"Trail of Cheers" (Daily Show's segment on "Chief Illiniwek")

"Trail of Cheers" is what the Daily Show called their segment on UIUC's decision to discontinue use of "Chief Illiniwek" as its sports mascot. Here is a link to the segment.
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/?ml_video=86244

Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show" was on UIUC's campus April 24th, filming a segment about UIUC's mascot. Here are photos that ran in today's student paper.

Today, March 13, 2007, the University of Illinois Board of Trustees voted publicly to discontinue use of Chief Illiniwek.

• A resolution was put forth for a public vote.
• Trustee Carroll amended the resolution, adding text that revokes the 1990 resolution that "retained" the chief as UI's symbol. She also inserted language that says Chancellor Herman will have full responsibility for resolving the issue.
• Trustee Dorris spoke against the resolution, at length.
• Trustee Sperling acknowledged the heartfelt sentiments of pro chief people, saying he felt that way at one time, too, and is sad that it has to end, but that it is important to let it go and move on.
• Dorris continued, developing a legal argument re the by-laws, procedure, etc.
• Trustee Montgomery (newly appointed) intervened saying the legal discussion does not take precedence over a moral issue, stating this is a MORAL issue and is about doing what is right.
• The BOT then voted. Only Dorris voted against the resolution.

I've been working alongside other Native people and our allies on this issue since I came here in 1994. THIS is the closure we've been working towards.

The announcement made by BOT Chair Eppley in February was unsatisfying, because it did not acknowledge what is WRONG with the chief illiniwek. Today's BOT meeting was different. It acknowledged what is wrong.

In particular, Trustee Sperling said he did not ever (speaking emphatically) want to sit and listen to another UIUC Native student describe her/her experiences on this campus with this issue. The student who spoke today is Genevieve Tenoso (with her permission, her remarks are below).

If you want to read press on this, google "illiniwek" (then click on the 'news' tab) and you'll find a great many articles. If you want to read our local (conservative, pro-chief) paper's coverage, go here:
UI Trustees Approve Resolution to end Chief Illiniwek.


The BOT also voted NOT to join a lawsuit being brought against the NCAA, by the two students who portray chief illiniwek. I do think we're at a definitive moment today.

The school will retain the name "Fighting Illini" --- and remake "Illini" such that it does not have any Native imagery or association. Whether they will be successful or not is a question and concern, but I do think we've turned a corner. It is my preference that they get rid of "Illini" too and begin anew with an entirely new sports team name, logo, and mascot.

-----

Good morning.

My name is Genevieve Tenoso, I am a Lakota/Ojibwa graduate student in Anthropology, and I am here today in order to speak to you about courage.

In my first year here, I was asked to write an essay that said something about who I was and what I hoped to accomplish.

I wrote about my grandmother. A strong, intelligent woman who put aside her own dreams of higher education in order to raise a family, and then later, my sister and myself.

That took enormous courage. To know just how much she was giving up, but to go ahead and do it anyway, because she knew we needed her.

In that essay I said that I wanted to pick up where she left off all those years ago when she was, like me, standing on the threshold of life, with paths before her branching off in every direction. Every road lined with seemingly endless opportunities.

But I am here today, in order to tell you that because of choices you've made, or failed to make, I haven't had one, single day on this campus when something didn't remind me that there is a big difference between the “Indian” you'd prefer me to be, and the living, breathing Native person that I am.

I am here in order to let you know that I am not alone in feeling this way, that for many of us, just simply coming to school is an act of courage. That because of choices you've made, or failed to make, we know that the color of our skin, the faiths we believe in, or the people we choose to love mean the difference between a rich, rewarding academic experience, and one fraught with stress, tension and fear.

I'd like to think that I am, like my grandmother, both brave and strong, but I stand before you today in fear.

Afraid for my future, and frightened for my life. I've been taunted, maligned and threatened for nothing more than standing up and saying “you have no right to lie about who I am; about who other Native people are".

That, takes courage. but courage is more than just facing your fears.

Courage is standing up for what you know is right, not just getting away with whatever you can.

Courage is accepting responsibility for your actions, not just washing your hands of them and claiming your conscience is clear.

Courage is answering hard questions, it's showing up and being willing to listen to those who may tell you things you'd rather not hear.

