Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone on this thread know what Howard University's current policy is about members of the public on campus? Does anyone know what HU's policy is about dogs on campus?

Alonda Thomas, a Howard University spokesperson, says there is no policy prohibiting dogs. Howard’s campus is open, meaning anyone is allowed to walk through it.
-from the article

How much you wanna bet that if black folks were routinely wandering around George Washington University taking their dogs for doo-doo walks either the campus police or MPDC would be locking em up en masse without hesitation? GW’s campus policy be damned they’d see it as disrespectful and probably shoot a few folks because a black person with so much as a toy poodle would be perceived as a threat.

DP I highly doubt they would arrest African Americans walking their dogs on "doo-doo walks" as you so eloquently put it in any of the universities in DC.

I challenge you ( and anyone else) to prove your statement. Either it will or won't happen. You can walk around GW, American University Catholic University, Georgetown. I predict if you pick up your dog poop nothing will happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone on this thread know what Howard University's current policy is about members of the public on campus? Does anyone know what HU's policy is about dogs on campus?

Alonda Thomas, a Howard University spokesperson, says there is no policy prohibiting dogs. Howard’s campus is open, meaning anyone is allowed to walk through it.
-from the article

How much you wanna bet that if black folks were routinely wandering around George Washington University taking their dogs for doo-doo walks either the campus police or MPDC would be locking em up en masse without hesitation? GW’s campus policy be damned they’d see it as disrespectful and probably shoot a few folks because a black person with so much as a toy poodle would be perceived as a threat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the students made a statement that basically said it was sacred black land. You could tell she was trying to make a profound statement, which is hilarious given the issue.

You mean Howard University has a historical and cultural significance for black Americans? Yes, it does. And the long term residents of the area respected it. It was generally understood by the locals that campus grounds were not a dog park.

Howard University never needed an explicit policy regarding dogs on campus until now.

Progress, folks, it's all about progress.

You sound like a bunch of entitled white old ladies.

Oh and heaven forbid black folks feel entitled to anything. That’s a sentiment solely reserved for a select few privileged people (i.e. whites) correct?

Hey it's probably you making fun of whites when they whine about the changing demographics of thw country ... and funny enough now it's you whining about the changing demographics of your neighborhood.

Changing demographics demand adjustment in terms of greater acceptance, yes. But accepting new faces is one thing while accepting archaic entitled attitudes is another thing altogether. I haven’t heard about any black or Latino residents in “browning” areas coming onto campuses and disrespecting students safe spaces at predominantly white institutions, have you?

You must be joking, right?

The vast majority of crime in predominantly white areas like Gtown and Cleveland Park is committed by blacks.

Cry me a river about seeing some dogs and white faces.

You’re conflating things doofus. We’re not talking about criminal acts by miscreants we’re talking about egregious disrespect by residents. Or are you of the opinion that all non-whites are criminal miscreants? You probably are. Anyway, you cite me some incidents at GW or American or Georgetown where students are taking issue with black or Latino folks wandering around their campus using any open area as a shit-space for their pets.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the students made a statement that basically said it was sacred black land. You could tell she was trying to make a profound statement, which is hilarious given the issue.

You mean Howard University has a historical and cultural significance for black Americans? Yes, it does. And the long term residents of the area respected it. It was generally understood by the locals that campus grounds were not a dog park.

Howard University never needed an explicit policy regarding dogs on campus until now.

Progress, folks, it's all about progress.

You sound like a bunch of entitled white old ladies.

Oh and heaven forbid black folks feel entitled to anything. That’s a sentiment solely reserved for a select few privileged people (i.e. whites) correct?

Hey it's probably you making fun of whites when they whine about the changing demographics of thw country ... and funny enough now it's you whining about the changing demographics of your neighborhood.

Changing demographics demand adjustment in terms of greater acceptance, yes. But accepting new faces is one thing while accepting archaic entitled attitudes is another thing altogether. I haven’t heard about any black or Latino residents in “browning” areas coming onto campuses and disrespecting students safe spaces at predominantly white institutions, have you?

You must be joking, right?

The vast majority of crime in predominantly white areas like Gtown and Cleveland Park is committed by blacks.

