Today, the FSSA (Faculty, Staff, Students, and Alumni) published a letter (to see the full letter, please scroll down to the bottom of this Blog) written by FSSA Spokespersons LaToya Plummer and Delia Lozano-Martinez on the official FSSA website calling for the Gallaudet Board of Trustees (BOT) to withdraw its recognition of a particular coalition called the Coalition of Students of Colors (COSC).
On November 13, 2006, the Gallaudet BOT announced their plans for selecting Gallaudet’s Interim President. The plan listed groups that would be represented in the search process, including the COSC. Prior to both dates, the FSSA continually cited exclusion and racism as two main reasons behind the Gallaudet protest. The CSOC has been given credit for igniting the Gallaudet protests, in fact their eloquent letter was the first one posted on the official FSSA website.
In this letter, the FSSA may be asking the Gallaudet Board of Trustees to allow their organization to determine which minorities in the Gallaudet community have a voice and which do not. In particular, the FSSA says about the COSC:
“This is the same group of people that fail to recognize that a coalition means the inclusion of all minority organizations.”
If that is the definition of a “coalition” then why does the FSSA refuse to recognize the COSC?
They go on to explain:
“Given that, we are worried that the establishment of the Coalition of Students of Color will only create division within the community of people of color.”
During the Gallaudet protest, not everybody was an FSSA supporter. However, everyone understood that one of FSSA’s many intentions was to unite as many students as possible (although the ultimate outcome was the formation of two distinct camps: those who supported Dr. Jane Fernandes and those who did not).
The letter concludes:
“We have not reached a collective understanding, and we ask that out of respect, the trustees halt on the recognition of the Coalition of Students of Color until we have the opportunity to resolve some of the issues that are preventing us from working together in a way that would do social justice proud.”
Unfortunately, this letter may defy the concept of social justice by trying to “halt recognition” of a minority group, especially one that represents racial and ethnic minorities.
“This is also a group of people who are pushing for the formation of a coalition without first resolving inter-group conflicts. They are the same group of people who, in part because they harbor anger at those who ignored us students of color at the very beginning of the presidential search process, are not willing to work with the Student Body Government or the Faculty, Student, Staff, and Alumni coalition.”
Doesn’t this sound like the conflict between the FSSA and the BOT prior to the termination of Dr. Jane Fernandes? The FSSA was rife with inter-group conflicts. Did the FSSA resolve its inter-group conflict with the COSC before forming its organization?
Both groups, the FSSA (which has not yet been recognized) and the CSOC may have merit in their argument to become recognized organizations. Should minority student organizations be placed under the umbrella of the FSSA? If so, should organizations representing faculty, staff, graudate students, alumni, etc. also be placed under the FSSA?
How do students of color feel about the FSSA issuing a public statement that minority groups must go through an additional layer, the FSSA, in order to be represented on the Presidential Search Process? Is this racism?
Granted, in the end of the ensuing discussion on this Blog, we may conclude that this may have been a poorly written and not well-thought out letter by “college students”. The FSSA must learn what the Gallaudet Administration did during the protests, every letter and public message will be carefully scrutinized. The FSSA needs to be more careful with their public messages if they truly seek unity for gallaudet.
Update: The FSSA letter on the CSOC has been removed from the official FSSA website. Here is the original letter:
MEMORANDUM
TO: GALLAUDET UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
SUBJECT: OPEN LETTER OF CONCERN ON THE RECOGNITION OF COALITION OF STUDENTS OF COLOR
DATE: TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2006To the Honorable Members of the Board of Trustees;
On Saturday, November 11, the Faculty, students, staff, alumni, and parents met with some members of the Board in regards to the Interim Presidential Search. These meetings were the first step towards recognizing the importance of community input. This ensures that representatives from different groups of the community are included in the Interim President Search Advisory Committee and breeds optimism that shared governance will soon be a model used within the Gallaudet community.
There is, however, an issue of concern we must present before this coming deadline in submitting names for the IPSAC. These past six months, we, the people of color, have fought to get our voices heard. The unofficial establishment of Faculty, Students, Staff and Alumni has brought forth a place of recognition and respect of and for others outside of minority groups. This unofficial organization has provided a safe haven where, through mistakes, we have learned that teamwork is the essential ingredient for the successful implementation of the principles of social justice at Gallaudet. Working together with the same group of people who initially ignored us and finding that people do learn from their mistakes has instilled in our hearts, the hope of a better Gallaudet.
