Welcome, Guest!

Editorial: Tolerance at Uni

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.

Comments

Haha, someone got here before me and said exactly what I did but anonymously.

I find George Reese's last comment very insightful. The fact that the Minority Student Affairs program has created so much alarm and defensiveness at Uni is an indication that the program is needed and is doing important work. The MSA is one program with very specific aims; it is not the only possible place at Uni to discuss cultural identity or racial issues. I'm heartened to hear in students comments that there are plans to create an additional organization at Uni to support all of our school's ethnic minorities, and I hope that those plans proceed in a productive direction. This seems like a much healthier and more honest approach than attacking the MSA program or questioning its validity and definition. A couple of commenters have wondered why there should be a focus on Native American issues in this comment thread, given that Native Americans are never specifically mentioned in the editorial. To members of the Uni community who know a bit about the controversies that have arisen from the work of the MSA program, however, the pointed critique of the program and its aims in the editorial's last paragraphs calls to mind the specific groups that the MSA program supports - African-Americans, Latinos, and Native Americans - particularly because one of the two organizers of the program is a Native American student. Moreover, Uni (in addition to being a public school) is a unit of the UIUC, an institution whose racist mascot has long been an insult and an injury to Native American people. As the recent forum on campus amply demonstrated, the "Chief" is an issue, and will continue to be one as long at the UIUC insists on retaining it. The bottom line is that students from markedly underrepresented minority groups at Uni have expressed a need for a program to support their particular needs and challenges in a school where they don't have many peers from their racial group. No student should be called upon to provide evidence of intolerance or hostility to justify such a program. This editorial has been very useful in expressing an opinion that is often heard at Uni but rarely officially discussed. I commend the editors for bringing this conversation to light. The sheer number of comments and the passion of the views expressed therein is evidence that this discussion needed to happen (and should continue to happen, at USEA, on the online forum, and perhaps even at an all-Uni public forum on race). But I also think Gargoyle readers have a right to point out the presumption and limited perspective evident in this editorial. It's true that our paper's editors represent a wide variety of racial and cultural backgrounds. But not one represents any of the racial groups whose concerns are addressed by the MSA program, which weakens the editorial's critique of the program and makes the statement "we can't agree that Uni's underrepresented minorities have faced significant obstacles gaining acceptance into the school's community" seem uninformed and presumptuous. I would also like to add that when I read the New York Times, I don't assume that its staff speaks for all New Yorkers, and we can't expect every article in the Gargoyle to accurately represent the perspective of every student and staff member at Uni. Perhaps it's true that a school newspaper represents the school more than a city newspaper represents the city, but I hope that most readers will be aware that articles are written by individuals or small groups of writers, who have their own perspectives, styles, and biases. I'm glad the editors brought these issues to light, and I think the resulting discussion has been largely productive.

Joy, you are right, I was out of line with that choice of terminology. Of all people, I should know better. It still concerns me that we don't have a level playing field when some folks sign their names and others don't. Again, kudos to those who do (including you!).

I find that people anonymously posting vile statements is just rude. How would you like it, anonymous, if everyone started sending you unsigned letters that put you down? while I do agree that Liz might be overeacting, if you're going to post rude comments, sign them.

I completely agree with Ms. Majerus. I'd also like to say that each person who commented here did so because they care about Uni. I hope we don't forget this.

No matter how admirable it may be that the younger Ms. Reese began a forum for minority students to seek recourse for slights against their race, there are more appropriate actions to be taken. For starters, how about getting the administration involved? The directors of this school are extremly good at disciplining those who personally attack others. If you are not satisfied with the measures they take, realize: there is more to be done. Instead of creating a truly ineffective group of students to complain about their problems, perhaps you should consider litigation? Judging from the extremly inflammitory nature of the comments I've read, I would bet money that the adults with an interest in this matter would call their lawyer instantly...IF they had any real chance of success. Since nobody has mentioned legal action, I must assume that either A) the administration dealt with the issues at hand as professionally as always, and the actions taken are not to the satisfaction of overbearing parents, or B) that nothing major has occured which warrants interference into a situation which does not exist. Whatever the case, this has been taken a little too far, don't we agree? With the amount of respect floating around here, between parents and students and teachers and others, the presence of racism or discrimination would not surprise me in the least.

[[Comment Removed at the Request of the Author. --Ben Hyman, Online Gargoyle Technical Editor]]

In no way do I wish lawyers to become involved!! Perhaps I was not as clear as I wished. No, I just am saying that with as wound up as these parents are getting over these situations, I would expect them to go all-out against the school. The fact that these people aren't taking stupid actions like that, just makes me think that they are grandstanding...attempting to promote their own agenda at a highschool which has no part in it. Perhaps it is their hopes that the debate raging on campus could be more easily fought at Uni. I'm only questioning the motivation of the parents, not advocating foolhardy actions.

