Edited By Virginia Stead
The research in A Guide to LGBTQ+ Inclusion on Campus, Post-PULSE is premised on the notion that, because we cannot choose our sexual, racial, ethnic, cultural, political, geographic, economic, and chronological origins, with greater advantage comes greater responsibility to redistribute life’s resources in favor of those whose human rights are compromised and who lack the fundamental necessities of life. Among these basic rights are access to higher education and to positive campus experiences. Queer folk and LGBTQ+ allies have collaborated on this new text in response to the June 16, 2016 targeted murder of 49 innocent victims at the PULSE nightclub, Orlando, Florida. Seasoned and novice members of the academy will find professional empowerment from these authors as they explicitly discuss multiple level theory, policy, and strategies to support LGBTQ+ campus inclusion. Their work illuminates how good, bad, and indeterminate public legislation impacts LGBTQ+ communities everywhere, and it animates multiple layers of campus life, ranging from lessons within a three-year-old day care center to policy-making among senior administration. May the power of well-chosen words continue to deepen our understanding, clarify our communication, and empower us all as pro-LGBTQ+ campus activists.
Chapter Five: LGBTQ Marginalization or Inclusion? Troubling Institutional Assertions of Commitment to Social Justice (Valerie a. guerrero / Kari J. Dockendorff)
| 55 →
LGBTQ Marginalization OR Inclusion?
Troubling Institutional Assertions of Commitment to Social Justice
VALERIE A. GUERRERO AND KARI J. DOCKENDORFF
When controversy occurs on campus, the faculty, staff, and student body often look to campus leadership to both understand the institution’s assessment of the event and to guide individual responses. The aim of this chapter is to explore an institution’s response to protests of an honorary degree leading up to commencement; we employ queer theory and critical race theory (CRT) to unpack the chain of events, the campus responses, and explore alternate institutional responses and future options to engage campus constituents in meaningful dialogue that allows for the “varying and variable subjectivities, identities, and the specific meanings attached to ‘differences’” (Brah & Phoenix, 2016, p. 258). For our purposes, we define “campus response” as statements released by spokespersons of the institution as well as any public campus actions.
We will examine the impact of these responses on the perception and enactment of the university’s strategic action plans and the overall campus climate. Throughout this chapter, special attention will be paid to the ways in which pointing to past efforts on racial inequality fails to address emerging and evolving complexities of race, gender, and sexuality on campus. Our critique of the campus’ responses through the lens of queer theory and CRT, seeks to embrace Harper’s (2012) call for recognition of one’s...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.