Those on the email list should have an email that contains information regarding the BSU Room situation. This is the place where you can list all questions and/or concerns and they will be answered as best as possible. If you are a member of the BSU and have not received the email please contact Danielle at bsu@jhu.edu.
Real Talk
The Official Blog of the Johns Hopkins University Black Student Union
Real Responses
 | Belita R. T. Frankli… on President Elect Mwende Mu… |
 | Nikon D7000 Where To… on Derion Albert, an afterth… |
 | Cheap Computer Desks on Derion Albert, an afterth… |
Blog at WordPress.com.Ben Eastaugh and Chris Sternal-Johnson.
Real Talk 
28 comments
Comments feed for this article
July 26, 2009 at 9:20 pm
Patrick B
Well after seeing the email, I still get the feeling that the room is no longer ours. Even though they say we have priority on scheduling, I do not think we can do the things we normally did in the room. No more studying, grilling, parties..etc. I guess the compromise is the best we can do right now, but it is not what we actually want.
July 27, 2009 at 11:04 pm
EWA
Quite honestly I am displeased with the compromise because I feel as if Hopkins is outdoing itself to rid the BSU of its room. It suggests we effectively lose the room without proper compensation. Although it may start out that we have access, it will not be hard for Hopkins to limit BSU access and increase control of the room over time. When I look at the BSU room history, it riles me up to know that the BSU will lose its room for some “unsaid” reason. One of the main reasons that BSU can even contest Hopkins currently is because BSU has sole access and control of the room. So if that is lost, where is terms of position of power will that leave the future BSU?
My initial reaction is that the BSU should continue to fight for more exclusivity to the room. I am very suspicious of Hopkins’ true intentions (since it tried to capture the BSU room mid-summer when no one is on campus). Thus, I am concerned with Hopkins holding up their end of the bargain (whatever that may be).
On the flip side, the BSU may not get a better offer than this. Although, it would look pretty darn bad for Hopkins to kick the BSU completely with no place to go.
July 27, 2009 at 11:07 pm
David
I’m not satisfied. I think we need to keep fighting. I can’t really say we, cus i haven’t done anything but they r giving the BSU a bad deal.
July 28, 2009 at 11:44 am
Danielle
I completely agree everyone’s displeasure with the compromise, and too believe that the BSU should continute to fight for the room. However, a part of me fears that they have already (effectively) taken the room, and this compromise may be the best that we can get.
After listening last night, to what has been said at the passed meetings with the Deans, I do believe that this issue is a greater one than merely one of a “space issue.” In that respect, I believe that we should let the Deans know that we realize that the problem is greater, but I also do feel that the BSU needs to publicize more that the room is available for use. As it is right now, only BSU members know, and probably just the other Black organizations on campus. I think that in order to keep the room, we would have to show the Deans that if they allow us to keep the room, we would have to be willing to really allow others to use the room (that should be our compromise).
On another (slightly random) note, it seems that only upperclassmen care about the issue (based on conversations, and the other blog comments). This I also believe is a problem. The Deans could easily just appease us now, but completely take the room in the future, especially if they see that the fervor over keeping the room is gone. I think that it would be beneficial if someone could post the history of the BSU room on the Blog, so that they can get a sense of what it took to get the room, and what we would be throwing away by giving it back.
July 28, 2009 at 12:27 pm
Anonymous
The only major change I would like to see is that the room be accessible to not only E-board members but the general body as well. If the back room is going to be available as a study room, that space would be nice to have accessible to us. Also, after Housing’s office hours, who gets to use the room? Your email says BSU only gets to use it for meetings… (I assume this ties into the room being accessible by AMR residents and the E-board? But like I said, I would like to see the room being open to all BSU members).