Gallaudet University will improve from this point on through continued open dialogue and giving ourselves permission to confront each other on issues that must be resolved. Most importantly, and perhaps our biggest challenge: we must push ourselves to engage in such dialogue and confrontation with various groups outside of our own communities and strive to work together as one community. Given that, we are worried that the establishment of the Coalition of Students of Color will only create division within the community of people of color.
As students, working with other groups of faculty, staff, alumni, and community agencies, we have been and continue to fight for social justice. We envision a place where each of our “voices” carry equal power. And as students, we recognize the Student Body Government as our representative organization. However, rather than working with the Student Body Government, certain individuals want to create a separate governing body. This is the same group of people that fail to recognize that a coalition means the inclusion of all minority organizations. This is also a group of people who are pushing for the formation of a coalition without first resolving inter-group conflicts. They are the same group of people who, in part because they harbor anger at those who ignored us students of color at the very beginning of the presidential search process, are not willing to work with the Student Body Government or the Faculty, Student, Staff, and Alumni coalition.
We want you to be aware that—as can be expected in times of crisis, certain issues are still unresolved. One such instance is the formation of the Coalition of the Students of Color. We have not reached a collective understanding, and we ask that out of respect, the trustees halt on the recognition of the Coalition of Students of Color until we have the opportunity to resolve some of the issues that are preventing us from working together in a way that would do social justice proud.
Respectfully yours,
La Toya Plummer Delia Lozano-Martinez
© Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of the author. As with every blog on this website, this blog does not reflect the opinion of DeafDC.com.
Exactly my thought. “The FSSA was rife with inter-group conflicts…”
And the umbrella part, too, knowing that there are groups who do feel differently but still want to forge ahead to make a more solid Gallaudet University for all.
I have questions, too.
http://kokonutpundits.blogspot.....-memo.html
This really makes no sense at all to me. FSSA said about COSC: “this is a group of people who are pushing for the formation of a coalition without first resolving inter-group conflicts.
I’m not aware of any inter-group conflicts within COSC. Seems to me the COSC had conflicts with FSSA. Is FSSA whining because COSC won’t forgive and forget?
“[COSC] is the same group of people who, because they harbor anger at those who ignored students of color at the beginning of the presidential search process, are not willing to work with the Student Body Government or the Faculty, Student, Staff, and Alumni coalition.”
Well, duh! If COSC still harbors anger at FSSA, SBG, GSA, et al, I for one certainly don’t blame them. You know the saying — “fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me”?
Maybe I’m being too pessimistic here, but there’s been no sign that FSSA leadership will do anything different next time. They criticize the administration’s flaws but say nothing about owning up to their own, Noah Beckman excepted. I think COSC is right to keep their participation in the interim presidential search independent of FSSA. My two cents.
Where’s KBM when we need her? :)
FSSA is a coalition. The splinter group that gave up the representation of black and colored students of Gallaudet, and left FSSA, did a great service in bringing about unity in FSSA. How? Simply by the fact they left. FSSA did not have any problem ever after, and the protest made a great breakthrough.
Now this sour group of losers wants to undo the protest. They won’t succeed. The monetary advances the traitors tapped on during Fernandes’ stint as designate dried out. Sorry there is no more booty for lying and spying. The power of the protest is so overwhelming that a few dissenters won’t be able to derail it.
Otherwise you may sing your bitter song as loud as you wish. Who cares?
Undo the protest? Hardly.
It was the BoT who officially recognized the CoSC as an organization.
Inclusiveness should also include those with dissenting views. Apparently, this has not been the case for the FSSA since they seem to support the memo and get the BoT to rescind it’s official recognizance of CoSC for IPSAC until I hear otherwise.
I was in total shock when reading the letter by La Toya Plummer and Delia Lozano-Martinez. I think they are making whole FSSA things worse and messier. I am almost lost for words and do not understand their points made. Where are the signatures coming from the faculty, alumnus, parents and staff of colors?
