFROSH mom says:
Rory, Rory….
That link should come with a warning.
In fact, let me check the clock here. Yes, indeed, I have been in a hypnotic trance for oh…hard to tell…still recovering…..
I may never be the same….which could be….a good thing…
February 9th, 2008 at 9:37 pmDavid Broadband says:
Super Penis, the N word, Willie E, and Super C, and the winner for tonight’s Oscar program is__________.
We have a vaudeville theatrical production over a day in the life of stress and boredom in the Purple Valley.
People stumble every day. They trip over themselves. The learning process is an arduous one with little time to ponder over one’s actions over time.
I hear there is a movement of some sorts for a social honor code? How is one to frame this code within the context of divergent social customs, traditions, religious prejudices, perceptual differences in how one interprets a word or action. How are we to interpret the mind of some student’s intuitive sense of some “evil eye”, lurking somewhere?
Perhaps we need to dust of copies of books pertaining to etiquette and manners. Manners matter. It is about being considerate and honest with others, and by helping others out.
Here are several suggestions: “Essential Manners for Men: What to Do, When to Do It, and Why” by Peter Post. {http://www.powells.com/biblio?PID=25450&cgi=product&isbn=0060539801};
“Redneck Book of Manners” {http://www.forwardedfunnies.com/redneck_book_of_manners_011632.html}., especially their comment: “Be aggressive. Let them know you’re interested. ‘I.ve been wanting to go out with you since I read that stuff on the bathroom wall two years ago.’ “;
“The Book of Manners” by Fu’ad Ibn ‘Abdul-‘Azeez Ash-Shulhoob at http://www.onlineislamicstore.com/b7899.html;
and finally, Whoopi Goldbergs: “Mind Your Manners” at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/078685295X/interactiveda477-20.
Alexis de Tocqueville, in 1831 published a book entitled: Democracy In America. Chapter XVII: Principal Causes Maintaining The Democratic Republic—Part 1
“All the causes which contribute to the maintenance of the democratic republic in the United States are reducible to three heads:
I. The peculiar and accidental situation in which Providence has placed the Americans.
II. The laws.
III. The manners and customs of the people.
“The importance of the influence of manners as applied in their proper sense of what constitutes the character of social intercourse, where it is extended to the various notions and opinions current among men, and to the mass of those ideas which constitute their chraracter of mind. This term is representative of the moral and intellectual condition of a people.”
How do we counteract the imperfection of human nature? How do we correct the natural defects of democracy and the consummate mixture of ignorance and presumption amongst ourselves?
Manners allow a democratic people to remain free insofar as the ideas and sentiments prepare a people for freedom, allowing each and everyone of us to enjoy that freedom from the tyranny of rude instruments and imperfect laws and with the unlimited authority of its institutions.
February 10th, 2008 at 12:09 amhwc says:
Good point, DKane. Now that you mention it, the only meaningful difference between this year’s brouhaha and Mary Jane Hitler was the use of permanent markers making it vandalism. If this year’s perp had simply put up posters with penises and the N-word on every dorm room door, it would have been EXACTLY the same as Mary Jane Hitler and I assume the college would have celebrated the free speech as with Mary Jane Hitler.
While I applaud Morty for finally expressing a little outrage, he’s fighting an uphill battle due to the notable lack of outrage demonstrated by the administration in a long string of prior incidents. By not having “teaching moments” for Mary Jane Hitler or for the racial slurs the year before and on and on, he’s allowed an community standard (or lack thereof) to become accepted.
BTW, I think formal social honor codes are silly. You either have a functioning community with accepted community standards or you don’t. Signing a piece of paper doesn’t change that.
Morty has an admissions problem and he’ll never effectively address the feces smearing, property destruction, alcohol poisonings, and racial slurs until he stops pretending to ignore that obvious issue. I am quite certain that the professionals in the admissions office could indeed deliver freshman class free of bigots if that were assigned to them as a higher priority than other attributes by the administration.
