When a female African American student was attacked in a hate crime last week, many students believed it was an attack on all African American students. On Monday, at least 300 students of all races and ethnicities marched from the Memorial Union to Mrak Hall to issue forth their “demands.”
Waiting for them was Chancellor Linda Katehi. The Chancellor, learning from the public relations debacle of five years ago, embraced the students both literally and figuratively. She issued an apology and offered fast action on all their demands, which she said were quite reasonable.
For the protesters it was a show of a variety of emotions – anger, sadness, and most of all determination.
ASUCD President Mariah Watson read a statement: “The black community here in Davis DOES NOT FEEL safe. Anti-blackness pervades every aspect of this society including academia.” She continued that the first priority of students should be to learn and incidents likes these “compromise our focus.”
“Our reality is that we are in danger,” Ms. Watson continued. She noted that many people questioned why black students were out protesting last quarter. “For anyone questioning whether anti-blackness is real, a member of our community was attacked.”
“As a leader of this community, as a part of this community, it hurts,” she said, the emotions coming through. She accused the university of “not prioritizing these needs until now.” Ms. Watson said, “I think it’s absolutely outrageous that it takes one of us getting physically attacked for this many people to show up for our community.”
Kathleen Hinkson and Kelechi Ohiri told the protesters that on February 15, a Monday, at 3 a.m., “a black female student was the target of a hate crime in West Village.” The three men responsible for the assault were apprehended and charged with two hate crimes.
Though these men were arrested, they said, questions remain in the black community as to “what can stop any of us from being the target of such an attack?” They asked, “Will we ever feel safe on this campus?”
Kelechi Ohiri explained, “The victim of this incident went through two minutes of automated messages before she was able to speak to an officer after she was attacked. Although campus police were helpful when they arrived and have taken this incident seriously, the wait time to speak to someone is concerning.”
She also expressed concern about “the lack of support for the victim and others impacted by this event.” She added, “As blacks students we face so many challenges being at the university, having to worry about our safety on a daily, nightly, hourly basis should not be one of them.”
Ms. Ohiri said that many students have resorted to the “buddy system” in the last week in order to feel safe on the campus.
Sydney DeLone the internal Vice President of the Black Student Union, was the one who would read the “demands” from the protesters. She stated that the hate crime “is not an isolated incident. It was just one of many that was actually reported and followed up upon.”
“We are demanding that our safety be a priority of the University of California, Davis and the UC System as a whole,” Ms. DeLone said.
First they called for emergency call boxes, stating that UC Davis “must re-invest in an emergency call box system. Campus aesthetics mean nothing in comparison to a life.” They called for call boxes not just in the Arboretum and West Village, but throughout the entire campus.
Second, they asked for improved lighting. “UC Davis must install more lights in areas of our campus,” she said. “Our lighting is subpar and therefore our safety remains an issue. It is irresponsible to have a campus as dark as ours when we have classes and labs that run way past sundown.” They also demanded that the university send a letter to the city of Davis “to also review their ordinances regarding lights and fixes.”
Third, safer transportation at night. “UC Davis must increase the current financial allocation to the following services: safe ride, Tispy Taxi, and Unitrans.”
Fourth, a UC-wide policy that addresses anti-blackness. “UC Davis must submit a letter of support urging the UC Regents to create a policy that targets anti-blackness in the UC. Part of the reason these incidents continue to occur at disproportionate rates is that our community is seen as less-than, uncared for, or not worthy of support.” She said, “In order to ensure our safety, you must validate our worth and experience.”
Fifth, a statement about the hate crime from West Village. She said that the management of West Village “has yet to release a statement about what has happened.” Ms. DeLone said it should be necessary for them to shed light on the situation as it occurred on their property.
Finally she called on the university to “review and finish the plans that were previously presented. We are grateful for our center, but we will not be appeased by a single building. Our experience, the hate, the racism will not be curbed because we have a center on campus.”
The Black Student Union gave the university “until February 29 to meet our demands.”
Chancellor Linda Katehi, following the student speeches, addressed the protesters, stating, “When one of our black students is attacked, we all are attacked.” She said, “I stand here next to you to just promise you one thing, that I will work as hard as I can to really make sure that you feel safe on our campus.”
She called the incident “heartbreaking” and expressed anger and frustration that the students were expressing concerns that they did not feel safe on the UC Davis campus.
“It is unacceptable that we as UC Davis, saying that we are here to educate our students and being proud for this institution, it is unacceptable that we cannot make you feel safe,” the Chancellor said. “That we cannot make you feel like you have the opportunity to learn like everybody else.”
“I want to apologize for that,” Linda Katehi said. “It is unacceptable that we as a university have failed you.” She added, “I cannot stand here and promise that tomorrow will undo all of these things. But I can promise to you that I will work as hard as I can to change things around here.”
She told the students, “I hope that students that come after you will have a different story to tell.”
Chancellor Katehi told the students that she and her staff will look hard at their demands, calling them “very reasonable,” and stating, “I have no reason to believe that we will not be able to really act on each one of them.”
The Chancellor was embraced following the speech by many of the leaders of the protest.
ASUCD President Mariah Watson explained what anti-blackness was and its history. She said, “It is the incident that happened at 3 a.m. on Monday morning outside of our home. It is professors telling us that our experiences that we bring here and our backgrounds don’t matter. That, once we enter this home, we’re just UC Davis students.” She said, “Excuse me, but tell that to my history.”
Ms. Watson criticized people who question the severity of the attack by saying, “Was it that bad? She didn’t die.” She criticized people for “ranking our oppression,” noting, “whether you’re spat at, called names or physically attacked, it’s still anti-black.”
She said of the demands, “They are not luxuries, they are necessities.”
Mariah Watson led the students in a moment of silence and then led them in a resounding chant of “Black Under Attack.”
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Who didn’t see this coming? We seem to have a group of black activists on campus who want to stir it up. They were just looking for any incident to get it going and three moronic non UCD student out-of-towners served it up to them on a platter.
Basically what you’re saying is that the student who was attacked, had it coming because a group of black activists in your view want to stir it up because they are tired of not feeling safe on their own campus, in their own community.
Nice try, I never said that at all, how did you get that out of what I wrote?
What I said was in my opinion they were primed to take any incident and run with it.
I’m sorry you come across as very insensitive here. I saw a lot of hurt and anger yesterday. People have the right to speak out and seek redress for grievances in this country without fear of retribution.
And that’s exactly what they’re doing, what retribution are you speaking of?
David wrote:
> People have the right to speak out and seek redress for
> grievances in this country without fear of retribution.
After telling BP that his comment is “very insensitive”…
Your words BP:
What I said was in my opinion they were primed to take any incident and run with it.
Is that a bad thing? Racism should NOT be tolerated in our community. The fact that people are all over it is a good thing, not a bad thing.
Who is tolerating racism here?
#crickets#
Sorry about crickets, somehow I missed it. The point I was making referred to the broader issue of black activism at UCD. It’s not a bad thing that black activists were all over a hate crime that happened on campus. Barack Palin implied that it was a bad thing.
BP
“We seem to have a group of black activists on campus who want to stir it up. They were just looking for any incident to get it going”
One could equally say that there are a group of white conservatives who are just looking for an article on black student concerns to be the first to post on the Vanguard in order to “get it going”.
This is a universal in human activities. When there is an issue that someone cares about, an incident that highlights that issue will always be used to draw attention to it. Is it not natural that if you do not feel safe, you will highlight the issue when there is an actual attack ? Do you not even have an obligation to do so ? This is called prevention. You can’t reverse this event. But perhaps is you call it out loudly enough, you can prevent the next one.
Let’s take the issue of rape. It is possible for men to be raped, but it happens to women with much greater frequency. I am sure that for a man, the threat of rape is much less on his mind if he walks across campus as I did many, many times far past dark. But men have mothers, wives, sisters, daughters….and thus rape is and should be an issue for all of us. But even as we acknowledge that women are by far numerically the greater targets, we do not pretend that it is not an issue for all or belittle those that bring up the issue with each new occurrence. Each time there is a rape, we don’t say “Well, men get raped too, so women’s fears shouldn’t be considered differently”.
