A Tale Of Two Campuses
By Keith Boykin, in sexuality
Friday, April 18 2003, 11:50AM
On some black college campuses, it is the best of times and the worst of times for gays and lesbians. Recent developments at Howard University and Morehouse College suggest some significant progress has been made, but much more needs to be done.
Howard University Makes Progress
Following a much publicized gay bashing incident by band members at Howard University last September, the school responded by taking several positive steps to address homophobia on campus.
The campus police voluntarily initiated a plan to train its officers how to identify hate crimes. Sargent Brett Parsons from the GLBT Unit of the Washington, D.C. Police Department conducted the training.
Howard also appointed two campus police officers to serve as liaisons to LGBT students. The liaisons have been so involved that members of the campus LGBT group, BLAGOSAH, said the officers voluntarily come to the group's meetings.
These changes happened not only with the support of the administration, but because of the leadership of the administration. Earlier this month, BLAGOSAH received notice that it had been selected by the school as the student organization of the year.
Sterling Washington, president of BLAGOSAH, said in an interview, "I'm happy with what's beginning to happen on campus." He should be. His group started with a dozen students in a room on October 6, 2000 and now has a membership almost three times as large. The group meets on campus every Friday, and is helping to create a more positive environment at Howard.
Morehouse College Surveys Alumni
In Atlanta, all-male Morehouse College has also been dealing with these issues. After a student was brutally beaten by another student with a baseball bat because he looked into a shower stall, LGBT students and local organizers rushed to respond. They held town hall meetings, met with administrators, spoke to the media, and focused the school's attention on the climate for gay men.
The school responded by creating a task force to recommend steps to improve the climate on campus, but there are new signs that the school may be playing it a bit too safe.
Last Monday, Morehouse College sent out an email message to its alumni asking for their opinions on the college's environment for gay men and bisexuals. The "Survey of Attitudes and Behaviors Toward Homosexuality" was voluntary and anonymous and was to be completed today, Friday, April 18. These are the actual questions.
How comfortable are you with homosexuals that you know?
How far should Morehouse go to separate heterosexuals and homosexuals in the residence halls?
How much should Morehouse punish individuals who abuse people because of their sexual orientation?
How comfortable are you with having homosexuals as friends?
To what degree do people in your social group speak favorably about homosexuals?
How safe do you think homosexual students feel on campus?
How "out" do you think homosexuals are on campus?
To what degree do you think homosexuality is immoral?
How much does the Morehouse environment allow students to be open about their homosexuality on campus?
To what extent should Morehouse devote extra resources to make sure that homosexuals are safe on campus?
To what degree does Morehouse's tradition of producing strong men affect your views about homosexuality?
To what degree do people talk openly about homosexuals on campus?
How much should homosexuals and heterosexuals be treated the same?
How much does Morehouse's reputation for enrolling homosexual men affect your pride in the College?
To what extent is it possible for homosexual and heterosexual Morehouse men to live together as brothers?
How much have you experienced negative encounters with people who are homosexual?
How much does Morehouse's emphasis on manhood affect how people react to the college?
What do you think is the level of hostility toward homosexuals on campus?
How much are homosexual and heterosexual students treated equally at Morehouse?
To what degree should the topic of homosexuality be incorporated into classroom discussions?
To what extent do your religious beliefs affect how you treat people who are homosexual?
How much should Morehouse allow students to be open about their homosexuality on campus?
The survey then ends with biographical information, including the respondent's sexual orientation.
In a letter to alumni that accompanied the survey, Morehouse President Walter E. Massey explained that last November, "in the aftermath of an assault by one Morehouse student on another that was alleged to have been motivated by homophobia, I established a Task Force on Tolerance and Diversity to identify best practices and recommend strategies the College can implement to ensure a safe and supportive environment for all students - straight and gay."
Right from the beginning, the tone of the letter, and the use of the term "alleged" may suggest some doubt about the true nature of the "gay bashing" incident. The President said the task force would use results of the survey and focus groups "to develop its recommendations, which will be sent directly to me."
That Morehouse would conduct a survey about sexual orientation is itself dramatic progress from the days when homosexuality was denied. Many of the questions will prove helpful to the task force evaluating the campus climate, but some of the questions are simply too leading and tendentious to be included at all.
The question of separating heterosexuals and homosexuals in the residence halls is one such example. Why is this even being discussed as an idea? Similarly, the question asking how much should Morehouse punish individuals who abuse people because of their sexual orientation. The question suggests that punishment may not be appropriate under the circumstances, and the tone itself sounds eerily reminiscent of one student last fall who felt the victim was the one who should have been punished.
The question about devoting "extra resources" almost sounds like the college thinks fighting hate crimes is a financial burden. That shouldn't be the case.
Another question also raised concerns: "To what degree do you think homosexuality is immoral?" That question almost suggests that the respondent should assume that homosexuality is immoral to some degree.
The larger question is why the college feels the need to survey its alumni about their biases before it takes action on homophobia on campus. Is this an effort to improve the campus climate or to prevent the loss of contributions?
Whatever the answer, Morehouse is to be commended for taking some action, but there still needs to be a lot more education about how to create a welcoming environment.
