The full quote is heard in the video above.
What student “Auntie Ezine” said—that’s her Twitter handle; her real name is unknown so far—was this:
“If y’all didn’t know this is the [Multicultural Student Center], and frankly there’s just too many white people in here, and this is a space for people of color. So just be really cognizant of the space that you’re taking up. Because it does make some of us [people of color] uncomfortable when we see too many white people in here. It’s only been open for four days, and frankly there’s the whole university for a lot of y’all to be at, and there’s very few spaces for us. So keep that in mind. Thank-you.”
You can hear the scattered cheering on the video.
1. I substantially blame the miserable failure of Barack Obama to fulfill his promise to build trust and reconciliation among the races. This is part of his legacy, the worst part. The rest of the blame rests with colleges like UVA, which have tolerated and enabled the rise of reverse-racism and self segregation.
2. What should the school do to “Aunty Ezine”? It has to be exactly what it would do to a white male student who made a similar “public service announcement” saying that ‘There’s just too many black people in here, and this is a space for whites. So just be really cognizant of the space that you’re taking up. Because it does make some of us whites uncomfortable when we see too many black people in here.’
I don’t want to hear rationalizations that this statement would be “different.” If it is, it shouldn’t be. The student should be disciplined, and hard.
3. The woman’s statement demands a mass white student sit-in at the Multicultural Student Center. The episode should not be allowed to fade away (while it is largely ignored by the mainstream media) and UVA fatuously says that the new Center is “open to all members of the university.” Oh yeah? Prove it. Currently, she is taking bows, tweeting,
I must have missed the announcement. When did Black History Month become “Insult Whites Month”?
Then she tweeted,
Watch those honkies run!
Your move, UVA. But please, nobody show this to the President, OK? Heaven knows what he would tweet about it…
46 thoughts on “Unethical Quote Of The Month: University Of Virginia Student “Aunty Ezine””
I don’t understand the words “reverse-racism”. This is just racism.
Of course, the problem is that they’ve put the big words, “Multi-Cultural” in the student center name which implies that this is non-white people only space. It should just be Student Center.
I’m sorry, but how does “Multi-Cultural” imply “non-white”?
It shouldn’t, but clearly the word “Multi-cultural”, to these students, implies that some students are more important than others.
I consider words like “Multi-cultural” to be dog whistles.
“Multi-cultural” simply means “not Western European.” It’s easy. Just like “diverse” means “as non-white as humanly possible.”
Rusty? Is that you?
The bigger problem here is conflating “culture” with “ethnicity”. While those rules are sort of consistent in the Old World, they are certainly not here, in America. A “multi-cultural” center shouldn’t be about whites, black, or whatever else. Culture isn’t ethnicity.
From another news source on UVA:
“The university has also expanded its LGBTQ Center and created Latinx-focused and Interfaith centers.”
Okay, two things:
1. I am not going to lay this at the feet of Obama. Obama has plenty to be blamed for in the area of race relations. There was so much lost potential. But, here, we are dealing with Academia. The intellectuals have so twisted around any logic relating to racial relations, that is where the fault should be placed for THIS sort of nonsense.
2. “I don’t want to hear rationalizations that this statement would be “different.” If it is, it shouldn’t be. The student should be disciplined, and hard.” It is different because the school has set up this mind-set (and the University has not set up the White People Cultural Center).. Like I pointed out above, they have an LGBTQ and Latinx-focused centers. Would it surprise ANYONE if those centers had similar incidents come up? It should not. When the University starts segregating people by these identities, the people are going to enforce such rules. This is not really to take the blame off of her, but to provide a fair share of the blame on the University for creating this mess. And, as discipline goes, how would it look for the University to discipline this segregationist who was only carrying out the segregationist model set up by the University itself.
To summarize: the entire blame for this scenario is an Academic system that continues to racialize every issue, creating brain-washed racists like this.
You bet. She’ll probably be promoted to junior assistant dean of diversity.
So she wants a space for “White people” and a space for “Colored people”?
In fairness, that is a reasonable expectation for someone who’s a member of the party that developed and legally established Jim Crow.
I mean, should we reasonably expect her to demand that, just to pay back for all their evils, “white” people make housing accommodations for “colored” people on the white person’s property? And perhaps ensure they are fed as well?
I mean of course, just in exchange for some manual labor is all…
Maybe Auntie should just put up signs marking the Multi-Cultural Center, “Colored Only”, pick out a few bathrooms and water fountains to do the same and then everyone feels safe again.
