|
||
| Home | Current Issue | Angry E-Mails | Letters To The Quad | Other Voices | Email Us! | Archives | ||
|
||
|
The Hollins Quadrangle |
||
|
||
|
Current Issue |
||
|
||
|
Melting Plastic: The Pearl Girl Stereotype
by K. McDonald
I’m on a plane home to Florida, and I tell
the woman next to me I’m going to see my sister in her high school beauty pageant. She says, “I’ve heard
about that tradition in the South.” The South? I look again at the pageant. It is the same pageant I was in at the age
of 17, contestant Number 19. I know the woman sees plaster-smile blonds with heads of curls, red lipstick, bleached teeth
to match bleached hair, the backstage cattiness, trendy diets to fit into sequined gowns, fake smiles, fake graciousness.
But I remember the pageant as one of the pivotal moments of my life.
I’m now in line at my old high school waiting
with my Mother and Grandmother for the doors to open. There are about a hundred people in front of us and another hundred
behind us. Everyone is holding flowers, cameras, and anxious faces. I’m silent, watching the high school girls around
me and become self-conscious. The tan, blond, size 2 girls accessorized head to toe pitching bubbly giggles- the epitome of
what was in, of what I wasn’t in high school. I’m surprised that it still affects me now, four years later and
outside of it. Although it is my sister, contestant Number 36 dressing back stage, I am there also, contestant Number 19,
putting on borrowed make-up, a borrowed dress, out-dated heals, and curling my thick straight hair in Florida humidity. In
high school I constantly battled with trying to fit that image, while loudly hating it, and hating myself for wanting to be
it at times. Rationally I knew that my conforming to what I saw as the cookie-cutter image would feel artificial. But part
of me longed to walk the hallways of school with ease, and that part of me thought that the image was the vehicle to do it
in.
So why did I voluntarily
participate in a pageant that encouraged you to conform to this image? My older cousin Jennifer explained to me that the pageant
had been an opportunity for her to become friends with girls she would never had attempted friendships with. For me though,
my pageant had begun as another chance to hate these girls, up close and personal. But two months of rehearsals, field trips,
backstage assistance and shared confidences, Saturday mornings spent gorging on brownies together changed my feelings. The
“Plastics”(to borrow a phrase from the beloved Tina Fey's Mean Girls) melted away, and I found that I had much more in common with these
girls. We all brought a self-consciousness to the stage, each of us had a desire to prove our worth to our classmates, to
our parents, to each other, to ourselves. Meeting my own self-consciousness in the other contestants allowed me to show them
compassion and acceptance, and helped me see through a stereotype that I had been clinging to.
I take this experience back to my life at Hollins,
where the Pearl girl stereotype persists. The Pearl Girl physical stereotype is as follows: girls with pearls, ribbons, popped
collars; the Pearl Girl stereotype on the inside: “girls who have too much money from mommy and daddy”, possessing
“a self-centeredness”. Hollins’ equivalent of Plastics? Why have I spent time resenting/ mocking the image
of the Pearl Girl? Why have I, an advocate for social justice, participated in the judging and labeling, the stereotyping
of a group of people? Is it that the stereotyped Pearl Girl is assumed to live on a higher socio-economic level? How can the
assumption of a person’s socio-economic level be used as a justification for stereotyping them? Through my years at
Hollins I’ve slipped in and out of stereotypes (to a degree we all do, don’t we?). I was a NEFA girl. Existing
in that stereotype I realized that the use of socio-economic position as a divide between stereotypes was artificial, as there
were girls who paid big bucks for their Goodwill look-alike designer jeans. Opposite them were girls who worked several jobs
to get through school while wearing their pearls. My pageant days had helped me to cross social boundaries that I hadn’t
thought I desired to cross as a 17 year old, and they have again assisted in my new perceptions of the social boundaries existing
at Hollins. Four years after the pageant, completing a degree in women’s studies, I re-examine the stereotype of
the Pearl Girl. I’ve wasted my time seeing people in the artificial groups existing on this campus. I think of all the
women I know who fit the exterior of the Pearl Girl stereotype. Through my growing friendships with these women, the semesters
spent in the same classroom, time spent as neighbors, each so-called Pearl Girl is fleshed out, and I begin to see the woman
underneath, with whom I share more similarities with than I’d thought as a first-year. The Pearl girls, the NEFA girls,
the Otaku girls, LUGS, etc. etc. Existing within, between, outside of these images are women who are more alike than unalike.
