By Hilary Franklin
I was 10 years old during DPN. I have vague recollections of “the week the world heard Gallaudet.” I remember knowing that it was something important and something to be proud of, even though I didn’t fully understand what was happening. A deaf university president? Great! That’s a pretty nice “hero” to have when you are 10 and your (mainstream) elementary school teachers are talking about it in class.
It is 19 years later, and instead of feeling pride, I am upset, torn, and depressed. Since learning about the arrests, my emotions have been all in a twist. I am not a Gally student or an alumna. I’m just a member of the Deaf community who hasn’t supported the protests (since May) for one reason:
Because I believe that Jane Kelleher Fernandes is, on paper, qualified for the job.
Now, before you bark at me, I understand that she has caused a lot of unhappiness among many students and former staff members at the Clerc Center. I have read the open letters, the memos, just about everything that has been made publicly available via blogs and other websites, including DeafDC.com. However, the letter that seems to be thrown out a lot is the following one, posted on the GUFSSA website titled, “Letter from Clerc Center Staff“.
The problem I have with this letter is that it’s unsigned. The claims put forth can only be respected if there are people willing to stand behind those claims. Whether or not reprisals occur, the fact that the letter is publicly anonymous lessens its credibility. As a former reporter, and a researcher, I must be skeptical of all anonymous materials.
Back to the presidency. Being a university president is very different than being a provost or other university-level administrator. Presidents are in a political arena, more so than other university administrators, including the Board of Trustees. Presidents are on the front lines when it comes to raising funds and being the “face” of the University. Presidents are involved not only with the day-to-day administration of the campus, but also with the surrounding community. In this case, Gallaudet’s community is not just the streets that border its campus. It is a world-wide community, simply because of its status as the only university for the deaf in the world. President Jordan is, effectively, a visible leader of the entire deaf community, whether or not deaf and hard of hearing individuals attend Gallaudet. Presidents at other universities don’t have that image to deal with in their daily jobs.
Even though Fernandes’ career at Gallaudet has been analyzed, speculated upon, and presented negatively, the fact remains that Fernandes is not the president yet. She is the president-designate. The Board of Trustees conducted a search process. President Jordan has iterated, and reiterated, that he was not involved in the search process. How can we know what Fernandes will do as President? Over the summer, during a BOT retreat, Jane Fernandes outlined a plan, a vision, for her Presidency. If the BOT supports it, how can we not give her a chance?
While I’m on the topic of the Board of Trustees, we need to remember two things: (1) the BOT includes Gallaudet alumni, and (2) the BOT had meetings that were open to the public and strongly encouraged students to attend. These meetings occurred early on in the search process. No students attended. If students don’t make their voices heard early on, why should the BOT listen to them afterward? I certainly understand the BOTs position on that.
With regard to claims that President Jordan “groomed” Fernandes to take over, well…that happens a lot. Historically, presidents have prepared their underlings to prepare them to take over. The problem here is that we have only one Deaf university. Fernandes could only be groomed to take over in one place: Gallaudet University. Provosts, vice-presidents, and other higher education officials at other universities can apply for university leadership positions anywhere. So, if Fernandes resigns, what happens to her? She doesn’t want to lose her job! Back in 1988, during Deaf President Now, President Zinser was hearing – she knew she had other options, and she willingly stepped down. Fernandes doesn’t, so of course she doesn’t want to step down. I actually applaud her stubbornness.
Now, I realize that if another finalist had been selected, these protests might not have happened. However, what is clear is that the Board of Trustees, by selecting Fernandes based on their reasons (which we don’t know), unwittingly caused something to happen: an outcry of students, staff and faculty who simply want to be heard. As soon as the protests started, the BOT and the university administration should have taken them seriously. The issues that were raised — and there are many — should have been addressed immediately. While Jordan and the administration say they have listened to the protestors, they don’t agree with them. They have every right to disagree, but I do think they should be discussing those issues more, and in public.
However, the protestors have done a very poor job in representing themselves maturely and with dignity. They have not respected the other students’ right to an education. By blocking off Hall Memorial Building, they prevented the majority of students on campus from getting an education. With protestors at the various gates around campus, President Jordan feared for the safety of other students, and closed the campus. I’m sure that was an agonizing decision for him to make. Safety, however, is just as important as education.
