How to handle this difficult situation with a friend

[Anonymous]

You can’t convince your husband to have the conversation, OP. Just send an email. It’s best if your family and hers don’t vacation together. I see nothing wrong with the letter she signed, but if DH is angry and reactionary, she deserves to know that, and the families aren’t a good match to vacation together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fine, here is the letter that they signed:

https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/e/2PACX-1vSxEIf0j1H6v3R4549yxfetSBy1ioc6VHyJa3vKfvgyVFX9TAluk_1laTuSBKAyzqjF3hJT9EVw0P7a/pub

Why is DH not equally concerned about the students being attacked for supporting Palestinian human rights?

“It is worth noting that not all of us agree with every one of the claims made in the students’ statement, but we do agree that making such claims cannot and should not be considered anti-Semitic. Their merits are being debated by governmental and non-governmental agencies at the highest level, and constitute a terrain of completely legitimate political and legal debate.

We are appalled that trucks broadcasting students’ names and images are circling the campus, identifying them individually as “Columbia’s Leading Anti-Semites”, and that some students have had offers of employment withdrawn by employers that sought to punish them for signing the student statement, or for being merely affiliated with student groups associated with the statement. In the absence of university action, students and faculty have undertaken the burden of blocking the images and identifying information broadcast on the doxxing trucks. It is worth noting that most of the students targeted by this doxing campaign are Arab, Muslim, Palestinian, or South Asian.”

NP - So free speech is ok for some but not all and there should be no consequences for behavior? The student letter and the faculty letter both state that the actions of Hamas on October 7 were a legitimate military action. They were not and to say that is to condone terrorism and yes it is antisemitic.

Imagine if this was white students who said something similar about what happened during the BLM protests in 2020? Every one of those students would’ve been facing worse consequences than a “doxxing truck”.

They clearly stated that staff don’t agree with all the student statements but we’re defending their rights to express their opinions …

I wouldn't be able to resist asking that friend about any other instances in the last three years where she publicly voiced her free speech concerns regarding doxxing, employment terminations, etc., especially for people whose views she does not agree with. If she is an equal opportunity free speech absolutust (and I know some), I would be able to continue the friendship, but I think I know the answer to that question.

Again it is somewhat amazing to me what imaginative world OP (and you) are attributing to the person who signed this statement. She is a faculty member in the United States during an interval of rampant targeting of free expression on college campuses by right-wing ideologues. I virtually guarantee that she will have 5-10 examples of her taking the position you think you’d “gotcha” her with.

DP but I am genuinely curious about this. It seems strange to pretend this is one sided as it seems “free speech” is also being “targeted” by left-wing ideologues throughout the entire education system…

[Anonymous]

Where was the outrage in academia for cancel culture until now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where was the outrage in academia for cancel culture until now?

Literally two weeks before the Hamas attacks, Columbia hosted a debate on this specific issue, discussing the problems with silencing opinions or forcing "serious discussions" of difficult topics off of college campuses. The focus of the debate was on the Supreme Court decision on affirmative action, and they discussed the problems with making certain opinions on a hot-button topic like that "unacceptable" on a university campus.

You can read about it here: https://www.columbiaspectator.com/news/2023/09/25/columbia-independent-holds-debate-on-free-speech-moderated-by-former-dean-valentini/

The idea that college professors only suddenly became interested in free speech in the last month so that they could defend pro-palestinian student groups is laughable. College professors are deeply invested in the idea of free speech on college campuses and one of the primary arguments in favor of tenure is that it protects the right of intellectuals to discuss unpopular or difficult opinions, and thus protects the university as a place of free thought and debate.

I 100% believe that if there were people trying to silence the opinions of pro-Israeli students or professors on college campuses right now, you'd see the same furor over it. Particularly with regards to issues that are complex, current, and widely debated on a global level (and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict surely falls in that category) most university professors fall in the camp of protecting the right to voice a broad range of opinions on these matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where was the outrage in academia for cancel culture until now?

Literally two weeks before the Hamas attacks, Columbia hosted a debate on this specific issue, discussing the problems with silencing opinions or forcing "serious discussions" of difficult topics off of college campuses. The focus of the debate was on the Supreme Court decision on affirmative action, and they discussed the problems with making certain opinions on a hot-button topic like that "unacceptable" on a university campus.

