Welcome, Guest!

Editorial: Tolerance at Uni

By Gargoyle Staff
Published: Wednesday, February 7, 2007 - 3:37am
Tags:

By Gargoyle senior editors
Posted Wednesday, Feb. 7, 2007, The OG, opinions

UNI IS NOT a perfect place: There have been recent controversies over “hot lists,” pranks involving offensive materials placed on and in lockers, emotionally damaging gossip blogs, and exclusive minority support services.

But high schools will be high schools, and at the end of the day Uni still provides an extraordinarily tolerant atmosphere with regard to the individuality of its students and faculty.

In the face of all of these isolated controversies, and the excitement that goes hand-in-hand with arguing for either side, we feel that many students lose track of just how supportive Uni's environment is. It's important to remember how Uni's culture compares to the teenage world that lies beyond our quaint academic getaway nestled in the heart of Campustown.

Most Uni students have been exposed to mainstream middle school environments, including (but not limited to) those of Urbana Middle School, Jefferson, Edison, St. Matthew's, and Franklin.

What's more, many of us have maintained some sort of connection to other local high schools over the years and have come to realize that Uni has an exceedingly more progressive attitude toward sensitive issues.

Thoughtful discussion and healthy debate truly play a role in the way the Uni community deals with these topics, whereas at other schools, interactions between different worldviews and ideologies are often more antagonistic.

Rarely does one hear slurs and insults thrown around maliciously in our hallways — when they are used, they are not warmly received by many peers. Clubs dealing with sensitive topics, such as the Sexual Health Awareness Group, are granted equal privileges to every other student group. Whatever disagreements we may have with each other, they don't affect our ability to coexist peacefully and respectfully.

Every year, Uni's Gay-Straight Alliance sponsors The Day of Silence. Participants in this event often don black apparel and abstain from all talking. Although Assistant Director Sue Kovacs warns students and their parents via e-mail that participating in such an event is a personal choice that could have consequences such as a grade reduction in class participation for that day, the majority of Uni faculty are understanding. They allow students to express class participation in other ways while remaining silent, demonstrating a high level of understanding and support for the GSA's mission.

When conjuring up ideas for Spirit Week last year, many Student Council members expressed enthusiasm for “Drag Day,” a day in which students would outfit themselves in apparel usually worn by the opposite gender. However, when several faculty members made it known that they would be uncomfortable with this theme, their views were respected, and the idea was dropped.

The most controversial debate at Uni this year arose because of a perceived need by some students for a minority student advocate position to support what they felt was a lack of sensitivity toward their experiences. While Uni's underrepresentation of certain minority groups is a serious issue that must be addressed, we can't agree that Uni's underrepresented minorities have faced significant obstacles gaining acceptance into the school's community.

The minority student advocates shouldn't have a tough time creating a “climate that is comfortable and conducive to the academic and social well-being” of underrepresented minorities, or “promoting multicultural awareness and positive social action by all members of the Uni community” — these are characteristics that Uni already has. The program can and should probably focus more on recruitment of underrepresented minorities.

Uni is as nurturing and open as any high school in the country, if not more so, and we should all keep that in mind as we learn and grow here. Whatever problems we have, we should continue to approach them in the same thoughtful, calm manner that we traditionally have.

  • Login or register to post comments

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
February 7, 2007 - 9:16am — Lisa (not verified)

Although we sometimes have the best of intentions (and sometimes not), it is critical that we do not try to define others' experiences. If I am stepping on your foot and you say "ouch," then I need to resopnd as if it hurts whether or not I am aware of that fact. It sounds like the editorial staff truly believe that there is a positivie multicultural environment at Uni. I encourage them to suspend that notion, so that they might EMPATHIZE with those who are claiming a different experience. When we listen and truly hear each other, we are taking steps toward a positive multicultural environment.
February 7, 2007 - 9:23am — George Reese (not verified)

Uni as a unique place. But I think you're wrong to minimize the work that must be done on creating a more inclusive environment. It is not correct to refer to the indicators of intolerance as "these isolated controversies". This is a denial of the climate that has allowed these events to take place. Uni is a place of privilege, and that privilege is maintained by excluding many people. First, in the admissions process, and then continuing through the feelings of uniqueness that come from considering yourselves better than other schools and separating yourselves from the broader community. The minority student advocates do in fact have a very tough time because there is clearly a sense among the editorial board of the Gargoyle (i.e., leading voices in the student body) that there is no internal problem for them to address. The so-called "isolated controversies" give the lie to this assertion. Most offensive is the following statement from the editorial: "The program can and should probably focus more on recruitment of underrepresented minorities." This is dismissive and conveys the sense of "We're fine here. You people just go handle those problems over there." Uni is a wonderful school. It is also a place of class privilege, elitism, isolation, and exclusion. These issues are only addressed if they are confronted openly, and they can only be confronted openly if they are acknowledged to exist. I'm white, male, Uni parent. I've had privileges. I like privilege. And I wish it were true that Uni and places like it were all about the wonderfulness of the right people in the right place to make them happy and achieve. And I do believe that a special place for hard-working students is some of the story. But there's also a story of power and privilege, and who gets to talk, and what they get to say, and who gets access to scarce resources and support. You do not serve yourselves well to deny that part of the story, or think that you're addressing it without looking in your own backyard.
February 7, 2007 - 9:29am — D. Anthony Tyeeme Clark (not verified)

