next »

[Molly Mfume, Prof. Emeritu]

Dear Psychologist and Bystander,

No, as I have already stated:

Well surprise, surprise, surprise. After all of these years of the radical left-wing educational lobby telling our kids they have rights and everyone should kiss their royal behind, this is what we get. What says it all is the following text from the article:

"students believe they have a right to say what they please..."

Instead of teaching civility, respect, and decency, you taught self-esteem (where none was warranted), tolerance (where none was deserved) and rights (where none was earned). And now, only now, do you see this might lead to a problem. How stupid.

The generation of the 60s produced this foul mouthed group of undisciplined kids. You people on the left got exactly what you wanted.

enjoy...

[Bystander]

Thanks, Psychologist.  Much appreciated.

More than anything else, I think we could all do with a heavy dose of moderation medication.  For example, in regard to my question--what has the academy done to project positive values and civility--consider something like multiculturalism.  There is a very benevolent side to it, e.g., in its urgings that we not make snap judgments about the superiority of our own culture and in its observation that some of the practices we consider 'part of human nature' or 'obviously correct' may not be so.  Indeed, many of the facets of our culture are very specific to that culture and many of the things that we are offended by in others' have cognate counterparts in our own (as the movie Mondo Cane pointed out, half a century ago).  First rule: think before you speak and amass and weigh evidence before you generalize.

At the same time, utter relativism is untenable.  As Stanley Fish sez, if you assume the posture that utter relativism is your operating principle you've privileged it as a position and actually eschewed it as a principle.

Absent moderation and a taste for nuance, you get phenomena such as the silence of feminists in the face of the Taliban's treatment of women (caught between their love of doctrinaire multiculturalism and quite proper desire for opportunities for women) or the democrats' choosing the views of teachers' unions over the desires of African Americans for school voucher programs.  Sometimes the world's too complex for simplistic positions.  (Maybe there's a significant place for unions but also the necessity that they rethink some of the positions they've taken.)

Call me old fashioned, but there are many things that bind us together as human beings, across time and space and age, gender and culture: the need for water and sleep and the awareness of our own mortality, e.g.  We need to talk about such things more and not always focus on the things which divide us.  There are also things that are (or should be) first principles, such as the categorical imperative, and things that are both 'uncivilized' and 'against nature' (in some senses of those terms) such as forced clitoridectomy.

If we project to our students that everything is relative,  that no actions are truly good or bad, that everything is culturally constructed, that we can do what we like without regard to others, etc. etc. we reap what we sow.  That doesn't mean that we need to give up some of the great insights of history, philosophy, or multicultural theory, only that we must avoid rigid dogma and spend more time seeking common ground.  Civilly.

[Psychologist]

Actually, Molly, I did get exactly what I wanted, and I'm very proud. My son is in his third year at the U.S. Naval Academy and he is quite disciplined and never foul-mouthed. He demonstrates "civility, respect, and decency" (that officer and a gentleman stuff is for real at the USNA). In a couple of years he wil be a highly educated officer in the Navy or Marine Corps and he might very well be putting his life on the line to defend, among other things, your (unearned?) right to spout whatever nonsense you choose to spout. I suppose it would make life nice and easy if sweeping generalizations and oversimplifications were true, but fortunately the aren't.

My main point about your comments, and those of many others from many parts of the political spectrum, are that they are based on streotypes and speculation with little attention to data and critical thinking. Your comments directed at me are downright funny examples of the seriously inaccurate conclusions that come from this sort of nonthinking. And by the way, if you had a clue about my political opinions, which you don't, you would have a very hard time classifying me as "on the left," on the right, or anywhere in between. In fact the whole notion of a unidimensional spectrum of political opinion is downright silly.

enjoy...

[Molly Mfume, Prof. Emeritus]

Psychologist, your left-leanings are clear, and as I've stated earlier:

Let's look at this logically instead of emotionally. These children learned that this type of behavior was their "right". People don't grow up with an innate notion of rights; they are taught them by someone. There are only two groups of people who would be teaching these children their rights: parents or the public school system. (Private schools---in particular, catholic schools---do not teach their students that they have a right to say whatever they want and everyone else has to take it.) If these foul-mouthed kids are say 20 or 21, then they were born in the early eighties---when many of the 60's generation were in their prime child-bearing years. Moreover, they were educated by teachers many of whom grew up in the 60s. The correlation is crystal clear to anyone who doesn't have a left-wing agenda.

[Rod]

Hooray for you again, Molly! Psychologist and Bystander can keep their heads in the clouds (or other places), but you've got the courage to cut through their nonsense. Right on!

[Rod (the real one)]

The message posted 4/15/04, 13:13 did not come from me, but was posted by someone apparently anxious to slap someone down for their opinion, but too cowardly to put their own name on the post.

To that individual - A pox on you, I say!