My perception of these stereotypes in my first two years here only served to keep me within my own restrictive-labeled-box.
I was fighting racism, sexism, homophobia, classism, but I had ignored the other stereotypes existing unchallenged within
my community. People grouping together who share similar interests will always continue on this campus, and should. It is when we attach a label, a negatively-viewed stereotype
to the group that the cohesiveness of our community is endangered. To the women who I have silently judged and labeled along
the way, please accept my apologies and sincere good wishes. To the women who like me have participated in the labeling, silent
judging of the women who we thought composed these stereotypes, I hope you can move beyond them, enjoy Hollins as a community
of women, and not as a collection of stereotypes.
Empowerment: An Open Letter
by Anonymous
Dear
Staff, Faculty, and Administrators, Though
it took me awhile, I realize that every single one of you is human. You have to be. You shed dead skin cells and get hangnails
and wake up in the mornings with grunge in your eyes. In some way or another, you breathe, chew, and communicate. So,
you're human. This means there are oversights on your part, mostly forgivable mistakes. However, I must speak of one mistake
that I think you can, for the most part, avoid. Please refrain from exerting your power just to exert your power. Just to
reaffirm your place in the world. Empowerment through the disempowerment of others = not okay. There's
this really awesome flyer in upstairs Moody, on the billboard near the office of Joe Rosenberg (director of student activities),
that reassures us of the role students play on this campus. The first thing it states is that "A student is the most important
person on this campus or any institution of higher learning." I agree with the poster.
Unfortunately, when you (staff, faculty, administrators) abuse power, it goes unchecked, despite numerous grievances,
complaints and general protest. Why is this? Well, even if we are the most important people on campus, we're only the most
important as a whole. Meaning, seeing change on this campus demands that we work
collectively during a four-year timeframe. This would be nice, but it does not address that our individual voices need to
be heard, as well as the voices of groups deemed to be on the periphery. We are
disadvantaged by our youth, our inexperience, our own fears. How can we trust ourselves to fight against oppressive forces
on this campus if we're not even sure who supports us? How long do we have to
keep speaking in code to one another, trying to determine who will support us and who will not? We need trust, not ice cream. Only
through my friends and my own negative experiences with people in positions of power do I know which of you I can trust both
inside and outside of the classroom. It is not pretty to come to such realizations the hard way; unfortunately, that's how
we operate, from a starting point of conflict. Even then, when we students try to warn one another, there is no way any of
us can listen all the time, or everyone's bias would keep us from ever taking classes or taking risks. Still, as a representative
of the most important element of this university to you, those who hold power on this campus, I will ask this of you (staff, faculty, administration): 1. That you openly admit to your mistakes and earnestly take our criticisms
into consideration. 2. That you are honest with your colleagues for the sake and safety of
your students. This means refraining from passive-aggressive behavior, and it means directly confronting your colleagues when
you feel they have overstepped boundaries. 3. That you embrace Hollins as separate from other universities and break
from precedence, especially concerning issues of hierarchy, and what reinforces the hierarchy (Tenure? Gender? Popularity?
Fate?) 4. That you try to learn what you can
about issues regarding the students. Ask us what's happening on campus. Attend Senate. Read the Columns. Allow students to go on a tangent in the classroom about issues regarding
the campus. Ask them their opinions—you, of all people, can sort through the biases later. 5. That you break from this parental attitude and allow the students
to live as adults. There's "tough love," and then there's allowing us the chance to be tough and to love. Let us appreciate
it for ourselves. We
want to stop problems before they can happen. That's all. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm tired of learning the hard
way, especially if the end result is the perpetuation of hierarchal blither-blather. Sure, it may be human, and "character-building"
to boot, but I don't know if I want to be defined by pain, angst, or drama. I'm too important to waste my time on all of that
mess.
