Skip to main content

The Emily Taylor Center and The Office of Multicultural Affairs, The Center for Sexuality and Gender Diversity are to be Merged

Written by Daniel Mercado

Go Anti-Woke, make KU go Broke

HB 2105 and Its Effects

In April of this year, the Kansas State Legislature passed HB 2105. HB 2105, also known as House Bill 2105, is a bill that has immediate and profound effects on post-secondary educational institutions. It prohibits these institutions from hiring faculty or other applicants based on a “DEI Pledge” and from making staff pledge support for or oppose a political ideology. Furthermore, it restricts Universities from granting or denying financial aid and refusing admittance based on the viewpoints expressed in the pledge or statement. The Bill also mandates Universities to make all approved training materials for students, teachers, faculty, and staff public. This Bill not only targets a non-existent issue in Universities, DEI Pledges, but also provides a clear legal pathway for reactionaries to report Universities to the State Board of Regents, which will then pass it on to the State Attorney's office and sue Universities, compelling them to halt all Diversity, Equity, or Inclusion pledge or statement.

This Bill is such a disaster because not only will it expand the ever-increasing war on public Universities, but it will force Universities to erase centers of gender and sexual diversity, women's studies programs, and inclusive policies that combat systemic inequality. The legal avenues presented in the Bill will allow right-wing reactionaries the legal ability to mass report universities for being too "diverse," a term that the Kansas State Legislature did not even bother to define. There is no mention of false reporting, no fine or penalty, and no compensation to the falsely accused party. This could lead to a significant loss of educational opportunities for students and faculty.

If this Bill was made in good faith, it is a failure because the key offense that is meant to be remedied by this Bill, DEI pledges, is not defined and is so vague that a simple statement celebrating campus diversity could be used to punish the University. However, this Bill was not made in good faith; the State Legislature made it to punish Universities for being too accepting of diversity, a move that could significantly harm the progress of diversity and inclusion in higher education

HB 2105 and KU

So, what will HB 2105 do to KU? According to insider information from a KU Staff member, there is already confusion about how training is supposed to be updated per HB 2105 caused entirely by the fact that there are no legal definitions for what constitutes DEI Pledges or if they are even allowed to talk about Diversity, Equity, or Inclusion in training. This lack of clarity and potential confusion is a significant issue that needs to be addressed. According to the same insider information, the KU Legal Department is the primary editor behind the training manuals.

KU announced today via email that the Center for Sexuality and Gender Diversity (CSGD), the Emily Taylor Center for Women and Gender Equity, the Office of Multicultural Affairs (OMA), and the Student Involvement and Leadership Center (SILC) would be consolidated into the Student Engagement Center. It is important to note that under HB 2105, these centers would stillbe allowed as they are enforcement mechanisms for Federal Civil Rights Protections on campus, and as such, not under the purview of the Bill.

Consolidating the four centers to create the Student Engagement Center is worrisome because the announcement is incredibly vague and raises several questions, such as whether similar roles will be considered redundant, how will one office suite house all staff members of the four centers, how will funding be allocated, will this consolidation be a merger of departments where the SEC is the overarching head and there will be smaller agencies that take the roles of the former centers, and was this always the plan to cut costs.

Daniel Mercado is the Chair of Educational Initiatives for the KU YDSA

Comments

More from The Weekly Rose

Someone Tell the UDK: Sports Betting is BAD!

Back with a vengeance on Wescoe Beach after getting kicked out of Kansas in 2023 for violating state gambling laws, the sports betting app Underdog Fantasy has returned to targeting college students with cash giveaways during Hawk Week in exchange for creating an account and placing a bet.

Neutrality Towards Fascists: What KU's Failing Free Speech Grade Actually Represents

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) ranks colleges based on their free speech environment. These rankings feign neutrality while excusing fascism, they do not represent the full picture of how free speech operates on campus.

In the Business of Ideology: A Critique of KU's Business School

CapFed is a facade beyond its modular facade; it is a shell over an institution that exists to reproduce the logics it teaches and the capitalists it relies on – no matter the ‘external’ costs. It understands its role in the community, it knows it will always have support from private actors and University administration, and doesn’t care that it eliminates contingent possibilities, both practical and theoretical.

Malicious Pronouns

Formatting your email signature in the face of the pronoun ban may seem daunting. Comply with the letter, but not the spirit of the law, and fill your email with non-gender identifying pronouns.

One Question, Many Answers: How Marx Articulates Communism

To better understand Marx’s original vision for socialism, it is best to go straight to the source(s). In Marx’s “Philosophic and Economic Manuscripts of 1844” and “The Communist Manifesto”, co-written with Engels, communism is described in a number of ways – positively, negatively, tangentially, and otherwise – which can be synthesized into an understanding of Marx’s socialist vision of a post-capitalist world.

Illegal Settlements and the Nakba: A Historical Pattern of Ethnic Cleansing (Part One)

Trump’s pattern of repeatedly targeting nations with leftist or left-of-center governments, increasing arms sales, and rejecting free trade by itself does not necessarily conform to the ideological framework touted by Liberal and (Liberal) Conservative think tanks that make up “America First”. Rather, it is a pattern indicative of a decaying capitalist system.