“The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.” Martin Luther King Jr. wrote these words several years before he would pay the ultimate price for speaking out against injustice and hate. In light of the capitulation of Tulane University to the anti-Black and anti-Brown — and anti-queer, anti-disabled, etc. — policies of the U.S. Department of Education, the message conveyed by King is as relevant and meaningful today as it was 62 years ago. 

President Mike Fitts recently informed the Tulane community that the Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion would transition into an ambiguously named entity that would remain steadfast in “creating an environment dedicated to using knowledge for good.” Further details and opinions about this have been well articulated in Tulane’s Hullaballoo, so we will not reinvent the wheel. Instead, we want to stay true to our core value of using “knowledge for good” by explaining why this is a bad idea from a social/school psychological perspective. 

It should come as no shock to an institution that actively denied the enrollment of Black people and women at its inception that certain historical and contemporary policies make life harder for groups whose identities serve as markers of devaluation and discrimination. In fact, there is a unique term for this phenomenon called minority stress, which the American Psychological Association defines as “adverse social conditions experienced by … members of stigmatized social groups” represented in the form of microaggressions, discrimination or even violence. 

Consequently, minority stress experiences are associated with an increased risk of developing a variety of health conditions from acute illnesses, such as the cold, to more serious chronic conditions, such as diabetes. Minority stress can go even deeper by impacting how genes respond to inflammation and eroding overall immune function. Overall, these findings suggest that minority stressors are not just social maladies but rather constitute a substantial health crisis. 

Fortunately, there are ways to confront this crisis. One effective method is by intentionally signaling safety via maintaining university structures that are committed to serving minority-stressed groups, such as the Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion. This might seem merely symbolic, but symbolism — through policy and messaging — matters. For example, before the federal enactment of marriage equality, mental health improvements were observed among gay men living in states with legal protections relative to those living in states without such protections. Symbolism matters, and unfortunately, the removal of EDI messaging from our university is a step in the wrong direction. 

As we read Fitt’s email, we were reminded of several previous emails from the same President Fitts but with strikingly different messages: 

• June 12, 2020: “… We have made progress together toward a more diverse, equitable and inclusive Tulane. But, as recent events have illuminated, we must do more. We cannot simply state that we are against racism; we must endeavor to be actively anti-racist. We must commit to making Tulane a more inclusive and supportive home for all.” 

• Aug. 19, 2020: “We are grappling with the centuries-old legacy of racial prejudice and discrimination and know we have a long way to go before we become a truly equitable and just community … We aren’t afraid to try new things or a new plan if our first doesn’t succeed. 

• Mar. 4, 2021: “To become a truly great university … Tulane must become a community that welcomes and supports a diverse array of students … Today, I write to you to provide an update on our continued efforts to promote equity, diversity and inclusion …” 

• Apr. 20, 2021: “… Tulane has a critical role to play in modeling a more just future by building a university that embraces its BIPOC members and values them as vital members of our academic family. Our admissions, hiring and promotion processes and, indeed, all of our operations, must reflect true equity, diversity and inclusion. We must promote initiatives that build trust and support for all underrepresented groups.” 

• Sept. 27, 2022: “Creating an inclusive university that is dedicated to equity, diversity, compassion, respect and opportunity for students … from all backgrounds is a core value of Tulane … This includes long-term university-wide commitments through the numerous initiatives of the Presidential Commission on Racial, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion.” 

So, President Fitts, please clarify Tulane’s values once and for all?  

Are we about dismantling anti-Black racism and providing opportunities to disadvantaged groups, or do we only engage in those efforts when it is ‘comfortable’ and ‘convenient’? 

The price tag for selling out to the Trump administration was quoted as $320 million. Is that amount more or less than the price paid by the late Dr. King? 

Tulane still has time to correct itself by resisting efforts to dismantle EDI initiatives. Otherwise, Tulane should consider clarifying who “one’s own” is referring to in its motto. 

Zachary Airington 

Allison Pequet