To paraphrase the infamous Governor of Georgia Lester Maddox: “We ain’t never gonna have better prisons until we have a better grade of prisoner…”
February 10th, 2008 at 2:13 amLarry George says:
“Morty has an admissions problem and he’ll never effectively address the feces smearing, property destruction, alcohol poisonings, and racial slurs until he stops pretending to ignore that obvious issue. I am quite certain that the professionals in the admissions office could indeed deliver freshman class free of bigots if that were assigned to them as a higher priority than other attributes by the administration.”
This is probably largely true.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:07 amFROSH mom says:
hwc:
You made some very interesting points on which I have a couple of questions:
(1) What is the “admissions problem” that Morty has?
(2) And, how can you “possibly deliver [a] freshman class free of bigots”?
Some sort of psychological testing as a part of the admissions process? Egads….
Bigotry can be very hard to spot…and many know how to hide it. I’ve had casual acquaintances for years before circumstances arose that showed they had this ugly trait.
February 10th, 2008 at 10:01 amfrank uible says:
SATs – egads!
February 10th, 2008 at 11:15 amFROSH mom says:
Frank:
SAT’s measure something very different and are flawed in their aims as well. Sadly, I would bet that intelligent people are more adept at hiding their bigotry, which, if true, would further complicate pinpointing this trait in a Williams applicant.
But c’mon, somewhere on this blog, you made the same argument about screening for bigots, so really, I would like to know…how could this be done?
February 10th, 2008 at 12:23 pmhwc says:
Morty’s admissions problem is that he continues to recruit and enroll a significant minority of students who engage in a pattern of social behaviors (alcohol abuse, property destruction, feces spreading, visible bigotry, and general neaderthalism) that is highly disruptive to the college community. The vast majority of wonderful kids at Williams College deserve better for their hard work, responsible behavior and $45,000 a year. It is these well-adjusted, socially-responsible, bright students at Williams who continue to pay the price for the admissions problem.
Can you ensure zero neanderthals at Williams? No, of course not. However, you can reduce the neanderthals to such a small minority that they no longer visibly impact the social climate. The majority of great kids becomes so dominant that they set the tone for the campus community, further reducing neanderthalism through peer pressure.
It’s quite simple. You identify the characteristics you desire and set a priority for the highly capable professionals in the admissions office. The admissions office enrolls students to meet the school’s priorities. And, they have a stack of five great apps to choose from for each admissions letter.
For example, let’s hypothetically propose that Morty set diversity and cultural acceptance as an admissions priority. All the admissions office as to do is flag applications that suggest an interest in, experience with, or a commitment to diversity. Ask for a “Why Williams?” essay and flag those applicants who are attracted to Williams because of its commitment to diversity. Flag applicants with extracurricular activities and/or recommendations highlighting engagement with culturally diverse communities. This is not rocket science. The Admissions Office is very good at what they do. And, remember, they have the luxury of picking and choosing from an enormous pool of academically qualified applicants. They can deliver any kind of student body the College wants.
Of course, here’s the rub. If you make these characteristics top priorities, then other characteristics move down the priority list. And, of course, you have to give control over the admissions process for the entire class to the Admissions Office. These are changes Morty is, apparently unwilling to make, which is why he turns a blind eye to the admissions problem and accepts the disruptive behavior, the property destruction, the high rate of alcohol poisoning hospitalizations, and the recurring ethnic slur incidents.
February 10th, 2008 at 12:57 pmIDiAR says:
hwc:
I’m sorry, but, that’s just a stupid idea. Most of the people who would claim “diversity” as the main reason to attend Williams are most likely complete tools just trying to pander to the admissions office. There are plenty of extremely smart and talented students (more like an overwhelming majority, if I had to guess) who would like to come to Williams for reasons besides its “commitment to diversity.” Even students who do support this commitment to diversity would have more important subjects to discuss in a “Why Williams” essay like, oh, I don’t know, academics perhaps?