With regard to the protestors, they are actually a very slim minority of the student population. The university’s enrollment was 1,913 as of last Fall 2005. The number of students arrested last Friday? 133. Even if we allow for a drop in enrollment of 600 students this semester, the percentage of students arrested barely reaches 10 percent. That is a very slim percentage. Blog reports from campus indicate that a steady group of about 150-200 protestors have been manning the front gates. While the support of alumni and other members of the deaf community have increased the number of protestors at the various gates around Gallaudet, the fact remains that only about 10-15 percent of current Gallaudet students are protesting.
And, what exactly are they protesting for? I know what they’re protesting against: Fernandes, claims of audism on campus, lack of diversity in the presidential search process, program cuts that Fernandes and other administrators have made, etc. It’s all negative. I can’t find any reports from protestors that provide suggestions on how to improve the university; only that Fernandes must resign.
Even if Fernandes resigns or is removed by the BOT (neither of which is likely to happen), the issues pertaining to audism, other forms of discrimination, and the program cuts still remain. How should those be dealt with? Tell me, please. Tell me what you want to fight for, not simply fight against.
Now, with all this said, it should be clear that I’m against what the protest is about and how it’s being done. What I do support is the right of students to be heard, listened to, and taken seriously. But infringing on others’ right to an education is not the way to do that. Representing yourselves in a way that makes the majority of people reading or watching about the protest not want to support it is not a way to do that. However, standing up for yourselves and fighting for the right to be heard is great – I applaud you for that.
I urge the protestors to do two things: (1) agree to negotiations with a team of mediators and stick with the negotiations, and (2) figure out what it is you’re fighting for. Simply saying you want “unity for Gallaudet” is not enough. We need to see a plan. We need suggestions from you on how to make that happen. Concrete actions are much louder than words (and signs) said in anger and frustration.
I want to see Gallaudet University become an institution we can all be proud of. Its undergraduate program has a long way to go before it reaches the educational standards of other universities. We need to fight for not only the educational rights of Gallaudet’s students, but those in elementary and secondary schools for the deaf (and mainstreaming programs) all over the United States. It’s time to raise the bar.
Hilary Franklin is a longtime resident of the DC area and a graduate of both the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Columbia University. Her background is in public policy analysis and American Sign Language education, as well as cued American English instruction. She wonders how the protest will end and what its eventual impact on the deaf community will be.
© Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of the author. As with every blog on this website, this blog does not reflect the opinion of DeafDC.com.
Sarcasm, is it… Glenn Anderson speaks: Gallaudet Presidential Search A Beastly Day
Bravo! You bring up some very good points!
I have been on campus and I can tell you that it is NOT 10-15% of the student body that is protesting.
I took a rough count on Friday evening and the number was about 400 before I lost count. I specifically made sure I did not count anyone that looked older than 30 or anyone that did not seem to be a student.
Later on, I met with more students who did not attend the rally.
I roughly estimate about 600-700 students are actively protesting. While about 400-500 others are not actively protesting, but agree with the protest. The rest are silent or against the protest.
Of course, that’s only my opinion and a rough count.
I suggest that you visit campus and talk to people. It is definitely not 10-15% for sure.
Let’s not forget the 82% of faculty that voted to remove Fernandes…
I second the recommendation. Visit Gallaudet and find out for yourself. It’s hard to see what is going on from such a distance.
At this moment I understand your thoughts and feelings, and I see your valid points. However, I fear you are misinformed about/have not considered 1)the number and makeup of protesters (they are not only students!), 2) JK’s ability to lead, 3) the BOT’s ability to make an informed decision, 4) the BOT’s willingness to access information that is not filtered through the President’s Office, 5)students’
“non-participation” in the presidental appointment process (false), 6) JK’s right to a position simply because of a lack of opportunity in other areas, 7) what the students are protesting for (they do have goals and ideas of what a post-JK Gallaudet would be), 8)the ability of the current administration to “raise the bar”, so to speak, 9) the depth of corruption and apathy that has taken root into the current administration.
To one scholar from another- you cannot possibly make a truly informed decision without going down there yourself and finding out what is going on. Have you talked to the protesters themselves? Have you visited Gallaudet? Have you done the background research?
Sincerely,
A Fellow Scholar
What are those post-JKF goals?
What will happen if she resigns? Who will take over? What will happen if the person taking over is not popular?
I have been asking these questions and have never recieved an answer.
They want the search process to be reopened, that’s I think will happens if she resigns or is brought out…(or the BoT appoints someone?)If the person taking over is not popular…oh boy. Hang on for a Civil War II.