You can read about it here: https://www.columbiaspectator.com/news/2023/09/25/columbia-independent-holds-debate-on-free-speech-moderated-by-former-dean-valentini/

The idea that college professors only suddenly became interested in free speech in the last month so that they could defend pro-palestinian student groups is laughable. College professors are deeply invested in the idea of free speech on college campuses and one of the primary arguments in favor of tenure is that it protects the right of intellectuals to discuss unpopular or difficult opinions, and thus protects the university as a place of free thought and debate.

I 100% believe that if there were people trying to silence the opinions of pro-Israeli students or professors on college campuses right now, you'd see the same furor over it. Particularly with regards to issues that are complex, current, and widely debated on a global level (and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict surely falls in that category) most university professors fall in the camp of protecting the right to voice a broad range of opinions on these matters.

I agree with this and this is critical to the OP's thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No advice but I’m in the same boat. My SO’s best friend keeps posting telling Jews to “stop centering your trauma” and calling the victims of the Nova music festival legitimate targets because they are “settlers”. Sharing disinformation saying Hamas didn’t kill babies. I never want to speak to this person again but my SO wants to remain friends. Ugh.

I call bullshit. If not, then you hang out with really ignorant and stupid people I have not heard or read a single person in any media anywhere on the planet suggest that the kids at that musical festival who were slaughtered were legitimate targets. No one at all.

NP. Your personal experience does not equal universal truth, PP. Just because you, individually, don't know anyone who has said this, and you have "not heard or read a single person in any media anywhere on the planet" say this--that does not mean that this sick thinking does not exist. Tragically, it does exist.

Also: How do you have time to see, hear and read all media "anywhere on the planet"? You must be omniscient. Or extremely dramatic. I think the latter is likelier.

There’s a far easier and more effective way to prove this poster wrong: post a link where anyone who is even remotely respectable is saying anything like this. I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that you cannot do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fine, here is the letter that they signed:

https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/e/2PACX-1vSxEIf0j1H6v3R4549yxfetSBy1ioc6VHyJa3vKfvgyVFX9TAluk_1laTuSBKAyzqjF3hJT9EVw0P7a/pub

Why is DH not equally concerned about the students being attacked for supporting Palestinian human rights?

“It is worth noting that not all of us agree with every one of the claims made in the students’ statement, but we do agree that making such claims cannot and should not be considered anti-Semitic. Their merits are being debated by governmental and non-governmental agencies at the highest level, and constitute a terrain of completely legitimate political and legal debate.

We are appalled that trucks broadcasting students’ names and images are circling the campus, identifying them individually as “Columbia’s Leading Anti-Semites”, and that some students have had offers of employment withdrawn by employers that sought to punish them for signing the student statement, or for being merely affiliated with student groups associated with the statement. In the absence of university action, students and faculty have undertaken the burden of blocking the images and identifying information broadcast on the doxxing trucks. It is worth noting that most of the students targeted by this doxing campaign are Arab, Muslim, Palestinian, or South Asian.”

NP - So free speech is ok for some but not all and there should be no consequences for behavior? The student letter and the faculty letter both state that the actions of Hamas on October 7 were a legitimate military action. They were not and to say that is to condone terrorism and yes it is antisemitic.

Imagine if this was white students who said something similar about what happened during the BLM protests in 2020? Every one of those students would’ve been facing worse consequences than a “doxxing truck”.

The faculty letter does not state that 10/7 was a "legitimate military action." Here's what it actually says:

"In our view, the student statement aims to recontextualize the events of October 7, 2023, pointing out that military operations and state violence did not begin that day, but rather it represented a military response by a people who had endured crushing and unrelenting state violence from an occupying power over many years. One could regard the events of October 7th as just one salvo in an ongoing war between an occupying state and the people it occupies, or as an occupied people exercising a right to resist violent and illegal occupation, something anticipated by international humanitarian law in the Second Geneva Protocol. In either case armed resistance by an occupied people must conform to the laws of war, which include a prohibition against the intentional targeting of civilians. The statement reflects and endorses this legal framework, including a condemnation of the killing of civilians."

The faculty letter does not endorse the views in the students statement, that 10/7 was a military response. Nor does it further editorialize that it was a legitimate military response. It's just describing what the student statement says. It then further contextualizes this by noting that even if you view the acts on 10/7 as a military action by an occupied people, that would make it an act of war, and any such act of war would have to conform to Geneva conventions, which do not permit the targeting or intentional killing of civilians.

Sure, it's written with a level of academic remove that intentionally obscures what the signatories actually think about the conflict. But the letter isn't actually about what they think of the conflict. It's about whether the students who wrote and signed the student statement should be targeted and doxxed as they have been, and whether their actions can be considered anti-semitic. The letter makes the argument that you cannot view the statement as de facto anti-semitic because the context of the conflict in Israel make the students' position on these events at least arguably true.