Seeing as I have the IHSA state chess tournament tomorrow and I need to get up early, I'll try to make this short. It's easy to get the catchphrases stuck in our heads without actually understanding what everyone has to say. I think that the vast majority of Uni students would consider a club devoted to the discussion of the issues faced by a particular minority group to be entirely legitimate. They would probably even accept and understand the potential need to exclude non-members of that minority. However, there are several problems that seem to bother people. For one thing, there aren't many people who are claiming they have experienced hostility at Uni because of race and the like. These issues are sensitive, but it does not seem unreasonable to ask for some kind of evidence--even general behavior not attached to any specific incident. As I have noted before, I don't think this debate itself constitutes such evidence because it hinges on whether such evidence exists in the first place. Again, I don't believe that people are really looking for proof here, just some kind of evidence. In addition, because people have claimed that intolerance exists at Uni, I suspect that many students belonging to the group of white and/or privileged presumed offenders feel their own morality being implicitly put to question. We have to scrutinize our faults, of course, but it's pretty confusing (and maybe frustrating) to do this when you don't know exactly what those faults are. Finally, the current minority advocacy program has the administration's endorsement and looks like THE official program at Uni High, although I don't know if this is really an accurate perception (in fact, I'm pretty sure it isn't). I don't think there would be nearly as much of an issue if the program were renamed Native American/African-American/Hispanic Advocacy Program With Outreach To Other Groups. Of course, that's a pretty cumbersome name, but you get the point. OK, I have to stop now and go to bed.

two things: firstly tommorow (friday) during lunch we are going to be adressing these issues and this editorial, so come if you want to contribute to this discussion. secondly, id like to point out that the fact that there are over 100 comments (most of them insightful) shows that in fact race is a very big issue at this school, not one that can be sidestepped.

I think this person has said one of the few logical things in this discussion. Anonymity is important in an overly-sensitive topic for the true feelings of an individual to be expressed. This expression can only be fully achieved when there is no fear of social repurcussions. And yes, Ms. Harris, it is annoying, but that feeling must be overcome with the knowledge that it will lead to a more intelligent and truthful discussion instead of a diluted watered-down version that will approach complete uselessness. To Mr. Porecca: The highest of kudos to your protection of a student's right to speak. I can only hope that that environment will remain, as time continues, where a student's voice is just as powerful and highly-regarded as anyone elses. Adolescence is one of the best resources to use in controversial topics such as this, as it provides a point of view often ignored by those who are older. Developing minds offer opinions of a more diverse nature and are often at the forefront of information. Finally, to Ms. Debbie Reese before I stop posting on this discussion that I, and obviously others, view as completely unconstructive. It seems that you keep distracting the issue from Uni (the subject) to whatever you want (the distraction). I may as well go ahead and say the following to encourage you to post more useful comments next time: "tell me something I don't know, and tell me something at all related to what I want to talk about." What you used to distract us was a biased view to attract sympathy votes to a specific group of people. You obviously consider yourself and your cause more important than the white man sitting on your right, and also the black-hispanic-asian-pacific-islander on your left, and I find that to be completely unmerited. I, for the record, also agree that the use of a religious introduction of any kind is unnecessary, along with the use of said tool to gain a headstart in a discussion intended for equality.

Note: The reply thing obviously didn't work in the above post, so to clarify, the first sentence was directed towards "im sorry im too scared to write my name."

I completely agree with Alex's point about the admin endorsing the MSA program but I'll take it a step further. They are paying Liz and Sharajonnie and whomever else to do this. For the most part all school funding helps or hurts all students evenly, and I'm sure there's some guideline that reads as such. This program's exclusivity, perceived or not, is what bothers me. Perhaps these discretionary funds shouldn't be doled out to anyone lobbying because in this case, not everyone stands to principally benefit equally. Yes, I did just accuse Debbie Reese et al of "lobbying." But if you look at the NAH Web site and its linked blogs, they read more like lobbying than anything constructive(i.e. the research that I know they do based on their short bios and the fact that they are at a research institution). What I'm saying is they reflect poorly and maybe even improperly on the U of I in going beyond their official assignments.

The individual involved in the attack of the black man was a uni ALUM. If you wish to attribute his actions to influences from around him, perhaps you should look elsewhere than the school he no longer attended. His violence seems uncharacteristic to those who know him, as he aquired such a trait after leaving Uni. It is also undeniably not racially motivated. The actions taken by the alum in question was a random act of violence perpetraited against the first available target. Knowing the company present at the incident, I can also say that the beating was probably influenced by narcotics or alcohol. That's conjecture, albeit informed. The fact that the man was black was merely a coincidence. Although unfortunate to the attackers, labelling this a hate crime (even if it can be argued otherwise) does not bother me. If that's what's needed to put a violent individual in prison, where he truly belongs, then so be it. Just realize, his actions have nothing to do with the school, or race.