If a Civil War II occurs, as you postulate, because the students object to a replacement for Fernandes, then they will have forfeit any and all sympathy from the outside world because they’ll be seen, rightfully so, as attempting to manipulate the process for “their” candidate.
There is such a thing as picking your battles and I question the wisdom of this particular battle. There are much more serious problems facing Gallaudet than governance.
Like others have said, I agree that it is approximately 300 students who are doing the protesting out of a student body of 1900. This lopsided result makes me view with considerable skepticism any claim that they represent the entire student body, even assuming that there is another 300 or 400 that are silently supporting the protest.
I suspect a lot of people on the outside, including Congressional staffers and representatives from the administration and the Board of Trustees have been doing the same kind of math.
Turning to Fernandes’ qualifications, it seems that there has been some concession that she is “on paper” qualified to run the university.
Turning to the allegations that Fernandes, nevertheless, is not qualified to run the university, I would say, like many neutral people, that the allegations are weak, unsupported, or biased. As others have noted, the “story” about Kitty has been largely unproven or wild supposition for the most part. See this particular thread http://www.deafdc.com/blog/?p=619.
As for the Laurent Clerc letter, I would have more consideration had the authors been brave enough to sign their names instead of insisting on anonymity. Now, it appears that they are largely angry because Fernandes had the temerity to remove tenure from them. My reaction with respect to this, and I think many outsiders share the same reaction, is why on earth should elementary and high school teachers have tenure in the first place? That is a privilege granted to faculty members at colleges and/or universities. Unless I am mistaken, this has not been addressed.
Another issue that has not been addressed is the fact that the protesters, as others have pointed out, do not have a coherent message. At least part of the message rests on the fact that Fernandes is not Deaf enogh. I find that the allegation by Fernandes has largely been supported by comments that I see on Draco Malfoy’s blog plus others cited on the DeafRead threads, plus, of course, the abuse hurled at anybody who has questioned this position. I think that a lot of outsiders share this viewpoint that the “not Deaf enough” argument is, at least part, of the protest, and to pretend otherwise is to refute reality.
Finally, as others have commented, the protesters do not appear to have a coherent vision about what happens if JKF is replaced. JKF appears to have a vision for Gallaudet, one of which appears to be inclusion for EVERYBODY. The BoT appears to be at least groping about for a vision and the protesters have not, to my knowledge, addressed this concern.
I note that no one has even attempted to address your particular points. I wonder why? :rolleyes:
In regards to Hilary’s point about the unsigned letter from Clerc Center, it’s easy to criticize something that you have no affiliation. It is unsigned because the teachers and staff of Clerc Center can face reprisals, such as losing one’s job. However, they needed to speak out as well. And just because it is anonymous doesn’t mean that it is not true. Perhaps this letter could have been vouched by former and retired teachers and staff. By the way, this letter has been vouched by a DeafDC blogger.
In regards to tenureship, I do belive it is unique in Deaf schools. I do know that Alabama School f/t Deaf offers tenureship as one blogger mentioned, some time ago, about getting his tenure.
Thank you for your input about tenureship. I did not know about that.
I have heard the Kitty story and it seems VERY weak. Why was Gallaudet not sued? Any judge would see this as age discrimination and Gally would have to pay up BIG time.
If this story is true, it did not have enough of an affect on Kitty to have her sue or she did something so egregious that she was justifiably let go and anyone would have fired her.
Excellent write-up. I really appreciate the DeafDC.com because it always present both positive and negative sides. Thank you Hillary for taking the time to present your point of view. I totally agree with all your points.
At RidorLive.com web site, I notice Gally aumini made comments and provided positive comments about Jackie Roth’s Open Letter with a link to a different website, but Ridor didn’t like the fact that someone included a link to Jackie Roth’s Open Letter. He deleted the link and stated “Ridor’s Note: Your link to that blog is deleted. I do not regard them as beneficial to the community. ”
It’s sad that some people such as Ridor aren’t willing to open their minds and listen to both sides.
Thank you so much for a well thought out and honest approach to the current situation at Gallaudet.
Excellent points. I absolutely agree that Dr. Fernandes is qualified on paper to be the next President of Gallaudet. And I also absolutely agree that the protest community really needs to be listened to. Your suggestions for a next step are spot on.
Only quibble I have with your points is that I think, from my observations, that while 150-200 students do show up regularly, they are often different from one time to next. So the percentage of students actually involved is probably higher.
