NYU New York’s administration has recently come under criticism as students took to the streets and social media to protest against right-wing commentator Milo Yiannopoulos. Students opposed his planned speaking engagement at NYU where he would profess his views and dissent against liberalism on campus. On Oct. 31, Yiannopoulos, the former Breitbart News Editor and self-proclaimed “most censored man in America,” was invited by conservative NYUNY professor Michael Rectenwald to give a talk on the identity politics of Halloween. Although the talk was specifically intended to expose Rectenwald’s students to new perspectives and peacefully dispute perceived NYUNY censorship, the speech set in motion a series of campus demonstrations and twitter threads — such as #CancelMiloAtNYU — that ultimately forced New York City's Mayor Bill de Blasio and Police Department to request that the event be postponed.

NYUNY students are not the only ones pushing back against individuals and views that they allege seek to invalidate the humanity of marginalized peoples. Other U.S. university students are also are utilizing their claim to the freedom of speech in an attempt to justify both intolerance and rejection of views that they disagree with. In other words, these so-called snowflakes and social justice warriors have been dissenting against the dissenters.

From college campuses to legislatures and coffee shops, freedom of speech plays a fundamental role in the way we individually navigate cultures, practices and religions outside of our own. At NYU Abu Dhabi, opinions are protected by academic freedom, which means that students have the choice to respectfully express unique sets of ideals — regardless of whether they may offend specific minority groups — and, concurrently, the option to fundamentally object to what they find controversial. The latter is essential, because as Craig Harper highlights in his article in The Ascent, freedom of expression does not equate to the right have your voice heard.

“Yes, you have the right to express yourself in any way you see fit (short of incitement to violence), but nobody has the right to demand that other people consume their opinions,” wrote Harper on the right to an audience. In essence, disagreement and debate are assumed to be an essential part of discourse, because in the large economy of opinions one is required to fight for one’s convictions to prove their worth.

However, anonymous expressions of controversial opinions online have become increasingly prevalent within the NYUAD community. Students at NYUAD have used anonymous fora that create the perception of free-flowing dissent, but without the potential costs of offense and public shaming, and the benefit of face-to-face exchange. Unlike perceived “snowflakes” in NYUNY who have been both publicly protesting and supporting controversial opinions, it seems as though NYUAD students battling in the shadows of social media have forgotten what is central to the university’s administrative story: facilitating dialogue by leveraging the disagreements that come with a diverse student body to tackle complicated issues.

This community of differing religions, languages and political views may be exciting and unique, but like most unfamiliar interactions, these distinct categories of personal identity also make NYUAD prone to disagreement and misunderstanding. This is not to say that there is anything wrong with dissent. In fact, it is important to understand that in the institution we call home, peer-to-peer disagreement is highly encouraged by the administration as a welcome means to learn from the diverse interactions at work and promote engagement with different and opposing views.

Kyle Farley, Associate Vice Chancellor and Dean of Students, recently sat down with The Gazelle to discuss dissent, harassment and discrimination within the context of NYUAD, during which he emphasized the importance of disagreement in a healthy educational environment.

“In terms of disagreement, or dissenting from the opinion of members of this community, that is expected in all areas of the university — in the classroom, in the residence halls, in student activities, etc.” Farley also highlighted the university’s protection of the free exchange of ideas and open inquiry and the principles of debate, challenge and protest, which ultimately ensure “that there are no policies, practices or intentions to limit or restrict peer-to-peer disagreement or dissent of any kind.”

Instead, the broader university and the Office of Campus Life have made efforts to provide students with a variety of de jure institutions and events that directly tackle difference — all immediately available to them after arriving on campus for Marhaba. The Office of Spiritual Life and Intercultural Education specifically offers two interactive programs — Sustained Dialogue and the Intercultural Learning Program. Eric Rothman, Assistant Director of SLICE, described the latter as a way to “reprogram people to how they understand difference and how they interact with difference” and similarly change people's “fundamental paradigm of how they understand themselves.”

Freedom of speech entails interacting and engaging with people of opposing and conflicting viewpoints, which oftentimes results in offense.

“Because we're such a diverse group of people we’re all operating by our own culturally influenced values, so it stands to reason that the things that we do or the things that we hold dear or what we find to be fundamentally right or wrong … will sometimes be at odds with other people who are operating according to their same culturally influenced values that are either different or perceived to be different,” said Dr. Alta Mauro, Director of SLICE, on the nature of offense as an expected, not sanctioned, reality.

The reality is that no one at NYUAD arrives with the full set of skills necessary to navigate the complexities of intercultural intercultural social interactions without insult and personal shame. As much as NYUAD is a community of global leaders, it is also a community that is influenced by students’ home countries; some of which are led by authoritarian dictators or conservative, religious leaders and others governed by deeply entrenched secularism or democratic socialism. At the end of the day, these collective experiences shape students, and, as Farley mentioned, “bring biases and assumptions” that through the course of their experience in this community are hopefully “able to increase [our] understanding and respect for peers who hold different ideas and beliefs.”

Ultimately, many administrators assume that offense is part of coming to a university that draws such a diverse group of students, faculty and staff together, and individuals like Dr. Mauro suggests that “it would help us to spend a little less time trying to keep that from happening and [instead focus on] what do we do when that happens because it's bound to happen.”

When we encounter a breakdown in discourse and a movement toward irritation, some in the NYUAD administration strongly recommends that the response be peer-to-peer.

“When someone says something you disagree with, NYUAD expects you to find the courage to grapple with that idea, to reflect on why someone else may think that way, to engage in dialogue with one another to reach a place of greater understanding … while maintaining respect for your peers even as you vigorously debate or rebut that classmate's opinion,” said Farley.

Recommendations to engage in interpersonal interactions are not simply based on the emotional value of face-to-face dialogue. Within the context of NYU, it is necessary to highlight that the University Student Conduct Policy does not empower the university “to interfere with the rights of a student beyond the University environment.” Thereby, at NYUAD all student conduct, messages and tweets that occur online and over social media — i.e. the Facebook Page NYUAD Confessions and Crushes and Compliments — are considered to be “outside the university context” and should only be subject to the purview of public authorities.

Although NYUAD does not tolerate harassment, bullying or discrimination of any kind — in-person, verbally, physically or online — the university is not responsible for protecting the hurt feelings that result from poorly received Trump appreciation posts on NYUAD Confessions or angry comments dismissing the existence of a gender pay gap. In taking advantage of the diverse community at NYUAD, students have the opportunity to profess their opinions and develop the skills to listen to opposing viewpoints. After all, the objective of any university experience is the exploration of a spectrum of differing opinions and ideas.

“This is a place to make mistakes, to question one another's assumptions, to unpack your own biases, and to leave this community more conscientious, thoughtful and nuanced than when you first arrived. Hemingway's quote, ‘There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self,’ feels particularly poignant here,” said Farley.

“This is a community where I hope students can grow in their awareness of others while also feeling respected as individuals; these are not contradictory goals so long as we judge our success not by avoiding tension and conflict, but by embracing it with the grace and humility we need in order to grow across our time at NYUAD.”