Cry me a river about seeing some dogs and white faces.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the students made a statement that basically said it was sacred black land. You could tell she was trying to make a profound statement, which is hilarious given the issue.

You mean Howard University has a historical and cultural significance for black Americans? Yes, it does. And the long term residents of the area respected it. It was generally understood by the locals that campus grounds were not a dog park.

Howard University never needed an explicit policy regarding dogs on campus until now.

Progress, folks, it's all about progress.

You sound like a bunch of entitled white old ladies.

Oh and heaven forbid black folks feel entitled to anything. That’s a sentiment solely reserved for a select few privileged people (i.e. whites) correct?

Hey it's probably you making fun of whites when they whine about the changing demographics of thw country ... and funny enough now it's you whining about the changing demographics of your neighborhood.

Changing demographics demand adjustment in terms of greater acceptance, yes. But accepting new faces is one thing while accepting archaic entitled attitudes is another thing altogether. I haven’t heard about any black or Latino residents in “browning” areas coming onto campuses and disrespecting students safe spaces at predominantly white institutions, have you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the students made a statement that basically said it was sacred black land. You could tell she was trying to make a profound statement, which is hilarious given the issue.

You mean Howard University has a historical and cultural significance for black Americans? Yes, it does. And the long term residents of the area respected it. It was generally understood by the locals that campus grounds were not a dog park.

Howard University never needed an explicit policy regarding dogs on campus until now.

Progress, folks, it's all about progress.

You sound like a bunch of entitled white old ladies.

Oh and heaven forbid black folks feel entitled to anything. That’s a sentiment solely reserved for a select few privileged people (i.e. whites) correct?

Hey it's probably you making fun of whites when they whine about the changing demographics of thw country ... and funny enough now it's you whining about the changing demographics of your neighborhood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the students made a statement that basically said it was sacred black land. You could tell she was trying to make a profound statement, which is hilarious given the issue.

You mean Howard University has a historical and cultural significance for black Americans? Yes, it does. And the long term residents of the area respected it. It was generally understood by the locals that campus grounds were not a dog park.

Howard University never needed an explicit policy regarding dogs on campus until now.

Progress, folks, it's all about progress.

You sound like a bunch of entitled white old ladies.

Oh and heaven forbid black folks feel entitled to anything. That’s a sentiment solely reserved for a select few privileged people (i.e. whites) correct?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the students made a statement that basically said it was sacred black land. You could tell she was trying to make a profound statement, which is hilarious given the issue.

You mean Howard University has a historical and cultural significance for black Americans? Yes, it does. And the long term residents of the area respected it. It was generally understood by the locals that campus grounds were not a dog park.

Howard University never needed an explicit policy regarding dogs on campus until now.

Progress, folks, it's all about progress.

You sound like a bunch of entitled white old ladies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the students made a statement that basically said it was sacred black land. You could tell she was trying to make a profound statement, which is hilarious given the issue.

You mean Howard University has a historical and cultural significance for black Americans? Yes, it does. And the long term residents of the area respected it. It was generally understood by the locals that campus grounds were not a dog park.

Howard University never needed an explicit policy regarding dogs on campus until now.

Anonymous wrote:One of the students made a statement that basically said it was sacred black land. You could tell she was trying to make a profound statement, which is hilarious given the issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the students made a statement that basically said it was sacred black land. You could tell she was trying to make a profound statement, which is hilarious given the issue.

HU students, faculty, and alum don’t find any of this shit (pun intended) remotely funny.

Anonymous wrote:One of the students made a statement that basically said it was sacred black land. You could tell she was trying to make a profound statement, which is hilarious given the issue.

Anonymous wrote:One of the students made a statement that basically said it was sacred black land. You could tell she was trying to make a profound statement, which is hilarious given the issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone on this thread know what Howard University's current policy is about members of the public on campus? Does anyone know what HU's policy is about dogs on campus?

Alonda Thomas, a Howard University spokesperson, says there is no policy prohibiting dogs. Howard’s campus is open, meaning anyone is allowed to walk through it.
-from the article

Thank you for this info.

Why doesn’t HU put a policy in place to control the situation? Close the campus? Ban dogs?