July 28, 2009 at 12:34 pm
A student
Real talk…we need to let the Deans know what the BSU rooms means to us…if that means sending out e-mails, bombarding their phones, dropping by their office everyday…then we must do it. We should also go their superiors with the same thing and basically say “Look, this room has a history, this room is our haven, etc.” As a black student, i still do not feel as if I belong on this campus and I’m a senior now. The Deans do not understand that, and we must try to make them understand. Yeah the underclassmen don’t understand…they didn’t have to deal with what the class of 2010 had to deal with. Forget the compromise and just let them know that we won’t leave so soon. I use the BSU room during reading period and finals. It’s our room….they just cannot take it from us. And if this doesn’t work…go the media. They already scrutinized Hopkins in the past. If Columbia can have a Malcolm X lounge, then we can have a BSU room…simple as that.
July 28, 2009 at 8:12 pm
Nora
I really do not see any reason to fight for the room. The compromise seems fair to me – I’d only second what another comment mentioned, where the room is open to all – not just E-board members – after hours. For those who say “fight for the room”, I’m someone who loves the BSU who needs to be convinced. I think the best way to use the room is if it’s truly open to all – something that the BSU room has been in theory but not in practice. We [BSU members] know, or should know that the BSU room has always been extended for other groups to use. Cultural groups such as CCS, ASA as well as the NPHC take full advantage. But the BSU still has a negative image – an image that the campus sees as well as people in the union.
If this allows more people to see the BSU room, I think it’s fantastic. It’s doing something that we have not been able to do. As long as we get priority access, as well as are able to enter after hours I see no problem at all. It seems like a nice healthy change – I’d be pretty happy about new furniture, the murals being preserved, some action taking place. The BSU room and the BSU seems stale, and I think people who want to fight for the room want to fight for selfish reasons. Saying things like “they just can’t take it from us” are childish. If we find something that we know we could do better without the compromise than with, that seems worth taking time and effort to fight and convince administration, please let me know. I’m starting to wonder why so many people are for fighting – this has been an issue plaguing the e-board, and has bothered the general body for a full year now. This is a fight that will last longer than the time the Class of 2010 is with us, and if the majority of supporters for fighting this compromise are in that class, I think we should stick with the compromise.
July 29, 2009 at 12:03 pm
Mwende
I do agree that this is a really good compromise, however as Danielle stated it has also come to my realization that the matter of the BSU Room is more than simply a space issue. I believe that both the University and ourselves have approached the matter with our own blind sighted, although very valid, agendas.
Forty years ago, the students who would be the first members of the Johns Hopkins University Black Student Union were told that the University had no place for them and if they wanted a location they would have to find one on their own. The students did what they had been forced to do and found a storage room in the basement of AMR II and cleaned it out completely. Since that time, not only has that room become a haven for the members of the Black Student Union it is also a place that I have seen utilized as a study space, game room and practice room for members and non-members alike. The plans the University has for the Room are in no way different from the purposes the Room serves now, however they would like it to be a neutral location for all students on this campus.
We cannot continue approaching this matter without addressing the actual issue; why is it that students would feel comfortable using the room exactly how it is now as long as it isn’t controlled by the Black Student Union. As a Black Student Union, I think part of our mission is branching out to the rest of Hopkins and spreading an understanding of who we are and what we do. We aren’t alone in this particular mission, I believe this is the case for all culturally, religiously, and sexually-oriented groups. What I am saying is that from what I’ve seen and experienced, the Johns Hopkins University lacks a general sense of comfort, understanding or interest in the student groups that don’t fall under our personal umbrellas.
This issue is much greater than an issue of space or control and if we sign off on this compromise, we are signing off on allowing students to remain comfortable with their discomfort and in that respect are going completely against one of the missions of our Union. I am not saying that everyone has to love or like me, but you damn sure better respect me and this is a two-way street. However, as students this should not our job alone and it must be one that the University works with us on. I understand that they want to make people as comfortable as possible during our four years sheltered away from reality, but that simply is not realistic. It is time to stop covering up the issues, and finally dealing with them and I don’t see that being possible with this compromise.
