|
Separate but equal as a concept for legal practice in the United States was struck down by federal courts decades ago. Unfortunately, the University is attempting a resurrection with the Night Ride service. For those who do not know, Night Ride is the University’s response to a lawsuit filed against Saferide by a student. The lawsuit alleged that Saferide violated Title IX by only servicing women. The federal office agreed. Thus, the University has been forced to alter its transportation policy to comply with Title IX.
The way in which the University has decided to alter its policy in order to comply is to establish Night Ride, a service for men. According to an article in the Oregon Daily Emerald on Friday, January 11, the Night Ride service hopes to serve gay men, men of color and transgender individuals. None of the quotes in the Emerald article makes mention of straight, white men. Don’t misunderstand, providing a service is fine, but that service should be available to all members of the student body. If the Night Ride service primarily seeks to serve gay men, black men, and transsexual men, it does not provide a service to most of campus. Saferide and Night Ride will both service different portions of the population, namely female and male, respectively; this is a conical example of “separate but equal” policy.
If a shuttle servicing system were proposed that would separate the vans for black and white people, the entire University would be up in arms. Night Ride and Saferide are the politically correct equivalent. Having two separate services creates unnecessary complications in funding and paperwork. In addition to being unneeded, separate services are just one more example of the politically correct thought police attempting to make issues out of nothing. The Saferide co-director, Nikki Francher, indicated to the Emerald that Saferide would not function as well if it were open to men. “Based on the information she received from Saferide volunteers and riders, Francher said she believes many women who use the service would not feel comfortable continuing to use Saferide if it were open to men,” ODE, January 11.
The above quote makes the overreaction clear, sexual predators are not going to use Saferide in order to further their practice. A van, driven by two people, isn’t exactly an environment conducive to sexual assault. Does DDS have a problem with sexual assaults occurring in its vans? I think not. There are plenty of circumstances more conducive to sexually assaulting people than riding around in a van, like fraternity parties. Having a separate but equal service just establishes one more layer of needless red-tape and sets a bad precedent. Should there be a separate service for gay, transgender midgets of color with bipolar disorder and progeria? How many shuttling services are needed to effectively service the campus? The answer is one. And there is a simple solution.
The simple solution is to combine all three shuttle services into one system. This would provide a safe shuttle for all members of the campus community. The DDS vans, Saferide vans, and proposed vans for Night Ride could be combined to serve the entire campus along with the other resources of those services. Only one director would be needed, and thus one more layer of bureaucracy could be eliminated. The University could save the salaries of two sets of staff by eliminating two overlapping services. This single shuttle service could provide safe transportation to those fearful of sexual assault and those too drunk to find their own way home.
One shuttling system would not only be logistically easier, but also would be more consistent with Title IX and other legal precedents. One simple, effective shuttling service would eliminate the separate but equal” standard set by establishing Night Ride.
Incidental fees from every student fund each of the current services, but two of three do not allow all students to ride. One service, funded by incidental fees from every student and providing safe transportation to the entire student body is the most logically consistent and logistically feasible solution to the University’s transportation problems. that the athletic department spend and raise every dollar possible. Out of the $32 million annual budget for that division, only a paltry $2 million comes from the general university fund. And even that has been scaled back to zero in the coming years. So the leftists won, right?
Well, not if their entire goal was to end the commercialization of colleges via the dependency on athletic revenues. Now that the athletic department will be wholly self-sufficient, there will be absolutely no moral authority for outsiders to complain about that department’s spending practices, a reality that will in turn spur more spending for better on field and monetary results in the future.
In the long run, it is absolutely important that it is remembered that the investment in the University’s athletic endeavors will pay nothing but positive dividends in the long run, and there’s no greater value to our community than that. And that’s true. As long as you acknowledge the value of cheerleaders.
|