I have found these posts interesting. In defense of requests for examples of discrimination, I think this information COULD serve as useful information to people who may be offending certain minorities without realizing it. How are others going to know what they have done to offend someone if they aren't given examples? I hate to use the Chief as an example, but I will--the "white men", who in their ignorance thought they were honoring the namesake of their state and University, were in actuality offending all Native Americans with their inappropriate use of the Chief and the dance at sporting events. Until the Native Americans let people know how offensive the Chief was to them, it was not realistic to think they would discontinue his role. Although it has taken much time and effort, the writing appears to be on the wall, that this is probably the last year that the Chief will be a part of the athletic events. What other inappropriate behaviors are we guilty of? What insensitivities do we need to be told of so we can treat others in less offensive ways? An important part of diversity education is helping others realize what the differences are and to respect them. Just my 2 cents!

hahah. i cannot stop laughing.

TREATED!!!!

hahahaha. the comments on here are getting ridiculous. i personally do not see what the big deal is. but that's just me.

I accidentally came across this editorial but now I've been following the comments on this thread for over 24 hours and I have one question. I, for one, would like to know what is wrong with some of the adults who are posting comments about this editorial? Most of the students on the senior staff of the Gargoyle at Uni are between the ages of 16 and 17, while most of the adults posting here are in their late 30s to their late 50s. I find the fact that the Gargoyle editors are being viciously attacked primarily by adults with several more decades of life experience to be a prime example of the type of bullying that as parents, we avidly try to teach our children to develop the maturity to avoid. I would like to congratulate Mr. Porreca here for being the cool voice of reason amongst several of his more hot-headed colleagues whose comments are so personal, divisive and visceral, that they sound like they never left the gossip-mills of high school themselves. Most of you are role models for the very students who you attack as being racially insensitive. If you can't comport yourselves with the dignity and sensitivity that you allege the Gargoyle editors lack toward their peers, then how do you expect them to learn to attain a more complex and enlightened outlook on racial and social issues festering at Uni High? Moreover, given your penchant to intercede with an editorial from the Gargoyle which is one of the rare high school publications that is still student-generated and student-run, I have to wonder what kind of parents and teachers many of you are. The Online Gargoyle is a forum for Uni High students to express their views--not for Uni High parents and teachers to co-opt and use to secure an audience for their own social and political agendas, no matter how benign and well meaning these agendas may be. Secondary education should ideally prepare students to reason critically on their own as they transition from teens to young adults. I agree with Mr. Butler who expressed a good deal of sense in his comments. This should be a teaching moment to get students who are having difficulties verbalizing some of the problems they have experienced as minorities (whether they are under or over represented) at Uni to come together in a spirit of mutual understanding and cooperation and to help them to support one another instead of encouraging them to bicker over who is the most worthy of the title of minority student. Many of the students who have commented in these threads are off to college in the next few months and will take with them the ideas that you are providing for them here as a template for adult behavior over the next four years. Is this really what you want them to remember about their last few months of high school?

assumption: a thing that is accepted as true, without proof If you were not making an assumption than were you asserting a fact? I was using the word assumption to your benefit, as otherwise I would consider you a liar. You may not have explicitly said you were assuming but you acknowledged that your comments were based without you "knowing all of the facts" or on rumor. If on the other hand you were neither assuming nor asserting but questioning, than I was merely answering your questions with first-hand knowledge. Yes, we are talking about the same incident, and as the police stated, there was no proof that it was a hate crime. Once again, I personally talked to the student and he was not motivated based on the man's race. I also point out that you had two of your facts wrong: It was only one Uni student, not two, and he was not in fact a student as he had officially graduated weeks prior to the incident. Finally, the juxtaposition of the "rumors" you had heard of a "white supremacy group" with the assault incident make for sensationalism, especially considering you were in the dark about both.

