Yesterday, the Student Assembly released the draft text of S.A. Resolution 34, “A Manifesto Calling Upon Cornell to Actionably Support the Asian American Community.” The resolution calls upon Cornell University to increase mental health training for faculty and establish new majors in Asian-American, Latina/o, & American Indian studies. Additionally, the resolution calls for the disarmament of the Cornell University Police Department (CUPD) and the abolition of fraternities.
As S.A. President Catherine Huang stated early in the resolution, I am also indeed shocked and appalled by the horrific acts of violence which occurred in Georgia. I am deeply saddened by the deaths of Delaina Ashley Yaun, Paul Andre Michels, Xiaojie Tan, Daoyou Feng, Julie Park, and Hyeon Jeong Park. I also hope that the perpetrator of these crimes is given the justice he deserves. Though many of our readers may understandably react to this tragedy with visceral emotions, it is important to note that an investigation is underway to determine the suspect’s motive. Information released to the public so far does not point to a definite racial motive, though investigators should apply considerable scrutiny and not rule anything out.
However, this article is not going to focus on the investigation into the tragedy and possible court proceedings. Nor am I going to address the rising tide of anti-Asian violence which historically has been perpetrated by people of all races. This article will not critique proposals to create a new Asian American Studies major, which I believe to be a novel and worthy proposal which deserves consideration. I will specifically critique the Student Assembly’s dual proposals of disarming the Cornell University Police Department and banning fraternities from campus.
The Student Assembly’s proposal to ban fraternities will not solve what it claims to be Cornell’s two most pressing problems with fraternities: sexual assault and hazing.
The resolution claims that fraternities are disproportionately responsible for multiple instances of sexual assault. To prove this, the resolution cites a report which cites a 2007 study which claims that fraternity members are three times more likely to sexually assault than their non-Greek counterparts. However, it is important to note that a lot has changed since 2007. The Department of Education, under the Obama Administration, released new Title IX policies regarding sexual assault, which Trump administration Education Secretary DeVos rescinded, citing lack of due-process for the accused. Cornell University has also initiated Sexual Violence Prevention Initiatives and currently offers additional resources through its Office of Institutional Equity & Title IX, and Bias & Response teams. Additionally, the Interfraternity Council, Panhellenic Council, and Multicultural Fraternity Council held a summit in 2016 to discuss the serious problem of sexual assault on campus.
The resolution also discussed the endemic problem of hazing which has plagued multiple Cornell fraternity chapters, most recently Phi Kappa Psi. A list of hazing violations can be found on a website created by Cornell University. It is also important to note that non-fraternal organizations have also been found in violation of hazing policies, such as Cornell Mock Trial and the Big Red Marching band, and Cayuga’s Waiters A-Cappella Group. In response to this problem, the Interfraternity and Panhellenic councils announced measures to “temper Greek life events,” after the tragic death of Antonio Tsialas in 2019. University administration also put out its own serious set of reforms, restricting the alcohol content of drinks, requiring expensive private security at large events, and implementing new registration procedures.
These notable measures towards safety aside, let us consider a world in which university-recognized fraternities are suddenly abolished. Will what the resolution calls “white male violence” disappear with the end of fraternities? Will extreme peer-pressure to drink dangerous amounts of alcohol end? The answer, unfortunately, is probably not. Abuses which once occurred, often unbeknownst to fraternity leadership, in the fraternity houses of old will move into Collegetown annexes, dorms, and other areas of campus. Just like the failed policies of Prohibition and the War on Drugs, the abolition of fraternities may very well drive these abuses underground and may make the problems we face as a university even worse.
The Student Assembly has also become ever more hostile to CUPD. The Assembly passed a resolution in December calling for the disarmament of CUPD, which President Pollack ultimately rejected. The resolution cites the Atlanta police’s inability to stop the tragedy as evidence that police do not protect or serve marginalized communities. However, as Ithaca Police Department Deputy Chief Vincent Monticello explained in his exclusive interview with The Cornell Review, the police often play a crucial role in investigating violent crimes and have made efforts to form long-term relationships with communities of color. Furthermore, CUPD has been an essential force in arresting perpetrators of sexual assault, with a notable example being an arrest of a potential assailant in 2018. CUPD has also played a vital role in managing the emergency “Blue Light” and virtual escort services. And if, as the resolution claims and is certainly sometimes the case, threats of force are involved after harassment, it will be necessary to deploy force in order to prevent a serious crime from taking place.
The efficacy of the Assembly’s proposals aside, I wish to ask, how do these initiatives solve the problems of the “Asian American” community? This is assuming such a label ought to exist, as it may homogenize the unique experiences of different Asian cultures in the United States. The abolition of fraternities and the disarmament of CUPD, though trying to address pertinent campus issues, do not remotely help remedy many of the immediate and tangible instances of discrimination Asian Americans face today, specifically in higher education.
Asian American advocacy groups have been fighting for more equitable admissions standards for years. In 2018, the U.S. Justice Department argued that Harvard University judged its Asian American applicants based on a subjective assessment of character traits. Admissions officials, according to the Justice Department, often rated Asian American applicants as less “likeable”, a rating which may be “infected racial bias against Asian Americans.” Similar accusations have been made against Yale University in 2020. The role of these negative and implicit biases against Asian Americans in the admissions process presents a clear & explicit example of modern-day racial discrimination. But, to my knowledge, I have not heard the same advocates against anti-Asian racism level complaints against our sister Ivy League universities.
While I appreciate the Student Assembly acknowledging the gravity of what happened this past week, the proposals contained within this “manifesto” will do little to combat the problems Asian Americans, as a constituency, face on campus and in higher education. I agree that prejudice against Asian Americans ought to be addressed and that measures ought to be taken to grant equality of opportunity, without regard to race. I also agree that hazing and sexual assault ought to be addressed more seriously. However, banning fraternities and disarming CUPD will not accomplish this, nor will it remedy the present-day discrimination the Asian American community faces.
