In recent weeks there has been a great deal of discussion about differences in opinion, a lot of it related to the Catt Hall / diversity debate. As a member of The September 29th Movement, I realize not everyone agrees with my viewpoint on diversity issues here at Iowa State. However, I am appalled at the number of uninformed arguments I have received from those who oppose my views.

I would like to encourage everyone to read the materials distributed by both the Catt Center and the Movement and the infamous Chapter six (written by Catt) in “Woman Suffrage by Federal Constitutional Amendment.” These should provide some understanding of the issues so that one may form an opinion based on fact. I am very open to hearing any arguments that can be supported with documented facts, but all too often I have heard people try to argue their positions using nothing but blind emotion.

Yes, diversity is an emotional and controversial issue at Iowa State, but an institution of higher learning and research is intended to teach us to cope with a world where the skills of gathering accurate information and using it correctly can make or break our careers.

I have heard many complaints against The Movement, not the least of which states that we are whiny and insatiable, and that we’ll do anything to get what we want. This simply is not true. For over a year we have been and are still striving for multilateral conflict resolution. This means that both The Movement and the administration would come together in formal meetings with a third party to find a mutually agreeable resolution of the concerns brought before the table.

We do not object to multilateral resolutions. What we object to is the administration’s habit of leaving students out of major university decisions. President Jischke claims diversity is important at ISU. We are seeking to make this true. We hope to make this university better for everyone by providing multicultural and diversity programs and the steps toward intercultural communication and understanding.

We aren’t in this for ourselves. If we were, we would not sacrifice our precious time to write letters or speak publicly to make others aware. And if we were in this for our own good, Allan Nosworthy would not have risked his life a month ago in a hunger strike. After all, we may not even see these changes during our educational careers here at Iowa State, as many of the programs will take years to implement.

I have also heard many attempts to shoot down our arguments for reopening the naming process of Catt Hall. Many claim Catt was not personally racist, classist or xenophobic, and that she only used her arguments for the greater good. While the intention of the women’s suffrage movement in itself was blameless, the tactics Catt used to reach this end were deplorable.

While perhaps not personally racist, classist or xenophobic (as it is difficult to prove or disprove her personal feelings as opposed to her public statement), she was a political expedient at least, employing means of reaching her goal without regard to ethical and moral standards. She catered to the whims of white supremacists in the South to gain the vote for middle-class, white women.

Some would argue that Catt was a product of her time, when white supremacy was the norm. While this may be true, does the presence of a prejudiced majority make that prejudice any more right?

No — racism, classism and xenophobia is not now, and never has been acceptable to disenfranchised and progressive peoples, whether they belong to the majority, minority or otherwise. I have heard still others accuse the Movement of being insensitive to women’s issues because Catt’s name stands as a symbol of the fight for women’s suffrage. On the contrary, I consider myself to be a feminist. However, I would have rather waited some 40 years more for the vote along with my sisters of color than to employ the unethical tactics used by Catt in her campaign.

I know that by now, many readers are thinking, “What does it matter? It’s just the name of a building.” In reality, it is so much more than just a name. As Catt Hall, the building stands as a towering symbol of exclusion at Iowa State. One might ask, “What difference does a symbol make?” Consider the Confederate flag. It is regarded as a symbol of oppression, once flown by those who opposed the abolition of slavery, and today, those who fly it are often required to take it down.

The process of naming the building excluded students and people of color, and when questions were raised about her political tactics, they were disregarded. The administration has contradicted its stance on diversity by excluding students, minorities and the disadvantaged from the naming process.

By naming the hall after Catt, the administration has set an example that it is acceptable to be politically expedient, as these are the people that are held in high regard and admired as heroes. This action and the ignorance of multiculturalism and diversity are yet other examples of the exclusion of students and minorities to satisfy the empowered “majority” at the expense of the disenfranchised. It is expediency at its worst.

As a member of the ISU community and a citizen of Iowa, I ask the administration to act upon its so-called commitment to diversity and provide multicultural and diversity programs so that perhaps we can begin to understand each other and avoid such problems in the future.

I also ask the administration to reopen the naming process so that we can honor someone who is worthy of respect from all of us, because as an ISU student and citizen of Iowa, Carrie Chapman Catt is not my heroine.

---

Elisa Strachan

Sophomore

Meteorology