Now let’s consider race. Yes, it is possible for a white student to be walking across campus and be the target of racial slurs, but it is much less likely to happen. I happen to feel that any individual walking across campus should be able to feel completely safe. But I am not about to deny that blacks, just like women, have an additional reason to feel fearful.
Just as one could say the Vanguard posts numerous articles on racism just to get it going, more readership and more comments.
As far as being the first comment I happen to wake up early and usually do post the first comments on most articles.
BP
I totally agree. And I support your right to make any comments that you see fit at whatever time works for you. I feel exactly the same way about the black student activists.
Actually your comments have sparked a side conversation on Facebook where several people have stated they don’t want to post here: “The reason I do not bother to enter discussion there” – Every time I have post an article on race, you, and a few others jump on it, often using pejoratives like “race baiting” and usually denying that there is a problem. So ironically it doesn’t bring in more readership, it turns people in the community off to coming here because they don’t feel safe.
Note the number of photos in this piece, how many appear posed/staged, and that all seem to bear a “copyright” logo. [which appears to be a new ‘twist’]
Geez – I killed myself sprinting to stay ahead of the march. Ask my wife, I’m paying for it today.
Really, so people “don’t feel safe” just writing their opinions on a blog? So are we all supposed to have the same feelings and opinions and just buy into someone else’s claims because they might feel offended by someone else’s opinions? Is that what free speech is all about? Like I stated earlier, Davis is not a racist community and I will speak out anytime it gets portrayed that way.
My point was in response to your comment that these articles generate readership, when in fact, it’s a mixed bag at best. It generates comments, but we don’t get a broad subsection of the population in those comments. It’s a mixed bag at best.
David, if you don’t want me to read or post on the Vanguard just say so. Believe me, my time can be better spent. I’ve noticed many of the conservative commenters have already disappeared, if a couple more leave the Vanguard can be bastion where liberals can congregate and agree with each other without “feeling unsafe” from any differing opinions. Just give me the word and I’m gone.
My point again was that these articles are not generating new readership. I publish these articles because I believe them important. I also value a diversity of opinion and do not wish the Vanguard to become an echo chamber of one thought or another.
Perhaps the “decrease in readership” is then the fault of the Vanguard by allowing for anonymous posters.
What if they are a “white” Jew? And please none of that “Jew ain’t a race” BS. Hate towards a group is hate towards a group.
Did UCD already give this group a ‘safe zone’ building on campus?
Which is of their demands do you consider unreasonable?
I think better lighting and call boxes for instant access to an authority are good for all students, not just students of color. But I don’t think campuses should have ‘safe zone’ buildings where one group or race segregate themselves off from the rest of the students if that’s what UCD now has.
Campuses and communities have these kinds of spaces for all sorts of different groups. How is it any different from say the Hillel House?
David wrote:
> How is it any different from say the Hillel House?
Students of ALL races and religions are welcome at the Davis Hillel House (and Davis Newman Center). The “blacks only” restrictions on many of the new centers are the first time I have seen demands for race restrictions on public buildings since “whites only” spaces became illegal in 1968.
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/25748/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-to-create-inclusive-campus-communities-first-create-safe-places/2016/01/15/069f3a66-bb94-11e5-829c-26ffb874a18d_story.html
Seriously?!?!!!
Read the Washington Post link
“Read the Washington Post link.”
DG,
I did. My reaction is those two student who didn’t welcome the other two students were a couple of assholes. I don’t care of what race.
And what is this “uncomfortable learning” BS?
But back to the Hillel House:
From Davis Wiki: “While Hillel focuses on Jewish programming, people of all backgrounds are always welcome.”
I had to check, because your implication was that Hillel House would exclude blacks who stopped by. Doesn’t appear so. Would Jews be welcome in the black safe space on campus? Why the difference?
I’ll tell you one thing for sure, and I can get a half-dozen black UCD alum to confirm this if you don’t believe me: when my sister was fighting for black rights on the UCD campus in the 60’s, there wasn’t a place that the black students met that she wouldn’t have been welcome with open arms.
My implication was not about exclusion it was about the necessity of safe spaces. You and others have chosen to focus on the former, while I have focused mainly on the latter. Focusing on the issue of exclusion is easy, but it ignores a more complex question – why do some feel the need to exclude. In the Jim Crow south, the issue of exclusion was a means to maintain superiority. The court at first allowed separate but equal and then punctured that sixty years later acknowledging separate is inherently unequal. This is a different issue, it’s an issue where exclusion is not meant to create superiority but rather to other a means of protection and safety. The common refrain I have heard over the years from African American students is one of vulnerability and discomfort in the community. Instead of focusing on exclusion, perhaps the better focus should be on the source of that discomfort so that people no longer need a safe space. But instead you and others seem find it much more simplistic to focus on effect rather than the cause.
My issue is with institutionalized segregation. Government should not be sanctioning exclusionary spaces. On the other side of the coin, anyone should be able to meet with whomever they wish in private space, unless it is to conspire to commit a heinous crime.
DG,
You asked:
You asked how it was any different from Hillel House. The difference, as I cited, is that Hillel House does not exclude, the so-called “safe space” you mentioned, apparently, excludes. To me, and I suspect to many, that is no minor difference.
So David, you find some article that somehow twists things to justify blacks not letting whites sit at their table but if it’s turned around and today if whites wouldn’t allow blacks at their table you know there would be #blackunderattack marches on the Quad.
Same applies if there was a white only safe house on campus.
Alan Miller is right, “Government should not be sanctioning exclusionary spaces.”
If you don’t believe that we should create exclusionary spaces, then you need to solve the other end of the equation.
So should whites have exclusionary safe places too if they feel unsafe?
Does the answer to that question solve the underlying problem here?
Do you not want to answer the question?
The question is irrelevant. The African American students want a safe space. The Chancellor is willing to give them that. If you don’t want them to have it, then you need an alternative solution. Look I’m not really keen on the notion of exclusionary spaces, but thus far, I have seen absolutely no willingness on your part (or any of the naysayers on here) to address the underlying problem. You’ve simply attempted to generate controversy on a very small part of the equation and avoiding dealing with the problem overall.
Who does?
Who does what?
BP wrote:
> Do you not want to answer the question?
If David answers BPs question I have a couple more:
1. Would you be OK with “Blacks Only” drinking fountains in the “Blacks Only” “safe spaces” paid for by taxpayers on campus?
2. Do you know if a black person has ever been charged with a “hate crime” in Davis?
David wrote:
> You’ve simply attempted to generate controversy
> on a very small part of the equation
Funny I don’t think it is a “small” issue and I bet you would’t either if UC Davis was building “whites only” “safe spaces” (with special “whites only” lunch counters)…
That’s fine if you don’t think this is a small issue and a diversion from the main topic. As I told BP, The African American students want a safe space. The Chancellor is willing to give them that. If you don’t want them to have it, then you need an alternative solution. Look I’m not really keen on the notion of exclusionary spaces, but thus far, I have seen absolutely no willingness on your part (or any of the naysayers on here) to address the underlying problem. So far, I haven’t seen one single suggestion from you on how to solve the problem.
Late to this discussion, have taken a break from the DVG. Is this young woman OK? What were her injuries?
I thought excluding other races in public places was illegal. Davis is monumentally safer than most or all urban areas.
I thought we had a “safe place” with the multicultural /gay / bi / trans-gendered multi-colored building near the Quad?
The irony here is that white and asian students are routinely attacked and threatened in Davis the past few years, and these attacks are given little attention. These attacks use knives, guns, shotguns, and other devices. Were there racial threats to this young woman?
This seems like an outgrowth of the Barack Obama / George Soros framework.
The police have been slow to release details so we don’t know the condition of the woman
No medical attention was needed.
There are call boxes in every new building on campus in the last 20 years, even outside. Straight to the UCPD. They don’t have phone booths all over, but never did.
TAPS also has a transportation service available on campus, not sure what they are complaining about there..
cru.ucdavis.,edu
Mobility assisitance shuttle
Mobility Assistance Program: The Mobility Assistance Shuttle (MAS) provides shuttle service to current UC Davis students, faculty, and staff with documented disabilities (temporary or permanent). The MAS provides on-campus rides to specified locations for academic or work-related purposes year-round. More information can be found at http://cru.ucdavis.edu/content.cfm?contentID=400 or by calling Campus Recreation and Unions at (530) 752-1730.