Hollins and HIV Testing by Amy Dixon
AIDS has affected my live on a personal level. A
friend of mine, "Paul," who had full blown AIDS died a few days ago. I know it is naive, but somehow I never thought he would
actually die. With each passing year I thought maybe he was ok, maybe he was healthy. His death took me completely off guard.
This was the first time I had knowingly come in contact with HIV. His death made it a reality. America romanticizes HIV. TV shows show it as a
noble death, and in some ways maybe it is. My friend, Caroline, and I were talking about this illusion the other day. Caroline
mentioned that Queer as Folk, a show about the GLBTQ community in Pittsburg, had a teenage character on the show who was HIV
positive. Her comment was very poignant; she said, "Hunter was what, maybe 16 or 17? If he was real he was going to die."
A good friend of mine was tested for HIV for the first time last year. I remember him saying "life is not Babylon." I am not here to debate the inerrancies of Queer
as Folk, but instead to discuss HIV testing on the Hollins campus. As a coping mechanism for Paul’s death I decided
to get an HIV test. I spoke to my Mother, and she said that if only one good thing came form his death, it’s that his
friends will get tested. I walked over to Health Services and requested to have a HIV test done. What happened next shocked
and appalled me. I was informed that Hollins "does not do HIV tests." I can get tested for any other sexually transmitted
diseases, but not HIV. I inquired with the nurse practitioner why this was the case. The response was that another organization
on campus did testing. She could not tell me what this organization was, who I could contact to find out, or when the HIV
testing took place. I was given a slip of paper with directions to the Roanoke county health department, in Vinton, Virginia. I was surprised that Hollins in good conscience
could pawn me off to another facility. I truly believe that Hollins has the duty to help students who seek out help. It is
a big step for a student to ask to have an HIV test, and then to be told "we don’t do that" is quite a blow and hypocritical.
In the waiting room students have access to condoms but not to appropriate health care on demand. I fear that if people have
to go to faculties off campus and leave a place they trust then they will be less likely to get tested. The State University of New York’s
at Potsdam health services statement on campus testing expressing my feelings better then I can say: "Is anything positive
accomplished by denying the student on-campus HIV antibody testing? We believe the answer is an emphatic NO! Our goal is to
be a student-centered health service, delivering holistic health care to our very diverse population of clients. This goal
cannot be achieved if we must turn students to others to obtain what may be the most important health-screening
exam of their life." I took the liberty to look at other universities policies on HIV testing. Virginia Tech offers free testing
to all students. VT also requires counseling for before and after you have a HIV test done. Other schools such as Smith, Agnes-
Scott and James Madison offer HIV testing for students on demand. I called Sweet Briar but could not get a hold of their Health
Services department. Roanoke College told me over the phone that they have free and confidential HIV testing done twice a
year for students. Roanoke’s testing is provided by the Roanoke department on health on the school’s campus and
is organized by Roanoke Colleges Health Services. I think that Hollins has a duty to ensure quality health care for all women
in all aspects of their health. HIV testing is a necessary thing that needs to be provided through health services, students
should not be turned away if they need help. Hollins students are lucky that Roanoke
has many venues and recourses to get HIV and other tests done. In downtown Roanoke there
is the Drop in Center, and on Peters Creek Road is Planned Parenthood. These organizations are valuable assets to the
Hollins community, but if a friend had not told be about their location, I would not have known that they existed. Health
services did not mention any of these locations. The issue with off campus testing is transportation and time. I have a car,
but if someone did not then they would have to take a taxi or have a friend drive them. If someone does not want people to
know that they are getting tested then some people might be deterred form getting tested at all. Also, the hours are limited,
and I know that there is no way I can get to a facility on a week day, and most are closed on the weekend. If health services
on campus provided HIV testing then I really believe that more people will seek out health care. It is a huge gap that Hollins
needs to fill. If they insist on not providing students with a life altering service then I feel that it is their duty to
be informed of where students can go, and what they should do. Not being able to even tell me the name of the organization
that does testing on campus, or when it happens, is unacceptable. Another friend of mine and I were discussing HIV
testing on college campuses. Her reaction surprised me. She said she did not want Hollins to have HIV testing because people
at places like Planned Parenthood are trained in telling people that they are HIV positive as well as giving recourses for
the next step the person should take. Her point was that she doubted that Hollins would have the funds to provide this training
and recourse. I agree that people at off campus faculties are most likely extremely well trained, and can provide direction,
but I don’t understand why Hollins could not make this happen here. In 2004 Hollins students founded the Sexual Assault
Center so that people could get help in a setting that they feel comfortable in. Why can’t Hollins do something similar
with HIV testing? Why can’t Hollins make free on demand HIV testing a reality? I have the right to know what is going
on with my body.
