Northwestern trustee apologizes for Facebook tiff with student
October 25, 2012
Northwestern trustee Ben Slivka apologized this evening for participating in a heated exchange about race relations with an NU student on Facebook.
The conversation, which was made public Tuesday night, came after Weinberg sophomore Pleshette Strong posted a Facebook status saying former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney exercised "white male privilege" when he interrupted the moderator of the first presidential debate earlier this month.
"White male privilege? Why are you getting all racist on your FB wall?" Slivka asked Strong in his initial message, according to a digital version of the Facebook exchange shared on an NU student's blog.
In a statement, Slivka admitted he used the "wrong tone and choice of words" in addressing Strong, who he said he met at Norris University Center last year and shortly thereafter added as a Facebook friend.
"Through my Facebook messages, I had hoped to initiate a discussion with this student about the issues of race, gender and power," Slivka said in the statement. "I realize that I probably have now done so in a much broader way. While that is not what I intended, I do hope that some good will result from it."
"Again, I apologize to this student, to my fellow trustees, and to the University community," he added.
Strong was not immediately available to comment this evening.
Read Slivka's full statement below.
Check back with The Daily tomorrow for more information on this developing story.
— Patrick Svitek
Slivka's full statement:
Statement by Benjamin W. Slivka,
Member, Northwestern University Board of Trustees
October 25, 2012
I recently had a Facebook message exchange with a Northwestern undergraduate student about a post she had put on her Facebook page regarding the presidential debate in which she used the term white male privilege. I had met her in line at the coffee shop in the student center last year and we became Facebook friends.
I joined Facebook over eight years ago, and since then I have had spirited discussions with many of the hundreds of my Facebook friends who are current or former Northwestern undergraduates. I'm someone who enjoys a good discussion and I sent this student a message in hopes of initiating one.
Upon reflection, however, I see that in both my tone and the choice of words I used in that exchange of messages, I may have inadvertently hurt that student. I sincerely apologize to her for doing so. Words matter, and I did not choose them well or think carefully about how I was using them. I also failed to keep in mind the appropriate relationship between a member of the University’s Board of Trustees and an undergraduate student. Facebook is an informal, egalitarian medium and I was using it in that way. But in doing so, I now realize I did not act in a manner appropriate for a member of Northwestern’s governing board. For that, I apologize to my fellow board members and the entire Northwestern community.
Through my Facebook messages, I had hoped to initiate a discussion with this student about the issues of race, gender and power. I realize that I probably have now done so in a much broader way. While that is not what I intended, I do hope that some good will result from it.
Again, I apologize to this student, to my fellow trustees, and to the University community.
Loading ...
Unfortunately, he has not apologized for his wrong views.
[Reply]
Lance Reply:
October 26th, 2012 at 12:46 am
Are you serious?
So if I said, in my opinion, black people should be the slaves of white people, that wouldn't be wrong?
If I said women should have no right to their bodies and should be tools of men, that wouldn't be wrong?
Do you believe in anything? Do you have any morals at all? Is it alright to kill someone? Why are your (presumably) anti-murder views any more right than someone else's?
He should apologize for having those views because those views are wrong. Just like people a hundred years ago should have apologized when they said black people were inferior or that gay people were sinners, because those views are wrong.
A free country means no one is going to take legal action against you or strip you of your rights because of your views. But literally human history and the nature of mankind dictate that there is right and wrong and that you should be on the correct side of it.
[Reply]
Trey Reply:
October 26th, 2012 at 12:49 am
"Frankly, if there is a God, he will do the world a favor and actually make the Mayan prophecy a real thing.
Beam me up Scotty, please."
http://www.northwestern.edu/counseling/
[Reply]
Ben Reply:
October 26th, 2012 at 2:19 am
This. How has he not recognized that his race and gender have helped him gain his success (preemptively: HELPED. not ENSURED).