As Nora said, if we do not decide to accept the compromise it cannot be for selfish reasons. Regardless of whether or not we accept the compromise, we as a Union need to step our game up and be about fully realizing our potential and that always needs to be our fight.
July 29, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Anonymous
i agree with nora, this compromise seems like the best were going to get and to be honest, it sounds pretty good. yes it would be nice to “fight for the room” as ling as there was some way of seeing that it would be worth it, but that’s impossible. Hopkins has already made their thoughts clear regarding how they think the room should be used and this compromise is by far they best offer they have put on the table. i also think it would be a great way to have others on campus acknowledge and appreciate the room through daily use while allowing the BSU to have priority.
July 29, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Anonymous
Now this is funny to me. All of this talk about the Black Student Union’s Mission and history. The organization does in fact have a strong history and I respect that but in recent years I cannot say we have made the best decisions. Keeping what’s ours and all of that talk is great but don’t you all (excluding the freshmen) think you should have thought of that before voting for a white guy to be president of the BSU last year. A majority of you all supported him. In time people strayed from him but in the beginning the Black Student Union decided that they would rather support a white boy from a majority white environment to lead them, then a perfect qualified black woman. Ridiculous. No one wants to stand up and discuss that matter but now were talking about how we’re proud black people and don’t want to what is ours taken away? It started last year when you decided that you would prefer that the only group on campus that is specifically for black students to be themselves be led by a white man. This has been a discussion among many of my friends who aren’t black. The chinese student association doesn’t have a white, black, or indian president because a chinese student would know what is best for peers like him. You all seriously fight the wrong battles.
July 29, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Anonymous
I really do not see how that is a relevant comment. If you would like us to compromise just say so. Past leadership is not on trial right now. I believe that the correct place for that conversation would be on another thread.
This purpose of this thread is to give the members a chance to voice their opinions on the conflict surrounding the BSU room, not complain about who was the President and what they have done wrong.
I just wanted that to be stated before this discussion strays from its purpose.
July 29, 2009 at 3:46 pm
Anonymous
It is not the decisions of the past president I’m talking about. I’m talking about the past decisions of the general body. It’s completely relevant. For every action, there is a reaction. Do you think that maybe electing a white president sent out the message that the black people in the BLACK student union were not the main subjects? That the BSU is not really centered around black awareness? Why should the BSU have their own room when they don’t even trust themselves to run the organization? These are valid questions. Black people aren’t the only ones running the organization, why should they be the only ones allowed to use the room? You all opened that door. It’s completely relevant.
July 29, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Anonymous
In response to above post at July 29, 2009 at 3:46 pm:
Your questions are quite valid but irrelevant to whether the BSU should keep its room or not. Any past decisions made were done so by the general body in the majority, which is the purpose of a democratic system. Accept those decisions, learn from them and move on.
Unless you can directly connect BSU’s past decisions with decisions the BSU should make about the compromise at hand then your post sounds like a unproductive, childish, finger pointing rant.
July 29, 2009 at 4:37 pm
Anonymous 1
If the BSU selects its President based on race and fights for racial equality, then there is a huge contradiction in its agenda. The selection of a white President does not mean the BSU is not centered around black awareness or that it does not trust itself. Simply that the best candidate was chosen regardless of race, which how all BSU members strive to be treated in the world.
Furthermore, having a white President did NOT cause Hopkins to try to take the BSU room. Do you really think that Hopkins cares whether the BSU can effectively represent itself? The BSU’s current predicament is more related to the Sigma Kai incident than its previous President’s whiteness.
Your post only reveals your ignorance. Blog about what the BSU should do now, not whose fault it supposedly is.
August 1, 2009 at 1:56 am
Nicholas Brady
The decision to vote a white man as our president is not up for discussion right now. That should really be the end of that. We may put up a blog post about this as a subject matter if people desire to speak on it. Until then, let us keep to the issue at hand.
