In a way, Sept. 11 froze the University in time and helped devalue most other occurrences on campus. And though it would be wrong to say that, as we enter a new year, that these tragic events will not continue to have a major impact on this campus, it would also be wrong to shortchange important events. To its credit, University officials created a nurturing and supportive community that helped students deal with the tragedy of the attacks. What it must now do is continue to foster a supportive community that looks out for students’ interests in all areas.
That is why the University should wholeheartedly endorse the creation of a gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender resource center. As a result of various meetings with student proponents, Vice President for Student Affairs Juan Gonzalez is well aware that sexual minorities suffer disproportionately from depression and eating disorders, among other things, in comparison to heterosexual students.
Georgetown is a Jesuit institution that cares deeply about looking after the whole person. Right now, however, the University is sacrificing its responsibility to a large number of its community members. The fact that Gonzalez refuses the creation of a GLBT resource center?and, what’s more, that he refuses even to discuss the issue with student journalists?shows that, so far, he isn’t following the Jesuit motto.
If the University had the students’ best interests in mind, it should not have waited to open campus dorms until this past Tuesday, the day before classes started. Not only did this inconvenience students who needed earlier access to their dorms for extracurricular activities, it was also a big hassle for those students who returned to campus over the weekend and discovered that they could not get into their rooms.
At the very least, the Office of Housing and Conference Services could have sent out an e-mail explaining its rationale and apologizing to those students whose original travel plans might have been disrupted as a result?international students, for instance.
A third issue where it is ambivalent whether the University has students’ best interests in mind is the current Speech and Expression policy. The University committee should proceed carefully in its effort to limit information covered under the current Speech and Expression Policy. On the surface, the committee’s proposal that the Vice President for Student Affairs should have the authority to remove anonymous publications from public distribution places if he considers them “grossly offensive” does not seem very radical and might be in the school’s interest. But more importantly, it is in the University’s interest to protect free discussion. Any effort to restrict the flow of information must be balanced against the Jesuit commitment to the search for truth.
The University responded admirably to the events Sept. 11. It has the potential to care for the needs of all it students. That is why it must continue to do so?for all students and under all circumstances.
