Valentine's Day often is viewed through the lens of the loving couple. Yet in a broader sense, the day's focus on care and affection should extend to the interpersonal connections that bind communities as a whole. At the University, these connections are especially strong because of the mutual respect and trust that undergird many of the day-to-day interactions between students. As recent instances of bias and violence have shown, however, there remain groups within the University community that are vulnerable to breaches of this contract.
Although students have been quick to come to the defense of these constituencies in the wake of overtly harmful acts, the institutional commitment necessary for a universal sense of comfort at the University has been lacking. In light of today's celebration of love, the University should consider ways it can reinforce protections for groups such as the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer communities, as well as women and racial minorities, who have been victimized with unfortunate regularity.
The grassroots efforts of students have been effective at mobilizing support for affected groups in the aftermath of attacks directed toward them. After two female University students were verbally assaulted with racial slurs on the Corner last April, for example, a number of organizations such as the Black Student Alliance, the Inter-Fraternity Council and Student Council held a gathering in the Amphitheater to protest intolerance. Similarly, a forum and vigil were held in October to show support for the LGBTQ communities following a series of suicides by students at schools across the country who were bullied and harassed because of their sexual orientation. This response was particularly warranted given that an attack against a University student had taken place on the Corner just a few weeks earlier, in which police also believe the motivation was the student's sexual orientation.
The passion woken within the student body by those incidents, however, has not strengthened the University's protections of vulnerable populations. Much of the responsibility for this falls upon the University administration for being overly passive in addressing structural problems that allow violence and discrimination to occur. The Board of Visitors, for example, has yet to act on a bill that was passed by Council last April expressing its support for a hiring policy that protects "against discrimination in local, state, and federal employment based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression." The Council resolution asked the Board to pass a similar measure in response to Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli's letter to state colleges and universities arguing for the elimination of non-discrimination protections on the basis of sexual orientation. The inaction by the Board has sent a negative message to those in the LGBTQ communities by suggesting the University administration is unwilling to push back strongly when the interests of minority groups are threatened. The Board can begin to overcome this perception by passing a resolution concurrent with Council's when it meets next week.
In more practical matters, the University administration also has missed opportunities to respond to the needs of vulnerable groups. In particular, there has been no move to increase funding for the SafeRide program that is a joint venture of Council and the University Police Department. The service has been overwhelmed by demand since at least last fall, when a number of students - primarily women - were assaulted in areas close to the University. With those attacks, as well as the deaths of Morgan Dana Harrington and Yeardley Love, still fresh in the University's mind, it is important that steps be taken to promote the security of the University's female population.
Standing in solidarity with these groups - women, racial minorities and the LGBTQ communities - is necessary if the student body as a whole is to thrive. Personal bonds that students form across social dividing lines are among the most enduring parts of the University experience, and the University administration must work to ensure that no group feels too threatened to enjoy the establishment of such relationships.
Read More
CARTER: U.Va. Health owes clarity to transplant patients
By Nathaniel Carter | 2 days agoUnfortunately, this negative press is fully the fault of U.Va. Health — it failed to address significant stakeholder concerns when crafting its justification.
EDITORIAL: Upholding medical amnesty is a collective effort
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoUniversity leadership, Greek life organizations and students themselves must recommit to the safety provided by an effective and knowledgeable use of medical amnesty.
KURTZWEIL: Dockworkers’ unions cannot avoid the threat of automation
By Paul Kurtzweil | 4 days agoInstead of continuing to demand decreased automation, the union should work with the legislature in the hopes of driving investment into the reorganization of the current workforce.