The senior editors of the school newspaper proclaim on the one had "at the end of the day Uni still provides an extraordinarily tolerant atmosphere with regard to the individuality of its students and faculty" and on the other unilaterally decide for everyone that young people of color may not assert their individuality! Not on their watch. Clearly, these particular recipients of white privilege are uncomfortable having been put in a position during their senior year of high school to reflect on their unearned advantages, undeserved benefits, and even mediocrity. Unfortunately, as this defensive and sanctimonious editorial suggests, Uni High School has failed all of its students. To those of you who are on the receiving end of this assault by your school newspaper, keep your heads high. You are smart. You are important. You are beautiful human beings!
February 7, 2007 - 9:37am — Frances Jacobson Harris (not verified)

I have to admit that I cringed a little when I read this editorial. I hope that the senior editors realize that "better than others" is still not good enough, and perhaps not even good. Saying so is making assumptions about others' perspectives that you are not entitled to make. Lisa said it better than I possibly could -- you can't imagine what it's like unless you've lived the experience. I do agree that Uni is a very special place. I realize it every time I speak to other school librarians. For example, when we started our subscription to the Advocate, not an eyebrow was raised. Every day I'm happy and proud to be part of this school. But I do believe you've made some very naive statements in this editorial. We still have a long way to go.
February 7, 2007 - 9:41am — Kathleen Patton (not verified)

Lisa beat me to it. Hear, hear. It is not the prerogative of the majority to tell the minority that everything's fine. I have been hearing loud and clear for four years that everything is NOT fine for all students at Uni. Yes, editors, I agree that Uni is a fantastic place, and far more comfortable for all sorts of people than any other school I'm aware of anywhere. But, please, recognize that some students have faced significant obstacles. The evidence for that? They're telling you they have. If you have never had the experience of living in an environment where you are an obvious minority for an extended period of time, I highly recommend it. I have had that gift twice in my lifetime. Once, when I was 20 and was a student at the University of Hawaii. There, white folks from the mainland are treated with a smile at the big resorts, but out in the neighborhoods and on campus, local people have a different take (and a different way of interacting) with us intruders. From 2001 to 2003, I worked at an all-male, all African-American school in Chicago, and so I was frequently the only woman and the only white person in a meeting or a gathering. I learned a lot in those 2 years about white privilege, and how much we "majority" people do not have to pay attention to "minority" culture. Being immersed in the African American community was quite humbling for me, who thought I knew so much about race. The first and most important step towards true nurturing is to recognize and acknowledge that we cannot define another person's reality. If someone is telling you that they are uncomfortable, THEY ARE. I applaud the students who are willing to do this very difficult work, and thank them for helping us at Uni talk more openly about these deep and potentially divisive issues. And, editors, I share your love for our school, and your belief that we are capable of approaching our differences in a thoughtful manner.
February 7, 2007 - 10:31am — Molly Springer (not verified)

If the Uni Student Council thought for a second that "Drag Day" would be a appropriate form of entertainment then it seems clear to this reader that there is a definite need for an advocacy program that counters whatever seems to be the majority point of view. If minority advocacy programs are needed at the college level, and almost every major university had several, then its also a safe bet that it is needed at the high school level as well. "Whatever problems we have, we should continue to approach them in the same thoughtful, calm manner that we traditionally have." I would beg the author to reconsider what tradition means at Uni and evaluate, who created this tradition? To use "thoughtful and calm" is the same sentence feels like you're trying to silence voice(s) that are different from what is a majority normative there at Uni. Traditions should and will change based to the people whom they effect. " Tradition is a guide and not a jailer"- William Somerset Maugham
February 7, 2007 - 11:21am — Suzanne Linder (not verified)

Hear, hear to Lisa, Frances and Kassie. I also find this editorial to be disappointing and, frankly, a little embarrassing. Not only does it insult and demean the minority students at Uni who have had the courage to say publicly that Uni has not been a welcoming environment for them, it also insults and demeans other local high schools that have GSAs, honor the day of silence and have faculty who are supportive of those efforts. I always cringe when I hear Uni students describing themselves (or their school) as better than the other local high schools. As a graduate of Urbana High School, I can assure you that Uni is a very different school, but publicly announcing ourselves as "better than" other schools only contributes to the perception that we are an elitist institution and insults the good work that goes on in those schools. It also embarrasses those of us who teach you when we interact with our colleagues in those local schools. Any time people in a position of privilege (and there are few high schoolers in town more privileged than Uni High students) are telling others that their experience doesn't count, something is wrong. As a white, middle class teacher at a privileged high school, I would never presume to speak for (or attempt to silence) faculty members of color and I would hope that the students I teach would be equally respectful of their peers.
February 7, 2007 - 12:13pm — Jono (not verified)

