Wednesday, February 20, 2008

QRC Hate Crime? No? That's Okay, We'll Make It That Way!

We all know that Pomona's The Student Life has a history of skewing the news to their own brand of far left agitation.

They constantly rewrite students' articles to reflect their own viewpoints and one time even used the phrase "undocumented citizen" to refer to "illegal immigrant."

Perhaps it should come as no surprise that the story, "Pomona Begins Investigation Over Alleged QRC Bias Incident" by Lindsay Mullen continues in that inglorious tradition.

Let's fact check every sentence of the TSL's most recent propaganda pieces.

On Jan. 30, the eve of Pomona’s Queer Resource Center open house, unidentified members of the 5-C community broke into Walton Commons and discharged a fire extinguisher. After the fire alarms were triggered by the chemical fumes, Campus Safety and the L.A. County Fire Department responded.

How do you know it was unidentified members of the 5-C community? Couldn't it just have easily been someone else? The article doesn't say and we are just left to assume it. Tsk. Tsk, TSL.

Although there was no permanent damage and nothing was stolen, white soot coated the kitchen and furniture in the living room of the QRC. The housekeeping staff worked to clean the QRC for several hours.

Pay attention to that. "There was no permanent damage and nothing was stolen." How many
hate crimes do you know of that leave "no permanent damage"?

Why does the TSL mention that the housekeeping staff cleaned up? Isn't that there job?
I checked The Student Life's record and there's nothing about how people had to clean up the mess that Kerri Dunn made. I guess not all non-hate crimes are equal, eh?

Associate Dean of Students Daren Mooko is heading an investigation. Mooko is interviewing witnesses and working to develop a charge sheet. Although it is not yet known whether the incident was a random act of vandalism or a hate crime, it is thought that alcohol played a role.

Why is the Associate Dean of Students heading an investigation? Shouldn't the police handle hate crimes? Or is it not a hate crime? Why aren't they handling it?

The answer: because it isn't a hate crime. If the Deans were serious about this one, don't you think that they would have turned it over to the police?

Pomona defines bias incidents as “expressions of hostility against another individual (or group) because of the other person’s (or group’s) race, color, religion…or sexual orientation.”

By what right does Pomona define bias incidents? Who said that they had a right to construct this policy?

So let me get this straight. Pomona defines what a bias incident is, appoints there own special investigation, and comes to their own conclusions about who should be punished?

I wonder what happens if no one is found guilty...

The administration is reluctant to label the occurrence a bias incident because there was no message, slur, or explicit evidence left at the scene. The college says it is strictly adhering to its policies outlined in the Student Handbook.

Wait a second. No message? No slur? No explicit evidence left at the scene? And yet it is ongoing? Hmmm.....

Well, couldn't they at least make one up? You know, kind of like "Hillary is a foxy lesbian," and call it a day?

Joshua Harris, QRC Interim Coordinator and Graduate Advisor, observed that a rainbow flag was missing from the window of the building after the incident.

The theft of the flag, which hung in the QRC for over a year, “sends a deliberate message,” Harris said. While there is a strong likelihood that the flag was stolen during the incident, it is also possible that it was removed before the incident took place.

Hold up. I thought the TSL said earlier that nothing was stolen. Now something is stolen? Will they notify the police? Don't count on it. After all, the police have to do real leg work.

Although the administration has not yet classified the incident, Dean of Students Miriam Feldblum acknowledged that it has caused emotional responses similar to those that occur after a bias related incident.

“Those of us who use the QRC feel personally violated,” Feldblum said.

“Regardless of the intent…the people who work and use this space can’t help but feel violated and threatened,” Harris said.

It finally comes out. Even if there was no incident, some people feel there was an incident and so it becomes an incident. Oh Doublespeak reigns supreme at Pomona! *Your correspondent hunts around looking for his copy of the Constitution, can't find it, and he cries.*

Christopher Ramos ’08, Senior Budget Officer for the QRC, was not shocked by the incident.

“Let us not pretend that hate, homophobia, and heterosexism do not thrive on campus,” Ramos said.

You know, Christomer Ramos, I don't really have any evidence for hate, homophobia, or herosexism on this, or any other, campus. And given that your organization sort of kind of depends upon there being a problem which it can "solve," I think I'm going to be pretty skeptical of your accusations.

After all, I have plenty of evidence that fake hate crimes are perpetrated all the time on American college campuses, sometimes by the very minorities who would benefit from the increased publicity. Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

As for invoking the word "thrive," I must take you to task.

You see, Merriam-Webster defines "thrive" this way.
1 : to grow vigorously : flourish 2 : to gain in wealth or possessions : prosper 3 : to progress toward or realize a goal despite or because of circumstances —often used with on<thrives on conflict>
Sorry. I just don't think hate "thrives" at Pomona. I do know that political correctness thrives there, even -- or is it especially?-- at a "liberal campus."

The QRC would like to continue discussion of the incident. Because similar events still occur across the nation, the QRC feels it is important to raise awareness and show that incidents that discrimination takes place even on liberal campuses.

