<p>Anyone who does not support this might as well cross off schools with black club, asian club, etc. Which is almost all colleges. It’s all division amongst students so there is no difference.</p>
<p>The race clubs fall in a legal gray area if they are supported by college funds. Swarthmore’s lawyers believe they can defend the social clubs where they said absolutely, positively that they would lose a legal challenge to the race-based orientation program.</p>
<p>I do, however, agree with your basic premise. I would, for example, be inclined to eliminate any college that sanctions race-based theme housing, i.e. the black dorm, the Asian dorm, the Latino/a dorm.</p>
<p>The clubs are somewhat different issue as they provide a cultural comfort zone, much in the same way the Jewish center offers special dinners and events around particular holidays. Swarthmore’s policy is that college funded parties or events sponsored by the various “multi” groups must be open to the entire campus and, in fact, some of these parties and events have wide participation.</p>
<p>“Every college and corporation is now pretty much required to have a Director of Diversity and Inclusion or some such newspeak title.”</p>
<p>Yes, I know, but it makes me howl with laughter just to read such titles.</p>
<p>
I have to admit that I checked the dateline after reading the article to see if it was dated 4/1.</p>
<p>It seems that programs like this just serve to segregate further by their grouping and focus on specific groups based on their race. It’s like having race-oriented housing. It seems that if anything, colleges should go out of their way to remove obstacles and potentially segregation-promoting programs whether intentional or not.</p>
<p>For any Holyokans - do you have more background on what they’re trying to accomplish in this race-specific group? I saw the general terms like ‘race issues’ and ‘social justice’ but how does this translate into what the focus and context of the program really is? I think the article must be missing some pertinent information and may simply be poorly written and perhaps it’s not quite the situation that comes across in the article. As a student there, what do you think of the program or do you not know much more about it than we do?</p>
<p>This is fascinating.</p>
<p>Brown has had a preorientation program for “third world” students forever – had it when I was there, 30+ years ago. It is controversial on campus – minority students strongly believe in it and defend it vociferously. Some minority students, however, really resent being invited, and don’t feel they are “minority” at all. Some students who are opposed to the program say the issue to address is socio-economic and not racial. Others who are opposed say the existence of the program immediately creates a division in the school – many kids make their friends at the orientation, and so all the minorities hang out with each other. When the “white” kids arrive, the minorities (who have been on campus for several days) already have friends. (There is at least one old thread in the Brown forum about this.)</p>
<p>My own personal opinion is that I wish Brown would take a totally different approach to its orientation. Many of the issues discussed at the third world orientation are valuable to every student, not just those of color. But the minority students at Brown are 100% totally opposed to changing this. </p>
<p>And so my perspective on the Mt. Holyoke program is … hmm, sounds interesting. I may pass the link along to the some students I know there, and administrators. </p>
<p>Zoosermom, you said: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just out of curiosity, are you just opposed to the “white” orientation, or are you also opposed to the type of minority one that Brown has?</p>
<p>
I’m opposed to the minority orientation as well. I’m absolutely fine with a separate international orientation though, because I think kids who are new to the country could use a specific helping hand. I would be ok with group-type meetings later on, but not as orientation. The welcome to the campus community should include everyone. I think segregated orientations are a spectacularly bad idea.</p>
<p>My daughter’s best friend goes to Yale and has a friend there with the last name of Lee. She is blond and a descendant of Robert E. Lee. Yale placed her in an all-Asian orientation group!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I do not know very much about the program, but I know that the college believes students of color, and international students, have a “right” to a ‘safe space.’ Some are uncomfortable discussing these issues in an integrated group; it makes it easier for them to be in small groups. Also, white students are offered this opportunity, in part, to have the ability to ask questions. All groups on this campus bicker when it’s time for discussion, so I <em>think</em> that the idea behind it is to allow initial conversations to happen so that when they’re integrated for actual orientation, everyone is on similar ground. Conversations about diversity happen in an integrated setting during orientation. Racial tension at Mount Holyoke is very high, as it is throughout the five colleges, so Mount Holyoke is only trying to provide everyone with the resources that they need. Not all students need it. Not all students take advantage of it. </p>
<p>FWIW: I had a friend who turned down Brown specifically because the overnight admitted students program is called “third world welcome.” </p>
<p>I understand that MHC’s programs will drive some people away, but it will also attract some others… </p>
<p>The ALANA orientation has always existed. International Orientation has always existed. The new orientation for white students emerged because white students complained that their roommates moved in early. Mount Holyoke is seizing the opportunity by educating all students who care (of color and white) about issues of race, racism, and social justice at Mount Holyoke during pre-orientation, instead of limiting it to ALANA students who, in some ways, already know what they’re going in to. </p>
