View Full Version : Yale's Conundrum
I see that Yale University, applying 21st century standards to a 19th century figure, have decided to rename Calhoun College for Rear Admiral Grace Hopper. Her accomplishments in military service and computer science at a time when both those fields weren't particularly hospitable to women seem very admirable to me.
However, there seems to be a move to overturn the decision due to her unacceptable skin color. What to do?
What unacceptable skin color? I am unaware of this conundrum as I did not go to Yale and do not follow it. I did visit a couple of times and used their swimming pool when my boyfriend went to lawschool there.
Yale Students Are Offended — Calhoun College’s Name Was Changed to Honor a White Woman
(http://www.nationalreview.com/article/445096/yale-students-offended-calhoun-colleges-name-was-changed-honor-white-woman)
iris lilies
2-22-17, 12:01pm
Can't someone find some Native American ancestry in Hopper's background? Should we have her people call Elizabeth
Warren's people?
Couldn't they have just found some rich alumni to donate enough money for another college?
Couldn't they have just found some rich alumni to donate enough money for another college?
Then there would be fervent opposition from all those social justice warriors living on scholarships and their parents over the source of the alumnus' dirty, dirty wealth.
Given that insurance and clockmaking have historically been Connecticut's major industries, why not go the way of sports stadiums and rename the college "Aetna College" or "Seth Thomas College"? As long as those companies are EEOC-compliant, of course.
My daughter's home university, Princeton, was engaged in some kerfluffle recently about how to retcon Woodrow Wilson from the campus.
http://www.princeton.edu/president/eisgruber/speeches-writings/archive/?id=16473
When I was at the British Museum a few months ago, there was a cool exhibit about people who had been removed from history. Broken statues, scratched-out inscriptions on public buildings/tombs, that sort of fun stuff.
http://www.livescience.com/images/i/000/038/754/i02/shutterstock_76621540.jpg
When I was at the British Museum a few months ago, there was a cool exhibit about people who had been removed from history. Broken statues, scratched-out inscriptions on public buildings/tombs, that sort of fun stuff.
Sooner or later, everything old is new again.
John C. Calhoun was willing to compromise on slavery to preserve the Union.
Thomas Jefferson owned slaves.
Winston Churchill had whiskey for breakfast.
JFK cheated on his wife.
Personally, I think true greatness is so rare that we should commemorate it where we can. That doesn't mean we need to overlook flaws, but we shouldn't be so quick to decide someone isn't worthy of remembering because of them.
Personally, I think true greatness is so rare that we should commemorate it where we can. That doesn't mean we need to overlook flaws, but we shouldn't be so quick to decide someone isn't worthy of remembering because of them.
+1
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.