I am not surprised because Law of Karma never failed. It never pay to poke at anyone uncivilly.
Let Gallaudet be restored with JK as the president so everyone can sleep better at nights.
Again, this perfectly illustrates FSSA’s lack of understanding when it comes to public relations. FSSA is continuing to shoot itself in the foot… and I daresay it’s starting to blow its head off!
Sheesh!
~ Deaf Pundit
No, the shot is coming from the loser camp that cannot admit defeat. It is their right to resent reality. But their shots are only water-gun shot. The protest, sorry, can’t be stopped.
As I suspected, the GUFSSA sought only to use LaToya and other people of color as a fig leaf cover for the protest, and once the protest achieved its goal, the people of color are, as usual, jettisoned as inconvenient.
What a bunch of fricking tools. What really gets me is that LaToya should know better that she’s being taken advantage of.
Diversity includes not only a monolithic unity perspective, but also different degrees of questioning and considerations. Fairness requires the inclusion of everybody, no matter how inconvenient and politically messy it might be.
I love the fact that my suspicions were correct and that the whole unity issue was only good until Fernandes stepped down.
Are you suggesting LaToya and Delia were pawns? And not smart enough to see it? Hmm…
I do not think FSSA is evil. Quite contrary, they have very sincere intentions that are often misinterpreted.
BTW, I’ve noticed that the editing feature is usually not available on comments this deeply embedded- which is too bad, because I’d really like to edit the above comment.
If FSSA collapsed, what will happen to its money? Donate it to Gallaudet, then.
What I would like to know is more details before passing judgement. I would like to see CoSC join FSSA, but who is to say that CoSA isn’t at fault here? If CoSA can’t get their act together, then how can they join FSSA?
That said, I do NOT KNOW the real story behind this. I’m just saying that there’s more to this than meets the eye, and I’d like to find out.
And yes, they could have explained it better.
CoSC is a splinter group. They don’t represent anyone else but themselves. A few days ago they demanded all BoT members to resign in an open letter. What for? It was simply stupid.
By breaking away from SBG they stepped on the road of racial segregation. It is not the road of unity. It is the road of pre-meditated discord and division.
Where’s this open letter? I’d like to see it.
Here is the letter. Look at the extremely stupid demand of the Board’s resignation:
“”And finally, graciously resign from the Board of Trustees so that a new group of Trustees may be sought to replace each one of you.”"
No more comment is needed.
——————————-
Memorandum
To: Gallaudet University Board of Trustees
Subject: Open Letter to the Board of Trustees
Date: Thursday, November 02, 2006
Honorable Members of the Board of Trustees;
In April of this very eventful year in the annals of this great university, we, the undersigned, requested with what we believed was a compelling argument that you should not have proceeded with the selection of a controversial choice as President of Gallaudet University. The Presidential Search Committee clearly had not given you the final 3 candidates who would be best suited to lead us in the direction we believe the university needed to go. The selection of Mr. Ron Stern as a finalist over Dr. Glenn Anderson was particularly disturbing in its blatant disregard of the university and Board of Trustees approved diversity statements.
As a result, and just as we predicted in our original letter, the deaf world was sent into chaos I believe nobody had imagined would be so intense and passionate. We predicted that your decision to accept the three candidates for finalist would be controversial and potentially damaging. We predicted that it would raise suspicions and divide our community like never before. Unfortunately you chose to ignore us and our plea. Unfortunately, you chose to lend credibility to the insult that a person of color in general and a black man in particular will never be considered equal to or better than a white man with a less stellar professional record and academic credentials. We believe the spirits of our forefathers have come to haunt you and to tell you that you were wrong.
You should never have accepted those candidates because it was very apparent to all of us that it was the most visible sign that the process was flawed. You therefore must be held accountable for the following:
1. A protest that took all of 6 months and great inflicted psychological and financial tolls on all involved.
2. A deeply divided deaf community where trust and friendships were very negatively impacted and scars might be felt for years to come.
3. An environment where suspicions of Management by Intimidation (MBI) were further proven by what was a stark contrast in the participation of staff vs. faculty and students. For 6 months we worked, learned and lived in an environment that became more hostile and unsafe the longer the protest continued. Staff was particularly affected as they were given direct instructions to tow the administrations line. They were intimidated.