<p>I hope that made sense. I’m sorry if it didn’t.</p>
<p>Am I just too stupid to believe that if our institutions including media treated people as people maybe the people would follow suit? I feel like hey if you are going to have something like this call it those interested in diversity days then everyone of every color, every religion, every economic background, every academic interest would be welcom. I know we all have different issues but do we become so politically correct that soon we’ll end up with brown haired people with large white dogs that make under 60,000 a year days. I wish we would just see the living breathing being in front of us instead of what color their hair or skin is…gees!! It all bugs me.</p>
<p>Mt. Holyoke should close up shop if it doesn’t believe the College is a “safe space”.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Really?</p>
<p>Is that from the stabbing at an Amherst party recently and the subsequent decision to search everyone attending Amherst parties for weapons? Or does the racial tension predate all of this semester’s mess?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree with that.</p>
<p>
This is a very interesting and telling statement. Perhaps what the colleges are doing is exacerbating or even creating the tension.</p>
<p>I recognize how bright and well-intentioned you are, but the fact that you don’t seem to understand the opposition or even to question the program is deeply disturbing to me. I want my daughter to be open-minded and questioning. The last thing I want her to do is accept policies and statements that are completely lacking in common sense just because someone in authority tells her those things. I want her to go to college to think for herself and not fall into an idealogy of any sort.</p>
<p>I wonder if Mount Holyoke, like many other schools, also has separate graduation ceremonies for different racial groups. It would make sense … Group them separately during orientation, and then graduate them separately at the end of their college careers. Perfect.</p>
<p>" It is to teach a willing group of students about issues of race and racism and make them aware of how their white privilege ties into the institutional racism that still exists."</p>
<p>This is how I interpret that statement :</p>
<p>Welcome to Mt Holyoke , white student. If you are not aware of how your race is favored ( say you grew up in an area that didn’t foster an environment of racism or superiority based on the color of your skin ) we will make you feel guilty for the sins of others of your race and lineage…:(</p>
<p>If the goal is to bring awareness and bridge the gap , then it should be open to ANY race to attend…or else be a session in the regular orientation, not seperate from the other programs.
I don’t see how this can possibly help bring different races together.</p>
<p>My children grew up in an area that has little or no diversity, but I am happy to say that through their college experiences , have very close friendships with people of different ethnic and racial backgrounds. No one had to organize an event for this to take place, it just happened naturally without intervention from a well meaning, PC event or group.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Of all the dumb reasons given for this program, this one is the dumbest. You don’t need to create a potentially divisive race-based program in order to let white kids move in early. Just let them move in early - same time as the kids of other races. </p>
<p>Seems to me a whites-only program could go either one of two ways, both bad. It could become a way for white kids to bond with each other to the exclusion of others, promote Us vs. Them thinking, and thus foster the worst sort of racism. Or it could become a big institutionalized Guilt Trip where the white students are gathered together and scolded for the sins of their ancestors.</p>
<p>I think these “programs” for minorities, whites and whatever should all be scratched. Why not just have one orientation for all students?</p>
<p>These generation of white students have never oppressed anyone, and most of minorities of my generation have never been oppressed. Although, I agree that we should learn about our history in order to prevent us from repeating pasts mistakes, these programs only contribute to the division that we see in America today.</p>
<p>" It is to teach a willing group of students about issues of race and racism and make them aware of how their white privilege ties into the institutional racism that still exists."</p>
<p>Could I please get me some of that white privilege? All these years of being white and I didn’t know that I had some coming to me. Dang!</p>
<p>I just love how the old “institutional racism” argument keeps getting trotted out. It’ll guilt those rich white folks every time.</p>
<p>I must say that this thread has brought a great deal of amusement to what otherwise might have been a mundane day. I almost feel as if I should make a financial contribution to Mount Holyoke for providing me with such great laughs.</p>
<p>western~</p>
<p>I have looked at your other posts and there seems to be a recurring theme to them, regarding race. Please explain so that I can understand.</p>
<p>
Good point since a lot of the bonding with fellow students might occur during orientation and pre-orientation. Further bonding occurs during housing hence another good reason to not have race-based (themed) housing (I know it’s usually open to ‘everyone’ but does it ever really end up that way?). It seems that the orientation, pre-orientation, and housing is a good time to start mixing it up.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Hmmm, they didn’t mention anything about this when we took the admissions tours at Mt. Holyoke and Smith.</p>