The Batten Leadership Institute: A Troubling Way of "Forming" Leadership by Anonymous
Note: Both myself and the women I interviewed wished to remain anonymous.
While I may be accused of not being brave enough to stand by what I wrote, there are other factors involved. Last year then
senior Lisa Bower wrote an article for the Hollins Columns that anonymously quoted some Batten students. These students were critical of the Institution’s programs.
A witch-hunt ensued in which one student was pulled aside and grilled, the directors believing her to be a dissenting person.
When she denied this claim they continued to try and find out who the anonymous persons were, and when they were successful
they asked those dissenters to publicly apologize to the entire Batten program. I ask you this: How can the directors of Batten
make changes if they are so focused on the personal, of finding out who the critics are and warning them to not voice their
concerns? How is this promoting student leadership if those in Batten are silenced when their opinions matter most? We’re told that Hollins is a sisterhood, a
community of “able” women bringing together a set of varying ideals, perspectives, and values. Hollins is dedicated
to a liberal arts education, but what does this mean? According to Merriam-Webster dictionary, “liberal arts”
can be defined as “the studies (as language, philosophy, history, literature, abstract science) in a college or university
intended to provide chiefly general knowledge and to develop the general intellectual capacities (as reason and judgment)
as opposed to professional or vocational skills.” Why then is our main leadership program, The Batten Leadership Institute
(BLI), so focused on these latter two skills? Why does the BLI seem to forget the framework of our institution and instead,
focuses on professional skills that are more linked to the corporate world’s fascination with presentation, instead
of embracing a creative and interdisciplinary approach that is truly inclusive? The BLI website says the program was started in 2002 after a monetary gift was given from a business
leader, Frank Batten, and his wife, Jane Parke Batten, an alumna. The website states: “Guided by the philosophy that
leadership cannot be separated from the individual, the institute helps each student develop her potential through personal
growth. At BLI, we believe who a student leader is informs how she leads.” But one student told me in an email interview
that she had left the program because “Batten did not fit [her] needs on many levels. The curriculum didn't fit [her]
leadership style, and no effort was made to accommodate [her].” She further stated that she believes “the main
purpose of Batten is to shape young women to fit only one model of leadership. It leans towards corporate leadership, all
the while claiming that it is the only way to be a leader. The main lesson [she] took away was that there is still a major conception that for a woman to be a leader she must gain membership to the ‘boy's
club.’” What does corporate leadership really mean? To define “corporate” I had to go to go to the definition “corporation”: “a body formed
and authorized by law to act as a single person although constituted by one or more persons and legally endowed with various
rights and duties including the capacity of succession,” (Merriam-Webster.com). Isn’t this what the BLI really
is? Aren’t the students, while under the guise of embracing their personalities, really taught to embrace the same corporate
values in order to become leaders in a business attentive society? This corporate slant is echoed in the Institute’s “component programs”
that cite such skills as: giving and receiving constructive criticism, understanding/analyzing body language, and “improving
organizational or public skills . . . or learning how to constructively manage emotions.” This reads more like a “how-to”
manual for those who want to climb the corporate ladder. Students are being taught that it’s important to be aware of
how others view them in order to ensure their own success. Another woman I interviewed via email seemed to
echo this claim: “In Batten, we were taught to be honest about ourselves and our emotions. In our group sessions we
discussed our faults and our challenges as far as ‘fixing’ our character faults in order to become better group
leaders. We also were filmed giving fake interviews and reading speeches in order to identify our faults in
such situations.” The BLI has become so overly equated with student leadership that only those within the organization are expected to
be success stories. In the summer before the 2004-2005 school year, Hollins released data on their summer pamphlet. It noted
that of the students who held the top
four SGA positions, 75% were in BLI. Is this saying that those three students are effective leaders, while the lone student
who wasn’t enrolled in this program has little-to-no leadership ability? How is that promoting an inclusive environment? Another shocking incident occurred in Moody. A Batten student approached me with frustrations
over those involved in SGA. “A lot of the students who hold positions in
SGA aren’t really the leaders,” she said, later divulging that she felt the “natural student leaders”
had been pushed aside. But those in SGA are the ones who stepped up, applied for their position, and ARE leading. What then makes a good leader? An enrollment in
the Institute? I beg to differ. The first student I interviewed said: “Batten may be the right step for some people.
