Yale Fraternities and Productive Dialogue

Following up my post below about the Yale fraternity whose pledges marched to women's dorms shouting no means yes, yes means anal sex:

The Yale Daily News has a *staff* editorial entitled "News' View: The right kind of feminism," saying: "Feminists at Yale should remember that, on a campus as progressive as ours, most of their battles are already won..." I wouldn't blame Yale's 'wrong' type of feminists if they said this editorial shows how far away the campus is from winning some important battles. Perhaps you think some rhetoric is overblown (DKE as a male-ponzi scheme) or at least counter-productive (but consider: why is it?), still, this editorial seems to downplay the problem: "And yet, as groups rushed to condemn the foolhardy DKE bros, they threw overwrought epithets, some almost as absurd as the chants themselves." Further, the editorial says: "We do not believe that a drive to inspire rape motivated the young, impressionable brothers on that cold Wednesday night. As the [women's] Center responded with histrionics, what could have been an opportunity for our campus to maturely and gracefully reprove public stupidity and affirm mutual respect turned into a daylong, private spat." A tip for the Yale Daily News: when you criticize others for overreacting with 'absurd' rhetoric, it is best not to say that women were hysterical when they should have been graceful. Yale editors: whatever you think to be true about their rhetoric, do you really think your call for productive dialogue goes along with your words? Further, even if the Women's Center did 'overreact,' many other feminists should rightly see this editorial as evidence that not people seeing the problem in the situation. It is not just the intentions of the rushed, as the editorial says. That is absurd. And the editorial's silence is unproductive. I mean, even the Feminist magazine at Yale says that while all participants deserve contempt (true), it is the rush chairs who really deserve punishment. Does the Yale Daily News editorial board sees them as the 'right' kind of feminism? I somehow doubt it.

Perhaps the YDS would respond saying that even the rush chairs did not intend to promote rape. If so, does the Yale Daily News really think that should end the conversation? I think there is a problem with just assuming 'boys will be boys', especially when organize a public march that harasses women. Yes, this is harassment or something very much like it. Remember that sexual harassment in the workplace wasn't seen as an issue. I suppose after making all these comments criticizing the YDS for not furthering dialogue, I have incurred an obligation to say my own thought-through comments, a debt I acknowledge I have not fully repayed here.

Update: "Penny Lane," The second commentator here, says much of what I wanted to say, but much clearer. Commentator "Chief" on the same thread says:

The regrettable fact is that making light of rape does lead to there being "attackers among us." This obviously does not mean that all of the DKE pledges who said the chants have committed or will commit sexual assault. However, Yale students have assaulted other Yale students sexually and will do so in the future, and to act as if that is a ridiculous or reprehensible assertion is to be dangerously blind to reality. If it weren't for the Women's Center's "histrionics," we might not even be talking about this, and DKE might never have had to face any consequences. Sometimes you have to yell about things to get people to pay attention, even if op-eds later criticize your manners. Moreover, the WC has sponsored and will continue to sponsor events that help create a productive discourse. That kind of feminism sounds just right to me. 

Another commentator points out that the YDN seems not to have paid attention to what the Women's center actually said:

This piece is incredibly disappointing. Yale clearly isn't as progressive as it claims to be. Did the members of the YDN actually read the women center's op ed. The YDN claims that the women's center is accusing DKE of intending to incite violence. Yet the women's center clearly said:

"Wednesday night’s chanting, when taken at face value, is a call to commit rape. We do not think that the fraternity brothers intended to incite violence; more likely, they neglected to consider how their words would impact our community."

They very clearly are saying that the intent might not have been to incite violence. But it's not the intent, but the effect that matters. The effect of joking about rape is that a woman (or man's) consent to sex is not taken seriously. Joking about rape is not going to turn every man in ear shot into a rapist. But it does send the message that maybe consent really isn't that important, and that what really matters is not whether your partner is enthusiastically enjoying themselves, but rather that you got them to sleep with you. It may have been a joke, but jokes are not always harmless.

Anyway, the commentators on the YDN site seem to be all over this:

To run this editorial now is, in effect, to shift the blame/responsibility for this incident to the Women's Center, for not having better handled an event that should be an expected or commonplace occurrence. This is wrong [...] In short, while it may indeed be worthwhile to examine whether the Women's Center could better represent Yale women, or more effectively advocate for feminist issues on campus, it is inappropriate to do so in this context, as an explicit response to a controversial incident of what may be termed sexual harassment.