You were invited to the forum on Racism, Power and Privilege at UIUC and you didn't even bother to show up. No one on this board could take the time to come and listen to the people who are most affected by the racial tensions on this campus. The people whose lives your choices have real consequences for.

You didn't show up because you didn't have to.

I was there, just like I am here, because I have to be.

When someone threatens to put a tomahawk into your face, you have to either stand your ground, or run away. When you discover that there are people who would rather butcher you like an animal than have you disagree with them, you have to react. You have no choice.

When the administration looks the other way while students of privilege commit these kinds of acts of psychic violence, none of us have a choice anymore.

And in a climate which progressively moves toward bolder and bolder acts of hate and intolerance, a time will surely come when no one at the university will be able to come away and say they have a clear conscience.

Every time you fail to show courage, we have to.

I'm no fool. I wouldn't put myself in harms way in order to satisfy some personal whim. I am here in order to speak for all of those who should be here, but couldn't be. I am here especially for all of those who we hope will be here someday, and in whose cause I am willing to risk much.

I am here to say that though I fear for myself, my hope gives me courage, because I know that with every wall I help to tear down, and every obstacle we remove, those who come after will be able to get just a little bit farther before they have to start fighting the same battles I've had to fight.

Maybe someday, through our combined efforts, we can clear that path and make this University a place of opportunity for all people. Maybe someday you will publicly acknowledge your part in creating an atmosphere where intolerance and bigotry and hate are the natural consequences of excessive school spirit.

Maybe someday you will show courage.

Until then. We will have to. I will have to.

In this place of learning, I sincerely hope you will learn from our example

Working, living, studying at UIUC: The context of working, living, and studying in a community that "honors" American Indians with "Chief Illiniwek" means that American Indians have to deal with a great deal of misinformation about our cultures. This was, in part what led my daughter, Liz Reese, to develop a program designed to meet the needs of underrepresented minority students at her high school ("Uni High" is UIUC's laboratory high school). Uni's school paper carried an editorial about Uni's climate on Feb 7th. Comments to the editorial capture the intolerance that lies beneath the surface in this community. At present, I am using this blog space to provide information and updates regarding the racial climate at her school. As part of UIUC's American Indian community, we view the discontinuation of "Chief Illiniwek" as only a small step in addressing racial climate at UIUC and in the Urbana-Champaign community.

Below are:

1) Letter #1: An Open Letter from my daughter to the Uni Community (sent 1:00 AM, 2/10/2007)

2) Letter #2: Immediately following it is a hurtful, uncaring response to Liz from a Uni parent [Note: Earlier, I included this parent's name along with her remarks, but I have decided it is not helpful to reveal her name. Her remarks are important, so they remain visible here.] (received at 11:33 AM, 2/10/2007)

3) Letter #3: A letter from a Uni parent, submitted as a comment at 11:56 AM, 2/10/2007. This parent anticipated the uncaring response in "Letter #2"

4) Letter #4: A letter from a Uni alum, submitted as a comment at 12:16 PM, 2/10/2007.

5) Letter #5: A letter, submitted as a comment, that contains the analysis that Letter #3 asked for.

6) Letter #6: A letter I (Debbie Reese, Liz's mother) wrote and circulated at 7:11 AM on 2/11/2007.

7) Letter #7: Letter to Uni Community from UIUC Provost Katehi and Uni Director Patton, sent at 2:42 PM on 2/15/2007.

NOTE: UIUC HAS A WEBSITE DESIGNED TO HELP PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT ACTS OF INTOLERANCE LOOK LIKE, AND WHAT A HATE CRIME IS.

---------------------------------------
(1) Liz's letter

Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 01:31:38 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Racist attacks on Uni Native Student

Uni High Community,

The controversy surrounding the Gargoyle Editorial Tolerance at Uni is now infamous. The MSA program and senior editors of the Gargoyle have been criticized harshly by our community, at times crossing the boundary of respect, a boundary that this email concerns.

I created the MSA program because I have felt victimized and uncomfortable because of my ethnicity at Uni, in my time here I have had students drum "Indian" chants when I walk into a classroom, I have even had people print out racially offensive materials and tape them throughout my locker, and then I have been told that it was my fault. I don't want others to feel that same pain I have and have it dismissed by their peers. While initially I concentrated my program on specific minorities, I have realized there is more pain to be addressed at Uni, and for months now I have extended the invitation to include all those who feel oppressed, and still I am alled exclusive and intolerant.