[Reply]
jen Reply:
October 27th, 2012 at 1:11 am
Kristin is just some crazy relativist who doesn't understand the difference between right, wrong, true and false.
[Reply]
jen Reply:
October 28th, 2012 at 10:47 pm
Kristin, you should just shut up already, everyone can tell you're trolling. Go back to WoW
[Reply]
kristin Reply:
October 29th, 2012 at 2:20 pm
and what the hell are you doing, jen, if not "trolling"? you've commented more than i have on articles about this issue, and have been a lil b*tch to everyone who disagrees with you.
you are frankly an immature little child who throws a temper-tantrum any time anyone ever disagrees with you. you must not have had very many people tell you "no" in life, and frankly, missy, you are sorely in need of it. because you come across as a spoilt little brat, if i am to be blunt.
lesson number one in life: you are not always right
lesson number two: fact =/= opinion, and vice versa.
so why don't you go back to pooping in your diapers, since that is what babies like you do.
you are frankly an insufferable human being, and i feel sorry for anyone who has to be around you for any length of time
Calm the fuck down Reply:
October 29th, 2012 at 3:49 pm
Jeez, personal insults from both Kristin and Jen help nothing. Jen, to your original point, the idea has nothing to do with who's a better person. It's a recognition that whiteness and maleness allow those that have them to not face certain obstacles that non-white and non-male people face. Whether it's an educational system that shows a clear failure to educate non-white children, a job market that, for whatever reason, discriminates against non-whites (these studies have ben floating around the comments threads) or the smaller interpersonal instances of racism that come from the way we're conditioned by society, women and non-white people face plenty of barriers that white men don't. While I don't think that a non-white woman who achieves the same things as a white man is better, I am aware that she likely had more to overcome to get to position. At the very least, she had to overcome a set of obstacles that the man has never faced, and may not even be aware of.
Calm the fuck down Reply:
October 29th, 2012 at 3:50 pm
And by Jen's point, I meant Kristin's point.
kristin Reply:
October 29th, 2012 at 2:13 pm
and jen doesn't understand that opinion (namely, hers) =/= fact.
a mark of an untrained, weak mind
[Reply]
Dang... y'all called me "a northwestern student"... last year I was "angry black man", you would think you'd know me by now. anyway...
http://www.substanceslashstyle.com/2012/10/ben-slivkas-opinion-of-racism-privilege.html
[Reply]
While Slivka may have chosen the wrong medium to have a discussion about white male privilege, I'm glad he didn't apologize to Strong for having different views. If you read the facebook exchange, the NU student (Strong) fails to provide sound evidence for her views, while Slivka uses concrete examples to support his argument.
Also, Obama interrupted Romney 23 times in the final debate, whereas Romney only interrupted Obama once. Is Ms. Strong going to cite a racial reason for that, or will she just attribute it to Obama being arrogant and desperate? #doublestandard
[Reply]
... Reply:
October 25th, 2012 at 8:29 pm
STFU
[Reply]
No, Dont Shut Up Reply:
October 25th, 2012 at 9:09 pm
"STFU" is such an intelligent criticism, "..."! Please tell me more!
No Apologies, Right on. When the most vocal on our campus call you "privileged," "racist," or "Ugly White Girl" for disagreeing with their radical views, they dont expect you to actually stand up for what you believe in and have a debate with them. Im glad Slivka actually wanted to have that debate and Im hoping more of his persuasion will speak up too. We shouldnt concede to the poor arguments of the radicals because were afraid of being called names.
[Reply]
Right on Reply:
October 25th, 2012 at 9:35 pm
Agreed. Props to Slivka for standing his ground in a culture where white men are unfairly attacked for holding an opinion.
[Reply]
Will Reply:
October 26th, 2012 at 12:16 am
...seriously? We live in a culture that gives white men the benefit of the doubt in nearly every situation. The fact that these things don't happen more often makes that evident.