Will they be appeased by two buildings?
Three buildings?
Four buildings?
Five buildings?
All buildings?
You know the answer. No. This goes back to George Soro, Eric Holder, and Barack Obama. Chancellor Katehi feels vulnerable because of PepperGate.
How about a CPO Mrak?
It’s these kind of statements that piss me off. This isn’t true but that’s what will go out in the media and Davis will be portrayed and thought of as racist and unsafe. This is a very safe community and not racist by any stretch of the imagination. Sure there have been a few incidents by a very small number of morons but Davis is a very open minded and welcoming community to all. I will use my right to speak out any time I feel our community gets portrayed in this manner.
I’m willing to guess most of the folks at the rally disagree with you. Since you don’t walk in their shoes, I think you lack the standing to dispute their claims. You certainly are not citing evidence to validate your claims.
How can I cite evidence of something that isn’t there?
BP
“How can I cite evidence of something that isn’t there?”
I would propose that the presence of several hundred fellow citizens of the Davis/UCD community at this rally is evidence of what you claim “isn’t there”. Unless of course you are asserting that your personal experience trumps all of theirs.
Tia Will, do you really believe that racism is rampant in Davis or on campus?
Tia Will
Tia Will, you wrote this just a few days ago:
Tia Will, do you really believe that racism is rampant in Davis or on campus?
Again BP you are implying that there is an acceptable level of racism, and that there is racism going on right now in Davis. So ill ask again, what level of racism is acceptable? How many hate crimes are ok in our community?
After writing:
> People have the right to speak out and seek redress for
> grievances in this country without fear of retribution.
And basically telling BP he had no right to speak on the topic, he doubles down and again bashed BP by saying:
> I think you lack the standing to dispute their claims.
Then writes:
> You certainly are not citing evidence to validate your claims.
But does not offer any “evidence to validate his claims” and as usual avoids the direct answers of my simple questions…
And, neither you nor they walk in mine… your point?
Let me ask you this Barack Palin; What is the acceptable number of hate crimes in a community of our size? For me the answer is zero. People ought to have a right of self determination, to be who they are without fear of being judged solely on how they look. Can you imagine being attacked physically or harassed wherever you go? Can you imagine how frustrating it must be? Even a situation where store security follows you around “because you look suspicious”. That happens in my store all the time, and frankly it needs to stop. Here are your words
“Sure there have been a few incidents by a very small number of morons but Davis is a very open minded and welcoming community to all. I will use my right to speak out any time I feel our community gets portrayed in this manner”
It does not matter if there are fewer hate crimes committed in our community. The point is that THEY STILL HAPPEN, and if you arent outraged by it, then YOU are the problem, not the people bringing light to the issue here in the community. Did it ever occur to you that there are incidents that happen every single day that are not unlike this one?
So ill ask one more time BP; What is the acceptable number of hate crimes in our community? What level of racism should be tolerated? For me the answer is NONE!
The crime was not committed in the City of Davis, by all accounts… the crime was not committed by residents of Davis, by all accounts… and I’m supposed to be “out-raged” why?
The crime is reprehensible, no matter the actual degree of the offense… it does not matter to me if the victim is male/female, white/Black/Asian/Pacific Islander, etc… it does not matter to me if the victim was Christian/Jewish/Muslim/Sihk/agnostic/atheist/Scientologist… it is a crime… it also appears to be heavily alcohol-ingestion related, not necessarily ethnic/religious/gender based, although the first and third might be contributing factors…
Today’s was
BP
““The black community here in Davis DOES NOT FEEL safe. Anti-blackness pervades every aspect of this society including academia.”
“This isn’t true but that’s what will go out in the media and Davis will be portrayed and thought of as racist and unsafe.”
Please accept my question as sincere. I am unclear which of these sentences you feel is not true. I can understand your feeling that it is untrue that “anti-blackness pervades every aspect of this society including academia”. But I cannot imaging how you would know if the first sentence is true or not. It may be that the vast majority of the black community does not feel safe. I think that yesterday’s event demonstrates that a sizable number of the black student community honestly does not feel safe. So were you applying your comment to both sentences, or just to the latter ?
BP, unless we are to assume that a small liberal town is more racist, as well as the educational and leadership systems, all run by liberals.
> ASUCD President Mariah Watson read a statement,
> “The black community here in Davis DOES NOT FEEL safe
Questions for David (and any members of the #BlackUnderAttack group that might be reading this):
When was the last white on black attack in Davis?
Has a black person ever been killed in Davis?
Can you name a town in California with over 50,000 people where less blacks are attacked and/or killed?
“When was the last white on black attack in Davis?”
Monday, February 15.
“Has a black person ever been killed in Davis?”
http://www.davisenterprise.com/media-post/darnell-dorsey-and-cameron-morrison-photos/
“Can you name a town in California with over 50,000 people where less blacks are attacked and/or killed?”
Is that the standard? Ms. Watson criticized people who question the severity of the attack by saying, “Was it that bad? She didn’t die.” She criticized people for “ranking our oppression,” noting, “whether you’re spat at, called names or physically attacked, it’s still anti-black.”
I’ve read 80-odd comments here and the article, and still don’t know what her injuries are. Can someone please elaborate?
South of Davis
“When was the last white on black attack in Davis?
Has a black person ever been killed in Davis?
Can you name a town in California with over 50,000 people where less blacks are attacked and/or killed?”
I am not sure how any of this is relevant to Davis. This is where we live. This is where we need to feel safe. This is where we can and should take action. One attack is one too many. We do not need a death before we act on threats and violence.
SOD is merely after some facts, and to see if there is really a pattern here. A pattern might sway some.
I know a few decades back there was a murder on Black Family Day, I’m not sure of the ethnicity of the individuals.
Stepping away for a moment from the emotional content, and looking at one of the demands, and taking the emotion out of that and substituting something called reason.
City and campus-wide installation of call boxes. Local governments everywhere have deliberately done the opposite; police call boxes are gone, fire alarm boxes are gone, even the iconic phone booths are gone except for those iconic British models used an ornaments. The reason is simple, cell phones. Nobody was using call boxes anymore, months would elapse without even a single usage. So this obsolete communication system was removed and precious tax dollars were transferred to greater public needs.
Take a walk today and look for any grouping of people on campus and off. What is the one item that almost all of them have, and use constantly? Super markets, in vehicles, during meetings and lectures, somebody holding an active cell phone is omnipresent. How are cell phones with one-button contact to emergency services now inferior to a distraught victim running around trying to find a call box?
Ignoring the fact, as proponents do, that reverting back to the early 20th Century technology would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, the nagging question nobody addressed is, “Why?” Was this particular assault in any way compromised to the successful arrest and prosecution of the suspects–or prompt medical treatment to the victim–by the fact there was no call box on the campus?
The “lighting” issue is also “suspect”… the fact is, the human eye is ‘light sensitive’ [heard it called, visual purple]. Unless you ‘light up’ to extent of daylight, it doesn’t help that much… the human eye reacts best to ‘uniform’ lighting… check this yourself… during a full moon, with no artificial light sources can you see better at night than you can with a new moon, and full street lighting [except people/objects in immediate proximity to the light]?
Oh, and we can actually carry flashlights and or ‘head lamps’… so much for reducing “carbon footprint” if UCD adds lighting everywhere 24/7 to let folk feel safe…
Right there about light HP. The super bright streetlights actually make it harder to see into the shadowed areas. Since you can’t light every space, the knee-jerk “increase lighting” makes no real sense.
As well, John Trojdil or whatever (sorry I don’t remember his last name) but he’s been on a campaign for years to get the city to keep just the lights lit in the fixtures it already has, and city council members have been calling for this, and we can’t even get a few bulbs changed. How are we going to install a huge wave of lights and with what money, and will it actually do anything real? Do we really want Davis to have a doubling or tripling of lights at night?
More lighting at ankle level would help on the sidewalks as far as safety goes but a flashlight does work well. Over lighting ends up making the victim more visible and the predator virtually invisible–the light is shining on the victim whose eyes are then not night adapted and the darkess outside the pool of light becomes impenetrable which results in the call for even more lighting. Also the people who want more lighting downtown should want lower height lights not the very high streetlights and effective lighting at crosswalks. Remember the lighting industry projects a 6% increase in lighting every year forever. That means unless we resist the impluse to increase lighting in response to every problem, we will eliminate the dark entirely to the detriment of humans and other living things.