It doesn't endorse their statement. It says they should be allowed to make it, and attempt to contextualize their statement.

I understand why it would upset people. I'm not even saying OP shouldn't end her friendship with this professor over it if she feels she needs to. But the letter does not call 10/7 a legitimate military action or anything close to that.

Same here.
And it specifically refers to the extremes people opposed to those students have taken, in very public ways.
Not going to go into the rest of it--whether and to what extent "the Palestinian people" support Hamas in all ways, or support their attacks, their links to Iran and Israel's proximity to countries deeply opposed to their existence, or the politics amongst and within other predominantly Muslim countries.

OP is in a difficult place, because she both has to figure out her own position but she also has to consider her husband, but I do think if she should reread the letter and its references carefully while also explaining that they are so deeply affected that they simply cannot make room for such positions at this time, and don't know if it will ever be possible to do so, acknowledge that the person has been a good friend and regret that this happened, but based on those circumstances is unable to maintain the friendship. This also does not call on the friend to explain or defend her decision to sign the letter, but CAN allow the friend to respond with more context and and feelings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Friend is the parent of one of DD’s close friends. She is a tenured professor at one of the schools that’s been in the news a lot recently because of reactions from students and faculty to the situation in Israel and Gaza. She signed her name to a letter that dh (and I) find extremely disturbing and dh has declared that he has lost all respect for her and in his mind the friendship is over. He is an alum of the same university which is how he saw the letter. He isn’t going to stop dd from being friends with her daughter but he won’t socialize with this woman again.
I want to speak with her and I want Dh to be there or at least to listen to our conversation. He doesn’t want to. I know he is upset and angry but I don’t think letting it fester in silence will help anything. Any thoughts as to what I can say to him to at least get him open to being present at a conversation that I will lead?
She (until now) has been a good friend - she and dh actually have a lot in common, they share (partially) the same background and we had actually been planning to vacation with this family next year - which dh now says will never happen but obviously canceling that will require some explanation.

Don’t talk to her and stay out of it. Trust me I have had to bite my tongue plenty over the years. Kids have bffs with parents who are extreme Trumpsters and even worked in administration. Pretty sure there are one or two parents who would sign pro Palestinian letter as well in different group. As long as her daughter is a good friend to your daughter and isn’t talking about there things I would stay out of it.

[Anonymous]

Just my 2 cents as a Jewish person who was upset to discover a friend liked a post for a pro-Palestinian rally on our children’s college campus (post actually included mention that Israel was to blame for the Oct 7 attacks). Let it go. If you or DH feel hurt/shocked by the support, just distance yourself (leave the kids out of it as you already plan to). Nothing you say is going to change their stance. All of this debate is a waste of time and energy. It only keeps us stuck in a place of mental anguish.

[Anonymous]

Eh, just slow fade. I personally think you are wrong to be so outraged over it, but that's your feeling and that's ok. Confronting her makes you look dumb, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP’s position is actually a perfect illustration of what the problem is. She’s confusing another’s position with regard to which she strongly disagrees with anti-Semitism. There’s nothing anti-Semitic in that letter.

+1

I’m actually impressed by an academic at a liberal institution willing to stick their neck out for free speech on campus and calling out the harms of doxxing/cancel culture.

Sounds like OP’s DH is too low brow to understand the point of this letter. The friend is better off not dealing with this family.

Low brow? Hahaha. Not at all. OP’s husband is totally right here. Their professor friend sounds like an apologist who consistently supports liberal matters and feels conflicted because the Palestinians are sympathetic, but doesn’t have the knowledge and intelligence to recognize that Hamas is a murderous terrorist regime that cares more about killing Israelis and decimating Israel than the health and safety of its own citizens.

JFC. The letter is about college speech. It’s not about Hamas. People like you are tedious and so blinded by your righteousness that you’re unpleasant to be around.

[Anonymous]

How did you find this letter that you are so outraged about? How would you even know that your friend signed it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where was the outrage in academia for cancel culture until now?

Literally two weeks before the Hamas attacks, Columbia hosted a debate on this specific issue, discussing the problems with silencing opinions or forcing "serious discussions" of difficult topics off of college campuses. The focus of the debate was on the Supreme Court decision on affirmative action, and they discussed the problems with making certain opinions on a hot-button topic like that "unacceptable" on a university campus.

