Stevens students, administrators, and alumni gathered in Kidde 228 this past Wednesday to discuss the state of life for underrepresented groups at Stevens at the LGBTQ+ Town Hall. A group of panelists including Dean of Students Ken Nilsen and Assistant Director of Diversity Education Liliana Delman, as well as student leaders from various LGBTQ-interest organizations (Ang Contreras, Nasir Montalvo, Eli Trakhtenberg, Izzy Joyce, and Tyler Wright), had an open discussion with student and alumni attendees about life at Stevens for marginalized queer groups. The panel was moderated by Student Government Association (SGA) Senator Liam McMurtry.
As a part of Stevens Pride Day, which also included celebrations on Schaefer Lawn that day and Walker Lawn that night, the LGBTQ+ Town Hall provided a lucid and real vision of where Stevens stands in serving marginalized queer identities on a day marked otherwise by uncompromised positivity and optimism. The panel took suggestions from the audience and discussed how Stevens can best show LGBTQ+ students and prospective students that they will both fit in and have their mental and physical health fully supported by Stevens student organizations and administration.
During introductions, panelists made their long-term goals for the LGBTQ+ community clear. Most panelists addressed the need for normalization of LGBTQ+ issues and educating allies to improve the campus environment. Trakhtenberg, Vice President-Elect of Torch Alliance and founder of new organization Sexual Wellness Education Activism and Training (SWEAT), began this line of discussion by mentioning the need for more visibility and social integration of LGBTQ+ organizations on campus, specifically through cohosting with non-LGBTQ+-focused organizations. Joyce, President of Torch Alliance, echoed this and mentioned the success of Pride Day, an event that Torch cohosted with 10 other organizations, including TranSIT and Lore-El Center for Women’s Leadership. Nilsen agreed, adding that this environment is a necessity because it gives students a place where they can “just be” without presenting themselves in a way aligned with others’ perceptions. All panelists expressed that Stevens could work on this issue but is heading in the right direction.
One subset of issues addressed involved necessities for LGBTQ+ students attending Stevens. Under this subset, the panel and attendees discussed the availability of gender-neutral housing and systems of changing names within the Stevens system. With both issues, all present came to the consensus that while these resources are available, hurdles blocking these resources exist too often. Wright, founder of TranSIT, began the discussion by pointing out that documentation for accessing gender-neutral housing is difficult to find, and many don’t know it exists. Joyce echoed this with another hurdle: until very recently, in order to live in gender-neutral housing, one needed fill an entire unit oneself rather than a roommate system similar to non-gender-neutral housing. Trakhtenberg agreed and pointed this out as an issue potentially blocking prospective students from feeling comfortable living at Stevens. Nilsen closed the discussion by addressing the reasons for some of these issues and his distaste for them, and reminded students that the administration is working on the issues.
Nilsen often acted as a grounding force for discussion, reminding students of the limitations of college administrations with keeping up with the increasing pace of change in LGBTQ+ issues. However, it was clear that these issues were near to his heart and constantly on his mind, as he appeared well-read on research as well the actions of other universities. He described himself as “in it for the long run,” having served in the Stevens administration for 25 years of rapid change, and committed to learning more about the perspectives of students, since “being LGBTQ+ isn’t the same for everyone.”
Another subset of issues handled was the creation of allyship within the Stevens community, leading to discussions of the state of Greek Life and the SGA with regard to LGBTQ+ issues. Most students on the panel agreed that Greek Life, especially fraternities, contributes to heteronormativity, and that inclusivity is the exception, rather than the rule. One alum mentioned that tackling this issue should not pit groups against one another in an “us vs. them” scenario and that LGBTQ+ students should first educate themselves on the tenets and values of fraternities to find common ground before reaching out to educate fraternity leaders on LGBTQ+ issues. Delman agreed, stressing the education of Greek leaders and promoting interfraternity mixers that would help combat strict binary structure and use of fraternity events to seek romantic interests. Both Nilsen and Delman also suggested reaching out to national chapters to stress LGBTQ+ education.
As for the SGA, the panel agreed that although more LGBTQ+ visibility in the student government would benefit the student body, LGBTQ+ organizations are usually treated equally and fairly when budgeting. However, Dean Nilsen made clear the importance of acknowledging the profound powers that the SGA has to influence the student body, and making sure that LGBTQ+ organizations had equal opportunity while LGBTQ+ students were being supported through subtle actions like SGA senators including their pronouns in emails.
The only topic that sparked uproar within the LGBTQ+ Town Hall regarded, of course, the Gianforte Family Academic Center and how its impending opening will residually affect the campus. Nearly an hour of deliberations boiled down to a few major points. The immediate concern expressed by Wright was that the naming will broadcast the wrong values to incoming students, showing LGBTQ+ prospective students that they are not welcome. Nilsen proposed a way of combating the negative situation by adding a positive, namely mobilizing alumni to donate money towards opening an intercultural center on campus. Trakhtenberg then added to all of this by stating that LGBTQ+ students could subvert the naming by refusing to call the building by its full name. It was clear that this issue still stings the LGBTQ+ community, which will continually adapt to address it.
The Town Hall was finally wrapped up by panelists giving closing remarks on the state of LGBTQ+ issues and Stevens. Overall, the panelists were optimistic and happy that the administration and students could have such open conversations. Nilsen and Contreras again mentioned the increasing speed of change in the right direction but recognized that Stevens is only beginning this change. Delman finished the conversation by pointing out that as the school progresses, it will hone its path, making its language clearer and naming its issues more effectively, and she hopes that events like this one will help Stevens progress into the realm of the best schools for LGBTQ+ resources.
Be First to Comment