Now I would like to say something about the compromise. Although it gives us very little in terms of “overt” power (as in actual control over the room), it gives us every possible to have “covert” or “subversive” powers over the room. We not only have 24 hour swipe access but also special scheduling abilities that allows us to not only access the room at all time, but also schedule whenever we like. If one thinks of this deal in comparison to the status quo, you will find that it is almost the same. The only difference is this issue of control… but it has never been simply the BSU’s room. It has always been a room on this campus, meaning property of the university. The BSU is a part of the University, but this room was not truly the BSU’s. I have to give the administration credit for crafting a compromise that takes into account our relationship with this room because if we fought honestly we would not get much more than this (but this is my opinion from dealing with these people for two meetings). So although we lose our “overt” power (or our belief in overt power), we have the abilities to subversively take control of the room much in the same way that we took over the room 40 years ago.
It is key to remember, the BSU did not buy this room. We struggled for this room, we fought for this room, and we took this room. If the room goes back into the “control” of ResLife, then the BSU will have to struggle and fight for control of the room again. But with the compromise we have legal abilities to aid in this fight that we did not have before. We should not be afraid of this struggle for the room, it is what has made our organization so strong over the years. We should also not be afraid to share our room. No matter what road we choose to take, we need to make sure it is taken with knowledge of our past but also consideration of our future. If “losing” the BSU room will give us more in the long-run, we should not shy away from taking a compromise even if it does not feel like a win. It is our future that I and hopefully the rest of this organization are fighting and struggling for.
-Nick Brady
August 1, 2009 at 10:46 am
Lela
When I read Mwende’s email I was content with the terms the deans agreed to, since it seemed as though all of the concerns voiced by the general body had been addressed and met fairly. Probably more than fairly when considering that the Deans can really give us much less and still move forward with their own agenda. My only reservation is rooted in the fact that I am not on the E-Board but still feel, as do many other members of the GB, that I have devoted a good amount of my time and energy to the BSU and its plight, and therefore would like to see that all members have access to the room.
Besides that, though, the administration is going to come in and make changes that the BSU has been pretending they were going to make for years. They will have to make aesthetic modifications such as new paint, new seating and more decorations in order to make the rest of the student body feel comfortable convening in the back corner of the basement of the oldest student dorms. The back room in the BSU is still a little disorganized and cluttered and needs to be cleaned out, so why not have more manpower available to make necessary changes? The plaques and plexiglass and making the archives availabe in the library seem like excellent ideas to me as well.
With the exception of a handful (literally five people since my freshman year) of students, other races have been intimidated to drop by the “open” BSU room. This change will undoubtedly garner new membership and compell the BSU to continue in its efforts to have a genuine presence in the community and on campus. Opening up cannot be a bad thing, and really the BSU MPR seems like something I would like to see happen in the near future.
August 1, 2009 at 11:06 am
Nicholas Brady
If that is your only reservation lela, then u have no reservations at all. One of the main points of the Dean’s compromise is that all members of the BSU have 24 hour swipe access to the room, not just the eboard.
I think there is a point to this discussion on the “openness” of the BSU room that is being skated around. The question is does the BSU want to replicate the patterns of uncomfortableness that formerly all-white spaces have caused Black students on this campus in history or would we like to move into an atmosphere that is more “multicultural” (whatever that means) and open; the answer is up to your personal opinion of what is the purpose of a BSU.
Historically speaking a BSU is not an “integration” type organization, but is born out of the Black Power movement (Dr. Hayes always stresses this). This is not a simple distinction, but is a pivotal distinction. It may not be worth anything now, but historically this has meant everything to the BSU. In order to stay true to what the BSU has meant as well as what it will mean in the future, we must find a compromise between these stark different opinions. Should the BSU be open or closed? I think the Dean’s compromise gives us an ability to both create the uncomfortability that Mwende desires, but also allow it to be a more open space to create a better sense of racial solidarity on this campus.