First, I meant "then" both times I used "than" above, and I do not mean to come off as attacking you Ashley, but the issues you discussed hit home with me as they involve my class and friends. my thoughts: Along a similar train of thought as Spencer, we all have ways in which we define ourselves as different than others, and skin color is only a part of this. I'm sure we can all think of someway in which we are a minority to the general population. A casual observer would think me the typical white male of European descent, but in fact I have an immigrant grandparent on each side of the family from non-European countries, I like my martini stirred, not shaken, and I prefer Izod boxers to other brands. As supa crank was saying, we all face difficulties, but it is important to face them with certain poise and not blow the issue out of proportion by forming exclusive clubs. There is an increasing trend in society whereby people are made to feel victimized and scream lawsuit at the first bit of discomfort. I have a plethora of food allergies and each year when the winter surprise party came around I was a bit disappointed to find I could eat virtually none of the goodies on the table in Uni gym. Was I uncomfortable? Yeah, a bit. However, I did not insist that the community cater to my individual needs by demanding parents cook desserts without nuts and other products and thus diminish my peer's enjoyment. Instead, I enjoyed what I could and was merry. While certainly I agree there is room for improvement in tolerance to all kinds of minority (not just race) at Uni and the general public, we must be careful we do not assign blame to the wrong issues. While I do not presume to tell a student how they do or do not feel, in my observations of 5 years virtually every time a student was shunned or mistreated it was because of how they dressed, their hygiene, the way they acted, etc. and never because of their skin color or ethnic background. So while discussion of the issue of racial intolerance is good, I am sure it is not one of the main problems facing Uni today, and thus I am most disheartened to hear rumors that such programs are receiving school funding when considering the state of our facilities and teacher salaries. While there have been no explicit examples of students at Uni who felt intolerance because of their ethnicity (but cases of students of "minority" saying the opposite), I am sure plenty of students could give examples of when they felt mistreated for reasons other than skin color. Also, the fact that when the club was form it was exclusive defeats the very purpose of its existence. I am astounded that it singled out people to join based on their race when it is supposedly about defeating such prejudices. As Morgan Freeman said, it is not very helpful to defeating racism to constantly point out a persons skin color: "I am going to stop calling you a white man and I'm going to ask you to stop calling me a black man." He is also against a black history month as once again it is differentiating based on race, which cannot help deal with racism. Finally, Mr. Clark's statement was absolutely shameful: "Clearly, these particular recipients of white privilege..." Not only does he presume the genetic background of the Gargoyle staff, but this is a racist comment. Is every white kid born inherently privileged (see Spencer's comment)? Mr. Clark has come full circle in his desire to be tolerant and ended up making generalizations about the "majority."

FREEEEDOM

I think that the behavior of some of the adults (and their poster child) in this thread has been absolutely shameful - to paraphrase Owen Wilson in "Bottle Rocket", inexcusable and inappropriate. I would encourage all Uni students to stop giving this "controversy" so much undeserved attention - those throwing stones at our student journalists are obviously abusing this forum for discussion to vent some ill-directed anger. Students - to continue to discuss this topic (regardless of the righteousness of your indignance) is to give an inkling of validity and credibility to these clearly mean-spirited assaults. You won't catch me at USEA this week, and I'd encourage you all to go do something constructive and positive as well. Also, I'm noticing a disturbing trend of Faculty vs. Students in this thread. This cannot possibly be viewed as constructive. I'm having a hard time with the idea that some things that have been said have come from people who work with young people for a living. Oh yeah, and while Concerned Student and others have all made excellent contributions to the discussion, anonymity is terribly not constructive.

I cannot honestly say that strongly I disagree with this article. There are points that I believe could be revised, but overall there was nothing that could be labeled as a reassurance to 'white privilege', or something made to reassure the 'minority masses'. That being said, I'd like to make some observations. One of the main reasons that people are getting so fired up about this is because right from the beginning, there have been parents who blatantly opposed this article and denounced the editors in the same breath. The reason so many people are responding is because they are outraged by comments made by people who may not know anything at all about Uni, are not part of the student body, and therefore have little insight into the situation. While it's a good thing that people are responding to this, it's also important to have the correct facts and sitation in mind. However, the issue that irritates me the most is the tone that is being taken by several commenters. As posted at the very beginning: "You are smart. You are important. You are beautiful human beings!" Well, thanks for saying so, but I think I know that already - or at least, I'm fairly confident I'm not a horribly awful person. Too many of the comments made sound as if they are speaking for every minority student. My viewpoint is my own, and having someone else say that this is how I'm supposed to be thinking is not something that I appreciate in any way. I cannot honestly recall a time during which I was ever insulted because of my ethnicity. Perhaps this is because I've lead some sort of 'sheltered life'or whatnot, but they're still my thoughts.

Interesting thoughts, Sam, and I think it's great that parents and students can discuss this all in this space. In response to your heartfelt writings, I'd say you're overlooking a couple of things. You wrote, for instance, that you "do not presume to tell a student how they do or do not feel," but then you go on to say that minority students should not feel the need for a safe, separate space in which to address their concerns together. If you're a white person, the world simply feels different to you than it does to a lot of non-white people. White people tend to think, though, that the way they see the world is the way that everyone else does. This viewpoint can make it frustrating for others to relate to them about sensitive or painful subjects, so not having them in the room for once while discussing those matters can be a relief, at the very least. My other comment is in answer to a question you asked: "Is every white kid born inherently privileged?" Actually, in this society, yes. Not quite "inherently," since race is a "social construction," so let's say "automatically" instead. If you'd like to learn how this is so, here's a link to a classic explanation of the concept, along with a list of 50 examples of "white privilege" from the author's own life. Not all apply to all whites in all American places, but surely some apply to you: http://seamonkey.ed.asu.edu/~mcisaac/emc598ge/Unpacking.html I think it was Socrates who said that "The unexamined life is not worth living." I hope that you continue to examine your own, and that you continue to grow from the kind of thoughtful self-reflection that such articles as this one can inspire.

