Open Campus: The debate over the use of Howard's campus by neighbors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So are white people unwelcome at Howard?

Only if they have dogs on the grounds of the university property. Take away the dogs and all are welcome.

Good. Then Howard should post the campus for no dogs and security personnel should enforce it.

Well I really do not think non HU students should be picnicking on the yard. It’s a college campus. I went to an urban school with a quad. I could not image the neighbors walking their dogs or setting up a picnic on it. It’s not a public park. It’s an active and integral part of the university. Just because it’s an open spaces does not mean it’s free to use as you see fit.

I'm another one who went to Columbia University. People from the neighborhood were always entering the campus. Because it's an urban campus. No one checked IDs. Security guards were present and as long as people were being pleasant, it was no big deal.

You seem to be misinformed about the situation. Howard students and the university welcome those who are new and/or old to the surrounding areas around Howard. People are welcome to walk through the university campus WITHOUT animals. The quad area is significant to the Howard University community because students picnic on the grassy areas, students study on the grass, university events take place on the grass. It is for this reason Howard issued a statement (posted earlier in this thread) asking the community to be respectful of the campus and its norms. I’m not sure why people think it’s okay for them to enter onto the property of someone’s “home” and enforce their own rules of what they perceive Howard should be doing. Howard has always had the norm of no animals on campus. Longtime D.C. residents understand this norm. It’s only recent transplants who want to change the norms of what’s been in place instead of respectfully understanding the university desires.

Again, Howard is open to anyone on the campus passing through the campus as long as your pet is not on the campus grounds. It is not okay for Fido to going about his/her nature on campus grounds when there are 4 places around the university perimeter where residents of the community can walk their pets.

Ok, but people walk their dogs on Columbia's campus and somehow the students survive.

[Anonymous]

PP, it’s seems you’re a bit academically and intellectually challenged. The picture you posted is of the cultural norms of Columbia Univeristy. As I have explained earlier Howard University has a different norm. If you were to go to a temple for worship you would not pray the same way you would at a mosque or a church. The same concept lies here. It’s a matter of principles and respect. It seems you lack both intellect and respect. Is it your cultural norm to allow strangers to show up on your doorstep and invite themselves in? Would you allow the strangers to then precede to have a party and ravage your home? I should think not!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's sad to see white DC residents so culturally illiterate about Howard and HBCUs and black history. I admit that when I first moved to DC, I had the model of college campuses with a more open feeling (having grown up in land grant college towns). So yeah, the first time I jogged through the Howard campus, it felt different. But, it didn't take me long to learn about the history of the U st area, Howard, and HBCUs, as well as to grasp why being on the Howard campus as a white person meant I needed to go out of my way to be respectful.

If you are clutching your pearls and can't figure out why there would be tension surrounding an influx of disrespectful white dog walkers on the Howard campus, then you're pretty culturally ignorant.

+1 THIS.EXACTLY.SUMS.UP.MY.THOUGHTS

Why is it so hard for urban gentrifiers to understand that Black/AA people don’t want their cultural historic piece of property desecrated by animals? To continue in such a manner means that people are willing to put animal nature over human feelings. That thought process is both despicable and shows how far basic humanity principles have eroded.

DP What about all the other animals? Are they going to kick out the rats, possums, squirrels, chipmunks? All people should be allowed to walk their dogs full stop. If it is an open campus than they shouldn't yell at people either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's sad to see white DC residents so culturally illiterate about Howard and HBCUs and black history. I admit that when I first moved to DC, I had the model of college campuses with a more open feeling (having grown up in land grant college towns). So yeah, the first time I jogged through the Howard campus, it felt different. But, it didn't take me long to learn about the history of the U st area, Howard, and HBCUs, as well as to grasp why being on the Howard campus as a white person meant I needed to go out of my way to be respectful.

If you are clutching your pearls and can't figure out why there would be tension surrounding an influx of disrespectful white dog walkers on the Howard campus, then you're pretty culturally ignorant.

+1 THIS.EXACTLY.SUMS.UP.MY.THOUGHTS

Why is it so hard for urban gentrifiers to understand that Black/AA people don’t want their cultural historic piece of property desecrated by animals? To continue in such a manner means that people are willing to put animal nature over human feelings. That thought process is both despicable and shows how far basic humanity principles have eroded.

You are kidding right? How stupid can one be to even form such a sentence? Clearly, the listed animals are ones in nature. It’s a sad day when some white people embarass the rest of us who understand Howard’s viewpoint.

DP What about all the other animals? Are they going to kick out the rats, possums, squirrels, chipmunks? All people should be allowed to walk their dogs full stop. If it is an open campus than they shouldn't yell at people either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, it’s seems you’re a bit academically and intellectually challenged. The picture you posted is of the cultural norms of Columbia Univeristy. As I have explained earlier Howard University has a different norm. If you were to go to a temple for worship you would not pray the same way you would at a mosque or a church. The same concept lies here. It’s a matter of principles and respect. It seems you lack both intellect and respect. Is it your cultural norm to allow strangers to show up on your doorstep and invite themselves in? Would you allow the strangers to then precede to have a party and ravage your home? I should think not!