August 2, 2009 at 12:58 am
Lela
The BSU was born out of the Black Power movement and exists in the present day. None of our goals should including creating an uncomfortable feeling for people of other races in the school, or discouraging their membership in our organization.
August 3, 2009 at 9:29 am
Brandon
I think we have done quite the opposite actually as a majority of our membership is not of african-american decent, but recognizes some other ethnicity or or group above their blackness. NOW, I am not saying that the people are not black, because I do not need to see this post fill up with foolishness, but I am saying that at the end of the day if you were asked where are u from or what are you, alot of our membership has something that they can say other than I am black or african american. This is double edged sword; the fact that we are diversifying is great, but we are now more so a multicultural student union than a black student union. This is mainly why I think Nick C was able to ascend up the ranks and assume such a powerful position.
The BSU has become very comfortable organization, to the point that the Deans see that we should be open to everyone. If I was a dean, I would think wow, they elected a white president. They are very accepting organization, so maybe they will accept us opening their space up to everyone since it is what they want to achieve. We are no longer that organization that doesn’t want to interact in their eyes.
August 3, 2009 at 3:36 pm
Mwende
First, I think it’s important to clarify what I mean by discomfort. I don’t think that the intentions of the University and our intentions are any different, although our reasoning may be. We both want students to feel welcome coming into the room and I think that we both would like to see the rooms utilized by more groups. However, what has not been acknowledged in these discussions with the Deans nor, until recently, the discussion amongst ourselves is that the use of the room is not hindered by whether or not it is open to students, it is hindered because the students at Hopkins feel uncomfortable with the Black students at Hopkins. I do not believe that this overall issue will be solved by making the students feel more comfortable by removing us from the room, and I believe that allowing the University to do so is counter to our greater mission here at Hopkins. I think that the role that we must play in conjunction with the University is encouraging students to feel open interacting with groups that they otherwise have not been comfortable with. I know this is not going to be a “comfortable” adjustment for students to make, but it is a necessary one if the atmosphere at Hopkins is to actually change and if this means students are forced to be uncomfortable with having to face their fears, then so be it.
Second, the Black Student Union as Brandon said is inherently a multicultural organization because the term “black” as it has been defined by society has been used to generalize an extremely diverse race. However, it is important to understand that despite being multicultural in our ethnic and nationalistic make-up, our experiences are very similar as a result of being forced under this one umbrella and those experiences are the ones which the Black Student Union is designed to address. There are several groups whose experiences are similar to ours, but none are identical. So are we to automatically embrace and fight for everyone’s struggle under the umbrella of the Black Student Union to be in conjunction with America’s idea of “diversity”? I don’t think so. I think our job is to work with other groups, but remain focused on who we were founded for. I think it is important to clarify that we are open and strongly encourage various people to feel comfortable learning about who we are as black people, but we are not the Hopkins Multicultural Student Union. Handing over the room does not encourage this message, it says we’re multicultural- as in we don’t really have to understand our differences, just generically embrace them.
August 4, 2009 at 4:18 pm
member
honestly this room was not founded on the basis of equality. To my understanding, BSU was designed to accommodate students of the african american and like persuasions. So i don’t understand how we are even responsible for the comfort of other students that wish to use the BSU room. If students feel uncomfortable using the BSU room (i cant imagine why, its not like we have put forth any notions of animosity or displeasure with any other ethnic group on campus), there are plenty of other rooms that can be utilized for other student use. However, this could be seen as an opportunity for us to build membership and further communication with other groups and individuals across campus.
Under the circumstances, this is the best compromise we are going to get. The next step is to do what we can to ensure that no less control of a room, that was developed without any help of the university, is taken from the BSU.
August 4, 2009 at 10:13 pm
Chidiac
Look no further than Albert C Robinson for the historical mission. In his visit to us last year, he spelled out a lot of what gave the organization focus. That included fighting for the rights of everyone regardless of color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation. It is worth fighting for because it builds a coalition of liberty and equality. It is for that great hope, that one day, we will not be judged by the color of our skin, but by the content of our character. These struggles fall to us because we are the vanguard of our generation. It may not be popular, it may make you squeamish, but shirk it and the legacy behind us crumbles.