Personally, I feel that the minority issues at this school are a lot more complicated than all of you seem to think. In my eyes, this minority group isn't inclusive at all, but rather, an exclusive club that serves only to African Americans, Hispanics/Latinos, and Native Americans. I said this earlier in the year during the initial controversy, and the club members I spoke to were fairly narrow-minded themselves, telling me that I'm a Jew--my skin pigment is light, so I don't feel intolerance. Unlike all of you seem to think, the general student consensus is that intolerance was a lot more limited before the formation of this club. I for one felt that people were judging me based on my culture a lot more after this club began. Before coming to Uni, I came across a lot of anti-Semitism--peers of mine even sometimes told me that I was going to burn in hell because of my religious beliefs; in rare instances, people even told Holocaust jokes to me--I've felt intolerance. I never felt any of this pressure at Uni. Even tense situations are dealt with responsibly by the students--the Jews and Muslims in our class have even had incredibly productive discussions about the Israel/Palestine debate. The point is, Uni students aren't bigotted racists by any stretch of the imagination. We function just outside of the mainstream, where we all tend to get along fairly well. As the editorial mentions, there have been breakdowns in the system--obviously, we don't deny that--but for the most part, Uni and its students are some of the most tolerant out there. This is what you all refused to recognize in our editorial. We don't oppose a minority support group, per se, but in my eyes at least, this particular one is functioning in a way that is facilitating more hatred and tension than there was prior to its existence. Ms. Patton pointed out that the writers of the editorial didn't take a proper look at the issues. Perhaps the rest of you should consider your own arguments first as well.
February 7, 2007 - 12:16pm — Sarah Pfander (not verified)

I think we should lay off a little bit. I too tend to disagree with this editorial, but if someone tells the senior editors that he or she cringed upon reading this article, it isn't exactly going to inspire the editors to write more editorials. The comment system is meant to foster discussion, not shut down the writers. Those so quick to tell the editors how privileged they are, and how their editorial speaks of a closed and unsupportive atmosphere at Uni, should think about the unsupportive atmosphere they are creating by bashing on the intelligence of our most beloved senior editors.
February 7, 2007 - 12:41pm — Suzanne Linder (not verified)

As the person who used the word "cringe," I would agree with Sarah that the comment system is not meant to shut down the writers. It does, however, serve as a reminder that what editors write on a public website can be seen by anyone in the world who chooses to visit the site (and as can be seen in this thread, it is not only Uni students who are reading this website). Therefore, I think it is all the more important that senior editors who write representing what will undoubtedly be viewed as "the voice of Uni High" be aware of how their message will be received by their audience and not be surprised when people are upset by what they say. The comment section allows the rest of us an opportunity to publicly express our opinions on the topic.
February 7, 2007 - 1:01pm — Andrea Park (not verified)

First off, I would like to say that I'm really excited that so many people are responding to this editorial. Being able to take in all of your opinions in addition to the article really enhances the reading experience! However, I really bristled at Mr. D. Anthony Tyeeme Clark's response. Instead of being a constructive comment, I find that it is actually presumptuous and thoughtless. Mr. Clark, who is not a Uni student, and certainly not on the Gargoyle staff, would not know the ethnic backgrounds of our senior editors. So to assert that, "Clearly, these particular recipients of white privilege are uncomfortable having been put in a position during their senior year of high school to reflect on their unearned advantages, undeserved benefits, and even mediocrity" is just as bad as his criticism of the editors, who according to him, are assuming that minority students do not face prejudice. Of the ten senior editors, eight come from culturally diverse backgrounds. Our senior editors represent such countries as Palestine, India, Romania, China, Egypt, and Iran. Lastly, when Mr. Clark warns, "To those of you who are on the receiving end of this assault by your school newspaper, keep your heads high. You are smart. You are important. You are beautiful human beings!" unjustly demonizes the Gargoyle and the Gargoyle staff. An editorial is hardly an "assault." It is a collective opinion. And if Mr. Clark were a frequent reader of the Gargoyle, he would know that there has never been an article posted, or printed, that has intentionally brought down the morale or self-confidence of Uni students. The Gargoyle is a newspaper made by the students, for the students. The Gargoyle's goal is not to make its readers feel unintelligent, unimportant, or ugly.
February 7, 2007 - 2:37pm — Kumars Salehi (not verified)

I don't feel that this editorial says anything noteworthy or important one way or the other, but I'm glad that people who feel strongly about it are not afraid to express their opinions with the appropriate intensity.
February 7, 2007 - 3:55pm — Chris Butler (not verified)

I agree that Lisa's remarks best expressed how many of us feel about this issue. However, I think we need to take this editorial in the spirit in which it was intended. Their main mistake wasn't malicious intent, but a lack of awareness of how deeply these issues strike minorities, especially Native Americans and African Americans. I constantly have to remind myself of how subjective my own opinions are, and I imagine the same is true for most or all of the faculty, let alone the students. Let's use this as a "teachable moment" for students whose hearts I truly think are in the right place, even if they may have expressed it in a clumsy way. What I fear is that this could be blown out of proportion and end up alienating some really good kids.
February 7, 2007 - 4:21pm — Lisa (not verified)

Yes! Let's use this as a teachable moment for the students and also for ourselves. A critical issue for privileged folks (which include the Editorial Staff @ Uni) is to realize that we can harm others in tangible ways whether we intend to or not. I suspect that some "really good kids," although perhaps not those to whom Chris was referring, are already alienated at the school. Because we think of ourselves as "good" with our "hearts in the right place" we might prevent ourselves from seeing the harm we cause others, which contradicts that image. Most of us will undoubtedly make mistakes along the way, but must allow ourselves to see those mistakes so that we can grow, become better citizens, and fight against injustice. I am pleased to see students, teachers, and community members grappling with these issues.
February 7, 2007 - 4:30pm — Debbbie Reese (not verified)