Amen!
Not only that, but if you carry a 3-cell mag-lite, you’ve got a pretty good self-defense tool…
Another thing about the lighting issue coming out of this: I have biked through every corner of West Village, and it is one of the most lit up (overlit?) places in all of Davis. I can’t imagine that somehow increasing lighting there even more would make that area any safer. I really hope Katehi doesn’t sterilize the campus with bright white light just because she is giving in to every demand as “reasonable” for political points. She blew it with the Pepper Spray and now she’s blowing it the other direction by giving in too fast and too much as a political response.
The link David posted didn’t have a photo of the guy on trial for “attacking a black person”:
http://www.davisenterprise.com/local-news/crime-fire-courts/trial-for-davis-child-assault-suspect-postponed-after-all/
and I think David knew my question was asking when (before the most recent attack where non Davis residents came to town and attacked someone) a white in Davis “attacked” a black person (it seems like if blacks are really “under attack” Davis should have a long list)…
You asked when the last time a black was killed in Davis, the answer appears to be two years ago.
Was that charged as a “hate crime”? If not, why not?
It was a boyfriend who beat his girlfriend’s toddler.
Well, it would seem that shaking a child to death demonstrates a higher level of “hate” than what we’ve seen so far in the recent UCD crime…
Oh, forgot… only white males can commit a “hate crime”… my bad…
Do I need to cite the penal code for hate crime or are you just being difficult here?
David… a link to the definition of a hate crime would indeed be useful… thx…
The definition is written into Penal Code 422.55(a): “”Hate crime” means a criminal act committed, in whole or in part, because of one or more of the following actual or perceived characteristics of the victim: (1) Disability. (2) Gender. (3) Nationality. (4) Race or ethnicity. (5) Religion. (6) Sexual orientation. (7) Association with a person or group with one or more of these actual or perceived characteristics.”
Link: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=422.55-422.57
“before the most recent attack where non Davis residents came to town and attacked someone”
The students yesterday said there have been a number of incidents.
“Davis should have a long list)…”
Why isn’t a short list enough?
Do you guys even have a clue how ridiculous you sound? Your never ending potshots at the victims of racism or the oppressed reveal a sad truth about this community. Your denial of the obvious is more damaging to the reputation of Davis than anything these young people did by peacefully and respectfully expressing their outrage and asking for constructive changes.
I’m glad that Katehi gets it. To her credit she has consistently spoken out against racism of all sorts. Even before Mizzou shined a spotlight, on how abused minority students feel and how their needs were being ignored institutionally, Katehi was out there condemning every incident. I don’t think your line about her having learned from the pepper spray incident is on the mark. Whatever errors she has made in other areas as far as I can tell she has consistently shown leadership by addressing the issues of racism on campus and not ignoring them.
It’s one thing to recognize and declare racism is reprehensible (which it is)… another matter entirely to agree about how it should be fought/eliminated… some of the “solutions” actually have fostered racism… yet one of the True (as I see it) solutions, modelling/training youth to be “color-blind”, is one of the ones most rejected by those who want to ‘pick at scabs’… actually, ‘color aware’ might be OK, but just like some folk are male, some are female… we should be aware of that… but not inappropriately act on those differences…
BP: Seriously? Are you just attempting to state something contrary to what is going on? There have in fact been incidents on campus targeting Blacks. There have also been incidents targeting Jews, Muslims, gay people and Mexicans. I’m sure there are some groups I have missed, but the point is that the UCD campus (just like any campus in the U.S.) is a microcosm of society and the hateful acts we hear and see reported daily on the news. Does this mean we stand by and watch as these acts of hate and violence occur? Absolutely not.
Please, let us show some respect and empathy. A female student was attacked. The jerks that did this did not “hand the students a reason to protest.” They are hateful people that harmed a student, a person, because of the color of her skin. How sick is that?
To say that the students are a group of activists waiting for something to happen really minimizes the problem that does exist. Quite frankly it does not show care, concern or empathy for others. You’re better than that.
Yeah, you missed ‘whites’ and ‘Christians’ who have been targeted, albeit to a lesser extent… ask any “Whitey” who lives in the Hunter’s Pt area in SF and travels outside after dark… oh, they don’t do it, as they know the risks… the SC shooting… were they targeted because they were Black, or because because they were devout Christians? We’ll have to wait until that case is tried to figure that one out… obviously the perp was not ‘Christian’…
Violence is bad [but sometimes necessary]… racism is wrong/bad…
hpierce
“were they targeted because they were Black, or because because they were devout Christians?”
Well, since the SC shooter was quoted as saying that he wanted to shoot “black people” in the hopes of starting a race war, I am not sure why we are discussing whether or not there was a racist component of this act regardless of what his feelings about Christians may be.
I find it interesting that you left off attacks against European- and Asian-Americans, which have become quite common and violent.
Thank you for your extensive coverage of this issue. As the writers of these two articles on #BUA are probably experiencing- you will even get verbally attacked if you even mention the issue, raise awareness, or shed light on the black experience. These comments only prove the point the students are trying to make. Black students aren’t supported. A woman was beat and people are mad that black students are protesting? And you all only see racism in terms of black people being killed? Wow. White people don’t experience racism so they don’t think it exists. Yet, they don’t even have the sympathy to commiserate with something they don’t understand. It is the same as a man turning to a woman and saying “childbirth doesn’t hurt! I feel fine!”. Except that institutional racism is still scoffed at. Don’t tell the Black community how to feel. Your comments are where the real racism is. That is all I’m going to say. Thanks again Vanguard. Another great article. You’ve challenged your white counterparts and shown support where there previously has been none. Keep on!
“A woman was beat and people are mad that black students are protesting?”
According to the Enterprise Feb 17 article: “They were throwing items at the victim and at the same time barraging her with racial slurs,” They were charged with assault so whatever they were throwing apparently did not make contact, otherwise the charges would have been assault and battery. It is a bit of a stretch to call this a beating.
I do however understand how this woman would feel unsafe. If I as a senior citizen were walking on campus and was accosted by several men who began telling me for example to get my wrinkly old fat ass off campus or something similar while throwing garbage in my direction, I too would be seriously concerned about my safety.
Oops…I cannot tell at this point whether she was physically assaulted or not. The range of media articles are calling it everything from attempted assault to assault and battery to battery. Whatever it actually was does not in my eyes diminish the seriousness of the of the offensive behavior.
You assume that whites (or asians) don’t experience racism, because you have been indoctrinated to believe such, and young people uniformly regurgitate the same ideology and thought processes.
Back at you… all ‘whites’, particularly white males, and/or those who do not share your views are inherently “racist”, right?
Old North Davis here, stepping in. I typically refrain from engaging in these conversations, but when you have ignorant comments that claim that some like David is trying to stir the pot on race when there supposedly “are none” is ridiculous.
1. As you may have learned by now, we do not live in a post-racial society nor in a color-blind society. Look around you, there is a reason why people group themselves by race because American history itself was so racially stratified, in terms of slavery, eugenics, xenophobia and beyond. Are we to ignore all of that now? Absolutely not. History does not go away, and its history lingers. Unfortunately bigotry does as well (thanks to those Davisites and Yolo County folks you only hear vocal here trolling on the internet and never vocal in public).
2. I attended the protest, I was present. Why? I’m not Black, in fact I’m White. When someone is assaulted, that’s an issue. Period. When someone is assaulted because of their race, that’s an issue. Period. When someone is assaulted because of their gender, that’s an issue. Period. And lastly, when someone is assaulted because of their multiple intersecting identities – race and gender – that’s an issue. I don’t seek to be blind in a society where I know that privilege and oppression exists. It’s all around me. The privilege I have that I can go to any restaurant downtown where a homeless person cannot. The privilege I have that I know that I won’t be followed in a store where a person of color might be. Please, please, please, just consider opening up your eyes…a bit.