As a current student who is on campus every single day and almost all day. I See the rise and fall of this tide called a Protest, I see the number of people guarding tha gates. I talk to my friends who are among those protesting and I can agree that the number might be higher than the 150-200 but not by much.
If you need proof of this, just look at what happened at College Hall this morning, their simply was not enough students to bloackade the floor so they gave up and DPS entered and re-opened the building.
So while the numbers might be higher than 200 hard core protestors its not in the 400-600 level that some are stating. 300 MIGHT be a good estimate and generous at that!
As a testament to the rumor mill nature of this protest, I heard they left College Hall because they did not intend to blockade it all day. Just to flex their muscles a bit.
Ah’ if thats the case they need better leaders for flexing muscles in such a manner is not helpful for the cause at all. It sends too many mixed signals and like you said leaves the rumor mill wide open to crank out any number of theories.
Bobby White, you have so hit the nail on the head with that first sentence… The protest DOES need better leaders. The problem with this protest is too many hands are in the pot, and those hands belong not to the more sensible mature individuals who will act in the best interest of the whole, but instead belong to those who’s passion allowed them to throw out all caution and respect. The protest is entirely valid, the need for Jane Fernandes to resign and for the Board of Trustees to reopen the President search is undeniable after examinine closely. The protest, however, has been a travesty. It’s been the Gallaudet Public Relations Department against juvenile delinquents, or so it appears to the exterior community.
The colder it becomes, the more we will see the attempt or actual takeover of buildings. It will be purely for warmth (read: selfish) reasons
do you think so, Alumna? This seems to me as going against the stated intentions of the protestors to not interfere with students’ ability to go to their classes. It would not gain them much sympathy, and then the administration would have a legal right to remove them for trespassing.
And perhaps the fact that some of them have already been arrested once are rather nervous about getting re-arrested. That probably would mean severe penalties. Yeah, I agree that 300 is a good estimate.
This is a very good and clear post. This situation could have been handled better on both sides. And there needs to be compromise on both sides. Remember - Gallaudet gets $$$ from the federal government. Who approves the budget? The Congress. What are they going to be thinking when they see such tactics on both sides on the local news? What will they think when the time comes to approve the next budget? Think about that.
God bless you, Ms. Franklin. We need more deaf people like you — open-minded, accepting, and willingness to welcome change with open arms. In other words, you’re not desperately clinging onto the past, afraid of what the future may bring. Instead, you look at the future with bright, shining eyes, regardless the consequences, and you carry the torch of hope and teamwork. You seek solutions, not obstacles. Now that’s what I call progress. Gallaudet students, are you taking notes?
Hilary,
I appreciated your blog entry. I now support the protest and at one point I was asking the same exact questions you did above. The infamous, “Not Deaf Enough” issue is still interwoven in this protest, but it is no longer the main issue. This is a complicated protest. Every one of us needs to make informed decisions about this on our own. I respect anybody’s stance on the issue. Still, the bottom line for me is having Dr. J.K. Fernandes resign peacefully for the sake of the larger community is the only way out of this mess. It is the only way the healing process will begin.I am still waiting for somebody to convince me that Dr. Fernandes will clean this mess up if given the chance? I simply cannot see it.
I would disagree to a degree on the “not Deaf enough.” They keep bringing up JKF’s lack of ASL usage, says she’s an “Audist”, and so on. The longer this goes on, the more they keep exposing themselves of the more underlying real issues that peppers around the “not Deaf enough” issue about JKF. It just keeps pointing to that everytime I read another post, comments, conspiracy theories or blogs.
I have am puzzled by the lack of recognization on other people’s part about this… Where are the deaf people saying “she’s not deaf enough” now? I haven’t seen them. No doubt there werea few dumb people who said that, but… The people saying that NOW is the Gallaudet Public Relations Department, and Jane Fernandes herself. Thus the nation’s papers keep printing it. It’s like a few members of the KKK saying the n word about a candidate running for office, then the papers blast it all over the place using it to say this candidate is facing opposition from the white folks, and THEN the candidate uses it as well. The few saying something once, does not make ALL opposition to someone be based on that ONE instance. The people wanting that piece of stupidity repeated over and over, is the one who “supposenly” is being referred to. Where’s the logic there?
Wonderful posting. I agree- it’s better to say what you’re protesting for, not against. It sounded better to say we’re protesting for equality, rather than we’re protesting against Bull Conner or John Doe. This is one main point why the FSSA lost support of several people of color- instead of protesting for “fairness” in the form of independent investigation of the search process, the FSSA demanded for Fernandes to resign and allowed for character assassinations to come in.
