Photo courtesy of Hannah Foley ’23
At 1:15 p.m. on Wed. March 1, Connecticut College faculty and staff congregated in front of Fanning Hall in a historic show of support for the student activists who occupied the building on Sunday night. They were accompanied by a large throng of student protesters who cheered on their professors as they took to the stage to verbalize their commitment to the activists in Fanning and the protestors in the crowd. The atmosphere was infectious; the faculty’s eagerness to stand in solidarity with students speaks volumes to the scope of the movement. Silence fell only when a microphone was passed to a faculty member at the front of Fanning Hall.
The general sentiment of the faculty was steeped in career-long frustration and exhaustion, culminating in a desperate plea for change. Professor Suzuko Knott of the German Department bluntly stated that “I can’t be at this institution any longer if we don’t have substantive change. So, this is it for me. Like, we change, or I’m done. That’s why I’m here.”
The demonstration in itself was momentous as it marks the first time in Connecticut College history that faculty have joined students in protest, despite three previous occupations of Fanning. Professor Derek Turner of the Philosophy Department was particularly impressed by the turnout: “I’ve been here since 2001 and I’ve never seen anything like this.”
During the past occupations, faculty communicated their dissatisfaction with the treatment of minorities by composing letters to the President and administration and providing moral affirmation for students from afar. This organized showing of solidarity, however, is unprecedented.
Various professors expressed displeasure with President Bergeron alongside their support for the students occupying Fanning. Professor Rachel Boggia of the Dance Department aptly offered that “the most important structural change is investment within DIEI… we have this extractive relationship with DIEI where their goodwill is used until it’s used up.”
“For nine years, we have put up with an administration that has dismissed our concerns. For nine years, we have witnessed our colleagues leave while the president stays,” said Professor Afshan Jafar, who chairs the Sociology Department. “The Board would have us believe our concerns are new and shocking, but we know better. We know what these nine years have been like. And so now we say enough. Nine years is long enough.”
Many faculty at the protest were tenured, which added a sizable cushion of job security and more protection for them to share the breadth of their disappointment with the institution. Assistant Dean of the College for Connections Libby Friedman later addressed the importance of including the voices of staff in the movement: “As staff members, and as an alum myself, we are standing in solidarity with the students in this building, we are standing in solidarity with the mission of this protest. And our reputation is deteriorating every day that change is not happening. So I just want to say that our support is with you. There’s a lot of staff members at this meeting right now, and I want to make sure that staff are counted as well.”
Professor Taylor Desloge of the History Department gave a powerful statement endorsing students working to affect positive change: “When my students get passionate about something, I can’t help but get passionate about it as well. I want my students to take the education they are getting in the classroom and apply it to the real world. I think this is an educational experience for you guys…I feel like this is the least that I could do, to come out and support you guys and to create a better learning and living environment.”
Dance Professor David Dorfman, who holds a commitment to the College as both an alum and longtime professor, provided insight into recent conversations among faculty: “The faculty met yesterday, and we want to do more than rhetoric, so we wanted to put our bodies on the line the way you all are doing and show support, but in a different way.”
While much of the focus of the past few weeks has been on the students’ side of the protests, it is important to remember that the issues also affect professors. Professor Nadav Assor of the Arts Department stated that, “The faculty are not just here to uplift students. We are here as part of this community that has been impacted by the issues, certainly with DIEI, and across the board with the issues of the way our faculty is addressed, the way our staff are leaving this place and not being replaced.”
Expressions of both the faculty’s disappointment in the administration and their enthusiasm for the students were manifold. Their stance on the matter is clear: the empty promises of the administration have them just as fed up as the students, and they are moved by the tireless, transformational work that student leaders have done throughout the past few weeks since news of Dean King’s resignation first broke.
Zoe Stapp ‘23 voiced her admiration for the faculty: “I think it’s really inspiring. It’s great to see them merging forces with the student body and I like to see that the whole campus is involved.” Another student echoed this assertion, “I think this week has been stressful and overwhelming so to have them out here helping us is just really beneficial and makes us feel really supported by them.”