3. Lastly (and I have to work today, hope you do too), the demands that these Black students made in response to the Hate Crime attacking the Black Woman were completely and fully reasonable. As a person who has been on college campuses in a range of capacities for over a decade, it’s safe to say that I’ve seen and been to a range of protests. Typically demands are outlandish and ideological (such as establish 3 new academic departments by next quarter). These demands were the complete opposite. More lighting on campus? Typically doable. (Hell, we need more lighting in town, especially in Old North Davis). More call boxes? Absolutely. (The concept of taking away call boxes/phone boxes in the first place was ridiculous, as they are and should be a public resource). Safer transportation at night? Yes, please. A statement from West Village? About time, this is your complex, deal with it. And a statement about anti-Blackness? Let’s. Time for us to stop ignoring that we live in a racialized society and embrace it.
Ok, stepping off my high horse…er bicycle…but I appreciate the forum to share my views. More than anything, I appreciate the Davis Vanguard for bringing light these stories which are often ignored elsewhere.
Until next time,
Old North Davis
I was there too. My view mirrors yours, although I lack your eloquence. Thank you for that 🙂
I am constantly amazed at the lack of compassion in these conversations. When one of my neighbors says somebody attacked him, we listen to his story and concerns. The intentional ignorance of many recent events, posted here and in other local media, always treated by some posters as a”prank” or “Trying to stir things up” , is more than sufficient proof of racism in Davis. I hope Madame Katehi takes this seriously and acts with due dispatch. Until then unity is the greatest weapon.
So many incidents where there have been claims that a group of young white men assaulted a black woman have turned out to be fabricated, yet in each case the social justice people after having come out in mass demanding nothing less than a lynching of the accused, have never apologized for their extreme over-reaction.
As I understand we don’t have a complete report from the police for what actually happened.
And since we are having to endure all this hyped up protesting before the report is actually finalized, it is a good bit of evidence along with all the other similar “incidences” to justify suspicion that the claims of this woman might have been fabricated, or at least inflated, to get the attention.
Maybe not. Maybe so. We just don’t know.
And here are some related questions.
So you say that you don’t feel safe? Safe from what? Safe from certain words? Safe from people saying things about you?
Where is the line for what is reasonable to expect?
When I was in my 20s I was super skinny, and had long hair and played in a rock band. Bad things were said about me routinely here in lovely and accepting Davis. Did it make me feel unsafe? No, it irritated me. But then I was already a person that understood that there is a percentage of ignorant and insecure people out there and it would be a waste of my precious four-twenties of life to let them cause me any long-lasting grief or pain. My goal was to work on my own personal self-confidence to build a titanium shell around myself to prevent me from becoming a wounded animal.
And what if you are not a like-able person? Do you as a person hold no responsibility for behaving in ways that makes others not like you and want to say bad things about you?
In nature, a wounded animal invites the predator. We can attempt to remove all predators from society, but are we really better served propping up all the wounded animals this way? It cannot be done anyway. There will always be predators.
It seems that all the wounded animals have organized. It is clear that they are all angry, sad, confused, frustrated and demanding… something. Unfortunately they don’t have any concrete ideas for making themselves feel better… other than venting at external events that cause the slightest dip in their existing misery.
A massive protest over three drunk idiots from out of town saying bad things to someone that lives here. My oh my, what have we degraded to?
I’m really fine working to get rid of as many predators as we can. But I think we also should be working to repair all those wounded animals. Neither are positive.
Please look up innuendo in the dictionary.
Please look up all the examples of fabricated or fake “racist” incidents on college campuses and in general. Then look up victim mentality.
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/20532/
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/07/31/hate-crime-hoaxes-present-burdens-lessons-college-campuses
http://www.dailywire.com/news/1044/top-10-false-claims-racism-campus-aaron-bandler
http://www.fakehatecrimes.org/
I think social justice liberals are creating monsters that they cannot control.
It reminds me of those old feminists that have sons that then have their lives destroyed by young feminists on campus.
If you open up Pandora’s Box the escaped demons might come back to eat your face.
Frankly
“My goal was to work on my own personal self-confidence to build a titanium shell around myself to prevent me from becoming a wounded animal.”
Are you insinuating that this young woman is a “wounded animal” ? What would you have had her do Frankly, engage her titanium shell and use her superpowers to fight off three men at once?
This is the height of victim blaming. We have a long tradition of this with women in our culture. Growing up I was taught that if I went out in a short skirt or tight clothing, I was asking for trouble. I was taught that I should not walk on the street alone after dark. I was taught that while it was just natural that men would cat call or come on to me, it was my fault if I drew unwanted attention by smiling or speaking to a man I did not know. This is victimization, not victim mentality and it is very alive and real in our society. I know because as a woman, I have experienced it first hand. Now I am not black, so I cannot speak to the black experience. But you seem to blame anyone who has not shared your experience for the simple fact that they are not you.
A woman is assaulted in some fashion and you bash her for not being stronger. Your constant references to “victim mentality” which by the way is not a recognized psychologic diagnosis but merely a construct used by those who are more powerful to refute claims of those who are legitimately victimized either by other individuals, or by society institutionally has nothing but ideology behind it.
Just disgusting. You are way, way better than this.
I see a great KDRT show coming our way!
This is much of the explanation for what is going on today.
http://www.wnd.com/2015/10/victim-mentality-causing-millennial-meltdown/
You’re so right, glad that there was nothing else wrong with the other generations, especially the Baby Boomers…oh wait…
Millennials are the offspring of the Baby Boomers. Nuff said.
Every generation has to overcome their own ignorance. Unfortunately, this takes most of a lifetime for some, a jail sentence for others.
Parents would be better served if they talked to their kids more at ages when they show signs of this activity.
Lots of people on this site think they have the problem solved. Incorrect, because each new generation needs to learn the same simple concept.
Ugh. I witnessed a teenager label an 8-year-old racist for no good reason. Eight.
Barack Palin: You asked Tia whether she thought racism was rampant on campus or in Davis. Is Tia really the person to ask? With all due respect to Tia, I don’t think she’s the person to ask.
While I respect the thought that one incident is too much, I think the true measure is whether it is pervasive and in my mind, based on conversations with literally hundreds of people of color, including family members, the answer is yes and it takes its place in many many venues and many forums.
There were at least 300 kids out there yesterday who I have no doubt would answer yes.
If you want to know if Davis is the Jim Crow South, then the answer is no. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t a problem.
A significant percentage of “the problem” could be the lack of coping skills for what are average human encounters and incidences that are redirected as racial incidents as a pressure release needed because of the inability to cope.
Just wondering… how many similar incidents where three drunken out of town idiots were yelling slurs at a white girl never got reported as a hate crime?
What does it even mean that UC Regents must validate a group’s worth and experience? And why not all groups?
So what are these plans that were previously presented?
Frankly-
Did you seriously just state that the problem with racism is that people lack the coping skills to deal with racism? The problem with racism, institutional or otherwise is racism, not dealing with it.
You are jumping ahead. First you have to define what you mean by “racism”.
Racism is…
Do you have another meaning?
Frankly
“A significant percentage of “the problem” could be the lack of coping skills for what are average human encounters and incidences that are redirected as racial incidents as a pressure release needed because of the inability to cope.”
I would be very interested to hear just what “coping skills” you feel might be useful to a young woman being assaulted by three men ?
I am aware of, and witness to, clear acts of racism on campus and within the City. I’m not just talking about bullying or negative comments thrown out. I’m referring to instances of a false arrest based on the description of “a black man” and another when police were summoned to deal with “the black man” trying to access an office where he had an appointment. These were both devastating and life-changing incidents in the students’ lives. I can fully understand why black students don’t feel comfortable in our community and on campus and we must strive to do better. These students don’t need a hate crime to stir them up. With new people coming to Davis from all over the World, this has to be a constant conversation on campus and should be within the City. I’m impressed by the students’ demands. They are asking for changes that will benefit all students and are very reasonable. With all of the challenges these students face, if these things will help, then I fully support addressing these problems quickly.
That is the question.
Do these things help?
I think not.
I think they do the opposite. And all you can write is “if”?
And “what” is the solution these people are demanding? For us to round up all the potential drunken white males and lock them away so the world feels safe from fear of bad words? For the cops to stand down? For us to implement a crime-and-punishment quota system with respect to race? Should the cops arrest more Asians because they appear to be under-represented in crime and punishment? Would that make all the non-Asians feel safer?
This “feel safe” thing is funny. Because I would say that there are more people running fearful from persecution over some de minimis comment or word just added to the hyper-sensitive speech code rule book.