I appreciate your suggestion, Mr. Butler, but there have been teachable moments all year long. It is after these conversations have been taking place that this editorial appeared. As demonstrated by the editorial, far more is necessary than the Minority Advocacy Program. Perhaps it is necessary that Uni have a forum similar to the one that took place on campus last week. Uni administrators may also explore some of the work being done on campus by the Chancellor's Diversity Committee. Some ideas proposed there are ways in which to integrate these difficult conversations into the required curriculum for everyone---students, staff, and faculty at UIUC. And as referenced in the News Gazette two weeks ago, there is a proposal to fund a "Project 200" that is an aggressive recruitment effort to increase the Native and Latino student population. Most definitely, we all have a lot of work to do.
February 7, 2007 - 5:44pm — Uni alumna (not verified)

I contend that the STOP forum was a total waste of time. It only further enflamed opposing sides without accomplishing anything constructive. And before Ms.Reese or Dr.Clark argue with my use of the word "enflamed" by telling me to check out the serene online broadcast of the forum, I would like to ask them this question: What is oppression and why do some of you(Ms.Patton) subscribe to the theory that the evidence of experienced oppression is "telling you they have"? What I do anticipate, if I do get a response, is a definition so loose and open-ended that almost any student could claim subject to tyranny. Our school has real, tangible problems that are not being discussed. Let's focus on those as well. Also, don't university professors have better things to do than getting incensed by the opinions of high school students? No offense, but I think this is all overblown. But I do agree with Kumars that this is a good place for voicing feelings. Love.
February 7, 2007 - 5:49pm — Billy Vaughn (not verified)

As the faculty sponsor of Uni's GSA, I find it troubling that the editors invoke our club and the Day of Silence as evidence of the school's tolerant environment. Yes, many teachers sympathetically allow for student protest on this day and work around its strictures. And while it is admirable that many students join in with the GSA on this day, it should also be remarked that the GSA is a club that has a very low membership on a year-round basis. Frankly, I don't think one day of student/teacher involvement is enough to truly gauge any level of tolerance at Uni, much less to gauge the experiences of students of color. When we realize that gay, lesbian, or bisexual students at our school do not feel comfortable to identify themselves as such, we must really question the idea that the mere existence of a Day of Silence is in itself proof of enough tolerance, not to mention respect, for all of our students, regardless of what happens (or does not, as the case may be) in other schools.
February 7, 2007 - 6:14pm — Bethany (not verified)

I'm just curious, but who is D. Anthony Tyeeme Clark? Mr. Clark, do you even live in Urbana-Champaign?
February 7, 2007 - 6:18pm — Sam (not verified)

http://www.nah.uiuc.edu/faculty-Clark.htm I think it's fair to assume that Debbie Reese is the sole reason he has ever happened upon this blog. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see any connection he really has with Uni.
February 7, 2007 - 6:22pm — Brittany Watkins (not verified)

Privilege. The fact that one can tell another that they do not believe racism or discrimination is still pervasive in this society, however passive it may be, is an applicable form of privilege. However, one oversteps a dangerous line when they choose to assert their privilege and dismiss another's plight of racism and exclusion as though it is some sort of grand delusion. Without diving into the history of a living in a Eurocentric society in which all others are forced to assimilate to the dominate culture, I would reject your notion that such a minority club would serve as exclusion to the majority and create feelings parallel to the those felt by minorities who have been ostracized. I find that when these sorts of groups are challenged by a dominant society it is not in the spirit of "we want to be a part of the struggle also" but an effort to maintain the status quo in the spirit of "our way is the only way." You say, "While Uni's underrepresentation of certain minority groups is a serious issue that must be addressed, we can't agree that Uni's underrepresented minorities have faced significant obstacles gaining acceptance into the school's community." I say I'm afraid that the first part of your sentence does in fact justify that the latter half can be indeed be agreed upon. To understand why, I urge you to look outside the everyday conceptualized meaning of a community. To be a "community" also means to possess similarity or likeness. The privileged may see the inclusion of one minority as integration and the step toward a more progressive society. However, the one minority may see it as exclusion. Thus no matter what, if I were to walk into a classroom and see hardly anyone similar to me or like me, am I really to accept that I am in a community? Sometimes we believe that coaxing minorities into believing racism and discrimination is a becoming thing of the past with only small remnants left, is a suitable course of action. However, it can serve as a patronizing experience. It perpetuates the belief that the dominant culture knows more about the condition of the oppressed than those who experience it first hand. Therefore, I urge you to tread carefully on your words. It is one thing to try an assure another that they are accepted, but a totally different thing to try and force them into believing it when first hand experiences tell them otherwise.
February 7, 2007 - 6:44pm — Jono (not verified)

I'm curious as to why no one who is opposed to this editorial responded to my comment regarding the anti-Semitism I've faced as a direct result of this minority group. You have criticized the writers of ignoring the fact that not everyone at Uni feels welcomed--maybe that's true. But what you're all failing to realize is that you're limiting your own perspectives as well; perhaps more so. Native Americans, African Americans, and Latino/Hispanics aren't the only groups of people who have faced intolerance in the past, and yet when other students have brought their cultures to the table, their opinions have been tossed aside. Ms. Linder defended the negative responses to this editorial as representative of free speech, but to me, that reeks of hypocrisy. As I see it, this editorial has been shot down purely because it represents a negative response to the minority club's stance (and allow me to specify that I am not opposed to a minority support group, but the way that this particular organization has formed itself into an exclusive club that dismisses other students' minority affiliations). As I said in my original comment, none of you who initially responded to this editorial realize that a significant number of students feels that the minority group is intolerant in and of itself--some of you don't even have primary connections to Uni, so I truly don't understand why you claim that you understand the issues more than we do. Instead of hiding yourselves behind a veil of innocence, realize that other people are allowed to disagree with you and have their own opinions. Personally, I expected a strong response to this editorial, but I didn't realize that the responses would be so narrow-minded.
February 7, 2007 - 6:51pm — Kumars Salehi (not verified)

