Wrong. The constituents are ALL current students of the college, their families, and to some extent…the alums.
If you feel only full-pay families and students are the true constituents, then you are effectively arguing for a return to the bad old days when colleges/universities were mainly the playgrounds for scions from aristocratic and upper/upper-middle class families with a tiny smattering of lower-middle class and lower income students with high academic stats admitted in order to bolster the given private college’s academic bona fides.
No, I don’t believe being a family or parent who is wealthy enough to be full pay should give one a greater or only voice as a constituent over students/families who aren’t.
That argument is very similar to ones advocated some libertarian-right folks who argue the voting franchise should be taken away from anyone who doesn’t meet the minimum property holding/taxable wealth threshold as was the case in the first few decades of the US Republic. It’s wrong and is the road to an undemocratic oligarchy run by a tiny minority of wealthy elites.
Help me out here. What does “EACH of the Americas” mean?
Is this North America + South America? Or should Central America get broken out separately?
Wait… or did they mean from EACH of these regions:
Region#1 Americas
Region#2 Caribbean
Region#3 Africa?
The Caribbean gets fuzzy. Does it matter whether the islands are sovereign nations (e.g., Dominican Republic, Haiti), or dependent territories (e.g. Aruba (Dutch citizenship), St. Barthélemy (French citizenship))? At the end of the day, does it really matter that a black Dutch international student should come from Aruba rather than from Amsterdam?
Speaking of Amsterdam, why no demands for black students from Europe? There are plenty of black people in Europe.
And why be so bloody restrictive about the continent of Africa? No love for the denizens of Madagascar or the Comoros Islands?
I’m not totally dumb in math, but I totally don’t get the “4% annual increase in Black student enrollment … starting in 2016 to accumulate to a 40% increase by 2022”
Does it mean:
Compound 4% increase per year, over the 7 year period from 2016-2022, like:
(1.04)^7
2016 1.040
2017 1.082
2018 1.125
2019 1.170
2020 1.217
2021 1.265
2022 1.316
But this only gets up to a 31.6% increase by year 2022.
or does it mean:
Additive 4% increments per year, for 7 years, like:
2016 4%
2017 8.00%
2018 12.00%
2019 16.00%
2020 20.00%
2021 24.00%
2022 28.00%
But this only gets up to 28% by year 2022.
Perhaps the Oberlin College Black Student Union should get some less writing/math/geography-challenged students to write their INSTITUTIONAL DEMAND letters. If you’re gonna make demands, you should at least make coherent ones.
Omg, if good college food were so common, we would’t be surprised and rave when it is.
And now the thread is tilting to some sort of entitlement? Free speech, marginalized groups? Some example from 150+ years ago? Come on. They can grumble, afaiak, but this is reaching ridiculous levels. It’s not like they’re activists for world peace.
College is not representative of a democratic republic.
If the school just didn’t call dishes Banh Mi or General Tso’s chicken, would it be perceived any better? I can tell you about the real slop at one place I worked. But they beat the naming game.
Because by virtue of being mainstream, questioning, challenging, and yes…having fun at their expense is far less skin off their nose than doing the same to marginalized groups. That’s the entire point of the nature of being mainstream versus being marginalized by the mainstream.
And this mentality goes back a long ways as shown by some literature.
Why do you think a protagonist like Robin Hood who “Robs from the exploitative rich Sheriff of Nottingham, Prince John, and their favored elites to give to the poor people of Sherwood Forest” makes a far more compelling hero than the Sheriff, Prince John, or those favored elites?? Hmm?
At my friend’s son’s liberal arts college in the northeast, they served matzo at Hanukkah, thinking they were giving a nod to the holiday. The Jewish students thought it was hilarious.
“Because by virtue of being mainstream, questioning, challenging, and yes…having fun at their expense is far less skin off their nose than doing the same to marginalized groups. That’s the entire point of the nature of being mainstream versus being marginalized by the mainstream.”
Now please, tell me even more about the reading habits of your older high school classmates. I haven’t learned nearly enough about them, and they’re vitally important to any debate topic here on CC.
The issue is that while some of the student demands are over-the-top as I’ve said in my first post on this thread, other demands are reasonable in light of the underlying issues involved.
For instance, undercooked rice not only from a palatability standpoint, but also from a basic due care/heath concerns as older relatives…including some who later became medical professionals have known of less well-off refugees and childhood friends who later developed long-term chronic digestive ailments from eating undercooked rice. Thus, I don’t think pooh-poohing this concern is warranted.
In the same vein, serving beef in traditional Indian dishes is not only inauthentic, but a major slap in the face to many Indians considering eating beef is forbidden in Hindu dietary laws and Hindus make up the majority of the population(~80%*).
Also, while some folks like PG minimize the significance of what she’d consider a mere “mistake”, it’s not something Hindus or even most observant followers of other religions with dietary laws take lightly IME. Especially when violating religious dietary laws has serious negative spiritual implications** in their religious belief systems.
And why an arbitrary percentage like 40%? A 40% increase of a 5% black student body is just two more percentage points. They wrote an angry demand letter for 2% more black students by 2022?