But I think that it is marketed as the ONLY way to lead, which worries me. In some ways I feel as though the presence on campus
is very superficial. Of the leaders on campus I know and respect, very few have taken any part in the program.” Why then are we praising the BLI and trying to implement it further into the Hollins social/academic sector? Why aren’t
we addressing the issues students and even faculty (who have historically disapproved of it) have with the program and re-structuring it so it better fits
the wants of the students, not the professional lifestyle that we are pushed to prescribe? Right now its presence is more
cult-like (it’s exclusiveness, falsely advertised selectivity, the one-version of teaching, the marketable assumptions). What’s even more disturbing is that the Hollins administration seems to want to avoid any
conflict over the program’s role within campus life (maybe due to the $2 million that Frank Batten just bestowed onto
the program last month). Instead the Master
Plan states that Hollins is planning to “build on the Batten Leadership Institute's success; integrate the institute
more deeply into the life of the university and add a curricular component.” Why? Many of my friends enrolled in the
Institute, I myself was encouraged to join and declined, and of those friends more than half had left the program by the end
of their sophomore year. In conclusion, the Master Plan narrows the University’s diverse atmosphere into four “hallmarks”
that supposedly sustain the liberal arts environment. These four categories are being re-evaluated and strengthened with new
programs and initiatives; of them the first mentioned is “leadership development.” I find this a bit unnerving
– why is professionalism cited before creativity? I find the other strategic priorities under the Leadership Development
section more appealing – more student internships, a worldwide alumnae career network, Roanoke Valley Partnerships,
a review of the student work study program. With these alternatives leadership isn’t measured by a stamp of approval
on a diploma. Here student experience and hands-on learning through outside factions are instrumental to the process of learning.
A more influential and important process than speech exercises that are videotaped and critiqued, just one of Batten’s
leadership assignments geared towards garnering student success. Coalition Building:
The Fall 2003 Demonstration by Lisa Bower When I contemplated what
my place was on this campus, now that I am not only a graduate student but a soon-to-be professor of English 141 (for the
next academic year), I could only focus on the necessity of history and speaking up. Come this summer, I will have been connected
to our institution for five and a half years (if you combine my undergraduate career with my HollinSummer experience). Though
I’m known for my criticism and, dare I say it, my willingness to speak out (i.e. my big mouth and loud voice), I also
have many positive things to translate to both new and old faces. I’ve seen this University thrive in a number of ways, none more
beautiful than the coalition building that occurred during the summer of 2003 and resulted in the fall 2003 Demonstration
for Diversity. It’s still a difficult subject for me. Though it was beautiful
to see so many Hollins women empowered and acting, seeing the resulting intimidation and disempowerment still enrages me.
