SGA Update

Last week, I attended the forums “Unpacking Chance the Rapper” and “Middentity.” I am impressed by the diversity of perspectives and I want to thank everyone for sharing them. Such disagreements and the critical exchanges are incredibly valuable. These conversations may cause discomfort, but actively challenging each other’s assumptions creates a stronger community. Thank you for your courage.

From the conversations that happened last week, it is clear that students, faculty and administrators interpreted Chance the Rapper’s lyrics in a variety of ways. Yes, words and opinions like those in Chance’s lyrics might make us feel unsafe, but we must think critically about the meaning of his statement. Do we believe Chance was inciting violence? Do we believe we are vulnerable to physical harm at the hands of our peers? Is our feeling of unsafety a result of Chance’s presence or the general atmosphere on our campus? I suspect that the source of this unsafety lies in our community. As such, we should focus on fixing our campus rather than demonizing an outsider.

One phenomenon I noticed during these discussions was the construction of moral hierarchies and absolutes. As soon as a position bears the label of absolute righteousness, to argue against it appears immoral. We should strive to avoid these types of constructions to ensure that all members of our community feel valued and heard. These issues are not black or white; they do not have right and wrong answers. Instead, their complexities lead to gray areas and disparate interpretations.

Another issue that we must grapple with in the wake of the Chance controversy is the relationship between freedom of speech and our community standards. We can condemn views that offend us, but silencing views that are incongruent with our own ideas breeds an environment of censorship. It suggests that disagreements of certain types cannot even be discussed. In the end, this policy breeds ignorance and frustration rather than productive dialogue and change.

As we move forward, we should recognize that these conversations might not result in definitive solutions to these vastly complex issues. The idea that all discussions must be productive is inherently flawed. An open dialogue does not produce a product; it generates insight and understanding. Instead of being divided by our identities, these conversations offer us opportunities to unite as a community through honesty.

I plan to continue engaging in these types of conversations. Please contact me if you have any ideas or initiatives you want to pursue.