4. A national leadership crisis where leaders appeared tentative or paralyzed with uncertainty and fear of cyber bloggers some of whom displayed a shocking lack of civility and engaged in painful character assassinations.
5. The confusion anger and frustration felt by our faculty as they tried to honor their academic obligations while also exercising their free speech rights to disagree with your selection of Dr. Fernandes as the President Designate from a FLAWED PROCESS.
6. The arrest of 134 mostly students and a few faculty, staff and alumni. These people are considered heroes for making this sacrifice for their beliefs. However, they are now faced with the shocking reality that they now have a record of being arrested and that is going to have adverse impact on their future opportunities to find work. The administration and the protestors were placed in this compromising position by your failure to heed our plea to STOP A FLAWED process.
7. The confusion and anger felt by students close to graduation and those who wanted to continue their education undisturbed by hostilities that lead to a take over of the main academic building and eventually a campus wide lockdown. Many were traumatized and their academic performance was impacted in negative ways. It might cost the university innocent students who did not protest but who can no longer feel safe and welcome, or who may feel their ability to study uninterrupted would be impacted negatively.
8. The tainting of potential applicants for the position of President and organizations who would normally be expected to lead us in the healing process and who in the passion of the protest, chose sides and gave up their impartiality which may or may not hider their ability to play important roles in the healing process. They have been compromised and conflicted.
9. The loss of jobs of potentially very effective and brilliant young leaders of the protest who also were employed in our K-12 education programs at the Clerc Center . Their involvement in the protest and voluntarily arrest makes them ineligible by law to maintain their employment. The fact that your negligence instigated their actions suggests that you indeed should be held accountable.
10. The difficult position our GUAA leadership and members were placed in during this conflict which in the end lead to the President and Vice President of the GUAA angering and dividing alumni who had divergent opinions of the protest. We believe the GUAA is a very important part of the university’s tradition and vitality. Your actions have compromised its effectiveness and questioned its integrity.
11. And finally, orchestrating and watching the incredible venom directed at Dr. Jane K. Fernandes by an enraged community is an example of gross negligence of your responsibilities as a Board of Trustee who is trusted upon to uphold the dignity and mission of our university and the community it serves. We hold you accountable for directing our anger at her. You made her a symbol of our pain and fears.
We believe as we did the moment Dr. Anderson was not a finalist, that this process was flawed. While we also believe the target for protesters anger was misguided and perhaps deliberately made so by the administration in order to protect the Board of Trustees and Dr. I. King Jordan from closer scrutiny. In other words, as a university staff person once said to us, the Board of Trustees is hiding underneath Dr. Fernandes’ skirts and must be flushed out and made accountable for their FLAWED PROCESS. We believe that that this was an act of cowardice on the part of the Board of Trustees and administration and therefore eroded your credibility, authority and legitimacy. We therefore request that every member of the Board of Trustee who participated in, directly or indirectly, wittingly or not, in the FLAWED SEARCH PROCESS do the following:
A. Do the honorable thing and graciously offer us a full accounting of their poor leadership and irresponsibility in this flawed process.
B. Conduct an independent investigation into the FLAWED SEARCH PROCESS and offer a public audited and notarized report.
C. Provide us with a public rationale for the decision to rescind Dr. Fernandes’ contract as President Designate which we believe is not only due to the toll the process has taken on the university’s finances but because of what we clearly believe is undue influence from the administration and specifically the Office of the President in this process. We submit the involvement of Ms. Patti Kunkle as an example of what we believe was undue influence. Her conflicting roles through out the process and her position within the Office of the President suggests there is no way Dr. Jordan was being honest when he suggested he had absolutely NO involvement in the process.
D. Seek legal ways to remove (expunge) the arrest records of the 134 protesters who are victims of your negligence and who were forced to engage in this form of civil disobedience by the fact you THREE times refused to acknowledge the FLAWED PROCESS. The fact that on the 4th try, you eventually got it right does not dismiss the fact that on THREE occasions you publicly defended your FLAWED DECISION.
E. And finally, graciously resign from the Board of Trustees so that a new group of Trustees may be sought to replace each one of you. That way we may be able to rebuild the authority, credibility and confidence/trust in the university’s Board of Trustees.