Trighap, the not Deaf enough were replete in the now-defunct gallyprez.com, in earlier vlogs via Joey Baer (they have been removed, sorry), in the inital outbursts on the day of the announcement of Fernandes as the 9th President, and then the recent newspaper articles. Someone said Fernandes failed to meet the deaf critieria because she married a hearing man, and then someone said something about her signing being awkward. Fernandes is just using that to her advantage, she didn’t make it up herself, it was there in the open for her to pounce upon. I guess this is one example that proves that loose lips will sink a boat.
You know, after all of this, all the debates and the tendency of other major bloggers to throw more wood onto the fire … I’m begining to get sick of Gallaudet. I don’t think the students, nor the faculty do themselves much pride by being a member nor that they are doing anything about it in a very admirable manner.
Being a deaf person myself, I want nothing to do with Gallaudet. What cause have I when they discriminate, argue bitterly, and when a fascinating topic actually arises (the Deaf Culture Standpoint for example), they have to turn it into a Fernandes issue? At this point, it wouldn’t shock me if an interesting article on Bush’s leadership or an abortion issue point of view debated was turned somehow into a reflection of Fernandes’ character and leadership abilities. Way to go, Gallaudet. Sarcasm very much intended here.
Don’t give up on your education, despite what is going on it is something you can always fall back upon at all times as an individual.
You can put the degree from GU to the wayside, but you hurt yourself by not being a good student.
Just because I’m deaf doesn’t mean I go to Gallaudet. It is not the be-all and all for deaf people. I attend a mainstream DC University for a M.A.
That said, the point of my response was to illustrate that Gallaudet has become useless. It does not inspire anything for any deaf person, whether a member of the University or not. One curious thing about Gallaudet is that members are entirely wrapped up in it and believe it is the only thing that drives every deaf person in the world forward.
And I ardently mock that conclusion, and mock Fernandes making her way into every issue there is out there for a Gallaudet student. They have lost the big picture. They no longer debate far more reaching issues of the world, but only the issues of Gallaudet.
In fact, there was an interesting post a while ago by Bobby Cox. It shared the concept of the deaf cultural standpoint. Now this is a fascinating concept. What is the deaf cultural standpoint? Such a thing even exist? What is the impact of technology upon it? What about the minorities in the deaf community? But no … a Gallaudet member took that theory and turned it into a, guess what, Fernandes issue.
I once had a curiosity to know students from Gallaudet. Now? I rather meet the deaf people abroad in other countries and in other states, far from the reach of Gallaudet.
You appear to have the same viewpoint as Lew Golan, a noted oralist. He wrote an op-ed piece in today’s Washington Post that is rather scathing of the protests and of Gallaudet in general.
I strongly disagree with him and think he’s a pompous jerk, but he has some intellectual firepower and his attitude exemplifies many non-Gallaudet deaf.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....01560.html
I just read the article. Thank you for the link, and sharing it. I have not heard of Lew Golan before. I must say that for the most part I agreed with his article, and you are correct, it does exemplify many non-GU members.
That said, there was a time when I did believe that Gallaudet could be a shining example for the deaf Americans (Not the world). A kind of city on the hill for everyone to look to. Do I think it still can? No. I believe that responsibility falls to some other education institute or organization now.
Gallaudet can still be a shining example or a city on a hill if you prefer for the deaf. Unfortunately, it requires a degree of inclusivity that I’m not currently finding in the protests.
Whoa! What’s that I am hearing? That’s right, an echo chamber.. It must be all the singing to the choir here.
Come on, guys, those arguements have been repeated ad nauseum from the very beginning. Many rebuttals have been made by myself and others.
I am really getting the impression that there is a core group of anti-protesters (note: not pro-JK) whom have their own agenda they are pushing. What are your reasons? Why are you so bound and determined to be right? What would you do if the protesters turned out to be right (as in their assessment of the flawed process)?
I remember the naysayers back in May saying it was just a bunch of dumb kids and it would blow over. I also remember people saying it was only ASL militant deafies supporting this protest. I remember people asserting that, indeed, JK was the perfect person for the position. I remember yet others saying (still today) that there are not many FSSA supporters.
There is ample evidence to show that those people were mistaken on all counts. Still, I don’t see you reexaming your preset ideas and deep rooted prejudices (yes, prejudices. I’ve seen a lot of anti-ASL and anti-DOD talk around here).
