Listen and learn

Editorial: Out of the woods

Earlier this month, the Bowdoin Outing Club (BOC) reported a budget deficit of $18,000 to the Student Activities Funding Committee (SAFC). The BOC is not technically in the red: the $18,000 it has overspent does not push it past its 2015-2016 operating budget. Without additional funding, though, the BOC will have to alter its plans for the remainder of the academic year. The number of trips per weekend will be reduced, less financial aid will be offered and students will be forced to supply their own transportation for some trips. Many worry that the repercussions of this could affect more than just those seeking to get away for the weekend. As Bowdoin Student Government (BSG) President Danny Mejia-Cruz ’16 said last week, “The BOC is one of the crowning joys and major selling points of the College and we don’t want them to go stagnant.”
Since this information became public, some have questioned how an oversight of this stature could occur. Part of the problem is circumstantial; the BOC receives their operating budget while the previous year’s expenditures are still being calculated. This means that any debt from the previous fiscal year is repaid with the next year’s operating budget—i.e. there’s little consequence for going over budget year after year.
However, the other part of the problem is procedural. The BOC receives the bulk of its money from the SAFC, a committee of eight students, who are responsible for determining how much money to allocate to “student-run” clubs, according to the BSG website. It gives operational budgets to 18 student-run organizations including $2,000 to the Bowdoin Food Co-op, $6,617.96 to the Men’s Ultimate Frisbee Team, and $24,010 to the Orient. This funding alone marks the College’s financial contributions to these student groups. However, there are several clubs that receive additional funding outside of the SAFC whose chief leadership responsibilities rest on non-students. These clubs—among which are the McKeen Center and the Outing Club—are inherently unlike “peer” organizations that request funding.
The SAFC gave the BOC over $69,000 for its 2015-2016 operational budget, but the BOC also received significant funds from an endowment, and a separate budget for the salaries of its non-student staff.
The issue is not the amount of funding the BOC has at its disposal—it is that with three non-student staff members holding its top leadership positions, the BOC is hardly a student-run organization. The BOC operates at a level of organizational complexity that is beyond what the SAFC was designed to oversee, and they should not be considered among student-run organizations. The SAFC’s responsibility should be focusing on clubs that are truly and fully student run. When the SAFC is tasked with the funding of organizations that are so massive in their operational capacities and so integral to the College’s image, it is forced to take on a task too large for a small group of students. The SAFC is not at fault—it finds itself in a difficult situation out of its control.
Given the confusing relationship the BOC has with the SAFC, it is clear that this funding model is flawed. Without funding large organizations such as the McKeen Center and the BOC, the SAFC could focus on the small student-run clubs—The Quill, Taiko and Club Tennis— that it is best-suited to work with. It would be able to devote more of its time and resources to allocating its funds properly among those clubs, while Bowdoin could recognize the McKeen Center or BOC as the large College-funded programs that they should be and deal with their funding separately and accordingly.
This editorial represents the majority view of the Bowdoin Orient’s editorial board, which is comprised of Julian Andrews, John Branch, Jono Gruber, Matthew Gutschenritter, Emma Peters, Meg Robbins, Nicole Wetsman, and Emily Weyrauch.