The college can begin that change by opening up the task force to openly gay and bisexual alumni, students and staff. Currently, Rev. Peter Gomes of Harvard University is the only openly gay member of the task force, according to press reports. That's a start, but if you really want to know how to make the campus more welcoming to gay and bisexual men, then you have to seriously involve them and engage them in the process.
Season of Hope, Season of Despair
Howard and Morehouse are two very different schools, but they stand as two of the most prestigious historically black colleges in the country. The experiences on those campuses may not be the same everywhere else, but they do raise questions for other schools to consider.
To fight prejudice and anti-gay bias, the entire school community needs to be engaged and involved. That means leadership from the top, and sometimes that requires pressure from the bottom.
Discuss this article on the message board
Comments conceal
Quentin
April 19 2003, 2:17PM
"That means leadership from the top, and sometimes that requires pressure from the bottom."
Are you aware of the delicious double entendre created in the last sentence?
*grins*
Nice article, though. While reading Morehouse's letter to alum, it struck me how the overall assumption was that the reader would not agree with homosexuality of homosexual men -- to use the phrasing. On one hand, I do understand it is simple heteronormativity, but on that same hand, I realize there is nothing simple about heteronormativity.
One of the dimensions I felt lost in your article was a discussion of the different environments of the two schools. One of the reasons why I believe Morehouse is conducting itself in its manner is because it is in the South. We don't talk about it much, but non-hetero sexuality works differently down there -- especially amongst Black people. In the South, a person can live quite comfortably in a closet with translucent walls. Being SGL/GBLT in the South means you can be open, while withholding, people can know, without "knowing."
The DC area is different with its strong SGL/GBLT community there. While the South exists on handling all "sensitive" information as politely and indirect as possible, a few states up, things differ. Southerners are not _very_ direct about uncomfortable things unless pushed. However, the very act of pushing could cause a reaction overcast with bitterness and anger for being pushed at all.
The geographical and cultural differences between the two schools is criteria needed in order to take the long view. In some ways, reaching out to alum from Morehouse is a brave step -- to assess its long unspoken history of SGL/GBT presences on the campus. Regardless of whether finances come into play, I feel that that step allows them to take a more in-depth look at the problem... which, in some ways, is very in keeping with the experience of being a Southerner.
Still, good read. Thank you.
Franz Freeman
April 22 2003, 6:55PM
I am absolutely INFURIATED over not only the course of events at Morehouse, but over official response to it by way of the questionnaire proffered to Morehouse alumni.
I consider the questions not only inflammatory, but invidiously inimical to anyone who may happen to promote tolerance over ignorance.
Let's consider Question 3: "How much should Morehouse punish individuals who abuse people because of their sexual orientation?"
The implications within this question are legion.
1) "How much" punishment suggests that no punishment at all could be an acceptable proposition, if the majority so believed.
2) "individuals who abuse people" contains a rather ambiguous constuct: abuse. What defines abuse, and who decides when an abuse has occurred?
3) "because of their sexual orientation" also implies that one sexual orientation is proper, and by negation, another is unacceptable. Underneath the question, is this what Morehouse believes? If so, they are in violation of their own code of ethics.
Therefore, such a question is fatally flawed. In fact, since when is there juridicial latitude in determining whether or not a crime exists? By definition, either an infraction of the law occurs, or it doesn't. In formal logic, we referred to this as "the law of the excluded middle."
As such, since Morehouse College is not in a legal position to decide whether a crime has occurred or not, neither have they the opportunity to decide "how much punishment" to mete. That's why we have statutes on the books and judges in the courts!
The Georgia hate-crime laws are clear. No crime against any person which stems from even the mere PERCEPTION of their homosexual orientation can go unprosecuted. Equal protection under the law renders this statute enforceable against anyone in violation of it.
Morehouse College should have consulted their General Counsel before having published such a precariously worded survey.
They'd better be glad this non-graduated alumnus never received a copy!
Thanks for your ear.
FRANZ
ps -- visit http://www.morehouse.edu/intranet/Policies_Procedures/PersonnelPolicies.pdf for details on Morehouse's Code of Ethics. You will be SHOCKED to discover the following language:
"Morehouse College bases its existence on certain fundamental principles. They include an appreciation for the ideals of justice, equality, democracy, liberation, the humane treatment of all people, and the development of the spiritual self and community."
I guess rather than "justice, equality, democracy, liberation," and humanity, the operative words really are "an appreciation" of such.
Chris
May 12 2003, 2:52PM
Thank you for your dedication to such issues. We need more LEADERS in our community taking on these issues and putting out the facts.
Sincerely,
Chris
In Cleveland
Leslye M. Huff, Esq.
February 17 2004, 1:59AM
I am an African American lesbian attorney practicing in Greater Cleveland. I am in a 21 year committed monogamous relationship.
It is crucial that African American lesbian, same-gender-loving people, gay men, and transgender folks do the difficult work of communicating across sexual orientations and genders with other African Americans.
We need to come out to the preachers, our parents, at school, at work, on the street corner, at the corner store, in the barber shop, at the hair dresser, in the choir, at the bar, to our friends, in sunday school, at the supermarket, in the "hood." I know it costs a lot to come out, but its worth the cost, particularly in the current political climate.
We need ideas for use in Cleveland about how to get more support from closeted African Americans and to build bridges across sexualities in the Black community. I am a board member of a local organization called BlackOut. Have any of you built gay/straight alliances among adults?