By Howard Hecht
On August 24, Binghamton University’s Vice President for Student Affairs, Brian Rose, published a message on the University website regarding the now controversial, and optional, RA discussion “#StopWhitePeople2K16.”
Today, after negative media attention for the event continued to gain traction, Rose provided a second message to the student body in an effort to “provide additional perspective.”
“For those who were familiar with the hashtag used in the title, it was understood not to be literal,” wrote Rose, reaffirming what he stated in his previous message to the public. “Nonetheless,” he continued, “the program should not have been so titled. Out of context, it is offensive and alarming. That was not the intent.”
In this message, Rose has, hopefully, quelled all fears that Binghamton University supports the title of the event, and further, that events with biased titles such as this one will become commonplace.
Over the past several days, Binghamton University has been under heavy scrutiny for the event’s title. This frustration with the University is understandable, but the extent to which the event’s purpose has been twisted and molded to fit the agendas of others is just as unacceptable as the title of the event itself.
Naturally, the backlash against the University has also extended to the three Residential Assistants who hosted the event. In an effort to prevent the further involvement of these three individuals, please understand that Binghamton Review does not endorse any of the hateful attention these RA’s have received. Their names have been redacted from the image posted alongside our original article, and hopefully, other news outlets will do the same.
These three RA’s chose to host this event, and therefore, must accept the consequences that come alongside choosing such a provocative, distasteful title. That does not mean, however, that they deserve to be excluded from further calm discussions on the topics they attempted to talk about in the first place.
Binghamton Review does not apologize for criticizing the event’s title, and we do not regret shedding light an issue that so many people clearly have a strong opinion on. We do, however, hope that out of respect for the University’s efforts to apologize for the event’s title, the culmination of this controversy can be considered progress toward peaceful discussion on this campus.
As Rose wrote at the end of today’s message: “Above all, I ask each of you to consider the purpose and impact of your response to this story and let this be a teachable moment for us all.”
Binghamton Review agrees wholeheartedly with this sentiment, and we hope to continue supporting the understanding, compassionate environment Binghamton University strives to achieve.
Rose’s initial response was all PC liberal rhetoric. Not one comment was made Wednesday where he acknowledged that the title of the course could be found to be wanting and offensive to thousands of White students and alumni and their parents who are often the ones paying the tuition and making donations. He was actually quite defensive of the “ironic” title. Today, he is backtracking, most likely because the governor’s office and the chancellor’s office told BU administration to get rid of the title and ensure the course was not offensive to anyone. Hopefully, Binghamton Review is not being pressured as well and will continue to expose any other inappropriate activities on the Binghamton campus. There is no place for anything like this.
Having lived in Binghamton worked for Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, ending my Carreer at Johns Hopkins I fount the course title offensive and the apology platitudinous. I agree that this form of hate has no place in a state run university.
Racism is still racism. If whites did something similar administrators would be fired and students would be expelled. Rose should resign immediately.
Huh. So the name “Black Lives Matter” doesn’t really have anything to do with the aims of the group?
So the name “Stop White People 2016” doesn’t really have anything to do with the substance of the presentation? HUH, HOW CONVENIENT. No wonder people don’t believe anything that’s fed them anymore.
The original title of the course was more than “offensive,” it was unambiguously racist. The Binghamton Review should not be so quick to “move on” to a calm discussion of the issues raised. Nowhere have I read that any apology has been issued by the three RA’s and I have serious doubts that the University administration would be so forgiving of such racism exhibited by white students. The entire notion of “white privilege” is itself racist, as the concept seeks to delegitimize the proper achievements and efforts of white people, as though this is acceptable. Absent a proper apology from the RA’s, each should be expelled from the University.
THIS IS RACISM. I’m white and there’s nothing I have to apologize for. This pandering to blacks is political manipulation and it’s flat out dangerous. If you think you’re going to subjugate me because of something a small fraction of white people did 150+ years ago, you’re sadly mistaken. I’m just as willing to fight racists attacking me as any black person, and I’ll take it right into your face. This is the road to REVOLT.
I’m a so-called person of color and former ultra-liberal college-indoctrinated lefty, but more of a moderate in the middle now…. and I will write what should already be plain as daylight to the University: The “StopWhitePeople” course title was obviously RACIST. Do NOT be cowardly by trying to hide behind a double-standard, or a disingenous “apology.” RACISM is toxic, no matter which “color” is attacking. Stop this toxin from spreading, if for no other reason than your own self-preservation, because racism even poisons its originator. The anti-white racists responsible for the course title must resign, or be terminated. They will learn and remember that bigotry has consequences, and in the long run will be much better people for it. More importantly, the University will have cleansed itself of their toxic racism.
If the message had been ‘stop black privilege’ or something similar, Mr. Rose would have already been fired and blacklisted. That he has not been terminated is hardly surprising, as the leftists are incapable of holding themselves to even their own standards.
Lesson Learned: Be as racist as humanely possible, but be slightly more subtle about it in the future.
What will be done about the racist content of the course?
““the program should not have been so titled. Out of context, it is offensive and alarming. That was not the intent.””
Even in context, the title is offensive to anyone that doesn’t share the ideology the course was based off of. Racism shouldn’t be acceptable, simply because it’s fashionable to hate the targeted group (whites in this case)
Stop non-whites from invading Europe, raping Europeans, from rioting, burning cities down, committing highway robbery in France, mass rape in North England (Rotherham) targeting European folk for crime, racial profiling and stereotyping European folk, killing police, thuggery etc?
Please wake up
http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/analysis_and_planning/enforcement_report_year_end_2014.pdf
Nonwhites commit 92 percent of all violent crime in New York City, and are responsible for 98 percent of all shootings, 91 percent of all firearm arrests, 88 percent of all drug arrests, 84 percent of all stolen property arrests, and 88 percent of all misdemeanor sexual offenses, the city’s police department has reported.