It is easy to blame the lack of courage on the part of Clementi’s roommate, Dharun Ravi, who was responsible for posting a video of him taking part in homosexual activity. The Internet has made it much easier to vent, to gossip and to share media, but Ravi did not have the courage to deny these social conventions and, moreover, lacked the moral fortitude to be accepting of someone who did not fit a heterosexual mold. One could even hold Molly Wei, Ravi’s friend, accountable for not putting a stop to this, when she was aware of Ravi’s actions. Wei’s inability — no, unwillingness — to protect Clementi from serious embarrassment highlights her own cowardice.
Though the primary fault lies with these two, it is conceivable that some people might view Clementi’s suicide as a result of his own lack of courage. I wouldn’t go so far as to blame Clementi for his death. After being humiliated, he was understandably too overwhelmed and scared to face a life that was no longer his own, but subject to the volatile perceptions of the people who had seen the video. But lacking the courage to be open about one’s lifestyle can contribute to a tragic end.
Because of Ravi and Wei, many look to this event as a sign that it is high time to do something about college bullying. But bullying will never be totally eradicated, for those who commit it tend to do so out of the eye of the authorities that will punish them. What could have prevented this sorrow, from all ends, was an injection of courage. Had Clementi had the courage to live, had Ravi had the courage to be accepting or had Wei the courage to stand up to her friend, this tragedy could have been avoided.
What, then, is wrong with college students today, that so many of us could lack this quality? Two weeks ago, I wrote of the need for a respite from working-world and hometown standards during these four years. I championed the right to hide our weekend activities and to live however wild a life we choose to pursue without being chastised or judged. Now, although I hold to my claim that this right is ours, I will postulate that the unchecked use of this right has costs that can make us weak. We are in a world where self-misrepresentation is a norm, where affairs, beliefs and insults are swept under the table to avoid conflicts. While we feel free to post pictures online of every party or trip, Facebook is not always a place for us to air our views, our more intimate lifestyles or our beliefs; we similarly avoid doing so in daily life, hiding small, yet important, parts of us. This has so occurred to the point that, when we are faced with the truth we don’t know what to do; we are much too afraid and ill-prepared to deal with it.
This calls for honesty — complete, unadulterated, nothing-to-hide honesty. When we have given everything of ourselves to others, as scary as it might be, we come into control of our own image, for there are no daunting secrets for bullies to hold above our heads. Once this happens, we need not fear a change in our reputations based on some new scandal that comes to light, as everything is already out in the open. When we claim to love our masked lives too much to be open, and thereby drastically modify the way people perceive us, we are in fact putting ourselves in a position to lose everything based on someone else’s terms. When they come out with the skeletons in our closet, we lose control. Game over.
I concede that honesty in itself doesn’t cure the intolerance that Ravi exhibited, nor does it remedy Wei’s unethical passivity. Rather, it withdraws the arsenal that such intolerance would use against us. They lose their power when we gain the courage inherent in openness. While privacy is the right of everyone, it is also the chink in the armor when someone is willing to exploit access to that privacy.
The truth is, I don’t quite know how to fix hatred, but maybe, by exposing our true selves to those who practice it, we will slowly help them adjust to the many different people of this world, and stop seeing homosexuals, or African-Americans, or Muslims, or any other marginalized person, as anything less than human. In the meantime, it is the best I can do to plead with all who could be victimized to take upon themselves the mantle of fortitude and arm themselves with the virtue of immovable dignity, pride and, above all, courage. It is my honest wish for you, me and us all to be so honest as to warrant that kind of invincibility, no matter what life — or others — may throw at us.
Joey Barnett is an anthropology major from Tulare, Calif. He can be reached at jbarnett@princeton.edu.
Read More
Princeton’s administration of justice is Trumpian
Frances BroganThe disparity between the University’s approach to Giberson and its approach to pro-Palestinian protestors reflects a concerning trend of appeasing an increasingly emboldened right rather than resisting the threat it poses to academic freedom and the wellbeing of Princeton students.
Secular Opening Exercises? Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water
Frank StrasburgerThe secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
The secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
Return Pete Hegseth’s educational ideologies “to sender”
Lily Halbert-AlexanderHegseth believes students are being raised to “see America as an evil place” because his confining approach to education leaves no room for admiration and criticism, hope and horror, to coexist. He treats American history, patriotic ideals and the “pillars of Western civilization” as if they were made of glass, as if “cross-cultural encounters” and critical race theory, the “cornucopia of diversity” he criticizes, could shatter them.
Hegseth believes students are being raised to “see America as an evil place” because his confining approach to education leaves no room for admiration and criticism, hope and horror, to coexist. He treats American history, patriotic ideals and the “pillars of Western civilization” as if they were made of glass, as if “cross-cultural encounters” and critical race theory, the “cornucopia of diversity” he criticizes, could shatter them.