The Black Student Union is not a separatist group, and as far as I can tell from the archives, it never has been and certainly not at its founding. What it has been, is when the chips are down, the Black Student Union will be there for the black community, always. The BSU adopts a big tent. We include the first generation to go to college from humble beginnings just as we include graduates of fancy, expensive private schools. We went to majority black schools, majority white schools, and every other demographic permutation. We include African Americans as we include Africans and Afro-Caribbeans. We will not complete the divisive efforts of racism.
If the BSU stands for black separatism, it will force integration-minded black students to shun the organization. As they integrate into the upward mobility networks of greater society, they will be unable to bring other black students with them and indeed may be asked to hide or play down aspects of their identity in an effort to show that they are ‘different’ from other blacks. That outcome would herald a lethal, self-inflicted blow for equal opportunity.
Look at the Black Panther movement. Their efforts to uplift the community through programs such as Saturday schools did wonders, and something we would be better off to see the return of. Notice how the FBI sought to undermine them. They sponsored orthodox separatists to take over the group’s name and thereby discredit them.
As long as others in society perceive their black peers as hostile, dangerous, or ‘uppity’, the Black Student Union is in no danger of slipping into a fuzzy sense of racial identity. For those afflicted by misconceptions it is not our role to make them feel comfortable, in fact I make it a point to agitate that discomfort. It is not excusable.
None of this, however, is germane to the discussion at hand. The BSU is not being removed from the room. Uninterrupted access is maintained. Those students that do not feel comfortable in a black setting will not come. Students who are comfortable in a black setting, and those that have not been in black settings in the past will, and with some luck, racial social segregation will be eroded. Additionally, the room will gain new amenities. MASC has a library hungry for archives like ours in addition to the MSE library. This change may make them more accessible and better organized.
August 5, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Nicholas Brady
I agree with the last paragraph of chidiac’s statement, your assessment of the black panthers is HORRIBLY inaccurate. The Black Panther’s started out as a black nationalist organization that lost its way when they allowed white marxist into their organization and it dilluted the whole message. Then a mixture of COINTELL-PRO infiltration, gang warfare (also manipulated by FBI), and police battles greatly weaked their numbers. Finally Huey fell into alcoholism and the organization fell apart with no leader and lost all funding and finally was torn apart with tax troubles. The lesson of the Black Panthers is what happens when you allow outsiders to dillute your message and purpose and how you can get lost due to outside pressure to conform, change, or dissipate.
As for the purposes of the BSU, the word “seperatist” has always been wrong when describing Black Power organizations. Sure, some people affirm the seperation of Black people from white people; but the general ideology of Black Power is not complete seperation, especially not on college campuses. BSUs grow on majority white campuses where you could never seperate. If BSUs wanted to seperate those that start BSUs would have instead gone to a HBCU. Instead we came to an all-white institution (that then became a majority-white instituion with our presence) and we formed BSUs in order to serve Black Students on these campuses and their very unique issues and problems. Black Power is not seperatist, but it does advocate that some seperation gives us the ability to pay close attention to uniquely Black issues on this campus and abroad that other organizations do not pay attention to. It is important to understand that BSUs are neither seperatist nor are we integrationist, but our purpose is to serve the Black population on this campus and abroad for the purpose of creating a more just and equal society.