February 10th, 2008 at 1:53 pmhwc says:
Academics are not mutually exclusive with other desired admissions qualities.
I think it’s fair to say that Williams currently prioritizes applicants with academics and a flagged attribute in another area. For example, a very high percentage of each entering class consists of students recruited for their athletic interests.
February 10th, 2008 at 1:59 pm'10 says:
Neanderthals are already a tiny minority of the student body, but it only takes one person in two thousand to write “nigger” and cause a massive uproar. If you wanted to eliminate that possibility, you would have to make the admissions department more than 99.95% accurate in detecting potential bigots, and I don’t see how that could conceivably be done – even a screening process based on a commitment to “diversity” (which, by the way, is probably one of the easiest subjects to write complete bullshit about – a KKK member could probably write a convincing essay if they used all the right buzzwords) wouldn’t necessarily guarantee anything.
Also, consider hypothetically that an otherwise brilliant and talented student applies to Williams, and the admissions office has some magical way of detecting that they may be a bigot. Why not admit that person and give them a chance to live in a diverse and tolerant community? If Williams’ mission is to educate people, it would seem that such a student would be a perfect target.
February 10th, 2008 at 2:01 pmhwc says:
BTW, top-shelf admissions professionals, such as those at Williams, aren’t easily fooled by application BS. They know how to spot applicants who have “walked the walk” as evidenced by their recommendations and extracurricular activities. That’s what admissions professionals do and they do it very well. Assign them a priority and they’ll get the students (given the luxury of the kind of large applicant pool Williams enjoys).
February 10th, 2008 at 2:02 pmFROSH mom says:
hwc:
Thanks for taking the time to answer so thoughtfully. With all due respect, I think it might be “rocket science”, or at least, very complicated.
How do you pinpoint, from a high school transcript, who is the “neanderthal”, who is “truly committed to diversity”…who has the “right characteristics”?
Transcripts are deceptive. A lot of students are extremely savvy at fitting a desired profile. And, by screening in this way, you also make no allowances for the kid who blossoms into the leader once arriving at W, or the kid who lets go of inherited biases once they leave home, etc, etc. A lot of these kids are missed as it is.
Shoot, I have no idea what the answer is. The whole thing makes me very sad. In fact, I don’t even think I can talk about this anymore. I officially withdraw from discussion until another bridge post, or art post, or tulip-planting post appears.
But again, thanks for thinking about my question, and answering it.
February 10th, 2008 at 2:03 pm[space] says:
So, new requirements for Williams Admission: minimum 1400 SAT, 3.0 GPA, must love all people as their brother/sister?
February 10th, 2008 at 2:03 pmhwc says:
You are looking at the problem too narrowly. We aren’t talking about a case where a lone-wolf Neanderthal acts out once every ten years. We are talking about recurring pattern of socially disruptive behaviors by a visible minority of students over a long period of time at Williams College — to a degree that is not seen at many other top liberal arts colleges.
The annual ethnic slur incidents are part of a larger issue that can really only be addressed by admissions office priorities.
The admissions priorities begat changes to the campus culture which in turn begat less interest on the part of Neanderthals to attend Williams College which in turn begats and even more desireable campus culture.
February 10th, 2008 at 2:12 pmhwc says:
Admissions professionals wouldn’t approach the problem by looking at each individual applicant to guess if he or she exibits the priority qualities. Instead, they build a class by looking at the huge stack of applications and flagging those that where the priority qualities clearly stands out. The same way they flag varsity football players.
I guarantee that in an applicant pool as strong as Williams has, there are thousands of students who have clearly demonstrated an interest in and desire to be a part of a diverse community…through their essays, their extracurricular interests, their personal experience, and their recommendations. Make those qualities a priority for the admissions office and you shape the student body, just like you shape the student body when you make varsity athletics a top priority.
February 10th, 2008 at 2:26 pmdkane says:
hwc claims:
Evidence? I have no reason to think that Neanderthal behavior is any more common at Williams than it is at Swarthmore, Middlebury, Amherst or any other LAC. If you have evidence, hwc, please present it.