You mean, like, say, slavery?
Who said such a thing? I’m merely proposing a way to make Democrats happy that tries to build on previous societal arrangements they enjoyed in the past… since it seems like the current Democrats want to relive the past.
In other words, yes
Oh come on, this is completely different.
They would be called spaces for “People of Color,” not “Colored People” which is a racist term.
Elizabeth Warren thinks we need race conscious laws. She said that. She really did. So, It is any wonder thus person runs around thinking it’s acceptable to discriminate against non-people of non-color?
Grrrt: “race” not “rave.” Stupid autocorrect.
Given that this woman has no official standing with the University, she didn’t actively begin evicting people, and the whole episode lasted barely a minute, i fail to see the big issue. Her speech was inflammatory, yes, but they were protected speech. Presumably, she didn’t make her “announcement” in a designated “free-speech zone”, but at most that counts as a public disturbance (though the student code of conduct defines it vaguely). The University of Virginia does have a prohibition against speech amplification devices, but she didn’t use one. And, lastly, based on the scattered applause and lack of vocal “boos”, one might argue her audience tacitly consented to the disruption. So, what do you suggest as an appropriate punishment?
Yes, had a white student made a similar speech about a historically-underprivileged group it would have sounded MUCH worse, and the student would have faced immediate expulsion. But a double-standard only proves a double-standard. Why call for someone else burned at the stake when there’s already an epidemic?
It’s legally protected, Neil. It also denies the rights of White student to participate fully in the activities of the University.
Freedom of Association – Students can associate freely with other individuals, groups of individuals and organizations for purposes which do not infringe on the rights of others;
Freedom from Discrimination – Students can expect to participate fully in the University community without discrimination as defined by federal and state law and University regulations;
The prohibition against “Intentional disruption or obstruction of teaching, research, administration, disciplinary procedures, other University activities, or activities authorized to take place on University property” also applies.
Her conduct threatens and undermines, both of these. If I were a student leader, I would make that reverse statement I hypothesized and dared the school to punish me, if there were no consequences for flat out racism on campus.
That’s a stretch. No students were prohibited from associating with other students, nor were they (really) discriminated against. White students continued to have the option to remain as before following the student’s outburst., she has no official standing as an authority figure, and everyone there knew it. Thus, we’re back to disruption, which is itself a minor offense. Again, I don’t understand why you would advocate a school trying to chill protected speech, especially when that speech hurt no one (except, perhaps, feelings).
If you were a student leader who made the reverse statement, you’d just be another asshole stirring the pot. I don’t disagree with your assessment of WHAT she said, but why advocate tit-for-tat? Such a stunt would do nothing but anger more people and deepen the divide (because now people would have to appear to DEFEND the content).
I fear the recrimination age has muffled your own ethical alarms on this one.
Because its a double standard, Neil. Do you really believe any student would be allowed to tell black students to leave a college structure because white students weren’t comfortable with them around? I’d feel comfortable arguing in court that those were “fighting words,” and not protected: “words that when uttered tend to create (deliberately or not) a verbal or physical confrontation by their mere usage”
If someone told me to leave a building because of my race, there would be a confrontation, as in “Excuse me? Are you really saying that I shouldn’t be here because I’m white? Just how are you going to make me leave?”
Jack the crux of this issue is related to your statement below.
“If someone told me to leave a building because of my race, there would be a confrontation, as in “Excuse me? Are you really say that I shouldn’t be here because I’m white? Just how are you going to make me leave?”
Who do you think would be punished if you did say that and a brawl ensued. I am of the belief that as a white student your academic career at UVA would be a short one despite the fact that until Aunt Ezine made a pronouncement that you get out because of your race.
The administration would most likely take Neil’s position that you were out of line and causing the disruption because you challenged a member of a historically underprivileged group. They win by making you the bad guy. This is a tried and true tactic of subversive ideology.
The goal is to make all whites feel guilty and acquiesce to demands. Creating the perception of guilt can make get people to do some stupid things against their own self interests
Oh, but I’d love that lawsuit and the damages to follow. That’s why white students have to confront this.
Tbe only other optoon is to join the Stormfront White Nationalist Community.
I agree but most of them have been cowed by what they actually see. Most will not fight what they believe will be a losing battle. That is how oppressors get their way. Students need to feel that each and every one will get a fair hearing. Until, University presidents and other academic officers are held personally liable for civil rights damages not much will change.