People are angry, that much is clear, but there is still a line of respect for other people that has been crossed.

That line was crossed on this evening, besides the still visible attacks on my family, several posts attacking my identity were deleted at the request of the administration. I choose to make these statements public because the anger, and cruelty displayed towards who I am and what I fight for should be made public. So that hopefully the community has something to say about what is and is not ok to do to its members.

Regardless of how well I executed my intentions, they have been and will be because I care about Uni, and I want to make it better.

Below are pieces of the deleted comments, from several different posts:

"Nobody commenting here is racist, Jude. In fact, most of us are from extremely diverse backgrounds (more so than Liz, who—shockingly—is only HALF Native American)."

"The MSA has met disagreeing viewpoints because the people who run it (i.e. Liz) fail to see that there are other people who have problems out there, and that they might even be feeling more pain. The people here who are the most uncomfortable are the editors, who have been verbally abused and still haven’t backed down—they’re 16- and 17-year-olds who do not run a professional publication, and yet you’re calling them arrogant and ignorant racists. Unlike Liz, they are not privileged enough to comment back—they’ll only be accused of being white supremacists once more. The irony is that, as Andrea Park pointed out early on in this onslaught, most of them could be seen as less privileged than Liz: out of the 10 of them, 8 are from non-White Anglo-Saxon Protestant origins, and of those 8, none of them are less than 1/2 ethnic."

"If Liz and the gang were truly so underprivileged and mistreated, they wouldn’t be able to carry on this ideological battle, and Liz wouldn’t be getting paid for causing unnecessary dissent; if you all represent an underprivileged culture that’s been so suppressed by the mainstream, then how come you’re employed by a highly-regarded university, such as the U of I? How is it that you all are members of middle class America? If you were truly so underprivileged, you’d be living in the inner city in the slums, or in a hovel on a reservation somewhere (and to those people who do live in such terrible conditions, I extend my warmest sentiments, as well as my hand for aid—I realize that there’s such a thing as racism, but I don’t see that The Chief trumps an example of genocide such as the Holocaust)."

"And in case you were wondering, one of the students leading the MSA group is much better off than my family financially, and is also lighter skinned (which to me is not a big deal, but to you, skin color seems to be very important)."

"is Liz Reese darker skinned than Arabs? I don’t about you, but my eyes tell me no. Is she darker than other races (i.e. Some asians, Indians, etc.)? No. So is she being mistreated because of her skin color? Not as far as I know. If the MSA program comes down to skin color, then there is no excuse for it excluding so many groups. And ultimately, skin color is what its coming down to. Liz Reese is Native American. Or 1/4 Native American rather. I respect that, I truly do. But she is just as privileged as any other person at Uni. There are people MUCH less well off than her. And her skin color is not darker than a white person with a tan. So where is her mistreatment coming in?"

Elizabeth (Liz) Reese

Yunpovi

Uni High Minority Student Advocate

-----------------------------------------
(Letter #2)

LETTER FROM UNI PARENT

Subject: RE: [UNI] Racist attacks on Uni Native Student
From:    
Date:    Sat, February 10, 2007 11:33
To:      "Elizabeth A. Reese" 

This was a mistake, miss.  Sorry, but it does not
deserve URGENT status on my e-mail.  And by
enclosing the snippets of deleted e-mail, you
intrigued me enough to read e-mails that
weren't all that bad.  In short, I now
think you're a child throwing a tantrum.
So please, don't e-mail me again.

-------------------------------------------------------

(Letter #3)

Letter from Uni parent that anticipated the letter directly above:

I'm a Uni parent, and I'm so sorry that your family has suffered these attacks. I think Liz is doing wonderful work and I thank her for it. I also hope this whole uproar brings about some constructive, recuperative discussion at Uni.

I worry that her email to all Uni folks this morning will further fan some flames against her, by not explaining just what was wrong with the deleted comments. What is offensive and repugnant about them won't be self-evident to some of the people who directly or even vaguely oppose or resent Liz's work.

