Much has been written and discussed about the recent Amherst College lacrosse program controversy and the deplorable racist acts by two seniors in a dormitory that prompted the firing of the coach, a mandatory racial sensitivity program, cancellation of the fall program and ineligibility for postseason participation in 2021.
These probationary conditions and penal sanctions were imposed by the college following cancellation of most of the 2020 season due to COVID-19. The team disciplinary actions were required by the college to bring about a “cultural change “ for the lacrosse program.
A large percentage of players, students, parents and alumni all deplored the actions by the two seniors, but felt that the penalty was overzealous. They feel that the transgressors were seniors who committed a heinous and insensitive act outside of lacrosse, but reducing the program and firing a respected coach was an unreasonable penalty – not probation – for returning underclassmen and incoming freshmen next year. Although the college administration labeled the overall punishment “probationary,” the punitive aspects were excessive for those not involved in the racial incident. Apparently, several players are transferring to other schools.
Of further, and more serious, concern are the stereotypical labels that have been assigned to those who don’t agree with the sanctions. We are labeled as insensitive, white, misogynistic male alumni since we fail to applaud the scope of solutions the college has imposed.
In 1975, when we were seniors, the class that chronologically paralleled our relationship to current graduates was the Class of 1930. Though we may have labeled them “the old guard,” we often listened to their experiences and opinions and, at times, their input was valuable and incorporated into favored policies. We did not catagorize their opinions as irrelevant points of view from a different era.
As members of the Class of 1975, we grew up in the 60s, applauded the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Martin Luther King Jr., admired the March on Washington and engaged in an unprecedented era of activism. In college, although Amherst was all male, we pursued an agenda of progressive participation that dominated our generation, professionally and in volunteer programs.
Therefore, when the college and many others label those of us who oppose the severity of the sanctions as white males from a racially insensitive era at Amherst, they perpetuate a form of stereotypical prejudice they purportedly seek to avoid.
In the early 1980’s, Anthony Lucas wrote “Common Ground,” a description of the search for consensus of three families during the busing crisis in Boston in the 1970s. In the 70s, we, as Amherst students, more often than not, also sought some common ground after listening to the opinions of older alumni. A consensus often incorporated, or at least reflected, input and respect for opposing prior Amherst generations.
In the lacrosse controversy and other recent dilemma that have arisen at Amherst, the college administration insists that it alone espouses a “Higher Ground.” When that approach is adopted, and the input of alumni and prior generations is dismissed with suggestions that they are racially intolerant, the result, as has been the case here, is rarely what is originally intended.
Steve Kramer is a 1975 graduate of Amherst College.