It is the age of the campus crybully and they are supported by the liberal professor bully and the social justice passive-aggressive bully.
Thick skin is the new sanctioned bias. The tables have turned and the new bully is really those claiming to be the victim.
Maybe a good first step is to acknowledge that incidents occur, not blame the victims, not put the onus for ‘dealing with’ these situations on the victims, and not insinuate that they are lying. That would be a good starting point. Then perhaps your other suggestions would be of interest to the community.
Do you think those three drunk idiots from out of town targeted this girl because she was black, or is it possible that it was just circumstantial and that a white, Latino or Asian girl could have just as easily been the target of their disgusting behavior?
Until I know the answer to this question I cannot accept this as a racist hate crime… which is the entire debate here.
Other than that I have complete empathy for what this girl went through as a result of the actions of these three drunken idiots from out of town assuming the story is true and accurate.
How many times have we heard on the Vanguard that people are innocent until proven guilty? If these guys did what they’re accused of then throw the book at them, but they deserve to have their day in court and their side of the story heard.
Frankly: I pose this question to you: Who exactly is being bullied when people protest racism?
To name a few…
Lawrence Summers
Tom Wolfe
Mary Spellman
Scott Eckern
Brendan Eich
Law enforcement.
Why do you think Katehi and other UCD brass actually attends these things. If she does not then “off with her head!”
And generally, the country… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyphenated_American
Because it’s basically part of her job description to represent the university in public. Also, I’d guess she actually believes the things she says on this topic.
I’m sure Katehi saw what happened to the Mizzou president.
You actually didnt answer the question. Those are names of people who got backlash for their opposition to gay rights. So ill ask again, who is hurt by people protesting racism?
A big difference from:
As you asked earlier.
I did answer the question.
Nope. That is incorrect.
And let’s add:
Mike Pressler, Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and David Evans
Justice4All:
Let’s try this again…
You said:
Since you are claiming racism, I asked you to define it.
BP
“Tia Will, do you really believe that racism is rampant in Davis or on campus?”
Rampant is a very non specific term. I believe that even one episode like the noose on campus, or a depiction of a burning cross or racial slurs shouted is evidence of the existence of racism, and as long as these incidents occur, I believe that we have more to do other than deny we have a problem because we are not the recipients of those actions.
I am white and I am not in law enforcement, so I don’t have a lot of black people coming to me with anecdotes about how they are subject to racist words and actions. I will share with you what I have seen throughout my career. At the Davis Medical Office Building we see people of all races. I have never once had a white person state to me that they felt their care might have been different because of their race. I have had many black women who on the first appointment with me are quite reticent and withdrawn. But on the second, and subsequent visits I have heard many times how happy they were to have me as their doctor because they knew when they came to see me that they would get treated as an equal and that their care would be the same as anyone else’s regardless of race. Now you might want to claim that all these women are displaying a “victim mentality” and that they have no basis for the belief that they may receive different treatment because they are black. If so, I would encourage you to look up differential medical treatment by race. This is a very complex issue with multiple determinants so I would recommend that you check a variety of articles to get an overview of where we have improved in care to our minority patients ( and there are many areas of improvement) but there are areas in which there is still much to be done to assure equality.
Once again Tia Will, this is what you wrote just last week:
This post sounds like you don’t think Davis is very racist at all.
BP
“This post sounds like you don’t think Davis is very racist at all.”
Not at all. My post was about my personal experience. It is true, I experience no racism at all. But then, I am white and so hardly a voice for the black experience in Davis.
I agree, racism is much less evident in Davis than other communities I’ve lived in too.
Funny that the Sac State campus has a whole department to deal with this: Education and Student Retention. They find kids eligible for college and help them get in, AND then help them cope with the new lifestyles. Wonder if they have a similar department at UCD?
No, at UCD they find people who qualify from out-of-state and help them get in, and then they get a wheel barrow to help with their fat, out-of-state wallets.
That’s what the Chancellor has elected to do to balance the budget. California kids be damned.. I have the memos.
Those wheel barrows of out-of-state money can help pay for all the new call boxes, spotlights and guard towers.
They do. But like a lot of things it’s underfunded.
So if I’m walking across the Nugget Soccer Fields at night and get mugged should I then demand that the city install call phones and lighting so I don’t feel unsafe?
Time to light up the Arboretum 24/7 like a football field in the name of stamping out racism! Damn the wildlife!
BP
“Tia Will, you wrote this just a few days ago:”
Yes, I did. And your point would be ? Perhaps it has escaped your attention that I am not a young black female university student ? Just because I have a given experience, does not mean that I think that my experience is definitive for that of the entire citizenry of Davis. I am fully aware that the experiences of others likely….no certainly…..differ from my own. I can both recognize my own blessings while holding in my mind that not everyone shares all of my blessings.
While Frankly and Barack Palin were busy downplaying racism and hate crimes in Davis, this was happening
http://www.abc10.com/news/local/davis/davis-police-identify-another-assault-as-hate-crime/53244618
The suspect sounds like one of our drunken crazy local homeless downtown derelicts.
Should we start posting every black on white crime that happens in Davis?
So it’s not racist because of the perpetrator being local? or drunk? or homeless? What is your point?
Did I say that Don? Did I say the suspect wasn’t a racist? He’s most likely a crazy downtown drunk, we have our fair share. Why do people on the Vanguard insist on trying to put words in other people’s mouths?
How about you answer my question: what was your point, Barack Palin? Any particular reason for all the characterizations, any pertinence to the topic at hand?
Give it up Don, you jumped to a wrong conclusion that I inferred it wasn’t racist when I never stated any such thing. The fact that it happened at Amtrak by a guy that the suspect said was drunk with a bottle in his hand leads me to believe that it was one of our local crazy downtown drunks. Other than that I don’t owe you any explanations.
The whole point of the post was to refute the notion that hate crimes dont happen in Davis. Literally, people were posting this yesterday WHILE A HATE CRIME WAS BEING COMMITTED IN DAVIS. Instead of actually admitting that there is a racism problem that needs address, the posters on this page proceed to blame other marginalized people in our community instead of simply acknowledging the problem and working towards a solution.
Don’t shout, it makes me feel “unsafe”.
Justice4All, looks like there is a lot of racism in little liberal towns.
BP, they couldn’t comprehend that. Soros, Holder, and Obama don’t go that deep.
I’d also be curious to know how many of these students are studying engineering or economics, or enrolled in ethnic, black, or social studies.
TBD wrote:
> I’d also be curious to know how many of these students
> are studying engineering or economics
Maybe some are from “Crowds on Demand”…
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-02-23/truman-show-usa-concerned-citizens-townhall-meetings-exposed-paid-actors
TBD
“I’d also be curious to know how many of these students are studying engineering or economics, or enrolled in ethnic, black, or social studies.”
Honest question. Why ?
I majored in anthropology and political science as an undergrad and ended up as a gynecologist. I truly don’t understand your point.
How would you expect to learn this information?
Professional complainers / victims are more likely to come from the one group than the other.
(Throw the book at the louts.)
BP
“Should we start posting every black on white crime that happens in Davis?”
A better plan in my opinion than pretending that such episodes do not occur against blacks by whites. Feel free to make a compilation and post it. I will be happy to decry every one that you manage to document.
Sounds like a drunk racist asshole.
A feel a Vanguard article being prepared for morning!
I think we should ask some student leaders from 20 or 30 years ago if they think racism was such a huge problem.
I saw, sometimes, people who were uncomfortable. When you come from Oakland, New York, or LA, and you move to an almost rural college, predominantly white / asian town with high academic standards, there are a different cultural norms. There is a difference between being uncomfortable and racist. (But I guess if the DV wants to sell Davis as a liberal racist mecca, so be it.) I had to go through a growth process myself, and dealth with feelins uncomfortable (at times), and I’m not black.
So much for a black president moving us forward. This past weekend he skipped the funeral of Supreme Court Justice Antonio Scalia, more proof that he is petty and hasn’t brought people together.
David wrote:
> ASUCD President Mariah Watson addressed the protesters
It looks like the majority of kids at “racist” UC Davis not only voted for Obama, but they also voted for a black female to be their school president…
P.S. I was on the campaign staff of a black friend who ran for and won the election to become AS President when I was an undergrad more than 30 years ago.
