Spring Break
Too much fuss over Chavez
- Page 1 of 1
While we support groups' rights to distribute flyers on campus advocating their opinions, the reasons behind the decision of OLE's executive board to do so Tuesday night reflect naïve and inaccurate assumptions about the student body and about their purpose as a minority organization.
In a letter sent to Dean of Student Life Susan Boswell when the MSE event was first announced, OLE explained their disappointment with the Symposium's choice of Chavez as a speaker and enumerated a number of reasons why Chavez was not an appropriate selection.
First, the group complained that their own "suggestions [for Hispanic speakers] were not adequately taken into consideration [by the Symposium], as the Chairs expressed to us that they had 'never heard of these people before.'"
OLE must realize that they do not have veto power over whether another group can bring a specific Latino speaker to campus. That the Symposium requested the group's input on which speaker to invite was a considerate gesture, but by no means a necessary one. OLE's purpose as a group should not be to guard against potentially controversial speakers.
Should every group that asks an African-American to speak on campus consult the Black Student Union (BSU) to make sure that the group approves of the speaker's opinions? Should the president of South Asian Students at Hopkins (SASH) get a phone call every time a visitor from the Indian sub-continent arrives at Homewood?
These propositions are clearly ridiculous, as is the fact that OLE thinks they should have a monopoly on Latino speakers who come to Hopkins. If anything, allowing a single group to dictate the agenda of all members of a specific ethnicity that visit Hopkins could contribute to the appearance that every person of that descent has the same opinion - an incorrect generalization OLE claims it wants to avoid.
In addition, OLE's letter makes further complaints to Boswell that advance unfounded assumptions.
"Many students come to this school having never encountered a Latino, and many more come with negative stereotypes and prejudices," the letter goes on to state. "Linda Chavez will be on the stage of Shriver speaking for all Latinos due to the lack of awareness of our community on the Hopkins campus."
OLE assumes a great ignorance on the part of the Hopkins community by stating that they will believe Chavez speaks for all Hispanics simply because she is Hispanic. Does OLE forget that many students come from geographic locales with large Hispanic populations (California, New Jersey, New York) and have certainly had enough interaction with Latinos to know that not all of them share the same opinions?
Even if only a small percentage of the Hopkins community had had previous contact with Latinos, to presuppose all students share the same negative stereotypes about them would undoubtedly be an erroneous assumption.
If anyone is ignorant here, it is OLE. They fail to take into account the diverse experiences and backgrounds of their peers and assume that a close-minded attitude prevails among community members.
In their letter, OLE states that "in our experience, many Hopkins students do not seek out or pay attention to the perspectives of Latinos on issues such as affirmative action and bilingual education."
Perhaps OLE should do some research of their own to ensure that they understand the broad perspectives of their own classmates before making sweeping accusations of a lack of sensitivity to Latino interests.