Perhaps no one is getting your argument because you're not explaining yourself very well. The norms of neighborliness should apply in a university community, and Columbia and Howard are both open urban campuses. If someone is "ravaging" the campus, that is different and I would assume that campus security would be called.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's sad to see white DC residents so culturally illiterate about Howard and HBCUs and black history. I admit that when I first moved to DC, I had the model of college campuses with a more open feeling (having grown up in land grant college towns). So yeah, the first time I jogged through the Howard campus, it felt different. But, it didn't take me long to learn about the history of the U st area, Howard, and HBCUs, as well as to grasp why being on the Howard campus as a white person meant I needed to go out of my way to be respectful.

If you are clutching your pearls and can't figure out why there would be tension surrounding an influx of disrespectful white dog walkers on the Howard campus, then you're pretty culturally ignorant.

+1 THIS.EXACTLY.SUMS.UP.MY.THOUGHTS

Why is it so hard for urban gentrifiers to understand that Black/AA people don’t want their cultural historic piece of property desecrated by animals? To continue in such a manner means that people are willing to put animal nature over human feelings. That thought process is both despicable and shows how far basic humanity principles have eroded.

DP What about all the other animals? Are they going to kick out the rats, possums, squirrels, chipmunks? All people should be allowed to walk their dogs full stop. If it is an open campus than they shouldn't yell at people either.

You are kidding right? How stupid can one be to even form such a sentence? Clearly, the listed animals are ones in nature. It’s a sad day when some white people embarass the rest of us who understand Howard’s viewpoint.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, it’s seems you’re a bit academically and intellectually challenged. The picture you posted is of the cultural norms of Columbia Univeristy. As I have explained earlier Howard University has a different norm. If you were to go to a temple for worship you would not pray the same way you would at a mosque or a church. The same concept lies here. It’s a matter of principles and respect. It seems you lack both intellect and respect. Is it your cultural norm to allow strangers to show up on your doorstep and invite themselves in? Would you allow the strangers to then precede to have a party and ravage your home? I should think not!

Perhaps no one is getting your argument because you're not explaining yourself very well. The norms of neighborliness should apply in a university community, and Columbia and Howard are both open urban campuses. If someone is "ravaging" the campus, that is different and I would assume that campus security would be called.

I think it’s your nonsensical ramblings & lack of intellect that confuses yourself and others on this board. The norms of neighborliness applies in both directions. I think I am quite correct in my assessment of your intellect because you failed to perceive that basic thought process.

[Anonymous]

There are 2 issues being co-mingled on this thread.

1) white people allowed on a "traditionally black" campus

and

2) dogs being allowed on said campus.

I have a big problem if white people are not allowed, but I have no problem whatsoever with them banning dogs. In fact, I wish they would. If more places banned dogs then maybe entitled dog owners would stop thinking they must have a right to take Fido with them everywhere by default.

I think there are some AA people posting who genuinely don't have a problem with white people/neighbors on campus as long as they don't bring their dogs. There seem to be others (or one other) posting saying that it's more than the dogs, it's that the white people still aren't really welcome for whatever reason because it's offensive given the history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So are white people unwelcome at Howard?

Only if they have dogs on the grounds of the university property. Take away the dogs and all are welcome.

Good. Then Howard should post the campus for no dogs and security personnel should enforce it.

Well I really do not think non HU students should be picnicking on the yard. It’s a college campus. I went to an urban school with a quad. I could not image the neighbors walking their dogs or setting up a picnic on it. It’s not a public park. It’s an active and integral part of the university. Just because it’s an open spaces does not mean it’s free to use as you see fit.

I'm another one who went to Columbia University. People from the neighborhood were always entering the campus. Because it's an urban campus. No one checked IDs. Security guards were present and as long as people were being pleasant, it was no big deal.

Yeah, but black Columbia students get harassed by campus security to this day. It's "no big deal" if you're white ... if you thnk that people could come over to the steps of Lowe from the Frederick Douglass houses and hang out all day, you're deluded.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/04/14/video-shows-black-columbia-student-pinned-by-campus-police-after-failing-show-his-id/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, it’s seems you’re a bit academically and intellectually challenged. The picture you posted is of the cultural norms of Columbia Univeristy. As I have explained earlier Howard University has a different norm. If you were to go to a temple for worship you would not pray the same way you would at a mosque or a church. The same concept lies here. It’s a matter of principles and respect. It seems you lack both intellect and respect. Is it your cultural norm to allow strangers to show up on your doorstep and invite themselves in? Would you allow the strangers to then precede to have a party and ravage your home? I should think not!

Perhaps no one is getting your argument because you're not explaining yourself very well. The norms of neighborliness should apply in a university community, and Columbia and Howard are both open urban campuses. If someone is "ravaging" the campus, that is different and I would assume that campus security would be called.