I think it was a good idea to document the comments by reprinting them for all to see, but a more direct explanation of just what's wrong with them seems more helpful. Otherwise, some people will think or say, "'Racist Attacks on a Native American Student'? What racist attacks? These commenters were censored simply for stating what they think, while Liz and then her mother are allowed to stay on their soapbox and make their exaggerated claims of victimhood."

Maybe Debbie could add another post to this blog that directly analyzes what's racist and dangerous about the deleted Gargoyle comments? Again, I understand that, but I think some still don't. At any rate, it is good to get those comments out in public in another sense--doing so will probably stop the even more hateful and threatening direction they were headed towards.

-------------------------------------------
Letter #4

Letter from Uni alum, submitted as a comment at 12:16 PM, 2/10/2007.

As a Uni alum, I was disappointed to read the editorial and comments from people who feel that Uni's environment is adequate in addressing diversity issues (not just race but economic class and sexual orientation as well).

Uni has made some progress over the years-They ended the "slave sales" after my subbie year, they added a Spanish language program after I graduated (imagine, a high school that offers Japanese and Russian language studies but no Spanish). However, these changes only came about because people *spoke out* about them.

However, for every step forward, there were still things that Uni made little progress on. My subbie year a fellow subbie recieved a note informing her that "niggers" don't belong at Uni. She decided to leave Uni, we had an assembley, and that was that. Actions from one student-yes-but the school's response to that note sets the tone for how racial issues are to be dealt at the school.

When should we as a community be content? Shouldn't we always be stiving to make Uni (and the greater UI community) a better place?

-------------------------------------------
Letter #5, submitted as a comment on 2/10/2007

I don't interact with people in high school often enough to have a good idea of what they should know or understand at that age (Liz herself excepted because I have a hard time remembering that she's even in high school. Something which I suspect says more about her intellectual abilities than it does about my poor memory). But I can say that the comments you've posted here demonstrate a kind of thinking that lies at the heart of what I'd call 'neo-racism'.

I call it that because unlike the kind of racism I grew up with -- which didn't really bother itself much with excuses or explanations -- this new version is chock full of half truths, sophisms and twisted logic, and is inordinately fond of justifying itself.

The primary component of this type of racism though, is that it sincerely, even passionately believes that it is nothing of the sort.

And there's the rub.

It's easy enough to refute overt racist thinking, but it's terribly difficult to fight neo-racism because it's so confused and self deluded. If you want to make a change, you have to attack the thinking that lies behind these kinds of arguments, because the arguments themselves are entirely specious.

Therefore education is the key, and the academy will be the battleground.

It's just sad that in this war, as in all wars, it's mainly the young people who end up having to fight them.


---------------------
Letter #6, by Debbie Reese, circulated at 7:11 AM on 2/11/07, posted here at 7:51 on 2/11/07.

As you know, Liz's letter was approved for distribution by the Director/Principal at Uni. We are all receiving an outpouring of support from parents, teachers, our colleagues, and Liz is also getting some support from peers at Uni.

I did not think her letter would be released for distribution. I thought the Director would feel a need to protect Uni. Releasing it was, I think, risky for her, but I think it also signals to us that she sees the value in exposing this stuff to the broader community. Only by exposure will our communities be able to acknowledge the depth of ignorance that must be tended to, and only with exposure can we see the depth of resistance that we are all up against.

This has been difficult. From a very hurt place yesterday, I sent all of you the letter from a parent who wrote to Liz, telling Liz that she is only "throwing a tantrum." Last night, the woman wrote to ask that I retract that email from public email lists. I don't know how to retract an email. I don't know how she knew I had shared her letter. Perhaps one (or more) of you wrote to her.

Yesterday afternoon (prior to receiving her email asking me to retract it), I considered the ramifications for the public broadcast of her name. Might she have allies that would further dump on Liz? How will her daughter and her daughter's friends respond to Liz? With that in mind, I removed her name from the blog where I posted Liz's letter, and the woman's letter and three other responses (http://nativeperspectiveonchiefilliniwek.blogspot.com/).

There have been other letters submitted, but I'm not sure if it is necessary for me to paste them above. (Update, 8:18 AM, 2/11/07: These additional letters can be read in the "Comments" portion of the blog.) The four that are above capture the substance of the others, and rather than demonstrate a show of support, I want this page to reflect the situation in its totality. That parent's sentiments must remain visible. Who she is is not important. What is important is that we know what resistance to change looks like.