"I'm curious as to why no one who is opposed to this editorial responded to my comment regarding the anti-Semitism I've faced as a direct result of this minority group." Sorry, dude, but has everything got to be blamed on anti-Semitism?
February 7, 2007 - 7:09pm — Thomas Garza (not verified)

I don't know who these senior editors are -- there may be scores of them, from every possible walk of life -- but it strikes me that this editorial is remarkably smug and self satisfied. If Uni is indeed such a haven of tolerance and understanding, then how do the editors explain the very controversies they try so hard to dismiss? But the point that really stands out for me is when they say (regarding the goals of the minority student advocates), " . . . these are characteristics that Uni already has". Really? The minority students just haven't figured it out yet or what? Isn't this a bit like saying "things are ok for you and you should know it because I'm telling you so". I would think that part of the job of the minority student advocate would be to tell the rest of the school how minority students are doing, not the other way around.
February 7, 2007 - 7:10pm — Mike (not verified)

I see a lot of people complaining about the tolerance at Uni High, and that we can improve on it vitally, but no one has given substantial personal examples of intolerance towards themselves. People have said that a lot of minority's face intolerance but from what I can tell they aren't speaking from personal experience.
February 7, 2007 - 7:11pm — Debbie Reese (not verified)

A few comments have specifically mentioned my name and that of my colleague in American Indian Studies, Tony Clark. There is a suggestion that we are outsiders to Uni. That is not the case. Uni students can take classes at UIUC, and Uni students have come to our events at the Native American House. Two years ago, we (Native American House) offered an Agora class at Uni. There are relationships between Uni and other units on campus. The Native community in Urbana-Champaign is tiny. We spend time together, learning about what we're doing in the places we live, work, and study. Because we're so far from our tribal homelands, we become family for each other. That means caring about each other's children and their schools. There is a lot of good at Uni, but there's a lot of work to do there, too. We share the high points and the low points with the Native community.
February 7, 2007 - 7:14pm — Frankie (not verified)

I agree with Mike. I've had no real personal experience with intolerance at Uni .
February 7, 2007 - 7:22pm — anonymous (not verified)

NOTE: I've deleted this comment because it was an insult and added nothing to the conversation. If "anonymous" has a problem with that, he or she can contact me at dporreca@uiuc.edu, call me at 217-244-8578, or see me in Room 205 of the Hue House. Thanks. David Porreca Gargoyle adviser
February 7, 2007 - 7:23pm — Rachel (not verified)

Jono, I'm curious as to what you mean that the anti-Semitism you've faced is a result of the minority group. In your previous comment, didn't you say that you faced those problems at your old schools, not Uni? Said intolerance at Uni is not only racial, though.
February 7, 2007 - 7:28pm — Jono (not verified)

In fact, if you reread it, I mentioned that I felt that Uni was incredibly tolerant until the formation of this minority organization, specifically because it's exclusive. I'm glad I could clarify that for you, though.
February 7, 2007 - 7:30pm — Jono (not verified)

And Kumars, I was using myself as one example.
February 7, 2007 - 7:42pm — Emily Kamm (not verified)

I consider myself a very tolerant and accepting person. I am also a white person. I ackowledge that we still live in a society where I, because of the color of my skin, am the recipient of advantages and privledges that I have not earned. In my American History Seminar class, I'm spending the whole year researching how the United States government systematically disenfranchised Native Americans, specifically with regards to education. A few weeks ago, I was discussing this project with my stepfather. He asked if I had any Native classmates and if I felt guilty about what my ancestors had done to their ancestors. In all honesty, I was completely unable to answer this question. I do not argue with the fact that Europeans and Eurocentric cultures have greatly wronged people they view as "inferior." But I'd always felt that by acknowledging the privledge I recieve, condemning the crimes of my ancestors, and working to be the most caring and accepting person I can in my daily life, I was doing all I could to absolve myself of those "original sins." Is this view wrong? I honestly want to know how guilty I am supposed to feel.
February 7, 2007 - 8:01pm — supa crank (not verified)

