Dear Editor,
I am writing in response to Jackie Everhardt III’s letter, “Controversy.”
I agree that there is a lot of controversy on this campus. However, I don’t think one can compare an act of racism with the implementation of a smoking ban; it’s not relevant.
It was more than just a “bad decision” for the students to paint their faces black. It was an assertion of and a statement about white privilege.
“Something maybe a hundred people saw” certainly is a big deal, and one can’t put people of color on the same level as people who smoke when one is talking about minorities.
I didn’t have to be there to understand that wearing blackface paint is an act of racism, white privilege, and oblivion.
Also, “wearing some hillbilly outfit to make fun of white farmers” is different from the blackface incident.
Yes, it is also an offensive act because it is a declaration of class privilege, but skin color is innate, whereas socioeconomic status is not.
I think that mandating diversity training is a good idea, and I hope that the students who committed this act will examine their previously unacknowledged privilege and make the appropriate changes.
– Meghan Dillie

Author