Pleshette Strong Reply:
October 25th, 2012 at 9:12 pm
A few minorities in power and a wikipedia citation is concrete evidence? How do you provide concrete evidence to supremacy? It is so much more than that. It's great that you spoke your views though (not many have come to Slivka's side) and I know this school isn't comprised of a bunch of like-minded people (or is it?). If (and when) there will be events around this, hopefully you come out and say what you wrote here.
[Reply]
To Pleshette Reply:
October 25th, 2012 at 9:31 pm
Pleshette, stop speaking in vague cliches please. "How do you provide concrete evidence to supremacy?" Like, seriously, you just said that?
Based upon the link Paul Jackson so thoughtfully provided, Slivka legitimately believes that opportunity is equal for all minorities. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree him, you put yourself above him in the fb conversation by refusing to respond to "a 52-year-old man." You're going to have egg on your face until you can produce a logical argument. He clearly just wanted to have an intelligent conversation with you, and you failed to turn that discussion into something productive by being defensive, dismissive, and rude. Way to go.
[Reply]
jen Reply:
October 25th, 2012 at 9:46 pm
I can't believe what I'm reading - why are people attacking Pleshette? He should apologize - he's a 52 year old Trustee interacting with a 19-year old sophomore undergrad!! The entire scenario is strange and Pleshette has no responsibility to justify her facebook status with citations for some crazy old man who took a status way too seriously
too seriously? Reply:
October 25th, 2012 at 10:38 pm
That's exactly the problem, Jen. If what I'm gleaning from the pro-Slivka people on this thread is right, people are fed up with the Pleshettes of the world making statements about "white privilege" and not backing up their claims. If an NU student had made a statement about Obama interrupting Romney due to some unsavory racial reason, it would be taken extremely seriously, and the student would be expected to explain herself and probably apologize to the NU community. But because Pleshette made a fb post that stereotyped whites, so it's okay for her to get away with not explaining her reasoning. She made a racial statement, she absolutely has a responsibility to justify herself.
And honestly, Ms. Strong is an adult, and if she was accepted into Northwestern, she is clearly capable of holding a thoughtful debate with another person.
Lance Reply:
October 26th, 2012 at 12:57 am
Yeah, Pleshette, why didn't you have a reasonable conversation with him?
I mean, when possibly one of the five or ten most influential and powerful people at this university (based on his money, positions, and activity among students), a 52-year-old white male, messages you and asks you "why you're getting all racist" and "personally insulting" him, why can't you just have an intelligent debate? I mean, it's not like you're less than half his age. It's not like you're a second-year student and he's been affiliated with the university for forty years.
Just listen to all the white people and men telling you what you should have done. They totally know your position. They know exactly what they would do if they were confronted by someone like that. They've known it all their lives - there's no such thing as privilege. No such thing as racial profiling or stereotypes built into our society. Slavery was long gone and we have a black President. There's no such thing as racism and you're racist for even thinking of that.
Why couldn't you just have a reasonable debate? Maybe you're just complaining about white male privilege as an excuse for your being unwilling to debate in a Facebook message thread with Ben Slivka. It's not like he has a building on this campus named after him or anything.
Sarcasm aside, you are incredibly strong and your responses in the thread were absolutely appropriate. Please don't let any of these brave Daily commenters get you down.
Lance Reply:
October 26th, 2012 at 12:47 am
It wasn't an argument. She didn't have to support her views over Facebook to a 52-year-old multimillionaire member of the Northwestern University Board of Trustees. The issue at hand is the blind, willful ignorance espoused in Slivka's discourses that is totally unbecoming of a supposedly worldly and educated man, especially one who holds such a high position of power and influence at our university.
He may have had "different views," but they were wrong. If you are actually intellectually curious, do some research yourself on white privilege, racism, and discrimination in society. Study up.
[Reply]
Ben Slivka is a badass.