This protest is really hard on all of this. I have had to go through soul searching many times already, only to reemerge to know that the two demmands (which has always been consistent) need to be satisfied.
So, listen and think. Or we’ll still be here rehashing the same old points when the fat lady signs.
And yes, the “hearing” cliches are intentional.
I will answer for myself. As a hearing DC college student.
First, it was the anger that began against her initially. I wasnt really paying attention then, but it bothered me that she was being attacked when it really didnt seem that serious a problem.
At the start of the semester the protest began again, I support the right to protest but it just seemed very pointless.
THEN it was the takeover of the school building. That set me off. I dont care what people say about being right or just, but never will I ever condone someone being prevented from learning. Education is one of the most important things in life. and I see people throwing it away and blocking those who want to learn.
The human chain at the gates to stop people from coming in was stupid, it was attrocious when I heard from people like RLM that they wanted to blockade the parking decks.
It is the tactics that bother me, it is the fact that you embarress me as liberals to go and squander your education and feel as if you are the ones who can make change occur. You can’t if you dont even respect your opponent, which is very evident at the ceremony for King.
The way the protest has acted has been like a mob, you cannot negotiate with someone when one of your terms is their dismissal.
The entire protest in my mind is for stupid and rather temporary reasons, it may seem valid to those experiencing it now, but in reality it wont matter. She may not be the best person to run the school, but she was chosen by the BOT for some good reason.
To also state, the reason why I am against the protest is because it is a mob. If she resigns what do you think will happen? The mob will take credit and the administartion will know it, they can’t effectively run an instituion if they are afraid of angering a mob. Think about it, any unpopular decision comes up and the mob can blackmail the school to do what it wants.
When she becomes president, you will have to deal with her on a human level. It will be very understandable if she is not reaching your hand to shake, but it will be big of her and neccesary for her as president to do so.
Your prepositon that somehow the process was unfair leads off to conspiracy. For all of the great perks of being a school president it is not an easy job in any way. Academics willfully give up high paying positions to work in academia and help educate others.
My suggestion is that the protest withdraw the key point of her withdrawl and then make your ammends. If she doesnt do so, go through the proper channels as you should have in the beginning and work on changing the system from within.
You lost me at “embarrass me as liberals and go and squander your education”, sorry.
I’ll be around when you are ready to present an arguement that isn’t emotionally laden and full of implied prejudice against the protesters.
One thing I have noticed about the discussion here and elsewhere is that everybody seems to be turning a deaf ear on each other. There is absolutely no communication going on between both sides or even with the same people on the same side. Diversity is all well and good but when everybody has opinions, it gets, well, quite muddled.
I’m not a fan of the protesters because I think that they are not at all inclusive, period. Despite furious backtracking by GUFSSA, the “not Deaf enough” argument has enough resonance that it keeps on getting repeated ad nauseam by everyone who is not a student leader.
That said, it does look like Fernandes will have to resign, not because of the protests, but because of the inept way she has handled the protests. She should have been right out there dealing with the protesters in a respectful yet firm manner. Instead, we have interviews with the Washington Post and pressure on the trustees not to cave in. I have yet to see that the administration reaching out to the protesters. It is quite possible to agree to disagree in a civil manner, but both sides are not giving in, much less communicating. I understand that Jordan has ultimate responsibility in running the campus until January 2007, but I would think that Fernandes would at least reach out. I think that failure is stoking the protests at least.
Anyway, my point is, and I will admit I get irritated at the point blank dismissal by you of Johan’s arguments simply by citing his conservative viewpoint as reason enough not to listen to him, that you are equally as guilty as everyone else in shutting people off if they do not agree with your viewpoints.
I admit I am guilty of this, but I sure as heck try to listen in a civil way and rebut point by point.
Any other attitude just drags the civil discourse down to where it is now and everybody is tired of this stand-off.
Enough said.
Johan has every right to disagree with my viewpoint, but I am not interested in hearing him slander an hypoethical “liberal” group of people.
If I started my letter with, “those conservatives…” wouldn’t that turn you off?
Johan has his opinion, and that’s fine, and I am willing to debate it. I just am not interested in strawman attacks on an entire “group”.
It’s like Rush Limbaugh on the radio screaming about “feminazis”. Immediately, his arguement is invalid because it relies on this whole fallacy of a strawman. He’s not talking about a real person. He’s talking about this whole idea he has in his head of the eeeevil feminists.