This we believe will lead to closure and therefore it will signal the first step towards healing. We believe it will be a long and painful process but with renewed trust in our leadership, we believe the deaf world will come out stronger and with a clearer sense of its unique multiple identities, its diversity and its untapped potential as citizens of the 21st century.
Thank you.
Respectfully,
Arlyn Penaranda David Musa King
Niesha Washington Anita Mazzuca
ENCLOSURE:
Open letters to Board of Trustees from the Students of Color dated April 24, 2006 and May 1, 2006 .
Where’s LaToya and Delia’s sig? Where does it say Coalition of Students of color? What am I missing? I would be curious to know what Lozano-Martinez thinks of the comment regarding Stern being selected over Anderson (particularly since it’s now apparently being attributed to her by proxy), given the situation…
Regina, you don’t understand the whole situation. The splinter group was organized by the people who signed this letter. La Toya and Delia are the protest leaders. They are not splinter. They are members of the FSSA. They loathe traitors, who organize the CoSC and backstab FSSA. That is La Toya’s and Delia’s letter all about.
Good morning in the reality, darling.
Actually, zol, dear you have no idea what I understand and don’t understand, so please, stop pretending that you do.
I see that I read the gallnet letter incorrectly. I rescind my objections. Life before coffee isn’t good.
Hey, hey wait a minute hon!! You wanted to see La Toya’s and Delia’s signature on the CoSC letter. Still you don’t get it?! CoSC is the splinter group, and La Toya and Delia are the protest leaders.
Two different group, two different letter… Capisce???
Okay, apology accepted… ;)))
agreed. i hope FSSA undoes some of the damage. obviously, it’s too fragile out there.
I definitely trust LaToya Plummer’s instinct and judgement what she know very well within the FSSA’s clockworks.
There were endless attempts to inflitirate and undermine the FSSA coaltion from time to time. One was David King, who was in such a cahoot with the IKJ adminstration to split the FSSA.
The Coaltion of Students of Color ought to be re-named “Students of Diversity” or simply see the whole student body as an equal one.
I am not much into political correctness myself. Why can’t we treat students equally in despite of their racial background or religion or creeds?
What about us, Causcasians in next ten years living in America? Will the Latinos and African Americans and other racial minorities stand together to deny our basic rights or dwell upon the past systematic oppression?
I personally do not deny systematic racism and oppression of particular minorities within the American society for past 200+ years.
Robert L. Mason (RLM)
What? You arent making any sense.
We should worry that there will be a majority minority nation and they might limit the rights of whites? Huh?
You dont deny racism occuring, or that you dont deny that there needs to be oppression?
Explain that much. The grammar and syntax doesnt work.
Also, treating people equally under the law is mandatory, treating people on a personal level is grand. Do you want to make the opportunity to do that without writing a letter accusing an organization of being “traitors” or associate them with “infiltrators”
do not trust latoya!! you do not know her .
There is no evidence that we refused to work with SBG and GSA. In fact, I continually engage in meeting and dialogue with SBG president on how to have his administration structure change and create office for COSC. He eventually endorsed my suggestions and even brought it to students congress. Before meeting with BOT on Saturday, I sat with SBG and GSA presidents and exchanged our perspectives and our expectation, and we eventually agreed that I should wrap up our meeting with BOT with strong call for no reprisal on all involved in protest. This is not teamwork with SBG?
I am proud to state that due to confidence SBG and GSA presidents has in our efforts; they make strong case for COSC to me involved in IPSAC, PSC and future committee that BOT require student representatives. If SBG and GSA believe we are not out to work along, they would not speak in our favor to BOT, which I believe give place to students of color recognition on IPSAC.
One thing is true, some of us refused to cooperate with FSSA and that is obvious. Does our refusal to cooperate with FSSA constitute that we are unwilling to work or cooperate with SBG? I have problem with FSSA mixing itself with SBG.
Several of us approached LaToya yesterday at G-Area to ask her motive behind the open letter to BOT and ask her politely to explain to us what internal conflict, because most of us did not understand or realize any conflict between organizations of students of color, except the fact that some organizations like BDSU and APA refused to officially be involved in FSSA as organizations. Their members are in FSSA as individuals. We need to keep that separately.