Last night, a Uni student who writes for the paper came to visit with Liz. This student supports Liz, and did so publicly on the comments to the editorial. They both see the need for further engagement with this topic and situation. They plan to have a dialogue between the two of them that will be published in the paper.

Uni students will keep working to increase understanding, respect, and change. Faculty and administration at Uni will, too, but they're going to need support.

Uni is a small place, underfunded, always in need of donations. In fact, they need parent donations to run the school. This isn't like a gifted school in Chicago [Note: an individual associated with a Chicago gifted school has pointed out that not all Chicago gifted schools are affluent; hers is much like Uni.]. Uni limps along. It is the University's "laboratory high school," where innovative sorts of educational efforts can be implemented. Right now, with this situation, I think it imperative that a significant chunk of UIUC's budget be directed towards Uni to deal with these issues. UIUC itself is massive, but Uni is not. UIUC is struggling with how to effect change and respect for difference. Uni is, too. Can UIUC's money, and the expertise of its faculty, be put to work at Uni?

We are grateful to all of you for your letters and support.

Debbie

(Please note that I am copying UIUC administrators on this message. Uni's home is in the Office of the Provost.)

----------------------------

Letter #7: Letter to Uni Community from UIUC Provost Katehi and Uni Director Patton, sent at 2:42 PM on 2/15/2007.

To Members of the Uni High Community:

A recent editorial about the Minority Student Advocacy Program in the Online Gargoyle has sparked debate about the program and comments about its founders. While the arguments put forth in the editorial are open to debate, the tone and content of the some comments attached to the editorial suggest there is work to be done to make the Uni community truly inclusive and supportive.

Uni High is a wonderful asset to the University, the community and the students it serves. However, Uni High's goals for building and serving a diverse student population have not yet been achieved. The Minority Student Advocacy Program, along with programs like Uni Summer camp and the multi-cultural parent work group, are important and positive steps toward achieving those goals.

Maintaining civility and collegiality in times of disagreement is the hallmark of civil society. Chancellor Herman recently stated that the campus must work together to build a campus climate with zero tolerance for racism and hate. The bar must be set even higher at Uni High because high school students must not be the targets of personal attacks or rumor mongering.

We call upon the entire Uni community to think seriously about the ways we interact with each other. We will be convening meetings in the coming weeks to discuss Uni's goals for a diverse student body and an inclusive climate, and the means by which we can achieve those goals. Open, civil and constructive dialogue on these topics will be critical to ensure that Uni continues to be the place we've all come to cherish.

Thank you.

Linda Katehi, Provost

Kathleen Patton, Principal/Director

Below are two posts made by students at University High School, attacking my daughter, who is American Indian. They are attacks due to a program she started last fall, to advocate for African American, Latino/a, and American Indian Students. It is the Minority Advocacy Program, or MSA. The posts are anonymous.

They appeared on the school's newspaper website, and have been taken down by school administration. I am posting them here so that others can read them in their entirety.

Until it is taken down, too, the entire conversation during which these two posts occurred is available here: http://www.uni.uiuc.edu/gargoyle/2007/02/editorial.htm


(1)

Judith Estrada is yet another shining example of a seemingly illiterate commenter. Nobody commenting here is racist, Jude. In fact, most of us are from extremely diverse backgrounds (more so than Liz, who—shockingly—is only HALF Native American). Our ancestors were killed too.

For instance, Jono commented on his Jewish heritage—the Holocaust happened much more recently than the initial European colonization of the Americas. I’ve been told by various Muslim students at Uni that they’ve come across violence, just because of their origins.

These students have come across a much more tangible intolerance, from meeting remaining survivors, or even being treated violently themselves.

And yet, unlike the MSA founders, they haven’t used this (EXTERNAL) intolerance as a crutch. The MSA has met disagreeing viewpoints because the people who run it (i.e. Liz) fail to see that there are other people who have problems out there, and that they might even be feeling more pain.

The people here who are the most uncomfortable are the editors, who have been verbally abused and still haven’t backed down—they’re 16- and 17-year-olds who do not run a professional publication, and yet you’re calling them arrogant and ignorant racists.