Granted, being aware of other people and respecting their circumstances is crucial for overall happiness, but isn't Uni coming dangerously close to coddling its student body? Racism, sexism, and all other prejudices are a constant in this world, a constant that will never likely dissipate in our lifetime or ever for that matter. How do we deal with these constants as an institution and as an individual? As an institution, our great administrators, like Ms. Patton, can enforce constipating rules on the student body to crack down on those making things "NOT fine for all students at Uni" in hopes that racism will never show its ugly face on the first floor hallway. What does this ultimately do? Nothing! Uni students never learn how to deal with prejudice, knowing that they can run off and tell and administrator who will undoubtedly call in the perpetrator's parents for a pointless meeting. As individuals, however, we all can combat prejudice. We can make personal efforts to refrain from being intolerant of others and learn how to deal with these intolerances when directed at us. Having a racial slur slung in our faces sucks. But it's life. Let me address those who are extremely upset about the "hot list." The list was juvenile and retarded at best but do you think such events won't occur again? Let me ask another question, do you use Facebook? Facebook in essence is a national vehicle for rating girls and guys based on their appearance. Hypothetically, let's say you are a freshman girl on your new college campus and you sit down with your friends for dinner. You hear a group of guys behind you talking about the girls they saw on Facebook, those they deem attractive and those they don't think too highly of. Let's go on to say you are one of the girls they "talk smack" about. You are inevitably going to be hurt by their words but what do you do? Do you go to the administration. NO! The administration could care less. Learning to deal with such instances in high school is EXTREMELY important. And if you don't think instances like the one above will happen to you in college, you are dead wrong. People at other schools are not half as nice as Uni kids. Uni should seriously chill out.
February 7, 2007 - 8:45pm — Alexx! (not verified)

I think that most of the students that have replied to this editorial are not focusing on the larger issue. We all like to focus on little details of the article and point out that everyone's a victim, but eventually we need to face the real problem. My personal impression of this article was that: 1) It encourages all the privileged Uni students to give themselves an undeserved pat on the back for how tolerant and accepting we all like to think we are (not to mention that we're SO much better than all those public schools filled with idiotic bigots that aren't smart enough to get into schools like Uni). 2) It says "yes, racism and intolerance is a problem but not at OUR school so why should it matter?" Why aren't we getting involved? Racism, intolerance, a lack of multicultural diversity are problems that will affect each and every one of us (and probably already do whether we admit it or not). These issues may affect us positively or negatively but nonetheless, we will all have to deal with them and we aren't really showing ourselves as capable of doing this when we pretend they doesn't exist. I hate to make a big deal out of this but that's exactly what it is. What makes Uni a better school than Urbana Middle School, Jefferson, Edison, St. Matthew's, and Franklin, and why does this article seem to imply that we were 'exposed' to these schools, as though they are dangerous to our well-being? In a way, I suppose they are to kids that have grown up in a cushy and stable environment, but still, what makes Uni better? Better test scores and a smaller environment does not necessarily equal tolerance and understanding; in fact, the smaller environment can sometimes breed more strife between people. Also, implying that we were 'exposed' to those schools is probably actually a wonderful word to show just how biased this editorial is. Whether we always readily admit it or not, we ARE sheltered and we most definitely should be 'exposed' to larger environments filled with people that haven't grown up in the same cushy lifestyles that we have. If our school is so great, why should we keep all this wonderful tolerance and diversity and greatness to ourselves? What's wrong with getting involved with the real world from time to time?
February 7, 2007 - 9:06pm — supa crank (not verified)

dude alexx and i are on the same page.
February 7, 2007 - 9:18pm — Genevieve Tenoso (not verified)

As a Native woman I am disturbed by the tone of neoliberalism in the editorial, and the dangerous ground it so closely treads on...wishing to celebrate multiculturalism without recognizing the reality of U.S. based racialized experiences in their own uniqueness. I wish those students who challenge the nature of the minority student group would think reflexively about if you are wanting to understand what these minority students are talking about? It matters so much if you are willing to conceed a safe space for those who feel uncomfortable...so that those students may support each other. At our University the Indigenous population has received threats of death and violence from young non-Native undergraduates. Please, stop and reflect about where your unwillingness to PRACTICE tolerance might lead...
February 7, 2007 - 9:19pm — Alex Zhai (not verified)

In this debate, several people have emphasized a need to empathize with or at least accept the experiences that others claim to have. However, it's not just the Gargoyle editors who have to try to make this happen. I don't think the other side has really made it clear exactly what these "experiences" are. As far as I know, very few concrete examples of intolerant behavior at Uni have been raised over the several months that this controversy has lasted. In fact, I can only think of one example that has been mentioned: when some culture comes up in history class, many students look to a particular student of that culture, as if he or she represents an entire group's views or perspectives. But no one looks at me when we bring up China or Chinese immigrants in history (except maybe if I'm having a coughing spasm at the same time). Similarly, I never look at other people in this rather awkward manner. I simply haven't seen this happen at Uni, to me or anyone else. Of course, previous comments have claimed that this editorial itself is an example of intolerant behavior. Unfortunately, this is obviously not the root of the issue--if there is barely any intolerance to begin with, then there's nothing wrong with saying so, which is what the editorial does. So I invite anyone to kill two birds with one stone and explain why the minorities in question feel uncomfortable. That said, being part of a minority* myself, I can understand the need for a place for minorities to discuss the unique issues they face. Based on what I know, I believe that most of these issues stem from outside Uni but may have effects on school. I personally struggle with deciding how much I am American and how much I am Chinese. Minorities have legitimate (and possibly many) special needs, but we shouldn't confuse that with rampant discrimination and intolerance at school. I think I'm keeping a pretty open mind, but I just don't see the evidence right now. If you guys want to discuss more facets of this controversy, I encourage you to visit the Uni forum for it: https://www.uni.uiuc.edu/bbs/ (you'll have to scroll down--the direct URL is kind of long) The discussion has not been very coherent so far, but it's another place to raise issues that you would like addressed. * I realize that at Uni, Chinese make up a sufficiently large portion of the students so that most of the feeling of minority is lost. However, that doesn't mean we don't face our own challenges, such as the assumption that we don't understand or respect the rules in America (not at Uni, of course). Regarding the exclusivity of the student minority group, it seems hypocritical to demand that others accept your own minority's disadvantages while rejecting the notion that other minorities also face significant adversity. P.S. There are a few things I disagree with in the editorial. For example, I agree with Mr. Vaughn in that the Day of Silence shows very little about the level of tolerance at Uni. Some people participate out of a fleeting interest or mostly for fun. I just don't think that Uni's environment is hostile to ethnic/racial minorities. After all, it's not a school's duty to provide a culturally tailored education to each individual student. P.P.S. Mike and Frankie beat me to this topic as I was writing.
February 7, 2007 - 9:30pm — Kumars (not verified)