Shamar Rule, a student leader of Student Voices of Equity, spoke shortly after the faculty speakers to remind the crowd of SVE’s demands, including the immediate resignation of President Katherine Bergeron and the strengthening of DIEI on a holistic level. Rule went on to introduce MOBROC for an intermission of music and mingling before the students separated from faculty to embark on a walk through campus that included student testimonies and a variety of chants such as “Kathy B has got to go” and “Conn is a catfish, admissions is deceitful.”
On behalf of The College Voice, as both students and journalists, we would like to express the deepest gratitude for the show of unity demonstrated at the faculty rally today. Your actions and words of encouragement help to keep this cause alive. It is because of your commitment to education that we are here. Thank you for moving forward with us.
In solidarity.
[…] Read More: Connecticut College Professors Make History with Faculty Rally in Support of Student […]
A heartfelt thank-you from an international camel mom to faculty and staff!
College can be stressful at times without all these issues, right now, it is depressing, infuriating, and frightening all at the same time.
The support from all sides, from faculty and staff is probably the single most stabilizing element during this time.
I am truly grateful for the support. International Camels are in an especially vulnerable position, because their personal support base is so far away. They can´t just come home, we can´t just visit. So many little things at Conn make their lives unneccessarily stressful.
I totally understand that my Camel is worried about her fellow students and that she wants to see change, even if it might come too later for herself.
Thank you again for joining this fight for a better community!
As a middle class 18 year old white man (who started as a freshman in 2000), I often felt uncomfortable at Connecticut College because there were so many people there who came from extreme wealth. I struggled to relate to other students and to the place as a whole. So I can imagine how a person of color who also doesn’t come from wealth could feel even more uncomfortable than I did.
However, the sad truth is that Connecticut College needs rich, white money in order to compete against other elite liberal arts colleges. Because of America’s history, the vast majority of money in this country is controlled by rich white people. The less of their money the school gets, the less it will have to give to lower income students. There are not alternative places to get money.
If these protests were mainly about how money is spent rather than where it is collected, I would be more sympathetic to the cause. Unfortunately, that does not seem to be the main focus of these protests. The protests are mainly against the idea that we took money from a place that 50 years ago engaged in discrimination. That makes their position unreasonable and untenable. If one goes back 50 years, every dollar in this country can be connected to some form of discrimination or outright exploitation. Every. Single. Dollar. Thus, fundraising would be rendered literally impossible if we were to abide by the philosophy of these protesters.
Essentially, these protesters are hurting people of color by making it much harder to raise the funds needed to provide financial aid, maintain the campus, and pay staff. Bergeron SHOULD be taking money from historically privileged places like country clubs and using it to pay for the education of people of color at Conn College. That’s the whole idea behind RESTORATIVE JUSTICE, a.k.a. social justice.
Rather than calling people racist, trying to get people fired, and creating obstacles to fundraising, I wish the protestors would consider other ways they could be helping people in need. They could be working to end the War on Drugs, helping to build more affordable housing, working to improve public schools, advocating for more funding for vocational training the working class, helping ex-convicts get jobs, teaching financial literacy, or volunteering at local schools. These are things would actually make a difference. And all of them are a lot more difficult than occupying a building.
You’re exactly right. These kids can throw a hissy fit over literally anything. It’s a past time for them.
Well said. Couldn’t agree more. Also wish the reporting of this protest was not completely one-sided. All students are not supporting this protest. Are the professors supporting them by cancelling classes? It is time to get back to normal class schedules. The last point is the claim this group is making that KB is a bully and created a toxic environment. Bullying? The irony here is so thick it could be cut with a knife. Is this group that self-unaware that they do not see their bullying tactics?
The handling of the Country Club Fundraiser was just the spark to this protest. If you look at the SVE demands, they are not about where to fundraise, but about how to prioritize spending to align with the purported goals and missions of the College. Also, restorative justice in the form of taking funds from formerly racist institutions typically involves an acknowledgement by the institution of the past harms they have caused and thus the need for restitution. That is not the same as taking funds from an institution and acting as if the institution has a gleaming past, and thereby whitewashing its sins.
YES to everything you said CC Mom!
Thank you CC Mom for highlighting the necessary part of “restorative justice”: the acknowledgement of the institutions of the past harm they have caused.
You could not have said it better. This is exactly the answer to some of the parents who still don’t understand the difference between “accepting donations” and “receiving reparations”.
You made it clear once and for all.