What I saw John was talking about this whole idea he has in his head of eeevil protesters who are whiny liberals who don’t value their education. He pretty much said so in his post.
Do I have to listen to it? No.
Johan, if you have points to make, feel free to discuss them. Attacking a whole group of people is no way to start.
We have at least one common area of agreement.
Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot.
Perhaps Johan wasn’t far off after reading those retorts?? As for speaking of “hypotheticals”, is that what the protesters have been doing all along? Instead of “hypotheticals” they’re conspiracy theories? The thing is here, many people are painting many of the protesters as if none of their actions had any fault of their own. They’re just “innocent” bystanders who just want to protest.
Now, about the DPS thing, that merits some serious looking into is the only thing I may agree upon in terms of communicating properly and clearly.
Like I said, this is everybody’s mess. Nobody is innocent in any of this and everybody’s is guilty to one degree or another in making a fine mess out of everything. Even me.
Keep politics out of it, I was just making a point that I self-identify as a moderate liberal and that this protest is very much radical.
I have made an emotional point that education is the main reason why people are in school and that the protest is a detriment to those trying to learn.
I read this morning the Washpost online talk back thing with Plummer being interviewed. She said that she was incapable of learning in a place where the atmosphere was so constraining. Now that right there is pretty off the wall.
If wildstarryskies thinks that I am just using a few examples and painting the rest like that, well to be honest with you, many of the leaders of the protest are the ones who are engaging in unneccesary actions. They took over a school building, where most of the classrooms are apparently, they football team blocked a gate to keep people from entering, and there was an attempt in RLM’s own words, they wanted to obstruct a parking deck.
The protest has invalidated itself as a leader by committing immoral acts. It has lost the moral high ground that it supposed to hold.
If you think the protest is valid, that is your opinion, but many outsiders are thinking that this is a very big overreaction that has caused more harm to the university than it will ever help.
Could you live with JKF as president? IF people had not protested, would she have been able to govern and lead the school? The obvious answer is yes. Classes would still go on, there would be much less angst, and that the quiet life that people lead would go on (pun unintended).
An Outside Scholar
You are probably right, she will probably have to resign, but unless she has something else for her to do or a monetary settlement is given to her, then she has no reason to do so. The protest will continue unabated even if she gains office, it may just get more vindictive.
I truly pity anyone who becomes the next president of Galladuet.
“F people had not protested, would she have been able to govern and lead the school?”
She hasn’t done an effective job in the past. I don’t see how she can do it now.
That was one of the major issues- that she does not possess the leadership qualities. If there had not been a protest, everything would have continued on the course they were on, which I feel would have been bad for Gallaudet.
I am glad this protest happened. Now people are realizing something’s up. The apathy has been broken. Even if we lose, JK can’t afford to screw up.
I seriously don’t understand what you mean by her not being an effective leader.
How can you quantify that?
I am not an ardent supporter of her at all, but I see this as an overreaction.
I mean, really what has she failed to do?
There is a line I steal from Futurama about God being good. “If you do things right, they wont notice them at all”
Do the research. Start with the Clerc Center letter. It’s at http://www.gufssa.org under “notable letters”.
Whoa! What’s that I am hearing? That’s right, an echo chamber.. It must be all the singing to the choir here.
Come on, guys, those arguements have been repeated ad nauseum from the very beginning. Many rebuttals have been made by myself and others.
I am really getting the impression that there is a core group of anti-protesters (note: not pro-JK) whom have their own agenda they are pushing. What are your reasons? Why are you so bound and determined to be right? What would you do if the protesters turned out to be right (as in their assessment of the flawed process)?
I remember the naysayers back in May saying it was just a bunch of dumb kids and it would blow over. I also remember people saying it was only ASL militant deafies supporting this protest. I remember people asserting that, indeed, JK was the perfect person for the position. I remember yet others saying (still today) that there are not many FSSA supporters.
There is ample evidence to show that those people were mistaken on all counts. Still, I don’t see you reexaming your preset ideas and deep rooted prejudices (yes, prejudices. I’ve seen a lot of anti-ASL and anti-DOD talk around here).
This protest is really hard on all of this. I have had to go through soul searching many times already, only to reemerge to know that the two demmands (which has always been consistent) need to be satisfied.
So, listen and think. Or we’ll still be here rehashing the same old points when the fat lady sings.
And yes, the “hearing” cliches are intentional.
couldn’t have said it better. ;)
Those two demands are, ahem, flawed ones. If anything, should have demanded for an independent and internal review of the process before moving forward with the demands. Had it been shown that’s something amiss, then protesters would then have the needed “meat” to press forward.