So we’re clear, I don’t agree with what she said and think her methods pointless. But, that’s just the thing. What does it cost you, or me, or anyone? It takes more time to get angry about it than the time of yours (or anyone’s) she wasted. If the University had actively supported her views and henceforth banned white students or assigned quotas, you would have a point. If she had any official standing with the University or had begun harassing individual students, you would have a point. If this had been anything other than one person stating one point of view for less than one minute, you might (just might) have a point.
Why not just let her vent?
Better yet, post some “White Lives Matter” signs around the building in the dead of night.
Jeepers slick, has the It’s O.K. To Be White meme been $#!tcanned?
Neil I agree that she should just be ignored. The problem is that her supporters will not ignore a countervailing perspective. Therefore, it becomes imperative that counter speech be made.
Let me ask you,
Why didn’t the community let the Charlottesville marchers just vent? Does it matter if it is one person venting or a bunch of people venting?
Maybe, just maybe had people ignored the Charlottesville group and said nothing all would be right with the world.
Yes, it’s a double standard. My point is, you seem to advocate burning the stick at both ends. Listen to her words: “So just be really cognizant of the space that you’re taking up. Because it does make some of us [people of color] uncomfortable when we see too many white people in here.” Where does she tell anyone to leave? She said that the number of white students made her (and others) uncomfortable and told people remain aware of that. She makes no demands, asks those present to “keep that in mind”, and ends by saying “Thank you.”
In your scenario, you’ve escalated. She told you the presence of “white people” (a group of which you happen to belong, but are not the exclusive member of) made her uncomfortable, and wanted you to be aware of said fact — suggesting there are equally commodious spaces nearby. Then she sits down. Instead of thinking to yourself “That’s weird” and going back to your book, you make another disruption (also in front of everyone) stating you couldn’t care less what she thinks and essentially daring her to physically escalate the situation.
Do you really want to go back to Chaplinsky thinking? In my estimation, her words pass muster under Brandenburg and you, meanwhile, have opened the gate to “imminent lawless action.” This isn’t a subversive ideology taking hold, it’s you proclaiming you’ll defend (potentially with force) that which no one has taken away (with their words).
What good are teachable moments if you refuse to teach?
”And, lastly, based on the scattered applause and lack of vocal ‘boos’, one might argue her audience tacitly consented to the disruption.”
I’m thinking there wasn’t any “vocal” reaction because any melanin-challenged audience members within earshot likely believes THIS is perfectly acceptable.
The Black Hebrews are known to make ridiculous, inflammatory statements to goad people into confrontation. The fact that two white people were willing to pander to their inane street theater proves nothing. For all we know, they were paid actors, the video was staged, or they were simply playing along. This is mau-mauing the flak catchers. So what?
Also, to play devil’s advocate, everything in the video WAS completely acceptable in one sense. One group demonstrated their right to free speech in a public forum, and two consenting adults engaged in legal behavior by showing what said group suggested showed them respect. No threat of force, no fighting words, no coercion. Yay, First Amendment!
Tell me Neil, where do you stand on the Charlottesville group with a parade permit that some constantly bring up as racist? They were just citizens who got a legal permit to assemble as a group? They had no official standing. They have virtually no impact on policy; maybe even less than you or I.
You said, ” Yes, had a white student made a similar speech about a historically-underprivileged group it would have sounded MUCH worse, and the student would have faced immediate expulsion. But a double-standard only proves a double-standard. Why call for someone else burned at the stake when there’s already an epidemic?”
You have to be kidding right. Hey Jim Crow was just a double standard. Sure it was codified into law so it is still just a double standard. The fact that one type of student would be punished because of an immutable characteristic while another is not is exactly what is considered to be racist and codified by someone’s rules.
As for burning, sometimes you have to create a back fire to control the spread of a wildfire.
What if Aunt Ezine had said all the Jews must get out because the hymies oppressed my people like Jesse Jackson has stated on occasion. Would that be acceptable?
What the hell does it matter if my relatives were Irish chattel relegated to only the most dangerous occupations because we were Micks and not English. What of the those Italian guineas who suffered the persecution of nativists of America? Historically underprivileged is irrelevant today. The students at UVA have never seen a “whites only anything”. They would not no abject poverty if it bit them in the ass. Would it be acceptable for Obama’s girls or perhaps any of Spike Lee, Kobe Bryant children to make such a demand. Are Appalachian whites on a scholarship more privileged than the children of African American doctors and lawyers?