Canceling the fundraiser was total nonsense. It’s really hard to take the SVE demands seriously considering that they are demanding more money spent on specific programs while at the same time they reject supposedly “racist” money, thereby making it harder for the school to raise funds in the future.
Also, how do you know that this country club did not “acknowledge” its past discrimination? Also, wasn’t the country club simply a venue? Meaning, we were taking their actual money or simply the money of the various people attending? Are we so sensitive that we can’t even walk into a venue that discriminated 50 years ago? Do we now need to know the 50+ year racial history of every venue that the school uses, and whether they “acknowledged” past harms? How does doing such things actually help anyone?
And shouldn’t the school newspaper be asking such questions, instead of reflexively jumping on the protester bandwagon?
Key question: If the history of this country club had never come to light, and the fundraiser had moved forward, who would have been harmed? Answer: no one. Yet, look at all the harm now being by the protesters. They’re making it permanently more difficult for the school to raise funds, which ultimately will hurt low-income students more than anyone else.
Not to give a pun, but the fundraiser was just the straw that broke the camel’s back, so you’re missing the bigger picture and just focusing on one piece. Also, it’s important to note that said country club is on the record of being extremely exclusive and has to approve everyone coming in. This means, of course, that it would not be just “a venue.” And the club doesn’t just have a discriminatory past, but rather barely has any members who are not white and Christian, prohibiting Jews and Blacks among others until not long ago (decades after most clubs around the country abandoned such policies). A newspaper article from a few years ago disclosed how the club had only 1 known Jewish member and no Black or other minority members—what if alums or supporters of the college who weren’t white or Christian wanted to attend this event? Would they have been asked to leave by the club or faced discriminatory harassment? So, yes, the club fundraiser is a notable issue in and of itself but by no means the only reason for the protests—they are happening because of significant issues boiling under the surface for years, including verbal abuse and bullying from the college president and a lack of institutional commitment to offices like DIEI. Reading through the faculty’s comments as well (that the faculty and staff are joining the protests should tell you something), it also sounds that there are additional issues that impact their ability to teach and their students’ ability to learn. The college hasn’t sufficiently replaced staff or faculty as people have left (and more are leaving because of the issues), leaving a greater workload for those remaining. For a college with supposedly solid fundraising efforts and an endowment that would provide a decent return, one wonders where the money is going if it isn’t being spent on faculty and staff, on student living conditions, nor DIEI. Addressing many of the issues you mention starts with adequately funding those three areas and making sure the college is a respectful and comfortable place to learn and work, not a place where people are fearful of the president.
All country clubs are exclusive and require approval of those who wish to join. Want to know what other institution is exclusive and requires approval? Connecticut College. Should we not hold fundraisers on our own campus?
The club *IS* just a venue. It doesn’t require approval of those who are there for a simple fundraiser. It only requires approval of people who wish to join the actual club. You’re conflating two completely different forms of approval.
There is absolutely no evidence that the club continues to discriminate. The fact that Jewish and black people continue to not be represented at the club is not evidence of discrimination. Rather, it’s evidence that Jewish and black people are not interested in joining the club. This, of course, is understandable of black and Jewish people, given the club’s history. But it’s not a reason to avoid the club altogether.
You said: “What if alums or supporters of the college who weren’t white or Christian wanted to attend this event? Would they have been asked to leave by the club or faced discriminatory harassment?” These questions are disingenuous. You’re speaking as if we still live in the 1950s. These days, the club would face legal consequences if they acted in such a manner. Also, why would the club open it’s doors to host a fundraiser if it had plans to ask specific people—based on their religion or race—to leave? That would make no sense whatsoever.
I have yet to hear one specific example of how Bergeron “verablly abused” someone. That’s quite a claim.
Perhaps the budget could be improved and funding could be used in better ways. But again, it’s hard to take the protesters seriously on these issue when their “spark” issue (the fundraiser) is so lacking in logic.
Again: If the history of this country club had never come to light, and the fundraiser had moved forward, no one would have been harmed. No one. In contrast, the protesters have permanently made it more difficult for Connecticut College to raise funds, which ultimately will harm low-income students most of all. This is the very definition of performative activism as opposed to real activism. Sadly, this type of activism is quite fashionable on college campuses these days.
Jennifer ’99 in solidarity. So proud to see my alma mater in the hands of such eloquent, passionate, engaged, young people.