Unlike Liz, they are not privileged enough to comment back—they’ll only be accused of being white supremacists once more. The irony is that, as Andrea Park pointed out early on in this onslaught, most of them could be seen as less privileged than Liz: out of the 10 of them, 8 are from non-White Anglo-Saxon Protestant origins, and of those 8, none of them are less than 1/2 ethnic.

Of the Uni High students, I’m sure Ms. Patton or Sue Kovacs could give you an accurate number of economically underprivileged children, and most of them would probably be white (especially considering the previous implications that Uni is comprised of all whites—I suppose the massive percentage of Asian, Indian, and Arab kids doesn’t count for anything else).

If Liz and the gang were truly so underprivileged and mistreated, they wouldn’t be able to carry on this ideological battle, and Liz wouldn’t be getting paid for causing unnecessary dissent; if you all represent an underprivileged culture that’s been so suppressed by the mainstream, then how come you’re employed by a highly-regarded university, such as the U of I? How is it that you all are members of middle class America? If you were truly so underprivileged, you’d be living in the inner city in the slums, or in a hovel on a reservation somewhere (and to those people who do live in such terrible conditions, I extend my warmest sentiments, as well as my hand for aid—I realize that there’s such a thing as racism, but I don’t see that The Chief trumps an example of genocide such as the Holocaust).

Disagreeing with you and pointing out the flaws in your argument isn’t racism—painting a picture of Uni as a breeding ground for racism and intolerance…that’s another story.

And one more thing: Latina/Latino only refers to a certain demographic; Hispanic is a broader term that applies also to Spanish-speaking Europeans—you obviously know what you’re talking about, Judith.

Posted by: Anonymous | February 9, 2007 9:59 PM |

(2)

Ok. Well let me ask you something. You say:

“Some people are mistreated because their skin pigment is darker (an otherwise irrelevant trait, thus proven by biology).”

I agree. Now I ask you, is Liz Reese darker skinned than Arabs? I don’t about you, but my eyes tell me no. Is she darker than other races (i.e. Some asians, Indians, etc.)? No. So is she being mistreated because of her skin color? Not as far as I know.

If the MSA program comes down to skin color, then there is no excuse for it excluding so many groups. And ultimately, skin color is what its coming down to.

Liz Reese is Native American. Or 1/4 Native American rather. I respect that, I truly do. But she is just as privileged as any other person at Uni. There are people MUCH less well off than her. And her skin color is not darker than a white person with a tan. So where is her mistreatment coming in?

Posted, in reply to *'s comment, by: Anonymous | February 9, 2007 10:34 PM | Reply

(3)

Yesterday's Forum, "Racism, Power, and Privilege at UIUC"

The largest auditorium on the UIUC campus filled quickly for yesterday's forum, "Racism, Power, and Privilege at UIUC." Two other buildings on campus were set up for overflow, where they could view the webcast.

There is a link to the archived webcast at http://www.iresist.org.

News coverage of the forum:

Washington Post
"School Hears Calls to End Mascot's Act"
Friday, Feb. 2, 2007, Page A02

UIUC's Daily Illini
STOP forum lets students voice concerns
Posted 2/2/07

Racism, Power, and Privilege at UIUC

On Thursday of this week (Feb 1st, 2007), the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) will host a public forum titled RACISM, POWER, AND PRIVILEGE AT UIUC from 4 to 6:00 at FoellingerAuditorium on campus.

The forum is co-sponsored by the Chancellor's office and S.T.O.P., a coalition of students, staff, faculty, and community members committed to changing the ways in which UIUC's campus is unsafe and unwelcoming to marginalized groups. (S.T.O.P. stands for Students Transforming Oppression and Privilege.)

The forum will begin at 4:00 with statements by the event moderators and a student in the S.T.O.P. coalition. They will be followed by individuals within the American Indian community, including an elder and a parent.

The first portion of the forum is Open Mic, during which anyone can make a statement (two-minute limit) to the administrators on the panel.

The second half of the forum is a Q&A during which moderators will read questions to administrators.

Panelists responding to questions include UI President White, UIUC Chancellor Richard Herman, UIUC Provost Linda Katehi. During the Open Mic, audience can submit questions (on index cards) to ushers who will hand them to moderators.

This forum was set up during fall of 2006 as a result of student protests of the Tacos and Tequila party held in October of 2006. The recent incident on Facebook provides additional evidence regarding the negative climate on campus.