Show post
Rudy Martinez #racist campusreform.org

Texas State University’s student newspaper published an op-ed Tuesday telling “white people” that “your DNA is an abomination.”

“When I think of all the white people I’ve ever encountered—whether they’ve been professors, peers, lovers, friends, police officers, et cetera—there is perhaps only a dozen I would consider ‘decent,’” student columnist Rudy Martinez begins the op-ed, which The University Star has not posted on its website.

"When I think of all the white people I’ve ever encountered...there is perhaps only a dozen I would consider ‘decent.'"

The piece documents Martinez’s personal opinion of “whiteness” and “white people,” which he defines to include anyone who is “a descendant of those Europeans who chose to abandon their identity in search of something ‘new’—stolen land.”

Contending that racial categories “are used to subjugate non-white people,” Martinez complains that “in Texas, a bizarre state I have now inhabited for four years, I continuously meet individuals that either deny the existence of white privilege or fail to do something productive with it.”

Addressing white classmates, he asserts that “you were not born white,” but rather “became white” and “actively remain white” through “allegiance to a country that was never great.”

Martinez then warns white people that “the oppressive world you have built...is coming apart at the seams,” describing Donald Trump as the last gasp of white supremacy.

“Through the current political climate, in which a white supremacist inhabits the White House and those of his ilk would try to prove otherwise, I see white people as an aberration,” he declares. “Through a constant, ideological struggle in which we aim to deconstruct ‘whiteness’ and everything attached to it, we will win.”

Until then, however, Martinez offers one final message for white people.

“Remember this: I hate you because you shouldn’t exist,” he concludes. “You are both the dominant apparatus on the planet and the void in which all other cultures, upon meeting you, die.”

Student Body President Connor Clegg told Campus Reform that he believes the article is an “embarrassment” to his school.

“I'm the first person who will stand up for the First Amendment any day of the week,” he said, “but when students are required to pay into a school paper like this which espouses these racist views, then I certainly think some action needs to be taken against this so-called reporter/columnist.”

Clegg also pointed out that the editors of the Star share accountability for publishing the op-ed, suggesting they should have exercised more discretion before deciding to run it.

“Ultimately, editors are the gatekeepers who have final say over these things so we need to look at that as well,” he argued. “I mean the rhetoric sounded like something that would come out of Hitler's mouth—not to be extreme but it's undeniable. ‘I hate you because you shouldn't exist?’ I mean come on. Whoever let that type of material get published should certainly be looked at.”

The Star’s Editor-in-Chief, Denise Cervantes, addressed that line of reasoning in an editor’s note published on the paper’s website Tuesday night, though as of press time there was still no digital version of the original op-ed.

“The University Star’s opinion pages are a forum for students to express and debate ideas,” Cervantes noted. “While our publication does not endorse every opinion put forth by student columnists or guest contributors, as the editor I take responsibility for what is printed on our pages.”

While he acknowledged that the op-ed had generated “widespread criticism” from readers, including “many expressing that they find the author’s ideas to be racist,” Cervantes sought to portray the matter as a misunderstanding.

“The original intent of the column was to comment on the idea of race and racial identities. We acknowledge that the column could have been clearer in its message and that it has caused hurt within our campus community,” the editor’s note concluded. “We apologize and hope that we can move forward to a place of productive dialogue on ways to bring our community together.”

Not all students accept that argument, however, saying it should have been clear to the editors from the outset that the piece was intended primarily as a racial provocation.

Savannah Gabrielle, a Latina student and Turning Point USA member, told Campus Reform that she “couldn't believe that my university, [which] supposedly supports different cultures and races, actually published that in the newspaper,” saying, “I feel like the writer wrote it in order to gain recognition and hopefully create a resistance to the ‘white race,’ but what he ultimately created was the beginnings of another Hitler.”

Texas State student Andrew Homann, a former chief of staff for the Texas Federation of College Republicans who once served as Texas State Student Body President, offered a similar assessment, drawing a distinction between the author’s right to freely express his views and the newspaper’s right to exercise editorial discretion.

“I am saddened by the fact that The University Star, my school’s paper funded by tuition and tax dollars, would give a platform to racism, bigotry and hatred,” he told Campus Reform. “While this individual has every right to express his disgusting world-view, this rhetoric does not belong in any publication, anywhere.”

Show post
Minnesota Student Association #fundie campusreform.org

On Tuesday, November 10, the Minnesota Student Association (MSA)–the undergraduate student government at the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities (UMN)– rejected a resolution for a moment of recognition on future anniversaries of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

.....

At-large MSA representative and Director of Diversity and Inclusion David Algadi voiced severe criticism of the resolution. He also made sure to emphasize 9/11’s status as a national tragedy in his response.

“The passing of this resolution might make a space that is unsafe for students on campus even more unsafe,” said Algadi, “Islamophobia and racism fueled through that are alive and well.”

Algadi added that holding a moment of recognition over a tragedy committed by non-white perpetrators could increase racist attitudes on campus, asking, “When will we start having moments of silence for all of the times white folks have done something terrible?”

Contrary to Algadi, Cameron Holl, a Student Senator for the College of Liberal Arts, condemned the resolution’s failure as, “simply un-American.”

“There was no reason for any student not to vote on this resolution and much of the dissenting discussion was wildly speculative and unrelated to the resolution itself,” said Holl, “Additionally, the same people who voted to close discussion early didn’t offer any amendments or changes to the resolution to find compromise and do their due part as a member of forum, which I think shows a lack of effort and respect for other’s opinions and beliefs.”