[Reply]
Bro Reply:
October 26th, 2012 at 2:18 pm
Say what you want about his conversation with Pleshette, but you can't deny the fact that Slivka is a hard-working, intelligent guy. He might be white, but he's earned where he is today. Why is everyone calling him a multimillionaire like that's a bad thing? When did success become an excuse to persecute someone? It's ironic that this univeristy full of limousine liberals loathes successful people.
[Reply]
A body with privilege cannot fully separate itself from such privilege. A body situated in a position of hyper-authority cannot separate itself entirely from such a position.
This Ben Slivka accused Pleshette of being racist for tracing iterations of white privilege, suggested white privilege is symmetrical to racism, forcefully asked for an apology (and quoted Wikipedia as if it has the answers to race relations...haha I found that funny, his views are quite baseless) - does that not strike you as odd?
Ah, you think Pleshette should have whipped up better responses? Of course, that's the concern here. Not that this was an act of intimidation and psychosocial violence. This exchange is inherently asymmetrical - he never intended on engaging in discourse, but exercising and imposing his hyper-authoritative, privileged, and "I speak, and therefore it is" self on one of few minority students on this "pretty" white campus.
[Reply]
Ben Reply:
October 26th, 2012 at 2:15 am
I completely agree. The conversation could be the example in the dictionary for both whitesplaining and mansplaining.
[Reply]
White Privilege Reply:
October 26th, 2012 at 7:24 am
If you are white at this university, you a branded with the mark of original sin. You will never be able to eradicate it in this culture. Eternal victimhood for nonwhites and eternal guilt for whites. You hear that white people? If you don't express guilt over being white, then you're a racist.
[Reply]
Patrice Matthews Reply:
October 27th, 2012 at 2:24 am
are you serious? it isn't about slave owning. I guessing that is what you mean about the original sin. it is about the prejudice that happens today. I do believe in that white privilege exist. No I don't think I am a freaking victim. It just means I have to work my ass off more than my white peers in many situations. white privilege doesn't equate to being racist. Acknowledge that it is a thing and keep it moving.
[Reply]
kristin Reply:
October 28th, 2012 at 10:44 pm
you know what is insulting about this whole thing?
the whole idea of "white privilege" basically says that white people who "make it" aren't as good as minorities who make it. because the basic premise is that society is fundamentally stacked against non-whites. therefore, the conclusion that logically follows is that, if two people --one white, one not-- are in the same social/class/whatever system, the non-white person is oh-so-slightly "better" because they had to work harder in this racist society, which makes their success oh-so-slightly more impressive, or something. or more meaningful.
you can argue the point til you are blue in the face, but the argument boils down to: if a white person is successful in our society, he or she didn't do it off of his or her merit entirely. if a non-white person is successful, they did so in spite of society, and therefore did it entirely from their merit.
and that line of necessary conclusions is basically, in a nutshell, why i have such a huge problem with this issue in particular, and why I become such a heinous b*tch when defending against all the liberal theorists of 'white privilege,' which in the end is a profoundly racist theory that i hugely resent, and will turn in to the definition of a crazy person towards anyone who tries to throw that garbage my way.
can you imagine the bloodshed if someone had some theory -- and many people agreed-- that basically insinuated that non-white people were somehow inherently better? And spoke that theory as openly as all the pseudo-intellectuals of race theory banter about "white privilege?"
because i will be damned if someone says, or implies, that somehow i didn't earn what i have. i have worked my tail off, have worried and over-organized and stressed about my work and responsibilities, to reach the very high standards I have set for my work product, abilities, etc. (if you can not tell from my posts, i am a highly critical person. but above anyone else, i am critical of myself)
and i will be damned if some race theorist tries to poo-poo that, saying that somehow what i have worked for is a little less, because it was "easy" for me. it is profoundly insulting, and i resent -- borderline hate-- anyone who would say that. because for people like me-- who gain our sense of selves by taking pride in our work, in being able to show we have built a successful, full life-- having someone say something like 'white privilege' attacks the very foundations upon which we find our worth.
