The road to hell is paved with good intentions." According to Tuesday's The Dartmouth, "most people on campus" felt that the lu'au party was not offensive, or intended to be. After asking 20 people, I wonder how that conclusion can be made.
I've personally talked to over 50 students and deans who felt that the lu'au party was offensive, maybe not to them, but that it was legitimately offensive to several students.
So who's right? To me, this is not an issue of determining if the lu'au party was offensive.The issue is how to create an environment on campus that fosters thinking and rethinking your actions, thoughts, and intentions, and their results.
Some say Hokupa'a (the Hawaii Club at Dartmouth) should have approached the houses to plan the event together. Why? The houses didn't want to host a lu'au, they wanted to have a party. There was no plans for it to be educational or a sharing of experiences.
Hokupa'a plans a lu'au every spring, and few offer their support. It takes five months of thought to plan. In addition to the lu'au, Hokupa'a does educational programs several times each term, such as in Collis and the Choates. Have you been to one? In order for any education and understanding to take place, we all have to meet each other half way. It can not be the obligation of one group to educate another, or to raise awareness and understanding.
The issue for me is not one that is simply deconstructed into "if you do something that offends someone, then don't do it." Then, no thought goes into one's actions, which is where these problems originally manifest themselves . To do or not do something without any significant thought and scope of your actions have, is pointless.
According to many, the lu'au party should not be compared to the "ghetto" party. Some argue that "Hawaii is a state, lu'aus occur all the time in Hawaii, what's the big deal?" Well, I agree that the lu'au party is not the same as the "ghetto" party, but it was done in the same conciousness, or lack thereof.
History tells a more shocking story of Hawaii's statehood. Hawaii's government was illegally overthrown by the U.S. in 1893, illegally annexed in 1898, and became a functioning part of the U.S. by the Organic Act of 1921. Former President Grover Cleveland, in office at the time of the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom, admitted that there was no authorization for the military coup on Hawaii's government, and that Hawaiians never gave up their sovereign rights to self-determination. President Bill Clinton issued the Apology Bill of 1993 saying that Hawaiians never relinquished their sovereignty, and that reparations must be made.
On the issue of lu'aus, just because it has become a part of American pop culture, in Hawaii or elsewhere, does not mean that it should be exploited at will. Some of you may never understand the hurt in seeing a part of your heritage exploited for commerical purposes. What pains me is that once a lu'au is no longer fashionable, that you all will walk away and not care about what happens to Hawaiians or the spirit of a lu'au.
But I have to deal with it. I have to go home and face my mom, a trained hula dancer since her childhood, and tell her that there was a party being held where people were encouraged to dress "Hawaiian style," ignoring who she is, the spirit of her hula dancing and Hawaiian identity. It's all related and inseparable.
It hurts me that "Hawaiian" to people is just about being laid back and having a good time. Hawaiian to me is about real problems, such as poverty, unemployment, poor health, depression, poor education, and welfare. These are the issues that we have, and what being Hawaiian involves. The fact that people feel a right to capitalize on some stereotype of where I am from and the people I feel a cultural responsibility to in the name of fun, angers and hurts me. Having a lu'au party isn't just about playing on stereotypes, it's taking a stab at the very integrity that we fight for as a people.
I'm saying, if you are going to throw a party, is your purpose to drink and have fun? If so, removing the alcohol would have a more drastic effect on the life of the party than removing a questionable theme. Will the party be ruined by just calling it a party? If a theme is used to be festive, recognize that there could be some that take offense or be hurt by it. If you can honestly say that no harm can be done, then go ahead and have your party. If harm is done, take responsibility, and realize that you were mistaken. Use it to learn and grow. We all screw up, turn it into a positive learning experience.
If you admit that someone could be hurt, and still want to have your party, then realize that you are consciously deciding to do something hurtful. If you feel that having a party that plays on the stereotypes of people's culture is fine, then say so loud and clear, and publicly.
Dealing with this issue is not easy. If someone says they are hurt or offended, don't ignore that or try to invalidate what that person is feeling. Don't make them prove it to you either. You may not be offended because you can't relate on a level that enables you to understand, but does that make it not offensive? I will never understand what it's like to be a woman and face sexism, but because of incidents like these, I feel that I can relate as a student of color who has faced a whole range of other '-isms.' It's not my purpose to try to comprehend and analyze sexism against women, because specifics are different. However, the hurt they face runs the same vein as the hurt I face. All I can do is support them with hopes that they too will support me.
I'm sorry, but there is no magic checklist that I can compose for anyone that indicates what is ok and what is not ok. Trust yourself. Think! I believe that each person has a good idea of right and wrong. If you feel that what you are doing is right, then go for it, and be able to back yourself up. Learn from what you are doing, improve and educate yourself so the next time you take action, it can be action that is informed.
I applaud Omar Rashid. He has enough nerve to speak up about what he feels should be the minimum standard of decency in this community. I only wish that there were more people with his strength to say what's truly on their mind. I am proud that he is willing to support me and my friends who are offended. It should not have to be the Hawaiians that initiate action. I am glad Omar spoke out. His actions have been criticized, but as a matter of fact, his blitz only went to Greek house presidents, and a few deans. From there it was forwarded around, creating controversy. The Greek leadership are the ones that should have handled this in a better way, not Omar. He did what everyone said he should have done.
Don't turn this into a debate about how you can negate every last word that I said, which will then somehow prove that no offense or harm was received. Idleness never made any significant impacts in anyones life. Where do we go from here? That is entirely up to you.