Aunt Ezine is nothing more than the Black equivalent of David Duke in behavior. If David Duke and his followers are to be pariahs so should she and her followers. That is what social justice is. Social justice is not about retribution for acts perpetrated on others by others for the purpose of accumulating power and benefits.
know abject poverty not no abject poverty
No, no, no. Using your Jim Crow analogy, I’m not siding with the segregationists; I’m suggesting the solution isn’t to expand the law to also apply to whites. This woman’s speech was awful, but it should be engaged with more speech, not punishment.
Any present who objected could have politely tried engaging her in private debate, asked her to refrain from making future loud declarations, or complained to nearby personnel (as one might otherwise do if someone makes a disturbance), or just (simply) moved on with their lives. This doesn’t have to become a thing.
I realize many here consider this symbolic of larger trends, and perhaps it is, but this case isn’t the cross anyone should die on. Please re-read my original post. My only real argument is that this person doesn’t deserve punishment. She spoke bluntly, and people felt compelled to listen. End of story.
Neil, your principle is correct, but misplaced. I’d fire an employee who said to white or black colleagues, “I’m uncomfortable with people of your color being here,” and no court in the US would deny that doing that isn’t a firing offense. This wasn’t just words, it’s conduct, and the conduct is undermining a healthy environment on campus that is conducive to education and social development.It’s just not a 1st amendment issue.
And back to fighting words: it triggers the ethical duty to confront, if the school doesn’t do its job, and then you are looking at violence. Again, as a white student I would refuse to leave, I would tell her that any student who opposes equal access to the Center shpuld be the one leaving, and I would ask an ally to find campus police and an administrator to settle the matter.
Any employee who said such a thing SHOULD be fired, but she isn’t (as far as we know) an employee. Just some student. Hence we’re back to why even make an issue in the first place? No one’s access to education was disturbed, as no one was forced to leave (or even told to do so).
Your ethical confrontation could be as simple as quietly not leaving. Or addressing her privately. Or any of a number of other interactions that don’t involve escalation. You suggest campus police should get involved for a momentary disturbance. The student made a loud(ish) announcement for under a minute and sat down. At the most, she should have been asked to leave.
This is NOT a big deal.
I can’t conceive how anyone would say that vocal racism on a campus is no big deal. It’s exactly the same deal as an employee in a workplace behaving the same. Exactly. That’s why I used that analogy. A manager is responsible for maintaining an environment that is conducive to productivity in the workplace. A college is similarly obligated to maintain an healthy and productive education environment. She engaged in the racial equivalen of sexual harassment, creating a hostile environment, and the message that the school shrugs it off as “no big deal” makes the environment more hostile still.
True, we must oppose these calls to segregation.
But the school is severely limited as to what remedies it has over students’ speech (as opposed to employee speech).
Alternatively, it’s emblematic of a mental disease spreading through society which threatens to Balkanize the nation and calls for full-throated, extralegal opposition from every man, woman, and child for either as long as one remains capable of opposing it or it is extinguished entirely, existing only in our history books with a perennially cursed name to stand on equal tier with ‘Nazi’ and ‘Communist’. Perhaps, rather than being tolerated, its adherents should be chased to the darkest corners of the world throughout the remaining generations for fear of military tribunals or openly unchecked acts of zealous vigilante justice.
Tolerance isn’t a virtue. It’s actually just the decadent nihilist’s vice of apathy. Enforced tolerance is just the quelling of your precious free speech. ‘Freedom’ by itself is a pleasant-sounding nonsense word which can’t ever apply universally without the complete abolition of governance and rational thought.
But why not? The first moral axiom is ‘to pursue the good and oppose what is evil’ (no space between for a simpering tolerance). This, a cancerous narrative parroted from the universities and audio/visual media in the hopes of brainwashing our children, is profoundly evil. We sit in the wretched position of having to remain silent in the face of it in fear of our livelihoods. If everyone willing to oppose it chose to, right now, it would collapse with barely a whimper. So, to those who would dampen the zeal of anyone willing to oppose it with questions which could only have earned a sarcastic laugh, if the questioner was very lucky, in the moments when a man’s son is being taken away for gender reassignment or during the liberation of the concentration camps, I can only wonder why even make an issue of it in the first place?
She privatized her profile.
I guess she was tired of reading all the replies quoting Brown v. Board of Education.
Maybe there were lots of People-of-beige-and/or-olive-Color trying to explain to her what their individual cultures are.
Which she just found annoying because all whites look alike to her.
Jefferson is rolling in his grave