I am a Uni parent not in the habit of following Uni issues, but I happened across this article and related comments. While I can't speak to the issues the article raises, I am concerned about the nature of some of the posts. I would like to say that I had the opportunity to become acquainted with the Reese family through Uni's swim team, over the course of three seasons. I have found them to be warm, kind, courteous, and respectful, willing to share their views and insights in a most non-threatening manner. They extended the same sort of courtesy in listening. I am extremely saddened to see their family treated so harshly in this venue. If nothing else, could we as parents see them simply as parents, too, hoping for the best for their child, as all the rest of us do for ours?

Thank you Ann. -George

I appreciate your comments, however I feel you misrepresented or misinterpreted my thoughts when you stated, "but then you go on to say that minority students should not feel the need for a safe, separate space in which to address their concerns together." I never once said minority students should not feel the need for a safe space. I feel that if it is well mediated and everyone remains respectful then there is no need for seperation for it to remain safe. Any official Uni club should be open and inclusive. If the goal was strictly privacy, then it should not be school sponsered or at the very least the creators should not flaunt the exclusive nature of the club as happened in this case. Again, I feel you missed another of my ideas, that calling me or anyone else a "white man" and thus in "the majority" is a poor attempt to define a human being. Everyone, no matter their race, can relate in someway to being in a minority and thus everyone's opinion on the subject is important. As for the list of 50 privilages whites generally receive, I do not deny I benefit from some of the items perhaps more than others of different skin color. As I said, there is room for improvement. However, I am sure it is not the case that every white man receives more benefits of that list than every black man. Please see Spencer's comment for a good example. I was only pointing out that for Mr. Clark or anyone else to make generalizations about white skinnned people is as bad as making generalizations about any other race, which is why I am against the idea behind creating such a list and claiming it speaks for any group as a whole as opposed to individual experiences.

I was surprised to see that many of these "White Privilege" thingies amount to "I am more likely to see a white person than a black person." While I'm not aware of the census figures, I'm going to assume that black persons are indeed a minority. So it stands to reason(and statistics) that any person will see more white people that black people. And being a hairdresser doesn't seem like a position of privilege to me. (I'm not launching an acidic, vitriolic attack on "Another Uni Parent". I'm just saying, statistics will out. And most of the things on those list are indeed valid considerations. But some of are less than ironclad) On a less specific note, this entire topic has little to do with the original editorial. It's rapidly ballooned into at least 100 posts. Most of these have little to say. This doesn't reflect badly on the posters; they can't say anything, either one way or the other, without being labeled as racist or overreacting. Label me all you want for this. It's what I think, and I'm entitled to say it. The reason certain minorities are underrepresented in the Uni population is that there aren't enough applicants from these minorities. The MSA is one way to solve this problem, by making the minority students already here feel more comfortable, and then perhaps allowing these more positive views of Uni(Uni is viewed as a private school, that you have to pay tuition to get into, in some communities) among their friends and families, therfore engendering more applicants. At least, that's my understanding of it. (I think they also mean to hang onto the students they already have) To me, this seems fairly indirect, and perhaps not the best way to go about it. A more open club would have prevented most people's issue with the MSA, i.e. "my minority was excluded, are we not repressed enough for you?" In my opinion, a direct outreach program would be better. A program that would go out into the community and spread news of sweetness and light about Uni. Perhaps both approaches would be needed. ( A common misconception is that these minorites receive some unconscious discrimination during the selection process. These targeted minorities actually receive a slight edge during the most competetive stage of the selection process.) The trouble is, the rest of us(not the targeted minorities) are having trouble understanding why these minorities get their own special club, and why Jewish people or Arab people don't also get to join the club. After all, there's a distinct anti-Arab feeling in the air, ever since 9-11. The reason there are no other minorities at the club is, those other minorities are represented in the Uni population. The certain minorities that are included in the club aren't there because they feel especially uncomfortable. They're there because Uni needs more of them at the school. Whether there are any actual cases of racial incidents which cause discomfort among these minorities is moot. It actually doesn't matter. The reason for the club's existence is to boost applications from the minorities included in the club. P.S. Let the accusations begin!

