Opinion
Student Assembly’s forum just a first: With dialogue established, time for action
By Will Kaback ’20 and Cesar Renero ’17
April 6, 2017
Tags opinion
By now, I think it is likely that the majority of the Hamilton community has read, or at least been made aware of, the minutes from this week’s Student Assembly meeting and the issues that were raised within them. During a public comment period, voices from the community—both Student Assembly members and nonmembers—spoke on issues of representation, receptiveness and reconciliation in student government at the College. It was a complex and occasionally confrontational conversation, one that no doubt left many feeling unsatisfied or frustrated as a result.
To say that holding this forum was necessary would be an understatement. Recent Student Assembly discussions have dealt with issues like the availability of feminine hygiene products, improving access to the Days-Massolo Center and facilitating greater inclusivity on campus. The letter of resignation published by former class of 2020 representative Katherine Barnes ’20 highlighted her concerns with Student Assembly itself. She wrote that Student Assembly “is not an inclusive space that represents every student on this campus,” adding, “just because no one blatantly says anything racist, homophobic, transphobic or misogynistic does not mean it is not present in every meeting.”
Barnes’s letter may have been the final domino to fall in the lead-up to this week’s forum, but it was far from the first time such critiques have been directed at Student Assembly. In the months following the election and inauguration of President Trump, discussions around race, gender and class have taken on a layer of added importance. And while I do not think anyone would argue that the prevalence of these issues at the College pale in comparison to the Trump administration, that does not mean we are exempt from addressing them where they arise. In doing so, however, we must work to ensure that conversations turn into initiatives, and initiatives into action. It is easy to point to problems and acknowledge them, but unless this dialogue transitions into change, it becomes little more than empty posturing.
First, we must recognize that there is a general sentiment around campus that Student Assembly is not representative of the entire student body, especially with regard to students of color. This issue, however, is not exclusive to Student Assembly, as student-led activities like The Spectator, Tour Guides and Greek societies continue to come to terms with their own membership makeup. We also should acknowledge that many students coming from marginalized backgrounds often find an important support system and safe space in multicultural organizations, yet the conversations within these spaces rarely permeate our general conversation. That is not to say these students are somehow guarding their dialogue or attempting to make it exclusive; rather, this reality suggests that groups like Student Assembly need to make more of an effort to seek out these points of view instead of expecting it to come to them.
Next, our student body as a whole must reevaluate the opportunities every student has to join a club of their choice. There is an embedded element of privilege in these larger student groups, as they consume time and resources while often offering little to no remuneration. Students who are assigned work-study, and thus depend on their jobs for their expenses, will be less inclined to join a society or organization if that translates to a tradeoff between the club or earning cash. If a need for income precludes such an extracurricular, it should be the entire community’s responsibility to find ways to ensure that all students, regardless of background, have an equal chance and an equal voice.
As agreeable as these goals might be, they remain lofty and difficult to attain. There is a delicate balance between pushing for greater equality and creating new problems as a result of these efforts. For instance, in seeking out and providing an equal platform for voices from marginalized communities, we must also avoid asking these voices to speak generally for their entire community as though all members of a certain race, gender or class share the same concerns or desires. Implicit in any effort to address intersectionality and equality is the potential for allies to contribute unknowingly to the original issue. Rather than acting as a deterrent for further action, this possibility should push us to double down on our commitment to heed all perspectives and consider their merits as a community.
Those searching for precedent at the College on these issues should look no further than the Movement. A student-led organization founded in 2013, the group sought to “encourage inclusion across all lines of difference and promote an awareness of the experiences of historically marginalized groups at Hamilton College.” They published a detailed list of goals and demands for the Hamilton community and hung signs around campus to increase visibility. The Movement was successful both in mobilizing action within the student body and providing a platform for community members to share their experiences at the College. They gained national attention and played a singular role in facilitating the creation of an institutional board called “The Inclusion Task Force,” whose purpose is “to assess the campus climate for students from historically underrepresented groups and identify specific ways to ensure that all students have equal opportunities to thrive at Hamilton, academically and socially.”
Additionally, as Student Assembly and other student-run organizations look to spur these initiatives, President Wippman should serve as a shining example of how to bridge divides and promote action. Despite being at the College for less than a year, Wippman has shown an innate ability for taking on challenges quickly and with open ears. Aside from his previous career as a lawyer, in which he consistently defended marginalized voices against multinational corporations and protected human rights, his role in responding to polarizing events on campus, like the aftermath of the election and President Trump’s travel ban, demonstrate a keen awareness of the importance of initiating action before the demand comes to him. While all can and should be a part of the process of improving our community, larger organizations like Student Assembly and the administration must shoulder the majority of the impetus for seeing this change come to fruition.
The task ahead is neither simple nor clear. It is, however, undeniably one we must take on. Having heard and recognized the concerns of those within our community, direct action is called for. This conversation is too important to exist only in words. Everyone can contribute to this effort, from President Wippman, to class representatives, to members of multicultural organizations, to professors, to the students who delete the Student Assembly minutes without so much as a cursory glance. With precedent for action clearly established, there is no excuse or rationale for treading water on this issue. No doubt there will be bumps along the way, but as this week’s forum showed, allowing for continued discussion, even when it feels fruitless, is the only way to push forward.