Thankfully, because of The Quadrangle, I have a space to articulate the history of coalition-building and the light and dark
sides to it. Of course, this is a subjective telling, as most if not all history is, and I would never claim to be the bearer
of ultimate truth. There is so much to articulate, as activism and upset do not occur in a vacuum (all jokes of the Hollins
culture seeming like a bubble or fishbowl aside). Like a line of dominos, events occur because of the people, the situation,
the culture, and the histories, both told and untold. The following is a timeline of information regarding the events leading
up to demonstration: Spring 2003: A huge tuition hike marks the beginning
of the spring semester. Though increases are normal, this increase is much more than expected, nearly double the usual 4-5%
increase. Once announced, many students panic about whether or not they can afford to stay at Hollins, and many look into
transferring or taking out more loans. Concerns related to SGA are met with either helplessness or defensiveness, as the decision
has already been made by the Board of Trustees. Though there are claims that financial aid would increase proportionally (in
terms of need), many students worry they wouldn’t make the cut. This discontent results in a meeting of students where people voice
the need for action. However, members of the then SGA come to convince the students out of action (this, of course, is debatable,
depending on with whom you’re speaking). Most of the students in attendance are from the Classes of 2003 and 2005
– seniors who are tired of fighting and sophomores, many of with have little idea how to begin, but have a lot of passion.
Tensions were running high when the infamous
“blackface” incident occurs at the end of the semester. Two members of ADA, in their final skits, wear paint on
their faces to mimic the ethnicities of Fat Albert and Jennifer Lopez. This is back when ADA skits occurred at meal times;
the cafeteria slowly takes notice. Members of the BSA are outraged, and the outrage soon spreads, culminating in a forum where
many students leave without a sense of closure. ADA disbands for a semester, at the request of the administration and
decides to stay disbanded for the entire year, to allow people to heal. The other ramifications specific to ADA are kept private.
The two students, who engaged in the blackface, apologize, as they didn’t know it was so offensive. The forum, moderated
by former Professor of Political Science, Wayne Reilly, is the moderator; students and some parents attend, along with many
members of the Hollins community. Many students leave without feeling satisfied. The semester ends. Summer 2003: Students begin emailing one another over
break, and finally, an email list begins full of friends of friends of friends. Fifty students are active in their emailing,
with even more reading and thinking about them. Picture students speaking honestly, and bluntly, about race, Hollins, and
financial aid. Students decide, over the summer, to appear at Opening Convocation with green and gold armbands, to acknowledge
that they had not forgotten the events of the previous year and to begin the dialogue about improving diversity policies,
training, and programs. Many students, including me, are asked to volunteer to facilitate diversity training and follow-through
for first-years.
Fall 2003:
Picture racial incidents, including but not limited to, bullying, slurs, and callous comments and questions. Admittedly, students were still frustrated about the previous semester, as well as comments from the then President, Nora Kizer Bell, involving civility, much of which was taken as a comment toward students still upset with what had happened – with the tuition hike and blackface. Emails begin to fly again, and people begin suggesting that we meet to discuss action.
It is October; picture over 100 women brainstorming in the Hollins room; picture committees (Public Relations, Coalition Building with other schools, a manifesta, and more). Picture coalitions between people and clubs. Picture VOICE, BSA, and OUTloud moving together as one entity, as clubs willing to put their names on the project.
We had the weekend to work. We were making headway. Banners and signs were made. Other schools and their clubs were on board to come. The media was contacted. A manifesta was written.
And then, it all went to hell.
The Dissolvement of the Coalitions: Intimidation
Up until this point, people were working together in new and innovative ways. Students were crossing social lines and banding over the issue of diversity.
What happened? Well, intimidation by administrators and a lack of support from peers resulted in the disintegration the coalition . Many members of the BSA were involved in the committee in charge of contacting their sister and brother schools in an attempt to bring other people onto the Hollins campus. We planned on having other schools on campus, planned on distributing our manifesta, and having a peaceful protest on Front Quad, complete with an open mic, and a reading of the manifesta every hour. The media was contacted and a group of five “the negotiators,” me included, would speak to the press reps. and talk to the administration, whenever they were ready to speak to us; we had a list of points, ranging from increasing the diversity of students/faculty to supporting and/or updating policies for Health Services/The Center for Sexual Assault, that we wanted the administration to commit to.