Wow, this is all very interesting. Definitely NOT what I was expecting when looking on the online gargoyle. But this entire page has excited many feeling and opinions. Here are mine... It's true, everyone can relate to being in a statistical minority, but that definition does not parallel the one of a racial minority, which is the topic of this very long conversation. A sociological minority is not necessarily a numerical one; rather it includes any group that is disadvantaged with respect to a dominate group in terms of social status, education, employment, wealth, and political. Straight out of wickapedia. I don't understand why anyone is opposed to this club that's been formed. It sounds like a club where sociologically disadvantaged minorities go and try to deal with the issues of intolerance in the school as well as recruitment of more minorities. ALL of these characteristics sound like positive ones that will only make Uni a stronger school. As woman of color who's graduated from Uni I can profess that Uni isn't a completely tolerant school...I don't even feel like I have to say that after reading many of the comments on this page. I understand that many people want to know specifically what has happened to students to make them not feel comfortable, curiosity is human nature, but what you need to understand is that it is not your PRIVILEGE to know that information. You don't know how a light bulb works, but you're not going to sit in the dark until you figure it out. Everyone faces difficult barriers in their lives, but statistically certain minorities have to fight through many more than the majority group. One extremely ignorant and offensive comment that I came across was that some minorities are jumping on the, "I'm the biggest minority so be nice to me" bandwagon. First of all, grow up; these comments are the ones that make me ashamed to have graduated from Uni. I know that at Uni student's have had history and English classes that talked about issues surrounding race that should have left you capable of making a more intelligent conclusion about how minorities deal with racism. I guarantee you, we do not jump on bandwagons, we fight for equality. And please, take the criticism that community members have offered. Believe it or not, they are older than you, have lived in more diversity and are more involved in the community than most of you, and they are smarted than you. Hopefully everyone will take the lead from this Mr. Clark character and treat everyone as if they are smart, important and beautiful human beings. It was not everyday that that Uni has that effect on all students.

Thanks for the response to the article, Jeremy, and I have no "accusations" to fling your way. I'm glad you looked at Peggy McIntosh's writing, but I think if you had read it more closely, your reaction would've indicated a better understanding of its contents. It's not trying to prove that which, as you correctly point out, everyone already knows, i.e., that there are more white than black people in America, and that one is thus more likely to encounter the latter than the former. The author's point about how that imbalance "privileges" white people is that as a white person, she rarely has to "deal with" members of another race, while black people have to deal with white people every day (as managers, clerks, teachers, bank officers, and on and on). The "white privilege" here, then, is not having to feel anxious over dealing with a member of another race; such opposite-raced encounters often do make non-white people anxious, because although most white people are nice and fair, the non-white people they encounter can't be sure of that--in their experience, some white people are not nice and fair. As a white person, this may seem like a trivial matter to you, but I suggest that you ask more people of color about it--they're carrying a daily burden in this one sense (among the many other senses on that article's list) that white people don't carry. Not having to wonder about and sometimes struggle with racial issues is an unearned "privilege" handed to white folks just because they happen to have been born into that category. Privilege only exists, you see, when others don't have it. I disagree with your interpretation of the article having nothing to do with the editorial. The authors were apparently not all white, but they are privileged in other senses, and thus prey to the kind of oblivion that the author of that article had to wake herself up to by writing down that list. If you're a Uni student or alum, you're smart--you can see the parallels if you open your eyes and think about them.

What privileges do the authors of the editorial who are from other backgrounds have that Native Americans, African Americans, and Hispanics don't? Please enlighten us.

I apologize for not including this in my other response and this will be my final post, but I was thinking about your comment further, Another Uni Parent, and something disturbed me to the point that I felt obligated to write again. You stated, "If you're a white person, the world simply feels different to you than it does to a lot of non-white people. White people tend to think, though, that the way they see the world is the way that everyone else does." This is a horrible generalization. It has been my experience that a white person is as likely to have a radically different view of the world from me as a person of any other race. I am just as likely to have a similar view of the world as a person from Sri Lanka as I am a person from Russia. I am outraged at the notion that because of my skin color, I might have a greater chance to lack the sensitivity necessary to discuss these issues. Even if we take your assertion as true, how then would discussing the issues behind closed doors allow me to become enlightened? I can not do as your quote from Socrates suggests if you do not allow me. And in response to Alex's comment as well, this is a good discussion, and a good fight, why can't we discuss it and fight it together, regardless of race?

Another Uni Parent, I too read the article you posted. I agree with much of what McIntosh wrote about the connections between racist and sexist societal structures, an idea also nicely explored in bell hooks's "Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center." However, I wished to adress one of the examples of white priveledge given in the piece: "I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking." As a white person worried about racism, my efforts to understand and combat racists institutions and actions are not directly "self-interested," as McIntosh puts it. However, people who are recipients of all the privledges explained above cannot possibly understand just what it feels like to live as a racial minority in a racist society. For this reason, I do worry about being seen as involving myself in an issue where I don't belong. The article states that a white person's opinion on racial issues will always carry more clout than a person of color's. In situations where no one wishes to acknowledge or deal with white privledge, this may be true. However, when active in institutions actively trying to combat racism, my opinion surely would not be more influential, primarily because while I can sympathize with the struggles faced by racial minorities, I cannot empathize.

