Yesterday I sat in the audience at the Plan 2008 Forum to hear Wiley give his speech about campus diversity. Mind you, I was not expecting much from this rich white man who, in a campus wide e-mail, named the goal of the forum as \creating a community more sensitive to issues of social bias and exclusion."" We are not talking about group cliques and making the nominations for homecoming queen more inclusive. We're talking about race, racism and white supremacy here on this campus-three words Wiley never once used in his talk.
My ears cringed and anger surged inside of me when Wiley claimed that we all have more commonalities than differences. And we need to ""focus on these commonalities rather than the things that divide us.""
My position as a white, middle-class, queer woman working in multiracial contexts has shown me nothing clearer than the fact that there are huge differences between me and a diversity of people. If I pretend these differences don't exist, I'm never going to be able to understand the problems of white supremacy, classism and heterosexism on this campus. I'm never going to know how to work for effective change. If I just focus on our 'commonalities' I'll be just reproducing silent oppression.
Not that I'm surprised the predominantly rich, white men who run this university use the forum as nothing but a public relations campaign.
In regard to the September 28 article, ""Women's groups object to harassment policy,"" I have a few objections. This article was misrepresentative of the Campus Women's Center and our actual beliefs.
The first point that needs to be clear is that the Campus Women's Center is not all ""Women's groups."" We are not representative of all women's groups on campus and in the community, and we do not claim to be that.
The second point is that we do not make public moral judgments on people or situations. We do not now, nor have we ever, claimed to be the authority on this particular situation or on the University Sexual Harassment policy. We are a resource and referral center. We understand that there are multiples of layers that are involved in this situation and in sexual assault in general.
The quotes printed about the situation were in regard to two persons' over arching opinion about the punitive measures that should be taken against known sexual offenders, not alleged sexual offenders and not specifically in this situation. We were misquoted as claiming an implied expert status on this situation and as having personal opinions about individuals and the actions the university should take.
Since there hasn't been an obvious conclusion or a clear policy description within your article, I am confused as to what I am supposed to be objecting to as a member of a ""woman's group."" This article was an oversimplification of a complex issue and the Campus Women's Center was appropriated for the purpose of propagating this publication's political agenda. This is not okay. We will not have our identity and our name be used in the political persecution of others.
We fully condemn sexual assault and are aware of the very real personal outcomes that happen to victims, survivors and loved ones of victims and survivors. We are here to create agency, not to have our agency misappropriated as a political pawn.
