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.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Telling you right now engaging her will not bring you any satisfaction
I fully agree. Resist the urge, OP. It could get bad and would then interfere with the ability of your kids to be friends.
But do you want your kid to be friends with someone whose parent holds these views?
I would. I share those views. There’s nothing anti-Semitic about them.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:it’s interesting / disheartening the majority opinion here seems to be that conversation with the friend would change nothing or be counterproductive. I’ve certainly had conversations that have changed the way I think about important / controversial topics. am curious to hear more why people think this is a lost cause
I don't think it's a lost cause--but I do think that OP and her husband think they have an impregnable moral high ground and that they are likely to be surprised and displeased by the response they get to them communicating that position.
If they're up for that experience and for working through it toward some actual end other than getting across that they are right and that the letter signer is wrong, then by all means they should pursue the conversation.
It honestly doesn't sound like they are, though--perhaps for reasons of political conviction, perhaps just because it's far too charged a moment for it to be emotionally possible.
Anonymous wrote:it’s interesting / disheartening the majority opinion here seems to be that conversation with the friend would change nothing or be counterproductive. I’ve certainly had conversations that have changed the way I think about important / controversial topics. am curious to hear more why people think this is a lost cause
Anonymous wrote:it’s interesting / disheartening the majority opinion here seems to be that conversation with the friend would change nothing or be counterproductive. I’ve certainly had conversations that have changed the way I think about important / controversial topics. am curious to hear more why people think this is a lost cause
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.”
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.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Other Columbia faculty wrote and signed a response letter to this one.
Also, it is amazing to me that people cannot see that the tone and perspective of the first letter has bias. Its main point isn’t about that, but its examples and support are presented as unbiased when they are, in fact, disputed by many.
I’m sorry so many are gaslighting OP and her husband. The signers of the letter have a particular view, which they take great pains not to say explicitly, but which they show through their sourcing.
As for how to proceed, I echo others and say pull back and do not engage right now.
Can you post this response?
https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/e/2PACX-1vRYUSR01Cb6zV50rDtm88q0ppSz-bn40oJ28YTG5cYJGpAjNF4hkiCAwQKya2iI5h--cb633CbeAtL6/pub?urp=gmail_link
I read both statements. In my opinion, both statements are highly biased and emotional, and I wouldn’t have signed either one. There is implicit but not directly stated support of hamas in the first letter, and implicit but not directly stated dismissal of the history of military occupation and blockade of Gaza in the second one. Neither is a full throated endorsement of free speech and condemnation of hate speech and hate crimes.
I agree with pp - pull back and do not engage right now.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Other Columbia faculty wrote and signed a response letter to this one.
Also, it is amazing to me that people cannot see that the tone and perspective of the first letter has bias. Its main point isn’t about that, but its examples and support are presented as unbiased when they are, in fact, disputed by many.
I’m sorry so many are gaslighting OP and her husband. The signers of the letter have a particular view, which they take great pains not to say explicitly, but which they show through their sourcing.
As for how to proceed, I echo others and say pull back and do not engage right now.
Can you post this response?
https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/e/2PACX-1vRYUSR01Cb6zV50rDtm88q0ppSz-bn40oJ28YTG5cYJGpAjNF4hkiCAwQKya2iI5h--cb633CbeAtL6/pub?urp=gmail_link
Anonymous wrote:Other Columbia faculty wrote and signed a response letter to this one.
Also, it is amazing to me that people cannot see that the tone and perspective of the first letter has bias. Its main point isn’t about that, but its examples and support are presented as unbiased when they are, in fact, disputed by many.
I’m sorry so many are gaslighting OP and her husband. The signers of the letter have a particular view, which they take great pains not to say explicitly, but which they show through their sourcing.
As for how to proceed, I echo others and say pull back and do not engage right now.