Unfortunately as it turned to be, LaToya outburst end up into using foul language like f**k you on Candace Jones who is also a black sister and strong support of FSSA protest. Candace and other Latino lady (both FSSA supporters) happened to disagree with the memorandum and wished to ask for an explanation.
LaToya explained she tried to work with me and Arlyn many time but we were not cooperative. Know this is purely untrue. Under what capacity was she trying to work with us? Under FSSA? Our position is clear on this. But under SBG, she never tries because she is not one of SBG officers. Again I work with along with SBG as member of Student Congress representing BDSU.
I can’t comment on LaToya’s behavior but it’s true that the SBG is interested in creating an office for COSC- if the SBG has one for international students, why not for students of color?
The Gallaudet Student Body Government sounds like it is taking the right steps forward, especially after Beckman’s Newsweek comments. In the spirit of Newsweek…Conventional Wisdom would bump up SBG while FSSA takes a dive.
So is this like the poorly written letter to the editor by the english professor?
It is inclusive as long as it inclusive, and that any dissenting voice should not be allowed within because that would hurt the cause.
So as long as people of color are united against a common cause thats alright, but if there is disagreement, then they are at fault for their disagreement and need to be investigated?
Correct. Diversity is only convenient to the white folks at GUFSSA when it achieves their goals.
In the beginning a few students from Coalition of Students of Color actually started the protest and were involved with FSSA but sometime after the SBG Town Hall, they withdrew their support. The members of Coalition of Students of Color practically forsaken Plummer and Lozano-Martinez but Plummer and Lozano-Martinez went ahead with the protest and won. Now, without Plummer and Lozano-Martinez, the Coalition of Students of Color are kinda reaping the rewards from the protest. See? How should they deal with that kind of conflict?
still doesn’t compute, PR. If Plummer and Lozano-Martinez are wonderful, and FSSA is a great representative of diverse students, then the BoT could have asked for their input. I don’t know that anybody is reaping any rewards from the protest just yet.
FSSA is an informal organization, a coalition of different groups. BoT does not need to recognize it separately, FSSA still has its due influence through the formal organizations.
CoSC is a splinter group that cannot claim to represent anyone else but themselves. Most students of color supported the protest and do not agree with the divisive tactics of CoSC. They decided to split away from SBG. By this they chose the bumpy road of racial segregation. It is not the way of unity. It is the way of pre-meditated dissent and division.
Bullshit. The protest was lily white for the most part. Most students of color, including me, didn’t participate in the protest because we, rightfully, saw ourselves stabbed in the back by FSSA last spring.
It seems to me Delia and LaToya were right up front at the protest, and “represented” lots of folks. Now they don’t? Is this a good idea now? No. I don’t think it is. But as has been suggested, there isn’t true “unity” at Gallaudet…
Ever since this May I have said all along, “Unity for whom?”.
All this brouhaha reminds me of the Life of Brian movie, where the Jews can’t work together to overthrow the Romans because everyone and his cousin has their own opposition group. The Judean Peoples Front, The Peoples Front of Judea, The Popular Front of Judea, and the Judean Peoples Crack Suicide Squad. Did I leave anyone out? The Campaign for Free Galilee. I need to buy that DVD.
The crab theory applies to all minorities, is that what you’re saying?
I love Python!!!!
Shane,
I find it interesting that you are now involved. Not too long ago, you wished to stay neutral about the Gallaudet protest by posting your message by Sorenson VRS. You have finally showed your true colors.
That letter to the BOT clearly shows that the GUFSSA wishes for greater honesty and equality through open dialogue. Is it really a crime for a group to identify its own weaknesses??? Duh. There is a Chinese proverb that best sums my views about the GUFSSA: “A gem cannot be polished without friction, nor a man be perfected without trials.”
KLM
KLM, I’ve been involved for quite some time. I wrote a letter to the editor for the Washington Post on May 13, 2006 criticizing the Gallaudet Administration’s use of the “deaf card” and explained that the protesters were not happy with the transparency and integrity of the search process.
Process, Not Product, Irks Some at Gallaudet
http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/wa.....+Gallaudet
Please also note that many times, especially here at DeafDC, bloggers may choose to publicize statements made by other parties for no other reason than to bring it to your attention, not neccessarily to support or contradict it.