I love Uni High, and most of my love stems from the genuine respect I have for the Uni faculty. However, although I didn't have anything to do with writing the editorial, I felt personally let down by some of the faculty's comments. Early on in the debate, some of the Uni faculty used the posting forum to personally attack the Gargoyle editors. I think that everyone is entitled to their opinion, I believe that teachers should be very careful about how they word criticism towards students. I know that several students were personally hurt by the comments posted by faculty. As Mr. Butler said, this is an excellent teaching opportunity for faculty, and should be addressed as such. Mr. Butler, Mrs. Majerus, and Mr. Porreca have all conducted themselves as I expected Uni faculty to, and for that I'm thankful.

First of all, I don't think any of the comments made by Uni faculty were out of line. I've heard several of my fellow students make accusations, saying some teachers' comments were "personal attacks." So what if they disliked the article? And so what if they felt strongly enough about it to use the words "cringe" and "embarassment"... If that's enough to dishearten and hurt you, don't write editorials. Because really, all those "attackers" did was not pat the senior editors on the back in any way. And there's no reason they should have to. I for one respect my teachers/the faculty all the more for their honesty.

I don't think its up to you to decide whether or not the comments were hurtful or not. Speaking of not understanding what other people go through, you were not part of the group who spent hours working on this editorial. Therefore you do not realize how much comments posted by teachers, who are people we interact with daily but who are also in a position of authority, can actually sting. It is not a question of teachers not being able to voice their opinions. Teachers are free to respond, to disagree or agree. But they should realize the consequences of their words and phrases. I agree wholeheartedly with Bethany and her comments above. For example, I'd like to point out Mrs. Majerus's comment, which I found very appropriate and mature. She did not agree with the editors but at the same time, she voiced her opinion in a way that I would expect of teachers. You are not on the staff. You do not understand how much courage it takes to put personal opinions out for everyone to read and respond to. Therefore, please don't tell our senior editors that they should not be taking the comments personally, because it's really not your place to.

You want my advice? Life's tough. Get a helmet.

But if it makes you feel any better, I'm sure your teachers love you very much and only said what they did because they know you're capable of so much more.

Couldn't you say the same thing to the minorities who are saying that even isolated incidents at Uni warrant a club? Shouldn't they be getting tough, as they will be facing all sorts of discimination (not just racial) when they get out of Uni? Or is getting tough only for people who are not Native American, African American, or Hispanic?

Hm. Let me try to make this more lucid. Your teachers were disagreeing with an article in which controversial statements were made. Some people are mistreated because their skin pigment is darker (an otherwise irrelevant trait, thus proven by biology). Now, one of those is not like the other...

I think the minority students want a club so they can get together for exactly that reason--to strategize together in a safe, collaborative space about how to "get tough." And to offer each other openly the support that other students obviously aren't demonstrating for them (that lack of support and sympathy is evident in many, many comments on this page). And by the way, members of the three minorities are already "tough" in some ways that you may never be. There is after all a softening element to privilege.

Emily, I'm so glad you're reading bell hooks! She's awesome. Try her essay "Representations of Whiteness in the Black Imagination." Since you took the time to respond directly to McIntosh's article, here's a response back for you. You responded to this item on McIn's list of privileges: "I can worry about racism without being seen as self-interested or self-seeking." Then you wrote: "As a white person worried about racism, my efforts to understand and combat racists institutions and actions are not directly 'self-interested,' as McIntosh puts it. However, people who are recipients of all the privledges explained above cannot possibly understand just what it feels like to live as a racial minority in a racist society. For this reason, I do worry about being seen as involving myself in an issue where I don't belong." I see what you're saying and agree that your concern is legitimate. However, you've taken that item from her list in a direction away from her main topic, white privilege. She just means that while people of color are often thought of as self-interested whiners when they worry aloud about (supposedly non-existent) racism, whites who worry aloud about racism are not seen as improperly or overly concerned with advancing the cause of their own racial group. That's because whites are generally seen as free agents (especially by other whites), free of racial bias, while people of color are seen as speaking for their race, and as racially biased. This dynamic might be changing, though, since she wrote that article in the late 80s. Whites do complain more about racism now against whites than they did then (such as complaints about "reverse racism," the supposed unfairness of affirmative action, and so on).