Ah yes, here it comes at last: the appeal to the unseen oppressed masses of the world. You see, often these incidents end up with No one dares to paint the following scenario:
That a bunch of drunk/bored college students started messing about with a fire extinguisher and didn't want to get caught.
No, it's a hate crime now, whatever the evidence to the contrary. Pity the poor fool who is brought in the "charges."


Anonymous said...

Hmm. Because you personally are not aware of prejudice in the 5Cs, doesn't mean it does not go on. Secondly, most hate crimes DONT leave permanent damage (what about emotional???). Does that make it OK? Third, no other organization was targeted that night. Spraying white foam over the entire inside of a building, specifically spraying inside the fridge, and taking the symbol of gay pride makes this message clear. They were specifically targeting the QRC. Would it be OK for you to accept that there is hate in this world (so much that organizations such as the QRC are NECESSARY) and that we need to recognize these issues to bring awareness to the majority? Feigning ignorance does not bring change. Are you too involved in your opinions to have a heart anymore? Come on son!

Charles Johnson said...

"Most hate crimes don't leave permanent damage"?

Oh stop it. That makes them not hate crime at all, but exercises in the first Amendment.

That so-called hate crime was explored in subsequent posts-- it was a bunch of drunk students messing about in the kitchen next door and had little to do with gays at all--and it was found that that flag was not stolen. (The door was locked, after all.) Nice try.

Anonymous said...

Dude seriously? Please check your spelling. There is not the same as their. Also, just out of curiosity, who did you have write your college essay? You absolutely should not have been admitted based on the level of writing you demonstrate throughout all of your "articles." The admissions staff should be ashamed of your presence on campus. The overwhelming stench of bigotry that permeates your writing contributes to an environment of ignorance and intolerance that allows crimes like this to continue. Forgive me, but isn't it the responsibility of the housekeeping staff to maintain the facilities on Pomona's campus and not necessarily clean up after the reckless actions of drunk students. Second, didn't this crime take place on Pomona's campus? Wouldn't it be reasonable for them to have a hand in the investigation as it is they who defined the crime as such in the first place? How you can make the accusation that Pomona has no place defining this as a hate incident when you try your own hand at proving the contrary is astounding. The stench of hypocrisy is almost too much for any reasonable individual to bear. Excuse me if I don't understand your perspective, but how can a white, christian, educated, heterosexual male living in the United States possibly understand or comment on the injustice that minorities of any kind experience on a daily basis? I can't imagine any circumstance which would allow you to experience discrimination on the basis of your sexual orientation, as the status quo allows those who are not "LGBT" the comfort of going about their daily lives without having their identity questioned and criticized. Dude, please enlighten me I'm trying to understand.

Charles Johnson said...

1. I never confused their or there in the post. Read it again.
2. I wrote my own essays. I also do all my own stunts.
3. The housekeeping staff cleaned up the fire extinguisher, but that is kind of their job, so I don’t much think it’s that bad or deserves a place in the article.
4. “Environment of ignorance”? It wasn’t a hate crime or a bias-related incident. It was, to quote the police report, a bunch of kids drinking and messing about in the room next door.
5. We’re a nation of laws so the whole “they defined the crime” in the first place goes to show why we it’s a good thing that people like you don’t control our judiciary.
6. The whole identity stuff is really silly. Gays are especially poor served when people try to spin attacks as attacks when they aren’t.

Anonymous said...

With regard to the previous poster's "environment of ignorance" statement, I believe the previous poster intended to address the overarching ignorance and prejudice present throughout the whole of American society towards certain individuals that necessitates the presence of organizations such as the QRC. Also, if you would have cared to go to the building before you wrote your article, you would have seen for yourself that damage was not only done to the kitchen, but also to the remainder of the QRC facilities. In addition, I believe the previous poster hoped that you would understand that since the incident caused emotional trauma similar to bias incidents, and that the administration would later classify the incident as such, that it would be necessary for the administration to view the crime as a bias incident to ensure the emotional and physical well-being of their students. Certainly, the article you quoted which states that minorities fake bias incidents to further their cause (what cause? to harm the majority?) could not be applied to all incidents (that would be ludicrous right? I mean what would ACTUALLY be the point). It seems you imply that bias incidents don't exist in any capacity and that all are just a ploy to harm the majority (white heterosexual men). With regard to the judiciary, I don't think that's relevant. The poster didn't even address this issue. I believe the focus of the administration's and posters statements were intended to address the issue of Pomona's policy, not that of the federal or other judiciary bodies. If those who use the QRC felt this weren't an incident that attacked them personally, what would be the point of your article? Your silly attempt to speak for those to which you have no relation is pathetic.

Your feeble attempt at writing for the conservative perspective is disgraceful. Your writing clearly demonstrates the downfall of solid journalism and opinion writing and the rise of a new era of socio-political writing that only solidifies the marked decrease of intelligible writing on these issues in our country. You writing seems to be fueled by an explicitly undisclosed hatred for minorities.

Charles Johnson said...

Nice try on calling me a hater of minorities, anonymous. I'm not and you'd be glad that you're anonymous or I would take you to court over libel.

As for minorities, I don't recognize the concept. There are only individuals.