Much truth in your account… irony abounds…
Someone pointed out last week how few students actually vote. But theoretically speaking, Obama could win 52-48 with those opposing him all being racist (again this is theoretical to make the point), if that were the case, would you say this isn’t a racist country because *only* 48% are racist? To me at least, 48% would be frighteningly high. My point: neither Obama’s election nor Mariah’s proves there aren’t pockets of racism either in this country or on the campus. (And to add to that point Obama only got 43 percent of the white vote in 2008 and 39% in 2012, so that puts potential share of white racists upwards of 55%.)
You must have sucked at statistics.
How so? Obama only got 39% of the white vote in 2012, Romney got 59%.
My point: Name one person who has commented here today who you believe doesn’t believe there are “pockets” of racism either in this country or on the campus.
I have no idea, because any time we run a race story, you, hpierce, Barack Palin, South of Davis, and Frankly are pushing back on every angle you can find to avoid the implication that there may be a problem.
Wrong. Now answer the question: who, exactly, do you believe posts to this forum who does not believe there are “pockets” of racism?
Using your reasoning Obama got over 90% of the black vote so I guess one could also say that puts the potential share of black racists upwards of 90%.
You’ve completely missed the context of the point. The point is response to the idea that because the students voted for an African American ASUCD they are not racist. I’m simply pointing out, using the Obama example, as to why that is a specious argument.
David:
A LOT more than 48% of the white people in Davis voted for Obama. I have yet to meet a single Davis resident that did not vote for Obama (I have never met Frankly).
We all know there are a few racists (of ALL races) in town, but I don’t get why you keep beating the everyone hates black people drum.
P.S. I’m surprised you say the “potential share of white racists” is “only” 55% because you leave out the the “potential white racists” who voted for Obama…
You are shifting the analogy which was that just because Obama won, doesn’t preclude there being a racist problem.
82% of Davis voted for Obama. But you still have those that want to portray Davis as being a racist community.
Because what I have seen is that there are people who are happy and proud to cast their vote for an African American president and yet turn their back on issues of local concern. In part, this is why I prefer in a lot of cases to use the term unconscious or implicit bias rather than racism. Obviously a hate crime is a manifestation of overt racism, so we are talking about different aspects of a much deeper problem.
I voted for Obama the first time.
David’s attempt at logic is foolish and offensive and takes us backwards, just like Obama’s rhetoric and actions. I didn’t vote for Obama but would vote for Dr. Carson, Thomas Sowell, or others. They can’t do worse than what we’ve had the past 7 years, or even 15 years.
45% of America didn’t vote for Carter, and 60% didn’t vote for Clinton, are they potential racists too? If one’s attempt at logis is this simpleton and unrefined, at least compare the differential of votes between Carter and Obama. I don’t have the numbers here, but maybe comparing these extreme liberals would show that potentially 2 or 3% might potentially have some component of potential racial bias.
It was senator Obama who said – so naively – that “The white man’s greed run’s a world in need.” This past weekend he could have been a ‘uniter’ by attending the funeral of SCJ Antonio Scalia, but he didn’t. I’m sure radical SCJ Ruth Bader Ginsburg was there, as she was close friends with our deceased Justice. Obama again shows himself to be petty, and recently cracked a joke about his death. He makes Carter look good.
Why does no one seem to understand that the point of my exercise was that electoral victory does not preclude a sizable presence of racists?
I agree with you.
In terms of bias, David routinely demonstrates the type that primarily exists in Davis.
SOD, who was that? Jeffrey Parker? I know we also had a ASUCD VP who was very conservative, and is now a doctor.
TBD wrote:
> SOD, who was that? Jeffrey Parker?
I went to another public school in CA (and was never involved with ASUCD)…
One aspect of the comments here is how far some posters are willing to go to come up with alternative explanations for what appears to be straightforward racist incidents.
A hanging noose becomes a prank. Racist slurs are because they were drunk. An assaulted woman is a “wounded animal” or has a “victim mentality”. A racially based ( by name calling) physical attack is because the perpetrator is “crazy” as is the shooting of nine black members of a prayer group by a man who states he “wanted to kill blacks”. Now a gathering of several hundred students is claimed ( with no evidence presented ) to possibly be from “Crowds on Demand”. Accusers in some instances have made false accusations, so of course it is likely that this has occurred here.
Apparently many have not given any consideration to Occam’s Razor. “ Suppose there exist two explanations for an occurrence. In this case the simpler one is usually better.”
Sometimes a racially based attack is just that, racially based. Many times women are harassed simply because the perpetrator is misogynistic. Alcohol is no excuse. It doesn’t put racist or misogynistic thoughts in people’s heads de novo. It simply lowers inhibitions so that people are more likely to express what is already in their hearts and heads. I would favor less excuse making for the perpetrators and more compassion for their targets.
I agree with that.
I disagree with that. Alcohol changes a whole person into a piece of that person, it does not lower their inhibitions as such, that is far too simplistic. If a person becomes someone they don’t like, it their responsibility not to drink, so yes, alcohol is no excuse. Similar a person who believes you shouldn’t drive drunk gets plastered and hops in their car and kills a family of four. Alcohol is no excuse, and it was their responsibility not to drive. It doesn’t mean the alcohol lowered their inhibitions to became the murderer they really were. It means the alcohol depressed their decent side, and their animal, dumb-sh*t side took over the steering wheel.
Subtle, but important.
South of Davis and pierce,
Even after I became a gynecologist, I continued to draw unwanted “compliments” and other comments of the “hey, baby….” variety from men on the street who seemed to feel that because I was a woman and they were men that completely out of line comments would be welcomed. Individual success in no way means that there is not misogyny in our society. I believe the same to be true of racism.
Is “hey baby” really an example of misogyny?
Or is it a lower class, crass, or urban way of potentially striking up a conversation with a woman? The odds may be very low, but it has to work occasionally, or they wouldn’t do it.
What is the female equivalent cat-call? Oh wait, women don’t cat-call generally. Hmmm.
Here’s the first comment in the comments section of the WashPo. I quote it because I largely agree with it and it is well stated:
Dave McHann
1/23/2016 5:52 AM PST
The example of the black students preferring to eat together as usual than with someone they don’t know is perfectly understandable. Honestly, having to suddenly make conversation with a stranger instead of enjoying lunch with your friends is a common experience. But designating areas that are out of bounds to others and calling them “safe spaces” implies that outside of that area you are unsafe due to the prospect of interacting with others. It’s an example of the campus culture which counter productively enforces group identity, hypersensitivity, aversion to engage alternative ideas and a significantly unreasonable standard of what is offensive.
Certainly students should be free to form groups with others around a common trait or interest. But the concept of “safe spaces” is divisive and not a reality in the real world which campus is not.
I wish I could go back in time and warn the person who coined the term “micro aggression” about what it would do. Our “progressive” campus culture has gotten to the point that we look for things to be offended by. The term reflects a reverse of what offensive always used to mean. The intent behind the action or statement used to be the judgment of offense. In other words what was offensive was the spirt of the person. Now emotional response, whether reasonable or not is the basis of what is offensive. The term should be “reverse aggression” because the person who claims offense is the aggressor and their target becomes the victim. It’s ironic that for the most part, people in our melting pot society get along just fine in the workplace and in common interaction. Yet, in the most “progressive” institutions in our society, the college campus, is constant charges of racism, sexism, marginalization, intimidation etc etc.
The term “trigger warning” really makes me laugh. I served six years in the Marine Corps infantry before college. In boot camp, the drill instructors would literally scream the most offensive , emotionally hurtful things they could imagine. There was purpose behind it and eventually it became background noise.
That’s one unhealthy extreme but I believe this “trigger warning” nonsense is even more unhealthy. Frankly, if someone needs to be warned that they might find something uncomfortable, that person is emotionally stunted.
Sadly, it’s the educators at these institutions to teach young adults who have created this childish, immature culture that doesn’t prepare for the real world. In fact it stunts the maturity and mentality needed for adulthood
Note: These were from the WashPo article DG sited above in the comments section.
Alan, thanks for posting Dave McHann’s comment.