And, before you start singing the praises of all things Swarthmore, please tell us the story of the Swarthmore student who, apparently, sexually assaulted several undergraduate women before leaving the college. I would rather have a campus with Mary Jane Hitler and Willy E. N-word than one with a serial sexual predator. But maybe that’s just me!
And Swarthmore doesn’t even have a football team!
[New readers may not know that hwc is extremely critical of the College’s tips” policies in admissions, especially with regard to men’s teams like football and hockey. Yet hwc is also extremely knowledgeable on this topic, so you should pay attention to what he has to say.]
February 10th, 2008 at 2:38 pmNeil says:
If “we are talking about recurring pattern of socially disruptive behaviors by a visible minority of students over a long period of time at Williams College” it is probably more reflective of the greater pool of highly academically qualified college applicants than the choices made by admissions.
Just as significant is the tone set on campus about what language and behavior will pass as acceptable.
February 10th, 2008 at 4:10 pmhwc says:
Most college newspapers have searchable archives. Pick any ten liberal arts colleges of your choosing (Pomona, Haverford, Wellesley, Smith Davidson, and so forth) and find the last time any of them had recurring outbreaks of feces spreading. Search the archives for alcohol poisoning hospitalizations. Search for ethnic slur incidents. Search for the number of alcohol poisoning hospitalizations over a period of time.
The full story can be found at: This Link
As I read the story, a male friend of “multiple” (the story doesn’t specify how many) female coeds “assaulted” them during a two or three day period in November. The victims and the alleged perp were all friends. The definition of “sexual assault” starts at inappropriate touching and continues along a spectrum to rape; the article doesn’t specify the nature of these incidents.
The female students compared notes and reported the incidents which triggered a series of meetings with the sexual assault team at the college including meetings with the Assistant Dean in charge of sexual assault issues and with the Dean of Student Life. The various support functions, including the student-led sexual assault response group and the Health Center are detailed in the article. Although not detailed in the article, I’m confident that similar series of meetings was occuring between the College and the alleged perp.
In December a month after the incidents, one of the women decided to file a formal complaint with the College and with the Swarthmore police. A College discplinary proceding was scheduled immediately after winter break (Swarthmore is on break from for a month, through January 21th), but the alleged perp opted to withdraw from the college effective at the end of the fall term (the third week of December). The College cannot hold a disciplinary hearing for someone who has withdrawn from the College (as opposed to taken a leave of absence).
The police investigation is still open, but the Police Chief quoted in the article seemed to suggest that an assault charge of this nature filed a month after the incident would be unlikely to result in a criminal prosecution due to lack of evidence.
The victim who filed the charges was quoted in a positive way about the response she received from the College:
The victim was extremely happy with the support she received from the SMART team. “[Our SMART team member] was with us every step of the way, she came with us to the Deans Office, she came with us when we went to Worth [Health Center].”
“It makes all the difference if you come when you’re needed,” she continued. “I know that if we hadn’t called [a SMART team member], we might have lost our nerve and not have talked to anyone — it’s like the first jumping off point. [Dean] Karen Henry is also wonderful with victim support.”
Her only beef was that the College could not procede with a College Judicial Council hearing for a student who had withdrawn from the College.
BTW, when you have a college community that applies peer pressure and involves groups (such as has been suggested by College Council in the Wily-E meetings), you get this kind of response even from the most unlikely source:
Delta Upsilon fraternity editorial on sexual assault
February 10th, 2008 at 4:12 pmhwc says:
That is true. No college will every completely eradicate the neanderthal population. The key is to make sure that the neanderthal population is so small that it does not approach the critical mass that allows it to influence what is and is not acceptable community behavior and discourage others from speaking out when that standard is violated.
It is clear to me, from any number of metrics (binge drinking rates, alcohol poisoinings, property destruction, feces spreading, and ethnic slurs) that Williams would be well served to cull the herd and reduce the size of the neanderthal population. Doing so through admissions priorities would be a more humane than shooting them.