"Please, stop and reflect about where your unwillingness to PRACTICE tolerance might lead..." Is it just me, or is this discussion getting irritatingly off-topic and more than a little pissy? Seriously, give concrete examples of racial intolerance at Uni or stop attacking the poor senior editors. You're going to make them cry.
February 7, 2007 - 9:42pm — Jono (not verified)

To Debbie Reese and Genevieve Tenoso: As I've already said once to the general audience, please take a look at my posts and tell me that they don't represent a misunderstanding or refusal to understand other minorities' experiences. You keep commenting on Native Americans and racism towards them, but I detect a definite refusal to admit that other groups that have not been allowed in the minority support group also experience intolerance. This is what upsets me personally. A minority group that would serve everyone would be a fantastic idea. Though I still believe that intolerance isn't as much of an issue at our school as elsewhere in the world, I don't deny the existence of racism, and Uni students aren't in any way immune to it. That said, this support group isn't functioning as inclusively as I'd like to see, and I've mentioned this multiple times both as a response to this editorial, and to the founders of the group. Multiple other students have raised the same claim, most of whom are minorities who've been rejected themselves. The only reason they've been kept out of this minority group is because they're Indian, Asian, and Middle Eastern as opposed to African American, Native American, and Hispanic/Latino. I don't see how this practice of selecting other's minority status (or lack thereof) is a tolerant practice. If there's something I'm missing, I don't mind hearing it, but I'm getting no answer at all, and that's what concerns me.
February 7, 2007 - 9:55pm — Alex Zhai (not verified)

As a sort of afterthought, I would also like to point out that it's ridiculous to say we've all grown up with cushy, sheltered, and/or privileged lifestyles. I'm sure that there are a lot of Uni students that don't fit under this description. I would consider it unfair to portray my own experiences in those words, at least without a few contrasting adjectives to balance it out. It's not as if we are utterly oblivious.
February 7, 2007 - 10:00pm — Sam (not verified)

"The Native community in Urbana-Champaign is tiny." Yes, but does that mean Debbie Reese needs to enlist all of them to attack some high school's editorial? A high school they have VERY little connection to. Quantity does not equal quality. I agree that this intolerant behavior has not been described concretely enough by the protesters. I second the emotions of Jono, Alex and pretty much anyone else who has any business commenting here.
February 7, 2007 - 10:08pm — Nish Nookala (not verified)

It seems like one of the main issues that has been raised over numerous comments is that the minority group in question seems to be exclusive to those people who are African American, Native American, and Hispanic/Latino. Maybe that invitation should be extended to all groups of minorities. I have to say that I agree with Jono's point that the idea of a minority group sounds interesting, but the implementation begs to be questioned. - just a thought
February 7, 2007 - 10:15pm — Rachel (not verified)

I agree with Alex, Jono, and Nish- I have to wonder why the minorities included in the minority group were just arbitrarily picked, and why only those minorities were chosen. Like Alex said, those aren't the only minorities that face adversity, whether it's at Uni or in the outside world.
February 7, 2007 - 10:23pm — Kumars (not verified)

In response to Jono, a broader, less exclusive minority group is in the works. It will act as a forum for all minority-related issues, regardless of whether or not the minority in question is considered to be at an academic disadvantage. I'd encourage you to talk to Sam Smith about it, because I think the idea of us heading such a club would be the essence of inclusivity and tolerance. Also, as a note to whoever is in charge of this sort of thing, maybe we can install some sort of safeguard to make sure that only people who have any claim to knowledgeability about what goes on at Uni can contribute comments - just so that we don't get anyone's private army of online Pinkertons flooding threads with redundant rhetoric.
February 7, 2007 - 10:33pm — Emily Kamm (not verified)

Nice Pinkerton analogy Kumars. Carnegie and Frick would be proud. However, I still don't know how guily I should be about being white. I wasn't being facetious.
February 7, 2007 - 10:39pm — Michelle (not verified)

...And where, exactly, did that come from? If you don't like our principal, fine. It's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. But to call yourself "anonymous" and then post something like that online without even attempting to back your opinion up is a pretty cowardly thing to do. If you have something to say, then say it with your own voice, and don't be afraid of the repercussions.
February 7, 2007 - 10:42pm — Alexx! (not verified)

