Scripps: The Most Racist College in America
Students urged to feel good about hating white people.
White people are worthy of hatred and no one should feel bad for hating them, incoming freshmen are told at the all-female, ultra-politically correct Scripps College in southern California, making it probably the worst and most racist undergraduate school in the United States.
“Anger is a legitimate response to oppression, as is sadness, fear, frustration, exhaustion, and a general distaste or hatred of white people,” write the student authors of the Unofficial Scripps College Survival Guide. The 217-page exercise in PC brainwashing is supposed to help new students adjust to Scripps College.
Scripps is one member of Claremont Colleges, a consortium of five undergraduate schools (known as the 5Cs) and two graduate schools located in Claremont, which is between Los Angeles and San Bernardino. The other four undergraduate member colleges are Pomona, Claremont McKenna, Harvey Mudd, and Pitzer. All five undergraduate colleges are afflicted by a group called The 5C Students of Color Alliance which wants racially segregated “safe spaces” off-limits to white students created.
Anti-white racism, anti-male sexism, and a catalog of ugly leftist, un-American ideas are all on display in the Scripps so-called survival guide. Rest assured that if the targets were anyone other than Caucasians and men, investigators from the Justice Department would be swarming Scripps College as you read this column.
And don’t let the weaselly word unofficial in the handbook’s title fool you. The campus administration unashamedly supports and promotes this radical vade mecum that is packed with politically correct drivel intended to poison the minds of impressionable youth and turn them against the American experiment. The college’s website contains an article describing the handbook in glowing terms. Officials appear to have chosen the descriptor unofficial only because they think it sounds cool.
The guidebook defines “White Privilege” as “the set of unearned benefits white people gain as a result of systematic racism and discrimination” that “benefits even those white people who are disadvantaged by other forms of institutionalized oppression like ableism, classism, sexism, homophobia, and transphobia.”
The writers add that “asking people of color to educate us about racism,” “asking people of color to absolve us of our guilt,” and “identifying the ways that we are engaging in the perpetuation of white supremacy” are all things that “we need to stop doing right now.”
In a “Dear white students” section, they explain that “[r]everse racism cannot exist because white people maintain power over people of color” and “because there are no institutions that were founded with the intention of discriminating against white people on the basis of their skin [color].”
A section focused on how to be a good “Trans Ally” urges new arrivals to ask for each of their peers’ gender pronouns to avoid unwittingly imposing the traditional male-female dichotomy on them. “Enacting a life of accountability and ownership over your own domination and privileges is the only way you can exhibit allyship,” the book states.
The guidebook also advocates the policing of language. It warns students to be careful about what they say in class and calls “capitalism and consumerism” concepts that “can lead to [the] dangerous promotion of certain ideals and widespread circulation of stigmatizing information.” The book scolds “those who oppose trigger warnings,” labeling such people as uncaring and “potentially sexist, ableist, homophobic, racist, classist, etc.”
The manual criticizes “ableist” language, denouncing the use of words like “insane” and “stupid” as “using disability as a metaphor to describe something negative” and “reinforcing [the idea] that mentally ill people shouldn’t be listened to, believed, or valued.” The handbook urges students to use words like “unruly,” “moody,” and “dismantled,” instead of “crazy,” “dumb,” and “stupid.”
Students are counseled in the handbook against referring to young people as “kids” or “teens,” because these words are “patronizing” in that they “belittle and demean young people’s power” and feed into the notion that “teens are incapable of certain leadership roles or don’t have the mental capacity/self[-]control/understanding to articulate or make good decisions.”
Conservatives have long known that the loudest yelps for diversity are heard among those most violently opposed to it in the realm of ideas.
Guidebook contributor and student Jocelyn Gardner gushed in the manual, “We wanted a variety of voices mentoring new students. The writers were given free reign in terms of style, and I think that really shows.”
“The guide is about more than just the day-to-day functioning of the school. For example, we’ve given readers a primer on campus social justice, and this will allow them to engage more confidently with those issues. For people who experience oppression, stigma, shame, or fear due to the silence around certain topics, simply having those topics in the guide will let them know that Scripps supports them. Students will know it’s okay to have discussions about those topics, and the silence will end.”
Instead of whining about phony injustices, Gardner ought to ask when the silence about political correctness on campus and the incalculable harm it does to the human spirit will end. But don’t hold your breath.
Conservatives may be amused by the brief essay at page 50, “Conservative at Scripps,” which has a Potemkin Village feel to it, as if it was included to trick readers into believing there is real intellectual diversity at Scripps. Of course it is unsigned. Maybe an actual conservative student could not be found at Scripps.
The essay’s author urges readers not to “take anything I say about attending Scripps as a conservative student too seriously” – and perhaps for good reason. She doesn’t seem particularly conservative. “I enjoy being my family’s go-to person to explain the basics of race relations or challenges that women face[.]“
She implies her conservative family, not her leftist professors and fellow students, are the intolerant people who need to change. Her parents, she writes, “were less than thrilled with the new perspectives I gained at school … [and] no one wanted to hear what I had to say.”