University President Eric Kaler, MSA President Joelle Stangler, and MSA Vice President Abeer Syedah all supported the 9/11 moment of recognition resolution. All of this high level support seemingly meant very little, however, given the wide margin of the resolution’s defeat.

Show post
Cora Segal and Nicole Sullivan #conspiracy campusreform.org

A “Fat Justice and Feminism” seminar sponsored by Swarthmore College blamed Ronald Reagan for the suffering of fat people and accused the Body mass index (BMI) of having “direct links to a white supremacist.”

The workshop, taught by feminist activist Cora Segal and self-identified “angry, man-hating lesbian,” Nicole Sullivan, took place Thursday and sought to “address the ongoing exploitation and oppression of fat people.”

“There is no scientific consensus whatsoever that fat people need to exercise more, or that fat is unhealthy. There is no evidence that [being] fat causes diabetes. Medical professionals are informed of this so-called knowledge by lobbying groups.” Tweet This

The Swarthmore Independent reports that Segal and Sullivan took aim at a variety of subjects including President Ronald Reagan, who they claimed “f*cked everything up” for fat people—though the Independent drily reports that “[n]o specific evidence about Reagan’s perverse policies or animosity toward obese people was offered.”

Segal and Sullivan also argued in favor of “communism and socialism as viable alternatives to capitalism and exploitation” and against oppressive healthy eating and exercise programs. The two reportedly went so far as to claim that “every physician is bought off by lobbyists and the diet industry.”

“There is no scientific consensus whatsoever that fat people need to exercise more, or that fat is unhealthy. There is no evidence that [being] fat causes diabetes. Medical professionals are informed of this so-called knowledge by lobbying groups,” the pair argued.

Paige Willey, an attendee to the conference, told Campus Reform "the whole event had a negative tone to it."

"Their whole argument was based in hatred. Very unproductive."

The activists also purportedly argued that the BMI features “direct links to a white supremacist” and is therefore useless because it was created by a “white, male, French astronomer,” Adolphe Quetelet.

The event was funded by the Women's Resource Center, History Department, Gender and Sexuality Studies, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Interpretation Theory, and the Worth Health Center.

Show post
Unnamed Alabama State University Professors #racist campusreform.org

A white professor is suing Alabama State University (ASU) over claims the historically black university discriminated against him and his partner based on their race and sexual orientation.

According to the lawsuit filed in federal court on June 11, Dr. John Garland is suing the ASU and eight current and former employees for racially discriminating against applicants for university positions and subsequently targeting him when he retaliated against those practices.

“[Garland’s supervisor] expressed his opinion, stated or implied, that Dr. Garland did not belong at the University and was not ‘suited to [the University’s] type of students’ because Dr. Garland is not African-American,” the lawsuit states.

Garland, who is a member of the Choctaw Nation but is identified as white by colleagues, was hired by the university in August 2008 as an adjunct professor. In January 2009, Garland was rehired as an assistant professor for the Master of Rehabilitation Counseling Program in the Department of Rehabilitation Studies in the College of Health Sciences (COHS).

His white same-sex partner, Dr. Steven Chesbro, was hired at the university around that time. They legally married in Maryland in February 2013.

Chesbro is currently dean of COHS, which the lawsuit alleges that students and faculty commonly refer to as “the White House.” He has an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charge filed against the university.

“A small, powerful group at the University believes that Drs. Garland and Chesbro have no place at the University simply because of their non-African-American or non-Black identity,” the lawsuit reads. “This group, including combinations of the individually named Defendants, have conspired to destroy the careers and employment of these two dedicated teachers.”

“Some administrators and faculty welcome and support Drs. Garland and Chesbro as colleagues, while others reluctantly accept their presence as a necessary evil due to legal considerations,” the lawsuit continues.

A university spokesperson declined to comment on the case as it’s an ongoing lawsuit.

“ASU has just been served with a copy of the lawsuit today and since it concerns an on-going and active lawsuit, the University has no comment about it,” ASU officials told Campus Reform in a statement.

According to the lawsuit, Garland was promised that he would be “laterally” transferred to a different position in 2013 due to the tense he had with his supervisor, a violation Garland’s contract. The transfer reduced his salary by $23,000 per year.

Garland also alleges that the university operator would incorrectly inform callers that he “no longer works” at the university. A university operator provided Campus Reform with Garland’s email address—albeit an incorrect one—but refused to state whether or not the professor was still actively employed at the university.

The 46-year-old professor argues he is “entitled to reinstatement to his former position, or a comparable position, and the removal of derogatory, defamatory, and inaccurate material from his personnel file, back pay and lost benefits and ‘freedom to work in a non-discriminatory, non-retaliatory, and non-hostile environment.”

Garland's lawyer, Wayne Sabel, told Campus Reform that both men plan to stay at ASU but "will continue to seek a favorable resolution to the issues raised in the lawsuit and charge." Sabel said the case is expected to be litigated over the next year or so.

Neither Garland nor Chesbro responded to requests for comment from Campus Reform. An automated email from Garland said he is out of the office until after July 7.

According to the Montgomery Advertiser, this isn’t the first discrimination suit ASU has faced in federal court. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a sexual and racial discrimination verdict which awarded $1 million in back pay and lost wages to three female employees in September 2013.