I've been following events at NU through the medium of the IV listserve. Of particular note for the past week or two was an incident of violence involving a student and the subsequent reaction of the student body on campus.
It seems that a student of hispanic ethnicity was not only harrassed with messages on their door, but actually physically assaulted with a knife.
Except he made it up.
Now, prior to this revelation, the whole student body was up in arms. Various "minority" organizations had banded together to stage a silent protest throughout an entire school day by wearing black and refusing to speak in any classes. Folks in IV understandably wanted to do their part in demonstrating their concern and compassion for those who might be targeted solely on the basis of their pigmentation.
When I first read about the situation and subsequent action I was rather shocked. First of all, I found it incredibly difficult to believe that anyone on a college campus would (even if they happened to hold disparaging views of hispanic folk, which in itself would seem very unlikely)
dare to act against another person with words and especially with physical violence in a manner that even might be construed as being race based. (unless the victim was
Jewish) I mean really, who among students who could get admitted to northwestern would be so incapable of "reading the times" that they would do such a thing. I assumed that most likely the culprit was not a member of the community and that therefore the whole brouhaha on campus would have very little effect.
As it turned out, I was right in my assumption, but for the wrong reason.
I think this whole incident goes to show just how dangerous it is to categorize crime based on perceived motivation.
Imagine if a student had been attacked with a knife and simply asked for their money. The story would have ended up as a paragraph long column in the police blotter section in the middle of the Daily. No one would say or think anymore about it.
Unless the victim was a woman, the assailant was a male, and the word "slut" happened to be uttered at some point.
Then Take Back the Night would have been all up in arms, and there would have been rallies at the rock and lighted candles late at night, and frat boys having to forgoe sleeping with their girlfriends so as to appear 'sensetive'.
All because the crime fell under the rubric of being part of the vast history of evil males oppressing virtuous females.
Don't misunderstand me... I'm all against violent crime. I think violent offenders should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. But to make the same violent crime better or worse based on a perceived "-ism" on the part of the offender? Sounds suspiciously like making some criminals "more equal" than others...