I need to know more about this issue before I decide where I stand but one question does come to mind immediately… What is the big deal about the Board recognizing the CoSC? I think the more groups that are involved with the IPSC, the better. That way, nobody can complain later. Why did is this so problematic for the FSSA?
It is problematic for GUFSSA because they want ONE message, ONE perspective, and ONE selected candidate.
Diversity falls by the wayside when it’s not convenient for GUFSSA. I think the real issue is whether GUFSSA “represents” all Gallaudet folks. LaToya thinks that GUFSSA represents students of color. It doesn’t.
Well, the FSSA does not represent nor speak for me. No one organization can possibly represent everyone.
However, for myself, I am a representative of Gallaudet University but I also speak for myself. Anybody who graduated, for example, from Gallaudet is a representative of that university.
No one voice represent all, but many voices do represent many. And the many voices do have overlapping agreements that have a common ground that is representative of everybody.
Are you proposing that EVERY graduate of Gallaudet comes before the BoT and represents themselves, that is, speaking for themselves? Of course, I am all for individuals writing letters to the BoT and voicing their opinions, but don’t you think it makes sense to have a representative or two from each of the different groups (e.g., Oral Deaf, culturally Deaf, Late-Deafened, Africian-American Deaf, etc., etc., etc.) to sit down together with the BoT? If there should be a certain group of people who are being excluded, they should form a group and select a reprentative or two to speak for them at the round table.
Admittedly, like many responders here, I am at a total loss as to what is transpiring. This “Disgrunted Deaf Person of Color” seems to feel LaToya and other people of color have betrayed them by appeasing FSSA at the sacrifice of principles that are important to them. My question for this person: What are you going to do about it? Give up in defeat, feel bitter about it, and hope Gallaudet would collapse, just so you can say, “Told ya”? Or do you plan to do something about it in a productive manner, like making sure they “hear” you and understand issues that are important to you? The SBG president did make a public statement of apology, admitting that they ignored you, acknowledging that racism does exist on campus, and vouching to work on erasing out audism, racism, and all other forms of discrimination. I say there’s lots of room for improvement! Let’s work together and do it better!
Juan,
My premise has been this, “No one organization can possibly represent everyone.” Whether it’s a group or an individual, a voice can be heard. Each of us or as a group has a separate interest in the process whether it’s to talk to the BoT or be involved in brainstorming sessions. There are many ways to contribute to help make Gallaudet a better university. Even being involved on discussion forums such as this.
“True civilization is where every man gives to every other every right that he claims for himself” - Robert Green Ingersoll.
Freedom of speech and freedom of association both come to mind.
Also, isn’t this an oxymoron—we want only one viewpoint on diversity?
That would be a dangerous cocktail on insisting on one viewpoint on diversity.
There is no diversity when there is only ONE perspective, ONE message, ONE group, etc.
Yeah. People often forget that true diversity includes diversity of THOUGHT.
~ Deaf Pundit
Lately, the postings on FSSA website are revealing that the coalition is not well structured to incorporate the views of faculty, staff, students, and alumni. It would be helpful for us to see the list of FSSA individual supporting members.
Yes, I agree. I think that would make a whole world of difference for FSSA to show a list of their supporting members. Additionally, regardless of this shared governance, we need to see who are the leaders of FSSA. It’s getting a bit messy. As visual supporters we are; we need to see names. It’s hard to see who’s who.
Like many other people who have already commented, I, too, have mixed feelings about this letter.
On one hand, the letter is not encouraging nor a sign of progress. It raises more questions than it makes points. It basically calls for a halt of all IPSAC activity while GUFSSA works on disparate views. It makes no other suggestions.
I find this unreasonable. The timeline isn’t forgiving; I wish the letter had come up with some more constructive avenue for the university (including the BOT) to take. I wonder why it is only the two women who have signed this letter; maybe it’s a show of solidarity among students of color, or maybe the rest of the FSSA declined to sign this letter. The letter does not clarify on that point.