The only thing was, the advisor of a club
at another school emailed the Hollins administration to inform them of what was going on;. things quickly went sour. The black
chairs of the BSA were brought into the Cocke building. This was during the time when the BSA had a white co-chair; she was
not at the meeting. The club’s advisors were also not contacted to attend. In the meeting, President Bell, and the Provost of the University, Wayne Markert, told the BSA that in inviting people to campus, they would be held responsible if anything went wrong. Though I was not present in the meeting, Frances Carter ’06 (though she came in with the class of 2005), was there and could probably articulate more clearly the tone that was used. They were told that they would be responsible if things got out of hand, if their ‘guests’ acted out, and so on and so forth. They were told that the club could feasibly be disbanded and that they, as individuals and the club’s members, could face serious ramifications. The students in this meeting felt not only disempowered, not only angry, but scared that they were the only people targeted.
Though the club was irate and ready to push forward, they needed a confirmation from other students and organizations involved, that if things went bad (the club was disbanded, the individuals punished), they would be supported. The BSA went to the then executive board of OUTloud and asked if they would support them if things went badly: they asked if the club would take a stand for them; they asked that if in the worst case situation (the club was disbanded), if OUTloud would follow suit in protest. The Executive Board at the time said no, they couldn’t disband, that they had worked too hard to get the club where it was at the time. The BSA pulled out of the then planning and so did a number of other students. The BSA felt intimidated, attacked, and betrayed. The members wouldn’t even come to the events on front quad; they felt as though they had to protect the interests of the club and its members. When the BSA pulled out, we lost the support of many people who had felt the protest was legitimate. Members of OUTloud were told they could participate but that the demonstration was not to have the organization’s name attached. VOICE became the one club to keep their name on the project, but as a new club, the group of women who pushed on was significantly smaller than before. The protest still occurred, though with a new name “demonstration” to make it appear more inclusive. The aggressive aspect of the protest was lost. However, when the Manifesta was presented as a petition at the event, nearly 200 people signed it, including members of the faculty. I firmly believe that we can learn from our mistakes if we listen to histories; even if they are word-of-mouth. I know that a group of women worked on a “History of Hollins Activism” during J-Term; I can only hope that the fruits of this effort become widespread knowledge. Sonya Coleman and the library have copies, if anyone is interested. We can learn from our mistakes if we push through the debris of negativity and distrust. We can see progress if we open our eyes beyond the self. I have to believe that. We can see change/evolution/progress if students realize that they are the most powerful people on this campus. We can not be kicked out for speaking our minds; if this was the case, I would have been gone long ago. Faculty, I urge you to promote student activism. Teach your students to question what they read, their reactions, and their peers. Teach them that speaking up is not a bad thing and that research is integral to being heard. I urge every person reading this plea for help to take a stand. This is not about being conservative or liberal or indifferent, this is about our community and changing it for the better. I ask simply that the climate of intimidation be stopped. I implore each of you to speak up in behalf of promoting a truly inclusive community. Students, Faculty, and Staff, I urge you to empower one another; I urge you to speak. If anyone would like a copy of the manifesta from this time, please feel free to email me at lbower@hollins.edu. I also have the final report from the S.A.C. (The Student Advisory Committee was formed by SGA as a result of the demonstration. Their purpose was to serve as the “check” to the President’s Task Force for Diversity; many of their recommendations have since been implemented. Examples would be policies in Health Services, Campus Safety and the Intercultural Center.) Yes, Let's Discuss Intercultural Programs by Writtika Roy Thif article is partly in response to the last article on Intercultural
Programs by ‘Anonymous’, and partly my own concerns. The last article started with [Hollins is segregated, especially
under national lines]. Well, perhaps as an international student and a very active activist on campus, my input may be interesting.
