By Alex Ehmke
Two years and 2,000 miles away from SMU, my past still catches up with me and reminds me I failed. I spent my first two years in Student Senate espousing clever arguments for why interest seats were ridiculous, and my second two nominally supporting them while actually doing nothing. I received an “M” Award for my contributions, but after four years in senate, I failed to address the most important issue that existed on campus. And that’s because I was wrong about the LGBT seat.
One of my favorite senate activities was trying to make fools out of interest-seat advocates. “How can we justify the creation of an LGBT seat?” I asked them. “Shouldn’t that just give rise to the creation of a heterosexual seat? What about a ‘Dr. Pepper Enthusiasts’ seat? Where does it end?”
As long as I didn’t speak in realistic terms, I wasn’t telling my LGBT friends I didn’t care. I was a chess player trying to win a debate at all costs, rather than a decision-maker charged with making the right choice.
Everyone at SMU knows why an LGBT seat is necessary and heterosexual seat isn’t, and why we have seats set aside for racial minorities and not for white students. I certainly did, but I didn’t want to acknowledge it – apparently the 1,025 of you who voted against this bill didn’t either. That reason is this: Unlike racial minorities and LGBT students, white, heterosexual students will likely never be made to feel like lesser humans.
For those who deny minorities are subject to intense discrimination at SMU, look no further than the last few weeks. It’s nearly impossible to get 100 students to show up to anything on campus, but 10 times as many went out of their way to vote against the LGBT seat.
I know for a fact that the vast majority of students don’t give two shits about senate, which means they voted just to give the middle finger to the LGBT community over an issue that won’t affect their lives at all. Tell me with a straight face there’s no animosity there, and I’ll have no problem telling you you’re a liar.
“I didn’t vote against the LGBT seat because I hate them – it was because they don’t need it! They can just run for the regular seats!” I was wrong about that, too. LGBT students are less able to win popular elections because of the very discriminatory attitude evidenced above. Moreover, having a senator assigned to that community would ensure their concerns are addressed by someone who understands, rather than by the anti-LGBT enthusiasts who are apparently so numerous on campus.
Many students voted “no” out of a sense of logical superiority rather than entrenched homophobia. These are the people I would ask to change their minds. As long as these communities are disproportionately targeted with hate, it’s fair to offer them disproportionately greater protection through additional representation. And as long as we’re not deluding ourselves, we can acknowledge there is a lot of hatred at SMU that needs mitigating.
As for the rest of you, who knowingly impose a hateful, homophobic agenda on others, I have no solution but to wish you’d grow the hell up. Maybe some day, your brother, best friend or son will come out to you, and I wonder if you’ll have the guts to say then what you say on Yik Yak now. Tell them you hate them, call them f****ts and berate them like the inferior beings you’re convinced they are. Until then, I hope you’ll continue hiding behind your screen names – the pointy white hoods of our generation – lest you be recognized as the cowards you are. I’m sure that some day you’ll regret the stance you’re taking, just as I do. You’re wrong about the LGBT seat, but it’s not too late to be right.
Ehmke graduated from SMU in 2012.
