The Imperialist apologizes

I would like to begin by initially apologizing for the language and images in the most recent issue of The Imperialist that individuals found disturbing or inflammatory. The phrase the staff likes to use is “provocative, not inflammatory,” and in this instance I think we have failed at that. I can assure you the images and language used, although certainly meant to be edgy, were in no way meant to inspire the type of reaction which this issue has received. We always wish for the magazine to increase dialogue, not cause its breakdown.

I would like to take this opportunity to address the specific concerns of which I have been made aware of. As far as the image on pg. 34 of The Imperialist with the subtitle “artist's representation...Vassar Campus,” I saw the drawing and allowed it to be put in the magazine. I originally found nothing about it to be offensive, and to be frank found it to be kind of stupid, but the author insisted upon its inclusion, and I felt no reason why I should omit it. Recently it has been explained to me what could possibly be offensive about it. The hyper-sexualized and almost primal portrayal of the African-American woman is evocative of a number of negative stereotypes which have followed people of African descent, particularly women, for many years. Although I did not originally realize the image's potential to offend, it does not free me of responsibility for printing it, but nonetheless speaks to the notion that its inclusion in the issue was in no way meant to be malicious. For the inclusion of this image I apologize.

The second concern I have been informed of is on pg. 36, in which the ALANA center and Blegen House are referred to as "ghettoes." Although I have a different intepretation of the term’s use, it nonetheless is a highly insensitive and offensive term to use in the way it was, and for its usage I sincerely apologize.

These are the specific concerns of which I have become aware. If I failed to address a concern which is presently being brought forth, any student is free to approach me to discuss their problem with something in the publication. As I have both just a moment ago and in the past apologized for inflammatory things done on the pages of The Imperialist, it is reasonable to believe I will offer sincere apologies in the future as well.

I would now like to address the accusation that in the most recent issue of The Imperialist there can be found “hate speech”. To be frank, I think that this charge is ridiculous. Things included were certainly inappropriate, but because they offend a person's sensibilities does not mean there is rational reason to believe that they have contributed to a hostile and threatening environment for any student on campus. In fact, I would say that the irrational and uncivil reactions to the magazine like accusing it of “racism” and “hate speech” actually contribute to a hostile and threatening environment for members of MICA, not just for those who are condemning it. In fact, as a person who has been a victim of racism in my life, I find the charges of racism and hate speech to be offensive, because I find them not to be flowing from a genuine concern for racial justice, but out of a kind of political hubris which reveals itself when individuals sense there monopoly on an issue being challenged and therefore automatically resort to the most pernicious accusation possible in the hope that it will cause panic and squash dissent, both of which occurred.

I make this strong distinction between "hate speech" and offensive speech because I think there is a legal difference. Not every instance of wrongdoing deserves punitive measures. If the VSA had punished MICA in some form beyond this, I think that would have been heavy-handed and inappropriate. I thank the VSA for, instead of taking unnecessary action, allowing MICA and myself to apologize.

—Graydon Gordian ’07
Editor in Chief of The Imperialist