The April Fools edition of the Pioneer is ordinarily a great read. I enjoy the pieces students write, all in the spirit of humorously “putting it to” individuals in the institution who are legitimate targets of clever and cutting jokes … targets like me. Indeed, being the brunt of such jokes is an occupational hazard for any college official.
But when attempts at humor truly demean people on campus (as individuals and/or as members of groups), reinforce painfully negative historical stereotypes, and seriously misrepresent the character or the efforts of others on campus to the point of insulting them, then those attempts at humor fail.
What do I mean by “fail”? I mean that the joke wasn’t, and isn’t, funny. At all.
The article entitled “Indians Take Over Bridges’ Office” in the recent April Fools edition clearly represents an attempt at humor that failed. It didn’t fail because it displayed painful ignorance about the complexities of Whitman’s institutional commitment to diversity, or because it insulted our efforts to work toward greater racial and ethnic communication and understanding on campus. It did those things, I “got” the point, and I remain committed to doing this important work. Rather, I believe the article failed because: in its desire to make fun of me and our efforts: it revealed shockingly simplistic, stereotypical attitudes about our Native American students and their ancestors.
In describing a fictitious takeover of my office by tribal members, the article used characterizations of Native Americans as savages (“scalpings will increase”) and ridiculously misrepresented the name of an alleged local tribe (the “Walla Walla Navajo”). In doing so, the article continued the long, painful, and not-funny history of depicting Native Americans in the most negative light and conveying disrespect for, and misunderstanding of, their tribal organizations. Such characterizations reflect not only an astonishing lack of historical knowledge, but also an intellectual cruelty toward our current Native American students that must be acknowledged. These students are not only members of our college community; they are also individuals who daily carry the complex awareness of what it means to be “different” on our campus: they bear the burden of generations of mistreatment by whites as well as the pride they have in their tribal affiliations, their connections with their respective tribal traditions, and their sense of belonging within larger indigenous Native organizations. To impugn these students’ identity in the way the cartoon did: to reduce them to caricatures of themselves: was an inexcusable act.
In conjunction with perpetuating the humiliation endured by Native peoples throughout our history, the article also reinforces a variety racial and ethnic stereotypes that are inaccurate, yet stubbornly pervasive in our society. Among them: that Indians have senseless names like “PomPomPom,” that they are inclined toward violent actions like scalping and duck killing, and that their recreational activities include games involving “Peyote” and re-enacting the massacre of Custer at “Little Bighorn.” What is the point in this? It may be to make fun of our commitment to diversity, but the real harm lies elsewhere. These stereotypes tap into popular images in American culture, and these images are not likely to make non-Native Americans think in serious academic, egalitarian terms about Native Americans. Stereotypes play critical roles in shaping how individuals act toward one another. Indeed, studies in social psychology offer overwhelming support for the idea that racial inequalities and biases in our legal, health care and education systems are strongly correlated with negative racial and ethnic stereotypes held by judges, probation officers, physicians, nurses, and teachers. I believe that institutions of higher learning have the opportunity to intervene in, and critically challenge, stereotype-making processes. Yet reinforcing stereotypes at Whitman College through words, actions or publications such as the Pioneer strengthens their pernicious influence.
Is this what you want to do with your freedom of speech?
Ultimately, it is up to students what is published in the Pioneer. I suppose it is possible that some might naïvely believe, in writing a piece like this, that it would spark engaged and meaningful conversations about racial and ethnic issues on campus. But at what cost, in this way? Whose feelings must be insulted, whose sense of value must be trampled, in the pursuit of such a “goal”? It is difficult for me to understand how any Whitman student would actually believe such (il)logic. Doing so would be akin to believing that detonating a bomb in the middle of a crowd would foster important dialogues about peace and nonviolence.
A final point. In my remarks at Convocation in the fall, I stated the following:
“We are a community that welcomes all and that acknowledges and celebrates (our) differences. We learn from each other and no one should feel that they must hang their background, their life experience or their beliefs outside the door of entry into Whitman College.”
While the College will not and should not censure individuals for writing or speaking in ways that offend, many of us find absolutely no humor in words, spoken or written, that hurt, demean or in any way convey disrespect to others. Such words encourage people to leave Whitman rather than enter it.