so before you go brandishing your ideas and theories so liberally about, think about what you are actually saying. not what you *think* you might be saying, but how what you are saying will be perceived by those you accuse of having the privilege. and maybe then you will understand why people, my self included, react so strongly against it.
i wonder if anyone who is a proponent of "white privilege" will be brave enough to come out and actually say that yes, indeed, "white privilege" means that successful non-whites are inherently better than successful white people. because i would put money on it that many people of this idea -- including some employed by NU -- even if they don't admit it, at some level believe the above to be true. and to those people i say, KMWA
dan Reply:
November 2nd, 2012 at 12:15 pm
lol @ kristin. don't worry! you're white and you did it all by yourself.
I'm glad we got another dangerous thought criminal to apologize for holding personal beliefs. Once all of these threats to society are off the street, our herd of sheep will be able to take over the world. Individual thought is wrong thought! Only when we take down the successful, independent members of society can mediocrity reign!
[Reply]
Matthew Drahozal Reply:
October 26th, 2012 at 12:00 am
I think what people don't seem to get is that "freedom of speech" just means the government can't punish you for holding controversial beliefs. It doesn't stop other people from calling you out for being a dumbass. And it certainly doesn't stop you from being wrong.
[Reply]
LOL Reply:
October 26th, 2012 at 12:36 am
Occupy Northwestern, is that you?!
[Reply]
Kind of ironic lol, but comedians have a way of seeing things very clearly and for what it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4f9zR5yzY
[Reply]
I'm noticing that the main issue people seem to have with Plashette's argument is that she doesn't provide solid evidence as proof of the white privilege she speaks of.
#1 because she was casually posting this on her personal page & a man who is supposed to be respected & professional as a trustee member attacked her, by accusing her of being racist, I don't blame her for choosing not to fully engage with this 52-year-old man
#2 in order for her to provide facts to back up this notion of white privilege, she would need to go through a long history and explain how essentially hundreds of years of degradation toward minority peoples have allowed for this white privilege to become so deeply embedded within society even today
#3 if Mr. Slivka were to pick up a sociology book about race instead of quoting Wikipedia, he might realize this & ultimately give some credibility to his argument
#4 his notion that working hard gets you places doesn't eliminate the fact that this white privilege still exists. that for some people getting places is a lot easier. that once they do get places, they won't be asked to prove they belong there...Donald Trump would never ask Romney to prove he's a citizen of the U.S. nor would he ask him to prove he went to Harvard, like he recently asked Obama. that, is what you call white privilege.
[Reply]
Everything about this is ridiculous, we are too damn old and too damn educated to be discussing something as important as race and privilege like this. The Northwestern community should be taking advantage of the ability to hold intellectual discussions on such a hot topic as race, but we instead have found ourselves shaming each other and calling everyone racist!
To pretend that white, and I would strongly argue straight, male privilege doesn't exist is like saying the sky isn't blue. This country was founded by white men for white men "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." While we praise Jefferson for calling upon Locke's philosophies, Jefferson neglected to use the true quote (it's in A Letter Concerning Toleration for all of you interested in sources) because we had slavery and that would have been too much hypocrisy for him to handle.
Also, for all of you standing up for Mr. Slivka and berating Pleshette for not including sources in a fb message rather accusatorially instigated by a member of the Board of Trustees, not one of you have used your name. I wonder why. And for everyone pretending that Mr. Slivka was attempting to have an intellectual discussion on race, gender, and society on such an informal forum as fb chat... Puhleaze... The comment, "White male privilege? Why are you getting all racist on your FB wall?" smacks of condescending incendiary language. As someone who doesn't know Mr. Slivka forgive me if that's how a multimillionaire member of the Northwestern Board of Trustees speaks.
