Pseudonyms in The Collegian

Dear Collegian,

In banning submissions under pseudonyms last year, The Collegian made a grave mistake. Though I do not attribute this decision to the current staff, I feel that it is still possible to remedy the situation.

Some may disagree with me citing the reasoning behind this decision last year: If one has something to say, one should be able to stand by it. Perhaps, but I find making such a blanket statement rather crass in that it fails to take into account individual circumstances.

Though some may have already forgotten, the series of editorial submissions by students under pseudonyms brought the issues concerning many of the influential student organizations fighting for social activism, among them SASD (Student Alliance for Sexual Diversity), to the forefront of campus consciousness.

Many of these people did not use their actual names out of fear that it would introduce domestic strife into their lives or put them in danger of physical violence.

They did not do this because they wanted to be subversive or to take back-handed swipes at those who differ in opinion. They were far from cowardly. They were courageous. I trust the editors of the print and online editions of The Collegian to be discerning in this kind of matter.

Some student activists abuse these unnamed authors, saying they went through the same and are fine, and why shouldn't these closeted individuals be fine in doing the same? It doesn't work that way. They must realize that they can never completely fathom the circumstances of another.

Visibility and voice are rights to be exercised freely, and people should be allowed to exercise these rights as much or as little as they are comfortable with.

Loud and proud is perfectly fine for a certain type of activist, but others are simply not like this. To choose to be something other than loud and proud does not necessarily indicate shame or an inability to accept oneself.

These anonymous authors and their peers, who are currently silenced by The Collegian, want to better the world and spread awareness about the difficulties they face as much as their present circumstances will allow. Be glad if you have the luxury to come out, or to reveal your identity or to speak freely without fear of harm.

Not everyone has this luxury. So long as someone says they feel unsafe or uncomfortable to be themselves on the Richmond campus, we must believe them. We will fight to make it safe and reserve for them a safe space until we can safely say that the danger has passed.

I do not wish for any warbling reply riddled with jargon of journalistic ethics in response to this letter. Those who submitted op-ed and letters to the editor under pseudonyms to The Collegian last year did so because they had respect for the paper as an institution and the safe space that editor Dan Petty and journalist David Larter sought to provide.

These men are journalists, but still sought to be compassionate individuals. Allowing anonymous submissions as part of facilitating a safe space for those who felt they could not speak did not adversely impact their careers. They have since thrived and flourished, as the past year has shown.

I sincerely hope that the current Collegian staff can demonstrate the same kind of maturity, leadership and understanding.