Let diversity grow

Last Wednesday evening, I walked into my Broadway dorm room to find a flier from one of the most under-represented minority groups on campus: the Columbia University College Republicans. The pink fluorescent flier, a parody on the “Safe Space” posters that hang on students’ dorm windows across campus in support of the LGBTQ community, included a page-long proclamation arguing for the abolishment of “safe spaces” for minorities on Columbia’s campus.

I applaud the College Republicans for being brave enough to touch the sensitive subject of “safe spaces.” I cannot, however, applaud their conclusions. Their argument rests on the flawed assumption that Columbia is a free-for-all in which no particular cultural mindset is dominant. From this assumption, they logically conclude that any university-endorsed attempt to help specific cultural groups is undeserved “special treatment.” Though Columbia has certainly progressed very far in recognizing the value of diverse minority cultures and perspectives, there is still a very clear Eurocentric and heterosexual dominant culture embedded in Columbia’s foundations. While these foundations are not inherently a bad thing, it is essential to make sure that the different perspectives on campus are expressly pointed out and their similarities and differences identified and celebrated.

In any discussion of the current status of minority student groups at Columbia, it is imperative to remember that until 40 years ago, Columbia was essentially a whites-only institution that did not recognize its homosexual population. When African Americans first started to come to Columbia in significant numbers and the gay community first began to emerge in the 1960s, they were entering an institution that had either rejected them or denied their existence on campus for over 200 years. Anytime new minority groups are allowed into mainstream culture that has previously excluded them, the minority group runs the risk of forfeiting its own unique culture in favor of the new, dominant one. When Stephen Donaldson helped create the “Gay Lounge” in 1967 and black students took over a first-floor room in Hartley Hall and renamed it the Malcolm X Lounge in 1970—“safe spaces” for these groups that still exist today—they were directly responding to this problem. They wanted to be included in the Columbia community, but did not want to give up totally their LGBTQ or African American identities.

Today, Columbia is not nearly as hostile to these two student groups as it was before the 1960s. However, this does not change the fact that this University was founded by white men of European descent; the names inscribed on the buildings are, with very few exceptions, those of white men of European descent; the works studied in the Core Curriculum were produced almost exclusively by white men of European descent; the architecture of the campus is neoclassical, an imitation of the cradle of white European culture; lastly, Columbia exists in a state that still denies gays their fundamental civil right to marry. There is no escaping Columbia’s white, European roots. This does not make Columbia an “evil” place—indeed, I am a huge proponent of a liberal arts education, I think Columbia looks really cool, I love the Core Curriculum (though its content could use a little bit of shaking up), and I find John Jay to be an inspiring figure. It is just important to remember that these are manifestations of a culture that is white and European at its core.

In the face of this dominant culture, it is essential to recognize that there are other extremely valuable cultures on this campus that have emerged from places other than Europe and white America, and that have made equally important contributions to the campus community. One of the best ways that Columbia has recognized these minority groups is by giving them the “safe space” to practice their own cultures on campus. This does not mean that these groups practice their cultures in exclusion of other cultures—this would violate University policy. Instead, these safe spaces are, as the description of the Malcolm X Lounge on the Office of Multicultural Affairs website says, “an intellectual, cultural and social safe haven for students from various backgrounds,” in which students can try to see society from that particular culture’s point of view. Anybody can get swipe access to these rooms, so long as they express an interest in either African American or LGBTQ culture. I am very much in favor of more communication between the different cultural groups on campus, and I would encourage these groups to reach out to the rest of campus and educate the community about their unique perspectives. However, by eliminating these safe spaces, Columbia would be eliminating the spaces in which the very real and very wonderful differences in cultural viewpoints that exist on Columbia’s campus can thrive.

Nick Bloom is a Columbia College sophomore majoring in English with a history concentration. He is a programmer at WKCR. Bursting Bubbles from the Inside runs alternate Tuesdays.