Three years of watching an endless cycle of offense by The Primary Source and waste of energy in response to it has frustrated me to the point of voluntarily writing while on a break from school - quite a feat indeed. I wrote this viewpoint to address a problem I've noticed in the Tufts community in general, but I was moved to write it after reading the April 18 Viewpoint "Stand up for the Islamic community" and the subsequent firestorm of Viewpoints once again inspired by The Primary Source.
Whenever The Primary Source publishes something offensive, and someone on campus actually notices, the response is completely ineffectual at accomplishing anything other than proving that the Source is right in their assertion that this campus supports not only freedom from discrimination, but freedom from offense as well.
Freedom of speech works both ways, and you have to accept the fact that if everyone in this country has the right to say what they want, you're not going to agree with everything that is said. However, because freedom of speech does work both ways, you also have the right, and some would say the responsibility, to respond to those with whom you disagree.
To equate reading a paper that expresses views different then your own with moral deficiency is immature and a bit reprehensible, especially given the purported Jumbo ideal of free and open discussion. Is Tufts as a campus really so sensitive that we can't read an article that we disagree with, entertain what it's saying for few moments, think about it critically and have a say about the issue, without this knee-jerk reaction to cry about hurt feelings?
Instead of telling us about how mean the Source is, why don't you go point by point through each of its arguments and refute them, provide evidence against them, show why they're wrong, and offer a different perspective on the issue than the one they've chosen to share with us? You and the rest of the campus who are so anti-The Primary Source and its writings would be better served by reading and openly rebutting what they say, rather than sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting "we can't hear you."
Offensive as what they say might be, the facts are that a quick look at any news source will show that in the last few years, Muslims have consistently made their way into the news for committing acts of violence, such as the beheading of three Christian girls walking to school in Indonesia; more than a hundred deaths in Nigeria, Libya, Pakistan and Afghanistan, among other countries, and the torching of the Norwegian embassy in Syria as a response to the Jyllands-Posten cartoons; and the use of suicide bombers against civilians in Israel and Iraq, the latter case being even more surprising for the fact that the bombings are carried out on fellow Muslims. In the past few months we have gotten to the point where it is a day without the occurrence of Muslim-perpetrated violence in the news that is notable.
I am not attacking Muslims or Islam. I have gone out of my way to take classes either about Islam or that somehow incorporate it into the curriculum so that I could gain a perspective about Islam that isn't tainted by the media and what is currently going on in world events.
I have Muslim cousins. I have spent over a month living with a Muslim family in a predominantly Muslim area of Northern Ghana. I am well aware that not all, or even most, Muslims are as they have been portrayed in the media, and that the Quran, Sunnah and Hadith aren't just verbose calls-to-arms. That being said, the way that some Muslims have behaved in the recent past has portrayed the religion in a negative light, and by doing so those individuals and groups have opened the flood gates for criticism and scrutiny that might not necessarily be warranted.
Unfortunately, the average American's experience with and knowledge of Islam is dominated by Sept. 11 and the events I listed above, because these are acts that have been committed by Muslims that have been well-publicized. The contemporary stereotypes surrounding Islam come out of these specific, enumerable and horrifically gruesome incidents, many of which have happened within the last decade.
Even though these actions have been committed by a minority of Muslims, the reactions of the rest of the Islamic community have done very little to dispel these stereotypes. As such, the onus is not on the rest of the world to strive for tolerance and find the good in Islam, but on the moderates within the Muslim community to decry those violent incidences that have been committed in the name of their faith, and to offer contradictory evidence and specific examples of why Islam is indeed peaceful and not as it has been portrayed in the media.
You say that the examples the Source uses are taken out of context. Give us the proper context. I'm not defending the Source, and I disagree with a lot of what they have to say, but writing a viewpoint that the Source is wrong for hurting minority feelings isn't "stand[ing] up for the Islamic community." Demonstrating why what the Source said is wrong and offering evidence to the contrary would truly be standing up for the Islamic community. You, and we as a campus, can do better.
Again, this isn't really about Islam or religion, nor am I directing this solely towards the author of the April 18th Viewpoint. It was her Viewpoint, however, that finally inspired me to write about this issue, which is why I used Islam as an example in the preceding paragraphs. During my three years at Tufts, and even while away, I have tried to the best of my ability to keep up with all of the campus publications because I think they all have something to offer.
In addition to looking forward to each Daily, I've eagerly anticipated those mornings every few weeks when the papers in the publication stands change colors, signaling the arrival of a new Observer or Source. What has disturbed me though is the complete abhorrence and lack of readership of the Primary Source on this campus, and it's not because I agree with most of what they say, but because it seems the student body is intentionally shying away from conflict or discomfort.
Yes, the Source can be inappropriate and inflammatory, much of the time intentionally so, but they often also have well-researched and well-written articles written by your fellow classmates that get lost in the fervor surrounding the sentences they throw in here and there to get a rise out of this very sensitive campus.
What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. The fact that I disagree with much of what they say is part of the enjoyment I get out of reading the Source, because at the very least they make me question my own beliefs and opinions, and so strengthen them.
This is an intelligent, engaged campus, and I think that we can do better in the way of a response to this source of contention than simply ignoring it, as some have suggested. In fact, I would argue that part of the reason the Source publishes the things it does is because they don't really think anyone will read it or care.
Few people on campus read the Source, and fewer will admit that they read it, or (heaven forbid) respond to it, and therein lays our problem. When this campus can't muster anything more than whines and complaints to respond to what the Source publishes, it makes their arguments appear stronger. It also makes their writers infernally pleased with themselves. Perhaps they would exercise better judgment if they knew that the whole student body was scrutinizing what they said.
Calling on the university to cut the Source's funding or for them to be censored or reprimanded is an unrealistic way of going about things that will be ineffective when attempted in the real world and, more importantly, fails to address the underlying problem. Ignoring the Source, an option some have suggested, is just as flawed a solution.
The Source has the chutzpah to put in print what many on this liberal campus are too scared to vocalize. Whether or not these stereotypes and misconceptions are expressed publicly in the form of a campus publication, they do exist, and usually under the radar. For better or worse, the often problematic things the Source publishes expose festering problems for what they are, and present an opportunity for those who are more knowledgeable to address these problems directly. Seize this opportunity to educate those around you, and use what would appear to be a negative situation to your advantage.
I strongly encourage those who disagree with anything published on this campus to write about it and to offer an intelligent, well-researched and thought-out response rather then the usual complaints and calls for apologies or censorship. Stand up for what you believe in and defend it well. Don't just say the other side is wrong, prove it. After a year away from Tufts, I am very much looking forward to returning this coming fall. Hopefully, I'll be returning to a more enlightened campus discourse as well.
Elana Cohen-Khani is a junior majoring in psychology.