[%sig%]

[Rod (the real one)]

"Hooray for Mfume! I especially liked the following:

"Instead of teaching civility, respect, and decency, you taught self-esteem (where none was warranted), tolerance (where none was deserved) and rights (where none was earned). And now, only now, do you see this might lead to a problem. How stupid."

Very nicely done."

[Psychologist]

I'm not sure who the "you" is that Molly refers to, but I'll give you my take on some of this. I have always believed that self esteem cannot be taught or given or anything of the sort. It must be earned. Tolerance must be mutual and must be deserved. I see no need to tolerate the intolerant, the cruel, the dishonest, or anyone else who chooses to violate basic principles of civilized society. Rights do not need to be earned, unlike privileges, but the list of what we consider to be rights ought to be very short and based on well accepted basic principles. I always have taught civility, respect, and decency to my children and to my students. I am pleased that with my children, at least, these messages got through.

Getting back to the issue of this discussion, I don't think the problem of boorish fans is that difficult to address. Schools ought to have clear, well-articulated conduct codes regarding behavior at school sponsored events and they ought to enforce those codes. I suppose there can be practical difficulties when we are dealing with large crowds, but those difficulties can be addressed.

It's been my experience that most of our students, whether their parents are "liberal" or "conservative," are decent, respectful young people. There always has been and probably always will be a subgroup who are lazy, disrespectful, and selfish. It's part of our job as educators to support the first group, encourage the second group to get with the program, and make them leave if they won't. Colleges and universities, of all places, ought to be bastions of civility. Dissent, disagreement, and playfulness are quite compatible with civility. So are different styles of expression. Cruelty and obscenity are not.

[Kae Engel/ Grant Architects, B]

What an interesting "dialogue" amongst all the a"academics", May I as a complete outsider and a visitor to the UMASS site weigh in on this discussion?  I listen with interest to the voices that protest too much on both sides of this fence.  The boom that was dropped on this maelstorm was I believe started this past winter during a University of Maryland Terrapin and Duke Blue Devil Basketball game.  A nationally televised game of the highest order in the ACC.  A Maryland Student brandished his painted Chest which read "Duke Sucks", Cameras zero in...as they always do, because that is what we want to see...we want the heat of the rivalry.  PLEASE, let us not pretend that this behavior is somehow new to the generation of students currently enrolled in the many fine institutions we share in this country.  Read some of the stories about your President and his cheerleading days at Yale and I suppose as we go down that road, lets then discuss the embarrassing behavior of his daughters and their inappropriate behavior, his brothers Neils inappropriate behavior...oh thats right...Privately educated(Phillips Academy, Andover)!!  I cannot believe the naivete that Public vs Private Education is somehow viewed as an indicator or gage of bad behavior.  I have never met more students that believed in their right to say and do anything as a birthright and privilege of their "daddy or grandaddy's bank account" than those educated privately.  The private school elitist education of which UMASS is an enrollment and endowment benefactor yields more power than any of us complaining here care to stomach.  When was the last time anyone on this site was invited to "Bohemian Grove"...  the frustration of the "fan" comes from their inability to compete physically and to be a part of the sport they love so well..whatever that might be.  How many games have I sat at and heard from the stands.."go back to foot locker...get off your knees ref, you're blowing the game!!  Maybe instead of building stadiums with multi million dollar donations and garnering the contract that guarantees television revenues, perhaps if Universities remembered their place in society and went back to educating those that would appreciate the opportunity of an education as opposed to those who get in "cause daddy was a graduate, or grandaddy endowed a chair or donated a new building, we would have a better quality of student and citizen.  Everything in life worth having is earned.  Whether a student earns his admission by academic performance or by athletic performance, the student has a right to be there and those students are well aware that their hard work and discipline has granted them the right to step forward and be counted as an exemplary example to even the loud mouthed fans and boorish academics.  I am sure that the academics must hear several times a year..a few students complaining that they pay "your salary" and if the chair or building fits......

[Lisa Caravacci]

"Them's fighten' words..."

There are many ways to express aggression, and there has to be some control as to what is allowed in public and what isn't.  I believe that during sporting events, a security guard should be monitoring any hecklers in the crowd.  Legally speaking, I am not sure that the heckler is breaking any laws.  Perhaps you could go with disturbing the peace.

I think that the University should post a sign:  No slurs.  That would bring the problem to light.  Cursing does tend to aggrevate others although most people have been trained to nicely "ignore" the other person.  But foul language could lead to physical violence and then the University would definately have to get involved.

So I suppose the best answer is to post the sign as a warning.  Decide what the punishment will be.  and then follow through.  Maybe 1 verbal warning and the next time  the fan will be asked to leave or the police will be called.  but as with anything, the law has to be followed because this could lead to law suits and the university has to be ready to deal with that.  I worked in sales, and I was told that if i suspected a shoplifter to report it to the manager , but that she had to be careful about reporting it to the police because if we were wrong, and the person didn't take anything, the store could be sued.