Undercooked rice is not a “microaggression,” though - it’s not “disrespectful”. And the way to deal with it is to request politely that the rice be cooked more. Some of you people don’t know how to say please any more.
I recalled an incident in my freshman year of HS when a Orthodox Jewish classmate became so worked up about a non-Jewish student casually mentioning he enjoyed eating matzoh crackers with deviled ham that he ended up screaming at that student.
Several other Jewish classmates had to step in to pull him aside, calm him down, and reassure the non-Jewish classmate that they knew he meant no harm by his casual admission while discussing the topic about Jewish foods with them. While most Jewish neighbors and classmates were more like the Jewish classmates who stepped in, it caused me to be more mindful about possible sometimes touchy sensitivities of those observing religions with restrictive dietary laws.
When I later mentioned this to one of my best HS buddies who came from a mostly Orthodox extended family but whose immediate family were more Reform oriented, he did say that some members of his extended family did take their religious observations seriously enough that he could easily see them reacting in a similar manner if they were in the place of that outraged Orthodox Jewish classmate.
“the same vein, serving beef in traditional Indian dishes is not only inauthentic, but a major slap in the face to many Indians considering eating beef is forbidden in Hindu dietary laws and Hindus make up the majority of the population(~80%*).”
If it were inaccurately labeled as being vegetarian, THEN it would be inappropriate. But if it’s accurately labeled as kheema with beef (or whatever the dish is), then there’s no harm, as (duh, duh, duh) a Hindu or other person who doesn’t eat meat simply won’t eat it.
You’ve never been to India. I have - twice. You most certainly can find beef dishes there. Hotels often have spreads of Indian food that have some beef dishes in it. Those who are vegetarian don’t partake. See how simple that is? It’s not an “insult.” Google Indian beef recipes, there are plenty.
The extent to which beef is eaten in India is also dependent on the region. India is essentially many countries / many languages / many cultures all stitched together under one flag. It’s not all Hindu.
“I recalled an incident in my freshman year of HS when a Orthodox Jewish classmate became so worked up about a non-Jewish student casually mentioning he enjoyed eating matzoh crackers with deviled ham that he ended up screaming at that student.”
Even the most observant Jews don’t consider kosher binding on non-Jews in any way, shape or form. There’s no need for any Jew to be “offended” or upset or hysterical over anything a non-Jew eats.
It’s very clear you’re completely unfamiliar with Jewish kosher practices; please stop pretending that you are. There is no more reason for an O-Jew to be “offended” by a non Jewish student eating matzoh and deviled ham as there is for an O-Jew to be “offended” by a non Jew eating shrimp or a cheeseburger. Matzoh is not “sacred” and any non Jew can eat matzah with whatever the heck he wants to. Your hs classmate, like so many of them, sounds like a total loser.
Well that student was just off his rocker. This had nothing to do with 'sensitivities" and certainly nothing to do with being an Orthodox Jew. He just sounds unstable. I’m Jewish and I can say with certainty that there’s nothing wrong with eating ham on a matzo cracker if you are not kosher.
I may not have been to India, but I had a few relatives who like you have gone there on business and friends who are originally from there and those who lived there for several years in neighborhoods far outside upper/upper-middle class and/or expat enclaves.
Even the relatives who have gone there on business and stayed in hotels like the ones you’ve been are well-aware enough to know what they are experiencing in living in hotels is far from experiencing the “real India”. One who is also a business consultant who has been to India many more times than you have has likened it to being enclosed in a bubble reminiscent to how White British citizens lived practically separate lives from the rest of Indian society…especially non upper/upper-class Indians during the days of the Raj,
Also, I know several people who emigrated from India and friends who spent several years living in and amongst Indians far removed from the expat and upper/upper-middle class corporate enclaves/hotels for work and/or academic field research related to studying Indian society.
All of them have stated that outside of hotels or enclaves catering to Western tourists/expats or some tiny localized areas where there’s a non-Hindu majority, beef is almost never served due to the sensibilities of the Hindu majority in many areas. Even in the tiny localized areas, serving beef can be very iffy as seen in this very recent report:
Look, you either support the idea of micro-aggression or you don’t. Of microagression complains are allowed to one ethnicity/race, they should be allowed to all. If Muslims protest against references to pigs in textbooks, then I see why Indians have every right to protest against beef.
"Some black students at Oberlin also have raised concerns about food being served by the same catering company – Bon Appetit – at the Afrikan Heritage House. The food grievances have even given way to “safe space” fears.
“We students are concerned about our safety,” sophomore Gloria Lewis told The Review. “And so beyond that, it’s about having a safe space. So it’s not just the dining hall. It’s everything. It’s the posts on Yik Yak. It’s the micro-aggressions.”
"Even the relatives who have gone there on business and stayed in hotels like the ones you’ve been are well-aware enough to know what they are experiencing in living in hotels is far from experiencing the “real India”. "
I didn’t “just live in fancy hotels.” I did ethnographies in rural India, complete with no sanitation facilities, and was well off the grid and experienced “real India.” I know what I’m talking about. You don’t - despite your ever present “I’ve got relatives who …”