I also question whether it is only the students of color (within the FSSA, the SBG, and the COSC) that have serious healing to do in regards to the effect of their disparate views. Many of us here at Gallaudet disagree on points both major and minor. Nonetheless we must find a way to band together, schisms notwithstanding, and make some progress. This letter seems to hold one schism more significant than the rest, and it also holds it as more obstructive.
Nonetheless, the letter does call to attention the BOT’s explicit recognition of the COSC. Until I read this letter, I thought this was a good thing. I don’t think anyone could blame me — FOUR students on the IPSAC?! What a huge opportunity for the community to truly have student input. Reading this letter did make me wonder: on what authority does the COSC get to have a voice? I first viewed it as an overt attempt to include underrepresented students. I now view it as official and rubber-stamped inclusion of a specific group of unknown membership and unknown intent.
Whether or not we can all join that group or stand behind it is unknown to me. That, and that alone, is what gave me pause after reading Delia and LaToya’s letter, not the “division within the community of students of color” they foresee or their charge that the SBG represents students of color and that, therefore, any other representation is counterproductive.
The SBG does NOT represent all students of color. And I take issue that “any other representation is counterproductive.” Counterproductive for whom? Sorry if it is inconvenient for you and SBG and GUFSSA, but there are folks out there who have different ideas than the monolithic viewpoint that the student leaders are apparently trying to impose on the rest of us.
This all is too reminiscent of Lenin’s quest for a one party state and look at how well THAT turned out.
Though that wasn’t part of what I was saying, yes, that’s another point to make. The SBG, in theory, is supposed to represent students of color simply because they’re also students. But do they, in fact, do a good job of that representation? I have a hunch, but no real evidence, that that’s not the case.
At the same time, there is also no evidence that the COSC can or will represent all students of color well either. But by giving the COSC representation on IPSAC, the BOT says otherwise.
Allison, you are right on target! CoSC is an opportunistic anti-protest splinter group organized by well-known persons who opposed the reform movement of Gallaudet. They only represent themselves.
If SBG did not treat black folks right then SBG needs to be reformed. Then CoSC should accept its role inside a reformed SBG body. Racial segregation is not a way to go in the 21st century.
You are mistaken - I never once said the COSC was anything, only that they were unknown (to me, anyway), and I questioned the BOT’s de facto recognition of them along with the entire faculty, staff, and student bodies. In fact, I never got the feeling they were anti-protest last month, only that they were anti-lockdown or anti-anything that disrupted classes.
Whether the SBG is truly doing its job of representing all students is a valid issue. Whether it should warrant a separate body of representation for students of color on the IPSAC, courtesy of the BOT…. of that, I’m not sure.
GRR — no edit feature. I’m getting my comments mixed up. When I wrote “In fact, I never got the feeling they were anti-protest last month, only that they were anti-lockdown or anti-anything that disrupted classes,” I was referring to the Concerned Students group that Bobby White was (is?) part of. I meant to write that in response to Zoltan’s next comment about Bobby White. Apologies for my incoherence. No coffee yet.
Do you remember Bobby White, the friend of David King, and the so-called ‘concerned student coalition’?
http://www.deafdc.com/blog/gue.....p-forward/
These bitter anti-protest initiative failed miserably. Now they try anouther route, that of racial discord and segregation. Is this right? No, I don’t thinkl they do it right. No way!
These are the very same folks who call themselves CoSC now. Is this not funny? If they can’t their way under one name, then they switch to another. Now that is what I call despicable opportunism! We should inform the Board about the past of this group. They should not have legitimate role in the selection committee for the permanent president.
The Board should have heeded the very honest letter and concerns of La Toya and Dalia, these uncompromisable and conscientious leaders of color of a noble reform movement for the future of Gallaudet University.
Excellent points Allison. Let’s say that you’re the Chair of the Gallaudet BOT. Your president is going to leave office on December 31st. You need to have an interim president in place before then.
There is no guarantee that the selected groups (other than COSC) will nominate a diverse body of representatives. What do you do? Perhaps the BOT felt that with limited time, they could rely on the COSC, an organization represented by elected leaders of diverse organizations, to represent the students of color.
Could we say that the SBG representative on the PSC that nominated three candidates last May represented students of color? Some may say no because he was a white male.
Could there have been a better way to represent people of color on the interim president search committee? Perhaps, with more time.