February 10th, 2008 at 4:24 pmdkane says:
hwc tells me to:
No. I am not the one claiming that Williams is such-and-such in comparison to other LACs. You are. If you have no evidence, then fine. Neither do I. But don’t claim that something (more Neanderthal behavior at Williams than other LACs) is the case without making clear the (lack of) evidence you have for it.
You are, of course, on much stronger ground when you cite the Report on Varsity Athletics about whether or not tipped athletes at Williams contribute more than their fair share to drunken stupidity. I know that this is a point that you want to make here, so just go ahead and make it.
February 10th, 2008 at 4:34 pmhwc says:
I have done the searches through the archives of college papers at numerous liberal arts colleges. I have compared the published binge drinking rates. I have compared the alcohol poisonings. I have compared the Cleary statistics. Williams has a problem, it’s as simple as that.
All you really have to do is read the Williams Record. Read about the emergency Board meetings on alcohol. Read the concern about the alcohol hospitalizations. Read about the closing of the Health Center nights and weekends because of alcohol liability issues. Read about the feces spreading. This is not typical behavior.
Just to give you a couple of examples. Swarthmore, Pomona, and Smith all have binge drinking rates in the low 30s compared to a national average of 44. Williams is in the 50s.
Swarthmore averages between 0 and 3 alcohol poisoning transports per year. Last year, two of the three were students from other colleges (Princeton was one) visting for a debate tournament. Haverford is slightly higher, but in the single digits per year. I have found no evidence of high alcohol poisoning transports at Pomona. Again, not zero, but not high double digits year after year after year sufficient to warrant multiple newspaper articles about the concern.
I have never heard of one instance of feces spreading at any other college I’ve looked at. Yet, we have seen outbreaks at Williams in two of the last three years.
There hasn’t been a reported racial slur incident at Swarthmore in years. It is simply not tolerated by the students and a Swarthmore Neanderthal going down that road would, in all likelihood, be told by his friends, “dude, that’s not cool…” before he could make a fool of himself. There have been racial slur incidents reported in the Record in three of the last four years, not counting the Hitler posters.
Williams is certainly not alone. There are other colleges that have problems. But, to pretend that Williams is “average” relative to other high-end LACs is simply sweeping the problem under the rug.
The losers are the vast majority of incredible students at Williams who have to put up with this nonsense.
February 10th, 2008 at 4:56 pm'10 says:
Is it possible that Williams has higher alcohol poisoning transports because it does a better job of encouraging students to call for help if there’s any chance there may be a problem? Similarly, is it possible that other schools have had racial incidents like this one, but that they haven’t been reported or seen as a campus-wide concern in the same way that they have at Williams?
Not saying either of those is necessarily the case, but I don’t think the arguments you’ve presented rule out those possibilities.
As for binge drinking rates, where do those numbers come from? What’s the definition of “binge drinking”? What’s the survey methodology, and what do those “rates” actually mean? (percentage of students who binge drink every week? in any given week? over the course of a year? in their lifetime?) It’s impossible to evaluate any argument using those numbers without that sort of information.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:25 pmfrank uible says:
So much crap to wade through, and so little time.
February 10th, 2008 at 5:44 pmmara says:
hmmm … and all of the college newspapers publish all of their incidents. My guess would be not.
February 10th, 2008 at 6:08 pmNeil says:
Whether Williams is below average (fewer than most), average, or above average (more unseemly anti-social racially motivated events) is somewhat irrelevent.
The question is whether we recognize this as a problem and if so, what we can do to address it?
I think its a mistake to consider feces spreading, and penis drawing/nigger scrawling, and binge drinking as one in the same. Certainly, binge drinking affects judgment but its a health issue, a social environment issue and a coping skills issue versus a racial bigotry issue versus a psychological problem about which I’m not sufficiently educuted to comment on.
