next »

[roarheels]

 The preacher was more interested in being a woman hater than focusing on any man. In the end, he was eventually just defeated in open argument and actually did not come back for a very long time. A journalism professor of vast erudition and experience descended one day to debate him and was supported by a 600 person gathering that grew over a couple of hours around the discussion. No one knew that this professor of journalism had at one point been a preacher and WWII fighter pilot and therefore not willing to back down until he won. As the debate mounted the preacher grew more embarrased until he stormed out of the area and did not come back during the rest of my time there. It was quite impressive as this guy had been irrepressible in the past, but I think it shows the value of engagement by the most learned members of the academic community ie our senior professor of journalism in defending publically and forcefully the tenants of tolerance.

[boogaloo]

My school has a preacher who did the same things....However he sadly has not gone away.  He's become something of a campus "landmark" and is now known as Preacher [Name of Building Next to Which He Preaches], has a small flock of admirers who cluster around him, etc. 

[argarg]

If someone wants a white club, let 'em.  The core two or three students will prance about for attention through a stunt or two.  The student newspaper will wrote about them.  That will provoke editorials on both sides.  Mouths will blab.  The club size will increase to maybe twenty.

Then, given the goldfish-like attention span of the average college student, interest will quickly fade.  The white club will atrophy.  The core students will realize no one is paying attention to them.  Club becomes shell of its former self within six months.  Dead within twelve.  Remains on the books for years to come because no one wants to take the formal step of eliminating it.

Wow, this makes me wonder if people said similar things about minority clubs when they were getting going..

Anyway, I'm surprised at the resistance to this idea, actually - there isn't the same strong community system among white Americans, maybe partially because of melting pot, partially because experiences are fairly diverse and there isn't one defining element that unites.  However, I don't understand how a desire for community could be looked down upon as racist.  It doesn't have to have a competitive, dominating agenda to be a university club, just a place to socialize.  There have been a ridiculous amount of negative stereotypes about whites thrown around in this discussion.  And no, the Irish club and the German club and the rest don't serve as a "white" organization for those of us without clearcut family history - at my previous university, they were part of the International house", focused on exchange students and teaching people more about their country's history and culture.  I think what we're talking about here may be more of a place where white American students can bond over shared experiences, and I don't think we should assume negative things, or that there is necessarily some dark or racist undercurrent to students seeking community.  You could say that its such a diverse group that they won't be able to connect as well, and they don't have the kind of discrimination experience that brings some of the minorities closer together, but does that invalidate their reason to try?

[zafir]

If someone on your campus wanted to establish an organization to address the concerns of white students, white faculty and white staff, would you object?

If so, why?  I'm also curious about what steps you are willing to take to stop any attempts to form such an organization.

Thanks in advance.

This already exists, its called student government, the board of regents, the faculty senate, and every other predominantly white organization present.

[beacon1]

If someone on your campus wanted to establish an organization to address the concerns of white students, white faculty and white staff, would you object?

If so, why?  I'm also curious about what steps you are willing to take to stop any attempts to form such an organization.

Thanks in advance.

This already exists, its called student government, the board of regents, the faculty senate, and every other predominantly white organization present.

Horse Chips! Gangs are predominately black and hispanic so therefore we should not allow those groups to form another form of social group. If someone wants to form a group, let em... provided there aim is not to cause physical harm to others.

[untenured]

If someone on your campus wanted to establish an organization to address the concerns of white students, white faculty and white staff, would you object?

If so, why?  I'm also curious about what steps you are willing to take to stop any attempts to form such an organization.

Thanks in advance.

This already exists, its called student government, the board of regents, the faculty senate, and every other predominantly white organization present.

Much as I don't want to admit it, I have to agree with zafir here.  I speculate the reason there are no 'white' groups is that 'white' influence already pervades university life that no separate group is necessary to address 'white' concerns.

If people want to firm a 'white' student issue, go ahead.   Usually a 'pro-white' group means a cover for racism, and the group will have to expect that response from people.  Of course there could be a 'pro-white' group that's not racist.  Either way.  Let 'em form.   The students' goldfish like attention span will cause it to disappear in a few years anyway (after the initial founding students graduate).

Untenured

[beacon1]

If someone on your campus wanted to establish an organization to address the concerns of white students, white faculty and white staff, would you object?

If so, why?  I'm also curious about what steps you are willing to take to stop any attempts to form such an organization.

Thanks in advance.

This already exists, its called student government, the board of regents, the faculty senate, and every other predominantly white organization present.

Much as I don't want to admit it, I have to agree with zafir here.  I speculate the reason there are no 'white' groups is that 'white' influence already pervades university life that no separate group is necessary to address 'white' concerns.

If people want to firm a 'white' student issue, go ahead.   Usually a 'pro-white' group means a cover for racism, and the group will have to expect that response from people.  Of course there could be a 'pro-white' group that's not racist.  Either way.  Let 'em form.   The students' goldfish like attention span will cause it to disappear in a few years anyway (after the initial founding students graduate).

Untenured

I can agree that maybe it is a cover... even if it is a cover should it be allowed?
My guess is that many racial organizations advocate racial discrimination to a degree.

[pyshnov]

I would avoid White Club. Almost certainly it would be organised by provocators to get politically incorrect folks to flock there. If not organised by provocators from the start, certainly it would be taken over by provocators soon.

White Club is just politically too revealing a name for a club and, on the other side, a name that reveals nothing about the club's interests. A Black club is another thing. In the Black club - everybody knows that the people there are talking about Whites. What the hell they will talk about in White Club?

[zafir]

Being "pro" white must be looked at in a socio-historical sense. It must be seen as the support of maintaining the traditional set of privileges whites have had in society.

The perceived "threat" which whites face is that they will lose their position of prestige and the fact that real equality does not simply mean raising others to "white" standards or giving them more access to society, it also entails that whites give up their set of historical privileges.

To see this as a threat, is a very latent brand of racism which marks present day American race relations. The very fact that anything race related is controversial, the desire to gloss over it, and the unwillingness to accept multicultural perspectives as being just as valid as those of dominant society are all signs that society still has a long way to go when it comes to race relations.

[spork]

You still dating that biracial student?

Being "pro" white must be looked at in a socio-historical sense. It must be seen as the support of maintaining the traditional set of privileges whites have had in society.

The perceived "threat" which whites face is that they will lose their position of prestige and the fact that real equality does not simply mean raising others to "white" standards or giving them more access to society, it also entails that whites give up their set of historical privileges.

To see this as a threat, is a very latent brand of racism which marks present day American race relations. The very fact that anything race related is controversial, the desire to gloss over it, and the unwillingness to accept multicultural perspectives as being just as valid as those of dominant society are all signs that society still has a long way to go when it comes to race relations.