2009-01-01 - The Commentator - Should YU Tolerate Tolerance?

Should YU Tolerate Tolerance?

by Raffi Holzer

January 1, 2009

Compared to other universities, Yeshiva University has long attracted a homogeneous crowd of Orthodox Jews. Some YU students, however, say that such homogeneity can lead to bigotry - and now aim to rectify that.

At the beginning of this semester, Fall 2008, a group of students formed a club that, in their words, stands to affirm that "every human being deserves to be respected and tolerated no matter who they are or what they believe in." Called the Yeshiva University Tolerance Committee, the innocuously titled club has generated controversy from its inception, and has already encountered a good deal of initial resistance from students and staff alike. Nearly all acknowledge that additional tolerance in abstract is a good thing, and plenty of students have rallied around the club, arguing that YU can be unfriendly to those with different sexualities, skin colors, and religious beliefs. Yet many others have displayed discomfort with the activities and goals of the club, and questioned whether the goals of tolerance are always fully in concert with YU's Jewish values.

Mission of the Tolerance Club
The idea for forming a tolerance club initially surfaced from sentiments that homophobia was a major problem on YU's campus, according to members of the club. After students met on campus, however, and as they saw other forms of intolerance, they decided their enemy should be "ethnocentrism, racism, and general close-mindedness on campus," according to YUTC Vice President Ely Winkler (YC ' 09). "As we saw what was occurring on campus, we changed our goals."

Once the club formed, there was no clear vision or mission, and no goal of creating controversy, according to club founders. At the beginning, YUTC President Avi Kopstick, explained, "I didn't have a concrete idea of what I wanted [to accomplish]," but simply felt that "not everyone is nice," and he believed that "[a lack of] tolerance had something to do with it." He figured a club to promote tolerance would be an obvious avenue for promoting kindness and sensitivity. "In other universities, of course there's going to be a tolerance club," he said. He added that he didn't think there would be much resistance: "Obviously everyone should be nice to each other."

However, while students on campus seemed to agree with the majority of the group's ideals for combating racism, and many have long argued that YU students need to expand their horizons, the club's promotion of tolerance for homosexuals emerged as a point of friction. One version of the mission statement reads, "This group aims to promote awareness of the effects of prejudice and ignorance on campus and to create an atmosphere free from racism, ethnocentrism, sexism, and homophobia and other forms of discrimination and insensitivity" (underline added). The inclusion of a reference to the tolerance of homosexual activity in the club's mission statement stirred much unrest as well as questions about to what extent homosexuality could truly be tolerated on an Orthodox Jewish campus. Homophobia and the tolerance of homosexuals became a sticking point for many students, and rumors began to circulate that the club was a front for a "gay club." Kopstick and Winkler firmly denied the validity of these rumors. Kopstick said that although he had expected the rumors, he had never intended for the Tolerance Committee to be viewed in that light. The club was started in response to what he and others felt was a marked insensitivity and carelessness when it came to others' feelings on the YC campus, and while homosexuality was included within that rubric, the YUTC was never intended to serve as a front for a gay club.

In one meeting of the committee, members told anecdotes that had convinced them that there was a need for such an initiative. Josh Shinefield, a member of the tolerance committee, expressed his story in a letter to the club where he described the scene at a lag ba'omer party he had hosted where a Jewish friend of his who attended YU and was clearly drunk upon his arrival to the party addressed one of this student's Hispanic friends with an insulting racial epithet. Stunned by the insensitivity and latent bigotry behind the comment, Josh joined the tolerance club after he decided that, "now is a time to be a teacher, and not just a bystander."

Other stories of racist and homophobic remarks heard on campus abounded at this meeting. Many of its members had similar stories. One common narrative cited by members of the club was that YC students made racist remarks about African-Americans during and following the recent presidential race. Shinfield said that, "on the night of the 2008 presidential elections I received a text message from a Yeshiva student that said, 'Don't lose heart yet - the white people are still getting out of work.'" Another club member remembered how, after the results of the presidential election came in, an acquaintance of his had thoughtlessly remarked, "Uch, there's a gorilla in office." Kopstick brought up an event he remembered where, "there was a conversation on homophobia in a sociology class where someone said he was 'not homophobic but wouldn't want his kids around people like that.'"

There also seemed to be a general consensus among members of the club that the YU campus had a particular problem with intolerance. Most agreed that sensitivity failed at YU. One member added that he found it particularly disturbing that "even rabbis here are racist, or don't clamp down on racist talk." Some posited that because YU is composed of a rather homogeneous group, and its students often lived in so-called "Jewish bubbles," its student body was more prone to insensitive talk and behavior, an assumption corroborated by Dr. Victor Schwartz, Dean of Students at YU. In his opinion, "when people are living in a somewhat homogeneous and somewhat closed community...those communities are at greater risk of developing prejudice and insensitivity toward others."

Kopstick admitted however, that despite the club's broad platform and inspiration, many students continued to latch onto the tolerance club's stance against homophobia. Several students both inside and outside of the club have maintained that they believe the club puts a disproportionately large focus on matters of tolerance for homosexuals. These students point to a public relations sheet that the club distributed that makes no mention of tolerance for racial minorities other than a reference to YU as a campus "that is primarily comprised of Jewish-straight-white-males." In a statement the club has said although it "recognizes that homophobic discrimination is significant... it is by no means the only or most important topic."