Sam, sorry you felt so outraged by the observation that whites tend to think others see the world the same way they do, but your outrage may be misplaced. This common white misperception is a well-documented result of a social order in which whites are dominant demographically and culturally--they tend to think that ways particular to them are instead "universal" ways. Here's how one scholar of whiteness puts it: "there are many things in life that are so entrenched in people's belief systems that we assume their universality. The classic example, for instance, is the racial category 'white.' Whiteness is always assumed. When 'we' see a white man on the street (and by we, I mostly mean white people, but the dominance of this ideology is such that this is not guaranteed) we might say to a friend, 'There is a man.' When 'we' see a black man on the street, we are likely to say, 'there is a black man.' This presumption of universality is a classic way of maintaining power."

Affirmative action is unfair. Colleges/employers/etc. try to create diverse work environments, but minorities(yes, because of a lack of privilege) fail out in droves. This is indisputable. So if it isn't reverse racism, isn't it at least very impractical? Also, what do you know about toughness? There are many forms of toughness. Uni students are tough enough to work through cumbersome integrals without succumbing. This is courage although perhaps not interpersonally. But Uni kids also motivate themselves to succeed, even in efforts like the MSA program. Motivation is not a privilege anyone should feel guilty about, Another Uni Parent, but rather the driving force of industry. The way the public school system is, everyone has a chance to succeed, and yes, having learned or wealthy parents is an edge. I just don't get what you want exactly.

"and yes, having learned or wealthy parents is an edge. I just don't get what you want exactly." Well, just that--acknowledgment of that edge, and of how whiteness is also an "edge." And accompanying recognition that others tend to lack such edges, and that they also have their own ways of dealing with that, and in the case of the MSA program, would like to be alone together (so to speak) to do so. By the way, who's asking anyone to feel "guilty"? I'm not . . .

I'll be adding this in a more prominent announcement shortly, but there's an easy way to insert a quote in your comment. Simply place <cite> tags around the text you'd like to appear in a quote, like so: <cite>and yes, having learned or wealthy parents is an edge. I just don't get what you want exactly.</cite> And that will produce the following: and yes, having learned or wealthy parents is an edge. I just don't get what you want exactly. Hopefully this will make it even easier to quote other people's entries. -Ben Hyman, Online Gargoyle Technical Editor

I have read every single comment on the editorial so far, and haven't been personally offended by any of them. While some of the faculty posts were more vociferous than others, I don't think any of them constituted personal attacks on us (the editors). We are almost adults, and should be learning how to handle criticism, which is sure to be a factor later in our lives. Some of our points in the editorial aren't presented with the same clarity and nuance with which we discussed them beforehand. In the future, we will be sure to spend more time reviewing and refining our work before publishing. I urge all of you to read the responses we have posted so far to the comments we have received. The senior editors are planning a group response in the near future, but Dana Al-Qadi and myself have already written individual responses as well. I would like to reinforce the notion that, though none of us can ever fully understand the experience of living as a member of a minority group that we don't belong to, we all still have the right to articulate our own perspectives. No conversation in which one party automatically dismisses the observations of the other will ever accomplish anything. We didn't intend to stifle the voices of the students we are accused by some of attacking, and we expect that considerations from a "privileged" position will not be ignored. With a nod to Spencer Pokorski's comment, I urge readers also to consider the following before I sign off: Some of the students invited to participate in the MSA program come from as socio-economically lofty backgrounds as anybody in the school. Privilege has many faces, and to think that the world is divided into those who enjoy all of it and those whose lives are completely devoid of it is ridiculous.

Hopefully this will make it even easier to quote other people's entries. kewl! thanks for alerting us to that, ben.

//Message from Online Gargoyle Admin: Comments Removed, Commenting Closed Anonymous personal attacks will not be allowed, and are not in accordance with our Statement of Principles, Gargoyle Policies, or Uni policies. I was advised by Kassie Patton, Uni's principal and a person who's previously granted a huge amount of leeway to the Gargoyle when it comes to printing potentially offensive material, to close comments on this entry for the time being. This is not a reaction to the entry itself, or the majority of the comments, but to the personal attacks against a student and her family, by name, that were recently submitted through the commenting system. I've removed the inflammatory comments for the time being, although some non-inflammatory comments may also have been removed (all content was saved offsite and can be safely restored if necessary--if you feel your comment was removed in error, please contact us using the links below). This decision will be under review over the weekend, and comments may or may not be opened again. We will keep you posted, either by e-mail or another comment here. If you have comments or questions, please contact Kassie Patton, David Porreca (Gargoyle adviser), or Ben Hyman (Gargoyle Technical Editor). Comments on other entries are not closed, and will remain open for now, provided nothing of this sort occurs again. -Ben Hyman, Online Gargoyle Technical Editor

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <i> <b> <p> <br> <br />
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

Word Verification
Please verify that you are human by correctly translating the image into text.
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.