August 6, 2009 at 11:02 am
Lel
I am in no way saying that the BSU is or was formerly a black seperatist organization. I am saying that the BSU is perceived that way on campus, and if anyone disagrees with me all they have to do is poll the student body and see that I am correct. I am not saying that by creating a welcoming feeling for students of other cultures or races should change any of its focuses to then include the focuses of those cultures or races, or that we should exert ourselves to cater to them in any way. I just think that if more students felt comfortable enough in the space of the BSU they could learn from our discussions and about our culture, not that we should change anything about how the organization is run or the beliefs and actions of the BSU. On the contrary; knowing that one has the responsibility of serving as an ambassador to other cultures during times when vistors share the BSU space puts added pressure on the E-Board and GB to be consistently furthering the goals and exemplifying the ideals of the BSU. I agree that our purpose is to serve the Black population on this campus and abroad for the purpose of creating a more just and equal society. I feel as though the BSU would be more effective if more of the student body could see that that is our purpose.
It seems as though some people are seeing this compromise as pressure to change our goals and areas of focus and activities to make more races feel comfortable in the BSU room. That is not how I interpret it. I see it as becoming hospitable to visitors, and as a result, allowing them to see the positive aspects of BSU.
August 6, 2009 at 11:05 am
Lela
I spelled my name wrong but… you see my point.
August 6, 2009 at 11:03 am
Lela
I am in no way saying that the BSU is or was formerly a black seperatist organization. I am saying that the BSU is perceived that way on campus, and if anyone disagrees with me all they have to do is poll the student body and see that I am correct. I am not saying that by creating a welcoming feeling for students of other cultures or races should change any of its focuses to then include the focuses of those cultures or races, or that we should exert ourselves to cater to them in any way. I just think that if more students felt comfortable enough in the space of the BSU they could learn from our discussions and about our culture, not that we should change anything about how the organization is run or the beliefs and actions of the BSU. On the contrary; knowing that one has the responsibility of serving as an ambassador to other cultures during times when vistors share the BSU space puts added pressure on the E-Board and GB to be consistently furthering the goals and exemplifying the ideals of the BSU. I agree that our purpose is to serve the Black population on this campus and abroad for the purpose of creating a more just and equal society. I feel as though the BSU would be more effective if more of the student body could see that that is our purpose.
It seems as though some people are seeing this compromise as pressure to change our goals and areas of focus and activities to make more races feel comfortable in the BSU room. That is not how I interpret it. I see it as becoming hospitable to visitors, and as a result, allowing them to see the positive aspects of BSU.
August 15, 2009 at 9:34 pm
Mwende
Hello Everyone,
I just want to give you an update of the situation at this point. Dean Boswell is out of the country until August 18th, so we have not planned a follow-up meeting with the Deans at this point. They have not contacted me to ask about a final decision. When Dean Boswell returns I intend on explaining to the Deans that it is impossible to make a decision that reflects the decision of the majority of the Black Student Union General Body considering that all of this discussion is taking lace over the summer. Hopefully, they respect this fact. Although, we have gotten some feedback on the compromise and intend to address the concerns risen, in no way can the feedback from 15 members or so guide us to make a final decision.
I would like to have an emergency General Body Meeting that is seperate from our normal General Body Meetings to discuss this matter if the administration agrees to postpone the necessity for a final decision. The final date and time for this meeting will be publicized when official. I hope that a majority, if not all, of our General Body members and other concerned parties attend this meeting.
August 31, 2009 at 1:00 am
Mark
Just a little institutional memory:
I came to JHU in 1977. At that time, the BSU had it’s own room, in the basement of the AMR building. We used our room for studying, playing ping pong, and most important, from my point of view, as a repository for old exams/quizzes. Our BSU was focused on making Hopkins a better place for the african american students, and helping them succeed academically. It was not exclusionary, but all the members had the common goal. We had our meetings in the BSU room, so it was open to all members, not just during eboard, or general meetings. Other students were not excluded from our room, and would occasionally come by to hang out, or play ping pong.
It seems that at a time when the University is advocating diversity, that striking a blow against the support provided by the BSU would be contradictory, assuming the room is actively utilized. Further historical information can be obtained via the officers of SOBA (Society of Black Alumni), including Robert Clayton, Janine Austin-Clayton, or former trustee Loren Douglas.