Scripps College is home to ignorant, radical, left-wing mobs whose continuing existence ought to frighten patriotic Americans concerned about the future.
Racist feminists at Scripps caused a stink last month when they learned Bill Clinton’s secretary of state, left-wing female Madeleine Albright, had been invited to be the college’s 2016 commencement speaker. Senior Kinzie Mabon described Albright in the same breath as being a “repeated genocide enabler,” and more damningly, as a “white feminist.”
It was just weeks ago at Scripps that student body president Minjoo Kim went into full social justice warrior freakout mode after someone scribbled “#Trump2016” on the dorm door of a reportedly Mexican-American student.
Kim denounced the whiteboard doodle as a “racist act [that] is completely unacceptable” and as “intentional violence committed directly [sic] to a student of color[.]” Charlotte Johnson, Scripps’ Vice President for Student Affairs and Dean of Students, agreed, describing the phrase “#Trump2016” as “racism” and “intimidation.”
Earlier this year the crazed leftists of the 5Cs drove the editor-in-chief of the conservative-leaning Claremont Independent out of his campus job as a writing coach. Steven Glick quit his job at Pomona College’s Writing Center, saying the constant harassment its progressive staff inflicted on him pushed him over the edge.
Glick wrote a column posted on the newspaper’s website that was titled, “I resign: The Writing Center’s mission is to teach writing, not ideology[.]” He explained that one of the center’s professors complained he wasn’t doing enough to make students feel welcome.
“To rectify that, she canceled my appointments that night and asked me to read three packets about identity politics instead,” Glick wrote. “One of the readings states that teaching English to non-native English speakers is an attack on free speech. Another criticizes ‘the hegemonic feminist theory produced by academic women, most of whom were white.’ The third, titled ‘Heteropatriarchy and the Three Pillars of White Supremacy,’ states that capitalism is racist.”
“I read all three packets, as I had been told to do. I did not agree with the opinions presented in any of them, nor did I see any connection between these readings and my work at the Writing Center,” Glick added.
Glick was then asked “what role identity politics should play in the Writing Center’s mission.” He said his answer was to provide “students with a community of experienced readers and writers, offering free, one-on-one consultations at any stage of the writing process—from generating a thesis and structuring an argument to fine-tuning a draft.”
Apparently that was the wrong answer because the next day Glick was placed on probation at the center. He quit even though he said he loved the job.
The newspaper, incidentally, has been attacked as “insensitive,” “racist, sexist, classist,” and for allegedly making some students “emotionally ill.“
After a photo of Glick and two of his editorial colleagues was posted online wearing promotional tank tops that read “Claremont Independent: Always Right,” one critic snarled, “Literally everything about it is a joke and honestly I wish I could shut them down but they would be so quick to spit their ‘constitutional rights,’ rights that only work for some.” Glick said a strange woman who saw the photo came up to him uninvited during dinner and ranted for 15 minutes about how the photo supposedly promoted racism, sexism, and other _ism_s. “When she left, she said I was a bigot,” he added.
As Jennifer Kabbany writes at the College Fix, since July 2015 Scripps has hosted events for non-white students in segregated “safe spaces,” and has begun to offer multiple gender pronoun options to students including “Hu, Hum, Hus,” “Per, Pers, Perself,” and “Ze, Zir, Zir.”
The other undergraduate schools in the Claremont consortium have also seen plenty of PC kookiness since last summer. At Claremont McKenna College an Asian student was bullied for stating the obvious fact that “black people can be racist.” A Pitzer College student’s proposal to launch a DreamCatchers club to raise the spirits of terminally ill hospice patients was attacked because the term “dreamcatchers” was deemed a form of cultural appropriation toward Native Americans. The same college approved the creation of a tattoo club but rejected a plan for a yacht club because the word “yacht” is “offensive” and the sport supposedly too “exclusive.”
At Scripps College last October student activists denounced “Project Vulva,” reportedly created by feminists “to initiate dialogue about the stigmatization of vulvas in society.” Organizers described the event as “educating people about the vulva in order to confront society’s stigmas and stereotypes, and make people more comfortable with the many varying images and types of cis and non-cis vulvas.”
Even that exquisite, avant-garde example of political correctness was savaged by campus uber-radicals. Critics attacked the event for being “extremely transmisogynistic” and “incredibly violent to trans women.“
In 2014 Scripps College abruptly rescinded an invitation to Pulitzer Prize-winning conservative columnist George Will to speak at the ninth annual Elizabeth Hubert Malott Public Affairs Program, “the mission of which,” says the Claremont Independent, “is to bring speakers to campus whose political views differ from the majority of students at the all-women’s college[.]“
Will was ostracized because he wrote a column expressing skepticism about the exaggerated reporting of rape incident on the nation’s campuses.
But Will is a white male, so no one at Scripps College needs to hear from him anyway.