Editorial: Out of focus

The students who hosted the “tequila” party received a harsh punishment from the administration. While some of the disciplinary measures seem productive—they will participate in an educational program facilitated by a faculty member, attend Active Bystander training and write a letter or paper on these experiences—other aspects of their punishment seem arbitrary. They were forced to move out of their room in Stowe Hall and relocate to doubles in Chamberlain Hall and they are banned from Ivies and Spring Gala. What’s more, Bowdoin Student Government (BSG) is moving forward with impeachment proceedings against two of its members who attended the party. While we have concerns about the impeachment proceedings and believe that aspects of the current punishments miss the mark, the details of the disciplinary actions are not the most important parts of this conversation.
It is concerning that the disagreement over punitive measures seems to be overshadowing the larger-scale problems and tensions on campus, both related and tangential to the “tequila” party and its predecessors. It is troubling, too, that many seem to focus on rumors about the exact details of who wore what to the “tequila” party. This diversion is crowding out the opportunity to think critically about why some Latinx students (and other students of color) feel disrespected and hurt by this incident in the first place. Last week, we wrote that regardless of what one thinks of the rules or the ways they are enforced, the focus in the wake of an event like this should be on listening and creating an environment that is welcoming to students who have historically felt unwanted and disrespected here.
Free speech is a right, but it does not excuse us from from being held accountable for the things we say and do by others who are exercising the same right. Free speech is necessary and important. However, if you want to be taken seriously, you must be as willing to hear others’ opinions as you are to dole out your own.
Despite the conversations we’ve already had, it’s clear there is still no solid consensus on campus about what defines hurtful ethnic stereotyping. That said, the onus should not be placed only on students of color to repeatedly educate others about systemic oppression and racism. Every Bowdoin student should have the opportunity to grow and succeed in this institution without having to bear the additional burden of repeatedly explaining to others why they deserve the respect of their peers.
It is reasonable to be conflicted about some of the issues raised by the “tequila” party. There may be more questions than answers and we are unlikely to reach a campus-wide consensus. Students of color—who do not have a choice about whether or not to care about race at a white majority college—have repeatedly expressed that this conversation is inherently painful, uncomfortable and unavoidable. This discomfort is a choice that white students have the responsibility to lean into.
This editorial represents the majority view of the Bowdoin Orient’s editorial board, which is comprised of Julian Andrews, John Branch, Jono Gruber, Matthew Gutschenritter, Emma Peters, Meg Robbins, Nicole Wetsman and Emily Weyrauch.

Editorial

This piece represents the opinion of The Bowdoin Orient editorial board.

February 26, 2016

Last semester, it was impossible not to hear about the pain that ethnic stereotyping causes people of color on our campus. So why did it happen again?

On Wednesday night at the Bowdoin Student Government (BSG) public comment time, students from across campus described the emotional harm that ethnic stereotyping at a tequila-themed party caused them. Some described how they felt a joke was had at the expense of their culture’s complexity and richness. Others said that they feel excluded from the campus community as students of color, and that events like this and their aftermaths reinforce that sense of ostracization. A first year said that he regrets coming to Bowdoin in the first place. The pain in the room was palpable.

It is alarming that we have had three prominent incidents of this kind in just over a year. Each time, a similar dialogue has been sparked in response. It’s frustrating that the same conversations keep happening with many of the same participants, a disproportionate amount of whom are students of color. It speaks volumes that most of those in attendance at the tequila party weren’t at Wednesday’s BSG meeting to hear the responses of those affected by their event. This is one of the reasons why we are stuck in this cycle of offense and re-offense.

There are some rules you can break that will only harm yourself—from something as common as drinking hard alcohol to more serious offenses like plagiarism. There are some standards of conduct at Bowdoin that you may not agree with. You might think that the Social Code’s phrase “conduct unbecoming of a Bowdoin student” is too vague to mean anything.

However, the fallout from the tequila party isn’t about breaking rules or your relationship with the administration. It’s about basic empathy. It’s not about finding a loophole in the College’s codes of conduct, and it’s not about a debate over political correctness. It’s about respecting your peers as human beings and acknowledging what makes them feel unwelcome in our community.

If you’re confused about why people are mad, take the time to figure it out. Listen to what your peers are saying, learn from past mistakes, recognize that this behavior has a historic and political context and stop throwing these parties. This behavior is demeaning to your peers and it must end.

This editorial represents the majority view of the Bowdoin Orient’s editorial board, which is comprised of Julian Andrews, John Branch, Jono Gruber, Matthew Gutschenritter, Emma Peters, Meg Robbins, Nicole Wetsman and Emily Weyrauch.

Comments are permanently closed.