 |
||
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The Yale Alumni Magazine is owned and operated by Yale Alumni Publications, Inc., a nonprofit corporation independent of Yale University. The content of the magazine and its website is the responsibility of the editors and does not necessarily reflect the views of Yale or its officers. |
|
The April Yale Alumni Magazine gives the impression that Yale is heaving with sexuality: Students agitate for co-ed suites (p. 8), clothing-optional parties are fun for all (p. 13), and queer studies are beginning to flower (p. 30). The old student aphorism “Sex kills; come to Yale and live forever” is obviously false. Of course, it’s been false for a long time. When I was a freshman in 1987, the slogan “one in four, maybe more” (inspired by a Wall Street Journal article about how many homosexual students there might be at Yale) was still fresh among campus activists. I remember enjoying several atavistic skinny dips with the Outing Club and multiple FOOT groups (Larry Kramer fans take note—that’s “outing” in the quaint early-20th-century sense of camping, hiking, and generally enjoying the great outdoors). Recently, there’s been the farce about a porno movie being filmed in Sterling Library, the national fame of the Yale Daily News’s sex columnist Natalie Krinksy, and the episode with the Orthodox Jewish freshmen who wanted to live away from the promiscuous atmosphere of Old Campus. Something is bugging me about this sustained carnival. Why is it that only an isolated group of Jewish freshmen have any interesting dissent to offer in response to Yale’s progressive sexual orthodoxy? It’s obvious these days that if you put several thousand late adolescents together in a small space, you’re going to get lots of sex, so puritanical tut-tutting is pointless and not what I’m proposing. Yale appears to be sexually frivolous and homogeneous in that frivolity. There is a curious lack of self-criticism and concern about what kind of people we become when casual sexuality becomes ubiquitous. Why such deafening silence from the culturally moderate, intellectually sharp philosophers, theologians, psychologists, or chaplains at Yale who might want to stir up multidimensional public conversation about sex? Or does freedom of expression at Yale have limits, and would sustained public criticism of Yale’s culture of sexuality get one branded as an extremist? There seems to be an unspoken “progressive” sexual orthodoxy at Yale, squeezing out the more traditionalist voices one would expect in a campus that valued genuine diversity. My worries will be assuaged on the day a conservative Roman Catholic theologian is appointed a professor in the Larry Kramer Initiative, in the same spirit of genuinely free inquiry that lets the religious studies department hire an atheist. President Levin’s statement, quoted in the April issue, that “lesbian and gay students are, and must be made to feel . a part of this institution,” is admirable (“Back in the Fold”). However, the Larry Kramer Initiative for Lesbian and Gay Studies will give Yale many ways to stumble from the ranks of the great, among them: 1) if lesbian and gay studies becomes a political, quasi-religious, or pop-psychology course rather than an intellectual inquiry; 2) if “queer theory” compromises Yale’s scholastic standards; 3) if homosexuality is treated as a norm, particularly if public identification with the gay and lesbian lifestyle is encouraged on campus; and 4) if the program backfires, reducing student body diversity— that is, if Yale becomes the Ivy League’s homosexual community. I’m not trying to be homophobic or sarcastic, but practical. Yale’s skill in handling this bombshell new subject of study and its impact on people everywhere will shape the university’s future one way or another. Part of Yale’s greatness is broad appeal, which the directors would be wise to protect.
Eugenics Apologies “An Eccentric Economist” (“Old Yale,” Mar.) lionizes Professor Irving Fisher not only for his work in economics but also for his being “among the first to develop the controversial eugenics movement in the United States.” Be advised that on March 11, the governor of California apologized “to the victims and their families of this past injustice.” I remember studying the ideas of Fisher and of Yale professor William Graham Sumner that led to the eugenics movement, which, as practiced in California and in 31 other states between 1909 and 1964 (when it was stopped), resulted in more than 60,000 people being forcibly sterilized. State court orders sterilizing supposedly defective people were given the blessing of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1927 to prevent their genes being passed on to another generation. The defective genes, according to Fisher’s theories, involved such traits as “petty thievery, alcoholism, poverty, various physical disabilities and mental illnesses.” In addition to the governor’s apology, the attorney general of the state of California apologized for the enthusiastic prosecution of cases resulting in forced sterilization by his predecessors, and the California senate adopted a resolution of apology. Not the least of the embarrassment of these California officials is the fact that Hitler’s Third Reich publicly acknowledged its debt to American scholars and the U.S. Supreme Court when it imposed forced sterilization upon “undesirables.” Why does not Yale apologize for the dingbat ex cathedra pronouncements of its professors of political economy in the unrelated field of genetics, for which Fisher and Sumner were supremely unqualified?
Safe to Play Squash I was delighted to see in the March issue a report on Yale squash and the recent success of freshman Julian Illingworth (“Sporting Life”). The news (for me) that the Talbott brothers are the current squash coaches is wonderful. The photo of Illingworth about to work out with Dave Talbott, however, awakened in me a memory of another very promising Yale squash player, Will Carlin '85, whose career as a pro was suddenly and tragically brought to an end by an eye injury in 1992.
In the photo, Dave Talbott is wearing glasses. Illingworth is not. I am wondering if protective eyewear is mandatory at Yale? I realize the pros hate to wear glasses, and in Europe wearing protective gear is considered quite sissy. I am reminded of a safety poster stating “A glass eye looks good, but it doesn’t see too well.” The photo in question was not taken during competitive play. Illingworth and Talbott were merely hitting a few balls for our photographer. Talbott says that players are required to wear protective eyewear in drills or in competition.—Eds.
Critique of CAB I was further happily convinced of the effectiveness of Rick Levin’s leadership when I read, finally, of the completion of the new CAB building at the Medical School (“A Neighborhood for Cures,” Mar.). I hope the administration realizes that the building is only one step of many necessary to maintain Yale’s place as a premier research institution. For the last 30 years, Yale has seemed to have a resistance to building anything new and has only recently begun to maintain what it already had. Without facilities and equipment in the sciences, Yale cannot get the grants, the faculty, or the graduate students necessary even to participate in the marvelous process of scientific discovery we see all around us today, much less to lead it. The one area where I believe your article was less than fully accurate was in its failure to more bluntly explain the competitive environment in which Yale science operates. It is not just a few universities that have built while Yale has slept. Over the past 30 years, all of Yale’s traditional peer institutions, and many new ones looking for a place in the sun, have greatly expanded their capacity to assume leadership positions in scientific research, particularly in medicine. Meanwhile, Yale bioscience stood still and foundered to the point that it was in real danger of drifting from eminence to irrelevancy. The CAB building will momentarily halt that drift, but continued momentum must be maintained if Yale is to retain its traditional stature. In Levin, Yale seems to have finally found a president who can herd all the cats and accomplish positive things for the university. I hope he keeps it up.
Touching the Face of God Judith Schiff’s article on “High Flight” and the Magee family brought back poignant memories (“Old Yale,” May). She failed to note that the Rev. John G. Magee was the Episcopal chaplain at Yale when I arrived on campus in the fall of 1949. The Magees invited freshman Episcopalians and faculty in small groups to their residence for Sunday dinner, a welcome respite from the mass dining at Commons for the students. This was only eight years after the loss of their son, and they clearly still were in mourning. I read their son’s poem in their home and later, through Yale Aviation, came to know its incredible capture of the spirit of flying.
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
||
©1992–2012, Yale Alumni Publications, Inc. All rights reserved. Yale Alumni Magazine, P.O. Box 1905, New Haven, CT 06509-1905, USA. yam@yale.edu |
||