Photo by Silas Gemma '26. Thussu calls for the Mount Holyoke community to be more accepting of those with intellectually diverse opinions and create welcoming classrooms.
By Rehat Thussu ’23
Contributing Writer
Mount Holyoke College is an institution that prides itself on being a space that welcomes and celebrates diversity. Our community’s strength lies in its diversity. Our campus welcomes students, such as myself, and faculty and staff from a wide range of backgrounds and experiences. If Mount Holyoke is a flavourful dish, then we the people on this campus would be its rich ingredients. Our diversity is what makes Mount Holyoke unique. Unfortunately, I have found that this richness is not welcome in all spaces, specifically our intellectual spaces.
The Western Massachusetts Marxist Lesbian Indoctrination Camp, as we sometimes call our college, has many of its members being strong advocates for progressive ideas. The lack of empathy and willingness to listen to others, especially across multicultural backgrounds, with differences in thinking and perspectives not only affects our dedication to advocacy but also academics.
Since the College’s founding in 1837, our community has produced numerous advocates for change that are much needed in our ever-changing society. Among them are Gloria-Johnson Powell, Ruth Muskrat Bronson, Kavita Ramdas and many others. The predominantly liberal views that we have cultivated at the College support us in pushing for ideas and values that are aimed at creating a more equitable and just society. However, more recently, our advocacy has been lacking inclusivity. Much of our arguments, values and even ideas at the College are inspired by a bubble of people who feel, think and talk the same way. We as a community often limit the voices of those who might feel a bit different than this performative and restricting progressive way of thinking.
More often than not, I have noticed how classroom discussions are centered around one view of thinking, primarily due to the fact that students that may have a different perspective are scared to contribute as they are afraid of being canceled. There have been instances where I did not raise my hand in class or say something if I disagreed because I was scared. I was afraid that I would be made to feel uncomfortable about having a different perspective, which has occurred in a few instances. In one of several such instances, during my first year at Mount Holyoke, I disagreed with a fellow student in a class discussion about how parents behave with children. Growing up in India, there are certain parenting practices that are considered acceptable, relative to many Western cultures’ understanding of progressive parenting styles. Because of my lived experience, I did not agree with the student in the class discussion. In response to that, they said my opinion was ill-formed and implied that the parenting practice in my culture was bad, which felt unfair. Since then, I found myself less inclined to participate if I disagreed with my peers or had a perspective that could invite scrutiny from these same peers.
Danyah Tarabulsi ’24, an international student at Mount Holyoke, shared her similar experience feeling this way in classes: “… I didn’t learn a lot about American history in high school. So I did not know what the Confederate flag was. And I asked that once in class and all eyes were like, how do you not know that and I was like, this is not part of my history. So like, you can’t expect me to already know it.”
I wonder how I am not only limiting my own academic learning but also my peers’. When we talk about a holistic education or holistic way of thinking, it includes perspectives that are diverse in nature. That sometimes means listening to the opinions and thoughts of those who are not in agreement with you. “I’m going to grad school for politics, and I know there are going to be students there who have vastly different opinions on issues. Sometimes I wonder how prepared I am for having productive or fruitful conversations with them since I’m coming from an environment where I feel like people aren’t open to having conversations with people who have different opinions or even people who come from different backgrounds,” Gauri Kaushik ’23 said. Kaushik’s concerns reflect how if we continue this practice of suppressing the opinions of those who are not in agreement with the majority, we are laying the foundations to create a space that is not inviting to freedom of speech and thought. If we aim to create an equitable and just society, then encouraging such a space might not be the best way to go forward.
“I’m going to grad school for politics, and I know there are going to be students there who have vastly different opinions on issues. Sometimes I wonder how prepared I am for having productive or fruitful conversations with them since I’m coming from an environment where I feel like people aren’t open to having conversations with people who have different opinions or even people who come from different backgrounds.”
As a community member, I strongly believe this narrow mode of thought does more damage to our activism than good. By allowing ourselves to exist in a vacuum of thought and belief, we encourage ourselves to hamper our intellectual growth. If we want to create an impact, it is important that we reach people who might believe and think differently than us. If we keep shutting down ideas and thoughts the moment they are remotely different from the majority of the campus, we restrict the potential to reach and create the impact that we aim for.
Students who feel nervous to bring forth differing opinions in classroom discussions or dining table conversations in Blanchard Hall are often tempted to agree with the majority, to avoid being scrutinized. They feel pressured to change their beliefs and opinions, just to feel more accepted in conversations and discussions. This has implications for one’s identity and even how one might perceive themselves. I know I have felt this pressure, and it felt dishonest to me and my identity. It is unfair that one feels pressured to change this aspect of their identity so that they can feel welcomed in this community.
As members of this community, it is important that we reevaluate how we create space in our intellectual spheres. I strongly believe that if we continue this culture, we are heading towards creating an intellectual community that is not in any shape or form holistic or understanding of different perspectives and experiences. It will also have consequences for our diversity. More often than not, our opinions are formed based on the experiences and backgrounds we have. For example, I am an international student like many on this campus. I grew up in a culture that is distinct from the majority of students on this campus, and oftentimes, the opinions I have formed, based on where I grew up, are at a crossroads with the opinions of the dominant views on this campus. If we continue to accept only the opinions that are agreeable to the majority, then we will continue to attract future community members who will fit that exact mold, a specific set of experiences and backgrounds, causing it to have a negative impact on the wealth of diversity that is currently present in our community. In short, the very essence of Mount Holyoke and its community will be lost.
At the moment, Mount Holyoke is becoming an oasis of learning that lacks intellectual diversity. I sincerely hope that we as a community find it in us to rebuild our holistic intellectual space, in a way that is welcoming for everyone on this campus.