I think it’s your nonsensical ramblings & lack of intellect that confuses yourself and others on this board. The norms of neighborliness applies in both directions. I think I am quite correct in my assessment of your intellect because you failed to perceive that basic thought process.

You should look in the mirror to see someone's nonsensical ramblings. If people are behaving in ways that are not "neighborly", students are free to call campus security. If Howard prefers to ban dogs from its campus, it should post signs to that effect. Otherwise you are just babbling complaints and not articulating what they are.

[Anonymous]

This thread only highlights what completely selfish jerks most dog owners are. You people defending this are probably the same people who let your dogs relive themselves in the children’s park near me despite there being a dog park two blocks away. Just the absolute worst.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are 2 issues being co-mingled on this thread.

1) white people allowed on a "traditionally black" campus

and

2) dogs being allowed on said campus.

I have a big problem if white people are not allowed, but I have no problem whatsoever with them banning dogs. In fact, I wish they would. If more places banned dogs then maybe entitled dog owners would stop thinking they must have a right to take Fido with them everywhere by default.

I think there are some AA people posting who genuinely don't have a problem with white people/neighbors on campus as long as they don't bring their dogs. There seem to be others (or one other) posting saying that it's more than the dogs, it's that the white people still aren't really welcome for whatever reason because it's offensive given the history.

You have captured this quite well. It seems earlier Howard issued a statement acknowledging that they welcome those in the community all of backgrounds without pets. Unfortunately, some outliers of black and white people want to make this a “race” issue rather than about dogs. These outliers want to make it about the color of someone’s skin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are 2 issues being co-mingled on this thread.

1) white people allowed on a "traditionally black" campus

and

2) dogs being allowed on said campus.

I have a big problem if white people are not allowed, but I have no problem whatsoever with them banning dogs. In fact, I wish they would. If more places banned dogs then maybe entitled dog owners would stop thinking they must have a right to take Fido with them everywhere by default.

I think there are some AA people posting who genuinely don't have a problem with white people/neighbors on campus as long as they don't bring their dogs. There seem to be others (or one other) posting saying that it's more than the dogs, it's that the white people still aren't really welcome for whatever reason because it's offensive given the history.

Given that white people can enroll in and teach at Howard, it's obviously not true that white people aren't allowed on campus. Come on. The issue is dogs.

Another separate issue might be if there's a big influx of residents not connected to Howard, who suddenly decide to start using the quad like a park (dog or no). That would probably be an issue regardless of their color; but the fact that they are likely to be white gentrifiers would add to the tension, for obvious reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So are white people unwelcome at Howard?

Only if they have dogs on the grounds of the university property. Take away the dogs and all are welcome.

Good. Then Howard should post the campus for no dogs and security personnel should enforce it.

Well I really do not think non HU students should be picnicking on the yard. It’s a college campus. I went to an urban school with a quad. I could not image the neighbors walking their dogs or setting up a picnic on it. It’s not a public park. It’s an active and integral part of the university. Just because it’s an open spaces does not mean it’s free to use as you see fit.

I'm another one who went to Columbia University. People from the neighborhood were always entering the campus. Because it's an urban campus. No one checked IDs. Security guards were present and as long as people were being pleasant, it was no big deal.

Yeah, but black Columbia students get harassed by campus security to this day. It's "no big deal" if you're white ... if you thnk that people could come over to the steps of Lowe from the Frederick Douglass houses and hang out all day, you're deluded.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/04/14/video-shows-black-columbia-student-pinned-by-campus-police-after-failing-show-his-id/

No one is saying racism doesn't exist. But imagine the uproar if Columbia students (generally whiter and richer than their neighbors) wanted to keep its neighbors from Harlem from entering the campus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP, it’s seems you’re a bit academically and intellectually challenged. The picture you posted is of the cultural norms of Columbia Univeristy. As I have explained earlier Howard University has a different norm. If you were to go to a temple for worship you would not pray the same way you would at a mosque or a church. The same concept lies here. It’s a matter of principles and respect. It seems you lack both intellect and respect. Is it your cultural norm to allow strangers to show up on your doorstep and invite themselves in? Would you allow the strangers to then precede to have a party and ravage your home? I should think not!

Perhaps no one is getting your argument because you're not explaining yourself very well. The norms of neighborliness should apply in a university community, and Columbia and Howard are both open urban campuses. If someone is "ravaging" the campus, that is different and I would assume that campus security would be called.

I think it’s your nonsensical ramblings & lack of intellect that confuses yourself and others on this board. The norms of neighborliness applies in both directions. I think I am quite correct in my assessment of your intellect because you failed to perceive that basic thought process.

You should look in the mirror to see someone's nonsensical ramblings. If people are behaving in ways that are not "neighborly", students are free to call campus security. If Howard prefers to ban dogs from its campus, it should post signs to that effect. Otherwise you are just babbling complaints and not articulating what they are.

If the University issued a statement and students have approached dog owners about campus norms as they walk Fido through the campus, why should Howard ruin the grass with no dogs allowed signs? This goes back to the issue of respect and campus cultural norms.