Some articles: 1. http://www.chicagobooth.edu/capideas/spring03/racialbias.html
2. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1527-2001.1998.tb01368.x/ful 3.http://www.forbes.com/forbes400/#page:1_sort:0_direction:asc_search:_filter:All%20industries_filter:All%20states_filter:All%20categories *check this list out and see how many women and people of color you see...maybe it's coincidence, but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck
tl;dr The (straight) white male privilege proof is in the pudding, and America is a Snack Pack.
[Reply]
true Reply:
October 26th, 2012 at 2:25 pm
I agree completely
[Reply]
Thank you to all for taking part in this conversation as these are what really help to educate us and open our minds to what other think (and how to respond to those thoughts) while at Northwestern.
Pleshette- To be faced with such a heavy topic with a trustee is absolutely intimidating. As a 19 year old college student, thank you for standing in what you believe and voicing your opinion in the best of your ability.
Ben- Your apology may have been forced, but our need to learn and grow, and not always having the most educated of opinions, should never be apologized for. We are constantly learning throughout life, I hope you were able to take something away from this exchange that challenges your previous processes.
As a Caucasian male, I understand that there are generally no (negative) snap judgements made when people look at me; people generally will not internally second guess my credentials or background when they first meet me. I understand subconsciously I may be deemed more "trustworthy" or "ambitious" than someone different than myself by a third party before introductions are made. I agree in that the opportunities available for all people are physically set in place (in many instances), but there is also a mindset that we are not always aware of that creates a bit of an imbalance. I do not feel guilty for my own actions, but I do work to understand how I can be part in building an inclusive atmosphere that brings a diverse set of bright minds together to advance the community (whichever community that may be).
Thank you to all who have commented and voiced your opinion. Learning of others' opinions should not cause us to lash out; it should help to educate us in how we work in today's world and provide insight into how we can positively change it.
[Reply]
It's simple. Comments on articles like these only solidifies NU's need to have a diversity class requirement. It's a fact of us not all having the same access to information and not being on the same page intellectually. Let us all at least be exposed to the kinds of conversations happening on campus that will clear up a lot of the miscommunication I see happening here.
[Reply]
Lance Reply:
October 26th, 2012 at 11:38 pm
What form do you think such a requirement should take?
[Reply]
Why don't we all just listen to what Louis CK has to say...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4f9zR5yzY
[Reply]
I've been a civil rights attorney for more than 30 years and find it incredulous that a 52-year-old man honestly believes that "skin color has little to do with success." (Did he really miss the whole civil rights movement that resulted in the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964???)
Although Mr. Slivka correctly states that "America is a land of freedom and opportunity," I can provide hundreds -- if not thousands -- of examples in recent years where the undisputed facts, not "stereotypical arguments," proved that people who "work[ed] hard" were denied jobs and promotions, fired, harassed, and subjected to other adverse treatment because of their race.
As a 50something black female, who graduated from a competitive college and law school, I count myself among the hardworking, high- achieving people of color cited by Mr. Slivka. Yet, I can share more than one or two personal experiences where I was treated differently (e.g., ignored in retail stores, asked to show an ID when using my Platinum Amex card, interrupted while speaking at meetings, etc.) based on my race and/or sex. Yes, I know some may attempt to explain away those examples as acts of rudeness everyone experiences but, believe me, I know preferential treatment when I see it. Wake up, Mr. Slivka. Discrimination is real.
[Reply]
Two aspects of this dust-up deserve further discussion:
1) Mr Slivka's assertion that his post on Ms Strong's FB page was Intended to initiate a serious discussion feels disingenuous to me. The tone was petulant and the content lacked substance
2) Just what does a trustee of the University think he is doing by entering into a FB friendship with an undergraduate student? To my mind it's as inappropriate as it would be for him to hang out in the lounge of a residence hall. There are appropriate ways for faculty members, senior staff members and trustees to get valuable insights into the student experience, but this is not one of them.
[Reply]
bumble Reply:
October 28th, 2012 at 3:02 pm
very true
[Reply]