Rabbi Steven Greenberg, Director of the CLAL Diversity Project at The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, and a graduate of RIETS who has since declared that he is gay, argued that the club should focus on precisely those issues that are challenging. "I'm not sure why YU needs a Tolerance Committee if it's only for things people already tolerate," he said. "Tolerance is about respecting people's different psychological and physiological realities, and ideological commitments, although you feel challenged by their presence or disagree with their decision," be argued. "Which differences are they going to tolerate?" Greenberg asked. "Ashkenazim and Sephardim? Redheads and brunettes?"

Staff Controversy Begins
The club's agenda also came under question from Dr. Hillel Davis, Dean of Student Life. According to Kopstick, this occurred when he sent out an email to various members of the YU administration and faculty on behalf of the tolerance committee asking each of them to submit a piece for a Tolerance Club newsletter. Kopstick says that, "[Dr. Davis] replied, 'tolerance is a really nice thing, but it scares me a little bit,' and asked to meet Kopstick."

In an interview, Dr. Davis said, "I asked to meet with him because I really wanted to know what he had in mind." But Kopstick said that "Dr. Davis was against the club from the get-go." Dr. Davis however felt that mischaracterized his position. "I don't believe I was against the club...when President Joel hired me, he said 'you're in charge of kavod habriyot,' so how could I be against tolerance?"

Dr. Davis did however express reservations regarding certain aspects of the club's activity. When the tolerance club scheduled an event that was to feature a Jewish homosexual among its speakers, Dr. Davis was instrumental, according to members of the Tolerance Club, in having the speaker removed from lineup, resulting in the canceling of the event.

When questioned about the strategic intelligence of featuring a gay, and thus controversial, speaker in their first event, especially as the club already seemed to be running into some resistance, Kopstick responded that he was "not going to shy away from an issue." However, after some thought and advice from various faculty, Kopstick decided that it would be better not to be confrontational. He emphasized that the club is "not here to scold people or indict people, but to do things in a positive way." Accomplishing his goals, he felt, would only be possible "By making the Jewish community at large comfortable, and... currently the comfort level is not there."

When Dr. Davis was asked about the aforementioned canceled event he said, "If someone wants to get up and say I am a proud non-halachic Jew, I would not be in favor; halacha is clear." However, when questioned about whether it would be appropriate for a homosexual to speak on campus regarding his being tolerated as a person, Dr. Davis aimed for nuance. He stated, "If someone were to say, 'Let me tell you why I feel disrespected on this campus because of who I am,' that is a message that potentially we need to deal with." However, he also said that when it comes to a halachic issue, such as homosexuality, it is more complicated.

Tolerance in Halacha
Halacha, in fact, seems to be at the center of the issues surrounding the tolerance club. After all, tolerance is an almost universally accepted ideal. Yet when placed in a religious context, the specter of having religion bend in any way in order to tolerate or accommodate others raises some anxiety. As Dr. Schwartz puts it, "Who doesn't like tolerance? ... But once you bring the religious aspect in, it becomes a more complex concern." As an example, Dr. Schwartz brought up the issue of sexism. Everyone might agree that "a woman doing the same job as a man should get the same pay." However, when it comes to questions of sexism within halacha things understandably become a bit stickier. "These issues become complicated when they get mixed with religious doctrine," he said, and so "the issue is, what do we mean by tolerance?

Although the dictionary's definition will generally suffice to answer such a question, when it comes to tolerance in a religious framework, the nature of the question becomes far more sensitive, and the answer far more complex. Some students felt that "tolerance implies validation," and thus a club that promotes the tolerance of homosexuals is inappropriate on the YC campus. One student remarked that "we can't tolerate something that's against halacha," and felt that creating any sort of public forum for gays on campus was wrong. He said, "Homosexuality is a problem that people should deal with privately." In his mind, the club is essentially equating all minorities, while he feels strongly that, "gays don't fit into the same category as other minorities on this campus... it's a moral and halachic issue."

Dr. Davis too said he was "not sure forming clubs about every deficiency we have is appropriate." However, when discussing the question of tolerance of homosexuals Davis made sure to stress that "you have to distinguish between the individual and the act," essentially promoting the principle of "hate the sin love the sinner." He added, "Of course we embrace tolerance... but we deal in a religious world, we're driven by Torah values." Dr. Schwartz echoed that distinction, saying, "Tolerance does not mean endorsement." He emphasized, though, that "we should be careful about using language that is pejorative."

When Rabbi Yosef Blau, mashgiach ruchani (spiritual advisor), of RIETS, heard about the campus discussion concerning the tolerance club, and asked about the tolerance of homosexuals from a halachic perspective, he responded with astonishment. "Do we tolerate mechalilei shabbos (Sabbath transgressors)? Of course we do. We don't spit at them or throw rocks at them." He saw nothing wrong with a club that promoted the tolerance of homosexuals and spoke about the sympathy he felt they deserved. When asked about the prospect of having a gay person speak on campus about his trials as an Orthodox Jew, Rabbi Blau responded with a question. "What's everyone hung up on?" he asked. "Is it going to make other people homosexual? No one is forcing anyone to go hear him." He added that he felt the issue was an important one and said, "I don't think it's going to be dealt with by prohibiting people from talking about it."

He ended by noting "there's a balance for everything in life. There's a time to be a kanai (zealot) and a time to be sympathetic." Rabbi Blau concluded that "we can spend our time attacking, but...is that the best thing to do? In my opinion, we're far better off showing sympathy."

(All rights belong to the Commentator)