Tuesday’s campus-wide email from “TBD Dartmouth” presented a number of criticisms of College President Phil Hanlon’s “Moving Dartmouth Forward” plan. I’d like to present my thoughts on the individual concerns the email raised as an attempt at serious discourse about pressing campus issues. The email first asserts that the early release of the “Moving Dartmouth Forward” plan to select individuals and groups demonstrates exclusivity. While the plan does have issues with exclusivity, they do not lie with to whom the information was made available. The information was eventually released to the public, and it made sense for President Hanlon to gauge response to his announcements prior to making them.
The email then takes issue with “certain students” who were “already ... granted positions” on the “Moving Dartmouth Forward” committees. Greek system leaders are important community leaders at Dartmouth. It’s not an “unfair burden” for people who do not already have established leadership positions to apply for equal recognition as those who do. The authors then condemn the administration’s emphasis on top-down social change, which is misguided because social interactions are ultimately carried out by students themselves — thus, they should be empowered.
The next point of the email criticizes a lack of emphasis on the effects of “structural oppressions” on campus. The influence of phenomena such as homophobia and gender biases on peoples’ lives is not something that can be fixed by the College, as a student is no longer a blank slate by the time he or she is 18. Aggressively combating biases would require expanding the College’s mission beyond simply education, and instead to re-education — an extremely difficult goal.
The authors then berate President Hanlon’s plan because it does not address the “Freedom Budget,” which not only would have cost a significant amount of money to implement, but also relied heavily on fallacious arguments. The population of people qualified to teach at Dartmouth is substantially older than the student population. It makes sense that the faculty would be less racially diverse then the millenial generation, as older generations include smaller percentages of racial minorities.
The email also condemns the lack of “adequate response” to the Student and Presidential Committee on Sexual Assault, whose recommendations — while admirable — include a number of intrusive and unrealistic proposals, such as mandatory coeducation in the Greek system and banning Bored at Baker. Like the “Freedom Budget,” “TBD Dartmouth” does not address where the resources will come from to implement these changes.
Next, the authors characterize the “Moving Dartmouth Forward” plan as blaming victims of sexual assault. The plan specifically creates a “comprehensive and mandatory four-year sexual violence prevention and education program,” and it’s unclear as to how this or other aspects of the plan constitute victim-blaming. It’s also ignorant to claim that sexual assault is exclusively caused by “a culture of entitled masculinity,” as there are cases in which men are the victims of sexual assault and lack recourse due to social stigma.
There are some points with which I agree. One criticism is aimed at the use of the phrase “alternative to the Greek system” — and, true, perhaps a semantic change is worthwhile. Using the phrase “additional social spaces” as opposed to “alternative ” would be a good way to de-emphasize Greek dominance as well as possibly remove the word’s associated stigma. I also agree with the email’s point that the “Moving Dartmouth Forward” plan lacks concrete implementation plans, despite its many specific policy proposals. As written, the plan isn’t a concrete policy document. It’s more of an address aimed at improving the public perception of the College, particularly that of prospective students and their families — and appealing to a future student body creates a lot of uncertainty among the current one.
Finally, the email closes by criticizing the College for “not ameliorating the existing structures that exclude [faculty and students of color].” It is the job of students themselves, not the College, to shape the world around them. It is beyond the scope of Dartmouth to do this on its own, but it is not beyond that of its amazing alumni.