And, plenty of anti-ASL and anti-DOD speakums around here? Are they just oozing off the walls as we speak?
Where?
McConnell, Remeber when I said I was finished debating with you? I meant it. If you want the same answers to the same old questions you’ve already asked, you know where to go look for them.
Then don’t reply. Others may jump in to make a point or an argument.
I have a question, does anyone NOT know how to count?
They keep sating 2 demands but maybe my math is poor but it looks like 3 to me.
1. Re-open the search proccess. (3) Fernandes Resign.
2. No reprisals
Now my question, why would they want to re-open a search process that they claim is flawed?
For the search process to be reopened, Fernandes must FIRST resign. You can’t satisfy the first demmand without prior action by Fernandes.
And as for the search process, yes, it must be reopened. The protesters, however, did not say “reopen the same search process” or “use the same search process as before”. It is clear to me that when the search process is reopened, there needs and will be new procedures in place to prevent this from happening again.
Hope that answers your questions.
I still count it as three demands. One is a precondition to the second.
Okay, you’er correct. STOP the whole protest! It’s really three demmands, not two!!! The protesters were lying all the time!!!
:)
Yes, I’m being silly. 2/3. Who cares? I think it’s pretty clear what the demmands (plural) are.
:-)
Well said Hilary!
~ Deaf Pundit
I appreciate the comments — I’ve just gotten online at 11:25pm and I wanted to clarify a couple things.
This post was originally written LAST week (10/18), but due to unforeseen issues, could not be posted by deafdc until today. So the numbers in the blog are *prior* to the increase in numbers of protestors at the front gates (before and after the march). However, I still stand by the fact that even though students are taking turns at the various gates, the numbers still do not reach a majority of the current student population. With alumni helping out, it can be difficult to discern who is a current student and who is an alum, short of asking each person individually.
I have considered, many times, whether I should go on campus and see it for myself. I have chosen, at this time, not to set foot on campus because I am not a student or alumna and not involved with the protest. That is my personal decision.
Also, with regard to the 82% no-confidence faculty vote — please remember that number is the percentage of voting faculty who ATTENDED the voting session. If you “assume” that those faculty who could not/would not attend the voting session voted FOR confidence in JKF, then that number drops to 62%. Also, there are faculty on campus who do not have voting privileges, and their voice should be heard as well. The faculty no-confidence vote is not a reliable measure — it is a good indicator, yes, but it is hardly a reliable measure of the entire faculty membership on campus — tenured, non-tenured, and adjunct. It is a measure of approximately 2/3 of the voting membership.
Again, thank you all for your comments — I look forward to reading more over the next couple days.
Hilary,
There is a reason it’s called FSSA - Faculty, Staff, Students and Alumni. There is widespread support. The students are doing most of the work, yes because they are on campus. The Faculty are bound to their contracts (they can’t walk out, or they’d be fired). The staff has been intimidated in submission. The alumni are the ones mostly running the blogs and sending money.
All of those people are stakeholders in the future of Gallaudet. Just because some of us are not at Gallaudet right now, does not mean that we don’t have some part of our future/past wrapped up in the success of Gallaudet University to become a place with higher standards that has combated audism successfully, with a President we can all look up to and admire.
There *is* support for this protest.
That’s just my take on it. :)
Oh, and yes, I have spoken with people who are both for and against the protest (deaf and hearing). I have spoken with interpreters, students, alumni, protestors, non-protestors. I have discussed this ad nauseam and that is why I decided to finally make my feelings public. :)
I think the real point at this stage of this whole thing is: Let’s say JKF is the best thing since sliced bread….there’s still no way she will ever be able to right the ship of Gallaudet.
Sad to say, but you would be correct.
However, the entire ship may collapse in on itself at the same time. It will not look good either way. If she leaves, people will still be angry and her supporters will feel cheated. As well as the fact that a good number of people outside of the school and community are watching, and I would wager that if the admin gives in it will not bode will for its reputation.
On the other hand, if she stays this entire situation will keep up until something happens. Lawyers and professional mediators need to get there quickly. The protestors have to drop their demand that she resign, it is an intolerable demand.
Bingo!
I agree with DT 100%
At this point in time, how can JKF possibly lead Gallaudet out of this mess?
Good post, but I’m somewhat confused as to your position on the protest. That is, how do you reconcile your post which says to give JKF a chance with a letter which a