I'm sorry Alex, should I have clarified that, by my own definition, cushy, sheltered, and/or privileged doesn't mean utterly oblivious? Also, I meant that just by attending Uni, we've been given privileges and opportunities that others don't have. I hate to sound as though I'm making assumptions, as I know nothing about your personal life, but do you disagree that you are privileged enough to attend Uni High? Although I find many faults with our school especially Uni's elitism, I have no problem admitting that by going to Uni we are setting up a much brighter future for ourselves than we probably would otherwise.
February 7, 2007 - 10:52pm — Elizabeth Reese (not verified)

Jono is a member of an ethnic minority that has been and continues to be oppressed. He has every right to claim feelings of Anti-Semitism from society. It is not the intention for the MSA program to exclude or offend anyone because of their ethnicity, and I apologize to anyone who has felt excluded. This program is still developing and I am learning a lot about what to do during the process. Ideally, that is if people will work with me, it is my job to listen to anyone who feels pain because of their identity and do something about it, and I am saddened if the misconception of exclusivity has stopped some who may feel that way from coming forward. Several posts have suggested the MSA program is a club that only serves African Americans, Latinos, and Native Americans. The only way that certain racial minorities are given any extra attention at all is those who are historically underrepresented and therefore need attention with regards to recruitment and retention. Issues of anti-racism and multiculturalism are issues for the broader school. I welcome all students who feel oppressed because of their race/ethnicity. I welcome those who simply recognize and care about others feelings to come to USEA the school wide club for taking about racial/ethnic issues. In regard to the idea of needing evidence of intolerance, many students may not feel comfortable coming forward because their grievances may be belittled by things such as this article or by the fear of drawing even more negative attention to themselves. These are sensitive issues that put students voicing these concerns in vulnerable positions. Also, we must remember that we do not live in the period when racist acts were rampant and blatant. We need to stop looking for lynching or other forms of racist violence and look at how harmful subtle racism/racist acts can be. Because of their subtlety they can only be seen by those that they hurt, and it is our responsibility as racially conscious citizens to respect what others feel and do something about it.
February 7, 2007 - 10:53pm — Ben Hyman (not verified)

As much as I have to say on the topic (and I've got lots to say), I'm going to focus my present comments on Kumars' request for a safeguard against comment contributions from unknown people. Also, as a note to whoever is in charge of this sort of thing, maybe we can install some sort of safeguard to make sure that only people who have any claim to knowledgeability about what goes on at Uni can contribute comments The beauty of an online publication with an open commenting system is that we receive these kinds of comments. In a situation like this, where we're suffering under a veritable deluge of comments, it can seem kind of overwhelming and yes, even annoying when people seemingly completely unrelated to Uni can voice their opinions on Uni issues. However, I think this is generally an advantage of an online publication, not a disadvantage. Yes, we open ourselves up to "fools, knaves, blowhards and nuts," as a recent germane article sent to me by Mr. Porreca phrases it. However, this also allows us to admit comments like those on Mr. Rayburn's favorite poem selection...I still have no idea who exactly "Margaret" is. Our options are the following: we could shut off commenting entirely, we could prevent any comments from appearing until they've been thoroughly read and edited, we could implement something akin to what the Agora site does, where only people with Uni NetIDs can comment (this is attractive to me in that at least we can put an end to the anonymous commenting and "first-name-only" comments), we could conceivably implement something allowing only people with UIUC (or maybe U. of I.) NetIDs to comment, we could make everyone manually register, or we could have exactly what we have now, a completely open system. I believe the last one offers the least pain and the most gain. -Ben, Online Gargoyle Editor-in-Chief [Technical Editor] P.S: To michelle, you double-posted your comment in response to anonymous...I deleted one of the (identical) versions.
February 7, 2007 - 10:54pm — Frances Jacobson Harris (not verified)

A word or two about commenting - I have been enormously proud of the fact that the Online Gargoyle has allowed open commenting. It's a brave (some might say foolhardy) thing for a school to do. But by allowing open commenting, you allow ALL comments -- not just those you agree with or those you judge to be "knowledgable." It is conceivable that people outside Uni might know a thing or two! There have been plenty of comments on other articles (most notably on music and movie reviews) that come from folks who have no association with Uni. I've heard no diatribes against those. Again, I think that allowing interaction with the broader world through the use of open commenting is very, very cool and is one of the many things that makes the Online Gargoyle such an outstanding endeavor. That said, Alex suggested that people continue this discussion on the forum that was created for this general topic at https://www.uni.uiuc.edu/bbs/viewforum.php?f=8. Anyone can read the postings, but only registered Uni folks can post comments. No one can post anonymously, which, imho, isn't fair play at all -- either from Uni folks or from outside.
February 7, 2007 - 10:54pm — Kathleen Patton (not verified)

I can answer a couple of questions. First, the minority groups that the support efforts in question are focused on are groups that are underrepresented at Uni, and groups that recruitment and retention efforts are needed to support. In no way should that be taken by any student in any other group as an indication that they do not have issues to be addressed or a culture to be celebrated. This effort is one small piece of work. It is not the be-all and end-all. Second, Emily, I don't think anyone is advocating guilt. I believe that it is important to leverage the power that is conferred on us by society to do good. I've seen you do that. Third, lots of non-Uni people read and comment on the Gargoyle. That's the thing about being online - it is the World Wide Web, remember? If we didn't want the world to enter the conversation, we would limit comments, or be on an intra-net. But this openness is a hallmark of Uni freedom, in my opinion. Last, there is no shame in admitting that we can do better. That's also a hallmark of Uni - striving.
123next ›last »