The recent surfacing of Douglas Muir’s defamatory comments toward the Black Lives Matter movement is illustrative of how much change still must occur before we can live in a true meritocracy — one in which we do not devalue or slander other demographic groups on the basis of the color of their skin or gender identification. Now, the comments do not necessarily reflect the University’s lack of advocacy. In fact, with organizations such as Green Dot among many others that promote advocacy for others, the University arguably has one of the strongest movements of advocacy of any organization in the United States. Still, the University and its governing officials can do more to ensure that once we leave this University, we are sensitive and supportive of others in whatever discipline or work force we choose to enter.
While we do boast a panoply of advocacy organizations, certain events on Grounds perhaps require faculty intervention and sanction. Specifically, the N-word was found sprawled over Kent-Dabney in early September, an absolutely unacceptable action against an important part of the University community. While resident advisors and the University responded in the best manner they could, the editorial board picked up on how difficult it is for University officials to respond to such a repugnant crime against African-Americans. But why stop there?
It is high time the University and its officials take greater steps forward in ensuring all students, not just those interested in advocacy, become sensitive and supportive of other groups. While we pride ourselves in student self-governance and autonomy as Thomas Jefferson originally envisioned, current events serve as an impetus for a change that students, by themselves, simply cannot make. Therefore, the University should collaborate with organizations that do promote this type of advocacy, like the aforementioned organizations, through seminars or classes.
All students, regardless of ethnicity, orientation, school or otherwise, should be required to take at least one seminar in their four years and should be deeply encouraged to take more. These seminars would consist of discussions about when, how and why we should advocate, with conversations that investigate the ramifications of both for and against advocacy, as well as attitudes we can adopt to promote advocacy. Both COLAs and USEMs do exist, but serve a markedly different than my proposal and are logistically different as well. COLA seminars are optional and only open to College students. And USEMs do not target the advocacy that is desperately needed. Furthermore, both COLAs and USEMs are restricted to first-years. Therefore, these seminars would consist of initiating the conversation of advocacy for social worlds that are discriminated against and, if well received, teach skills learned in student organizations. For example, Green Dot aims to “increase [students’] proactive and reactive bystander behaviors.” These seminars may not be the panacea for the end of slanderous comments, but they certainly would be an enormous step in the right direction.
Now, there will of course be backlash. Is it fair to mandate that students take seminars on top of pre-existing classes that actually prepare them for the real world? Is it right to mandate that students who do not agree with this brand of advocacy be required to sit through and talk through it? Yes, it is, on both accounts. Firstly, it is important to recognize that sensitivity and an appreciation of other groups are arguably the most powerful attributes to have going into the working world. Knowledge and skills often come and go, but one’s open-mindedness and their willingness to collaborate mark the characteristics of a truly great leader. Secondly, this mandated seminar would not conflict with classes because their predominant utility would be to start the conversation and challenge students to vocalize their opinions, whatever they may be.
In times such as these, it is critical that we stand together as a University and be mindful of the ramifications our comments may have unto others. The division Muir’s comments incite builds walls in not only the University community, but the Charlottesville one as well. Moreover, by initiating the conversation, we can develop a new brand of advocacy by not belittling others that are spiritually, tangibly or socially different from ourselves, but rather by lifting ourselves up.
Sean Sequeira is a Viewpoint writer.
Read More
PARTING SHOT: No man is an island
By Ava MacBlane | 5 days agoRetirement, as you can tell, has been treating me well. When people ask me now if I miss it, I laugh and tell them some things I definitely don't miss. But I don't always get to tell them about the things I really do miss.
PARTING SHOT: You never know unless you try
By Lexi Baker | 5 days agoMy time at the University was shaped by the people who showed me grace and kindness and by those who had confidence in me, even when I struggled to have it in myself.
PARTING SHOT: A love letter to Cav Daily and Connection
By Ava Proehl | 6 days agoMy time here taught me to look for the genuine, human connection in every moment.