You can read about it here: https://www.columbiaspectator.com/news/2023/09/25/columbia-independent-holds-debate-on-free-speech-moderated-by-former-dean-valentini/

The idea that college professors only suddenly became interested in free speech in the last month so that they could defend pro-palestinian student groups is laughable. College professors are deeply invested in the idea of free speech on college campuses and one of the primary arguments in favor of tenure is that it protects the right of intellectuals to discuss unpopular or difficult opinions, and thus protects the university as a place of free thought and debate.

I 100% believe that if there were people trying to silence the opinions of pro-Israeli students or professors on college campuses right now, you'd see the same furor over it. Particularly with regards to issues that are complex, current, and widely debated on a global level (and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict surely falls in that category) most university professors fall in the camp of protecting the right to voice a broad range of opinions on these matters.

Good. I hope they will speak up with equal outrage against students who suppress free speech by tearing down posters of Israeli and American hostages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fine, here is the letter that they signed:

https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/e/2PACX-1vSxEIf0j1H6v3R4549yxfetSBy1ioc6VHyJa3vKfvgyVFX9TAluk_1laTuSBKAyzqjF3hJT9EVw0P7a/pub

Why is DH not equally concerned about the students being attacked for supporting Palestinian human rights?

“It is worth noting that not all of us agree with every one of the claims made in the students’ statement, but we do agree that making such claims cannot and should not be considered anti-Semitic. Their merits are being debated by governmental and non-governmental agencies at the highest level, and constitute a terrain of completely legitimate political and legal debate.

We are appalled that trucks broadcasting students’ names and images are circling the campus, identifying them individually as “Columbia’s Leading Anti-Semites”, and that some students have had offers of employment withdrawn by employers that sought to punish them for signing the student statement, or for being merely affiliated with student groups associated with the statement. In the absence of university action, students and faculty have undertaken the burden of blocking the images and identifying information broadcast on the doxxing trucks. It is worth noting that most of the students targeted by this doxing campaign are Arab, Muslim, Palestinian, or South Asian.”

NP - So free speech is ok for some but not all and there should be no consequences for behavior? The student letter and the faculty letter both state that the actions of Hamas on October 7 were a legitimate military action. They were not and to say that is to condone terrorism and yes it is antisemitic.

Imagine if this was white students who said something similar about what happened during the BLM protests in 2020? Every one of those students would’ve been facing worse consequences than a “doxxing truck”.

They clearly stated that staff don’t agree with all the student statements but we’re defending their rights to express their opinions …

I wouldn't be able to resist asking that friend about any other instances in the last three years where she publicly voiced her free speech concerns regarding doxxing, employment terminations, etc., especially for people whose views she does not agree with. If she is an equal opportunity free speech absolutust (and I know some), I would be able to continue the friendship, but I think I know the answer to that question.

Again it is somewhat amazing to me what imaginative world OP (and you) are attributing to the person who signed this statement. She is a faculty member in the United States during an interval of rampant targeting of free expression on college campuses by right-wing ideologues. I virtually guarantee that she will have 5-10 examples of her taking the position you think you’d “gotcha” her with.

DP but I am genuinely curious about this. It seems strange to pretend this is one sided as it seems “free speech” is also being “targeted” by left-wing ideologues throughout the entire education system…

There are a small handful of RWNJ internet outlets that purport to report “campus news” but exist for the specific purpose of organizing online harassers and pointing them at individual professors for doxxing, attacks on their employment and death threats on themselves and their families—much of this anonymous. It is often based on very out of context claims about syllabus content or events that occur in classes. Some of these outlets have openly solicited students to report “outrages” for this kind of escalation. The results are so predictable that researchers can identify in advance when a faculty member is going to be subject to a targeted attack by their name being mentioned in this small handful of outlets.

It is fair to ask questions about overly censorious attitudes on both sides of the spectrum, but there is no equivalent to this operation on the left. So: nobody is “pretending”.

The argument that this is a “both sides” phenomenon is a talking point of these far-right actors so it is not surprising that it seems intuitively true to you; they have been very successful propagating this fiction.

I hope that helps.

[Anonymous]

Oh man. This is happening to me too. I’m totally fine with people wanting a ceasefire and being mad at Netanyahu - who sucks and I agree about ceasefire - but the folks who are insinuating that there’s any justification for killing civilians (on either side) or throwing around terms like ‘open air prison’ and suggesting the Israelis are white occupiers (they are the same color as Palestinians) I’m kind of done with. I would not be having a conversation. I just unfollowed and it’s done.

From my pov it’s very easy to support a 2 state solution, be anti killing civilians, be anti terrorist. Honestly anyone who has some other hot take pov I just want them to be quiet