February 10th, 2008 at 6:46 pmDavid Broadband says:
Only when we have experienced the inhibitors advances and the machinations of the written and spoken word will the crowd rise where “by a divine instinct men’s minds mistrust ensuing danger”.
A clarion call has been issued for diversity parameters as a measure of weeding out this insuperable antipathy between the student men and women of rank within Williams corridors. The injured parties, many of which have taken upon themselves this role as a crusade for cancer, now are calling upon administration and students to respond to the martyrdom of our gallant idealists as has been vibrantly felt throughout the quiet and stately buildings of Williams Commons.
Meanwhile, there is much charm and kindred of purpose within these grounds, where there is much to admire as to the good nature of our people. There is a longing to fulfill the dreams and goals that have yet to be shaped by its energy.
This period of pessimism is certainly to be followed by optimism. Wise leadership necessitates good counsel where we draw upon our experience between mind and emotion and not look to encumber others through the occasional outbursts of unwanted excitement. This excessive concentration can only bring us to the brink of that choice towards unstable body of emotions moving one to the abuses of authority.
Hatreds, passions and prejudices are to some extent innate and may be reduced by wise leadership or inflamed by bad.
We have much to learn from our experiences and all the more to be enriched by them. Let us pay tribute to the best in each and every one of us, and help others realize theirs.
February 10th, 2008 at 7:06 pmhwc says:
I think an analysis would show that nearly all of the asocial behaviors in the Williams community are directly related to heavy binge drinking.
Note that the new Dean, in an interview last December, said that her biggest surprise about her new job was that problem drinking is the number one issue she has to deal with.
I don’t think Williams will successfully deal with the ancilliary symptoms until it gets the underlying problem under control and brings the binge drinking rate down to at least national collegiate averages.
This will take understanding who the heavy binge drinkers are and taking steps to enroll fewer of those type students, thus reducing the critical mass that negatively impacts the majority of the students.
February 10th, 2008 at 7:16 pmJG says:
“I think an analysis would show that nearly all of the asocial behaviors in the Williams community are directly related to heavy binge drinking.”
While I would agree that there are many problems related to drinking, I think it is a cop-out to place the blame entirely on alcohol. These behaviors may come out more easily from booze, but the root is deeper. To say you could reform bigots and idiots by getting rid of drinking is to let them off way too easily.
During my time at Williams there were events that had the racial slur vs. free speech debate going (Mad Cow fiasco anyone – 2001 I think) and were conceived – and in some cases published – fully sober. Mary Jane Hitler also was not a drunken event was it?
So I won’t downplay the seriousness of binge drinking if you don’t downplay the seriousness of disrespect and bigotry. The penis drawing and n-word event THIS TIME may be a drunken idiot, but the next time may not be. And a drunken Williams student who embraces diversity and generally has respect for fellow students doesn’t do this kind of thing when drunk. Alcohol poisoning causes harm to the student him/herself. Racial slurs are aimed outward. You simply cannot conflate the two.
If it were that easy, Williams would be a dry campus in a heartbeat.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:10 pmhwc says:
JG:
I agree with you. There is an underlying disrespect and sense of entitlement that would be there with or without the booze, albeit perhaps repressed.
I think there would be signficant overlap from an admissions profile standpoint. The demographics of heavy college drinkers are very well researched. In other words, if the admissions office tried to cull out the heavy drinking demographics, I believe they would also be culling out the racial slur profile as an added bonus.
Conversely, if the admissions office flagged and prioritized applicants who had walked the walk in diverse environments (for example, teaching summer enrichment classes in Latino or African American neighborhoods or serving for three years as a judge in the local teen court system), I suspect that the binge drinking rate at the college would drop.
February 10th, 2008 at 8:24 pmaparent says:
“I have never heard of one instance of feces spreading at any other college I’ve looked at.”
Just offhand, without researching the issue, I know that the Bowdoin student newspaper published information in one of this year’s issues about a campus “pooper” there as well.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:51 am