Davis and UC Davis are not perfect but when someone says they don’t fee “safe” here I’m sad for them since when they go to a big city with WAY more racists and murderers who shoot people every week they will probably end up locked up in a “safe space” unable to work.
Perhaps it would be better to explore why they don’t feel safe here rather than disputing it.
While I don’t deny that some people may feel they don’t feel safe it also seems that “unsafe” is the new term being used by activists to push their agenda. It’s been used in several demonstrations in the last year.
Perhaps true. A few years ago what I heard from many students was “uncomfortable” rather than “unsafe.” Of course it was mostly in reaction to social interactions rather than a violent assault.
Here’s two articles on how the terms of “unsafe” and “safe spaces” are now being used by activists:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/260744/crymobs-crybullying-and-lefts-whiny-war-speech-daniel-greenfield
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/how-campus-activists-are-weaponizing-the-safe-space/415080/
David wrote:
> Perhaps it would be better to explore why they
> don’t feel safe here rather than disputing it.
I am not “disputing” it I just said that I am sad that some people would feel “unsafe” in the very safe city most of have decided to live in…
We have great schools here and yet in 2012, we had a number of parents of mixed race students tell us that they put their kids elsewhere because of school climate. Just because we are low crime, does not necessarily mean people feel safe, especially when “safe” has multiple meanings.
I want to probe the issue of “unsafe” so that we can better a better handle on what it means. Obviously you see it through the lens of physical threat as manifested in the crime rate, I think it has more to do with the climate that has seemingly escalated in the last few years with a few graffiti based incidents to now a few physical assaults.
I sometimes felt unsafe using the Lower Freeborn bathroom as a student because of alleged gay males cruising there for random hookups – in the toilet stalls.
“I sometimes felt unsafe using the Lower Freeborn bathroom as a student because of alleged gay males cruising there for random hookups – in the toilet stalls.”
Has anyone told you, you’re weird?
Well, that was a rousing discussion on the term “unsafe”.
AM–excellent post of Wash. Post article–didn’t know the mainstream media still allowed such heretical articles to be published!
Here’s another comment from the WashPo:
PerSpektiv
1/23/2016 12:55 AM PST
As a Northwestern graduate – and as a university faculty member – I have to say I’m embarrassed by this opinion piece. There are at least three things wrong with Schapiro’s argument. First, once you’ve accepted the principle of providing “safe places” that are defined phenomenologically – that is, by those who want to feel “safe” – there is no logical way to set limits on how far this can be carried. The potential number of safe places approaches infinity.
Second, it is fundamentally wrong to teach young people that they should find “safety” in self-segregation. Safety in a complex, diverse, and sometimes unforgiving society (and world) necessarily inheres in building a committed, unwavering sense of community, not in nurturing periodic retreats into isolation.
Third – and this is to me the most distressing thing about Schapiro’s comments – his notion of “uncomfortable” learning implicitly denigrates one of the most important elements in higher education. No learning is “uncomfortable” to someone with an open mind. A critical mission of the university is to create open, curious minds, and equip them with the tools to fill that openness with reliable knowledge.
Schapiro’s argument that one needs a regular dose of “comfort” in order to be fortified to confront uncomfortable realities sounds much like advocating a stiff drink (Southern Comfort?) before an unpleasant encounter that might turn out badly. I hope that’s not where the learning process is headed.
Northwestern is a distinguished institution. It has had strong leadership on the academic side of the house, headed by the chief academic officer – the Provost. University presidents serve at the top of the administrative hierarchy, but not the academic. Northwestern has a history of selecting presidents who are respected in their scholarly fields, noncontroversial, and effective as fund-raisers, but who are not visionary institutional leaders. Morton Schapiro continues that honored tradition.
These photographs of the large groups are beautiful and stirring. Great job, David!
“, because any time we run a race story, you, hpierce, Barack Palin, South of Davis, and Frankly are pushing back on every angle you can find to avoid the implication that there may be a problem.”
“Perhaps it would be better to explore why they don’t feel safe here rather than disputing it.”
That’s not “The Davis Way.” Deflection and denial are much less enervating (especially to the amygdala-centric minds) than engagement and exploration. The absence of honest, decent concern from the usual suspects can lead one to but a singular conclusion about their values. I hope the new voices that have arisen will continue to read and comment on this matter and not be stifled by the execrable rantings of the fearful white right. I am assured by academic friends who live there, that Davisites are, by and large, harmless liberal humanistic hedonists. One would hope that their concern for human rights goes beyond lip service, though their tolerance for even tiny inconveniences seems limited.
Oh, please B, do for once cut the flowery language and just state outright what your singular conclusion about “their” values is. Go ahead, say it. I dare you.
That’s right, the word is: Mensch!
We came dangerously close to one of the Davis Vanguard’s distinguished anonymous commenters #cough# #choke# #gasp# #wheeez# calling another in our loving community a mensch. I sincerely thank all involved for your wise decision to spare the challenge to my humility.
Dangerously close.
OK, Since Don cut my humorous response, as predicted, I think you’re edited
[moderator] Please read and follow the Vanguard Comments policy.
https://davisvanguard.org/about-us/comment-policy/
Alan
“I disagree with that. Alcohol changes a whole person into a piece of that person, it does not lower their inhibitions as such, that is far too simplistic.”
Perhaps i was unclear. I did not mean to imply that disinhibition is all that alcohol does. It has a great many effects on the human body and brain. It does disinhibit. It also affects muscular tone and coordination, slurs speech and alters speech patterns, affects judgment making an individual less aware of their limitations and less able to accurately assess risk. I am sure it has many other effects both physiologic and psychologic. But what it does not do is to introduce new ideas. What ever comes out during a drunken episode was already present in that individual although they may be able to mask it very well in the sober state and indeed may not even be aware it is there. Yes, they may look like a “different person” but I guarantee you that the alcohol did not in and of itself imbue them with new knowledge or new attitudes.
Interesting that we will persecute an inebriated male to the full extent of the law for saying hurtful things, but a female cannot be expected to use good judgement in deciding to have sex once she has had a few drinks.
There is some gender equality for you!
Are Democrats involved in a war on men?
Great point, the word hypocrites comes to mind.
Maybe this is making white students feel unsafe on their campus:
http://louderwithcrowder.com/17392-2/#.Vs4JEcdlk3g
And they just keep on proving my assertions.
I’m genuinely puzzled by this concept of ‘safe spaces’ as some kind of segregated space where only one race is allowed to go, ostensibly so that they can feel safe (?did I get that right?)
Are blacks or hispanics less safe on college campuses than are whites or asians?
We can gather campus crime data from across UC for the past couple of decades–list campus violent crime victim rates by race (of course also listing the % of campus student population of each race), as well as violent crime perpetrator rates by race (also listing the % of campus student population of each race).
In this way we can see the violent crime rates, both victim and perpetrator, broken into racial categories, for an objective measure of these rates. Do these statistics show that one race of students is less safe than other races of students, or that one race of students commits violent crimes significantly more than other races of students? (My guess is not)
It should not be that difficult to compile such campus crime stats.
Until then it’s hard to be sure whether or not the perceived unsafeness of students of any one particular race is based on objective reality, or if it has been a manufactured perception that is not supported by data. If it is primarily perception based, with data that contradicts the reported perception of bias, then find out what is creating that false perception, and deal with it–surely we want our perceptions to accurately reflect reality?
“Are blacks or hispanics less safe on college campuses than are whites or asians?” “It should not be that difficult to compile such campus crime stats.”
To start with, you appear to be thinking of safety strictly in terms of crime. That’s moving you in the wrong direction. Last night at the Davis Human Relations Commission meeting, there were a couple of interesting comments that bear some further exploration. One from an African American who said that a lot of blacks in Davis are almost fearful of going to public places. The other based on a conversation with some Latino Students, there is seems to be a similar fear in that community as well. This is fear of crime. Looking at crime is not going to get us to an understanding of this fear. I think it is multi-leveled, but it is not based on a fear of violent attack.
I know of whites who are also fearful of going to public places. That’s not something that only certain races feel, that’s something everyone can feel.
That’s kind of like responding to an issue of women’s safety going out at night with respect to sexual assaults by saying, I know men who are afraid to go out at night. Why downplay the concerns?
apples and oranges
Just an analogy about your tactic. You don’t negate someone’s concerns by broadening the pool.