The article seemed useless to me not only because it was it was another rant without constructive criticism, but it was not
well researched. So here’s my view for the Quadrangle: 1. There is no such thing as ‘dinners for international
students and their friends’. It is an event where Carvin members prepare the food and the setup themselves, and the
host families and interested friends are invited. 2. There is no such thing as the International Fair. As the
GIA president, I arranged the Multicultural Festival last Spring, and this Spring, which contained performances, poetry, and
great food. How many people without direct connections to Carvin or the Intercultural Programs actually knew about this? Freaking
EVERYONE, okay? We put flyers up on every bulletin board on campus on both semesters, put an ad on Grapevine, and listed it
on ‘This Week at Hollins’. I personally told many faculty and students about it both times. The turnout this year
(March 11th, 2006) was disappointing. I don’t know if the anonymous author came to our event. GIA had spent a lot of
time and money to prepare this. The Hollins Community just wasn’t interested. In fact, people with connections to GIA
and Carvin members who came to support the show were the best part of it; I’m thankful that they were there. Next time
anyone writes an article criticizing Intercultural Programs, consider what you yourself have done for ‘diversity.’ 4.
It’s completely natural for people to start off making friends with people they think they have something common with.
That’s not segregation, or racism. Hollins students come from different backgrounds, and you can’t expect the
prejudice problem to be solved here. I have international student friends because we have common experiences. I have many
other friends with common views. The way to get different groups of people to mix together is to have more social events where
people interact. I whole-heartedly support events by student clubs like BSA and OutLoud which try to do that. That’s
why GIA did the Multicultural Festival. If anyone wants more on campus, why don’t you do it yourself? I will give you
all the help you need to arrange an event on campus. But judging from how many people came to this year’s Festival,
I would say most aren’t interested. 5.
I support special New Student Orientations, and the Diversity Banquet. I don’t know who the author of ‘Intercultural
Programs’ was, but she certainly didn’t find out why we think such events are necessary. I have no prejudices
against American students, but when I came to Hollins, I needed to learn from older international students about coping with
cultural differences and dealing with unique financial and legal situations. I was relieved to have just one day to know the
students better. Ditto for other minority students. They are invited for a special orientation session to address the mixed
feelings of being a visible minority on campus (supported by research). But they aren’t the only ones to learn about
this. I remember attending a big social gathering for new students at the back of Tinker, to introduce them to student clubs
and allow them to mingle. It was arranged by the Intercultural Department. Although I think special orientations are like
a band-aid for institutionalized racism in America, it is something we are better off with. If you have groundbreaking ideas,
then please share them. 6.
The Diversity Banquet is for Hollins seniors who have contributed to intercultural activities on campus. I don’t know
what the author meant by ‘most visually identified members of the Hollins queer community’ but I couldn’t
tell who was a lesbian at last year’s banquet (and I don’t need to). Why were some seniors awarded for their contribution?
Because not all Hollins students give a shit about intercultural activism. And again, minorities in America have a history
of government enforced racism (take WS 208!). American institutions owe us motivation and help to make society more equal.
(and it doesn’t cost Hollins that much money). 7.
Finally, I would like to emphasize that ‘activism’ has its root in ‘act’ not ‘rant’. The
Quadrangle is a great example of activism, but articles without any new ideas aren’t. Please don’t complain about
the administration or departments if you haven’t done anything yourself (don’t get me wrong, maybe the author
has done something). Since I am continuously working for intercultural events and admissions, I understand what it means to
be ‘working on it’. If anyone wants to know how, bring your ideas in. In my observation, students who blame the
Intercultural Department for everything haven’t been a part of the hard work themselves. Yes it could use more funding
and staff, but what the department needs most is dedicated student activists; and let me tell you, I have realized most Hollins
students aren’t interested to attend a FREE cultural event with food (!), let alone arrange an event themselves. We
are the ones with power at Hollins. Most of us are too apathetic and don’t use it. Campus Safety by Rachel McCarthy James |
||
|
||
|
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
The Quadrangle’s purpose is to fill in the blanks, to speak on topics and preach our opinions. Everyone is welcome to submit
and everything we print is opinion-based and meant to be taken as such. We do not speak for Hollins University, but we do
speak for a community we love enough to criticize.
|
||